October 2007 – Page 3

The dog-and-pony show leaves town

In a masterful bit of scheduling (not) our illustrious Governor, Martin O’Malley, arrived 40 minutes late to his presentation at Salisbury University and spent the next 50 minutes using the magic of PowerPoint to explain why he, no wait the people of Maryland, needs to dig deeper into the pockets of those he deems aren’t paying their fair share to supply the nanny state with its big-government manna.

It’s interesting to look at the coverage provided by my hometown paper (Salisbury Daily Times) and the Baltimore Sun. Both of them provided a Republican quote or two but it didn’t sound like O’Malley got a lot of tough questions. (They needed me there but I work for a living.) I did notice that the Daily Times story correctly stated that the Maryland share of the state’s budget is about $15 billion as the remaining $15 billion or so is simply transfer payments from the federal government. That’s sort of scary when you realize Maryland has just under 6 million residents but has the wealthiest per capita income in the country. There’s no way we’re getting back what we put in, unless you count how many Free Staters are employed by the feds because of our proximity to DC.

Just to review, here’s the laundry list of new taxes proposed by the state government:

An income tax rate increase to 6% and 6.5%, respectively, for Maryland residents making over $200,000 and $500,000. Currently all income above $3,000 is taxed at 4.75%, making the rate increase either 26.3% or 36.8% depending on income. While those rates may sound low, bear in mind Maryland counties have a piggyback income tax that generally runs 1-2% on top of the state share.
A 20% increase in the state sales tax, from 5% to 6%. Here on the Eastern Shore it gives another point advantage to sales tax-free Delaware. The evidence of its business effect is along U.S. 13 going north from Salisbury into Delaware – on the Delaware side it’s furniture store row because a 5% difference is pronounced on big-ticket items.
A doubling of the cigarette tax from $1.00 per pack to $2.00, although O’Malley conceded that may be adjusted downward if a federal cigarette tax sought as part of the SCHIP reauthorization overcomes President Bush’s veto.
Indexing the state’s gasoline tax to inflation, although earlier proposals have also asked for a 10-12 cent per gallon increase in the tax in addition to the indexing.

In return, there would be a few tax adjustments, ostensibly to help the poor and elderly:

Unspecified “tax credits” for low-income families and seniors. Of course, they already pay very little in income tax now so in essence it’s an increase in wealth transfer payments.
A 3 cent per $100 reduction in the state’s property tax rate. The caveat on this one is that the reduction is phased in over three years. Something tells me that the three year timeframe was selected because I believe that’s how often property is reassessed – thus any gain on the rate would likely be eaten up with the increased values.

Also on the table as it has been for the past five years is slot machine gambling, as Marylanders flock to Delaware, West Virginia, and now Pennsylvania to play the one-armed bandits. They’re expecting slots to chip in about $500 million once the state selects locations and commences operations, but that won’t likely occur in full until the next state election year of 2010.

Another voice on the budget machinations was provided by our County Executive, Rick Pollitt. According to the Sun:

Pollitt thanked the governor for wading into the budget battle and urged lawmakers of both parties to avoid politicizing a financial issue that affects all residents. “We’re citizens,” he said. “We need to fight this and overcome this as citizens.”

His obvious concern comes from whether Wicomico County’s modest share of the state pie would be maintained. Unlike his counterpart in the Governor’s chair, Pollitt has a restriction on spending because in 2004 county voters approved a revenue cap that limits spending increases to 2 percent per year. Because of it, my property taxes here went down 6 cents per $100 this year but the county still had its maximum spending power.

I also got input yesterday from two Eastern Shore legislators. Republican Delegates Addie Eckardt and Jeannie Haddaway (both of District 37B, which covers a large portion of the lower and mid-Shore) chimed into the argument with this claim that the corporate taxes will hurt the middle class, too:

As Governor O’Malley travels the state selling his plan to raise a plethora of taxes, Delegates Addie Eckardt and Jeannie Haddaway point out that the math just does not add up.

The Governor came to Salisbury University trying to convince citizens that increasing the corporate income tax will help make higher education more affordable for the middle class”, said Delegate Eckardt. “A study released in September by the Maryland Chamber of Commerce shows that increasing the corporate income tax will lead to a loss of over 2,500 jobs by 2017. How exactly does increasing unemployment make higher education more affordable?”

“It is very easy to target seemingly faceless corporations,” said Delegate Haddaway. “But the reality is that the citizens of Maryland will be hurt by it more than the corporations themselves. The corporations can cut payroll, raise their prices, or just move out of the State to make up the difference. But how do our citizens make up the difference when this causes the costs of food and goods to rise while at the same time, mismanaged government has caused their utility bills to go up and their tax bill to go up? It is these people – hard working, middle class people – that will be hurt by this.”

In August, House Republicans offered a budget alternative that would fix the structural deficit through slowing the growth of government and a limited slots plan” said Haddaway. “The plan was presented to the Governor in good faith, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.”

What the Governor refuses to acknowledge is that Maryland has a spending problem, not a revenue problem”, said Eckardt. “Tax increases are not necessary”.

Ladies, don’t hold your breath. As “rich” Republicans, we’re just going to have to take it in the shorts for 3 years before we get another crack at changing the political face of Maryland. But in the meantime, we need to be like the elephants who symbolize us and have long memories because it’s going to be another 36 months of the Democrats doing what they do best – ensnare more and more people into government dependency.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

Odds and ends no. 8

Haven’t done an “odds and ends” post since February but I have a few itty-bitty items tonight that I wanted to touch on:

Saw this in my e-mail box today. Apparently Mike Huckabee’s campaign manager Chip Saltsman agreed with my assessment last night about his amount of face time:

Well that debate was definitely different. Gov. Huckabee hit every question out of the park but he wasn’t asked nearly enough questions…Given the actual amount of air time the Governor had at today’s debate, we are clearly going to need the financial resources to cut through the media filter and speak directly with voters.

