"Well, I'll tell you, if I were Joe Biden, I'd want to get that V-P thing in writing." (Rudy Giuliani)
Steve Says: In my previous column today, I talked about what I believed to be the replacement by Hillary Clinton of Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket. I just received the following from Carolyn, an activist for soldiers and military families. She lives in the Midwest. I gave the October 5 date for a Biden exit in the previous column. The following is Carolyn's message, citing sources within the DNC:
Date: Sunday, September 14, 2008, 3:05 PM
hi all
Let me share some info with you that i have gotten from excellent sources within the DNC:
On or about October 5th, Biden will excuse himself from the ticket, citing health problems, and he will be replaced by Hillary. This is timed to occur after the VP debate on 10/2.
there have been talks all weekend about how to proceed with this info. generally, the feeling
is that we should all go ahead and get it out there to as many blog sites and personal email
lists as is possible. i have already seen a few short blurbs about this - the "health problem"
cited in those articles was aneurism. Probably many of you have heard the same rumblings.
however, at this point, with this inside info from the DNC, it looks like this obama strategy will be a go. Therefore, it seems that the best strategy is to get out in front of this obama maneuver, spell it out in detail, and thereby expose it for the grand manipulation that it is.
so, let's start mixing this one up and cut the obamites off at the pass - send this info out to as many people as you can - post about it on websites and blogs - etc etc
If you have any thoughts or questions about this, please be in touch.
Lastly, i have put an excerpt from Rudy's speech at the RNC below - it seems to address this
very issue!!
yours in the fight,
Carolyn
Excerpts from R.Giuliani's speech at the 2008 RNC:
Rudy: "Obama — Obama promised to take public financing for his campaign, until he broke his promise."
Rudy: "Obama — Obama was against wiretapping before he voted for it."
Rudy: "When speaking to a pro-Israeli group, Obama favored an undivided Jerusalem, like I favor and like John McCain favored. Well, he favored an undivided Jerusalem — don’t get too excited — for one day, until he changed his mind."
Rudy: "Well, I’ll tell you, if I were Joe Biden, I’d want to get that V.P. thing in writing."
Showing posts with label Rudy Giuliani. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rudy Giuliani. Show all posts
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Friday, February 8, 2008
Sharon Caliendo: Great Political Operative
This weekend I'll be writing about Sharon Caliendo, a political activist in Oklahoma. She was an important figure in Tom Coburn's winning a U.S. Senate race. Coburn was the man who introduced John McCain at last Thursday's CPAC meeting in DC.
For candidates to win in statewide or national races, they need people like Sharon. She (along with Greg Alterton) founded the Rudy Giuliani site on Yahoo, and when Mayor Giuliani left the race, Sharon and Greg changed the group to: Rudy Supporters for John McCain. It remains one of the largest groups on Yahoo.
Here's what Sharon wrote about her experience in the Coburn campaign.
"It was the largest grassroots effort ever in the State of Oklahoma, and we did it from the ground up in every county. Then a State GOP Chair was elected that didn't believe in the grassroots and they lost that large coalition of Republicans that worked to elect Dr. Tom. Office holders were behind another candidate in the primary including enlisting help from the WH but Dr. Tom prevailed. The other candidate had a mailer with Pres Bush they sent out in the primary. Never had seen that before."
"Know this is looking ahead but we need people passing out McCain stickers at every major conference football game this fall. We have 85,000 in the stands and another 10,000 milling around at every home game here in Norman for the University of Oklahoma. Lot of Texans come up for our games. We need to get those college CR's around the Country involved so we can get them passing out stickers. We have a Senate race and my hope is to tap into that to get some Inhofe/McCain/? shirts for both OU in crimson and OSU in Orange. OSU only has about 40,000 at their games but we can still tap into them as well. Our largest donors to the GOP in OK are also donors to OU and OSU"
"We could do it around the Country!"
Sharon
Here's how I responded to her:
Sharon, I'm going to reprint your piece (on my blog) about your working for the election of Dr. Tom. I hope everyone who has a blog will do the same thing. There are ways people can magnify their efforts on behalf of a candidate, and you demonstrate exactly how it's done. It's critical for McCain to go out and "engage" with other voters. John McCain has never lost an election, and with the help of people like you, he'll keep that perfrect record in 2008.
Stephen R. Maloney
For candidates to win in statewide or national races, they need people like Sharon. She (along with Greg Alterton) founded the Rudy Giuliani site on Yahoo, and when Mayor Giuliani left the race, Sharon and Greg changed the group to: Rudy Supporters for John McCain. It remains one of the largest groups on Yahoo.
Here's what Sharon wrote about her experience in the Coburn campaign.
"It was the largest grassroots effort ever in the State of Oklahoma, and we did it from the ground up in every county. Then a State GOP Chair was elected that didn't believe in the grassroots and they lost that large coalition of Republicans that worked to elect Dr. Tom. Office holders were behind another candidate in the primary including enlisting help from the WH but Dr. Tom prevailed. The other candidate had a mailer with Pres Bush they sent out in the primary. Never had seen that before."
"Know this is looking ahead but we need people passing out McCain stickers at every major conference football game this fall. We have 85,000 in the stands and another 10,000 milling around at every home game here in Norman for the University of Oklahoma. Lot of Texans come up for our games. We need to get those college CR's around the Country involved so we can get them passing out stickers. We have a Senate race and my hope is to tap into that to get some Inhofe/McCain/? shirts for both OU in crimson and OSU in Orange. OSU only has about 40,000 at their games but we can still tap into them as well. Our largest donors to the GOP in OK are also donors to OU and OSU"
"We could do it around the Country!"
Sharon
Here's how I responded to her:
Sharon, I'm going to reprint your piece (on my blog) about your working for the election of Dr. Tom. I hope everyone who has a blog will do the same thing. There are ways people can magnify their efforts on behalf of a candidate, and you demonstrate exactly how it's done. It's critical for McCain to go out and "engage" with other voters. John McCain has never lost an election, and with the help of people like you, he'll keep that perfrect record in 2008.
Stephen R. Maloney
Thursday, January 31, 2008
How John McCain Can Win!
The way John McCain can win the general election is to emphasize in word and deed that he's a superior human being. In The Almanac of American Politics (2008), conservative guru Michael Barone, who disagrees with McCain on several issues, says the following about him:
"For many Americans, John McCain is the closest thing our politics has to a national hero, a presidential candidate widely admired in 2000 and an independent leader of great force in the years after. His personal story is a dramatic one, told beautifully by Robert Timberg in The Nightingale's Song and by McCain himself in the 1999 bestseller Faith of My Fathers."
"McCain is the son and grandson of Navy admirals, a decorated Navy pilot himself. He volunteered for service in Vietnam and in July, 1967, was injured in a flight deck explosion on the carrier Forrestal. He could have returned home, but refused, and in October, 1967, was shot down over [North] Vietnam. He spent five-and-a-half years, most of it in pain and torture, in Communist prisoner of war camps. He refused to be let out ahead of those who had been in longer when he was offered release because of his father's rank."
"McCain returned to the United States in March, 1973. His final assignment in the Navy was as Senate liason. In 1980, he retired and moved to Arizona, his wife's home state. In 1982, he ran for an open House seat. Attacked as an "outsider," he responded, 'The longest place I ever lived was in Hanoi.' He led 32% to 26% in a four-way primary, and won the 1982 and 1984 general elections and then the 1986 Senate contest easily."
If John McCain runs as that man, which should be fairly easy, because he IS that man, he has a good chance to win. He's a hero, and Hillary Clinton (like Barack Obama) is not. McCain must continue to run as an exceptional human being, someone whose life is a model for all Americans.
McCain will not win merely on his "positions." Instead, he will win on personality and character. To the end, surrogates -- like Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarenegger, as well as the two Georgia Senators (Saxby Chambliss and Jonny Isakson) -- can play important roles in citing McCain's key qualities.
In short, the best approach is for John McCain is to run as himself. For someone like Hillary Clinton, the best strategy might be to run as someone else. The American people vote largely on likability, courage, and integrity, three areas where she's lacking.
I hope everyone who visits this blog will visit the following site for McCain volunteers:http://mccain08olc.blogspot.com/
Here's the note McCain operative (par excellence) Brad Marston sent me today:
Stephen,
I look forward to working with you as well. I would hope as a first step you will join the MV08 Bloggers. I have cc'd Michael Schuyler, our National Chair for Blog Out-Reach on this e-mail and I am sure he will get in touch with you.
I would also invite you to join MV08 as a National Co-Chair. Your political insight, tireless efforts on behalf of candidates, recognition of the imprtance of the internet in today's political campaigns and finally, yes, your contacts will prove invaluable.
McCain does put a huge emphasis on involving veterans in his campaign. In fact one of our National Co-Chairs, Sheridan Folger is on the NH Veterans Council with the campaign.
Note: I'm honored to join as a National C0-Chair of MV08. I hope all those of you who back Sarah Palin for V-P will get on the McCain Team. He's the one who will make the choice of a running-mate, and we need to "help" him choose Sarah.
Greg and Sharon say it well. The following short comments were made today by two members of the Rudy Giuliani group on Yahoo:
Never want to be at a watch party again where someone talking about a Governor's race that was just lost 2-1 says that it is OK because we stood on principles (?) and that is more important than winning." (Sharon Callien, head of Rudy Group)
"As bad as it sounds, politics is about winning, and about having the opportunity to move your ball further down the field. If one's "principles" are rejected by 66% of the voters, maybe that person shouldn't have trotted out those principles in the arena of politics. I'm all in favor of people staying true to their convictions, but if their convictions mean landslide losses at the polls, maybe they shouldn't leave their day job." (Greg Alterton, Rudy Group)
Greg added: "The Unappeasables, those who would condemn Ronald Reagan were he alive today because he wouldn't be "conservative" enough for them, don't amount to much of anything in the GOP. If they want to vote for the nominee, great. If they want to take a walk, that's fine too. Either way, they won't impact the results of the election much."
Note: Both these strong Rudy supporters are now backing Senator John McCain. They will be assets to his campaign.
"For many Americans, John McCain is the closest thing our politics has to a national hero, a presidential candidate widely admired in 2000 and an independent leader of great force in the years after. His personal story is a dramatic one, told beautifully by Robert Timberg in The Nightingale's Song and by McCain himself in the 1999 bestseller Faith of My Fathers."
"McCain is the son and grandson of Navy admirals, a decorated Navy pilot himself. He volunteered for service in Vietnam and in July, 1967, was injured in a flight deck explosion on the carrier Forrestal. He could have returned home, but refused, and in October, 1967, was shot down over [North] Vietnam. He spent five-and-a-half years, most of it in pain and torture, in Communist prisoner of war camps. He refused to be let out ahead of those who had been in longer when he was offered release because of his father's rank."
"McCain returned to the United States in March, 1973. His final assignment in the Navy was as Senate liason. In 1980, he retired and moved to Arizona, his wife's home state. In 1982, he ran for an open House seat. Attacked as an "outsider," he responded, 'The longest place I ever lived was in Hanoi.' He led 32% to 26% in a four-way primary, and won the 1982 and 1984 general elections and then the 1986 Senate contest easily."
If John McCain runs as that man, which should be fairly easy, because he IS that man, he has a good chance to win. He's a hero, and Hillary Clinton (like Barack Obama) is not. McCain must continue to run as an exceptional human being, someone whose life is a model for all Americans.
McCain will not win merely on his "positions." Instead, he will win on personality and character. To the end, surrogates -- like Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarenegger, as well as the two Georgia Senators (Saxby Chambliss and Jonny Isakson) -- can play important roles in citing McCain's key qualities.
In short, the best approach is for John McCain is to run as himself. For someone like Hillary Clinton, the best strategy might be to run as someone else. The American people vote largely on likability, courage, and integrity, three areas where she's lacking.
I hope everyone who visits this blog will visit the following site for McCain volunteers:http://mccain08olc.blogspot.com/
Here's the note McCain operative (par excellence) Brad Marston sent me today:
Stephen,
I look forward to working with you as well. I would hope as a first step you will join the MV08 Bloggers. I have cc'd Michael Schuyler, our National Chair for Blog Out-Reach on this e-mail and I am sure he will get in touch with you.
I would also invite you to join MV08 as a National Co-Chair. Your political insight, tireless efforts on behalf of candidates, recognition of the imprtance of the internet in today's political campaigns and finally, yes, your contacts will prove invaluable.
