Four years after Wisconsin became the chief battleground in the war of taxpayers versus public sector unions, a new front is developing south of the Cheese Curtain in Illinois.
With the possible exception of California, no where else in America are government unions so powerful. And of course it should be no surprise that both states are fiscal basketcases.
My fellow Land of Lincoln taxpayers and I are burdened by over $100 billion in unfunded public worker pension debt. Over $150 million has been contributed by just six government unions to Illinois pols in addition to countless hours of volunteer time by unionized state employees. Illinois’ new reform governor, Republican Bruce Rauner, has proposed banning public sector unions from donating to Prairie State political campaigns. Major state contractors are already prohibited from doing so.
“After you win, let’s negotiate our pension and work rules and healthcare,” Rauner says is the longtime game plan of the government unions, one that has been successful for them–but toxic for everyone else in the state. AFSCME represents the most state workers, its contract in July and there is speculation that there will be a first-ever strike by state public servants. Their is much for taxpayers to dislike in the current AFSCME contract, for instance, workers can play hooky from work twelve separate times before getting fired. At my job, I’d be fortunate if I got away with that once.
Four years ago Wisconsin’s reform governor, Scott Walker, fought the unions and won. But Walker had Republican majorities in both chambers of the state legislature, while thanks to gerrymandering, the Democrats in Illinois enjoy veto-proof majorities in the General Assembly. On the other hand Rauner has a $20 million PAC, much of it self-funded, to promote his case, and unlike his predecessor, the self-made multi-millionaire is not deeply unpopular.
Rauner has another ally in his upcoming fight against the unions: mathematics. Unlike the federal government, states can’t print money. And the great majority of Illinoisans are not union members or public sector employees.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich will roll out “responsible” tax plans that protect against revenue gaps. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Arizona’s new Republican governor are delaying big dreams of nixing the income tax as they face budget shortfalls. And Missouri Republicans, once jealous of their neighbor Kansas’ massive cuts, are thankful they trimmed less.
Call it the Brownback effect.
What’s the Brownback effect? The decision to seriously cut taxes including eliminating taxes on small business and apparently a lot of people are trying to contrast themselves to this:
In Missouri, Republicans like Kraus proudly noted that while Kansas eliminated taxes on small businesses, they did only a 25 percent tax deduction to lower their taxes. And their income tax cuts were much smaller, he said: only half a percent, phased in over five years starting in 2017.
“We’re trying to protect the core levels of funding so we don’t disturb … state government,” he said.
Because God forbid big Government actually become smaller. But here’s the thing that really jars my gears, why are these guys all trying to be not Brownback?
The left poured money into Kansas, activists entered the state in their full force a year before the election targeting Brownback, in fact many on the left expected Brownback to be the reason why Pat Roberts would lose re-election because of the collateral damage for those ousting the governor who constantly behind in the polls. Take a look at the Wikipedia chart of polls was behind in the polls the whole time. There were 9 polls in the course of the year where he was ahead vs 30 that showed him behind and the media & left were feeling their oats:
Gail Jamison, a lifelong Republican, voted for Sam Brownback for governor in 2010 believing he would restore school funding that had been greatly reduced by the recession.
Four years later, she has joined with more than 100 prominent Republicans in publicly throwing their support behind Brownback’s Democratic opponent — because, she said, Brownback pursued a hefty tax cut for the rich that deprived schools of needed resources.
“I am shocked by what’s happened,” said Jamison, president of the Board of Education in this Wichita suburb. “I find it personally a very extreme stance.”
Davis retains strong leads among moderate voters and Independents, while taking 27 percent of the Republican vote from Brownback. He also has double-digit leads in the state’s two largest television markets, making a Brownback comeback a more difficult and potentially more expensive proposition.
By contrast, Kansas’ cuts to education as a result of the revenue hit was a contentious issue in Brownback’s near defeat to Democrat Paul Davis last month.
the key word in that sentence is NEAR.
Do you know what another word for a “near defeat” is? VICTORY!
Even with a libertarian candidate grabbing 4% of the vote in the end Brownback still won by 3 1/2 pts, yet like with the government shutdown stuff the left continues to insist that the all of this will destroy the GOP, even as it failed to do so.
That’s pretty amazing, but not as amazing as one other fact. That some on the right continue to fall for it.
When will we ever learn?
Update: GOP here is how the GOP should react when the left tells us to be so very afraid of our principles
If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below.
Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic super-PAC run by former political advisers to Majority Leader Harry Reid, sent about $1.5 million to two super-PACs that promoted businessman Greg Orman, who was running as an independent and refused to identify with which party he would caucus. Orman was ultimately unsuccessful in his campaign to unseat Republican incumbent Pat Roberts.
Senate Majority PAC sent $1.31 million to Committee to Elect an Independent Senate in five installments beginning on (you guessed it) Oct. 16, the start of the veiled disclosure period. The Reid-aligned PAC also sent $151,000 on Nov. 3-4 to Kansans Support Problem Solvers, which also backed Orman…
What you mean that the same party that when all in for “independent” Charlie Crist went all in for an independent in Kansas? I’m shocked SHOCKED.
This is a worthwhile story and Jazz is right to give it prominence but I have to take issue with his conclusion:
the big story here is that Harry Reid was dumping some mad cash into a push to elect Orman, who is not even a member of his party. I can already hear some of you saying, hold on… he can’t do that! But actually he can. And he did. That’s a rather dangerous game to be playing, though. When people were donating to Senate Majority PAC, was it with the understanding that their donations would be going to someone who flatly admitted that he might caucus with the Republicans if they took control of the Senate? Or were they intending to have their money spent on Democrats?
A full accounting of all these contributions will be forthcoming. Harry Reid may have a bit of explaining to do to both his big dollar donors and his base at large.
I submit and suggest that the only people who believed Greg Orman was an “independent” were those voters the MSM were trying to deceive, just as that same media tried to convince Floridians in 2010 that Charlie Crist was an independent. They are the same folks to that Jonathan Gruber hoped to fool as well.
Jazz is a fine reporter but here’s wrong here. The big money democrats might have an issue with Harry Reid’s strategic decisions because those decisions as I noted likely cost Democrats the Senate but let’s not for one moment pretend that any of those donors who funded that campaign of deception believed it.
The year is almost over but I’m still hoping to make enough from my own niche market to salvage 2014 but it will take $4500.
If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below
“The midterm election is a year away. There’s plenty of time for Republicans to work on the brand, but they’ve taken a bit of a beating here. They’ve got some work to do. They need a bit of a makeover,” King said.
Yesterday the federal government shut down for the first time in two decades due, in part, to the GOP’s growing opposition to contraception. Republicans are intent on rolling back women’s rights, and this time they are holding the federal government hostage in an attempt to advance their agenda.
And when they weren’t complaining they were laughing
Seriously? Republicans Threaten ANOTHER Government Shutdown Over Obamacare!
And all that was before the election, an election that not only increased the GOP majority in the House but gave them a much larger majority in the senate than expected, yet we are still hearing this nonsense:
This GOP strategy is ideal for a party that has developed a reputation of not governing in the recent past. In October 2013, the House of Representatives and the Senate could not agree on an appropriations continuing resolution, or a bill to fund the government. This government shutdown was largely caused by conservatives who wished to defund or delay the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as “Obamacare.”
This move was largely considered to be a total disaster for the GOP. Shutting down the government severely damaged the Republican brand.
Maybe if it’s just me but if I had the type of election after standing up to Obama & the Democrats by shutting down the Government that the GOP did I’d not be all that afraid of opposing them again.
The year is almost over but I’m still hoping to make enough from my own niche market to salvage 2014 but it will take $4500.
If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below
After seeing this article concerning Occidental College’s involvement in the political process for school credit
The results were the first for Occidental’s biannual program, in which students spend the beginning of a semester working in the field and then return to campus, studying campaign tactics and political theory, discussing their experiences and the results of the election.
In addition to talking about the finer points of voter engagement and campaign donations, the students also talk about the more unsavory aspects of democracy: negative ads, doors slammed in your face and what it’s like to live on pizza for weeks at a time. And, for this group, what it’s like to feel depressed and cry after your candidate loses.
Which included this line:
All of the students worked for Democratic candidates;
and this one:
The two professors teaching the course — Peter Dreier and Regina Freer — were concerned enough that they asked the religious counselor to visit the class.
My questions are these:
1. If a college is giving full time credit for working for these campaigns is this not an “in-kind” donation to the candidates and parties by the school that much be reported as such?
2. How is this college preparing folks for the real world when you have people who are so freaked out by losing a campaign that you have to summon “religious counselor” visit the class after an electoral defeat?
Meanwhile at the same time that Landrieu is trying to run from her base by pretend she is something she is not Barack Obama is running toward his by being what he is:
Obama has pledged to use his executive powers to alter the immigration system before the end of the year, though it remains unclear exactly when he will act. He has asked senior aides and Cabinet secretaries to present him with options but has not formally huddled with them to make a final decision, according to administration officials.
This has produced a lot of shock of argument from the right and talk of a big fight, with many figures arguing that the president is making a huge mistake by ignoring the will of the electorate. Why can’t they be more like Mary Landrieu & try to pivot toward the electorate.
They have it exactly backwards.
Not in terms of policy, the idea of a mass amnesty is a horrible policy that is going to hurt the country tremendously for years to come, and both the building of the Keystone pipeline and defending life iar the right things to do.
But politically the President has it exactly right and Mary Landrieu has it wrong
Absolutely nothing he may do is likely to expand his popularity among the people who just rejected his agenda and after six years of president Obama in office it’s highly unlikely he’s going to earn any new followers among the general public.
Politically The only thing he can do is to play to his base that has stuck with him, and since said base, and while some of his media base would like to play up to the candidates running in 2016 they are still afraid of the race or the sex cards being played on them.
The President may not have any gumption in dealing with Putin or Syria, but when it comes attacking his political foes he’s a tiger. This is exactly the type of thing that’s necessary for him to be relevant not only in terms of the remainder of his term but in terms of the next presidential election. Bill Clinton is right:
He also said Obama should maximize his pulpit and not give in to being a “lame duck,”
Mary Landrieu on the other hand is making a mistake.
Now in fairness to the senator from Louisiana she is in a horrible position. Her odds of winning a runoff in a red state where President Obama is highly unpopular are long to begin with and her opponents are smelling blood in the water.
If she had been given proper support from Harry Reid over the last 18 months she might have had time to separate herself from the White House and be in a better position, but with only a few weeks to go she doesn’t have that luxury. She has no good options, only a series of longshot options and her best longshot option is to completely energize the base, that is the black vote.
She needs to go whole hog for Obama, she has to remind every single person that she ever pulled a sting for, crooked or straight of every single favor she ever did for them and bluntly tell them their choice is simple, someone who will pay off and someone who won’t.
Running as pro-life isn’t going to win a single pro-life voter any more than Scott Brown running as pro-choice was going to win a single abortion friend while going after positions dear to her base is only likely to prompt them to stay home in a race they figure is lost anyway.
In the public service business you have to decide if you want to be a statesman or a politician. It’s kinda late for either Obama or Mary Landrieu to pretend to be a statesman so they might as well be a politician who plays to win.
Speaking of winning the only way I can end this year a winner is if you consider hitting DaTipJar
It’s been a week since election days which produced a lot of big losers in Election 2014 on the left. In all the noise here is one that you might have missed:
Political candidates backed by the controversial Middle East advocacy group J Street were trounced at the polls on Tuesday, with J Street’s endorsees losing in almost every competitive race.
You remember J-Street they are the Jewish lobby that somehow never seems to fail to back the enemies of Israel.
This included races that they once described as “Must win“:
The controversial liberal advocacy group J Street has launched a fundraising blitz for two of its “strongest allies on the Hill,” Rep. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa) and Sen. Mark Udall (D., Colo.).
“We can’t afford to lose these two races,” J Street political director Dan Kalik wrote in a recent email to supporters, urging them to donate at least $18 dollars to Udall and Braley.
And remember these were incumbents with all the advantages of incumbency in their hands. Oddly enough they have been trying to spin this as a win but observers are not fooled:
“J Street does this after every election,” said one senior official with a pro-Israel organization. “They endorse dozens of no-risk candidates so that when their competitive picks get crushed, which they almost always do, J Street can still claim victory.”
“But it’s a dumb game that they’ll always lose,” the source said. “The American people are overwhelmingly pro-Israel and elect overwhelmingly pro-Israel candidates. Pro-Israel groups have sort of the opposite problem but for the exact same reason. It’s hard to cram more pro-Israel lawmakers into Congress, given how it’s almost already completely maxed out.”