Yes, he couched it as a fundraising appeal but it’s nice to have my observation validated. However, one thing I’ll promise Governor Huckabee is as much time to answer my questions as he desires. On his blogsite he does solicit “blogs for interview” and I’d certainly be happy to ask him a few tough but fair questions that I feel would better inform the voters. And he can take just as many words as his heart desires to answer them. After all, while I’ve endorsed Duncan Hunter bear in mind that even my bottom choice among the GOP hopefuls is far, far better than any Democrat.

Speaking of Democrats, another e-mail I got was from Bill Richardson’s Presidential campaign. I’m not sure he’s yet gotten the memo where President Bush can’t be elected to a third term. But he sure borrowed a page from his cohort John Edwards and is one of eight governors suing President Bush over his veto of the SCHIP reauthorization. Richardson notes:

The President has been openly hostile to children’s health care. New SCHIP regulations that his Administration issued in August violate the intent of Congress, interfering with the states’ existing SCHIP programs and limiting their expansion.

And now we’re joining forces with New York, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Washington, Arizona, and New Hampshire — and we’re taking President Bush to court.

Somehow I KNEW Maryland would be in on that. Naturally, all of the governors involved are Democrats.

On another recent post, the results are in for the “In Honor” fund drive. 35 blogs helped with the effort, and the total raised was $5,823. It was short of their revised $10,000 goal but blew by the original $2,000 benchmark they set. So if any of you donated, give yourselves a hand.

I’ll leave you with this for tonight. On a totally unrelated note, it’s time to crank up the Iron Maiden. I didn’t notice it until the very end but my last post on the Green Fund was post number 666. It’s sort of a funny milestone I guess, and given the tendency of radical environmentalists to equate their cause to a religion it’s possibly more appropriate than one would think at first glance.

Green Fund: the color of our money becoming theirs

After trying and not succeeding in this year’s General Assembly session to create a fund dedicated to cleaning up Chesapeake Bay a different tack was announced yesterday, this time purportedly with the approval of developers.

For those who do not recall the last General Assembly session (or are now in my national readership) the Green Fund bill was an attempt to extort from developers and anyone else interested in improving their properties an “impervious surface fee” of up to $2.00 per square foot, impervious surfaces generally being buildings or pavement. Eventually the bill was amended to spare homeowners to some extent but commercial and industrial development continued to pay the full freight. While majority Democrats enabled the Green Fund bill to pass the House of Delegates by a 96-41 vote, it passed too late for the Senate to give it more than one reading.

Version 2.0 of this bill changes some of the parameters and is expected to bring $85 million to the state coffers annually if passed next year. According to the Gazette article by Sean R. Sedam:

Under the proposal, homeowners would pay an annual fee of a penny per square foot on their homes after the first 1,000 square feet.

The penny-per-square-foot assessment would also apply to hardened surfaces on commercial, industrial and institutional properties, which could get breaks on the fee by taking pollution-reduction measures in buildings or removing pavement.

Advocates say the fee would cost average homeowners about $10 per year.

(snip)

‘‘The Green Fund is something the governor supports in theory,” O’Malley spokesman Rick Abbruzzese said late Wednesday. ‘‘It’s pretty remarkable when environmentalists and developers can come together on supporting restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. He looks forward to working with environmentalists on this piece of legislation.”

In this case, speaking for the developers was the Homebuilders Association of Maryland. As I often do when I hear about a group seemingly going against self-interest to some degree or another, I decided to follow the money. A quick search of the recent political contributions of this august group showed me they donated $4,000 to the O’Malley coffers – $2,000 each in 2005 and 2006. To some extent it’s understandable given our state’s current political makeup but this idea the Homebuilders Association has thrown their weight behind shifts the burden from a onetime payment when a piece of land is developed or redeveloped to a continual revenue stream that can easily be raised at the whim of the Democrat machine in Annapolis. Just because it would likely cost me less than the average amount (my house is barely over 1,000 square feet – not sure how a wood deck on the back and gravel driveway fits into the scheme) doesn’t mean I think it’s a good idea considering my occupation.

Further, I see this as another intrusion into the free market by our nanny state. As noted in the pull quote, part of the bill notes that businesses can get a break on the fee by removing pavement or taking pollution reduction measures. What this doesn’t tell me is whether this reduction would be a dollar-for-dollar swap – in other words, let’s say a business converts part of its parking lot from standard asphalt to Grasspave blocks. I can guaran-damn-tee you that it costs a LOT more than a penny a square foot to do that. Of course, someone in Annapolis will come up with the bright idea of a state program to pay the company for doing that but you also know that the penny per square foot will have to go up to a nickel to do that…then a dime as more items come under the funding menu. It’s the way of all government programs.

And in a state that already spends big bucks to purchase land and take it off the tax rolls, it creates more pressure on remaining landowners to feed the Annapolis beast through ever-increasing taxes and assessments such as the Green Fund would become.

To be honest, I haven’t done the reading to see if this is a “first in the nation” Green Fund law Maryland is proposing (such as our statewide “living wage” law that recently came into effect.) But Maryland tends to be among the leaders both in loony liberalism and in figuring out new and better ways to reach into our back pocket. With 29 other states fronting on the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico or Great Lakes; and environmental groups claiming like Maryland’s that its public waterways are in “crisis” mode, this idea is sure to spread to become a national and even international call.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

All quiet on the western front

A couple quick items about the Presidential race and Maryland’s part in it to start this evening. I may scope out the rebroadcast of the GOP debate just to hiss at Chris Matthews. Who puts a debate on at 4:00 in the afternoon anyway?

