Media, candidates, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Please make mention of the fact that this article originally appeared on: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. If you have a blog or web site, please establish a link. Thanks. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin) I receive no financial support or direction from any candidate.
Tomorrow I'm going to write about the following piece from Politico.com: GOP Leaders Warn of Election Disasterpolitico.com — Shellshocked House Republicans got warnings from leaders past and present Tuesday: Your party’s message isn’t good enough to prevent disaster in November, and neither is the NRCC’s [National Republican Congressional Committee's] money. The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama or anti-Rev. Wright campaign, they are simply going to fail. More… (US Elections 2008)
The article's message is either poppycock or balderdash. I haven't figured out which. A candidate's "brand" is not the Party. Rather, it is the candidate herself or himself. Also, if those supposed "leaders" had done a better job leading, well, things would be better.
There's much hand-wringing lately over the loss of Republican candidate Woody Jenkins in a supposedly "safe" election in Louisiana. As Karl Rove put it Tuesday night, "Look, Woody Jenkins [who's lost more elections than Britney Spears has mispaced underwear] is a fine man, but he's terrible candidate." I support only exceptional candidates.
As for Woody's loss, the best way to get candidates for congressional races is NOT to "round up all the usual suspects." Instead, get people who have great integrity and a real passion for the voters of their district. They usually win.
More to come on Wednesday.
On my Pennsylvania-specific blog, I have posted a strategy for Keystone State congressional candidates. Since it has national implications, I'm re-posting it here on this national blog. ON THIS BLOG THE EMPHASIS WILL NOT BE ON PROVIDING TIDBITS OF INFORMATION, BUT RATHER ON STRATEGIES AND TACTICS FOR WINNING. "Winning isn't everything -- it's the ONLY thing." (Vince Lombardi)
"[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out." Chuck Todd, MSNBC
Barack Obama will almost certainly be the Democrats' presidential nominee. The question for presidential nominee John McCain and congressional candidates like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Mike Livingston, and Marina Kats is how can they pick up the votes of Hillary Clinton supporters.
A lot of Hillary voters, as many as 45%, say they will not vote for Obama. If they will defect from the Democratic nominee, they may just defect from "down-ballot" candidates.
Melissa, Toni, and Marina can appeal to many disaffected Hillary backers. One major way they can do so is to emphasize the need for Pennsylvania to elect women to federal offices, including the presidency and the Congress.
The Republican candidates need to emphasize the many things they have in common with Hillary voters, especially their belief that Mrs. Clinton was mistreated by the national media (which is true) and by the arbitrary rules set by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean (also true).
Melissa, Toni, and Marina should say very explicitly -- and often -- that they want the Hillary supporters to back them. But won't that offend Obama voters? Possibly, but who cares? They're the left-wing types who aren't going to vote for any Republicans.
Consider a few example of results from the Pennsylvania Primary:
4th District (Beaver County, Melissa's District) Hillary 28,205 Barack 12,184
17th District (Lebanon, Toni's District) Hillary 7,316 Barack 5,772
13th District (Montgomery, Marina's District) Hillary 77,762 Barack 75,515
I sent the following e-mail to Sharon Caliendo, a political consultant in the Southwest:Sharon: Thanks so much for passing my "Hillary Strategy" along to Congressman Tom Cole's office.
The issue has really nothing to do with whether someone "agrees" with Hillary. On some issues Hillary is okay (there are lots of issues after all!) and on some she is not so good.The real question: is Mrs. Clinton getting shafted by the Democrats' "old boys network" and by the national media, which hates her? The answer is yes.
Consider again Chuck Todd's comment last night on MSNBC: "[There's] this aspect of the Boy's Club ganging up on her [Hillary] and shoving her out."Bingo, Mr. Todd.
As I'm saying on my blogs -- and trying to get many others to say the same thing -- it will help Republican candidates (especially females) to start pointing out that Mrs. Clinton is getting savaged by media and political hacks (Howard Dean) who have done everything they can to wreck her campaign.Our Republican candidates should start saying that out loud (and in press releases).
Many Democrats, especially women voters, believe it's time in our nation's progress for a female candidate to get the nomination for the presidency.I've been advocating that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin be our GOP candidate for President in 2012 (if we lose this election) or 2016. I've done this not because she's a woman but because she is a remarkable human being and the most effective elected official in any state.
In PA, Hillary Clinton won nearly every county -- in some cases, she won by three-to-one or even four-to-one. We need to reach out (and keep reaching out) to Hillary Clinton supporters. They are the keys to John McCain winning the presidency -- and to many fine candidates getting elected to Congress.
Sharon, I want people like Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, and Marina Kats to win elections. To do so, they have to defy some of the conventional wisdom, especially the elements that will lead to "conventional" defeats.
The three Republican candidates did NOT grow up with "silver spoons" in their mouths, and they need to get that across to Hillary supporters.
In the PA Primary on April 22, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes, an amazing total. Many of those voters will understand that we're running superb candidates this year. Winning is just so much more enjoyable than losing.
John McCain has said he wants to contest for every vote. I hope every one of our candidates, male or female, takes that approach. Sen. Clinton has campaigned with real ferocity and skill. She should have our respect for that.
(Note: Here's what Adam, a Coloradan and probably the best young political operative in the country, said about the thoughts in this column: "Good strategy. I'm not an expert on PA, but Hillary supporters certainly seem like a key to GOP victory. If you can hang Obama around a local Dem's neck, you might be able to pick of quite a few votes. The only caveat is that you probably can't associate Obama too closely with Dems who backed Clinton.")
Following are additional statements on the "Hillary Strategy." I posted them on http://www.mccainnow.com/, an important site bringing together McCain supporters. I urge you to visit and register so you can participate on it.
Like you, I've been fascinated by the "exit polls" showing that a great many Hillary Clinton voters (nearly half in Indiana) are saying that will not vote for Barack Obama. Very, very interesting -- and more than just "interesting."
On my Pennsylvania blog (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/) I'm asking John McCain and several great (female) congressional candidates in PA to go after those Hillary supporters. It's essential that John McCain (and other GOP hopefuls) start asking explicity for support from voters who have backed Mrs. Clinton.
Frankly, I hope John McCain and other candidates for federal offices say and do some unconventional things. Specifically, I hope they say that Mrs. Clinton is being savaged by the national media (which happens to be true). I also hope they say (accurately) that the Senator is being shafted by Howard Dean and other members of what Chuck Todd (of MSNBC) calls "the Democratic 'Old Boy's' Club."
If we scratch Hillary's back, many of her supporters will end up scratching ours.
