HEATHER WILSON TERRIFIC, SANTORUM SCUMBAG

NOTE: TODAY (WEDNESDAY) I'LL WRITE MORE THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT HEATHER WILSON, WHO WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT CHOICE FOR V-P ON THE REPUBLICAN TICKET, AND WILL DISCUSS YESTERDAY'S "BIG LOSERS," WHICH TURNED OUT TO THE MOTLEY CREW OF RIGHT-WING TALK RADIO "HOSTS." IF PEOPLE LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH AND ANN COULTER DO END UP SUPPORTING HILLARY CLINTON, THAT WOULD BE GREAT NEWS FOR THE "NEW" REPUBLICAN PARTY, ONE THAT WON'T HAVE A SPACE FOR THE HATERS OF THE WORLD.

Wednesday comments on what happened yesterday (Super Tuesday): "The big losers last night were the talk-radio hosts." (One McCain advisor)

I think the California poll showing Romney ahead in California must have been a premature April Fool's joke. It is time for "Team Romney," as Hugh Hewitt likes to call them, to fold its tent. There are significant realignmnets going on in the country generally and the Republican Party specifically. The traditional Republicans, the ones I grew up with in upstate New York, have reappeared, much to the amazement of many conservatives and libertarians. Most Americans -- the vast majority -- are moderates, although they usually don't play a leading role in primaries, which tend to attract the far-right or far-left. In Florida and California, roughly half the Republicans voting identified themselves as pro-choice -- the same was roughly true in NY, NJ, and CT. However, most of those people voted for McCain, who is solidly pro-life. Go figure. I believe McCain will attempt to unify the Party, but he won't -- and shouldn't -- go around with a beggar's bowl. He should keep his distance from Hewitt, Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hewitt. He doesn't really need them.


NOTE: TODAY (SUPER TUESDAY) I HAVE A NEW COLUMN ABOUT FORMER SEN. RICK SANTORUM, WHO'S RECENTLY EMERGED FROM PA'S POLITICAL TRASH DUMP TO MAKE ANTI-MCCAIN ROBOCALLS FOR ROMNEY. SANTORUM IS JUST BARELY AN EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING, SOMEONE WHO ALMOST SINGHANDEDLY WRECKED THE GOP IN PA. WEAR YOUR HELMET, RICK. The Santorum column will appear BELOW this one on the merits of choosing Heathr Wilson for the vice-presidential slot on the Republican ticket. I HOPE YOU'LL CONTINUE TO VISIT THIS BLOG OFTEN THROUGHOUT THE ELECTION. THERE'S A BATTLE GOING ON FOR THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, AND MY BLOG IS GOING TO PLAY A CENTRAL ROLE IN THAT STRUGGLE.

After I suggested possible V-P choices (for McCain) as Michael Steele of MD and Congresswoman Heather Wilson of New Mexico, I got the following response from a Capitol Hill type:

"I'm certainly not opposed to a black or woman as VP but they do need to be ready to be VP and thus President. I'm not trying to be disrespectfu because I like Michael Steele but his highest elected office is Lt. Gov. I'm not comfortable with a one term Lt. Gov being VP and the media would rip him as not being ready for such high office. As far as Heather Wilson, I had never heard of her until I arrived on Capitol Hill and while she seems to be a good Congresswoman she doesn't jump out to me as VP material. A weakness of the GOP is we are weak with women and minorities and a direct result of this weakness is the GOP doesn't have as many women and minority elected officials. This is a weakness I do believe that McCain can and will help us with."


The following is my response:

In an age when Barack Obama, lately an Illinois State Senator, is seen as a credible candidate for President, Michael Steele looks pretty good. As for Heather Wilson, I believe the only female veteran ever elected to Congress, she's a graduate of the Air Force Academy. a Rhodes Scholar, and a widely acknowledge expert on foreign affairs, particularly in the MidEast. She was perhaps the most-targeted candidate by the Democrats, but she won twice against Hispanic opponents in a district (NM, 1st) that's 43% Hispanic. Her career in the military, in foreign affairs, and in Congress is a lot more impressive than that of, say, Hillary Clinton. She is a ferocious campaigner. She goes for the jugular but is NOT a dirty player.

Right now, if I could give one name to John McCain it probably would be Heather Wilson. Frankly, we will always be weak with women and minorities if we don't look for people in both categories who can meet a challenge. Right now, many Americans look at Republicans as the Party of, by, and for older white people (i.e., people like me). We have to end that half-true stereotype SOON.