Over the weekend, I pledged to keep tabs on Barack Obama’s upcoming Maryland visit. It’s not like I expect him to say anything other than his faux-populist big government solutions to all of America’s myriad problems; no, the reason I find it interesting is the split that it puts in Maryland’s highest offices because our Attorney General Doug Gansler is listed as a co-host for the Obama stop while Governor O’Malley endorsed Hillary way back in May. And while my memory is that a big deal was made days ahead of Hillary doing a fundraiser in Annapolis a few months back, I’ve heard nothing from Maryland’s or DC’s major news outlets regarding the Obama stop in Largo.

The other interesting note comes from the Maryland for Fred Thompson blog as blogger Ted Pibil participated in a conference call with Thompson campaign manager Bill Lacy. As would be expected, Lacy was upbeat about Thompson’s camapign and having done a similar conference call myself with Duncan Hunter, I would expect nothing less.

I’m still a little p.o.’ed about Thompson skipping the Maryland debate, but in a conversation I had recently with a political strategist I’ve come to know from a local campaign he postulated that Thompson had everything to lose by participating in a debate with the so-called “second tier” candidates. If he dominated the field, well, it was just a bunch of the also-rans in the polls that he beat. On the other hand, if he were outshone the Thompson campaign would have to deal with spinning a number of excuses for his poor performance.

Thompson is already getting a reputation as not too great of a speaker on the campaign stump. There’s at least one national story circulating just today about Dan Bartlett, onetime aide for President Bush, who’s quoted that Thompson “peaked in the spring before he became an official candidate and has little chance now to become the nominee,” and that Fred was the biggest dud thus far compared to expectations. However, a close reading of the story by AP writer Jennifer Loven shows that Bartlett made these comments in a speech back on September 13, shortly after Thompson entered the race. Interesting how that timing works, huh?

What I think I’ll do is post this now and add accordingly after I’ve watched some of the debate. The monoblogue world headquarters is situated where I can’t see my TV so I’ll shut down for now and come back with quick reaction to what was said this afternoon.

Debate notes, 12:30 a.m.

No, the debate didn’t last that long, I was waiting for a storm to clear since my lights flickered a couple times. Anyway, did it seem to those few of you who watched (after all, the debate was on MSNBC) that Rudy, Mitt, and Fred got the most face time? Much like a TV show cast, you had three lead stars, the comic relief (Ron Paul) and the people who get a couple lines in the background (Huckabee and McCain to an extent, but Brownback, Hunter, and Tancredo really got the shaft.)

And they had their share of annoying questions – are topics like CEO profits and the “shrinking American dream” really questions or editorial comments? Quit playing the class envy card already.

So how did I rate the participants? In order, I’d say Giuliani and Tancredo did the best, Hunter did well, and Fred Thompson scored well with his points but for an actor he really stammered through a couple questions. Romney was sort of a mixed bag for me, while Huckabee and Brownback went back to pandering again on a couple questions. I wasn’t impressed with John McCain and frankly Ron Paul was irritating.

That’s how I looked at it, but I’m sure several comments are forthcoming with a lot of differing opinions.

Sharing “In Honor”

As most of you read yesterday, I was host for Carnival of Maryland 17. I had just one submission that I did not include, for two reasons. First of all, the website where it came from is actually out of Pennsylvania, and while the Maryland Bloggers Alliance does have an “expat” member who lives just across the state line and we have included an out-of-state post in our Carnival from time to time, I thought that it wouldn’t be appropriate.

But more importantly, after reading the post and the cause it represents, I decided that this deserved a standalone post rather than just a few lines in my carnival. While I heartily disagree with a lot of what’s said on the Comments From Left Field website the cause is a good one, and after a great start the total’s been stuck at just under $6,000 of a $10,000 goal. True, the original benchmark of $2,000 was long passed but there’s no reason to stop now – to that end the Gray/Mora donations can be made here. If you’re not familiar with Fisher House, their site is here. Even a few dollars from each of my new crop of daily readers puts them over the top before their self-induced goal date of Wednesday.

Catching on to the earmark bus

As I alluded to over the weekend, I received a missive from Congressman Wayne Gilchrest’s campaign informing me that he’s for doing away with some of the pork too:

As more stories emerge linking egregious spending in Washington in the form of earmarks with campaign contributions for members of Congress, the need for full disclosure of earmark requests is needed now more than ever, U.S. Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (R-Maryland-1st) said.

Gilchrest signed a discharge petition last week that would force a vote to allow all earmarks to be challenged and debated on the House floor, regardless of what type of bill they are included in.

“Earmarks have been around for a long time and in some cases they make sense,” Gilchrest said. “We’ve requested earmarks for highway safety projects that otherwise might not have received the same level of funding in our state because of other high profile projects previous Governors have deemed priorities. But it’s clear that secretive earmarks slipped into bills in the middle of the night is not good government. If legislators believe that their earmarks are worth funding, they should be able to get up and explain them to their colleagues. We’ve got to begin to restore the faith of the American people that this system we have established is working, and that it’s transparent to prevent even the hint of impropriety.

“It’s why I have also always supported a line-item veto to give the President the power to strike some of this egregious spending in many of these bills. As it stands now, the President has to veto the entire bill and we’re heading down the path of a fiscal showdown that won’t benefit the American people.

The discharge petition currently has 196 signatures, and needs the signatures of 218 members of Congress for it to go forward.

Obviously the question I and most of my regular readers have is: what took so long? To be honest, the timing is suspicious as it came a week after the issue was brought up by opponent Andy Harris. The discharge petition in question still has 196 signers, as Gilchrest became signer #183 on September 26. Oddly enough, Gilchrest signed right after Presidental candidate Duncan Hunter; fellow Oval Office aspirants Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul signed it September 20. Needless to say, Democrat Presidential candidate and House member Dennis Kucinich has yet to sign.

Whether this discharge petition has any sort of hope or not will obviously hinge on the majority Democrats, since the GOP only has 201 members with both currently vacant seats formerly held by Republicans who died in office.