Recognize that it makes eminent sense for Republicans to treat Howard Dean (an odious creature) like a political pinata. Actions by Dean and other in his Democrat Cabal -- specifically, the dinenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida Democrats should be a major issue for McCain.
We need to sympathize (now!) with those disenfrachised Democrats. We must remind those voters that Dean is treating them like dirt. Deans' strong-arm tactics are depriving Mrs. Clinton of the nomination.
Yes, I'm aware that in politics the actions I'm advocating "just aren't done." Why they're not done, however, is a question that has no real good answer.
In my home state of Pennsylvania, I'm strongly backing one presidential candidate (John McCain) and four great congressional candidates (Mike Livingston, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, and Marina Kats). I have this terrible sense that if all four of them don't reach out forcefully -- and explicitly -- to Hillary's suppoters, then all they all could lose Pennsylvania.
John McCain has said many times that he wants to "contest for every vote." In the Pennsylvania Primary, Mrs. Clinton got 1.25 million votes. I'm a selfish Republican -- and I hope McCain and others also are. I want a good chunk of those million-and-a-quarter votes to go to oustanding Republican candidates, starting with John McCain.
In recent memory, Senator Clinton said the following: "I have a lifetime of experince. John McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator Obama has a speech [against the Iraq War] that he gave in 2002." I hope McCain is readying a commercial featuring Clinton making that statement.
Yes, when the Democratic Primary comes to and end -- presumably at some point in our lifetimes -- Mrs. Clinton will go through the motions of endorsing Barack Obama. But her heart -- and I assume she has one -- will not be in it. In reality, she will be looking ahead to 2012 and her race against . . . President McCain.
So, let's go get those Hillary supporters. We need to sympathize with them about their candidate's legitimate grievances against the Obama-loving media and the Clinton-hating national chairman (Dean). If we ask sincerely for their votes, we can get them -- and in massive numbers.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Governor Sarah Palin: American Hero
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and her husband Todd hold their baby boy Trig Paxson Van Palin in Anchorage, Alaska, on April 23. When the Palins learned their son would have Down syndrome, there was never any doubt they would have the child. "Every innocent life has wonderful potential," said Palin.As anyone who's frequently visited this blog knows, my admiration for Gov. Palin, her husband, and their children is almost boundless. Gov. Palin's 18-year-old-son, Track, is an infantryman in the U.S. Army.
I hope that when it comes to selecting his vice-presidential running mate that John McCain does the right thing -- and selects Sarah. She and Todd are role models and exemplars for all Americans. God bless Sarah, Todd, Track, Willow, Bristol, Piper, and Trig. Alaska loves you already and eventually the rest of America will.
Note: I have a new column up on my other national blog: http://stevemaloneygop.blogspot.com/. It deals with the relationship between the McCain Campaign and some critical races for the U.S. House. I urge you to visit. Thanks. On this blog tonight I'll be criticizing the Hillary-Barack exercise in political vaudeville. They should both be ashmed of themselves, but apparently shame is not their strong suit. They both seem to believe that pandering to people with low intelligence is the key to victory.
9 p.m. It's finally happened: I'm getting bored with the Democratic Primaries and the endless streams of nonsense that come out of the candidates mouths. Apparently, Obama has won NC by a significant amount. Apparently, Clinton has won Indiana by a relatively small margin.
My biggest question: who is voting for these two people? Some 91% of Blacks are voting for Obama. Mrs. Clinton's problem is that she isn't getting 91% (or even 61%) of the White vote.
Barack wins good-sized states (Illinois, North Carolina, Georgia) by chalking up huge majorities in Black precincts. In white caucus states, with few people taking the time to participate, he gets most of his votes from far-left liberals, Moveon.org-types. Thus, Obama will become the Democratic nominee. His scum of the earth are more numerous than her scum of the earth.
He's a terrible candidate, but I guess he's exactly what today's Democat Party wants. Poor them. Poor us.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
McCain: Treat Obama Like Dirt
Okay, I'm supposed to be the guy that's good at predictions -- ever since I hit the PA Primary just about right. Indiana: Clinton 54% - Obama 46%. North Carolina: Obama 52% - Clinton 48%. I would not be amazed if Hillary won both. This week I'll post more pictures of the "rock," the one you see below.
Ray "Bubba" Sorensen and the magnificent "Rock of American Ages" that he painted. More about Bubba and more pictures of the rock in future columns. Please pass them on to friends and fellow McCain supporters. My dear friend Rhodann Elliott of Corpus Christi, Texas, sent me this picture and several others. I told Rhodann, a fellow flag-waver and with a son-in-law in Iraq, that individuals like Barack and Michelle cannot understand what America and the flag mean to people like us (and especially to John McCain). As a poet said in another context, "It means not less than everything." As you see on the rock, "All give some, some give all."
IF YOU WD LIKE E-MAILED COPIES OF SORENSEN'S PICTURES, PLEASE EMAIL ME AT: TALKTOP65@AOL.COM. (THERE ARE 10)
Ray "Bubba" Sorensen and the magnificent "Rock of American Ages" that he painted. More about Bubba and more pictures of the rock in future columns. Please pass them on to friends and fellow McCain supporters. My dear friend Rhodann Elliott of Corpus Christi, Texas, sent me this picture and several others. I told Rhodann, a fellow flag-waver and with a son-in-law in Iraq, that individuals like Barack and Michelle cannot understand what America and the flag mean to people like us (and especially to John McCain). As a poet said in another context, "It means not less than everything." As you see on the rock, "All give some, some give all."IF YOU WD LIKE E-MAILED COPIES OF SORENSEN'S PICTURES, PLEASE EMAIL ME AT: TALKTOP65@AOL.COM. (THERE ARE 10)
Note: On my Pennsylvania for John McCain blog today (Monday) I have a list of "100 Ways to Help John McCain Get Elected." It deals with practical steps you can take to help your favorite candidate. The list can be adapted to apply to ther candidates. I urge you to take a look at it (by clicking on the word "blog" above.) Thanks!
I heard Sunday on CBS that their new national poll shows McCain significantly behind Clinton and Obama. I know: polls are not written in stone but rather in the wind, but the CBS revelation sounded like a chill breeze to me.
There are several reasons Sen. McCain might have hit a bump in the road, including the fact the Democratic candidates get about 10 times as much media coverage as our favorite Senator from Arizona. Basically, CNN, MSNBC, and even (sob!) FOX run 24/7 commercials for Hillary and Barack. Would anybody expect a discouraging word from Candy Crowley or Suzanne Malveaux, who serve basically as cheerleaders for Obama?