McCain does put a huge emphasis on involving veterans in his campaign. In fact one of our National Co-Chairs, Sheridan Folger is on the NH Veterans Council with the campaign.
Note: I'm honored to join as a National C0-Chair of MV08. I hope all those of you who back Sarah Palin for V-P will get on the McCain Team. He's the one who will make the choice of a running-mate, and we need to "help" him choose Sarah.
Greg and Sharon say it well. The following short comments were made today by two members of the Rudy Giuliani group on Yahoo:
Never want to be at a watch party again where someone talking about a Governor's race that was just lost 2-1 says that it is OK because we stood on principles (?) and that is more important than winning." (Sharon Callien, head of Rudy Group)
"As bad as it sounds, politics is about winning, and about having the opportunity to move your ball further down the field. If one's "principles" are rejected by 66% of the voters, maybe that person shouldn't have trotted out those principles in the arena of politics. I'm all in favor of people staying true to their convictions, but if their convictions mean landslide losses at the polls, maybe they shouldn't leave their day job." (Greg Alterton, Rudy Group)
Greg added: "The Unappeasables, those who would condemn Ronald Reagan were he alive today because he wouldn't be "conservative" enough for them, don't amount to much of anything in the GOP. If they want to vote for the nominee, great. If they want to take a walk, that's fine too. Either way, they won't impact the results of the election much."
Note: Both these strong Rudy supporters are now backing Senator John McCain. They will be assets to his campaign.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
McCain: Choose Sarah not Mike!
"I trust in the good sense, courage, resilience, and human decency of the American people . . . the most optimistic, ingenious, and industrious people in the history of the world." (John McCain, January 29, 2008)
Congratulations to Senator John McCain for his huge victory tonight in Florida, one of my favorite states. A salute also to another fine candidate, Rudy Giuliani, who will always be "America's Mayor." It's not a well-kept secret that tomorrow in California Mayor Giuliani will endorse the campaign of his friend, a great American patriot named John McCain.
This is a good night for America.
I've written recently about my problems with the candidacies of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, neither of whom would be a good choice for an office like the presidency. I hope you'll read what I wrote -- and comment if you'd like.
I'm hearing tonight that John McCain in his victory speech did everything but offer the vice-presidential slot to Gov. Mike Huckabee. I believe McCain should choose someone else, specifically, Gov. Sarah Heath Palin of Alaska. She brings everything to the table that Huckabee does -- but without his baggage. Huckabee has established himself as "Pastor Mike," somebody who'd be very much at home in "Mayberry, RFD." The states he would "help" in are mainly ones where McCain doesn't need help. Sarah would bring the values voters with her. Would love to hear your comments!
I'd like everyone to visit Cindy's blog and read her outstanding tribute to our President, George W. Bush. Here's the link: http://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2008/1/29/3494764.html
Tomorrow (Wednesday), I'll put up some excerpts from the tribute. Right now, the world little notes the greatness of the man, but I'm sure it will long remember. Greatness? He kept us safe for six years. Enough said.
Congratulations to Senator John McCain for his huge victory tonight in Florida, one of my favorite states. A salute also to another fine candidate, Rudy Giuliani, who will always be "America's Mayor." It's not a well-kept secret that tomorrow in California Mayor Giuliani will endorse the campaign of his friend, a great American patriot named John McCain.
This is a good night for America.
I've written recently about my problems with the candidacies of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, neither of whom would be a good choice for an office like the presidency. I hope you'll read what I wrote -- and comment if you'd like.
I'm hearing tonight that John McCain in his victory speech did everything but offer the vice-presidential slot to Gov. Mike Huckabee. I believe McCain should choose someone else, specifically, Gov. Sarah Heath Palin of Alaska. She brings everything to the table that Huckabee does -- but without his baggage. Huckabee has established himself as "Pastor Mike," somebody who'd be very much at home in "Mayberry, RFD." The states he would "help" in are mainly ones where McCain doesn't need help. Sarah would bring the values voters with her. Would love to hear your comments!
I'd like everyone to visit Cindy's blog and read her outstanding tribute to our President, George W. Bush. Here's the link: http://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2008/1/29/3494764.html
Tomorrow (Wednesday), I'll put up some excerpts from the tribute. Right now, the world little notes the greatness of the man, but I'm sure it will long remember. Greatness? He kept us safe for six years. Enough said.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
FRED THOMPSON: HISTORY'S WORST CAMPAIGN
I wrote the following in response to a Yahoo "conservative" group where one member was asking where Fred Thompson's headquarters were in states like MI, MN, SD, and ND. You'll note that I'm not a big fan of Fred Thompson.
When the book is written on this campaign, there will be a fascinating chapter on Fred Thompson and his Incredible Disappearing Act. Asking where Fred's "headquarters" are in MI & MN is like asking where Ron Paul's HQ is in Harlem.
Apparently, Fred's "trophy wife," Jeri, is the head of his campaign. One step he should make immediately is to fire her. If his campaign isn't the worst in recorded history, I shudder to think which one was more inept (Dennis Kucinich? Mike Gravel?).
When Fred was in on the Senate on 9/11, he said of his own situation, "Now is not the time [for me] to leave . . ." Shortly thereafter, he left to go to an important position in Hollywood on a TV show that was regularly anti-military and anti-conservative.
In Thompson's career, he often had to choose between serving the nation and making a lot of money. In every cash, the appeal of the big bucks won.
I can't imagine what the appeal is that Fred holds for some conservatives. What on earth has the man ever done in his career as an elected official? Exactly what did he accomplish as a Senator? In his lucrative role as a lobbyist, he had as clients one unsavory individual or group after another, including the dictator of Haiti.
Fred is now 67 -- and looks and acts his age. At the same time, he's been building on his reputation as the laziest man in Washington. He has an active campaign in only one state, South Carolina, and when he loses there I'm sure he will return to Hollywood and live happily ever afterwards,
As a candidate, Fred is not in the same league as John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, or Mitt Romney. Those conservative individuals have been running full-speed for a year. In contrast, Fred has been meandering along, giving one pedestrian speech after another.
Good riddance, Fred.
When the book is written on this campaign, there will be a fascinating chapter on Fred Thompson and his Incredible Disappearing Act. Asking where Fred's "headquarters" are in MI & MN is like asking where Ron Paul's HQ is in Harlem.
Apparently, Fred's "trophy wife," Jeri, is the head of his campaign. One step he should make immediately is to fire her. If his campaign isn't the worst in recorded history, I shudder to think which one was more inept (Dennis Kucinich? Mike Gravel?).
When Fred was in on the Senate on 9/11, he said of his own situation, "Now is not the time [for me] to leave . . ." Shortly thereafter, he left to go to an important position in Hollywood on a TV show that was regularly anti-military and anti-conservative.
In Thompson's career, he often had to choose between serving the nation and making a lot of money. In every cash, the appeal of the big bucks won.
I can't imagine what the appeal is that Fred holds for some conservatives. What on earth has the man ever done in his career as an elected official? Exactly what did he accomplish as a Senator? In his lucrative role as a lobbyist, he had as clients one unsavory individual or group after another, including the dictator of Haiti.
Fred is now 67 -- and looks and acts his age. At the same time, he's been building on his reputation as the laziest man in Washington. He has an active campaign in only one state, South Carolina, and when he loses there I'm sure he will return to Hollywood and live happily ever afterwards,
As a candidate, Fred is not in the same league as John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, or Mitt Romney. Those conservative individuals have been running full-speed for a year. In contrast, Fred has been meandering along, giving one pedestrian speech after another.
Good riddance, Fred.
Friday, January 11, 2008
The Presidential Nominees Will Be . . .
This weekend I'll have a column on Saturday and one on Sunday. I'd love to hear from readers on their "guesses" -- and that's all they can be at this point -- on which candidates they (i.e., you) think the eventual nominees will be. There don't appear to be any clear frontrunners right now. Super Tuesday (February 5) is looming as the definitive moment, but we may not know for certain even then who the winners will be. It could be that close a race.
What are my guesses? So far, I'm said on different occasions that I believe the Democratic nominee will be Barack Obama (rather than Hillary Clinton), but I can't make that claim with certainty.
Unlike many of my fellow conservatives, I never understimate the political skills of anyone named "Clinton." On Eric Dondero's radio show the day before the New Hampshire primary, I said that Mrs. Clinton's "tearing-up" episode would help hur rather than hurt, and I turned out to be one of the few conservatives that got that right.
On the Republican side, I don't believe the nominee will be either Fred Thompson (the most disappointing of the candidates) or Mitt Romney.
I started out many months ago by. endorsing Rudy Giuliani, whom I still think would be a fine nominee. But for various reasons, I switched last week to John McCain.
In other words, I've been all over the lot on my predictions. What are your own thoughts?
If I had to bet the farm today, my guess would be: Barack Obama and John McCain.
The following are my additional comments to "GenXDad" on his praise for Cindy's piece on McCain-haters and Reagan-haters being one and the same:
I give Cindy at The Pink Flamingo (http://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/blog) a lot of credit for doing some great research on this subject. It's hard to remember, but Reagan got criticized all the time for being "too liberal," which was ridiculous. He did what he believed had to be done, including the grant of "amnesty" to many immigrants, mostly Mexicans. Reagan was not a militant pro-lifer, because he believed (correctly) it was impossible to pass any sort of constitutiononal amendment on the subject. Go to wikipedia and read about "The Human Life Amendment," and you'll see why he thought as he did. He ended up as one of the few truly GREAT Presidents. There have not been any perfect Presidents.
It's fine for people to disagree with John McCain on immigration, campaign reform, or other issues. But they have an obligation to show that they understand his arguments and then they have to duty to show why they disagree. Mere sloganeering is not enough by any means. An issue like immigration is really a tough one. How does one take a sound position without sounding anti-Mexican and thereby losing (forever) most of the critical Hispanic vote? McCain wrestles with such issues -- but most of his opponents have done little thinking on the subjects.
What are my guesses? So far, I'm said on different occasions that I believe the Democratic nominee will be Barack Obama (rather than Hillary Clinton), but I can't make that claim with certainty.
Unlike many of my fellow conservatives, I never understimate the political skills of anyone named "Clinton." On Eric Dondero's radio show the day before the New Hampshire primary, I said that Mrs. Clinton's "tearing-up" episode would help hur rather than hurt, and I turned out to be one of the few conservatives that got that right.
On the Republican side, I don't believe the nominee will be either Fred Thompson (the most disappointing of the candidates) or Mitt Romney.
I started out many months ago by. endorsing Rudy Giuliani, whom I still think would be a fine nominee. But for various reasons, I switched last week to John McCain.
In other words, I've been all over the lot on my predictions. What are your own thoughts?
If I had to bet the farm today, my guess would be: Barack Obama and John McCain.
The following are my additional comments to "GenXDad" on his praise for Cindy's piece on McCain-haters and Reagan-haters being one and the same:
I give Cindy at The Pink Flamingo (http://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/blog) a lot of credit for doing some great research on this subject. It's hard to remember, but Reagan got criticized all the time for being "too liberal," which was ridiculous. He did what he believed had to be done, including the grant of "amnesty" to many immigrants, mostly Mexicans. Reagan was not a militant pro-lifer, because he believed (correctly) it was impossible to pass any sort of constitutiononal amendment on the subject. Go to wikipedia and read about "The Human Life Amendment," and you'll see why he thought as he did. He ended up as one of the few truly GREAT Presidents. There have not been any perfect Presidents.
It's fine for people to disagree with John McCain on immigration, campaign reform, or other issues. But they have an obligation to show that they understand his arguments and then they have to duty to show why they disagree. Mere sloganeering is not enough by any means. An issue like immigration is really a tough one. How does one take a sound position without sounding anti-Mexican and thereby losing (forever) most of the critical Hispanic vote? McCain wrestles with such issues -- but most of his opponents have done little thinking on the subjects.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
McCain: American Hero, Patriot, Christian
Mike Devine, who posts under the name "Gamecock" sent me an article that's critical of Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and just about everybody other than Fred Thompson. It centers on the South Carolina primary, and you can see it by clicking on: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200801/POL20080109d.html
The article may tell you more about SC politics than you want to know, but you won't find anything better between now and the Palmetto State primary. I expect Larry Perrault and SJ Reidhead can't wait to respond it -- especially SJ (Cindy), who hails from SC.