On a broader, more philosophical note, much of the earmark reform needs to come from a change in attitude among the voting public. Too often they grade their Congressman on how much bacon they bring back to the home district. It’s the same philosophy where John Q. Public wants all the bums thrown out of Congress – except their own representative. Voters want as much pork brought back to their district as their person in DC can scratch out, forgetting that in order to get it he or she has to allow the other 434 members of the House their respective chunks of the meat too. There’s very few altruists in our nation’s capital.

So while this discharge petition is a start, it does nothing to promote and educate the voters about what should be the proper role of the federal government, and that role certainly isn’t that of paying for the “Bridge to Nowhere” to be built.

Crossposted on RedMaryland.

Election Calendar: October 8-21

I almost thought I’d have nothing but fortunately a couple of the Congressional websites must have read monoblogue and my complaints about them not placing up an event calendar so I can keep voters informed of local appearances. So now they have said calendars.

As a review, I note appearances for Congressional candidates on the lower Shore (Dorchester, Wicomico, Somerset, and Worcester counties) and Presidential candidates anywhere on the Eastern Shore or Delaware. Sometimes I cover other political appearances of interest from officeholders not running, like my first entry.

Wednesday, October 10: Governor Martin O’Malley comes to Salisbury University to host a Budget Forum at The Great Hall – Holloway Hall. The event commences at 1:00 p.m. Quoting from my cohort at Delmarva Dealings (a big h/t to G.A.):

I encourage anyone interested in going to either call or email Ashley Valis, an assistant to the Governor:

(410) 260-3886
avalis@gov.state.md.us

Thursday, October 11 (tentative): This would be Congressman Wayne Gilchrest‘s biweekly appearance on the AM Salisbury radio program with Bill Reddish, running from 7:40 – 7:50 a.m. He’ll likely discuss his recent trip to Iraq and other capitals. That’s on WICO-AM 1320 here in Salisbury.

*Just added*

Friday, October 12: Congressional candidate Andy Harris has three Lower Shore events planned. First he’ll be the guest of Bill Reddish on his AM Salisbury program (WICO-AM 1320) from 7:40 – 7:50 a.m. Then he does another radio gig with Jack Gillian of WQMR-FM out of Ocean City (101.1 FM) from 10-11 a.m. and finally will campaign at the Maryland Federation of Republican Women Conference in Ocean City at the Carousel Hotel (also there will be his GOP opponent Joe Arminio.) The Harris campaign let me know he’ll have a hospitality suite at the event, though.

Saturday, October 13: On the Democrat side, Congressional hopeful Frank Kratovil is slated to appear for the Somerset Democratic Club breakfast on the UMES campus in Princess Anne, the Student Services Building to be exact. The event runs from 9-11 a.m.

Wednesday, October 17: Also on Frank Kratovil‘s docket is an appearance at the Wicomico County Democrat Club meeting, they meet at the Knights of Columbus in Salisbury from 7-8:30 p.m. (Yeah, he’s a calendar convert.)

Thursday, October 18 (tentative): My female readers in Dorchester County can meet Congressional aspirant Joe Arminio at the Dorchester County Republican Women meeting. Unfortunately, that’s all the info I have but perhaps an astute reader can assist me with getting the word out for next week’s edition.

With that I wrap up another Election Calendar and an exciting weekend for monoblogue in general.

Carnival of Maryland 17

Once again, welcome to Maryland’s Eastern Shore for this ~~semi-weekly~~ (biweekly, thanks to John at ShoreThings for pointing that out) version of samples from the Free State’s best blogs and websites. (So how did mine get included?)

For those of you who are new to the concept of a blog carnival, this is a collection of linked articles built around a theme. In this case, we all hail from Maryland, hence the name. Many of the contributors come from a group I belong to, the Maryland Bloggers Alliance, whose members hail from every part of the political spectrum. Not all of us focus on politics, though, and a number of submissions this time don’t fit into the political realm at all. I have a veritable smorgasbord of items submitted this week, so like a good wandering roadtrip on a sunny day, I’m going to wander the back roads and city lights of Maryland with today’s Carnival.

I think I’m going to start with another blogger who’s done some wandering in her time. At The Greenbelt, a lady we know in the MBA as The Ridger reminds us about the natural activity this time of year in her post October. On the other hand, what happens to some of that natural flora and fauna is worked into Kevin Dayhoff’s humorous treatise Living and Loving in the Age of Asparagus.

The humor doesn’t stop there, though. Always good for a smile, Attila at Pillage Idiot checks in with a clash of cultures in Polyglot. Meanwhile, Paul at Capital Punishment has come up with a message for the Geico gecko. And while his post isn’t as recent as the others, Anthony McCune has a clever interaction with the IRS with his Resumania – Installment 1.

And that’s just as good a segue into politics as my feeble mind can make so I’ll go ahead with all those politically inclined submissions I have. For those of you not in Maryland, it bears telling you that our state is facing a large budget deficit and a number of solutions are being discussed. Brian Griffiths cautions us not to expect miracles from one proposal in Why Slots Won’t Work. Then he demolishes one liberal arguing for high taxation with his post Owing Favors. Brian Gill of Annapolis Politics also takes his turn at the liberal pinata, skewering our state’s so-called living wage law in Minimum Wage/Living Wage.

Our contributors didn’t ignore national politics, though. One of my pet topics there is what I call the Long War, and Bruce Robinson at GOPinionPlus speaks out about liberal talking points in Dishonorable Discharge: Democrats soil themselves. Then we have Stan, writing as Blogger1947, letting his Congressman know how he feels about the subprime mortgage “crisis” in Elijah, Elijah, Elijah! Plus, Mike Netherland at the appropriately named Mike’s Nether Land blog looks at Social Security with Strange Bedfellows? While he has a funny take on the issue, it does make you wonder why those groups are working together.

For those of you who follow politics and consider all the national surveys that are done as pollaganda, here in Maryland we have a website called Hedgehog Report, a place where you can get the lowdown on national political polling. But Dave Wissing decided to do his own poll on a development in the town of Columbia, and he gives his results on What The Online Gang Thinks. (No word on margin of error, though.)