But the defeat might not be a surprise when you consider this poll mentioned at Haaretz :
The poll asked respondents to rate their feelings of warmth towards various personalities and institutions on a scale of 0-100, and the results, in descending order of their mean score were: Netanyahu (61), Jon Stewart (58), Clinton (57), Democratic Party (51), Barack Obama (49), Malcolm Hoenlein (45), Sheldon Adelson (28), Republican Party (28), John Boehner (25) and the newly elected and soon to be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (24).
That’s right the same Jews who embrace the opponents of the state of Israel love them some Bibi.
The latest in our series of posts that will not surprise any person who has been paying attention.
Today’s installment comes a post from Granite Grok & a tweet from Boston Bridget on the Elections in NH.
While the GOP was winning Governorships in Illinois, Maryland and even Massachusetts and Republican Senate Candidates were winning every senate seat in sight at the very same time Maggie Hassan was beating Walt Havenstein holding the Governorship and Scott Brown was losing to Jeanne Shaheen.
So How did Havenstein manage to lose when the GOP was winning statewide? Granite Grok provides a clue
I can now tell the story – a meeting was set up, like back in 2010 with the leaders of the L&F wing of the Party with Papa Smurf (John Sununu Sr), for Havenstein. Walt arrived – and only 4 people were there instead of the scores that had been invited. Each and every one of them, including me, said “No apology, no support. We will not be used as cover; we will not be there”. It is my understanding that Havenstein was PISSED – he was the Nominee so how DARE he not get that support and stomped out redfaced when told the reasons. He assumed that votes would be there – you know what “assumed” means. A lack of Consistency.
Oddly it appears that if you use sexual slurs to describe your base and refuse to apologize said people choose not to show up and vote for you.
Unlike Haverstein Brown didn’t directly insult his voters but he did choose to emphasize positions his base hated:
Brown especially with his absolutely pandering in on-bended-knee-running to Shaheen’s Left on being “I’m more Pro-Choice than her!!!!” told another large group of normally Conservative Republicans “I don’t need you at ALL” – that would be the large Pro-Life voters to whom this issue IS their top issue if not their SINGLE issue when voting.
Mind you there were pragmatic people who tried for him. Boston Bridget is as pro-life as they come yet there wasn’t a person who worked harder to try and elect him north of the border but that didn’t move the faithful:
@DaTechGuyblog@GraniteGrok I talked to a young woman in NH who said that ppl in her church refused to vote for either Senate candidate.
In each of these candidates, not maintaining a Consistency with their base cost them. It should show that trying to replace that base with another, and being very untransparent about it, failed to create a Trust and you both lost votes.
Yeah but a lot of high paid GOP consultant said otherwise, and we all know they know a whole lot more than a blogger in a Fedoraand scarf.
There are less than 60 days to the year and to say things are tight financially around here is to say the Titanic had a bit of a leak but there isn’t a lot of money in telling GOP candidates things as they are rather than what they and the establishment want them to hear.
If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below
On Tuesday two historic events took place involving black running from office.
In Utah a land where over 60% of the population is Mormon (a religion that has an ahem, interesting history with black Americans) elected Mia Love to congress. She becomes the first black republican woman ever elected to the house of representatives.
Meanwhile 2000 miles to the east in South Carolina, the birthplace of Secession, Republican Tim Scott because the first black Senator of either party, to be elected from the south since reconstruction.
If one wanted to trace the history of progress of the Black community in America these would both be notable events.
But in an interview with the Washington Post back in May, Congressman Clyburn thought this was nonsense.
“If you call progress electing a person with the pigmentation that he has, who votes against the interest and aspirations of 95 percent of the black people in South Carolina, then I guess that’s progress,” Clyburn told the Post.
Now I’m sure that the people would argue that it’s not the color of the skin but the content of one’s character that matters therefore the NAACP has an argument about not acknowledging Scott or Love in a public way, that is of course if they consider being a member of the GOP beyond the pale.
The only problem with making that kind of argument is that I seem to recall back in the days when my traffic was better, the type of politicians the NAACP feel are worth defending:
The NAACP, New England Area Conference (NEAC), respectfully requests that the Massachusetts House of Representatives abstain from voting in the matter of the expulsion of Representative Carlos Henriquez, expected to come before the House today. In the alternative, Members of the House are asked to vote against the expulsion of their colleague.
in July of 2012 he was charged with Kidnapping and assault of a woman. In Sept the kidnapping charge was dropped but the other charges remained pending.
Strangely enough this took place at the height of the entire “War on Women Meme” was being advanced by the press however as Mr. Henriquez has a (D) next to his name the media didn’t find those charges reflective of the War on Women meme so not only did it get very little press, but even with the charges hanging over him he ran for re-election and won by 46 points! in his overwhelmingly Democrat Boston district.
As my former co-host Joe Mangiacotti said during an interview with Kirsten Hughes Chairwoman of the GOP:
According to police he choked and punched Catherine Gonzalez in the Summer of 2012 that was his, he took her for a ride and took her cell phone she was, drove her to Boston she was able to escape the vehicle and call the police
“When a woman tells you she doesn’t want to have sex, that means she does not want to have sex.”,
However Rep Henriquez refused to resign and continued to work from his jail cell:
DaSilva said Henriquez’s office is fielding four or five constituent calls a day, mostly from people concerned about cuts to unemployment benefits. She said Henriquez also has been reviewing budget amendments, though she would not say which.
But it wasn’t until a month later that the Massachusetts House, overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats finally decided to vote on expelling him from their body.
And it was then that the NAACP decided to spring into action. They wrote in his defense to the Great & General Court (the Massachusetts House) imploring them not to expel the convicted representative:
Why on earth would they do this?
There are two basis on which NEAC makes the request. Firstly, the matter of expulsion is premature since Representative Henriquez’s case is under appeal. The House of Representatives must respect the Massachusetts judicial process and let Representative Henriquez’s case before the Appeals Court proceed, without jumping to judgment before the appellate decision is rendered.
Seriously? A conviction isn’t good enough, he has to lose the appeal as well. Cripes with a good set of lawyers to delay the process he could stay long enough to become speaker.
Secondly, while NEAC respects the jury’s decision, there is currently no rule for expulsion that applies to misdemeanor convictions. Representative Henriquez was duly elected by the electorate and there is no legal basis upon which the House of Representatives can properly act.
While the MSM never bothered to cover this story, the internet is forever.
So let’s recap. Massachusetts State Representative Carlos Henriquez: convicted of assaulting a women, admonished by a judge about no meaning no who is a democrat and the son of an Obama secretary, worthy of a written defense by the NAACP to keep him in his seat.
US Senator Tim Scott & Mia Love, both elected winning historic elections in areas where blacks had been suppressed or diminished, not worth a mention.
I’m guilty of many things, but one is talking about race and Things Black too much.
The reputational demise of public astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson elicited a great deal of Schadenfreude, but it depressed me for one reason: I liked seeing a black person talk about something other than race, being black, or crime–the last of which is all too often a byproduct of race. Finding out that Mr. Tyson is a bit of a charlatan made me sad.
That said, in this post, I will be again guilty of discussing race, but only to point to three pockets of hope on the subject.
The mindterm election this past week saw the turning of the U.S. Senate to the GOP and GOP gains for the House. Among these are Senator Tim Scott (SC), Representative-Elects Mia Love (UT-4), and the much-less heralded, but no less significant Will Hurd (TX-23). That these three people are black and Republican is remarkable in itself, but some might also find it equally remarkable that the majority of each constituency is non-black. (Mr. Hurd’s district consists of mostly of Americans of Mexican ancestry.) However, this shouldn’t be surprising at all.
Most (all?) U.S. congressional districts represented by black Democrats–Congressional Black Caucus members–have long been carved out for them. I contend that each one of them has been planted by the Democrat Party and the party heavily funds all of their campaigns.
It is a method of keeping each of these districts voting Democratic, keeping the voters quiet about economic progress, and it feeds on the indoctrinated notion that having a representative who looks like you somehow elevates you. That same notion explains why virtually all black American voters voted for Barack Obama, especially in 2012. And I need to repeat: it keeps each of these districts voting Democratic. This is how the fallacy of black=Democrat was born.
An inverse anecdotal example: I live in a district with a majority-black voting base–formerly represented by Maxine Waters and recently re-carved in order for Karen Bass to retain her place at the table–and have watched, cycle after cycle, as Republicans–usually black, but not always–have haplessly run, including the locally famous homeless activist Ted Hayes in 2008. These brave people get no publicity and, usually, little funding, though Mr. Hayes got a great deal of the latter.
Back to the newly elected black Republicans, the demographics of these pockets of post-racialism is the real progress: that three people who do not look like the majority of their constituents can be elected by them and that three black politicians can base their campaigns on issues other than race.
Sheldon:All the non human apes are classified as “great apes” except one, That means taxonomists created the entire category of “lesser ape” just to single out the poor Gibbon as the weird kid on the playground. Now there’s a hairy little fellow with a genuine beef.
Leonard:But the gibbon doesn’t know what it’s categorized as, it doesn’t even know it’s called a “Gibbon”.
Sheldon: True. [Turning to Howard] Sorry kid You’ve got it worse than a Gibbon.
The Big Bang Theory The Prom Equivalency 2014
Ok this week Democrats lost the senate, lost the governorship of states such as Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts, lost practically every close race there was to lose and the president’s post election presser was apparently a disaster.
In the end, Konni Burton was true to her word: She reclaimed Senate District 10 for her party.Burton, a Republican, claimed 53 percent of the vote to Democrat Libby Willis’ 44.5 percent
Seriously DaTechGuy, after all that’s gone wrong for Democrats you think they’re going to be upset at losing a state level seat in Texas? Well that seat had some significance:
The battle for District 10 wasn’t just about one Senate seat. It was about the ideological balance of power in the Legislature’s upper chamber.
Supporters dropped millions of dollars into the race, with some of the largest donations for Burton coming from the Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC and some of Willis’ largest donations coming from the Mostyn Law Firm in Austin or the Mostyn-funded Back to Basics PAC.
Ok so it was an important state seat, but still that’s not going to drive Democrats nuts, but there’s more…
Burton, considered a rock star in Republican circles, drew support from a variety of people, including U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a high-profile darling of the Tea Party, local GOP state Reps. Jonathan Stickland, Matt Krause, Bill Zedler and Giovanni Capriglione and Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley.
OK so a tea party texan won it Texas, that’s still not so odd but here is the coup de grace
The decisive seat in Texas that affected the ideological balance of Texas that now belongs to a Tea Party Republican, belonged to a democrat for the last six year, that Democrat’s name?
The defense of the unborn is very personal for me. My husband Phil and I are the proud parents of Tori and Faith, whom we adopted through the Gladney Center in Fort Worth. This session I was proud to join thousands of conservative activists in peacefully supporting pro-life bills in the Texas Legislature. The people of Senate District 10 deserve a Senator who respects all human life. In the Senate, I will fight to keep Texas tax dollars from going to Planned Parenthood or any organization that provides abortions. I will also oppose any federal incursions into Texas designed to mandate that citizens purchase healthcare covering elective abortions.
Konni Burton, the Republican who won it, is as conservative as they come. Burton is from the district and had trouble finding someone to challenge Davis, so she decided to just run herself (before Davis decided to enter the gubernatorial contest instead of running for re-election). After Davis’ 2013 filibuster, Burton told me for a piece I wrote for the National Review that her fundraising picked up.
“I was doing well with fundraising previous to this, but this has certainly helped, this pro-abortion stand that Wendy has taken,” Burton said at the time. “It’s a stand for abortions after five months! It’s helped immensely.”
Perhaps she will send a “Thank You” card to NBCCBSABCCNNNPRMSNBCNYT & Planned Parenthood for delivering the seat and a 2/3 majority to the GOP in the Texas state senate.
As a Massachusetts conservative watching the national media go wild about the election of a Republican Governor completely ignoring the lack of coattails (hell the lack of coat) is a source of frustration.
Charlie Baker is a nice guy and he means well but his election is not likely to have more than a cosmetic effect
The best way to explain the problem is to think of Baseball and the difference between buying a championship and building a dynasty.
In Massachusetts there are two conflicting views of the party, the establishment that is interested in the top of the ticket. It produces for those at the top patronage and excellent resume fodder in the hopes of getting a national political position.
Because of that goal they can’t take the time to build a farm team, every year that passes brings up a crop of people in Red States vying for those same jobs with resumes filled with actual positions in government.
They need that governorship today, they can’t wait around for the GOP to start winning seats in the statehouse, in fact a strong GOP controlled house and or senate will simply mean a crop of rivals with strong resumes in government as well.