But Senator McCain bears some of the blame. He's much too nice to Senator Clinton and, especially, Senator Obama. On Chris Mathews show, he said Obama's "bitter" comment was elitist, but he didn't think the Senator himself was "an elitist." Good grief! It's like someone refusing to say Donald Trump has funny hair..
Let's see: Obama said we small town Pennsylvanians (of which I'm one) are "clinging" to our religion, guns, racism, and xenophobia. Elitist? It goes far beyond that. It's despicable . . . reprehensible. Also, since Obama was referring exclusively to "white folks" (I'm also one of THEM), it had a strong racist tinge.
Obama a racist? Well, yeah. After all, he's the guy who called his grandmother (from all evidence a saint) "a typical white person." In his famous Philadelphia speech on "race" (of which no one can remember a single word), he compared grandma to Rev. Wright -- and not favorably.
Obama not an elitist? Please, John. When he says he "respects Senator McCain for his service to the country," the Illinois Senator has to choke the words out. Nothing in Obama's background suggests he understands -- or respects -- people who commit their lives to serving their country. In his days at an exclusive Hawaiian prep school, at Columbia, and at "Hahvad Law School," I dont think he ran into a lot of military types. The notion of Obama actually in the military is something like imagining Rosie O'Donnell as Miss America.
We've seen the new Democrat National Committee ad that shows how much they "respect" McCain. It portrays him as guy who presumably would like to continue the Iraq War for "100" years. Their other ad shows McCain as a guy who thinks a lousy economy is just peachy. Trust me, come next October Barack Obama will be saying basically the same thing. I predicted awhile back that Moveon.org would be calling McCain a "warmonger." About a day after my prediction, they did just that.
Since Obama receives most of his mega-millions from Moveon, perhaps he'll tell them to desist? Fat chance. Pigs will qualify as Rockettes before that happens.I do not believe Barack Obama is a good man. I would have to see some evidence.
In fact, I believe he's a taller, more polished, more calculating version of his "spiritual advisor," Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Chucking Obama under the chin when he makes outrageous and false statements only encourages him.
Frankly, when it comes to the Democrats' frontrunner, it's time for McCain's famous temper to make a reappearance. For instance, when Obama makes "elitist" (and worse) comments, the moment has arrived for some straight talk about the nature and character of the man.
Obama is the guy who sat in Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. So, I'm sure that hearing some strong language from McCain will not cause him to dry up and blow away. More's the pity.
Fire when ready, Senator McCain.
I heard Sunday on CBS that their new national poll shows McCain significantly behind Clinton and Obama. I know: polls are not written in stone but rather in the wind, but the CBS revelation sounded like a chill breeze to me.
There are several reasons Sen. McCain might have hit a bump in the road, including the fact the Democratic candidates get about 10 times as much media coverage as our favorite Senator from Arizona. Basically, CNN, MSNBC, and even (sob!) FOX run 24/7 commercials for Hillary and Barack. Would anybody expect a discouraging word from Candy Crowley or Suzanne Malveaux, who serve basically as cheerleaders for Obama?
But Senator McCain bears some of the blame. He's much too nice to Senator Clinton and, especially, Senator Obama. On Chris Mathews show, he said Obama's "bitter" comment was elitist, but he didn't think the Senator himself was "an elitist." Good grief! It's like someone refusing to say Donald Trump has funny hair..
Let's see: Obama said we small town Pennsylvanians (of which I'm one) are "clinging" to our religion, guns, racism, and xenophobia. Elitist? It goes far beyond that. It's despicable . . . reprehensible. Also, since Obama was referring exclusively to "white folks" (I'm also one of THEM), it had a strong racist tinge.
Obama a racist? Well, yeah. After all, he's the guy who called his grandmother (from all evidence a saint) "a typical white person." In his famous Philadelphia speech on "race" (of which no one can remember a single word), he compared grandma to Rev. Wright -- and not favorably.
Obama not an elitist? Please, John. When he says he "respects Senator McCain for his service to the country," the Illinois Senator has to choke the words out. Nothing in Obama's background suggests he understands -- or respects -- people who commit their lives to serving their country. In his days at an exclusive Hawaiian prep school, at Columbia, and at "Hahvad Law School," I dont think he ran into a lot of military types. The notion of Obama actually in the military is something like imagining Rosie O'Donnell as Miss America.
We've seen the new Democrat National Committee ad that shows how much they "respect" McCain. It portrays him as guy who presumably would like to continue the Iraq War for "100" years. Their other ad shows McCain as a guy who thinks a lousy economy is just peachy. Trust me, come next October Barack Obama will be saying basically the same thing. I predicted awhile back that Moveon.org would be calling McCain a "warmonger." About a day after my prediction, they did just that.
Since Obama receives most of his mega-millions from Moveon, perhaps he'll tell them to desist? Fat chance. Pigs will qualify as Rockettes before that happens.I do not believe Barack Obama is a good man. I would have to see some evidence.
In fact, I believe he's a taller, more polished, more calculating version of his "spiritual advisor," Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Chucking Obama under the chin when he makes outrageous and false statements only encourages him.
Frankly, when it comes to the Democrats' frontrunner, it's time for McCain's famous temper to make a reappearance. For instance, when Obama makes "elitist" (and worse) comments, the moment has arrived for some straight talk about the nature and character of the man.
Obama is the guy who sat in Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. So, I'm sure that hearing some strong language from McCain will not cause him to dry up and blow away. More's the pity.
Fire when ready, Senator McCain.
Great Candidates, Great Investments
Question: Is it possible that, as 54% of the American people believe, that Barack Obama shared a least some views with Rev. Jeremiah Wright?
Answer: My greatest fear is that he shares many such views. Michelle Obama has said, "In 2008 America is a mean place" and that she has only become "proud of [her] country" as her husband has become successful in the primaries. Frankly, does Obama agree with his wife? Who knows? Right now, Obama looks dispirited and unelectable.
Since this is a national blog -- one that talks a lot about the presidential race -- why have I been discussing congressional races in Pennsylvania? I'm doing so because it's essential that McCain, if he wins on Nov. 4, have enough Republicans in Congress to keep him from having a failed presidency. If he has to depend on Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, then God save the republic.
As you've been hearing for some time, Pennsylvania, where I live, will be a crucial battleground in this year's election. If John McCain wins the Keystone State, it's probable he will be the next President. For McCain to win, the Republican Party must get out the vote. That will require a lot of organization at the district (congressional), county, and local levels. Right now, the organizational capacity is questionable.