I think all the article's criticisms, including those of Mike Huckabee, are somewhere between petty and totally unfair. For Huck fans, the accusations are mostly "inside baseball" stuff about the conservative wing of the So. Baptist Church and the VERY conservative wing. In the mind of some Baptists, Mike chose the "wrong" side in a denominational struggle. Talk about arcana.
I like Mike Devine (Gamecock) a lot, but his support of Thompson, like the Fred Campaign itself, is embarrassing. Fred is the laziest of candidates, and he's the worst when it comes to raising money. After 9/11, Fred said, "Now is not the time to leave [the Senate]." Shortly thereafter, he left -- to join the cast of a television show (Richard Wolf's "Law and Order") that missed few opportunities to bash the military and the GWB segment of the country. Frankly, Fred should be ashamed of himself.
"Yes, we have no bananas," when bananas is an analogue to perfect candidates.
I criticize Mike Huckabee myself, but anyone with sense will see that he, like several other candidates, is a good one and a man with some remarkable political achievements.As for John McCain, yes, he is a "maverick," that is, someone who thinks for himself -- wow, how exotic.
He has been pro-life and pro-military for his entire life. He is a Christian, which is a term that does not and should not have a narrow meaning. Of great significance, he's an American hero who underwent torture for many years.
Of great note, he has tackled issues (including immigration and campaign finance) where others have relied on pandering to an increasingly clueless "base." That's a group which believes the answer to real, pressinging problems is to "just say NO." On campaign finance: it has turned into a vehicle for re-electing incumbents (Pelosi, Murtha, Obey, Waxman, Rangel) unto perpetuity.
McCain's approach may have had its flaws, but anybody who doesn't see that the current financing system is a nightmare for representative democracy has not been paying attention.
For Huck supporters, they need to see that -- in many ways -- McCain is a lot like Mike Huckabee, although without the Southern accent. Mike and John both get criticized at least as much for their virtues as their faults. At times it appears the only people who like them are voters (and not just in states like Iowa and New Hampshire).
My point is that we need to recognize that candidates who disagree with us on one or more issues are not therefore beyond the pale. Heck, even in my case, I'm not always right.
May the best man win.
The article may tell you more about SC politics than you want to know, but you won't find anything better between now and the Palmetto State primary. I expect Larry Perrault and SJ Reidhead can't wait to respond it -- especially SJ (Cindy), who hails from SC.
I think all the article's criticisms, including those of Mike Huckabee, are somewhere between petty and totally unfair. For Huck fans, the accusations are mostly "inside baseball" stuff about the conservative wing of the So. Baptist Church and the VERY conservative wing. In the mind of some Baptists, Mike chose the "wrong" side in a denominational struggle. Talk about arcana.
I like Mike Devine (Gamecock) a lot, but his support of Thompson, like the Fred Campaign itself, is embarrassing. Fred is the laziest of candidates, and he's the worst when it comes to raising money. After 9/11, Fred said, "Now is not the time to leave [the Senate]." Shortly thereafter, he left -- to join the cast of a television show (Richard Wolf's "Law and Order") that missed few opportunities to bash the military and the GWB segment of the country. Frankly, Fred should be ashamed of himself.
"Yes, we have no bananas," when bananas is an analogue to perfect candidates.
I criticize Mike Huckabee myself, but anyone with sense will see that he, like several other candidates, is a good one and a man with some remarkable political achievements.As for John McCain, yes, he is a "maverick," that is, someone who thinks for himself -- wow, how exotic.
He has been pro-life and pro-military for his entire life. He is a Christian, which is a term that does not and should not have a narrow meaning. Of great significance, he's an American hero who underwent torture for many years.
Of great note, he has tackled issues (including immigration and campaign finance) where others have relied on pandering to an increasingly clueless "base." That's a group which believes the answer to real, pressinging problems is to "just say NO." On campaign finance: it has turned into a vehicle for re-electing incumbents (Pelosi, Murtha, Obey, Waxman, Rangel) unto perpetuity.
McCain's approach may have had its flaws, but anybody who doesn't see that the current financing system is a nightmare for representative democracy has not been paying attention.
For Huck supporters, they need to see that -- in many ways -- McCain is a lot like Mike Huckabee, although without the Southern accent. Mike and John both get criticized at least as much for their virtues as their faults. At times it appears the only people who like them are voters (and not just in states like Iowa and New Hampshire).
My point is that we need to recognize that candidates who disagree with us on one or more issues are not therefore beyond the pale. Heck, even in my case, I'm not always right.
May the best man win.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
For President: McCain or Giuliani
Somebody asked me today (it was James of opinionatedcatholic, one of the better blogs in the universe) which candidate I was supporting for President. I told him I'm supporting both McCain and Giuliani, the two individuals I believe are best able to protect the country, fight Islamic fascists, and support our military. After the Surge worked so dramatically, McCain came back into the picture for me. He had been advocating it for years.
However, I will support the Republican nominee (whom I assume will NOT be either Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo).
However, I will support the Republican nominee (whom I assume will NOT be either Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo).
Friday, December 21, 2007
Christmas Stories: McCain & Spears
Picture of downtown Pittsburgh, with the Monongahela River on the right and the Allegheny River on the left. The two come together at Point State Park to form the Ohio River.My Christmas Story
As a POW, my captors would tie my arms behind my back and then loop the rope around my neck and ankles so that my head was pulled down between my knees. I was often left like that throughout the night.
One night a guard came into my cell. He put his finger to his lips signaling for me to be quiet, and then loosened my ropes to relieve my pain. The next morning, when his shift ended, the guard returned and retightened the ropes, never saying a word to me.
A month or so later, on Christmas Day, I was standing in the dirt courtyard when I saw that same guard approach me. He walked up and stood silently next to me, not looking or smiling at me.
After a few moments had passed, he rather nonchalantly used his sandaled foot to draw a cross in the dirt. We stood wordlessly looking at the cross, remembering the true light of Christmas, even in the darkness of a Vietnamese prison camp. After a minute or two, he rubbed it out and walked away.
That guard was my Good Samaritan. I will never forget that man and I will never forget that moment. And I will never forget that, no matter where you are, no matter how difficult the circumstances, there will always be someone who will pick you up and carry you.
May you and your family have a blessed Christmas and Happy Holidays,
John McCain.
As many of you know, I'm giving John McCain another look. I continue to believe that he and Rudy Giuliani would be outstanding presidential choices. I'm also hopeful that both of them would lean toward Gov. Sarah Palin when they're considering vice-presidential choices. Finally, on the basis of their past performance, both McCain and Giuliani would be willing to campaign for Melissa Hart and William Russell in their efforts to win congressional seats.
Mike Huckabee and Jamie Spears
I heard on CNN that candidate Mike Huckabee described the pregnancy of 16-year-old Jamie Spears (Britney's younger sister) as a "tragedy." Frankly, that's a misuse of the word "tragedy," which is not a synonym for every unfortunate event that occurs in the world. The sad thing is that there's no solid evidence that young Miss Spears is ready to have and care for this child. Huckabee did salute her -- and wisely so -- for apparently never considering an abortion.
I wonder if her responsible behavior in choosing to have the child doesn't over-ride the irresponsible part: getting pregnant at age 16. At this point, all we can do is wish her and child well -- and provide whatever support we can for this young-mother-to-be.
The untold story in this event is what steps, if any, Miss Spears and her family are willing to take to ensure the child is loved and well-cared-for. Is she, like her older sister, intends to continue "partying" and devoting her life to a series of pointless activities, then the child truly will need our prayers.
I hope Jamie decides from this point on to be a role-model for the 800,000 American teenagers who become pregnant annually. In avoiding the easy way out of having an abortion, she may in fact be off to a good start.
As for Mike Huckabee, he needs to read up on the concept of tragedy. I suggest he start with Aristotle's "Poetics." Also, as a Christian minister, he needs to emulate Jesus Christ in staying away from judgmentalism. "Nor do I condemn you . . . Go and sin no more."
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Obama/Murtha: Disastrous Choices For America
Note: If you're tired of politics (but how could that happen?), please go over to my other site for some great pictures of a very special kitten. Just click here.
Obama: Disastrous Choice for America
Here's what The Economist says about Barack Obama [the candidate of "hope"] in its Dec. 15-21 edition: "A President Obama would turn precoceptions upside down; indeed he might be able to achieve far more both at home and abroad than any other candidate. But hope does not balance budgets, craft alliances, or reform schools. It certainly does not prove that Mr. Obama would be the best -- or even a good -- President."
The Economist continues: "Mr. Obama cannot change his experience deficit, but he can change his substance deficit. His economic policies (like those of the other Democrats . . .) are crowd-pleasing stuff. He is iffy about free trade. He wants health insurance for all -- and expects the rich to pay for it. He wants schools to get better, but he panders to his leftist base by eschewing merit pay for teachers and independent charter schools."
Also, "On Iraq, he affects not to have noticed that the 'surge' in and around Baghdad is producing palpable successes, and clings to the idea, beloved of his Party base, that all troops should be withdrawn even before he putatively takes office."
The Economist frames its comments on Obama as being helpful. In fact, they're a devastating critique of the candidate's naivete and his penchant for demagoguery. What about his stand on education? He refuses to take on the Teacher's Union and he refuses to support any real sort of choice for parents and students. Instead, he offers a vague "hope" that schools will somehow (perhaps by magic?) get better.
In other words, eights years of an Obama presidency would offer Americans an endless stream of rhetoric about the importance of education. But, aside from the teachers getting more money, NOTHING would change. Bad teachers would get the same pay as good ones. Parents would have no real opportunity to send their children to better schools.
On Iraq, Obama appeals to the small, activist segment (20%) of his Party that tells pollsters they think it would be best if the U.S. loses the War in Iraq. Like most Democratic presidential candidates, Obama seems to have no understanding of what motivate the mass murderers who call al-Qaida their "spiritual" home.
Yes, Obama "panders" to his Party's Leftist core. Apparently, that's his nature, and he would be a disastrous choice for America. He's so bad that he makes Hillary Clinton look good.
How do Obama's political and intellectual failures relate to someone like William Russell, who's opposing John Murtha? In fact, Murtha's approach to problems -- in Iraq, in education, in health care, in economic development -- closely resembles Obama's. In other words, the solution is to pay off some interest groups, such as the bosses of the Teacher's Union.
Russell has two young children, so he has a personal interest in improving education and resolving the situation in Iraq in a way favorable to the United States. The way to improve educational performance in America is to reach out -- to teachers, to parents, and to students -- to find ways to do things better. The implicit assumption of someone like Obama (and Murtha) is that things can't be improved, which is ridiculous.
In fact, we shouldn't underestimate teachers. My mother was one for many years, and I also taught for 10 years. Granted, most teachers -- like "most" people generally -- are average. Many of them fear that steps designed designed to reward excellent teachers will somehow come at the determinet of the "average many."
But a rising tide lifts ALL boats.
What do teachers generally -- the average and the above-average -- recommend to improve their own performance? What do they suggest to make them more a part of an economy and a society based on merit? In fact, most people in any occupation want to learn ways to make themselves better at their job.
What about identifying the best teacher in every school? Then, assign them to one or two teachers that are less skilled or experienced. In other words, let the top teachers share their expertise and mentor their colleagues. This happens all the time in business, but only rarely in education.
On Iraq, the real question (for Obama, Murtha, and others) is this: Where do we fight al-Qaida and how do we fight them? Presumably, the answer is NOT that we confront them in the streets of New York. "Redeploying" the troops to Okinawa, Murtha's solution, is a suggestion that's pitiful rather than helpful.
If there's a better way to fight al-Qaida, then people like Obama and Murtha are obligated to tell us how -- and where.In other words, let's come up with "win-win" solutions to our society's problems. We don't need to follow Obama's (and Murtha's) assumption that the only "problem" the world faces is how to make sure he gets elected.
Obama presents himself as the candidate of "hope." In fact, the real candidates of hope are people like Russell, who don't look at politics as some kind of zero-sum game. They offer hope that America's problems -- and we have plenty of them -- are soluble.
WHY DO I LIKE RUDY GIULIANI?
One reason I like Rudy a lot is that his actions -- along with those of Police Commissioners Bratton and Kerik (yes, the much-maligned Bernie) -- dramatically reduced the crime rate in New York City. There are many people in local, state, and federal government that seemingly believe high-crime-rates are something that "just happens." They are dead wrong.