Then there is the grass-roots Tea Party activists. They aren’t looking for a job from the government. They are looking to be able to keep their own jobs and business intact and be able to afford to have a decent life to raise their children here without either being hit in the pocketbook or because of their religious & social values.
For them it’s the bottom of the ticket that matters since until there is a change in the state senate and house all a GOP Governor can do is delay the day of reckoning.
So the idea is to start at Single A, city councilors, school committees. Recruit candidates to fill those spots. Then in four or five years those people can run for mayor, country offices, register of probate etc. the Double AA of electoral politics at the state level while a new grew group of people are recruited for the single A offices. After a few years the AA polls will start running in the state house and senate and positions like secretary of state & AG and within a few years viola you have a full slate of viable candidates not only for the Governor’s office but for congressional and senate seats.
Until the Massachusetts GOP decides to embrace the base GOP leaning votes will continue to leave the state and sooner or later there won’t be enough left to allow even a Republican as socially liberal as Charlie Baker won’t have a prayer ever again.
Today there are a lot of high fives going around in GOP circles celebrating Stacy McCain style and a lot of spin being made.
People are rightly blaming Barack Obama for the defeat of many a Democrat Senate candidate but in truth he is the secondary cause. There is one person who is ultimately culpable for the democrats Senate defeat and that person is Senate Majority leader Harry Reid.
Part of the job of a party leader is to protecting members of the caucus. Thus a House Speaker or Senate Majority Leader preserves his power reading the mood of the country and their districts of his members. The leader provides votes that can help weak members get reelected and avoiding votes that would hurt it, even if such votes are ostensibly against the will of the party or their President.
Lucky for Senator Reid the GOP house passed a plethora of bills that provided Golden opportunities for those Senators at risk to cast votes popular in their states that their counterparts in the house had already taken advantage of. The catch, the White House didn’t want those bills to see the light of day and risk the President having to make an uncomfortable veto.
So Harry Reid had a choice:
Allow such bills a vote in the Senate to give vulnerable Senators a chance to publicly vote against the president.
Keep the bills from ever seeing the light of day and protect the president from casting an unpopular veto
He chose the latter and sacrificed his caucus for Barack Obama.
What’s even more amazing is he could have provided the votes his members needed while still giving the White House the cover they desired, to wit
He could have killed those bills in committee allowing his members to create profound soundbites to send home but keeping them there long as to run out the clock
He could have sent those bills to committee with large enough majorities that his vulnerable senators could vote for them there without reporting them out.
He could have allowed highly amended version of said bills, completely unacceptable to the House, to come out of committee for a vote causing the House members in conference to kill it.
He could have allowed the bills to pass and then appoint a conference committee designed to block and stall said bills to run out the clock.
He could have allowed members in safe districts to filibuster the conference report blocking the final bill from getting to the White House.
He could even have allowed a procedural vote on the bills and arrange for 41 of his safe senators to keep them blocked.
Any one of those steps on a half-dozen bills on key issues from the Keystone Pipeline to Obamacare could have made a difference giving a vulnerable senator a Hell’s Canyon Dam to hang their hat on and the media something to spin and giving nervous incumbents an argument against retirement. A Tip O’Neill or a Lyndon Johnson would have done it.
But Harry Reid is not Lyndon Johnson or Tip O’Neill and so the Democrat majority had to die so Barack Obama’s ego, an ego that demanded he not be exposed for the weakling he is, could live.
Thanks Harry, we appreciate it.
Harry Reid was first elected to the house in 1983 serving under Speaker Tip O’Neill. He was elected to the senate in 1987 and has been part of the leadership since 1999. He know how the game is played and what was necessary to keep his majority. Yet he tossed it away.
Given that fact I wonder what the White House had on him to keep him in line?
Today is election day and a lot of pixels will be used by plenty of people including me concerning what will happen and what it means.
But no Matter how the vote comes out this evening, whether Conservatives are treated to the sequel to the Big Red Wave or liberals take glee at the defeat of Mitch McConnell, Jodi Ernst and particularly Scott Walker, if there is one paragraph about election day and it’s aftermath that Conservatives should take to heart it is this one from Robert Stacy McCain:
We have congressional elections every two years, and elect a president every four years, but the culture shapes the attitudes and beliefs of our youth seven days a week, 52 weeks a year, every year, from the time a kid starts watching Sesame Street until the time he’s an adult who has been so thoroughly indoctrinated that he cannot think outside the limits of this cultural programming.
That conservatives who pride themselves at looking at things as they actual are must be reminded of this is sad. That Christians who if they have been the least bit catechized understand the Devil is the “prince of the world” is ironic.
That it is very likely the majority of Republicans and Conservatives will forget this truism, is disastrous.
Today is election day and our friends on the left have a world of worry in states all across the county.
A lot of Democrats are in sheer panic. We will see plenty of dishonest and dishonorable tactics used by professional Democrats to keep their pols in office, to keep their staffs in comfortable jobs , to keep their friends getting government contracts and to make sure their friends in non profits can draw large salaries “for the children”. For these connected people their first concern is and always has been, the gravy train.
There are also a lot of Democrats who are ordinary people who aren’t remotely connected. Some have been Democrats all their lives and instinctively hate Republicans the way Red Sox fans hate the Yankees. Others have been sold a bill of goods by either MSNBC or their unions or the various web sites. Still others have been taught by the celebrity culture that Republicans are “uncool” and still others honestly hold the opinion that the ideas of the Democrat party and/or liberalism and socialism are better than the ideas of the Republican party and/or conservatism.
But regardless of motivations, selfish or selfless both groups have one thing in common. If they were asked to pick one race, other than their own, to go their way. If they could wave a magic wand and guarantee that no matter how bad a disaster tonight is for them, they would know one particular Republican would lose, from Concord New Hampshire to San Diego California, from Miami Florida to Spokane Washington the answer would be the same.
The guy Democrats want to see lose most of all is Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin.
No single person has been the source of greater grief to Democrats everywhere than Scott Walker.
It’s not that he won in a traditional blue state, that happens on occasion, it’s not that he’s considered a potential 2016 presidential candidate, there are plenty of GOP candidates out there ready and waiting to be hated.
What they can’t get over is he refused to be cowered in the face of all their might.
When the media said his changes were going too far, he went ahead with them anyway.
When the Democrats fled the state rather than allow his measures to be voted on, he persevered.
When he was pilloried daily on the cable networks he went on their shows and fearlessly but politely, made his case.
When the national GOP ducked and covered and only people like Sarah Palin & the late Andrew Breitbart would back him up he soldiered on.
When the left was holding protests, occupying the statehouse,when teachers unions were getting doctors notes to skip class and make a mob, he remained cool and steady.
And when the entire left side of the country invested everything they had, everything they felt everything they desired in one last desperate recall attempt to get rid of him, he not only beat them, but beat them by a margin totally unexpected.
All that is bad enough but when Walker program went into effect not only the indentured servants forced into unions flee but the desired and suggested results that he stated happened to the advantage of cities, towns and schools all over the state, but to the disadvantage of the Democrat interests who used the public treasury as their public fiefdom.
He demonstrated that the promises of the Democrats were hollow, Walker will never be forgiven for this
Even if by the end of the day every Senate Democrat New Hampshire to Alaska fell, Even if Brian Herr could pull off the impossible dream by beating Ed Markey in Massachusetts, even if Charlie Crist collapsed in Florida and Daniel Mallow imploded in Connecticut and it would matter one bit.
Because as long as Scott Walker is defeated in Wisconsin as far as the media is concerned that will be the only story of election 2014 and the conga line of liberals and media will run from the New York to the DNC HQ in Washington.
As everyone knows I supported first Karen Testerman and then Bob Smith for the GOP Senate in NH furthermore I argued that nominating Scott Brown might cause 2A and pro-life people to stay home.
However not only did Scott Brown win the primary but he’s run an excellent campaign overall. Combine this with a poor campaign by Shaheen, and the record of president Obama on Ebola & ISIS and viola Senator Brown has a real chance to take that seat.
In one respect win or lose Brown has already done a huge service for the GOP. When the election season began nobody was picking NH as a state the GOP could flip. Thanks to a strong well-financed campaign by Brown the left has spent an inordinate amount of 3rd party/national money resources defending New Hampshire that they could have spent in Louisiana, or Alaska, or North Dakota, or Colorado, or Arkansas, or Iowa, or North Carolina or Montana or Virginia or in the Florida Governor Race etc etc etc.
Taking money from the left is good, but winning the Senate is better and now the Tea Party and Conservatives in New Hampshire have a chance to not only spike the ball providing a final service for conservatives running nationwide.
Until election day an election is like a marketing campaign, but on election day it’s like a battle where morale is critical. As New Hampshire is one of the eastern states it will be reporting earlier than many other states.
If the Democrats media allies can project a victory in New Hampshire fairly early it will keep up the morale of liberals farther west where pols are still open who will be working as hard as they can to hold senate and house seats. It will provide a narrative that will make it easier for Democrat talking heads to keep the troops fighting till the last poll closes.
But picture if by 9 or 10 PM New Hampshire is still in doubt, or better yet imagine if the networks find themselves calling the state for Brown.
Picture the analysts on MSNBC trying to spin a Brown victory as not a fatal disaster for Democrats, picture them trying to give hope to their party faithful farther west, that a loss in NH doesn’t mean the Senate is going GOP bigtime while wearing drawn faces. Even a race that can’t be called will have a depressing effect.
Such a blow could be critical, if the left decides there simply isn’t hope how many may choose to give up? How many will go home, stop working, vote for a green or 3rd party liberal or even to not bother to vote figuring they can’t make a difference. Picture what that will mean not just in Senate & House races but up and down the ticket for the GOP.
While Senator Brown is not the ideal candidate to many conservatives aiding a victory by him on Tuesday might in NH might make the difference between winning and losing for stronger House and Senate conservatives across the nation.
So I urge you , if you are a New Hampshire Tea Party voter, a second amendment defender or even like me, a strong pro-life voter and considered staying home or even voting 3rd party reconsider, because choosing to elect Scott Brown may do more for your cause than you can possibly imagine.
Election results won’t be coming in until Tuesday night, but it’s already time to select the biggest loser of the midterms: environmentalists and their climate change agenda.
During the brutally cold 2014 winter, San Francisco hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer announced that he would be contributing $50 million to his NextGen Climate Action PAC–and he was hoping to raise $50 million more with the goal of making global warming and extreme weather a top political issue during the midterm campaign.
Last month a recent Gallup Poll found that climate change was the least important of thirteen issues it put before voters. When I reported on Steyer’s $100 million objective–one he now claims he never set–on my own blog months ago, I wrote, “Anyway, a fool and his money are easily parted, which makes me wonder how Steyer became a billionaire.”
I certainly got the “fool” part right.
Our cold winter led to a short spring and a cool summer. As for extreme weather, there have been fewer tornadoes this year. For instance, this August saw fewer twisters than any August since the 1960s–despite much better detection technology. While Pacific hurricane activity is up this year, for the second year in a row there have been few Atlantic hurricanes, something that wasn’t mentioned by the mainstream media when the second anniversary of Hurricane Sandy passed.
The Democrats may hang on to their majority in the US Senate, but the trends of late make the Republicans the favorite.
But the climate change activists will lose no matter the electoral outcome.
One of the few setbacks in the march of radical feminism & liberalism in the country since the 60’s was the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks of 2001.
For decades manliness was portrayed as a primitive outdated quality. Undesirable to society, particularly in a post cold war world. Gone were they days when an aspiration to be a fighting man was a virtue. Army men were broken weak beings, more likely to snap and be a danger to the public then be their protector. To be used not as a fighting force to combat threats but as a giant NGO.
But when the planes hit the twin towers, suddenly the left’s portrayal of the world as a place where the US was the problem didn’t sell. Suddenly people were less worried about a tough fireman whistle at a passing woman than their willingness to run into a collapsing tower. Soldiers went from the ignorant who could not get another job to the brave men who are our shield against those who wanted to kill us.
These men went from the wolves ready to attack, to the sheepdogs guarding the flock in the blink of an eye.
During such times it’s impossible to forget the nature of the world as a dangerous unforgiving place. Our cultural “betters” were checkmated and for a time the nation acted accordingly, but as it always does time passed, the threats were defeated and people forgot.
It’s a cycle that’s very common, the good times, followed by the bad and the great awakenings. It goes back to Old testament days, Israel cries for help, God delivers them, they get comfortable, forget God, are conquered, they cry for help and the cycle starts again, If you look at the history of great nations this is extremely common, they get comfortable, soft and then reality smacks em in the face, they deal with it and forget. Only nations under constant threat such as Poland & Israel are immune.