We Republicans, to our detriment, demand a lot more "experience" (i.e., age) than the Democrats do. This has been true since 1960 when the "too young" Kennedy defeated Nixon. Like Claude Rains, we "round up the usual suspects." We need to take a different approach.

RICK SANTORUM, A LOSER AS A PERSON AND A POLITICIAN


In the summer of 2006, Republican Rick Santorum was running behind Democrat Bob Casey by a margin of 60% to 40%. But Santorum apparently had a hole card: the fact that he was raising more money -- mostly from PACs -- than any other candidate for the Senate. Eventually, he would end up with a huge sum, $27 million. (You can read about this on OpenSecrets.org. Just go there and type in the name "Santorum.")

So, what eventually happened with Santorum? On Election Day, 2006, he ended up losing to Casey by 59% to 41%. He spent $27 million, and apparently all that money bought him an increase of one percentage point.

This is the Rick Santorum who is sending out a million robocalls denouncing John McCain for having a bad "termperament." That's priceless, because Santorum was one of the most arrogant, ill-tempered, cynical people ever to serve in the Senate. It's the same Santorum who "begged" (McCain's word) Senator McCain and Mayor Giuliani to come to Pennsylvania to campaign for him in 2006. They both showed up and worked hard, but Santorum had alienated so many voters that Ronald Reagan and Abrahma Lincoln couldn't have saved him.

Santorum was at the top of the Republican ticket in Pennsylvania and his abysmal performance helped drag down at least two Republican congressional candidates. One of them was Melissa Hart, my congresswoman, whose opponent (Jason Altmire) ran constant messages trying to link Melissa with Santorum. Another Republican congressman who lost mainly because Santorum was so weak and disliked was Fitzpatrick in the eastern part of the state. He lost by fewer than 1,000 votes. Melissa went down by 52% to 48%.

Santorum lost so badly because he was strongly rejected by Democrats, Independents, Blacks, women professionals, younger voters, and even traditionally Republican suburbanites. This self-styled super-conservative ended up running ads talking about how closely he had worked with . . . Hillary Clinton. His ads mainly tried to bring across the point that he actually was a "good guy." However, the voters who knew him best didn't believe a word he said.

Santorum had orginally won a seat in Congress 20 years ago mainly by accusing his Democratic opponent (Doug Walgren) of not living in Pennsylvania. However, relatively soon after Santorum went to Washington, DC, he brought his family with him. In the following years, he claimed to have a residence in suburban Pittsburgh, but he never lived there. He did, however, bill the district (Penn Hills) for $100,000 for a year's worth of "cyber school" for his six children. For obvious reasons, the district balked at paying such a huge sum.

Santorum also wrote a book suggesting that working mothers should stay home with their children -- as his own wife has done. Of course, that meant the huge number of working women in PA had no interest in voting for him.

McCain and Giuliani tried to save him, but Santorum was beyond salvation. He tried to purchase their affection with his vast campaign war chest, but the voters weren't buying.

This is the same Rick Santorum that's now attempting to tell the nation how to vote. I doubt that anyone is listening to him anymore. He exemplifies everything that's wrong with American politics.

CONSERVATIVE BLACK REPUBLICANS: AMAZING GRACE!

The National Black Republicans Association (NBRA) released today the following essay by Frances Rice:

DEMOCRATS AND RACIAL POLITICS: FROM JIM CROW
TO BARACK OBAMA

By Frances Rice

Democrats have a 150-year history of using race as a political weapon to keep blacks in virtual slavery and Republicans out of power.The recent firestorm ignited by Senator Hillary Clinton's racially-tinged attempt to derail Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign shows the perils of Democrats using their race-based weapon against a black Democrat. In the black community, people are outraged about how Democrat demagogues, including Billionaire Bob Johnson of BET, are treating Obama as an "uppity Negro" who dares to defy their white Democratic Party masters.

Prior to the Clinton-Obama hullabaloo over Senator Clinton's disparaging remark about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Clinton campaign was being given a pass for using racial slurs against Senator Obama. When Democrats called Senator Obama a "Magic Negro," there was hardly a ripple of protest. Just as little concern is expressed when Democrats slander black Republicans, such as former Lt. Governor Michael Steele who Democrats depicted as a "Simple Sambo" and Dr. Condoleezza Rice who was portrayed as an ignorant "Mammy", reminiscent of the racial stereotypes used by Democrats during the days of "Jim Crow."

Any Republican using such slanderous tactics against blacks would be castigated as a racist and destroyed politically.