The GOP in Pennsylvania -- and other states -- is still reeling from the heavy losses in 2006. The stench from the Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham, and Bob Ney scandals has not yet fully abated.
I've been supporting several Republican candidates between I believe they and John McCain can build upon one another's strength. If those candidates flounder, it will hurt the Republican cause in general and our presidential hopes in particular.
The candidates I've endorsed include Melissa Hart (in the 4th district -- where I reside -- opposing Democrat incumbent Jason Altmire); Marina Kats (in the 13th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Allyson Schwartz); Toni Gilhooley (in the 17th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Tim Holden); and Michael Livingston (in the 2d district, opposing Democrat incumbent Chaka Fattah).
If I can read the national Republican Party's mind -- and, in this single case, I believe I can -- they believe Melissa Hart almost certainly will win. Frankly, Melissa's loss in 2006 was a fluke, a result of a temporary anti-Republican tidal wave.
What does the national GOP think about the prospects for the other candidates, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston? They probably believe all three will lose. They might be right in all three instances, but -- at the beginning of May -- there's no certainly about next November's results.
The only thing worse than losing a congressional race -- and it's much worse -- is to leave the race uncontested. Frankly, we Republicans have to stop conceding 100-plus seats to the Democrats. That's an obvious point we all need to get across to the national Party.
Yes, Kats and Gilhooley are currently big underdogs in their races. But I've told them both that I believe, if they do just about everything right, they can win. I'm not stupid, and I know the odds, but Gilhooley and Kats are going build great support in their districts. Both of them, especially Gilhooley, are going to benefit from McCain's strong showing in the state. As for Kats, her youth intelligence, and patriotism are going to contrast sharply with Schwartz, who has none of those qualities.
As for Michael Livingston, he will gains tens of thousands of votes more than any Republican has in his district. He's not waging what is known as a "starter campaign," but he is establishing a foundation that the GOP has never had in the the 2d district. Livingston, a tax attorney and law professor, is a great candidate -- while his opponent, Fattah, is an awful one.
Right now (and again, this is my belief), the national Republican Party, which has millions on hand, is preparing to give Livingston, Kats, and Gilhooley a grand total of zero dollars and zero cents. Why? Because they don't believe they can win.
It's something like the old line about getting a loan from the bank. If you really need the money, the bank won't give it to you. If you don't need it, they'll give you all you ask for.
In 2006, my friend and political ally Diana Lynn Irey ran against John Murtha. In the election, Diana got nearly 80,000 votes in a district where Republicans were lucky to get 40,000. She raised $856,000. She had more individual contributors (7,000) than Murtha. She brought many people -- a lot of them young -- into Republican politics.
What did Diana get from the national Republicans -- and for that matter, from the state Republicans? Basically, she got their best wishes. But as for the check, well, it was never in the mail.
Contrast Diana's situation with that of Rep. Tom Reynolds, a member of the Republican leadership and congressman from a "safe" Republican district in upstate New York (Buffalo suburbs to Rochester suburbs). Historically, it's a district where it's nearly impossible for a Republican to lose. Reynolds, unfortunately, almost accomplished the impossible.
He won 52% to 48% in 2006 in a district where a Republican should win by at least 60% to 40%. How much did it cost him to win? Almost $5.3 million dollars, an almost unimaginable sum. A good chunk of his campaign war chest came from the national Republican Party.
Look at it this way: Reynold got 30,000 more votes in his district than Irey got in hers. He spent nearly $50 per vote. In contrast, Irey spent about $11 per vote. (Just FYI, Murtha spent roughly $28 per vote.) If Diana had been able to spend, say, $22 a vote guess who might just have won the election against Murtha?
As for the Tom Reynolds of the world, they have access to huge amounts of campaign cash. If they need lots of cash from the national Party, then they're bad investments. Money sent to them is a form of political CPR.
I'm recommending that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) give Gilhooley and Kats at least $10,000 up front. I'm also recommending that they give Livingston, more of a longshot, $5,000. When the three candidates use the money to build strong organizations -- and thus go up in the polls -- the NRCC should give them more money. In politics as in life, money begets money.
In its support of candidates, the NRCC doesn't seem to favor organizational development. Instead, it seems to favor having candidates in trouble spend hundreds of thousands on TV ads. Generally, at least in recent months, those candidates seem to lose.In politics, that's not a great way to run -- or to build -- a Party.
Here's a bulletin to national Republicans: TV ads, while helpful with name recognition, don't work nearly as well as they once did. In support of that position, I point to one Barack Obama. In the Pennsylvania primary, Obama broke all records for television commercials. He spent $10 million, and had a total of nearly 7,000 ads in the state. For all that, he lost to Mrs. Clinton by 9.2%.
There are reasons TV ads don't work as well now as they did a decade ago, but I'll save that subject for another day.Frankly, the next election does not, if we lose, signify the end of the world as we know it. When we have great candidates -- as we do with Gilhooley, Kats, and Livingston, we need to support them.
Consider this: In 1974 and 1976, novice candidate Newt Gingrich lost his first two races for Congress. In 1978, he finally won. Sixteen years later he was Speaker of the House.
The future of the Republican Party rests with great candidates like Irey, Hart, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston. I fully expect more than one of them to win on November 4. And remember, I'm the one who called Hillary Clinton's Pennsylvania win -- almost down to the precise decimal point.
Note: If you want to contribute to or otherwise support the Republican candidates I've noted, click on the links above. The exception is Marina Kats, whom you can support by clicking on her link, but whose contributions should go via snail mail to:
Kats For Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
Answer: My greatest fear is that he shares many such views. Michelle Obama has said, "In 2008 America is a mean place" and that she has only become "proud of [her] country" as her husband has become successful in the primaries. Frankly, does Obama agree with his wife? Who knows? Right now, Obama looks dispirited and unelectable.
Since this is a national blog -- one that talks a lot about the presidential race -- why have I been discussing congressional races in Pennsylvania? I'm doing so because it's essential that McCain, if he wins on Nov. 4, have enough Republicans in Congress to keep him from having a failed presidency. If he has to depend on Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, then God save the republic.
As you've been hearing for some time, Pennsylvania, where I live, will be a crucial battleground in this year's election. If John McCain wins the Keystone State, it's probable he will be the next President. For McCain to win, the Republican Party must get out the vote. That will require a lot of organization at the district (congressional), county, and local levels. Right now, the organizational capacity is questionable.
The GOP in Pennsylvania -- and other states -- is still reeling from the heavy losses in 2006. The stench from the Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham, and Bob Ney scandals has not yet fully abated.