And that brings us to election 2014.
The Bills of Obamacare are coming due, the jobs that were promised have not come, the millennials who thought Obama was going to usher in a golden age are still living with their parents mired in college debt without prospects, ISIS is running rampant is able to behead Americans with impunity and you have “lone wolf” attacks in the US making news. On Ebola the government seems unwilling or unable to do what needs to be done.
In 2008 you could spin Barack Obama as the savior of the world and the young would believe it, in 2012 with Bin Laden dead and Obamacare not implemented the media could still spin away the problems that had not yet been solved.
But now six years and reality has caught up to women, to millennials, to latinos. It’s no longer possible to sell the Democrat party to an overwhelming majority of them based on minutiae like birth control pills.
As for the black community while an appeal to Black pride could overcome economic realities with the first black president running for reelection in 2012. But now it’s 2014, Obama is not running and no amount of crying Jim Crow, Michael Brown or Trayvon Martin will create the same cultural stakes.
While the rest of the world was focused on game six of the world series, the national race for the senate and the Charlie Baker Martha Coakley debate two candidates for State Senate in Massachusetts and their supporters converged on Leominster city hall:
Both Senator Jen Flanagan & former rep Rich Bastien’s people turned out in force for the pre-debate standout while inside the final preparations were made.
While the debate was carried on Leominster Public access cable it still drew a fair-sized crowd.
Unlike the Wofford Tsongas debate applause was allowed after answers. That came in handy allowed me time to live tweet just about every question and response. Before I get to some of those tweets let me give you the post debate comments of both candidates first Senator Flanagan
Then former rep Bastien
In the debate the candidates agreed on more issues than you might expect. from the Kinder pipeline (both opposed although Flanagan wants to work with federal reps) the new bottle bill (both opposed Bastien calling it a tax on water Flanagan saying it’s not necessary with the current recycling). Both suggested college costs have to be controlled (Flanagan talking about controlling fees Bastien suggesting state money directed to well endowed colleges be diverted toward state and community colleges) and both against increasing taxes to pay for mental health programs (Bastien noting his signing of the no-tax pledge Flanagan saying new taxes won’t help arguing for reorganization instead).
There were also pronounced differences on a new Fitchburg Charter School (Bastien for Flanagan against) On question 1 the automatic Gas tax, Bastien calling it ducking responsibility and noting the cost per mile of road in Mass. vs other states while Flanagan noting she is constantly told by local cities & towns that more money is necessary for roads.
The elbows came out when Bastien hit Flanagan on her record nothing she voted for the budget including the bottle bill and for Deval “Patrickcare” while coming out against the ballot question and the nursing cuts but the most dramatic exchange came after the obligatory mutual Unitil bashing..
Bastien noted Flanagan while hitting Unitil took campaign donations from them, Flanagan was indigent
#flanagan says it’s ridiclious to think she’s paid off over #unitil I don’t look at campaign finance report before I vote.
#bastien notes a lobbiest who donated bragges about influence, why do you take the money #flanagan You’ll have to ask them (big ouch there) — Peter Ingemi (@DaTechGuyblog) October 28, 2014
Tip O’Neill famously noted he didn’t look at donations when he was voting but while Flanagan’s defense drew strong applause from her supporters at the debate her answer in an age when national democrats are constantly talking about the corrupting influence of money from corporations might not play well beyond the base.
applause not withstanding it’s not a winning argument to voters saying that money doesn’t influence votes #flanagan#bastien
In fairness it’s really a catch 22 for a sitting committee chair running for re-election. If your influence as a finance sub committee chair of a 30+ Billion dollar budget is a selling point for voters of a district it’s certainly going to be an even bigger selling point for firms looking to influence how that money is spent when they decide who to give money to. It’s the classic chicken & egg problem and if this was a national race the video of that exchange would go viral potentially destroying a candidate.
With a local race and an office holder who is fairly well-known in the district with a reputation as a caring advocate, particularly on mental health issues (where a lot of the debate oddly seemed to focus on) A quote like that might be twitter fodder but it’s unlikely to produce more than minor damage, even in a state as cynical as Massachusetts.
My take? I’d give Bastien the debate on points but I don’t think Flanagan cost herself votes that she already had.
I think this race is going to come down on turnout if “Turn the rascals out” is the cry then in the year of a GOP wave Baker’s coattails will make the difference for Bastien, if however the sentiment is more anti Coakley than anti incumbent mood then she has a great chance of staying where she is.
I’d watch this race, it might say a lot about where at least Central Massachusetts is going.
Let me introduce you to Ann Wofford she is the GOP candidate running in the Massachusetts 3rd District for congress
Yesterday I had the pleasure of watching her debate incumbent Niki Tsongas in Devens Ma. and if you following my livetweet of the debate you would realize she is something special.
Tsongas is a practiced debater and a well spoken woman but Wofford not only answered questions directly but her plain-spoken opponent was not only more than a match for her but bluntly spoke truths that would make any Conservatives’ heart go pitter patter on comprehensive healthcare
question on jobs #wolford Talks about regulation killing jobs ” Congress has shown it can’t do comprehensive anything” #ma3#ma3debate
Those three quotes: The Federal government is not here to save us, Nobody believes this president anymore and “Congress has shown it can’t to comprehensive anything” would all be best sellers at any GOP event nationwide and are sentiments that a majority of the country might support.
And when Niki Tsongas pushed a minimum wage increase as a panacea for women in distress & the middle class in distress Wofford bluntly answered “We live in two different worlds.” that pretty much sums up conservatives vs liberals on real life. I summed up the debate here
And livetweeted throughout the event. I didn’t shoot much video other than the closing statements
but the Lowell Sun site has video available. but that not what struck me about this debate.
as I mentioned when summing up this is the first time I’ve gone to a Tsongas debate and didn’t see a line of Niki Tsongas yard signs lining the road that you take to the debate, in fact if I didn’t know which road to take or have printed directions a person driving through the main road through Devens who have absolutely no idea this event was going on.
I submit and suggest this was deliberate, Tsongas is a good candidate but Wofford is an impressive woman and the last thing you want if you are an incumbent of the Gilligan party in one of the most depressed districts in a state is to highlight an opponent that simply radiates competence.
But that point raises another. It’s one week before election day. Why am I only now discovering this about Ann Wofford?
The district is considered relatively competitive, and Tsongas has several times barely cleared 50 percent against relatively unknown and outspent GOP opponents. There have even been competitive primaries for the chance to face her.
But this time, nobody stepped up—which is why, Wofford tells me, she decided to do it herself. “I just feel that is outrageous,” for the incumbent to go unchallenged, she says. “I do not feel that I am represented by my current congressperson, and I refuse to be told you have no choice.”
In a year when competence is the #1 issue, in an era where the left is constantly pushing the “anti-woman gop” lie don’t you think that a highly competent, poised woman who can go toe to toe with a long-term incumbent might be someone you want to push? Particularly when you’ve only got three contested congressional seats in the state:
Wofford, a chemical engineer with 17 years in the private sector, was raised in Western Massachusetts and now lives in Haverhill with her husband and two daughters. She emphasizes fiscal responsibility, concerns about the Affordable Care Act (her husband works in New Hampshire, where just one provider participates in the health insurance exchange), and securing the borders against illegal immigrants. Her rhetoric, while not rabid by any means, is a bit too Tea Party-tinged for most of the state, but will resonate with a lot of people in that district.
So will her demands for more transparency in the federal government, and her charge of “dysfunction” in Washington politics. “It’s a separate world, where they help each other,” while the middle class stagnates, she says.
So you’ve got an intelligent, well educated and successful woman running in a competitive district and the party is doing squat to push her? Excuse me?
If I was the in charge of pushing the GOP in the state neither I nor any of my surrogates would be making a media appearance without mentioning Ann Wofford. If I had a visiting out-of-state party member visiting I’d have Ann on stage to meet them. The moment any person from either the left or the press (but I repeat myself) breathed the words “War on Woman” I’d be throwing Ann Wofford in their faces.
At the very least, Wofford stands as a welcome female face for a Massachusetts Republican Party sorely lacking them. Good luck trying to remember the last Republican woman nominee, let alone winner, for Congress or U.S. Senate in the Bay State.
On the national level I understand the party not putting a lot of resources into Massachusetts because, well it’s Massachusetts one of only 4 states that Obama is not upside down but that doesn’t excuse people at the state level not getting the word out. Other than Mary Lotz, Frank Ardinger and Richard Shufford I haven’t even heard a person mention her name. let alone tweet it.
After all how are you going to get the national party to kick in to turn things around if you don’t even let them see when you have a diamond in the rough?
I admit that this is my first piece on Wofford this cycle & I should have gotten to her sooner but despite what some might think I’m not paid to promote the GOP (although hits to DaTipJar are happily accepted) and there are people in the party who are, hell I’m not even a republican.
Anyway her web site is here. She deserves your support and attention because this is a woman to watch even if you have to figure out to watch her on your own.
There is one week to the election and we keep seeing new polls talking about how close things are, how the election will go down to the wire.
On MSNBC everyone is spinning looking at pols first saying how close it is , while at the same time claiming that things look good for their favorite candidates (like Chris Christie).
Granted a network needs a race, even beyond being Democrats with bylines they need you to have a reason to watch. No race means no story and their job is to keep you from switching over to Doctor Who reruns on BBC America. If the people in front of those camera can’t do that they’ll be replaced by other that can.
So in the interest of decoding what’s really happening out there these are the things to consider:
Right now the poll numbers mean very little, the odds of any trend suddenly reversing in the last week, baring something like a giant Ebola Outbreak or the fall of Baghdad, are pretty low. So the trends more than anything else will establish where these races are going.
But while the trends even in Massachusetts are good for the GOP right now, as the Leominster GOP committee chair notes, they hard work has to continue.
And that’s why last night, while Charlie Baker and Martha Coakley had at it in Worcester Two GOP candidates Rich Bastien running for State Senate in the Worcester Middlesex district and Brad Wyatt running for State Rep in the 12th Worcester district were at the Twin City Tea Party asking for votes and looking for workers.
Wyatt, in his first race has been approaching his fight against a 20 yr incumbent like a business concentrating on door knocking and contesting votes to the point where his opponent, who normally feels safe about ignoring GOP candidates, has been on the attack.
But attacks or no Wyatt soldiers on, to him both the campaign and a potential job as State Rep are problems to be solved. As he put it:
My time on earth is too short to go up to Boston to get along to go along
That’s the same theme that former State Rep Richard Bastien running in the Worcester and Middlesex district for State Senate discussed before the Tea Party. With a debate scheduled for tonight he had his pitch down pat talking not only about the area he wishes to represent, an area, that has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation but noting that for all his opponents talk of “Jobs” five decades of Democrat rule has led to decades of decline.
The democrats have been in control of Massachusetts longer than the Castro’s have controlled Cuba
The results have been similar people leaving as fast as they can.
He talked about the amount of outside money coming in for his opponents asking why groups in Ohio for example are spending money on a central mass State Senate race. He answered his question when he noted the state budgeted over 36 Billion dollars (not counting off budget items) this year.
That’s the final piece of the puzzle of election 2014.
For all the positive GOP trends and for all the leftists in office claiming they don’t know the president they hailed as a messiah in 2008 nationwide, there is a wild card to be considered: The Unions, the NGO, the green companies and all of the various groups that have lived high off the hog on the tax dollars their democrat allies have sent their way.
Given the spending levels of government Tens of millions of dollars are a drop in the bucket. These people are not going to give up those hundreds of billions of your tax dollars nationwide without a fight.
With that amount of money at stake if anyone for one moment thinks they will not violate law when all hey risk are low level operatives, is a fool.
The trends might be going your way and you might work very hard but if you aren’t keeping your eyes on the polls and ballots from the moment the doors are open till the last vote is counted you are setting yourself up for defeat.
You have been warned.
If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below
Sir Humphrey: Bernard, what would you say to your present master as the next Prime Minister? Bernard:The Minister? Sir Humphrey: Yes. Bernard: Mr Hacker? Sir Humphrey:Yes. Bernard:As Prime Minister? Sir Humphrey: Yes. [notes Bernard checking his watch] Are you in a hurry? Bernard:No; I’m just checking to see it wasn’t April the First.
Yes Minister Party Games 1984
In late November I’ll be celebrating the 7th anniversary of my blog. In those seven years there have been two instances where I woke up in the morning and was so surprised at what was being reported that I presumed I was still asleep and dreaming. The first was when Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize:
Being a normal and sane man I assumed I was still groggy or maybe still asleep and then turned on the TV.