And for whatever reason this time around education was on the mind of three of my contributors. The local school blues are sung by Streiff in his post Henry Kissinger Validated (from RedMaryland, a blog I contribute to); P. Kenneth Burns of Maryland Politics Today with an essay entitled The Difference Is Night And Day…Or North And South, and Zinzindor of Leviathan Montgomery, who goes into the lack of charter schools in his home county of Montgomery.

Maryland also has its passionate sports fans, but while most of Maryland follows the Baltimore Orioles, a long skein of losing seasons has tried many fans’ patience. Fellow MBA member Soccer Dad was kind enough to contribute one story about the end of an era for one family.

Before I get back to the Bay Bridge though I have a couple back roads to wander, posts that didn’t quite fit a particular category. Mark Newgent at The Main Adversary discusses movie director Elia Kazan in Tearing Down the Facade. When you see how it ties together at the end, Mark’s done a nice job of relating two distinct Hollywood eras. Hollywood also ties into another intriguing post as Undercover Black Man celebrates the tenth anniversary of the David Simon/Edward Burns book “The Corner.”

One thing I also wanted to bring out in hosting this affair was the talented bloggers who inhabit the Eastern Shore. I’m not the type to just grab posts, so I was disappointed that only one of my local cohorts submitted. But the one who did is one of the more talented writers from the heart that I know, and Karen submitted three separate items from A Woman’s Point of View. Enjoy reading 1942 Was a Very Good Year, a timely message in The Pink Ribbon, and her tribute to her parents in The Vow.

Now as the headlights shine on my home and the journey concludes, I want to leave you with one of my own posts. I’ve contributed to almost every one of the previous 16 Carnivals, usually with some political screed or another, a serious, lengthy thought piece. All right, I’m doing the same here but it’s not so long and it cured a case of writer’s block I was suffering from. The title of the piece is Bad senior, no donut.

So I hope you enjoyed the journey around Maryland, and our next edition will eminate from Prince George’s County, where a timeout will be taken from Creating a Jubilee County to host Carnival of Maryland 18 on October 21.

All I have to say is “wow”!

And the hard work begins. To paraphrase the quote from Benjamin Franklin, now I have a readership – if I can keep it.

I wanted to first go through some of what you can expect when you come back to monoblogue. I focus on a number of things, mostly political but I swerve into other topics which interest me. Here’s just a few:

Obviously I devote a lot of time to the Presidential race. I’ve managed to get on the e-mail lists to almost all of the campaigns, even the Democrat ones since I like to see what the other side is doing. People may ask why I do that and link to Democrat campaigns (particularly when I sit on our local county Republican Central Committee) but I believe in an informed electorate and once they start reading the Democrat talking points, it’s usually plenty of rope for the D’s to hang themselves with. It’s been a great last few days for me on the phone – it goes without saying how much of an honor it was to speak to Rush yesterday, but I also got to talk to Presidential candidate Congressman Duncan Hunter last week too. And I’m still attempting to do the same with other Presidential candidates as well – while they may not be high on my list, they’re certainly better than the alternative.
The hotter topic is more local, but it does have some national import. I live in Maryland’s First Congressional District, which is considered one of the most meaningful races in the nation as a barometer for how conservatives will do in the 2008 general election. It pits the Republican who’s most likely to buck the party line according to a CQpolitics.com study, Congressman Wayne Gilchrest, against three other GOP challengers (one backed by the Club For Growth) and at least one Democrat who’s attempting to run right of Gilchrest on some issues. So I devote a lot of space to posting and commenting on what those campaigns have to say. (All of the candidates are linked toward the top of my right-hand column.) Also I do a weekly Election Calendar where I see which candidates are coming to my local area, the lower Eastern Shore of Maryland.
Once these people get elected, I don’t stop examining them. I’m definitely a critic of our Governor, Martin O’Malley, a Hillary clone and backer who’s out to raise our taxes in order to address a state deficit primarily caused by overspending on the part of both parties. But O’Malley doesn’t just want to plug the budget hole, he’s out to throw more money to his union buddies (for example, supporting and signing a statewide “living wage” for companies contracting with the state of Maryland.) From January to April while our General Assembly is in session, it’s a frequent topic of discussion. I also check in from time to time on how our federal representatives are doing.
I also get to a lot of local and state party events, and it gives me several opportunities to be a photojournalist. I like putting together pictures and text to tell a story. A good recent example was the GOP straw poll our county’s Republican club held. (And that event was my “baby” to boot, I came up with the idea to both promote the club and be a fundraiser. By the way, Fred Thompson won it handily and the club made some “free” money too.) I also give the same treatment to other local events that interest me.
Additionally, like Rush, I get tired of talking about politics all the time so I delve into different subjects. It’s one reason I do the band links I have on my site and promote some of my weekend band-watching. Moreover, while he’s a huge football fan, I’m a diehard baseball fan so one way I support our local team is weekly during the season I post a Shorebird of the Week with a picture of and information about the player. (Our local minor league team is the Delmarva Shorebirds, a class “A” Orioles affiliate based here in Salisbury.) And oddly enough, the most-commented post I’d done prior to the Rushalanche was on junk faxes. So I throw a few changeups here and there to keep things interesting.

Now I wanted to address some of the many comments I got. As I’ve said before to my previously small but loyal following, I have the best commentors on the Eastern Shore. You folks just took it to a national (and international) scale.

A few people took issue with my views on the Alan Keyes post about abortion. Obviously the Declaration of Independence states clearly we have the right to life. Further, I happen to be one who believes life begins at conception, even if it’s not yet viable outside the womb. But I think abortion should be looked at as a states’ rights issue once Roe v. Wade is overturned. Also, we need to instill an attitude among the next two generations that respects life. At this time, I just don’t think the climate is right to push for a Constitutional amendment on abortion, but I’ve been convinced to change my mind on term limits over the years too – I used to be against them and now I’d like to see that, among others, as a Constitutional amendment.