I've been supporting several Republican candidates between I believe they and John McCain can build upon one another's strength. If those candidates flounder, it will hurt the Republican cause in general and our presidential hopes in particular.
The candidates I've endorsed include Melissa Hart (in the 4th district -- where I reside -- opposing Democrat incumbent Jason Altmire); Marina Kats (in the 13th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Allyson Schwartz); Toni Gilhooley (in the 17th district, opposing Democrat incumbent Tim Holden); and Michael Livingston (in the 2d district, opposing Democrat incumbent Chaka Fattah).
If I can read the national Republican Party's mind -- and, in this single case, I believe I can -- they believe Melissa Hart almost certainly will win. Frankly, Melissa's loss in 2006 was a fluke, a result of a temporary anti-Republican tidal wave.
What does the national GOP think about the prospects for the other candidates, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston? They probably believe all three will lose. They might be right in all three instances, but -- at the beginning of May -- there's no certainly about next November's results.
The only thing worse than losing a congressional race -- and it's much worse -- is to leave the race uncontested. Frankly, we Republicans have to stop conceding 100-plus seats to the Democrats. That's an obvious point we all need to get across to the national Party.
Yes, Kats and Gilhooley are currently big underdogs in their races. But I've told them both that I believe, if they do just about everything right, they can win. I'm not stupid, and I know the odds, but Gilhooley and Kats are going build great support in their districts. Both of them, especially Gilhooley, are going to benefit from McCain's strong showing in the state. As for Kats, her youth intelligence, and patriotism are going to contrast sharply with Schwartz, who has none of those qualities.
As for Michael Livingston, he will gains tens of thousands of votes more than any Republican has in his district. He's not waging what is known as a "starter campaign," but he is establishing a foundation that the GOP has never had in the the 2d district. Livingston, a tax attorney and law professor, is a great candidate -- while his opponent, Fattah, is an awful one.
Right now (and again, this is my belief), the national Republican Party, which has millions on hand, is preparing to give Livingston, Kats, and Gilhooley a grand total of zero dollars and zero cents. Why? Because they don't believe they can win.
It's something like the old line about getting a loan from the bank. If you really need the money, the bank won't give it to you. If you don't need it, they'll give you all you ask for.
In 2006, my friend and political ally Diana Lynn Irey ran against John Murtha. In the election, Diana got nearly 80,000 votes in a district where Republicans were lucky to get 40,000. She raised $856,000. She had more individual contributors (7,000) than Murtha. She brought many people -- a lot of them young -- into Republican politics.
What did Diana get from the national Republicans -- and for that matter, from the state Republicans? Basically, she got their best wishes. But as for the check, well, it was never in the mail.
Contrast Diana's situation with that of Rep. Tom Reynolds, a member of the Republican leadership and congressman from a "safe" Republican district in upstate New York (Buffalo suburbs to Rochester suburbs). Historically, it's a district where it's nearly impossible for a Republican to lose. Reynolds, unfortunately, almost accomplished the impossible.
He won 52% to 48% in 2006 in a district where a Republican should win by at least 60% to 40%. How much did it cost him to win? Almost $5.3 million dollars, an almost unimaginable sum. A good chunk of his campaign war chest came from the national Republican Party.
Look at it this way: Reynold got 30,000 more votes in his district than Irey got in hers. He spent nearly $50 per vote. In contrast, Irey spent about $11 per vote. (Just FYI, Murtha spent roughly $28 per vote.) If Diana had been able to spend, say, $22 a vote guess who might just have won the election against Murtha?
As for the Tom Reynolds of the world, they have access to huge amounts of campaign cash. If they need lots of cash from the national Party, then they're bad investments. Money sent to them is a form of political CPR.
I'm recommending that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) give Gilhooley and Kats at least $10,000 up front. I'm also recommending that they give Livingston, more of a longshot, $5,000. When the three candidates use the money to build strong organizations -- and thus go up in the polls -- the NRCC should give them more money. In politics as in life, money begets money.
In its support of candidates, the NRCC doesn't seem to favor organizational development. Instead, it seems to favor having candidates in trouble spend hundreds of thousands on TV ads. Generally, at least in recent months, those candidates seem to lose.In politics, that's not a great way to run -- or to build -- a Party.
Here's a bulletin to national Republicans: TV ads, while helpful with name recognition, don't work nearly as well as they once did. In support of that position, I point to one Barack Obama. In the Pennsylvania primary, Obama broke all records for television commercials. He spent $10 million, and had a total of nearly 7,000 ads in the state. For all that, he lost to Mrs. Clinton by 9.2%.
There are reasons TV ads don't work as well now as they did a decade ago, but I'll save that subject for another day.Frankly, the next election does not, if we lose, signify the end of the world as we know it. When we have great candidates -- as we do with Gilhooley, Kats, and Livingston, we need to support them.
Consider this: In 1974 and 1976, novice candidate Newt Gingrich lost his first two races for Congress. In 1978, he finally won. Sixteen years later he was Speaker of the House.
The future of the Republican Party rests with great candidates like Irey, Hart, Kats, Gilhooley, and Livingston. I fully expect more than one of them to win on November 4. And remember, I'm the one who called Hillary Clinton's Pennsylvania win -- almost down to the precise decimal point.
Note: If you want to contribute to or otherwise support the Republican candidates I've noted, click on the links above. The exception is Marina Kats, whom you can support by clicking on her link, but whose contributions should go via snail mail to:
Kats For Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Conservatives, Libertarians, Republicans: Send Money
NOTE: ANY MEDIA OUTLET, CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE OR BLOGGER WHO WOULD LIKE TO USE ALL OR PART OF THE MATERIAL ON THIS SITE IS WELCOME TO DO SO. JUST GIVE A LINK TO THE SITE. Another column here will be up Sunday afternoon. Thanks for visiting
Note: On my Pennsylvania blog (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com) on Saturday night I've begun writing about one of America's worst congressmen, Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Philadelphia. Please visit.
"Americans [unlike every other nation in the world] identify ourselves by fidelity to certain political principles." (Justice Antonin Scalia)
This weekend -- and continuing well into next week -- I'll be writing about my favorite congressional candidates, some of them mainly conservative, some mainly libertarian, but all of them Republicans with much in common. These candidates need --and eminently deserve -- your political, financial, and moral support. They include:
Note: On my Pennsylvania blog (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com) on Saturday night I've begun writing about one of America's worst congressmen, Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Philadelphia. Please visit.