Apparently not being George Bush counts for a lot. From what I’ve seen on Morning Joe even the White House seems a bit embarrassed.
Just woke up and turned on the TV but couldn’t find the controller so only saw the pictures of the pope and talk of an election, it wasn’t until about 4 minutes later that I found out that Benedict XVI will resign effective Feb 28th. I was rather surprised it was a contrast to Pope John Paul II who stayed on as an example of perseverance but of course it is up to the pope who decide if he is physically capable of ding the job.
Today came number 3 when I saw this headline at Hotair:
Boston Globe endorses Republican for MA governor
Granted it’s not as unusual for this to happen as a Pope resigning (after while you have to go to per-guttenburg days to find a Pope resigning you only have to go back 20 years to find the Globe going for Bill Weld.
Still the idea of the Boston Globe picking a republican is very odd to say the least, so odd that if you look at reaction from the right there is one person to blame for this and it isn’t Charlie Baker.
That’s a very fair point and the daily caller provides context
In past elections, The Globe has only backed Republican candidates in anticipation of landslide victories; Bill Weld crushed Mark Roosevelt in the 1994 election, garnering nearly 71% of the popular vote in the process.
I agree, the primary driver is the bandwagon effect but consider, you can’t have a bandwagon if someone hasn’t managed to get a lead and the Baker campaign deserves full marks for doing a better job than the last time he ran and lost, which apparently can’t be said for Martha Coakley.
And if you look a the the Globe’s editorial they make a legit case
Effective activist government isn’t built on good intentions. To provide consistently good results, especially for the state’s most vulnerable and troubled residents, agencies need to focus on outcomes, learn from their errors, and preserve and replicate approaches that succeed. Baker, a former health care executive, has made a career of doing just that. During this campaign, he has focused principally on making state government work better. The emphasis is warranted. And in that spirit, the Globe endorses Charlie Baker for governor.
This is very true of Charlie Baker but then again it was true of Charlie Baker the last time and that wasn’t enough to cause them to abandon Deval Patrick. This time however thanks to the Gilligan effect hitting Democrats this year, competent is the new sexy. The Globe continues:
Baker splits from the national Republican Party on social issues such as abortion rights and same-sex marriage. The commitment he expresses to avoid raising taxes shouldn’t be mistaken for an allergy to the public sector; Baker spent the formative years of his career deep in the weeds of government — first as secretary of health and human services under Governor William Weld and then secretary of administration and finance under Weld and Governor Paul Cellucci. In those years, he learned how agencies work (or don’t) and how budgets are balanced (or not).
Do not let the emphasis in this paragraph fool you, the only sentence that matters is the first one. I don’t care how much he knows about “how agencies work”, even with a veto proof majority in both houses if Baker gave even the slightest indication of social conservatism on abortion or Gay Marriage they wouldn’t care if he was going to win 99-1 and raise taxes 200% to feed the poor, they would be condemning him as a villain worse than Hitler and carrying Martha Coakley on their shoulders.
I know some on Twitter who have said that Baker is to the left of Coakley see this as confirmation of what they’ve said. Red Mass Group which previously expressed support for Baker has yet to update but as I’ll be attending a Tea Party event tonight, we’ll see what they have to say about the Globe endorsement.
What do I think? I think Rob Eno made the most important point in a piece on another subject:
Yes, I know, I am king of the RINOs because I support Charlie Baker for governor, so what right do I have complaining… The reason I support Charlie is because he isn’t Bill Weld, at least when it comes to party politics. Charlie has put his money where his mouth is when it comes to helping legislative candidates this cycle. Because of it, we look to make great gains.
For all my disagreements with Baker on social issues he would be one of the most competent men ever to sit in the corner office and if he has some coattails and advances the GOP to the point where there is the slightest chance that the Democrats might eventually lose their veto proof majorettes in both houses and help us repeal the gas tax then he will have done more for the state than any Governor has in decades.
Something that can’t go on forever won’t and the veto proof governance of Democrats for my lifetime has turned Massachusetts into a state you go to get an education and then get the hell out. ASAP if Baker can win this election (remember all this talk not withstanding he hasn’t won anything yet) and change this situation then he will deserve the support of the party and its faithful and the tanks of the state for years to come.
Of course if he does that then the Globe will certainly not back him a second time.
In its first political endorsement in three years–and the only one it will make in 2014–the Chicago Sun-Times says of this year’s Illinois governor’s race, “It may well be the most important election in our state’s modern history.”
I’ll one-up the Sun-Times here and declare it’s the most important Illinois election ever.
But some stubborn conservative-minded Illinoisans can’t see beyond the edge of their noses and insist on voting for the Libertarian candidate for governor, Chad Grimm, a thirty-three year-old who manages his family-owned gym in Peoria.
The other candidates are Chicago Democrat Pat Quinn, who inherited a mess when he succeeded his two-time running mate Rod Blagojevich. But until Blago was arrested in late 2008, Quinn was silent about the sins of the current inmate at the Englewood Federal Correctional Institution. The Republican nominee is Chicago North Shore businessman Bruce Rauner, who vows to phase out Quinn’s “temporary” income tax hike–which the incumbent now wants to make permanent.
In its endorsement of Rauner, the downstate paper News-Gazette opined, “One of the definitions of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over again with the expectation of different results.” That is why Quinn’s support is stuck among his base of left-wing ideologues and the uninformed, which in Illinois amounts to a shockingly high 40 percent of the electorate.
Even in President Obama’s home state, this should be Rauner’s race to lose. But in recent polls, Grimm has been collecting about five percent support. Grimm and his supporters know that it would be a fairy tale if he bested Rauner and Quinn. But the Libertarians see the 2014 governor’s race as a chess game. “If we break 5 percent,” Grimm said earlier this month, “we make ballot access easier in future elections.” It would. Minor party candidates need five times more signatures to gain ballot access than the Republicans and Democrats need. Is that fair? Probably not. However, there is too much at stake in Illinois this year for right-leaning voters, even it’s only a few of them, to throw away their vote just to make a statement.
Emptying my mind of some stray thoughts on Election 2014.
I might owe Scott Brown an apology, I thought he was doomed as a candidate as 2nd Amendment folks, pro-lifers and Rand Paul people who didn’t want another GOP senator in NH in 2016 talking up a rival would stay home but he recovered from some early mistakes, ran a smart campaign (with the exception of a single ad) and once again managed to take advantage of really dumb mistakes by an opponent in a year when Democrats are tanking.
On that same subject Martha Coakley has to stop running for higher office at times when Democrats are in the middle of shooting themselves in the foot.
I can’t really see what Charlie Baker is doing different this time around, that he is leading by so much really shocked me, however real change won’t come in Massachusetts until there we have more than 20% of the house seats and 10% of the senate.
I don’t understand Seth Mouton. He has an excellent back story but I haven’t seen his campaign run a single positive ad defining himself, even Richard Tisei’s negative ads are a split a negative with a positive.
I’ve really got to laugh when they link Tisei to Ted Cruz.
Nobody actually expected Wendy Davis to win in Texas but Democrats raised an awful lot of money for a year because of her race.
The only way that Democrats are going to oppose voting methods that make voter fraud easy is for republicans to take advantage of those methods of fraud more effectively than they.
When people argue that voter fraud doesn’t exist they remind me of Sicilians who used to say there was no such thing as the mafia. I still can’t keep a straight face when people say it.
It’s 10 years since the Red Sox won their first world series since 1918, the shine is still on it (of course winning two more since then certainly helps).
That being said has there ever been as great a post season as this one, every series, even the sweeps have been exciting?
Now that I think of it isn’t this a repeat of 100 years ago when the Giants and the Red Sox ruled the roost? Hope that doesn’t mean that after 2018 we’ll have to wait four generations to win again.
All the empirical evidence screams Big Red Wave but I think a lot of conservatives like me were burned in 2012 and are gunshy about publicly saying it too loud, but when you have democrats using Both Clintons, Both Obamas and Biden in MASSACHUSETTS with under 20 days to go, you’re in trouble.
Final thought, to those who think Hillary Clinton will be a strong president, if she wasn’t willing to Obama in 2008 when his people were intimidating her delegates and stealing the Texas primary / Caucus what make you think she’ll stand up to anyone else?
One can not look at this election cycle and watch the once feared Obama collapse without seeing parallels with the historical fall of tyrannies.
If you look at the history of repressive regimes there are two hard and fast rules concerning them:
1. Their Power is completely based on the fear of the population:
Mirror Spock:Terror must be maintained or the Empire is doomed
Star Trek Mirror Mirror 1967
This fear is usually established right at the start by a few choice examples and once established keeps people in line. It permeates every single ordinary activity. The butcher the baker and the candlestick maker all could be ready to report any dissent. Furthermore it doesn’t have to be fear of death, people with something to lose, a position, a business, any comfort they have might be even more effective that the threat of death to someone who has nothing.
As long as that fear is maintained the regime’s power remains. It creates a seal on the people that can’t be penetrated.
2. Once the fear is gone, the regime’s fall is very quick:
Marn:Citizens, I elect to join the Revolution.
Doctor Who The Sunmakers 1977
Fear has one weakness, it generates anger. Eventually either due to outside pressures or inside pressures the anger begins to leak out into the open, usually at the fringes on the edges. Unless it’s crushed , more and more of that repressed anger leaks out until it becomes overwhelming. The enforcers and toadies seeing what’s coming switch sides to save their skin until finally the regime tears open like the bottom of wet paper bag, the Mussolini or Ceaușescu is seized and it’s all over.
And that is what has apparently happened to Barack Obama this cycle.
At the very start any critique of Barack Obama was restrained by fear, not of violence, but of the race card.
Bill and Hillary Clinton were the first targets , their tongues tied, even as her supporters were intimidated in the Texas primary.
John McCain was next, unwilling to attack for fear of being dubbed racist by the media who loved him when he was attacking George Bush.
The Republicans in Congress were next cowed during the first two years, terrified of the race card and the power of the president, and mindful of the example being made of a Sarah Palin was willing to fight, by the media.
The regime didn’t see what was coming in 2010, tyrannies usually don’t, but when they did, sprang into action using the power of the government to go after the Tea Parties that had risen up against them. Placing fear in the heats of the donors and business in a failing economy afraid of being audited. Playing , with the help of the media the race card liberally and intimidating a feckless Mitt Romney unwilling to attack. By this they to maintain their power.
The power of the Obama administration was built on a lie of competence , was maintained by fear and intimidation but now that fear is gone. It only remains to be seen if he will take his entire party with him.
Update: Doug Mataconis objects to my use of the word Tyranny,
@DaTechGuyblog Calling it tyranny is the kind of pointless partisan rhetoric that makes me glad I’m not part of the partisan world anymore
Richard Tisei is the GOP candidate for congress in MA-6 his website is here. Tisei was the Lt. Gov candidate for the GOP last time around, and had spent 26 years in the MA House and senate before that.
He is openly gay and married his boyfriend last year. He has not been shy about hitting the GOP over gay marriage making big headlines at the start of the Mass GOP 2014 convention by boycotting it, stepping on former running mate Charlie Baker toes. It would have been the only story of the GOP convention if the party didn’t shoot Baker in the foot in an idiotic attempt to keep Mark Fisher off the ballot.
Last time around Tisei ran against the corrupt John Tierney in the 6th and lost by a hair. This year given the GOP wave coming, he was expected to beat him, but Democrats threw the rascal Tierney out in the primary by an overwhelming margin nominating Seth Moulton in the 6th.
What really makes things interesting is Seth Moulton back story. He parents are ultra liberals yet he still enlisted to fight in Iraq while disagreeing with the war and furthermore served multiple tours because he thought it was the honorable thing to do. It the type of thing that makes a conservative’s Heart go pitter patter
Moulton is a guy who had the world by the Balls, coming out of Phillips Andover and Harvard….. he could have written his own ticket….but obviously he answered the need to give back and serve our Country in Iraq.
Your Nanepashemet Mountain of a Man doesn’t know him, never met him, never even shook his hand. But a guy with his promise doesn’t show up that often.
When I look at the photo above, taken during one of his four tours of duty in Iraq….. I see an “American”. I will register as a Democrat if necessary, but I’m voting for Seth Moulton for the Massachusetts 6th Congressional District seat…. and I hope you do too.
However that didn’t slow him down and he not only beat Tierney, he crushed him.
Given Mr. Tisei’s bouts of Scozzafever which enraged folks like Yankee Pundit and Mouton’s character you might think voting for Moulton would be an easy call for a social conservative & some spoke to me highly touting Moulton’s character & military record so I went to his web site…
…and discovered that while Moulton is a man of exceptional character (a great rarity for the party these days) he’s not only liberal but ULTRA liberal both on social & fiscal issues. His record on the issues is everything I have written against since I’ve first started this blog.