If the controversy generated by Senator Clinton's remark that diminished the civil rights role of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. signals the beginning of an end to the type of racial divisiveness inflicted on our nation for over a century and a half by Democrats, then the angst created by Senator Clinton will be well worth it.To fully appreciate the significance of this possible historical turning point, we must pause to examine briefly the Democratic Party's sordid racist history.

Click here to view the full article.


From Steve: As many of you know, I'm a major advocate of getting more African-Americans to vote for conservative Republican candidates. The NBRA is a major force in making that happen. The following is my response to Frances Rice's comments:

Frances Rice's piece is outstanding, and it demonstrates why conservatives of any color need to fight the effort to keep Blacks in a state of political bondage. Hillary Clinton and her supporters, including Bob Johnston, have determined that now is the time to "go negative." You are seeing subtle efforts to portray Mrs. Clinton as not only the "female candidate," but also as the "white candidate."

But don't liberal Democrats "love Black people?" Not exactly. They love the votes more than they love the individuals who cast ballots. Four years later they show up, brag about a few short-term handouts, and ask (demand) the votes again.

Frances Rice mentions the slurs against Michael Steele, a great candidate and a wonderful man, and Condoleeza Rice. Similar slurs were made against Ken Blackwell in Ohio and Lynn Swann, candidate for governor in PA. In Swann's case, Gov. Ed Rendell (who supposed "loves" Black people) ran campaign ads -- in black-and-white -- that sought to portray Lynn as some sort of unsavory character out of an old Steppin Fetchitt movie. Gee, did anyone (besides me) call Rendell on this? Nope.

Yes, I am Caucasian, but I do understand how difficult it must be at time for Black conservatives to sustain their efforts. But it's absolutely essential to make sure that great candidates like Steele, Blackwell, and Swann ultimately prevail. Your peers might not thank you now, but your children and grandchildren surely will.God bless all of you who are doing the "heavy lifting." It will pay dividends.

I intend to reprint the short of version of Frances Rice's piece on my blog. I also urge people of all races to join conservative Black groups (such as the ones in Yahoo Groups) and do everything possible to support their efforts. If you can, please make financial contributions to Black conservatives. Thanks!

Two Great Candidates (Huckabee & Palin) and An Awful One (Larry Craig)

Please don't skip over the material at the bottom of this post dealing with disgraced Republican Senator Larry Craig's pleading guilty to lewd conduct in a Minneapolis restroom. It's depressing, but it's important to face reality.

Note to supporters of MIKE HUCKABEE and other candidates, the best way to learn about Sarah Palin is to read some of the national articles praising her, all of them listed on my blogroll (Fred Barnes' "The Most Popular Governor" in The Weekly Standard, White House Correspondent Les Kinsolving in WorldNetDaily, Dimitri Vassilaros in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review), SJ Reidhead on BlogCritics, and Tom Koenniger in The Columbian). The Wikipedia article on Sarah (type in her name) is short but accurate. If you're interested in blog sites backing Sarah, look at: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/, http://palintology.com/ (an Alaska site), http://outsideofthebox.townhall.com/, as well as pro-Huckabee sites such as http://onemom.wordpress.com/, http://opinionatedcatholic.blogspot.com/ and http://themaritimesentry.blogspot.com/. Please join us in our efforts to get the most electable woman on the GOP ticket. If you're interested, leave a comment or send me an e-mail at TalkTop65@aol.com.

A big welcome to the newest Palin Fan (and a strong supporter of Mike Huckabee), a guy named "Nuke" who does Nuke's News & Views at: http://conservablogs.com/nuke/

In my comments section for yesterday's column, you'll notice NY Catholic Mom saying that Sarah should hold her political fire until Mike Huckabee has served two terms and Sarah's kids "are grown." Three of the kids are pretty well grown by now, including a boy who will soon be 19. The following in blue is my response:

Dear Catholic Mom: Sarah seems to have done a wonderful job (along with her husband, Todd) with her kids to this point. From the polls, it looks likely (though not inevitable) that Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the next President of the U.S. The push to get Sarah on the ticket is an effort to forestall that from happening.

If Mike Huckabee or any Republican presidential candidate doesn't have an absolutely dynamite running mate, then the only time he will spend in the White House will be on a visitor's pass. Yesterday, a blogger for Huckabee noted that "It's time for Mike to take some risks." He said a mouthful.

People who believe Mrs. Clinton will be easy to beat are in denial, ignoring her tremendous financial and political resources, as well as her strong appeal to several large voting blocs. In generic polls (do you prefer a Republican or a Democrat for President?) the Democrat wins by 52-39%.