"Americans [unlike every other nation in the world] identify ourselves by fidelity to certain political principles." (Justice Antonin Scalia)
This weekend -- and continuing well into next week -- I'll be writing about my favorite congressional candidates, some of them mainly conservative, some mainly libertarian, but all of them Republicans with much in common. These candidates need --and eminently deserve -- your political, financial, and moral support. They include:
- Melissa Hart, who lost her race for re-election in 2006 in PA's 4th congressional district (west and north of Pittsburgh) and is running again to regain it. Melissa is a slight favorite to win, mainly because John McCain should carry the district by a huge margin -- and thus help propel Melissa to victory. I've written a lot about Melissa (who was -- and will be -- my congressional representative) and will write a great deal more.
- Toni Gilhooley, a 25-year-veteran of the Pennsylvania State Police who is running against Democratic incumbent Tim Holden in Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district (Harrisburg and surrounding communities). Toni is a big underdog, but as I'll explain, she has the drive and personal characteristics needed to achieve an upset.
- Marina Kats, an attorney and an immigrant from Russia, who's running against extreme leftist Allyson Schwartz, in Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia). I've said -- humorously but accurately -- that Marina is the most beautiful young woman ever to run for Congress. She's also an underdog, but with the national attention her campaign will receive. she has a chance to do the impossible: beat militant leftist Allyson Schwartz.
- Michael Livingston, a law professor and tax expert, who's running against Democratic incumbent Chaka Fattah in Pennsylvania's 2d congressional district (Philadelphia). A true libertarian Republican (Marina also fits that definition), Michael will wage a strong campaign against an opponent who currently appears to be unbeatable. I'll be writing a lot more about Michael in the coming months.
What do I wish YOU would do right now? I hope you'll click on the candidates' names above, go to their web sites, learn about them, and make at least a small donation to their campaigns (perhaps $10 or, if you can afford it, $200 or more).
Granted, very few Americans ever donate to a political campaign -- perhaps 2% of the population. However, if you don't contribute to candidates you believe in, they have little chance of getting their message across. Everyone reading this piece has one vote, but those who do contribute are leveraging (increasing) their influence on the election.
In 2006, I worked hard on the campaign of Republican Diana Lynn Irey, who ran against "The Prince of Pork," John Murtha. Diana didn't win the election, but she was able to get support from 7,000 donors. In fact, she had many more individual contributors than Murtha, one of the most powerful -- and objectionable -- individuals in the U.S. Congress. Diana established a foundation for the future, hers and the Republican Party's in Pennsylvania.
Yesterday, Friday, I had a long phone conversation with Toni Gilhooley. She is an absolutely remarkable woman. Trust me, Toni is exactly the kind of individual we need in the House of Representatives. Her opponent, Tim Holden, passes himself off as a "conservative Democrat," which is something like claiming to be "the world's tallest midget."
In fact, one of the first things Holden did in the current Congress was to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Of course, in that single action Holden -- the supposed "conservative" -- ensured that left-wing Democrats would head every important committee. He also ensured that no "conservative" -- or even moderate -- legislation would ever see the light of day.
That's a little detail Tim Holden withholds from his constituents. It's a detail Toni Gilhooley MUST get across to 17th district voters if she hopes to win. In other words, she has to drive home the point that Tim Holden, amiable as he seems to be, is a total impostor. In return, the voters have to consider the real possibility that Holden is not the man they've thought he was.
Also, anyone who is going to vote for John McCain in the 17th -- and most people will -- must realize that they're cancelling out their vote if they cast a ballot for Holden.
In the case of Marina Kats, her opponent, Allyson Schwartz raises a massive amount of campaign funds -- more than $7 million in the last two election cycles. Who donates to Schwartz? The most left-wing political action committees and individuals in the U.S. People who contribute to Schwartz take a dim view of America's role as a powerful, dynamic force on the world stage. (If you'd like to take a look at Schwartz's contributors, go to http://www.openscrets.org/ and type in the name "Schwartz." You'll recognize a lot of the names.
What kind of person is Marina Kats, a woman born in Russia and now seen by many as an embodiment of The American Dream? Here's how The Philadelphia Bulletin described her:
"Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."
Kats says, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
In contrast, Allyson Schwartz favors a timetable for Iraq withdrawal, with all the bloodshed, political chaos, and national security threats that would result. Ms. Schwartz doesn't live in a world where her strongest supporters wear flag pins and send their sons and daughters off to defend America. Instead, she lives in world dominated by polls and irritated by America's exceptional role in world history.
Yes, that's harsh, but is there any evidence it's untrue?
If Schwartz shares Kats's strong felling about the American flag, she has kept them a secret. It's apparently not a subject she discusses, even though her own immigrant background is not all that dissimilar from Kats's. One sign of Schwartz's thinking on the subject is that she voted against the amendment to prohibit flag-burning.
If you want American politics to change for the better, I suggest the way to bring that about is to support Marina Kats, Toni Gilhooley, Melissa Hart, and Michael Livingston. They need votes and your best wishes -- but most of all at this crucial moment, they need your money to get across their compelling messages
(Here's the link to the article in The Bulletin. I urge you to read it:)
http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=19335675&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=618959&rfi=6
Note: If you'd like to contribute to Hart, Gilhooley, and Livingston, you can do so at their web sites. Marina Kats has a preliminary web site up, but until the permanent one is available in a few days, you can send a check to her at:
Kats for Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
I hope every blogger or other online communicator will either reprint this column or pass it along to friends and family members.
Note: Different Republican candidates will not agree on every issue. The views expressed here are my own. The candidates can speak for themselves when it comes to specific issues. I receive no financial assistance or direction from any candidate endorsed here.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Battle Royal: Kats v. Schwartz
Question of the Day: If it's okay for Barack Obama to get 90% of the Black vote, why isn't it okay for Hillary (or McCain) to get 90% of the white vote? [There will be a new question of the day every, well, day]
Marina Kats, an emigrant from Russia who bleeds red, white, and blue. She's running hard for Congress in PA's 17th CD.
This column deals mainly with Republican Marina Kats's race against incumbent Allyson Schwartz in PA's 13th congressional district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia).
Earlier, I called Schwartz one of the nastiest people in DC. For example, when Marina Kats became the presumptive nominee, Schwartz's mouthpiece, Rachel Magnuson, said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's.
That will be difficult because Kats's professional record consists of being a highly successful lawyer and entrepreneur, a living embodiment of The American Dream. Schwartz's record consists of being a government employee for 30 years.
Spokeswoman Magnuson added, "Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families." Oh really? Actually, Rep. Schwartz voted to end the Bush tax cuts, an action that would harm families in the lowest tax bracket by increasing their income taxes by 50%. In Cincinatti recently, Schwartz admitted that her tax views, coupled with "Hillarycare," which she supports, would raise the taxes of the average Montgomery County family by $3,000 annually.