Here are the two candidate in debate:
So what you have is this, A socially liberal Republican who is not shy about attacking & embarrassing his party but is good on fiscal issues vs a Democrat of exceptional moral character who is spectacularly wrong on just about every issue. It’s enough to make a Republican go Tevye
If you are a republican who votes on issues alone the answer is obviously Tisei
On the other hand If you are the type who dislikes career pols Moulton is an obvious choice.
If you are a tea party guy voting on fiscal responsibility Tisei is your man.
On the other hand If you want to make Tisei pay a price for what he did to Charlie Baker you want Moulton.
If you want the National GOP to have every vote they can in congress you want Tisei
On the other hand If you figure the GOP majority is pretty secure & don’t want to risk a relapse of “Scozzafever” in Washington then Moulton is the guy
If you want to play the “inclusive party” card then Tisei is your man.
On the other hand If character is your #1 factor Moulton is the guy
If you want Massachusetts to have at least one GOP member to protect our interests in the majority then Tisei is the choice
On the other hand If you think with war brewing a vet is the best choice you want Moulton
If you value legislative experience in a congressman you want Tisei
On the other hand if you want someone who has strong beliefs and will always vote them you want Moulton
If you want to stop a candidate whose backstory would give national appeal to liberalism you vote for Tisei
On the other hand If you want to stop someone who might use a national position to hurt social conservatives in the party you vote for Moulton
My district is ma-3 and I’m voting for Ann Wofford & I’m not going to lose any sleep over this it. Here’s why:
When Tierney’s wife tax evasion conviction broke in 2010 the Boston Globe said this:
You can crow all you want about some kooky yard sign of the president in a turban or whatever but this is a bit more serious to the tune of, oh, seven million dollars. Hudak may be painted as a wing nut – and rightfully so – but he doesn’t have any immediate ties to serious law breaking like this. Keep it mind that Tierney voted against the internet gambling ban while all of this was going on.
The Globe’s willingness to endorse Tierney simply shows that there is no level of corruption or illegality that a democrat can do, oh I’m sorry be “ignorant” of that would cause them to endorse a conservative republican.
Two years later when Tierney faced the openly gay socially liberal GOP candidate Tisei, they re-elected him AGAIN.
So if Democrats were willing to elect and re-elect the corrupt Tierney in the 6th what kind of miracle is it going to take for Tisei to beat an ultra liberal Democrat with impeccable integrity in a district where the GOP has won two races in the last 45 years and none of the last 9.
I’m a man of faith but even faith has limits.
I’m going to spend my time worrying about races that the GOP can actually win, because in my opinion not only is Moulton going to win in MA-6 I predict it’s not going to be close.
But the real crisis is deeper. Most of the people who voted for Obama don’t follow politics and couldn’t tell you who Frank Bruni or Peggy Noonan are. The crisis that has hit democrats in general and Barack Obama in particular can be explained in one loud exclamation, regularly uttered in one of the classic syndicated sitcoms of the 60’s by the hilarious Alan Hale:
You see the best way to describe how Barack Obama is perceived by ordinary non-political Americans is how Gillian was perceived by his fellow castaways on the Island.
If you watch Gilligan’s Island you will quickly realize that there is one thing you can count on: from experimental jetpacks to telephone lines washing ashore whenever there is a potential for the castaways being rescued., Gilligan will somehow mess it up.
They understand it so well that even after they are rescued they take precautions when they know Gilligan is coming.
Gilligan:Wow Professor is that one of our experiments?
Professor:Yes, [leading him to a table] but it starts over there Gilligan.
Gilligan: Oh wow professor look at all this stuff how do you do all that stuff [accidentally crashes into the table & smashes everything on it]
Professor:Oh that’s all right Gilligan, that’s not part of my experiment, You see I was expecting you today so I set that up especially for you
The Professor and his fellow castaways don’t hate Gilligan, they can’t even stay angry at him. They simply accept that no matter his intentions, anything he Gilligan touches turns to disaster.
That’s what has happened with Barack Obama. Partisans on the left can be counted on to spin his failures, partisans on the right to ascribe malicious intent but the vast body of apolitical people simply shrug when things go wrong in government.
They just don’t expect better anymore.
It’s an incredible turnaround, In 2008 Barack Obama was considered so competent that people actually thought he would lower the oceans and bring peace to the globe, the expectations were through the roof.
Six years later this tweet says it all
The single most telling commentary on the #obama years is the total lack of surprise by the public on their weak #ebola response #tcot#p2
That is the real disaster this isn’t a crisis of competence, it’s a crisis of expectations that is dooming the Democrats this cycle, and threatens to infect them like Ebola. (and this latest Politico poll (a source not known for spinning for the GOP) can’t be reassuring:
An overwhelming majority of voters in the most competitive 2014 elections say it feels as if events in the United States are “out of control” and expressed mounting alarm about terrorism, anxiety about Ebola and harsh skepticism of both political parties only three weeks before the Nov. 4 midterms. In a POLITICO poll testing the hardest-fought states and congressional districts of the year, two-thirds of likely voters said they feel that the United States has lost control of its major challenges. Only 36 percent said the country is “in a good position to meet its economic and national security” hurdles.
Expect the media to spend the next two years doing their best to distance themselves from their former Messiah in the hopes of making sure Gilligan’s white hat isn’t handed down to the Democrat party as an heirloom.
We are $5000 away from ending our year if not in the black, without additional red ink.
If you think this coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below
“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.”
Cardinal Francis George
A general rule of thumb for public officials is, if tweets like this:
If the 5 pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game. Were instructions given on filling out anti-HERO petition?-A
The high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine. Jesus answered him, “I have spoken publicly to the world. I have always taught in a synagogue or in the temple area 10 where all the Jews gather, and in secret I have said nothing. Why ask me? Ask those who heard me what I said to them. They know what I said.”
When he had said this, one of the temple guards standing there struck Jesus and said, “Is this the way you answer the high priest?”
Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?”
But in a breaking development Wednesday, Houston Mayor Annise Parker appeared to be backing away from the initial requests. Janice Evans, a city spokeswoman, told Law Blog in a statement:
Mayor Parker agrees with those who are concerned about the city legal department’s subpoenas for pastor’s sermons. The subpoenas were issued by pro bono attorneys helping the city prepare for the trial regarding the petition to repeal the new Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) in January. Neither the mayor nor City Attorney David Feldman were aware the subpoenas had been issued until yesterday. Both agree the original documents were overly broad. The city will move to narrow the scope during an upcoming court hearing. Feldman says the focus should be only on communications related to the HERO petition process
“Let me just say that one word in a very long legal document which I know nothing about and would never have read and I’m vilified coast to coast,” Parker said. “It’s a normal day at the office for me.”
That statement isn’t consistent with the tweet we started this post with is it?
This demand was intended to send a message to the dissenters. When that backfired, the city backpedaled and claimed they were the victims, but that’s nonsense — and it still reveals exactly what Houston has in mind with its equal-rights ordinance.
So, if a pastor is engaged in a theological discussion with a fellow pastor on the covered topics, that will have to be produced. If a pastor texts a friend his position on “restroom access,” that has to be produced.
The City of Houston’s subpoenas demanding that pastors provide the government with copies of their sermons is both shocking and shameful. For far too long, the federal government has led an assault against religious liberty, and now, sadly, my hometown of Houston is joining the fight. This is wrong. It’s unbefitting of Texans, and it’s un-American. The government has no business asking pastors to turn over their sermons.
More importantly, the rules about tax exemptions for religious institution do not prevent churches and Pastors from taking stands on political issues of the day or even advocating certain positions. If they did, then people like Martin Luther King Jr. would have been violating those rules throughout the Civil Rights Movement. According to some reports, the city is arguing that the churches were engaging in supposedly illegal campaigning by backing the repeal measure and helping to organize the signature, but even if that’s true it strikes me that any law that would prevent such activity would be a violation of the First Amendment rights of both the churches and the Pastors themselves, not to mention being a pretty extreme intrusion by the state into the church’s operations.
and allies like Charles Kuffner who while referring to the Pastors as “haters” leads his post with:
The other concern is that the HERO haters will do an effective job at portraying themselves as victims. It is the one thing they are really good at, after all. It looks like they succeeded, unfortunately.
FYI; that last phrase is what we in the real world call “projection”.
but I suspect the thing that moved her the most is fear of a possibility raised by Stacy McCain:
Christians in Texas are not going to surrender without a fight, and every Democrat in Texas ought to be held accountable for what radical Democrats led by Annise Parker are doing in Houston. Every Democrat in the state should be publicly challenged by Republicans either to endorse Mayor Parker’s extremist agenda, or else to denounce it. And every Texas Democrat who claims to oppose Mayor Parker’s agenda should then be called upon to condemn any Texas Democrat whosupports Mayor Parker’s agenda. It is high time, you see, that “moderate Democrats” stop pretending to be moderates, because the Democrat Party is not a moderate party.
And he suggests not stopping with Texas
Mayor Parker’s radical agenda is the agenda of the Democrat Party, not only in Houston, not only in Texas, but everywhere. The sooner Democrats are forced to admit this, the sooner the American people can decide whether they want to follow the Democrat Party down this highway to hell that Democrats are paving at taxpayer expense.
Because this is in fact the agenda of the Democrat party and the last thing their candidates need in what’s already looking like a wave election is to be given the choice between keeping their radical base happy or exposing their radical agenda.
But they shouldn’t worry there is a zero possibility that the mainstream media that forced the entire republican party to answer for Todd Akin’s remarks would hold democrats to that same standard.
The real question is this. Will the media attempt to stigmatize Christianity reach the point where the left will see this type of behavior as a positive electoral decision.
This blog exists as a full-time endeavor thanks to your support. The only check I draw to pay for this coverage and all that is done is what you choose to provide.
If you think this coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting Datipjar below and help keep the bills paid.
In the first volume of his still incomplete Magnum Opus on Lyndon Johnson The Path to Power on page 735 Robert Caro notes the election day theft of a US Senate Special election that LBJ thought he already had won was to a degree incidental, having little to do with Johnson or the US senate and having everything to do with an upcoming appointment to the Texas Liquor Control Board to be filled by his primary opponent Prohibitionist Governor Pappy O’Daniel:
Ten days before the election, however, O’Daniel had succeeded in pushing through his fifth nominee, another Prohibitionist. A second vacancy on the board would occur shortly , and if O’Daniel succeeded in filling that, too, with another Prohibitionist, the Board “could just about have ended the liquor and beer business down here.” Equally important, O’Daniel’s victory reminded Beer, Inc., that a powerful Governor might succeed in winning passage of the bill creating a “dry zone” around military camps. “There were millions and millions of dollars involved now, ” Lawson says. “They had to get him out of the Governorship.”
Beer Inc saw a chance to protect their business and jumped at it and Pappy O’Daniel was happy to let them do it for his own purposes.
Right now something similar is happening but the potential beneficiaries of it hasn’t quite figured it out.
Yesterday I wrote that Saudi Arabia was in a Catch-22, the high oil prices that they craved for years not only enabled their foes but created vast markets for alternative oil production that put their oil monopoly, the very source of their power and relevance in jeopardy.
Thus the Saudi’s are pumping up a storm and the price of oil is dropping to levels that we haven’t seen in years.
That puts money in the pocket of every American who owns a car and every american who doesn’t. Almost every single thing that is delivered in the US comes by truck so the cost of freight goes down. Most plastic comes from oil so every manufacturer using plastic for their product or their packaging will see a price cut too.
With an administration looking incompetent on Ebola, at total failure in Iraq & Syria, and dealing with an electorate where they are so unpopular that Obama Delegates won’t admit voting for him they need something ANYTHING to change the subject.
If I was the head of the Democrat party I’d be ready to start a media blitz the moment gas prices go below $3 a gallon, extolling the virtues of the polices that both reduced Gas prices and while giving us a production reserve ready to go if things go wrong.
Now it’s true that this administration did all it could to stop domestic production and even now their allies are striving to checkmate ever possibility of additional drilling and fracking nationwide. Furthermore such a public move risks upsetting the environmentalist types who are part of the Democrat base.
But desperate times call for desperate measures. The Saudi’s for their own reasons have thrown him a lifeline and Obama has to grab it. After all the low info voter who took him across the finish line in 2012 are unlikely to catch onto a lie taking credit for this price drop, at least not before election day and the media certainly isn’t going to clue them in. Furthermore with all the bad news going out day by day a shot of good news that the administration can point to at the very last moment could be game changing.