In New York, Mayor Bloomberg, elected twice as a Republican, and Commissioner Kelly have continued the policies of Rudy Giuliani and earlier commissioners. They have had tremendous success at keeping crime -- especially the murder rate -- down.I heard the other day that New York City is on track to have fewer than 500 murders this year, putting it about on a par with Philadelphia, a much-smaller (and Democrat-controlled) city.
How many murders were there in NYC before Giuliani and Bratton iniated their crime-fighting policies. There were 2,494 -- nearly five time as many as are projected to occur this year.
Gee, how on earth did that great accomplishment (a pro-life achievement, by the way) occur? It happened because Giuliani and Bratton had an extremely insightful view into why and where crimes occurred.
Specifically, they understood what happens when neighborhood have broken windows, when begarrs are panhandling, when public urination runs rampant, when public drunkeness is tolerated, when sex parlors open up, and where groups of drug users congregate.
What happens is people assume nobody cares about the neighborhood. Good people move out -- and bad people move in. Crimes proliferate, and murders become a way of life.Giuliani and Bratton understood that it's critical to "sweat the small things." You can read the whole story in Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point. There was an epidemic of crime -- and Giuliani innoculated the city against it.
The approach is still paying great dividends and saving thens of thousands of lives. Other cities -- Philadelphia being one, Pittsburgh another -- should emulate "America's Mayor" and his New York Miracle.
Obama: Disastrous Choice for America
Here's what The Economist says about Barack Obama [the candidate of "hope"] in its Dec. 15-21 edition: "A President Obama would turn precoceptions upside down; indeed he might be able to achieve far more both at home and abroad than any other candidate. But hope does not balance budgets, craft alliances, or reform schools. It certainly does not prove that Mr. Obama would be the best -- or even a good -- President."
The Economist continues: "Mr. Obama cannot change his experience deficit, but he can change his substance deficit. His economic policies (like those of the other Democrats . . .) are crowd-pleasing stuff. He is iffy about free trade. He wants health insurance for all -- and expects the rich to pay for it. He wants schools to get better, but he panders to his leftist base by eschewing merit pay for teachers and independent charter schools."
Also, "On Iraq, he affects not to have noticed that the 'surge' in and around Baghdad is producing palpable successes, and clings to the idea, beloved of his Party base, that all troops should be withdrawn even before he putatively takes office."
The Economist frames its comments on Obama as being helpful. In fact, they're a devastating critique of the candidate's naivete and his penchant for demagoguery. What about his stand on education? He refuses to take on the Teacher's Union and he refuses to support any real sort of choice for parents and students. Instead, he offers a vague "hope" that schools will somehow (perhaps by magic?) get better.
In other words, eights years of an Obama presidency would offer Americans an endless stream of rhetoric about the importance of education. But, aside from the teachers getting more money, NOTHING would change. Bad teachers would get the same pay as good ones. Parents would have no real opportunity to send their children to better schools.
On Iraq, Obama appeals to the small, activist segment (20%) of his Party that tells pollsters they think it would be best if the U.S. loses the War in Iraq. Like most Democratic presidential candidates, Obama seems to have no understanding of what motivate the mass murderers who call al-Qaida their "spiritual" home.
Yes, Obama "panders" to his Party's Leftist core. Apparently, that's his nature, and he would be a disastrous choice for America. He's so bad that he makes Hillary Clinton look good.
How do Obama's political and intellectual failures relate to someone like William Russell, who's opposing John Murtha? In fact, Murtha's approach to problems -- in Iraq, in education, in health care, in economic development -- closely resembles Obama's. In other words, the solution is to pay off some interest groups, such as the bosses of the Teacher's Union.
Russell has two young children, so he has a personal interest in improving education and resolving the situation in Iraq in a way favorable to the United States. The way to improve educational performance in America is to reach out -- to teachers, to parents, and to students -- to find ways to do things better. The implicit assumption of someone like Obama (and Murtha) is that things can't be improved, which is ridiculous.
In fact, we shouldn't underestimate teachers. My mother was one for many years, and I also taught for 10 years. Granted, most teachers -- like "most" people generally -- are average. Many of them fear that steps designed designed to reward excellent teachers will somehow come at the determinet of the "average many."
But a rising tide lifts ALL boats.
What do teachers generally -- the average and the above-average -- recommend to improve their own performance? What do they suggest to make them more a part of an economy and a society based on merit? In fact, most people in any occupation want to learn ways to make themselves better at their job.
What about identifying the best teacher in every school? Then, assign them to one or two teachers that are less skilled or experienced. In other words, let the top teachers share their expertise and mentor their colleagues. This happens all the time in business, but only rarely in education.
On Iraq, the real question (for Obama, Murtha, and others) is this: Where do we fight al-Qaida and how do we fight them? Presumably, the answer is NOT that we confront them in the streets of New York. "Redeploying" the troops to Okinawa, Murtha's solution, is a suggestion that's pitiful rather than helpful.
If there's a better way to fight al-Qaida, then people like Obama and Murtha are obligated to tell us how -- and where.In other words, let's come up with "win-win" solutions to our society's problems. We don't need to follow Obama's (and Murtha's) assumption that the only "problem" the world faces is how to make sure he gets elected.
Obama presents himself as the candidate of "hope." In fact, the real candidates of hope are people like Russell, who don't look at politics as some kind of zero-sum game. They offer hope that America's problems -- and we have plenty of them -- are soluble.
WHY DO I LIKE RUDY GIULIANI?
One reason I like Rudy a lot is that his actions -- along with those of Police Commissioners Bratton and Kerik (yes, the much-maligned Bernie) -- dramatically reduced the crime rate in New York City. There are many people in local, state, and federal government that seemingly believe high-crime-rates are something that "just happens." They are dead wrong.
In New York, Mayor Bloomberg, elected twice as a Republican, and Commissioner Kelly have continued the policies of Rudy Giuliani and earlier commissioners. They have had tremendous success at keeping crime -- especially the murder rate -- down.I heard the other day that New York City is on track to have fewer than 500 murders this year, putting it about on a par with Philadelphia, a much-smaller (and Democrat-controlled) city.
How many murders were there in NYC before Giuliani and Bratton iniated their crime-fighting policies. There were 2,494 -- nearly five time as many as are projected to occur this year.
Gee, how on earth did that great accomplishment (a pro-life achievement, by the way) occur? It happened because Giuliani and Bratton had an extremely insightful view into why and where crimes occurred.
Specifically, they understood what happens when neighborhood have broken windows, when begarrs are panhandling, when public urination runs rampant, when public drunkeness is tolerated, when sex parlors open up, and where groups of drug users congregate.
What happens is people assume nobody cares about the neighborhood. Good people move out -- and bad people move in. Crimes proliferate, and murders become a way of life.Giuliani and Bratton understood that it's critical to "sweat the small things." You can read the whole story in Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point. There was an epidemic of crime -- and Giuliani innoculated the city against it.
The approach is still paying great dividends and saving thens of thousands of lives. Other cities -- Philadelphia being one, Pittsburgh another -- should emulate "America's Mayor" and his New York Miracle.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Giuliani, McCain Leading, Thompson, Romney Fading, Huckabee Advances
Rudy 33% McCain 19% Thompson 16% Romney 11% Huckabee 9% in Latest Washington Post - ABC News National GOP Poll (Note: See my question at the bottom).
Republican Presidential hopeful, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, center (above), leaves a news conference in Washington, Friday, Nov. 2, 2007,with Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., rear, and Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., left, after the announcement of Sen. Bond’s endorsement of Giuliani for President. Sen. Coleman endorsed Giuliani on Thursday.
Senator John McCain has returned to second place with Rudy Giuliani continuing to lead the GOP Field in the latest Washington Post - ABC News National GOP Poll.
The poll gives Rudy a double digit lead over John McCain who has limited his campaign to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Fred Thompson’s campaign continues to collapse while Mike Huckabee is now threatening Mitt Romney’s fourth place.
In the general election portion of the poll, Rudy Giuliani does the best of any GOP candidate, trailing Hillary Clinton by only 4 percentage points - well within competitive striking distance.
Steve Maloney says: I have endorsed a ticket of Rudy Giuliani - Sarah Palin. I also have tremendous regard for John McCain, and I've written several favorable pieces about Mike Huckabee. I am asking both Mayor Giuliani and Senator McCain to step up to the plate and endorse the candidacy of William Russell against John Murtha.
COULD THIS MEAN THE REPUBLICAN RACE COULD COME DOWN TO A BATTLE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS, JOHN MCCAIN AND RUDY GIULIANI? I'D REGARD THAT AS A TERRIFIC SCENARIO, BECAUSE EITHER MAN WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT OF THE US.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
WILLIAM RUSSELL CAN DEFEAT MURTHA: REQUEST TO GOV. SARAH PALIN
I APPRECIATE THE MANY (MANY, MANY) VISITORS WHO HAVE COME IN THE PAST TWO DAYS. I THINK WHEN SOMEONE UTTERS THE MAGIC WORDS THAT "JOHN MURTHA MUST GO," IT GETS PEOPLE'S ATTENTION. TOMORROW I'LL TALK SOME ABOUT HOW MURTHA CAN BE DEFEATED BY WILLIAM TROWER RUSSELL.
Thanks to the LARGE NUMBER of visitors from http://thepinkflamingo,blogharbor.com/blog and from http://freerepublic.com/, as well as many other sites. You're always welcome here -- as are your comments. One important thing you can do for William Russell is send an email to Josh Schultz at the National Republican Congressional Committee and ask the national party to provide some "seed money" for William's campaign. Like most national committees, the NRCC has a tendency to funnel money to Representatives who have been in Congress long enough that they should be able to raise their own money. Please send your request to: jshultz@NRCC.org. Tell him (nicely) that you'll be a lot more likely to contribute to the NRCC if they give EARLY support to people like Lt. Col. William Russell. Since Russell is going to get a great deal of national publicity (it's already starting) because of the nature of his opponent (Moneybags Murtha), he will help Republican candidates across the nation. You can find William's campaign site by clicking on the link on your right (at the top).
In the last 12 hours -- from midnight to noon on Tuesday, Oct. 30 -- I've had more than 100 visitors to this blog, putting me on pace for a record day. William T. Russell, who is running against the odious John Murtha in Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district, is getting tremendous traffic on his web site.
Frankly, Murtha has been willing to sell American soldiers down the river for his personal political gain, and he has no business being in Congress. He raises millions of dollars from DC lobbyists, but as a Congressman, he isn't worth a plug nickel.
By soliciting support from the extreme left-wing of his Party, symbolized by his political ally Nancy Pelosi, Murtha has put personal gain ahead of his country's security.
Many people are making modest contributions to Lt. Col. Russell's campaign and volunteering to support him in other ways. Everyone who is supportive of Russell, a Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom veteran, has my heartfelt thanks -- and his.
Please take a glance at the several columns below (scroll down) that I've written regarding William and some other terrific candidates. Some individuals have promised to ask leading Republican presidential candidates to publicly back William's campaign. Senator McCain, Mayor Giuliani, Senator Thompson, Governor Romney, and Governor Huckabee should do precisely that.
If you want to support William in any way, please go to his web site at: http://williamrussellforcongress.com or e-mail his campaign manager, former Marine Larry Stiles at lstiless@yahoo.com. William, Larry, and all who are supporting him are frankly helping write a new chapter in American history.
If you know anyone in the 12th District of PA (including towns like Johnstown, Monongahela, Washington, and Canonsburg and Greene County) please ask them to support William's candidacy. If you can make a small cash contribution, please do so. This campaign is just beginning, but it's building momentum very quickly.
As you'll note in the column below, I'm asking Governor Sarah Heath Palin of Alaska, the country's most popular elected official, to look into her heart and offer public support for William. Governor Palin's 18-year-old son, Track, is training now in GA for the U.S. Army infantry. There's no better way to "support our troops" than to offer your backing for William T. (Trower) Russell.
If you want to know more about William -- who, with his wife, was in the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 -- please read my columns and visit his web site at: On our right, you'll see a link for William's site. Please go there and bookmark it.
Thanks to all of you. (More to come)
NOTE: I am an independent blogger and receive no financial aid or direction from any candidate supported on this blog. The candidates this blog is supporting include: Sarah Palin (for vice-president of the US), William Russell, Melissa Hart (4th Congressional District, PA), and Heather Wilson (U.S. Senate, NM). Bobby Jindal (D, LA) has already won his race for Governor. After doing some more research, I'm going to support as many as four other candidates.