Another comment I wanted to respond to was from one Steve Lockridge, who noted:

If we could avoid major disaster, it might be a good thing for Hillary to be prez for four years with a do nothing Dem Congress. Look at what Jimmy Carter did for the GOP.

Unfortunately, I don’t think we can avoid a major disaster this time. While I can see the point about the executive being blamed (fairly or unfairly) for the nation’s problems that occur during his term, there’s just too many other lasting effects a Hillary administration would have, particularly in the judges she’d select and the HillaryCare program that wouldn’t be able to be killed – after all, we’ve been stuck with Social Security for over 70 years and Medicare/Medicaid for over 40 (but who’s counting?)

There were also a large subset of comments suggesting that I picked a funny name for monoblogue and why I didn’t pick something like monoblog.com.

As I noted during the conversation, the inspiration from the name came from Rush. I was listening one day about the time that I began this website, trying to think of a good name for it, when Rush started on some subject just before the top of the hour break and commented that he would talk about it in the monologue section of the next hour. I just correlated the “log” and “blog” and said to myself, “now THAT would be a catchy name – monoblogue.” After all, I’m pretty much the sole writer (tomorrow I make an exception for Carnival of Maryland 17, as I’m the host) so it’s my monologue on the World Wide Web. As for the .us part, I’m an American and not a commercial. But then again…

…someone asked in an e-mail about advertising on my site. Well, it’s funny you should mention that – I’ve envisioned monoblogue as becoming a side income supplement. (My real job is an architect and project manager for a firm here in Salisbury, monoblogue is just my hobby/obsession). So it’s something I’d like to pursue but to be fair to the prospective advertiser I’d like to see how my readership shakes out and ask a couple people I know for advice on the tax ramifications. (Doesn’t that suck? Repeal the 16th Amendment and pass the FairTax already.) I do already have advertising of sorts on the site with the band links; the badges for Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, and shortly Fred Thompson; and the link to the Patriot Post. (If you don’t already subscribe to it, you really should. It’s RIGHT and it’s free!) I also did the Amazon and art.com ads before but that didn’t work out. Maybe I’ll begin with replacing the Amazon.com ad and work from there. But to answer the e-mail; yes, I’m interested.

And to all of those who just commented and wished me well, I extend a big thank you! But now the real work begins, as I think I’ve gotten most of my new readership up to speed so now I can stop the navel-gazing and start getting back to meatier subjects. After all, I have a press release from my Congressman sitting in my e-mail box that I have to critically review and comment on.

Oops, forgot one thing people were asking about, a look at what my fifteen minutes of Rush fame wrought.

Yesterday at about 9 p.m. my website that averages 5,000 hits a day had 57,211.

As far as readership, lately I’d been averaging about 110 readers a day (at one point during our municipal elections here I was doing 200 or so) but yesterday I had 3,916 visitors, 3,760 first-timers. I’d love to keep you all on a daily basis because I generally post that way, some days 2 or 3 posts but mostly once a day. Since I’m more of a “wonkish” commentary site than a news one and I work full-time, that’s what I feel comfortable doing.

So once again thanks to Rush and more importantly, thanks to you for reading.

Reevaluating Fred Thompson

Since I have a couple or three new readers, let me start out by saying welcome to monoblogue. This isn’t a new site, so you pick me up doing something I promised to write last weekend for those who get a weekly e-mail update that I do (if you wish to be added to the list, my e-mail address is in the upper left-hand corner.)

Back in May I attended the Maryland state GOP convention. Yes, we have a few Republicans here despite Governor Martin O’Malley’s bid to tax us out of existence. Anyway, at the convention it was encouraged that we figure out which candidate to throw our support behind and do so relatively early. And since I’m one that really HATES campaigns based on thirty-second commercials and writes a website dedicated in part to informing voters, I decided to make a public show and series of posts on how I arrived at my decision. In turn, the issues I base my decision on come from what I call my “50 year plan”, in which I make suggestions to the future leaders of America on policies they should follow and attempt to base my ideas on our founding principles.

So the original series of posts is here, and if you go to the start of the 50 year plan topic to the left you’ll see where I stand on them.

Now, to Fred Thompson. I originally included him in my evaluation but could only base it on the little I knew at the time in July and August. Now that he’s a full-fledged candidate this gives me an opportunity to finish this job. Each of my topics was assigned a point scale that increased with greater importance, so I’ll go through what I know about Fred from his website. However, feel free to add items if you think I’m incorrectly interpreting something said…I’ve added points when people have pointed out items I didn’t see.

Unfortunately, Fred doesn’t go into eniment domain or property rights (as in the Kelo decision) in any meaningful way, so I can’t give him any points there. Not many candidates did, so his zero points of 5 don’t put him far down the list.

On the Second Amendment, here’s what Fred has to say:

I strongly support the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Gun control is touted as a major crime-control measure. But some of the places with the strictest gun-control laws also have high violent-crime rates. Disarming law-abiding citizens does not prevent crime. The answer to violent crime is smart, effective, and aggressive law enforcement. The real effect of these gun-control measures is to place onerous restrictions on law-abiding citizens who use firearms for such legal activities as self-defense, sport-shooting, hunting, and collecting. I am committed to:

Strictly enforcing existing laws and severely punishing violent criminals.

Protecting the rights individual Americans enjoy under the Second Amendment.

In comparison to the rest of the field, Fred is better than average – but I wish he’d talk as much about repealing some of the more egregious federal laws as he does about strict enforcement. I’d rerank him about where I ranked John McCain, who got 5.5 out of 7 points in my previous Second Amendment post. So Fred has 5.5 points and would move up to tie McCain for third. Since I’d previously talked about Fred, he jumped 3.5 points from my original ranking.