Somehow this supposed "fighter on behalf of middle-class families" thinks that raising their taxes is somehow a beneficial act. Raising taxes and then using the money for government handouts designed to gain votes aren't exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Ms. Magnuson continued that Schwartz is committed to "making sure the streets are safe from crime." She added, according to the Philadelphia Bulletin, that Schwartz "should do well against someone 'who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer.'"
In other words, voters are somehow supposed to hold it against Marina that she's had a real job in the private sector -- as compared to Schwartz, who has spent a lifetime feeding from the public trough. (Schwartz's husband is a wealthy cardiologist, a profession that will benefit financially from Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan.)
In terms of crime, under Schwartz's watch, it has gone up in the Philadelphia area like a rocket. Schwartz is not "for" crime -- she just has no idea what to do about it, aside from regularly chucking the ACLU under the chin.
More to come this weekend on the Schwartz-Kats race, one of the most important not only in Pennsylvania but also the nation. If Marina wins on Election Day -- and be prepared to stay up late -- it will be a sign the country has returned to its senses.
If you'd like to contribute to Marina Kats's campaign -- and I hope you will -- the best way to do so now is to send a check made out to "Kats For Congress" to the following address:
Kats for Congress
The race between these two candidates reflects the critical choices that face Americans this year. I hope you'll bookmark this site and return. See below for biographical information on Marina.
Marina Kats, an emigrant from Russia who bleeds red, white, and blue. She's running hard for Congress in PA's 17th CD.Some of the most important congressional races in the country are taking place this year in Pennsylvania. This column about Republican Marina Kats versus Democrat Allyson Schwartz originally appeared on my PennsylvaniaforJohnMcCain blog, which I invite you to visit. If the beauteous and fierce Marina can build NATIONAL support, she will win (much to most people's amazement). You go, girl!
This column deals mainly with Republican Marina Kats's race against incumbent Allyson Schwartz in PA's 13th congressional district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia).
Unfortunately, Ms. Schwartz and her staff have a reputation for being among the nastiest, most self-absorbed people in Washington. I'll provide illustrations below.
She raises huge (really, really huge) amounts of money -- a total of $7 million-plus in her last two campaign cycles. . How does she generate so much campaign cash? In the usual way, by selling out to every special interest group and radical individual that wave bagfuls of cash at her. Go to OpenSecrets.org and put in the name "Schwartz" to find out what segments are buying Schwartz's affection this year. Make no mistake about it: Schwartz gets most of her money from the 20% of Democrats who tell pollsters they hope that America loses the war in Iraq.
Seventy years ago Allyson Schwartz's mother fled the Nazi onslaught in Austria and came to America. One would imagine that Allyson would have a good grasp on the concept of evil. However, her namby pamby approach to dealing with al Qaeda and terrorism shows she's much better at reading polls than she is looking into "the heart of darkness." Her idea of defending this country consists mainly of uttering slurs against George W. Bush. She has no strategy for protecting the nation against Islamic radicals.
The good news is that Schwartz will be facing her toughest opponent ever, attorney Marina Kats, an Abingdon, PA attorney. Marina is a patriot who loves her country, qualities that are not Schwartz's strong point. Sadly, even before Kats got the official nomination, Schwartz and her minions were throwing mud. I expect Kats can win the coming donnybrook, but there will be nothing easy about it.
Earlier, I called Schwartz one of the nastiest people in DC. For example, when Marina Kats became the presumptive nominee, Schwartz's mouthpiece, Rachel Magnuson, said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's.
That will be difficult because Kats's professional record consists of being a highly successful lawyer and entrepreneur, a living embodiment of The American Dream. Schwartz's record consists of being a government employee for 30 years.
Spokeswoman Magnuson added, "Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families." Oh really? Actually, Rep. Schwartz voted to end the Bush tax cuts, an action that would harm families in the lowest tax bracket by increasing their income taxes by 50%. In Cincinatti recently, Schwartz admitted that her tax views, coupled with "Hillarycare," which she supports, would raise the taxes of the average Montgomery County family by $3,000 annually.
Somehow this supposed "fighter on behalf of middle-class families" thinks that raising their taxes is somehow a beneficial act. Raising taxes and then using the money for government handouts designed to gain votes aren't exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Ms. Magnuson continued that Schwartz is committed to "making sure the streets are safe from crime." She added, according to the Philadelphia Bulletin, that Schwartz "should do well against someone 'who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer.'"
In other words, voters are somehow supposed to hold it against Marina that she's had a real job in the private sector -- as compared to Schwartz, who has spent a lifetime feeding from the public trough. (Schwartz's husband is a wealthy cardiologist, a profession that will benefit financially from Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan.)
In terms of crime, under Schwartz's watch, it has gone up in the Philadelphia area like a rocket. Schwartz is not "for" crime -- she just has no idea what to do about it, aside from regularly chucking the ACLU under the chin.
More to come this weekend on the Schwartz-Kats race, one of the most important not only in Pennsylvania but also the nation. If Marina wins on Election Day -- and be prepared to stay up late -- it will be a sign the country has returned to its senses.
If you'd like to contribute to Marina Kats's campaign -- and I hope you will -- the best way to do so now is to send a check made out to "Kats For Congress" to the following address:
Kats for Congress
PO Box 91
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
The race between these two candidates reflects the critical choices that face Americans this year. I hope you'll bookmark this site and return. See below for biographical information on Marina.
Who exactly is
Marina Kats? She's an attorney and entrepreneur from Abingdon, Pennsylvania. She was named one of the "50 Best Business Women in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" by former Governor Tom Ridge. An immigrant from Russia, Kats is a board member of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society of Philadelphia. She serves as an overseer of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society of Philadelphia. She serves on the Board of Overseers of the Albert Einstein Healthcare Network as is Vice President of Temple University's Presidential Advisory Board and serves on the Temple University School of Law Alumni Board. Kats is the current President of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce. She's the mother of two daughters If you'd like to learn about three other dynamic congressional candidates, Melissa Hart (4th District), Toni Gilhooley (17th District), and Mike Livingston (2d district) please visit their sites:http://peoplewithhart.com/http://gilhooleyforcongress.com/http://livingstonforcongress.com/ These fine people need your support . . .
Thursday, May 1, 2008
GOP CANDIDATES YOU WILL LIKE
As of Thursday night, I've begun writing a column on Pennsylvania blog about what should be one of the most ferocious congressional races imaginable: Republican Marina Kats versus Democrat Allyson Schwartz. I hope you'll visit -- and then go to Marina's preliminary site where you can volunteer your support. Marina is beautiful -- and, oh yes, she is extremely tough. Wear your helmet, Allyson.