Dear Friends, I bet you didn't hear this on the evening news last week: "In Al Anbar province, last week we had no casualties, killed or wounded in action."
That's what Maj. Gen. Richard Sherlock, Director of Operational Planning on Joint Chiefs of Staff said in the regular Defense Department briefing on October 24.
Al Anbar is the predominently Sunni part of Iraq where al Qaeda in Iraq was wreaking havoc about a year ago. I went there last December. It is a province of about 1.2 million people, most of whom live along the fertile river valleys. It is vital to America that Iraq not become a safe haven for al Qaeda Al Anbar is ground zero for that fight.
Late last year, the Marines in Anbar changed their strategy and they got more American forces to help implement it this spring.
The Marines partnered with the Sunni tribes who were willing to reject al Qaeda. The Chiefs told their young men to join the police -- and they did. With U.S. help, they started rooting out the foreign fighters in their midst and cutting the rat lines bringing suicide bombers in from Syria.
We should have no illusions about the opportunism and self-intrest of the al Anbar tribes. But their willingness to oppose al Qaeda and its brand of Islamic extremism is sufficient for our purposes.
We don't need to build a Jeffersonian democracy in Iraq. We need to prevent it from becoming a safe haven for al Qaeda. The counter-insurgency strategy in al Anbar appears to be working.That's why you didn't hear about it last week.
Heather A. Wilson, Candidate for U.S. Senate from New Mexico. Heather is the first female veteran (Air Force) ever elected to Congress. She's a candidate who deserves and needs your support! I'm hoping she will come to PA and speak on behalf of her fellow veteran -- and candidate for the U.S. House -- William Trower Russell.
Thanks to the LARGE NUMBER of visitors from http://thepinkflamingo,blogharbor.com/blog and from http://freerepublic.com/, as well as many other sites. You're always welcome here -- as are your comments. One important thing you can do for William Russell is send an email to Josh Schultz at the National Republican Congressional Committee and ask the national party to provide some "seed money" for William's campaign. Like most national committees, the NRCC has a tendency to funnel money to Representatives who have been in Congress long enough that they should be able to raise their own money. Please send your request to: jshultz@NRCC.org. Tell him (nicely) that you'll be a lot more likely to contribute to the NRCC if they give EARLY support to people like Lt. Col. William Russell. Since Russell is going to get a great deal of national publicity (it's already starting) because of the nature of his opponent (Moneybags Murtha), he will help Republican candidates across the nation. You can find William's campaign site by clicking on the link on your right (at the top).
Note: See Chris Voccio's fine piece today on Murtha and his "earmarks." I have a long comment on Chris's site: www.pennrepublican.com. Anyone interested in the Russell-Murtha campaign will want to subscribe to Chris's new, Johnstown-based monthly publication.
In the last 12 hours -- from midnight to noon on Tuesday, Oct. 30 -- I've had more than 100 visitors to this blog, putting me on pace for a record day. William T. Russell, who is running against the odious John Murtha in Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district, is getting tremendous traffic on his web site.
Frankly, Murtha has been willing to sell American soldiers down the river for his personal political gain, and he has no business being in Congress. He raises millions of dollars from DC lobbyists, but as a Congressman, he isn't worth a plug nickel.
By soliciting support from the extreme left-wing of his Party, symbolized by his political ally Nancy Pelosi, Murtha has put personal gain ahead of his country's security.
Many people are making modest contributions to Lt. Col. Russell's campaign and volunteering to support him in other ways. Everyone who is supportive of Russell, a Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom veteran, has my heartfelt thanks -- and his.
Please take a glance at the several columns below (scroll down) that I've written regarding William and some other terrific candidates. Some individuals have promised to ask leading Republican presidential candidates to publicly back William's campaign. Senator McCain, Mayor Giuliani, Senator Thompson, Governor Romney, and Governor Huckabee should do precisely that.
If you want to support William in any way, please go to his web site at: http://williamrussellforcongress.com or e-mail his campaign manager, former Marine Larry Stiles at lstiless@yahoo.com. William, Larry, and all who are supporting him are frankly helping write a new chapter in American history.
If you know anyone in the 12th District of PA (including towns like Johnstown, Monongahela, Washington, and Canonsburg and Greene County) please ask them to support William's candidacy. If you can make a small cash contribution, please do so. This campaign is just beginning, but it's building momentum very quickly.
As you'll note in the column below, I'm asking Governor Sarah Heath Palin of Alaska, the country's most popular elected official, to look into her heart and offer public support for William. Governor Palin's 18-year-old son, Track, is training now in GA for the U.S. Army infantry. There's no better way to "support our troops" than to offer your backing for William T. (Trower) Russell.
If you want to know more about William -- who, with his wife, was in the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 -- please read my columns and visit his web site at: On our right, you'll see a link for William's site. Please go there and bookmark it.
Thanks to all of you. (More to come)
NOTE: I am an independent blogger and receive no financial aid or direction from any candidate supported on this blog. The candidates this blog is supporting include: Sarah Palin (for vice-president of the US), William Russell, Melissa Hart (4th Congressional District, PA), and Heather Wilson (U.S. Senate, NM). Bobby Jindal (D, LA) has already won his race for Governor. After doing some more research, I'm going to support as many as four other candidates.
__________________
Critically Important News from U.S. Rep. Heather A. Wilson, 1st District (Albuquerque)
Dear Friends, I bet you didn't hear this on the evening news last week: "In Al Anbar province, last week we had no casualties, killed or wounded in action."
That's what Maj. Gen. Richard Sherlock, Director of Operational Planning on Joint Chiefs of Staff said in the regular Defense Department briefing on October 24.
Al Anbar is the predominently Sunni part of Iraq where al Qaeda in Iraq was wreaking havoc about a year ago. I went there last December. It is a province of about 1.2 million people, most of whom live along the fertile river valleys. It is vital to America that Iraq not become a safe haven for al Qaeda Al Anbar is ground zero for that fight.
Late last year, the Marines in Anbar changed their strategy and they got more American forces to help implement it this spring.
The Marines partnered with the Sunni tribes who were willing to reject al Qaeda. The Chiefs told their young men to join the police -- and they did. With U.S. help, they started rooting out the foreign fighters in their midst and cutting the rat lines bringing suicide bombers in from Syria.
We should have no illusions about the opportunism and self-intrest of the al Anbar tribes. But their willingness to oppose al Qaeda and its brand of Islamic extremism is sufficient for our purposes.
We don't need to build a Jeffersonian democracy in Iraq. We need to prevent it from becoming a safe haven for al Qaeda. The counter-insurgency strategy in al Anbar appears to be working.That's why you didn't hear about it last week.
Heather A. Wilson, Candidate for U.S. Senate from New Mexico. Heather is the first female veteran (Air Force) ever elected to Congress. She's a candidate who deserves and needs your support! I'm hoping she will come to PA and speak on behalf of her fellow veteran -- and candidate for the U.S. House -- William Trower Russell.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Republicans: How to Win Elections by "Walking Around"
Note: Please take a look at the previous columns regarding William Russell's important race against John Murtha.
One-sentence summary of today's column: The candidate should find people who know "everybody" (figuratively) in a town or small city, gain their confidence, and have them introduce him or her to all influential people in the immediate area.
Because I live with a disabled spouse and a disabled stepdaughter, I don’t get out as much as I should. Consequently, I spend a whole lot of time on the Internet, doing work for a couple of companies (including one in Illinois and one in Michigan) and conducting my political activity in support of several Republican candidates.
The Internet can be a great tool, especially for political candidates who aren’t exactly swimming in money (like William Russell, who’s running against John Murtha). However, it’s not enough by itself.
A successful political candidate – and I’ll do all in my power to see that William wins his race – has to make contact with the right people. Yes, because you can’t run a campaign with money, some of those “right people” will be those who regularly help raises funds for Republican candidates. I’m hoping people in the 12th District – and adjoining areas – will help William raise funds.
Two of those people are Diana Irey, who ran against Murtha in 2006 and raised nearly $900,000, and Republican Mark DeSantis, who’s running a remarkable campaign for Mayor of Pittsburgh – and reportedly might raise about $300,000.
But there are other “right people” who are equally important. They’re the individuals Malcolm Gladwell (in his book The Tipping Point) calls connectors, mavens, and salesmen.
Connectors are individuals whose “hobby” is . . . meeting other people. As Gladwell says, “They are the kinds of people who know everyone.” Some connectors literally know a thousand or more men and women. Yes, they’re rare, but they exist in just about town with more than two stop lights.
A candidate like William should never be alone. When he finds a connector – a police officer, a mail deliverer, or an insurance agent – he should walk around with them and get introduced to some of the people they know. There are connectors in Johnstown, Monongahela, Washington, Greensburg, and the other towns in the 12th District. They aren’t too hard to find, and if you quiz them, they’ll tell you who the other connectors are.
The connectors probably can tell someone like William who the mavens are. They’re individuals who know a lot about various matters. Mavens are the ones we all go to for advice on a variety of subjects.
Often, they’re the kind of people who read Consumer Reports cover-to-cover. Mavens know who the best real estate agent is – and which kind of cars have the best warranties. Political mavens – Adam Brickley who found the “Draft Sarah Palin” effort is one and I’m another – are the experts on candidates.
The salesmen (or saleswomen) excel at getting people to buy things – from products to candidates. They’re very good at persuading people. Often, they head up a small business that’s so successful it’s becoming a large business. Nicole Cavoti, a sorority sister in college of Melissa Hart, is one such people, and she just sold me and my wife an IRA plan.
One of the most important things a political candidate can do is to find the connectors, mavens, and salesmen. He or she must also ask for their support and work as closely with them as he can.
Many years ago – I believe Nixon was still President – I met two African-American men who did public relations work for the Republican Party. I asked them how Republicans could get more Black votes.
They told me: “Go to the beauty parlor operators and haircut people, the ministers, and the small businesspeople. They all vote – unlike the people standing around on street corners – and they know everybody else who votes.” Bingo!
The two public relations men were talking – without using the terms – about connectors, mavens, and salesmen. Win enough of them, and the candidate wins the election.
There are African-Americans – two of them are my neighbors – who know just about every Black person who’s a “likely voter” in Ambridge, PA, where I live. Get my neighbors on your side, and it could translate into a lot of votes. To meet small businessmen in Ambridge, the person to see is John Dunn, who spent more than 30 years as an insurance agent.
As you can see, I’m somewhat “old school.” I don’t believe in spending hundreds of thousands – or millions – on TV advertising. People are becoming immune (as Malcolm Gladwell noted recently) to political ads. Apparently, however, they aren’t becoming immune to a real candidate’s VOICE on radio ads.
Radio is relatively cheap, and TV is expensive (no relatively about it). When all else is equal, go for the cheaper alternative.
A campaign that emphasizes winning the right people is the right approach for a candidate like William Russell.
(Note: I’ll write more in the future about a low-cost, high-impact campaign. The Malcolm Gladwell book has excellent material on how Mayor Giuliani and Police Chief Bratton brought about a massive decrease in crime in New York City in the 1990s.)
Afterthought: If I were William Russell, one place I’d look for money and support is in Democratic congressman Mike Doyle’s City of Pittsburgh district. Doyle raises a lot of money, but he generally runs unopposed.
But there are tens of thousands of Republicans – although not enough to win the Doyle seat – in Pittsburgh. A candidate like William might seek contributions from Republicans in the Doyle district and perhaps pick up several campaign volunteers. It would be a shame merely to ignore the Republicans there. Call it the “Adopt a Candidate” approach.
Trower
William T Russell
PO BOX 630
Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15907
www.williamrussellforcongress.com
william.russell@williamrussellforcongress.com
(814) 248-3435
One-sentence summary of today's column: The candidate should find people who know "everybody" (figuratively) in a town or small city, gain their confidence, and have them introduce him or her to all influential people in the immediate area.
Because I live with a disabled spouse and a disabled stepdaughter, I don’t get out as much as I should. Consequently, I spend a whole lot of time on the Internet, doing work for a couple of companies (including one in Illinois and one in Michigan) and conducting my political activity in support of several Republican candidates.
The Internet can be a great tool, especially for political candidates who aren’t exactly swimming in money (like William Russell, who’s running against John Murtha). However, it’s not enough by itself.
A successful political candidate – and I’ll do all in my power to see that William wins his race – has to make contact with the right people. Yes, because you can’t run a campaign with money, some of those “right people” will be those who regularly help raises funds for Republican candidates. I’m hoping people in the 12th District – and adjoining areas – will help William raise funds.