Unfortunately, Fred still doesn’t go into election or campaign finance reform so he remains with no points of the nine I gave on that topic. And on trade and job creation, aside from a call to “open markets abroad to American goods” he doesn’t go into nearly the specifics that other candidates like Duncan Hunter have on their individual websites. However, having used the Club for Growth as a guide to many of the other candidates, I’ll defer to their generally positive evaluation of Senator Thompson’s record and award him points accordingly. Sam Brownback had top marks among the candidates on my original post, and I think Thompson deserves the same 7 points of 11. He now has 12.5 points overall and would rank second at that point.

Education also ranked as an important issue with me. Fred has generally agreeable things on his mind for what to do with the federal government and education:

A well-educated citizenry is vital to our security, our economy, and our democracy. Despite the tens of billions of dollars spent on education by Washington each year, and the hundreds of federal education programs now in place, our children are still falling behind, particularly in subjects crucial to the global economy in which we live. At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. State and local governments are closest to the parents, the kids, and the schools, and best situated to implement changes and innovations that best educate children. I am committed to:

Giving parents more choices in education and schools less bureaucracy.

Reviewing federal programs for cost-effectiveness, reducing federal mandates, returning education money to the states, and empowering parents by promoting voucher programs, charter schools, and other innovations that enhance education excellence through competition and choice.

Encouraging students and teachers to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and math—fields that are crucial to our security, competitiveness, and prosperity.

Promoting transparency to assess performance, promote accountability, and share innovations in education at all levels.

There’s only two quibbles I have with this set of ideas. One is asking the question of how he would encourage the students and teachers to pursue particular careers and the other regards transparency. Keeping something valuable behind glass is less useful than taking it away altogether. Let the states be laboratories as you stress in the opening paragraph. And how about money following the child? What Thompson says is good, but a couple others say better things in my view. I’ll award him 8 of 13 points, which leaves him with 20.5 points but puts him in the overall lead!

Only John McCain among Republicans talked about my next subject, which touched on veterans affairs. More or less it became a look of the role of the VA since I decided to defer actual military strategy to a later discussion of the Long War. So no points of 15 for Fred, but it didn’t affect his ranking any among the GOP contenders.

My next topic was energy independence. Senator Thompson has this to say about it:

The energy challenges our nation faces today are real and significant. Our dependence on foreign sources of oil threatens our national security and puts our economic prosperity at risk. America must rise to the challenge and take the steps necessary to become more energy independent before this becomes a crisis. No one solution will solve the energy challenges we face; all ideas must be on the table. Greater energy security will enhance our ability to pursue our foreign policy and national security objectives. Increasing our energy independence and investing in alternative energy sources will also produce a healthier environment. And while we don’t know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce CO2 emissions without harming our economy. Overall, I am committed to:

A balanced approach to energy security that increases domestic supplies, reduces demand for oil and gas, and promotes alternative fuels and other diverse energy sources.

Investing in renewable and alternative fuels to promote greater energy independence and a cleaner environment.

An energy policy that invests in the advanced technologies of tomorrow and places more emphasis on conservation and energy efficiency.

Conducting research and development into technologies that improve the environment, especially the reduction of CO2 emissions.

My biggest question is who makes all these investments that Fred speaks of? Shouldn’t we leave that to the private sector and not give out the opportunities for boondoggles and pork we see too often with federal research grants? This doesn’t really jibe with where I stand on the issue, but also talking about increasing domestic supplies saves him from a deduction. I think one point of a possible 17 is fair since there were other candidates I docked here. Fred loses the lead but stays in contention with 21.5 points, falling to third.

On the subject of entitlements, Fred doesn’t touch the third rail but does discuss his thoughts on health care:

Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some, however, choose not be insured; others cannot afford it. Every American should be able to get health insurance coverage that is affordable, fully accessible, and portable. Coverage should meet their individual needs and put them in control. Those who propose a one-size-fits-all Washington-controlled program ignore the cost, inefficiency, and inadequate care that such a system offers. Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available for all Americans without imposing new mandates or raising taxes. Current government programs must also be streamlined and improved so that those who truly need help can get the health care they need. I am committed to a healthcare system that:

Realigns programs and creates a system around individual consumers and patients by providing more information and more opportunities to choose affordable health care options that best meet their needs and those of their families.

Improves the individual health of all Americans by shifting to a system that promotes cost-effective prevention, chronic-care management, and personal responsibility

Modernizes delivery and administration of care by encouraging the widespread use of clinical best practices, medical information technology, and other innovations.

Increases competition and consumer choice while streamlining regulations through free-market solutions that benefit individuals and reduce costs for employers.

Promotes and speeds medical research and life-sciences innovation.

In many ways, the criticism I have of the Thompson healthcare plan reflects that I had of his energy plan. For his talk about federalism, it seems like he looks to the bureaucracy to push particular solutions rather than vowing to decrease federal involvement. None of my contenders achieved more than 9 points and Mike Huckabee looked more to the private sector for his healthcare solutions for the most part. So I award Thompson 6 points, raising his total to 27.5 points and jumping him back to second overall.

I noted in my introduction to the next part that “Ben Franklin noted that nothing in life is certain except death and taxes. While you can’t argue with those two truisms, a third corollary one is that Americans feel like they’re being taxed to death. I know I do.” So how does Thompson look at taxes? Here’s what he says on his site:

The U.S. tax code is broken and a burden on U.S. taxpayers and businesses, large and small. Today’s tax code is particularly hostile to savings and investment, and it shows. To make matters worse, its complexity is a drag on our productivity and economic growth. Moreover, taxpayers spend billions of dollars and untold hours each year filling out complicated tax returns, just so they can send more money to Washington, much of it for wasteful programs and the pet projects of special interests. We need lower taxes, and we need to let taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned dollars—they know best where and how to spend them. And we need to make the system simpler and fairer for all. To ensure America’s long term prosperity and economic security, I am committed to:

Fundamental tax reform built on the principles of simplicity, fairness, and growth.