This might be enough to save the Senate for him, Why it might even be enough to cause Ms. Grimes to admit to voting for him and make Senator Shaheen willing to be seen with him in New Hampshire!
Well maybe just save the senate, after all there’s a big difference between a longshot and a miracle.
Just saw the latest “Too Extreme” ad against Marilinda Garcia running for NH-2 via the DCCC.
Just want to point out that if she wins Marilinda Garcia would be the first Hispanic Woman to win a congressional seat from the New England.
Given that the Democrats practically own New England and tend to win the Hispanic Vote it would likely be a huge embarrassment for the party for the first Hispanic Woman election to congress from New England to be a republican.
That’s likely why you don’t see any national network talking about the historic nature of this election.
Frankly if Marilinda Garcia was a Democrat and the NRCC was running ads against her calling her “too extreme” ABCNBCCBSMSNBCNYTWAPO et/al would be calling said ads racist.
Which goes to show that the difference between “A historic first” and “too extreme” is the difference between a “D” and an “R”
Closing thought: When you have four different ads calling the first potential Latino woman in congress from New England “extreme” that means one thing…
Update: from a reader:
The Democrats did the same thing with Miguel Estrada: blocked his nomination to the DC Circuit, which is a SCOTUS feeder, so that we couldn’t have the “historic first” of a Latino on the highest Court.
Yesterday the Hill noted that Ted Cruz turned up in Kansas to say a few words on behalf of Pat Roberts (R-KS?) who is fighting for his political life to save a Senate seat that has belonged to the GOP since before I was born:
Tea Party favorite Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) waded into the Kansas Senate race Thursday, touting beleaguered Republican incumbent Pat Roberts as the contest’s only true conservative.
Cruz’s visit follows that of Sarah Palin who came in earlier to buck up the longtime GOP senator who had held off a determined challenge from Tea Party candidate Milton Wolf, a challenge that alienated the tea party base necessary for him to win.
That problem makes it VITAL for Roberts to be able give tea party supporters a reason to vote for him and Ted Cruz had such a reason in his hand:
Cruz noted that when he waged a 21-hour filibuster to protest ObamaCare last year, Roberts was one of only a handful of senators who came to the floor to support him. Roberts, standing next to Cruz behind the podium, reminisced about a Senate attendant reminding him to put on a tie before speaking on the floor in the early hours.
Cruz started with his 21 hour floor speech something that couldn’t be ignored. First it couldn’t be ignored by republicansin the Senate:
Within hours of Liz Cheney, now a candidate for the Senate in Wyoming, announcing her support of Ted Cruz’s filibuster, Senator Mike Enzi, who Cheney is primarying, took to the floor of the United States Senate and declared he stood with Ted Cruz.
Pat Roberts, the elderly Senator from Kansas who may soon be getting a stiff primary challenge, stiffly stood on the floor of the United States Senate to show he too stood with Ted Cruz.
Rand Paul, after NBC News reported he may disagree with Cruz’s filibuster threat, went to the floor of the Senate and stood with Ted Cruz.
That illustrates a point about conventional wisdom, our friends on the left and in the media along with many in the GOP were adamant that Ted Cruz’s moves vis a vis Obamacare which took place one year ago were going to be a disaster for the party
Obmacare’s launch has been a dismal failure so dangerous that if you are a Democrat running for election in 2014 you’re running away from it, fast!
So lets summarize:
Ted Cruz make a fight that the establishment shied away from. He took on a position for principle not popular with the media and public. He made that fight with lots of risks and little upside and pushed the media to the point where that media made absolutely sure that the entire country knew which party wanted to stop Obamacare and which party with one voice was dedicated to protecting Obamacare from repeal and or delay at all costs….
…right up until they weren’t.
and now that move, which gave Pat Roberts a chance to confirm his conservative street cred might just be the move that saves him.
Closing thought, last year I argued that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, Ted Cruz was doing the GOP establishment a huge favor by staying out races which involved incumbent Republicans. Yesterday’s appearance for Pat Roberts is the final piece in the puzzle whereby Ted Cruz, like Rand Paul before him, earns chits with the establishment GOP that he will be in a position to cash in during 2016 if he chooses to do so.
One might argue that this is contrary to the principles of the Tea Party, but one might also argue that the move Cruz support Roberts in Kansas demonstrates that in a room full of people who think they are playing chess with checkers players he is playing Diplomacy instead of chess.
“To the angel of the church in Laodicea, 10 write this: ” ‘The Amen, the faithful and true witness, the source of God’s creation, says this:
I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. For you say, ‘I am rich and affluent and have no need of anything,’ and yet do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I advise you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich, and white garments to put on so that your shameful nakedness may not be exposed, and buy ointment to smear on your eyes so that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and chastise. Be earnest, therefore, and repent.
Avram: He’s right and he’s right? They can’t both be right.
Tevye:You know you are also right.
Fiddler on the Roof 1971
It is said that the best compromises are ones where everyone walks away angry, if that is the case I suspect a fair amount of my readership must consider me compromised over the last few election cycles:
For example I’ve upset the teams of establishment republicans like Mitt Romney, Charlie Baker and Scott Brown by pointing out their weaknesses in their position and disdain for the base of the party. A base that a candidate needs if they are going to win elections because said base provides the unpaid foot soldiers that do so much of the busy work on a campaign. That kind of talk doesn’t endear you to the candidates or their teams and it leads to posts like this from Robert Stacy McCain:
See, here’s my problem: It’s not just that I remember all the recent backstabbing and sellouts by Mitch McConnell and his GOP Senate cronies, but I also remember the history of Republican Senate majorities under such paragons of conservative leadership as Bob Dole and Trent Lott. I remember how GOP leaders begged and groveled in their vain attempts to retain the “party loyalty” of such stalwarts of Republican principle as Jim Jeffords and Arlen Specter. And then I think one more time about that Mississippi primary, you see, and the way all these things keep adding up in my mind . . .
Well, maybe Mitch McConnell will be Senate Majority Leader next year. Maybe that gives you a raging boner, just thinking about it.
But speaking for myself, “Meh.”
They haven’t done a damned thing to suggest they even care whether I care or not. And I’m pretty sure I don’t care. Do you? Why?
On the other hand while acknowledging this problem I’ve also noted that after Mitt Romney, Charlie Baker and Scott Brown won their primaries I’ve urged Tea Party people and the GOP base to support them (well not so much Charlie Baker but that’s partly what this post is about) noting not only the positions I agree with them but of the absolutely horrid choices their opponents are and the fact that or the other will have the right and the power to legislate over us.
This hasn’t pleased those who insist there is:
#1. No difference between the parties
#2 That we are enabling those who are discarding us.
To some degree this is correct, there are plenty of interests in the GOP and to a degree a GOP win in this election will be simply a question of GOP interests getting favor vs the left’s interest getting favor and if that sounds like the intrigue of a feudal court that’s because it’s exactly what it is. This type of talk doesn’t endear me to tea party types but this argument produces pieces like this from Gene Schwimmer at the American Thinker who lists Obama’s sins from Obamacare to Red lines and then notes the future:
The above bullet points detail what Obama has done in the past. What about the future? Currently on deck, executive amnesty for unlawful aliens, temporarily on the back burner on the pleadings of vulnerable red-state Democrats and by the dread of possibly having to govern with a Republican Senate and House for his last two years.
And here’s an angle conservatives thinking of sitting out the election apparently have not considered: Obama leaves office in 2017. Any other president would want to leave the maximum number of Democrats behind in the House and Senate; however, the political calculations of this most arrogant and narcissistic of presidents will be different. After noon on January 20, 2017, Barack Obama will no longer be president and thus will no longer care whether any Democratic senator or representative is re-elected. After January 20, 2017, he won’t need them anymore.
Democrats might want to think about that while take-no-prisoner conservative purists planning to stay home on November 4 ponder what a completely uninhibited President Obama, the clock ticking on the final two years of his term, might try to accomplish by executive order.
Annoying everyone is not the best way to keep a radio show on the air but the question before the house is: Which of these two arguments are right?
The answer is both of them.
Yes the Republicans have not earned my vote, they have been squishes they have on occasion kicked us to the curb for their own purposes, but in the End we are conservatives and there is one fact so obvious that I’m ashamed to have to point it out.
Life isn’t Fair!
This is a fact that conservatives should already know, unlike our liberal friends we have to deal with things as they are while doing our best to move things to the way they ought to be.
To my social conservative friends who stayed home over Mitt Romney, ask yourself, would he not have felt it necessary to defend federal law in the DOMA cases?
To my 2nd Amendment friends in NH Would Scott Brown be running around the country providing star power for democrats this cycle? (And if he won would’t we have a pro-life pro 2nd Amendment candidate in NH today? “
To those Tea Party members who fought so hard to get the repeal of the Automatic Gas tax on the ballot? Would Charlie Baker have allowed the Gas Tax to be linked to the inflation rate forcing us to resort to a ballot question to repeal it?
The time and effort that all of these decisions have cost us could have been spent fighting for other things if he had elected these men last time around.
On election day therefore it is our job in fact our duty to vote for the most viable conservative choice possible to keep thing from moving too far in the wrong direction, even if that choice is not the one we would like to see.
Meanwhile our bigger job is to act and to educate. Fiscal and Social conservatives not only have better ideas we have the history of these ideas actually working, Yes the world is full of low information voters out there who have no clue, our job is to give them a clue, to fight the war in the media, in the papers and in the culture to demonstrate the wisdom of what we do and espouse.
It will not be an easy fight, the culture and the media will fight strongly against us but reality is a powerful point in our favor.
Only then when we are willing to make the public case for conservatism and take the slings and arrows that come from it will we be able to move enough of the public so that the courtiers and the connected will find their way to support us, not because of their love of justice and right but because it will profit them and when they come the toadies will follow.
So if you are in New Hampshire make sure that Scott Brown makes it to 51% and when he does make damn sure he knows the difference between 51% & 49% were conservatives like you.
In Massachusetts make sure Charlie Baker gets to 51% and when he does make damn sure he know the difference between that 51% & 49% were conservatives like you
And finally in 2016 get out and vote for the GOP Nominee, even if it is Chris Christie, Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney and make sure every single hanger on who gets a job in DC because if it has that job because of conservatives like you.
And then get out there and made the case for conservatism to the neighbor, to your friends and to your community by your words and your deeds every single day of the year.
And if you think this is too hard, too ambitious and too much work ask yourself this.
Where would the country be if Rush Limbaugh decided it was too hard to fight for conservatism and just decided to spin discs for the last 30 years?
This blog exists as a full-time endeavor thanks to your support. The only check I draw to pay for this coverage and all that is done is what you choose to provide.
If you think this coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting Datipjar below and help keep the bills paid.
Greg Orman is apparently going the way of the Washington Nationals folding when at the decisive moment
Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts has galvanized enough rank-and-file Republican voters to close the gap with independent challenger Greg Orman in one of the nation’s hottest races, a new CNN/ORC poll has found.
Roberts leads Orman, 49% to 48%, according to the survey of 687 likely voters that was conducted October 2-6.
Were we not hearing just a few days ago about polls showing Orman up by as much as 8 points? What might be happening?
May I suggest a combination of this:
Democrats won’t be getting any help from Obama in the blood-red state. Just 32% of likely Kansas voters said they approve of the job the President is doing.
If I was Reince Preibus I’d be running a version of that ad in every TV Market in the nation for the next month.
“My job is to bring up issues that Americans care about. It’s my responsibility to ask the tough questions. No matter whose leading the country they need to be held accountable. I have unique access to the president, his advisers, the candidates and members of congress. I’d better use that access for a greater good, use it for people who can’t get through the White House Gates, for people who can’t be heard. The American People deserve answers”
Chuck Todd NBC 2013
Beverley Hofstadter: an adult Jewish male living with his mother is so common it borders on sociological cliché.
The Big Bang Theory, The Maternal Capacitance 2009
This question is being put to him because he accused Tom Cotton in August of essentially being pro-Ebola, just as Cotton’s fiendish financier masters demand. Pryor made it an issue in the election so now here’s MSNBC letting him follow up by tossing him what they thought would be a softball. Oops. Pryor being Pryor, though, I wonder how much of this ummmmming is doofishness and how much is him hurriedly trying to calculate how a red-state Democrat should respond. Do you pander to conservatives by bashing O or do you pander to the liberals whom you desperately need to turn out?