Two of those people are Diana Irey, who ran against Murtha in 2006 and raised nearly $900,000, and Republican Mark DeSantis, who’s running a remarkable campaign for Mayor of Pittsburgh – and reportedly might raise about $300,000.
But there are other “right people” who are equally important. They’re the individuals Malcolm Gladwell (in his book The Tipping Point) calls connectors, mavens, and salesmen.
Connectors are individuals whose “hobby” is . . . meeting other people. As Gladwell says, “They are the kinds of people who know everyone.” Some connectors literally know a thousand or more men and women. Yes, they’re rare, but they exist in just about town with more than two stop lights.
A candidate like William should never be alone. When he finds a connector – a police officer, a mail deliverer, or an insurance agent – he should walk around with them and get introduced to some of the people they know. There are connectors in Johnstown, Monongahela, Washington, Greensburg, and the other towns in the 12th District. They aren’t too hard to find, and if you quiz them, they’ll tell you who the other connectors are.
The connectors probably can tell someone like William who the mavens are. They’re individuals who know a lot about various matters. Mavens are the ones we all go to for advice on a variety of subjects.
Often, they’re the kind of people who read Consumer Reports cover-to-cover. Mavens know who the best real estate agent is – and which kind of cars have the best warranties. Political mavens – Adam Brickley who found the “Draft Sarah Palin” effort is one and I’m another – are the experts on candidates.
The salesmen (or saleswomen) excel at getting people to buy things – from products to candidates. They’re very good at persuading people. Often, they head up a small business that’s so successful it’s becoming a large business. Nicole Cavoti, a sorority sister in college of Melissa Hart, is one such people, and she just sold me and my wife an IRA plan.
One of the most important things a political candidate can do is to find the connectors, mavens, and salesmen. He or she must also ask for their support and work as closely with them as he can.
Many years ago – I believe Nixon was still President – I met two African-American men who did public relations work for the Republican Party. I asked them how Republicans could get more Black votes.
They told me: “Go to the beauty parlor operators and haircut people, the ministers, and the small businesspeople. They all vote – unlike the people standing around on street corners – and they know everybody else who votes.” Bingo!
The two public relations men were talking – without using the terms – about connectors, mavens, and salesmen. Win enough of them, and the candidate wins the election.
There are African-Americans – two of them are my neighbors – who know just about every Black person who’s a “likely voter” in Ambridge, PA, where I live. Get my neighbors on your side, and it could translate into a lot of votes. To meet small businessmen in Ambridge, the person to see is John Dunn, who spent more than 30 years as an insurance agent.
As you can see, I’m somewhat “old school.” I don’t believe in spending hundreds of thousands – or millions – on TV advertising. People are becoming immune (as Malcolm Gladwell noted recently) to political ads. Apparently, however, they aren’t becoming immune to a real candidate’s VOICE on radio ads.
Radio is relatively cheap, and TV is expensive (no relatively about it). When all else is equal, go for the cheaper alternative.
A campaign that emphasizes winning the right people is the right approach for a candidate like William Russell.
(Note: I’ll write more in the future about a low-cost, high-impact campaign. The Malcolm Gladwell book has excellent material on how Mayor Giuliani and Police Chief Bratton brought about a massive decrease in crime in New York City in the 1990s.)
Afterthought: If I were William Russell, one place I’d look for money and support is in Democratic congressman Mike Doyle’s City of Pittsburgh district. Doyle raises a lot of money, but he generally runs unopposed.
But there are tens of thousands of Republicans – although not enough to win the Doyle seat – in Pittsburgh. A candidate like William might seek contributions from Republicans in the Doyle district and perhaps pick up several campaign volunteers. It would be a shame merely to ignore the Republicans there. Call it the “Adopt a Candidate” approach.
Trower
William T Russell
PO BOX 630
Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15907
www.williamrussellforcongress.com
william.russell@williamrussellforcongress.com
(814) 248-3435
Thursday, September 27, 2007
BULLETIN: GIULIANI IN NHI
The latest national and state polls show Rudy Giuliani surging to the lead nationally and -- of great significance -- drawing even in the key state of New Hampshire. He's doing so with significant support from the evangelical Christian and conservative Catholic communities. "America's Mayor" is advancing in spite of the scorched earth policy of a tiny fragment of evangelicals, such as Laurence White and Larry Perrault, whose effort seem designed mainly to hand the general election to Hillary Rodham Clinton. On White and Perrault, see the two columns I'll write on Thursday and Friday.
Gov. Romney has reportedly spent $2 million in NH, and he served as Governor of the neighboring state of Massachusetts. The spending and proximity may not be enough. If Romney loses New Hampshire, his campaign will be a case of "dead man walking." Senator McCain, who won the primary in the Granite State in 2000 is locked in third place. Mike Huckabee, the approved candidate of the two Larrys (White and Perrault) has only a tiny fragment of the vote and shows no sign of forward momentum.
The following are the figures, released today, from the WMUR (Manchester, NH) poll conducted this week: Romeny, 25%, Giuliani 24%, McCain 16%, Thompson 13%. The results reflect a surge in Giuliani''s support, while Romney has dropped 9% since early this year..
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
Gov. Romney has reportedly spent $2 million in NH, and he served as Governor of the neighboring state of Massachusetts. The spending and proximity may not be enough. If Romney loses New Hampshire, his campaign will be a case of "dead man walking." Senator McCain, who won the primary in the Granite State in 2000 is locked in third place. Mike Huckabee, the approved candidate of the two Larrys (White and Perrault) has only a tiny fragment of the vote and shows no sign of forward momentum.
The following are the figures, released today, from the WMUR (Manchester, NH) poll conducted this week: Romeny, 25%, Giuliani 24%, McCain 16%, Thompson 13%. The results reflect a surge in Giuliani''s support, while Romney has dropped 9% since early this year..
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
RUDY & SARAH: VICTORY in 2008
Sarah Palin and husband Todd in Dillingham, Alaska, with Alaska Teacher of the Year Ina Boucher
Diana Lynn Irey, Washington County (PA) Commissioner who gained a national following in her heroic campaign against John Murtha, is endorsing Rudy Giuliani for President. In 2006, Giuliani campaigned tirelessly for two conservative Pennsylvania Republicans: Senatorial candidate Rick Santorum and gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swann. Thanks Rudy. In the words of Sarah Palin (spoken about her son), "We have your back."
John Hawkins August 10, 2007 column (J.C.'s Corner) in "The Forgotten Street" gives a salute to Sarah Palin and the grass roots effort (led by Adam Brickley at http://palinforvp.blogspot.com).
He also mentions as possible females for higher office Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutcheson and Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. I am opposed to either Kay (whom I like a lot) or Marsha (who is a fine congresswoman) getting consideration for higher office.
It makes no sense -- check out the Cheney fiasco -- to nominate people for Vice-President who have no chance, either because of age, health problems, or lack of energy -- to have a opportunity to run for President. That eliminates Kay Hutcheson.
What about Marsha Blackburn? She's only 55 years of age and she has a good record as a Tennessee state Senator and as a congresswoman, where she's been cited as one of the best "new" representatives. She's pretty, blonde, and relentlessly Republican.
However, Rep. Blackburn won her congressional seat in one of the most Republican districts in America -- an area stretching from the suburbs of Nashville to the suburbs of Memphis. In other words, she represents the classic GOP base: people who are white, generally affluent, and almost reflexively Republican.
Early in the presidential campaign,Blackburn was a staunch backer of Mitt Romney. Later, she switched her allegiance to her home-state candidate Fred Thompson.
To win elections -- and to avoid repeating the disaster of 2006 -- Republicans don't need to solidify the (Southern or Southwestern, white,well-off, significantly evangelical) base. Frankly, attractive as she is personally and politically, Mrs. Blackburn doesn't really add strength to the Republican ticket.
Exactly who is she going to attract that we don't have already?
In the coming election, a Republican who wants to win must contest effectively in states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and -- yes -- in Hillary's New York. The Republican Party in Ohio, usually a must-win state, is in disrepair, and Hillary will carry that state. She may also carrry Florida and Colorado, both with big Hispanic bases mainly ticked off at the Republican Party's stance on immigration.
Since 2004, the number of people who identify themselves as Republicans has declined by about 10%. The number who identify themselves as Democrats has risen by about 10%. Also, the number of Independents who lean Democratic has increased substantially.
In New Hampshire, three-fourths of the Independents say they will vote in the Democratic primary. Let me beat the networks by about 14 months and "declare" the Sununu Senate seat in New Hampshire lost. The Virginia Senate Seat vacated by Republican Warner? Also a sure loss against an extremely popular Democrat.
Republicans have problems with the following voting segments: Blacks, Hispanics, young people (voters under 35), women professionals (teachers, journalists, doctors, lawyers), gays (about 5% of the electorate in most states), and younger evangelicals. (In 2006, Democrats got 27% of the evangelical vote, up from 21% in 2004).
A person like Mrs. Blackburn might help some with female professionals, but I see her as a net negative with the other key groups.
Traditionally, the Republican Party has nominated aging male Caucasians. All too often, as I've said before, the vice-presidential choice has been an individual who's one or more of the following: aged, or corrupt, or unelectable. When asked why he put Agnew on the ticket in 1972, Nixon replied, "Because no one in his right mind would want to assassinate me." Maybe that comment gives some insight into Bush, Sr.'s curious allegiance to the intellectually challenged Dan Quayle.
Recently, the web site race42008 had a discussion about the GOP's presidential nominee's "need" to have a Black running-male (there being no Black females imaginable) on the ticket. The participants came up with every conceivable Black other than O. J. Simpson and Michael Vick. It was a sad display of tokenism and political naivete.
He also mentions as possible females for higher office Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutcheson and Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. I am opposed to either Kay (whom I like a lot) or Marsha (who is a fine congresswoman) getting consideration for higher office.
It makes no sense -- check out the Cheney fiasco -- to nominate people for Vice-President who have no chance, either because of age, health problems, or lack of energy -- to have a opportunity to run for President. That eliminates Kay Hutcheson.
What about Marsha Blackburn? She's only 55 years of age and she has a good record as a Tennessee state Senator and as a congresswoman, where she's been cited as one of the best "new" representatives. She's pretty, blonde, and relentlessly Republican.
However, Rep. Blackburn won her congressional seat in one of the most Republican districts in America -- an area stretching from the suburbs of Nashville to the suburbs of Memphis. In other words, she represents the classic GOP base: people who are white, generally affluent, and almost reflexively Republican.
Early in the presidential campaign,Blackburn was a staunch backer of Mitt Romney. Later, she switched her allegiance to her home-state candidate Fred Thompson.
To win elections -- and to avoid repeating the disaster of 2006 -- Republicans don't need to solidify the (Southern or Southwestern, white,well-off, significantly evangelical) base. Frankly, attractive as she is personally and politically, Mrs. Blackburn doesn't really add strength to the Republican ticket.
Exactly who is she going to attract that we don't have already?
In the coming election, a Republican who wants to win must contest effectively in states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and -- yes -- in Hillary's New York. The Republican Party in Ohio, usually a must-win state, is in disrepair, and Hillary will carry that state. She may also carrry Florida and Colorado, both with big Hispanic bases mainly ticked off at the Republican Party's stance on immigration.
Since 2004, the number of people who identify themselves as Republicans has declined by about 10%. The number who identify themselves as Democrats has risen by about 10%. Also, the number of Independents who lean Democratic has increased substantially.
In New Hampshire, three-fourths of the Independents say they will vote in the Democratic primary. Let me beat the networks by about 14 months and "declare" the Sununu Senate seat in New Hampshire lost. The Virginia Senate Seat vacated by Republican Warner? Also a sure loss against an extremely popular Democrat.
Republicans have problems with the following voting segments: Blacks, Hispanics, young people (voters under 35), women professionals (teachers, journalists, doctors, lawyers), gays (about 5% of the electorate in most states), and younger evangelicals. (In 2006, Democrats got 27% of the evangelical vote, up from 21% in 2004).
A person like Mrs. Blackburn might help some with female professionals, but I see her as a net negative with the other key groups.
Traditionally, the Republican Party has nominated aging male Caucasians. All too often, as I've said before, the vice-presidential choice has been an individual who's one or more of the following: aged, or corrupt, or unelectable. When asked why he put Agnew on the ticket in 1972, Nixon replied, "Because no one in his right mind would want to assassinate me." Maybe that comment gives some insight into Bush, Sr.'s curious allegiance to the intellectually challenged Dan Quayle.