Mike Livingston, the law professor who's running for Congress from PA's 2d congressional district (against Dem. Chaka Fattah) and I have been corresponding regularly. I sent him the following today about his own race, Melissa Hart's race in the 4th district (against Dem. Jason Altmire), and Marina Kats's contest in the 13th (against Dem. Allyson Schwartz):
Dear Mike Livingston:
Melissa Hart, who is running in the 4th District in western PA is a good friend of mine, and I keep trying to get people nationally to "adopt" her -- with some success. One of Melissa's big advantages this time (as compared to the mid-term election of 2006) is that John McCain should win the 4th by a large margin, particularly if Rev. Wright keeps spreading his cheerful message of ignorance and animosity. Altmire has yet to denounce Obama's "bitter" comments denigrating Pennsylvanians -- presumably because he agrees with them.
Mike, when your own campaign is done, maybe you can write a book about it. Running against Chaka Fattah may be in some ways a thankless task. However, there are tens of thousands of people in the 2d CD who will vote for Mike Livingston if you can get your message out.At the very least, your presence in the race is going to force Fattah to reconsider some of his militantly leftist positions. He's also going to have to explain why his seven terms in Congress have left at least 150,000 people in the district mired in poverty. If Fattah has a clue about economic development, he has fooled me -- and the people he supposedly represents.
If you haven't heard yet from Eric Dondero of BlogTalkRadio/Libertarian, you will soon. When libertarian Republicans learn who you are and what you believe in, many of them will support you -- by "support" I mean send money! There are thousands of libertarian Republicans out there who will contribute to your campaign -- if they can just find out that you exist.
I truly believe what I said earlier about how to get voters' support: to ask for it. The process is just that simple (although it requires great time and effort.
Many of the Republican candidates for Congress have a lot in common -- although you're not as good looking as Marina Kats (nobody is)! Marina has a great chance to make Allyson Schwartz, a terrible legislator, sweat. Allyson claims she's a powerful defender of the "middle-class." Somehow she thinks raising their taxes, discouraging energy development, and basically rooting for al Qaeda in Iraq constitute defending the country.
On libertarian (freedom loving) Republicans. One notable member of that group was a popular columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Tom Hritz. He liked to smoke and one day a busybody at the P-G asked him if he was going to participate in "The Great American Smokeout." Irritated, Hritz said he was going to promote a new holiday called "National Mind-Your-Own-Business-Day."
Another Hritz-ism: Somebody asked him what he thought about the performance of Robt. Casey, Sr., father of Senator Bob. Hritz said, "Listen, after two terms of Bob Casey as Governor, Pennsylvania is lucky it's still a state."
Tom and his wife (also very funny) have passed away, but they're obviously still here in spirit. They'd have loved the chance to vote for people like Mike Livingston, Melissa Hart, and Marina Kats.
NOTE: THIS IS A "BONUS" COLUMN REPRINTED FROM MY PENNSYLVANIA BLOG (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/, WHICH I HOPE YOU'LL VISIT FREQUENTLY. SUPPOSEDLY, THIS IS A "BAD YEAR FOR REPUBLICANS," BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL GOP CANDIDATES IN THE CRUCIAL STATE OF PA WHO HAVE A CHANCE EITHER TO WIN OR MAKE REAL INROADS IN DEMOCRATIC STRONGHOLDS.
At the top, Mike Livingston, Republican candidate for Congress in PA's 2d congressional district (Philadelphia). There's no truth to the rumor that Mike recently won the national "Brad-Pitt-Lookalike-Contest."
Mike Livingston, the law professor who's running for Congress from PA's 2d congressional district (against Dem. Chaka Fattah) and I have been corresponding regularly. I sent him the following today about his own race, Melissa Hart's race in the 4th district (against Dem. Jason Altmire), and Marina Kats's contest in the 13th (against Dem. Allyson Schwartz):
Dear Mike Livingston:
I think I can bring attention to candidates I support. My "bull-in-a-china shop" approach online works better than I could have imagined.
Melissa Hart, who is running in the 4th District in western PA is a good friend of mine, and I keep trying to get people nationally to "adopt" her -- with some success. One of Melissa's big advantages this time (as compared to the mid-term election of 2006) is that John McCain should win the 4th by a large margin, particularly if Rev. Wright keeps spreading his cheerful message of ignorance and animosity. Altmire has yet to denounce Obama's "bitter" comments denigrating Pennsylvanians -- presumably because he agrees with them.
Mike, when your own campaign is done, maybe you can write a book about it. Running against Chaka Fattah may be in some ways a thankless task. However, there are tens of thousands of people in the 2d CD who will vote for Mike Livingston if you can get your message out.At the very least, your presence in the race is going to force Fattah to reconsider some of his militantly leftist positions. He's also going to have to explain why his seven terms in Congress have left at least 150,000 people in the district mired in poverty. If Fattah has a clue about economic development, he has fooled me -- and the people he supposedly represents.
If you haven't heard yet from Eric Dondero of BlogTalkRadio/Libertarian, you will soon. When libertarian Republicans learn who you are and what you believe in, many of them will support you -- by "support" I mean send money! There are thousands of libertarian Republicans out there who will contribute to your campaign -- if they can just find out that you exist.
I truly believe what I said earlier about how to get voters' support: to ask for it. The process is just that simple (although it requires great time and effort.
Many of the Republican candidates for Congress have a lot in common -- although you're not as good looking as Marina Kats (nobody is)! Marina has a great chance to make Allyson Schwartz, a terrible legislator, sweat. Allyson claims she's a powerful defender of the "middle-class." Somehow she thinks raising their taxes, discouraging energy development, and basically rooting for al Qaeda in Iraq constitute defending the country.
On libertarian (freedom loving) Republicans. One notable member of that group was a popular columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Tom Hritz. He liked to smoke and one day a busybody at the P-G asked him if he was going to participate in "The Great American Smokeout." Irritated, Hritz said he was going to promote a new holiday called "National Mind-Your-Own-Business-Day."
Another Hritz-ism: Somebody asked him what he thought about the performance of Robt. Casey, Sr., father of Senator Bob. Hritz said, "Listen, after two terms of Bob Casey as Governor, Pennsylvania is lucky it's still a state."
Tom and his wife (also very funny) have passed away, but they're obviously still here in spirit. They'd have loved the chance to vote for people like Mike Livingston, Melissa Hart, and Marina Kats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