In her first Senate race in New York, Mrs. Clinton ran against a popular young congressman, Rick Lazio. Despite being called a carpetbagger and every other name in the book, she won 55 percent to 43 percent, which in New York qualifies as a landslide.

New York is a much more diverse state than most people think. It has a rich ethnic and racial blend. One surprise is that the state has a huge number of farms, and dozens of small and medium-sized cities, as well as many villages.

If Mrs. Clinton wins in 2008, her opponent in 2012 might very well be Gov. Sarah Palin. Poll data (I can provide if you'd like to see it) shows the Democrats doing very well among Catholic voters. That data has been generated by Rasmussen and Pew, two highly respected survey firms.

The Republican Party has also done poorly for nearly 30 years with women professionals (teachers, doctors, lawyers, businesswomen, nurses) for 30 years, and that gap is widening. The current thinking among most experts is that the Republican Party will get skunked in most important races, including the one for the Presidency.

It wouldn't benefit Mike to choose a male Caucasian (a Fred Thompson or Newt Gingrich) with very limited appeal to voters generally, as the Republican Party has done over and over and over again since the Eisenhower era. If the Republican Party has stars -- and Mike truly is one -- then it is time to present them to the voters.

Gov. Palin has more executive experience than Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards -- combined. That executive experience comes from two terms as Mayor of Alaska's fastest growing town (Wasilla) and as governor of a state that's crucial to America's energy future. She also serves as chairman of energy resources for the Republican Governors' Association.

In a Republican Party (see the material below on Sen. Craig) beset by corruption and sexual misconduct, Sarah Palin is a model of ethical behavior. In her tenure on the Alaska Oil and Gas Commission, she blew the whistle on ethical misconduct by the head of the state's Repubican Party and on Alaska's Attorney-General.

The Republican Party has only two women -- a shamefully low number -- who could run effectively on the national ticket. They are Congresswoman (and Air Force veteran) Heather Wilson of NM and Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. I don't think the message we want to send to women interested in public service is that they had best ally themselves with the Democrats.

Surveys demonstrate that 92% of Americans are ready to vote for a qualified woman for President. Gee, what woman might that be? Apparently, Republican women make up most of the 8% who are not ready to vote for a woman for the highest office. That is just plain sad, and hopefully candidates like Sarah will rectify the situation.

As you can see, a great deal of thought has preceded the many thousands of hours people have spent on Sarah's behalf. IT IS NOT A CASUAL SUGGESTION.

(Note: A good chunk of the statistics I cite are drawn from a figure who's young but has almost achieved sainthood in the conservative movement, Patrick Hynes. You can find the material in his article, "Identity Group Conservatism," at the following link: http://anklebitingpundits.com/content/index.php?p=2496)

steve maloney

MINNEAPOLIS (Aug. 28) - Idaho Sen. Larry Craig is a conservative Republican who has voted against gay marriage and opposes hate crimes legislation that would extend special protections to gay and lesbian crime victims.

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, confirmed on Monday that he pleaded guilty earlier this month to a charge of disorderly conduct after he was arrested at an airport. In the wake of Craig's guilty plea on misdemeanor charges stemming from complaints of lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the Minneapolis airport, his political future is in question. The three-term senator, who has represented Idaho in Congress for more than a quarter-century, is up for re-election next year. He hasn't said if he will run for a fourth term in 2008 and was expected to announce his plans this fall. A spokesman, Sidney Smith, was uncertain late Monday if Craig's guilty plea would affect his re-election plans.

Steve says: Affect his re-election plans? What re-election plans? This pitiful guy is political dead meat. I am sick of people, especially those who masquerade as "conservative Republicans," engaging in sexual misconduct. It's disheartening to see Republicans (Rep. Mark Foley, Sen. David Vitter, and Randall Tobias (Hollywood-Madam-customer) appealing to the "Republican base" with demagoguery and pandering -- and then engaging in the basest of behavior. In dealing with the "base," their motto is let them eat rhetoric.

Sen. Larry Craig should resign, and should do it today. Sinful and disgusting behavior by such people is an arrow in the heart of our many decent candidates, including people like MIke Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Michael Steele, Heather Wilson, and Diana Lynn Irey. The "narrative" people like Craig construct is one that says Republican elected officials are corrupt hypocrites. The fact that there were problems with the way Craig conducted himself should not come as a major surprise (for decades there have been rumors that Craig is gay, although married). As William F. Buckley, Jr. said many years ago: "Self-control is the most exhilarating of pleasures." Too bad that people like Foley and Craig don't heed that admonition.