Recently, the web site race42008 had a discussion about the GOP's presidential nominee's "need" to have a Black running-male (there being no Black females imaginable) on the ticket. The participants came up with every conceivable Black other than O. J. Simpson and Michael Vick. It was a sad display of tokenism and political naivete.
But why Sarah Palin? She's scrupulously honest, which puts her at odds with the state's pervasively corrupt Republican office holders. She's able to win elections against both powerful Republicans (Frank Murkowski) and Democrats (Tony Knowles). She's completely uninterested in using political office to enrich herself and her family.
She's BOTH a female professional AND a working mother. She's not only FOR the "workingman," she's married to one (commercial fisherman and oil field production worker). She's a devoted Christian whose religious beliefs have NOT curdled into sanctimony and self-congratulation.
She not only "supports" our troops, but also has a beloved son -- Track -- who's one of them. She's an expert on energy and the environment, two of the great issues of our time. She's a lifetime advocate of the sanctity of life and gun rights, but does a minimum of pandering on either.
That's why I support Sarah Palin for vice-president and, in God's own good time, for President. Those with eyes to see detect signs there of another Washington, Lincoln, or Reagan. She's a person whose communication skills and character have earned her the nation's highest approval ratings.
She's a breath of fresh air in a political atmosphere -- Republican and Democrat -- that's generally stultifying.
The new national polls are coming out today. The Democratic version shows Hillary Clinton increasing her lead over Obama and Edwards, in keeping with her Gallup Poll ranking as the most popular woman in America -- Oprah is second.
The Republican Poll is as follows:
Rudy Giuliani 30%
Fred Thompson 22%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 09%
Mike Huckabee 04%
One notable point in the poll is that Thompson is taking support from Huckabee. I'm hoping that Mike, a wonderful man, will read the handwriting on the wall and throw his support to Rudy Giuliani. When the time comes, I believe John McCain, a true American hero, will do the same.
George W. Bush, who knows something about winning elections, has said that the national polls are very important this time around because the primary itself will be "a national one." He's referring to the fact that 60%-plus of the nation will vote from the Florida primary (January 29) through Super Tuesday on Feb. 5.
In Pennsylvania, which will hold a "late" primary, Giuliani seems to have an insurmountable lead.
I strongly urge people interested in voting in the general election for someone other than Mrs. Clinton to back Rudy Giuliani. He's already focusing on the Democrats and has completely refrained from attacking Republicans.
I also urge Republicans to ask (beg?) Rudy to choose as his running mate Sarah Heath Palin.
Anyone who has seen Sarah in action will recognize that she will never be "Rudy's token." With her, Rudy will have his hands full, which is as it should be. I don't expect her to discard any of her core beliefs.
She's BOTH a female professional AND a working mother. She's not only FOR the "workingman," she's married to one (commercial fisherman and oil field production worker). She's a devoted Christian whose religious beliefs have NOT curdled into sanctimony and self-congratulation.
She not only "supports" our troops, but also has a beloved son -- Track -- who's one of them. She's an expert on energy and the environment, two of the great issues of our time. She's a lifetime advocate of the sanctity of life and gun rights, but does a minimum of pandering on either.
That's why I support Sarah Palin for vice-president and, in God's own good time, for President. Those with eyes to see detect signs there of another Washington, Lincoln, or Reagan. She's a person whose communication skills and character have earned her the nation's highest approval ratings.
She's a breath of fresh air in a political atmosphere -- Republican and Democrat -- that's generally stultifying.
The new national polls are coming out today. The Democratic version shows Hillary Clinton increasing her lead over Obama and Edwards, in keeping with her Gallup Poll ranking as the most popular woman in America -- Oprah is second.
The Republican Poll is as follows:
Rudy Giuliani 30%
Fred Thompson 22%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 09%
Mike Huckabee 04%
One notable point in the poll is that Thompson is taking support from Huckabee. I'm hoping that Mike, a wonderful man, will read the handwriting on the wall and throw his support to Rudy Giuliani. When the time comes, I believe John McCain, a true American hero, will do the same.
George W. Bush, who knows something about winning elections, has said that the national polls are very important this time around because the primary itself will be "a national one." He's referring to the fact that 60%-plus of the nation will vote from the Florida primary (January 29) through Super Tuesday on Feb. 5.
In Pennsylvania, which will hold a "late" primary, Giuliani seems to have an insurmountable lead.
I strongly urge people interested in voting in the general election for someone other than Mrs. Clinton to back Rudy Giuliani. He's already focusing on the Democrats and has completely refrained from attacking Republicans.
I also urge Republicans to ask (beg?) Rudy to choose as his running mate Sarah Heath Palin.
Anyone who has seen Sarah in action will recognize that she will never be "Rudy's token." With her, Rudy will have his hands full, which is as it should be. I don't expect her to discard any of her core beliefs.
Together, they can supply dynamic leadership in a time when the country desperately needs it.
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
From today's Anchorage Daily News (http://adn.com): Following in the footsteps of North Dakota. Gov. Sarah Palin has been picked to serve as chair of Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission in 2007-08, according to a state-issued press release. Palin succeeds North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven as head of the group, which promotes the conservation and efficient recovery of the nation’s oil and natural gas resources.
NOTE: MUCH OF MY EFFORT BETWEEN NOW AND SUPER TUESDAY (FEB. 5, 2008) WILL BE ON BEHALF OF RUDY GIULIANI'S CANDIDACY FOR THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION. AT THE SAME TIME, I'LL DEVOTE AS MUCH TIME AS I CAN TO THE OTHER CANDIDATES I SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY GOV. SARAH HEATH PALIN OF ALASKA AND DIANA LYNN IREY OF PENNSYLVANIA.
Evangelical Extremism is Destroying Mike Huckabee's campaign:
On Mike Huckabee's main blog today (Tuesday), he reprints a letter from Dr. L. White, a Lutheran pastor in Houston. I urge you to read it -- and also read some of White's anti-American tirades. Here's my response to the White letter and his other writings, especially "God and Caesar," which is available at: http://mtio.com/articles/bissar55.htm
I've posted a comment on Gov. Huckabee's blog about Dr. Laurence White. I don't know whether it will get printed. I've probably written enough about Dr. White, a thoroughly evil egomaniac.
In his essay "God and Caesar," White compares America to Nazi Germany, saying the following: "America finds itself today in the midst of a moral catastrophe. We have cast aside the most basic standards of human decency. We have broken marriages and fractured families. Our youth are losing their way and often their lives in a maze of alcohol and drugs. We live in the midst of a culture that mistakes lust for love and tolerates the vilest perversions as acceptable alternate lifestyles while pestilence stalks the land. Our public schools have become facilitators for fornication and procurers for the abortionists knife. America has sown the wind of immorality and we are reaping the whirlwind of destruction and death. We have degenerated into a nation rolling in luxury, reveling in excess, rollicking in pleasure, revolting in morals, and rotting in sin. Personal responsibility, duty and honor have been abandoned in our mindless pursuit of instant gratification for our every desire."
Frankly, people who agree with Dr. White should not spend time blogging for Mike. Rather, if things were anywhere near as bad as he says, the proper response would be to engage in violent revolution. Dr. White's extremist comments are the kind that influence "pro-life-killers" like Eric Rudolph and Paul Hill.
Why is an attractive and articulate candidate like Mike Huckabee getting only a dismal 4% in the latest national polls? I fear it's because many Americans somehow associate Mike and his cause with the Dr. Whites of the world.
The Huckabee campaign made a major mistake in posting White's vicious screed against America. The country is not about to elect anyone who has a deep loathing for this country.
The Huckabee campaign disavowed the anti-Catholic statements of one its supporters (Dr. Ride in Iowa). It should do the same with White's comments.
TWO VIEWS OF MIKE HUCKABEE: MATT & STEVE
Note: As the week goes on, I'll talk about a few of the many columns I've written on Gov. Sarah Heath Palin and why I think she would be a dynamic -- and successful -- candidate for the nation's highest offices. On my blogroll you'll find dozens of bloggers who support Sarah for the nation's highest offices. If you'd like to "sign-up" as a Sarah supporter, please contact Adam Brickley at his site (http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/)
Before that, however, I'll talk about correspondence I've received from Matt in Washington state (http://senseinpolitics.blogspot.com/) and John Hawkins in Florida (http://theforgottenstreet.com/)
In response to my recent column indicating that I believe the Mike Huckabee's effort to get the Republican nomination cannot not succeed, Matt in Washington state sent me the following e-mail:
Stephen, I saw your posting in which you say you withdraw Mike Huckabee from consideration. I understand your reasons why, and let me add some [about] why I support Huckabee. It is because he has articulated so eloquently things I have been thinking of for quite some time. Things I would expound on if I were running for political office. Positions I would collectively call " Practical Conservatism." He seems to be trying to lead the conservative movement away from vitriol and rhetoric to more practical solutions to problems. That is where you and I are.
As for his winning, well, he could just be another Goldwater. He'll blaze the trail for another person who will come along and say the same things to a more receptive audience. I think that some of his ideas are light years ahead of what is currently being preached as policy, particularly in the realm of health care. Because he thinks outside the box, and because he holds to his principles while still being likable, he is the one I am truly fired up about. Some had the same feeling for Bobby Kennedy.
But I am realistic, I will be satisfied if Giuliani or McCain get in (hopefully with Gov. Palin). Giuliani being president won't mean that we'll have more abortions in this country, and I doubt that the current status would change even if Huckabee got in. Giuliani comes across as urbane and sophisticated; heck, he's from New York! Sure he's had issues in his personal life that make me have a few questions. But we've had a divorced man as Commander in Chief -- Reagan, who also was Republican -- so that should be put to rest. Giuliani has crossover appeal, and could actually put my state (Washington) in play.
I want to run for office someday, and I think that a variation of Huckabee's platform would appeal to the large number of Independents we have here. I'd have to be looked at as a moderate if I wanted any chance of winning statewide office as a Republican.
This e-mail has run longer than I originally wanted, but I wanted to say check out my newest posting today on "Gun Control for Criminals" and let me know what you think.
Thanks for listening . . .
Matt (E-mail at: corpsole2@olypen.com)
Steve's Response: Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of the man. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (Admittedly, in the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.)
What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states). Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.
Can Mike Huckabee possibly have a dramatic surge among primary voters? In that regard, one candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9% in late November, 2003 and was at 52% in February, 2004. (Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.)
In the race for 2008, the only real movement in the polls over the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.
By the way, one national poll showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who say they aren't going to vote for Rudy in the primary still have a favorable view of him.
I've read that nearly six-out-of-ten Americans haven't seen so much as ONE debate. The current campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.
Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be gravitating toward Rudy. Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of passing.
Also, he's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.
Overall, Mike Huckabee should have a bright political future. With Fred Thompson, I believe his political career is behind him.
If I had to go way out on a limb, I'd guess the Democratic ticket will be: Clinton-Richardson. The Republican ticket may well be Giuliani-Palin.
Steve (e-mail at: TalkTop65@aol.com)
Before that, however, I'll talk about correspondence I've received from Matt in Washington state (http://senseinpolitics.blogspot.com/) and John Hawkins in Florida (http://theforgottenstreet.com/)
In response to my recent column indicating that I believe the Mike Huckabee's effort to get the Republican nomination cannot not succeed, Matt in Washington state sent me the following e-mail:
Stephen, I saw your posting in which you say you withdraw Mike Huckabee from consideration. I understand your reasons why, and let me add some [about] why I support Huckabee. It is because he has articulated so eloquently things I have been thinking of for quite some time. Things I would expound on if I were running for political office. Positions I would collectively call " Practical Conservatism." He seems to be trying to lead the conservative movement away from vitriol and rhetoric to more practical solutions to problems. That is where you and I are.
As for his winning, well, he could just be another Goldwater. He'll blaze the trail for another person who will come along and say the same things to a more receptive audience. I think that some of his ideas are light years ahead of what is currently being preached as policy, particularly in the realm of health care. Because he thinks outside the box, and because he holds to his principles while still being likable, he is the one I am truly fired up about. Some had the same feeling for Bobby Kennedy.