Do you see it? The headline isn’t that Pryor couldn’t decide on tossing Obama off the bus or not, the headline is the softball question. Look at the video:
It’s bad enough that Mika is calling this a “A sweet, little, nice, gentle question” or saying, “She asked a gentle she was just being honest and the guy just collapsed!”, listen to what the reporter says in response to Mika’s words:
“I’m actually not sure I thought he would have a yes or no answer” and “Ah well you know like I said I was a little surprised they were so difficult, because he had aired this ad on Ebola late in August accusing his opponent Tom Cotton of not doing enough tn fight to fight global pandemics. So I you know I expected he would I guess more of the…it was a news of the day question.
She’s not denying that she was tossing him a softball, in fact she’s practically apologizing that he couldn’t handle it as if. Hey it’s not like I was trying to challenge a Democrat running for the US Senate.
Take another look at the first video I post with the question to Cotton the Republican, nothing softball there.
Everyone is getting a laugh here because Pryor looked like a doofus, but the story here is: It’s apparently the Job of NBC reporters on the road covering a critical Senate races to toss democrats softball questions, not a particular Democrats being unable to answer it.
When we laugh at the batter’s inability to hit a fat pitch rather than be outraged at the supposedly neutral pitcher deliberately throwing him a fat pitch with the game on the line we are doing exactly what the media wants.
You should be outraged, unless of course you are so used to it that it doesn’t phase you anymore or don’t really give a damn..
Sir Humphrey Appleby: So we trust you, to insure that your minister does nothing incisive or divisive over the next few weeks Sir Arnold Robinson Avoids anything controversial. Sir Humphrey ApplebyExpresses no firm opinion about anything at all! Is that quite clear? Bernard Woolley:Yes well I think that’s probably what he was planning to do anyways
If you spend any time watching TV in Boston this month there is an unending set of political ads, in addition to the various attack from the superpacs trying to define their opponents I’ve seen ads promoting various candidates from Scott Brown and Charlie Baker on the right and Martha Coakley and Jeanne Shaheen on the left
But you know whose name I haven’t seen in a single positive ad on TV promoting? Garcia’s opponent Congresswoman Ann Kuster.
In fact the only ads I’ve seen with Ann Kuster’s face on them are this one
Now it’s certainly possible that these ads are running and I just haven’t seen them, so I went to Congresswoman’s Kusters site yesterday. They had a section called videos so I went straight there. Here is what I found:
Congresswoman Kuster hasn’t held a town hall meeting with her constituents since her 2012 victory; that’s over 600 days. In a region of the country where voters like–and expect–these events from their representatives, it’s rubbed some voters the wrong way. Local New Hampshire newspapers have published letters to the editor from voters venting about Rep. Kuster’s lack of constituent services.
But this should not be a surprise it’s much easier to be the invisible woman relying on SuperPAC attack ads then showing up in person and risking having to answer questions, particularly as the head of her party just said this:
Here are the four sentences that will draw all of the attention (they come more than two thirds of the way through the speech): “I am not on the ballot this fall. Michelle’s pretty happy about that. But make no mistake: these policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them.” Boil those four sentences down even further and here’s what you are left with: “Make no mistake: these policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them.”
It doesn’t take a political mastermind to realize that an ad in which the President of the United States says “Make no mistake: These policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them” might not be helpful to the Democratic candidates trying to run away from him this November.
If fact as the National Review’s Joel Gehrke reports the first such Ad is already in place in KY.
and Politico reports on the air in Kansas:
No wonder Ann Kuster is practically in hiding If I was ann Ann Kuster I wouldn’t show my face in the district and risk having to field a question about the President’s words and if I was Marilinda Garcia I’d repeat them at every stop I make till election day.
Herod the Great:Guilty in the womb, Guilty in the stars, I’ll bring down those stars and snuff them out in blood! This s my world I will not share it with an infant. There’s no room for two kings here like a new born scorpion (stomping sound) underfoot!
Jesus of Nazareth 1977
One of the most depressing polls I’ve read concerning the upcoming midterm election is this NH poll quoted by Hotair this week.
While it shows NH-1 looking very good for the GOP (Guinta +10.3) and tight Races between Brown & Shaheen for the senate (Shaheen up+ 0.5) and Havenstein vs Hassan for Governor (Hassan up +3.8) it also shows one of the best candidates the GOP has, Marilinda Garcia trailing incumbent Ann Kuster by 11.1 points.
That number seems rather high. Over the last century NH-2 was reliably republican from 1915 till 1991 but democrats have won 3 of the last four elections. Winning in Democrat waves years like 2006 (D+7.1) in the Big Obama wave of 2008 (D+15) losing in the GOP wave of 2010 (GOP + 1.6) but winning again in 2012 with Barack Obama back on the ballot ( D+4.8).
Given that close race in 2012 one would think that with Barack Obama’s NH popularity at -5 (-5/50 with 43% Strongly disapproving) in a year that is looking more and more like another GOP wave this race should be a lot closer instead of polling as if enough Massachusetts residents have crossed the border to turn the district permanently blue.
Either way , given those numbers and the closeness of the Governor’s & Senate races in NH not to mention a party desperate to hold the Senate nationwide you might logically assume the various Liberal PACS supporting Democrat candidates would not be spending a lot of time or money going after Marilinda Garcia as she has not been within single digits in any RCP poll since mid August.
You’d be wrong.
One of the realities of being a candidate in NH with only one prominent TV channel in the state (WMUR channel 9) is a large amount of your ad buys will be on Boston TV stations frequented by NH viewers and if you are one of those NH residents who for examples watches The Big Bang Theory on Channel 38 from 7-8 PM weekdays you are seeing a lot of attack ads going after Marilinda Garcia like this one.
In fact lately I can’t turn on a TV without seeing something like this from either the DCCC or pseudo pacs like “Americans for Responsible Solutions” piling on Marilinda Garcia. For some reason they are throwing the kitchen sink at Marilinda Garcia in a race that is polling safe for democrats. The question is why are they doing this at the same time when vulnerable Dems around the country are clinging on for dear life?
Marilinda Garcia is everything the Democrats fear most, she is young, she is smart, she is attractive and she is hispanic and she has been an effective pol in the state of New Hampshire and an unabashed unafraid conservative. They hate her the the way Peter Page hated Shane Hawkins in the movie The World’s End.
Now imagine just for a moment that Marilinda is a democrat and Mr. Sullivan a republican. Would there be any other story in the media when this took pace? The outrage would extend across every channel. Media giants would decry such sexism? Ms. Garcia would be a household name pegs as a rising star in the party and the attacks on her would be decried by all right minded people.
Alas that is not to be, she is a conservative with a “R” next to her name so she is subject to the great realities of life: Any attack on her, no matter how sexist, will be unworthy of condemnation or even notice.
The key word there being “Rising Star”. The one thing the left and the media (but I repeat myself) didn’t want was Marilinda Garcia to be defined by the electorate as the strong smart dynamic woman she is, who on top of everything else is also an excellent retail politician as I noted in an interview with her earlier this year:
DaTechGuy: I was watching the interview you were doing over there and I noticed something interesting at the end and it’s one of the little things about you that impres me. When you were done with that a lot of people the go from interview to interview you actually went from that one to here You made it a point to thank the cameraman and shake his hand and hello and that’s the type of retail that’s the type of authenticity you don’t see with some politicians they just get so jaded. I know that’s not so much a question but a statement but How important is it for to you to make sure you identify with all the voters including the cameraman and the person there to make your case?
Marilinda Garcia:Well I think that I’m naturally personable I’m mean I love to meet people you know People are what make life interesting right, friends family and just random people you meet in the store, on the airplane wherever, I love to talk to people, but to your point, it is challenging because it’s unfortunate that in the hubbub of the race, that you have to talk to this one, talk to that one and kind of the way everything you say is on the internet forever so it can paralyze you if you let it. But I really do try to just stay who I am and you know treat everyone like I like to be treated so to that effect he’s there’s he’s a human, he’s so I try to say ‘hello’.
If you watch the full interview with State Rep Garcia
…you will recognize at once would recognize in a second hat this woman is something special.
And that’s why she was ignored by the media for months to keep her unknown to the voters and it’s further why, even when trailing by double digits is the subject of unrelenting attack, as I said back in March….
And while she might get some attention at GOP conferences, CPAC and places like the NRLC 2014 where she sat for an interview with me about her NH-2 run.
…outside those GOP events she won’t be introduced to the country by the MSM. If fact she can’t be because she is the living embodiment of all that the media insists the GOP is not. She will remain invisible to the MSM until she becomes too prominent to be ignored.
You might as well rename the Pacs going after her as: “Americans who don’t want a young attractive effective Hispanic GOP woman in congress on the national stage”
That’s why the left will stop at nothing to destroy her, because in a state as small as New Hampshire a pol who can do retail politics well always has a shot. Particularly if you kick in a few dollars to her campaign here.
I think the national Democrats would just as soon lose every other race in New Hampshire that see Rep Marilinda Garcia take her seat in congress. I think they’re that afraid of her.
They oughta be
If you think this site and the writers who write here are worth your support please consider kicking in so we can reach our final goal for the year
I have been making a principled argument for Tea Party / Libertarians to swallow their pride and vote GOP this year from LA to NH etc based on the need to stop the even worse Democrats. Now let me make one rather self serving / pragmatic point:
If the GOP loses without us, failing to get the Senate, then we can flex our muscles saying: “You can’t win without us.”. That is Mitt Romney circa 2012.
But what we stay home and they still win?
What if the GOP fails to win NH & NC and loses Kansas and still manages to get the net +6 seats to win the senate and increases their lead in the house?
If this happens what will happen to any perception of Tea Party / Libertarian power and how will a victorious GOP treat our causes?
As you might guess the next 44 days before the election are going to be a whirlwind to some degree for those of us who follow electoral politics closely.
However for those of you do don’t (and if you don’t I’m happy but surprised to have you here reading) let me give you a brief idea of what is going to be in the headlines.
1. NFL Scandal
Goodell’s excellent blocking aside the media is not going to let this story die the fact that we have games on Sunday, Monday & Thursday help as it means that there is not a single day of the week where there is not a game, the preparation for a game or the aftermath of a game. As a masculine sport the NFL stands in for the GOP for the Democrats entire “war on women” meme. so by keeping up the pressure the media manages to indirectly hit the GOP while making elevating a subject that does not reflect on this administration.
Oh and expect the “Redskins” story to pop up every now and again as well
The Ebola outbreak is causing death and destruction in Africa and the prospect of the disease-spreading is real. People are dying and worry is really setting in.
This story is considerably more newsworthy than the NFL and it certainly deserves attention but expect a lot of that attention to become louder, particularly as how it develops will have little fallout on this administration and the media can point to the president’s speech as the White House taking action. Thus it will get a lot of play over the next 40+ days
3. Campus Rape
Expect more studies, book and loud pronouncement from the view to the congress on this non issue, with a whole lot of studies with dubious figures for the sake of promoting outrage and firing up the college base. Personally if I was the father of a daughter and I bought the rape odds that the media has pushed I wouldn’t pay 40K to put a daughter in that spot.
This is an issue that’s going to be pushed full hilt, it’s perfect for the left, it plays the “war on women” card generates fear against their political foes and because the numbers are cooked as long as accurate figures don’t come out before an election (and the media will make sure they don’t) they can always point to their own actions as the cause of success.
In reality this is an issue that they would just as soon not cover but thanks to the beheading videos it’s impossible to ignore, but there is good news for the MSM here. While the reality is we are highly unlikely to defeat ISIS without US troops doing the heavy lifting on the ground this is not going to be apparent for many months. Because of this every single step and speech is going to be highlighted as a strong bold move to stop a threat to the United States rather than a way to save his poll numbers before a key election.
So be aware that if you expect to see anything about the IRS scandal, the Economy, the price of Oil, jobs, immigration / amnesty and where all those kids on the border ended up going, forget it all of those issues hurt democrats and even if you find an illegal immigrant with a pending NFL contract infected with Ebola raping a young woman on campus while wrapped in an ISIS flag it will get a 30 second line.
I’m sure the MRC can do a story count but does anyone expect anything different?
Yes, I understand the GOP has not earned the respect or even the support of the Tea Party voter but has Barack Obama and Harry Reid who have used the power of the federal government in an attempt to break us earned it more?
The only people less deserving of victory in November than the GOP are the Democrats.
So Pick One:
The Satisfaction of seeing Pat Roberts, Thad Cochran go down & telling GOP establishment “I told you so.” for a week.
Two Years of a Harry Reid controlled senate whitewashing and protecting the Obama Administration with no restraint on judges.
May you be happy in your choice.
We remain 5 grand away from making our expenses for the year and a sold $1000 away from making them this month.
If you think the coverage and commentary we provide here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below to meet our annual expenses.