But I am realistic, I will be satisfied if Giuliani or McCain get in (hopefully with Gov. Palin). Giuliani being president won't mean that we'll have more abortions in this country, and I doubt that the current status would change even if Huckabee got in. Giuliani comes across as urbane and sophisticated; heck, he's from New York! Sure he's had issues in his personal life that make me have a few questions. But we've had a divorced man as Commander in Chief -- Reagan, who also was Republican -- so that should be put to rest. Giuliani has crossover appeal, and could actually put my state (Washington) in play.
I want to run for office someday, and I think that a variation of Huckabee's platform would appeal to the large number of Independents we have here. I'd have to be looked at as a moderate if I wanted any chance of winning statewide office as a Republican.
This e-mail has run longer than I originally wanted, but I wanted to say check out my newest posting today on "Gun Control for Criminals" and let me know what you think.
Thanks for listening . . .
Matt (E-mail at: corpsole2@olypen.com)
Steve's Response: Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of the man. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (Admittedly, in the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.)
What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states). Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.
Can Mike Huckabee possibly have a dramatic surge among primary voters? In that regard, one candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9% in late November, 2003 and was at 52% in February, 2004. (Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.)
In the race for 2008, the only real movement in the polls over the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.
By the way, one national poll showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who say they aren't going to vote for Rudy in the primary still have a favorable view of him.
I've read that nearly six-out-of-ten Americans haven't seen so much as ONE debate. The current campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.
Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be gravitating toward Rudy. Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of passing.
Also, he's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.
Overall, Mike Huckabee should have a bright political future. With Fred Thompson, I believe his political career is behind him.
If I had to go way out on a limb, I'd guess the Democratic ticket will be: Clinton-Richardson. The Republican ticket may well be Giuliani-Palin.
Steve (e-mail at: TalkTop65@aol.com)
Monday, September 24, 2007
Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson and Evangelical Extremists
Note: Tomorrow I'll be reprinting two e-mails I've received: one from Matt (of SenseinPolitics) about the positive qualities of Mike Huckabee, the other from John Hawkins (of The Forgotten Street) about the conservative credentials of Fred Thompson. Here's the e-mail I sent to them today:
Matt & John, could I reprint your e-mails (one each)? John Hawkins in Florida, a long-time associate of mine who's a supporter of Fred Thompson), wrote a thoughtful e-mail. Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of him. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (In the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.) What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states).
Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.
One candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9-10% in late November, 2003, and was at 52% in February, 2004.
(Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.) Kerry it turned out was "everybody's second choice" among the Democrats, which may also be the case with Mike Huckabee.
Remember, however, that Kerry won Iowa and New Hampshire, which I don't believe is possible with Mike. If Mike doesn't win Iowa, he should withdraw and begin planning for the next campaign.
The only real movement in the polls in the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.
There was one poll that showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who aren't going to vote for him in the primary still have a favorable view of him.
I've heard that 59% (think that's it) of the American public hasn't seen so much as ONE debate. The campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.
Of note: Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be going toward Rudy.
Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowflake's chance in Hades of passing. He's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.
Romney said that abortion should be left up to the states, because that's exactly what would happen if SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade. To Romney's credit, he told people the truth, even though some evangelicals didn't want to hear it. Despite Dr. Dobson's and Rev. Larry White's rants, there is never going to be an amendment overturning Roe. If it happens, it would be the result of actions by by SCOTUS, not by Congress and the states.
The problem with the extreme evangelicals -- the "absolutists" as my friend Sanity102 calls them, is their appalling egoism. The define their own form of Christianity as the only type of belief acceptable to God. They believe that because they want a certain political action to take place that the system has failed if it doesn't. I've compared them them to naughty two-year olds, individuals who start screaming if they don't get their own way.
The absolutists do harm to a campaign like Mike's. One evangelical on the main Huckabee blog said that Mike was heading to perdition because his band played some Willie Nelson songs. Another individual said that the election of Hillary Clinton (herself a liberal Christian) would lead to "the persecution of hundreds of Christians." Other supporters deserted Mike because he said essentially that DC residents were being subject to taxation without representation. Still other evangelicals got in an uproar against Mike because he said there was SOME racism in the opposition to immigration reform.
Perhaps Mike's most controversial statement was when he said, "Life begins at conception, but it doesn't end at birth." This was a slap at evangelicals and others who claim to be "pro-life," but show no concern for children outside the womb who need assistance.
As I've said before, Mike is a better candidate than some of his strongest supporters could ever imagine.
steve maloney
Matt & John, could I reprint your e-mails (one each)? John Hawkins in Florida, a long-time associate of mine who's a supporter of Fred Thompson), wrote a thoughtful e-mail. Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of him. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (In the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.) What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states).
Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.
One candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9-10% in late November, 2003, and was at 52% in February, 2004.
(Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.) Kerry it turned out was "everybody's second choice" among the Democrats, which may also be the case with Mike Huckabee.
Remember, however, that Kerry won Iowa and New Hampshire, which I don't believe is possible with Mike. If Mike doesn't win Iowa, he should withdraw and begin planning for the next campaign.
The only real movement in the polls in the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.
There was one poll that showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who aren't going to vote for him in the primary still have a favorable view of him.
I've heard that 59% (think that's it) of the American public hasn't seen so much as ONE debate. The campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.
Of note: Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be going toward Rudy.
Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowflake's chance in Hades of passing. He's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.
Romney said that abortion should be left up to the states, because that's exactly what would happen if SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade. To Romney's credit, he told people the truth, even though some evangelicals didn't want to hear it. Despite Dr. Dobson's and Rev. Larry White's rants, there is never going to be an amendment overturning Roe. If it happens, it would be the result of actions by by SCOTUS, not by Congress and the states.
The problem with the extreme evangelicals -- the "absolutists" as my friend Sanity102 calls them, is their appalling egoism. The define their own form of Christianity as the only type of belief acceptable to God. They believe that because they want a certain political action to take place that the system has failed if it doesn't. I've compared them them to naughty two-year olds, individuals who start screaming if they don't get their own way.
The absolutists do harm to a campaign like Mike's. One evangelical on the main Huckabee blog said that Mike was heading to perdition because his band played some Willie Nelson songs. Another individual said that the election of Hillary Clinton (herself a liberal Christian) would lead to "the persecution of hundreds of Christians." Other supporters deserted Mike because he said essentially that DC residents were being subject to taxation without representation. Still other evangelicals got in an uproar against Mike because he said there was SOME racism in the opposition to immigration reform.
Perhaps Mike's most controversial statement was when he said, "Life begins at conception, but it doesn't end at birth." This was a slap at evangelicals and others who claim to be "pro-life," but show no concern for children outside the womb who need assistance.
As I've said before, Mike is a better candidate than some of his strongest supporters could ever imagine.
steve maloney
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Sound Politics.Com Pro-Palin Comments
In case you missed it, here's a fine post from SoundPolitics.com on Gov. Sarah Heath Palin.
September 21, 2007
Crystal Ball Time
Allow me to amplify and expand on David Postman's discussion of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Postman makes a number of prudent points in his coverage about Palin's rise and its significance. What also bears mentioning is that she may well land on the short list of possible Republican VP nominees next year.
This post first stoked my consideration of that issue. This profile by Fred Barnes cemented the idea that it could be serious. Doing some quick research for this blog entry drew a number of related hits, including a Draft Sarah Palin for VP blog and some related Alaska media coverage.
Palin has some obvious appeal for all the reasons Barnes and Postman enunciate. Granted, Alaska isn't the first state people look to for a quality VP choice. Yet, consider that if Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney becomes the nominee they're likely to want fill out the ticket with someone from the South or the West who has unimpeachable conservative credentials. Palin fits that bill. Plus, it wouldn't hurt for a Republican VP nominee to be somebody other than a white male given the leading contenders for the Democratic nomination. Yes, identity politics are no fun, but they do matter sometimes.
The main point is keep an eye on Palin. She's been soaring while seemingly the entire rest of the GOP in her state has been imploding. That alone make her worth watching.
Footnote: Postman uses the term/adjective "Outside" in his post. For the uninitiated, that's how Alaskans refer to all things non-Alaska. It's almost never considered a compliment and indicative of the exceptionally wary eye Alaskans cast beyond the borders of their unique state.Posted by Eric Earling at September 21, 2007 06:23 PM Email This
Comments
1. I hear she's pro-life and conservative too! And she took on the Republican Establishment. Of course she'd be popular. What's not to like?
Posted by: Michelle on September 21, 2007 07:23 PM
2. I agree, and that would be an individual that I could vote for.
She sounds like a Barn Burnin Reagan Like Conservative.
Posted by: GS on September 21, 2007 10:34 PM
3. I have loved Palin since she ran for Governor!
She would make a perfect VP selection.
Now if only Romney could get the nomination, Romney/Palin has a nice ring to it!Posted by: Kyle on September 22, 2007 11:44 PM
4. Thanks very much for the link. Gov. Palin is a very inspiring leader, and there are a growing number of us who think she is the future of the GOP. If you agree, you can join our blogroll as either an "Endorsement" or a "Palin Fan" (someone who likes the Gov. but isn't ready to endorse her for VP just yet). Hope to be seeing more of you.
Adam BrickleyFounder, Draft Sarah Palin for Vice Presidentpalinforvp.blogspot.compalinforvp@gmail.comPosted by: Palin for VP! on September 23, 2007 10:01 AM
5. I very much encourage people to join Adam Brickley's effort to Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President. Compared to many past V-P choices (Spiro Agnew??!! Dan Quayle??!!) she would be a superb selection. Her son joined the military on Sept. 11 and is now in basic training at Ft. Benning. This is a remarkable family.
Steve MaloneyPosted by: Stephen R. Maloney on September 23, 2007 05:44 PM
September 21, 2007
Crystal Ball Time
Allow me to amplify and expand on David Postman's discussion of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Postman makes a number of prudent points in his coverage about Palin's rise and its significance. What also bears mentioning is that she may well land on the short list of possible Republican VP nominees next year.
This post first stoked my consideration of that issue. This profile by Fred Barnes cemented the idea that it could be serious. Doing some quick research for this blog entry drew a number of related hits, including a Draft Sarah Palin for VP blog and some related Alaska media coverage.
Palin has some obvious appeal for all the reasons Barnes and Postman enunciate. Granted, Alaska isn't the first state people look to for a quality VP choice. Yet, consider that if Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney becomes the nominee they're likely to want fill out the ticket with someone from the South or the West who has unimpeachable conservative credentials. Palin fits that bill. Plus, it wouldn't hurt for a Republican VP nominee to be somebody other than a white male given the leading contenders for the Democratic nomination. Yes, identity politics are no fun, but they do matter sometimes.
The main point is keep an eye on Palin. She's been soaring while seemingly the entire rest of the GOP in her state has been imploding. That alone make her worth watching.
Footnote: Postman uses the term/adjective "Outside" in his post. For the uninitiated, that's how Alaskans refer to all things non-Alaska. It's almost never considered a compliment and indicative of the exceptionally wary eye Alaskans cast beyond the borders of their unique state.Posted by Eric Earling at September 21, 2007 06:23 PM Email This
Comments
1. I hear she's pro-life and conservative too! And she took on the Republican Establishment. Of course she'd be popular. What's not to like?
Posted by: Michelle on September 21, 2007 07:23 PM
2. I agree, and that would be an individual that I could vote for.
She sounds like a Barn Burnin Reagan Like Conservative.
Posted by: GS on September 21, 2007 10:34 PM
3. I have loved Palin since she ran for Governor!
She would make a perfect VP selection.
Now if only Romney could get the nomination, Romney/Palin has a nice ring to it!Posted by: Kyle on September 22, 2007 11:44 PM
4. Thanks very much for the link. Gov. Palin is a very inspiring leader, and there are a growing number of us who think she is the future of the GOP. If you agree, you can join our blogroll as either an "Endorsement" or a "Palin Fan" (someone who likes the Gov. but isn't ready to endorse her for VP just yet). Hope to be seeing more of you.
Adam BrickleyFounder, Draft Sarah Palin for Vice Presidentpalinforvp.blogspot.compalinforvp@gmail.comPosted by: Palin for VP! on September 23, 2007 10:01 AM
5. I very much encourage people to join Adam Brickley's effort to Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President. Compared to many past V-P choices (Spiro Agnew??!! Dan Quayle??!!) she would be a superb selection. Her son joined the military on Sept. 11 and is now in basic training at Ft. Benning. This is a remarkable family.
Steve MaloneyPosted by: Stephen R. Maloney on September 23, 2007 05:44 PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