A new tax code that gets the government out of our citizens’ pocketbooks, while enhancing U.S. competitiveness abroad.

Dissolution of the IRS as we know it.

Well Fred, you certainly identify the problems, but to borrow a phrase from a long-ago Presidential campaign and commercial slogan, where’s the beef? Originally I awarded Ron Paul 2 points based on the same idea and lack of specifics, I think that’s fair for Fred as well. No one got more than 14 points of the possible 21, so the small increase won’t hurt Fred a lot. He sits in third place with 29.5 points.

I said this about Fred regarding my next topic, one I call “role of government“:

As far as Fred Thompson’s treatise on federalism goes, it misses the target by just one tick as he says, about education, “It is appropriate for the federal government to provide funding and set goals for the state to meet in exchange for that funding.” No it’s not. Other than that, the man almost sounds like me and I’ll leap him into the running with 22 points. He may become a formidable candidate worth my support once he fleshes out some of the underlying issues he’s not gone into yet.

I’ll stand by what I said then, give Thompson the 22 points (of a possible 23) and now he vaults back into the lead at 51.5 points.

Now we talk about my second-most important topic, immigration. It was worth 25 points to start with and many candidates really helped themselves on the subject. Fred looks at immigration thusly:

The United States is a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, legal immigrants have brought energy, ideas, strength, and diversity to our country, our economy, and our culture. This must continue. But in the post-9/11 world, immigration is more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, abrogates a fundamental responsibility. I am committed to:

Securing our borders and enforcing immigration laws. Amnesty is not an option and the toleration of “sanctuary cities” must end.

Reviewing our immigration laws and policies to ensure they advance our national interests.

Uniting Americans by welcoming legal immigrants willing to learn English, assimilate into our communities, and become productive citizens.

Again, a lack of specifics hurts him to an extent. Some of the other candidates are very thorough with their plans and if I agreed with them ranked pretty highly. I’d have to rank Thompson among the lower tier of candidates at this time, giving him 6 points of 25. Since I deducted from people like John McCain, this isn’t so bad and keeps Fred in the running at 57.5 points. He’s right near the top.

Finally, we talk about the Long War, or as Fred puts it, national security. My views are here, and Fred’s are here:

The first responsibility of government is to protect the American people, the homeland, and our way of life. Today we face the urgent threat of radical Islamic terrorists. Al Qaeda is committed to attacking us here at home, and wants to use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to kill millions. We must never give them that opportunity. We must defeat the terrorists abroad, and that begins in Iraq and Afghanistan—the central fronts in this global war. We must show the world we have the will to fight and win. A weakened America – or an America that appears weaker – will only encourage further attacks. We must persevere. As Commander-in-Chief, the president must ensure the United States has the means to achieve victory. Presidential leadership requires talking to the American people about these stakes, mapping out a clear vision for success, and devising a comprehensive strategy for achieving it. I am committed to:

A larger, more capable, and more modern military that can defeat terrorists, deter adversaries, and defend the U.S. and our interests.

A missile defense system that can protect the U.S. and our allies from long-range ballistic missiles.

An enhanced intelligence community, with robust human-intelligence capabilities, focused on terrorism and proliferation.

A robust approach to homeland security that will protect our nation from terrorists and WMD, regardless of where they come from.

A strengthened system of global alliances to better combat terrorists, proliferators, and traditional threats to our interests.

A judicial system that deals with the realities of terrorists and unlawful enemy combatants.

Perhaps the only two I’d rank higher are Rudy Giuliani and Duncan Hunter, and it’s only because I’m wondering about whether the global alliances Fred speaks of would or wouldn’t include the UN that I don’t give him the full point total. As it is, I’ll rank him next down with 23 points. That puts him right next to the top at 80.5 points.

There were also categories I called “intangibles”, topics that didn’t rise to major issues with me but were enough to swing the totals by a point each. For Fred, he has one negative intangible, which is “(c)ombating the spread of obscenity over TV and other media by making sure parents can better exercise their responsibilities.” It sounds just a touch too much like censorship, so he loses one point from the total. He’ll finish with 79.5 points.

So I’ve now reevaluated Fred Thompson and added Alan Keyes to the mix yesterday. This is how the candidates shake out then:

Duncan Hunter, 82 points
Fred Thompson, 79.5 points
Rudy Giuliani, 79 points
Mike Huckabee, 76 points
Alan Keyes, 62.5 points
Mitt Romney, 45 points
Tom Tancredo, 41.5 points
Ron Paul, 34.5 points
Sam Brownback, 20.5 points
John McCain, 18 points

Really, I’d be happy with any of the top four candidates at this time. Thus, I’ll add Fred Thompson to my list of “recommended” candidates along with Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, while still maintaining my endorsement of Duncan Hunter. But I’m still a little miffed at Thompson for skipping “our” debate in Baltimore since some of the proceeds from ticket sales were supposed to go to our state and local county parties. I hope he really doesn’t think that poorly of Maryland, since it’s a state I chose to live in (being born originally in Toledo, Ohio.) Maybe an appearance at Wicomico County’s 2008 Lincoln Day Dinner next February will make up for that. (hint hint)

And one final note for the Rushalanche of folks: if you’re curious about my blogging origins this post may answer the question.

Welcome to the Rushalanche!

Since most of you readers have never heard of monoblogue prior to my conversation with Rush, a little about my website.

I started this a couple years ago because I couldn’t write a letter to the editor every day. But in the last 22 months this has become my hobby/obsession and the actual reason I wanted to call in was to see what websites are considered the top sites for conservative thinking so I can link to them and use them to improve my own writing.

On monoblogue, I cover a variety of subjects ranging from national and Maryland politics to my love of baseball and local music. Another goal is to inform the voters of the Eastern Shore and elsewhere of the political choices they have and editorially push them in the “right” direction.

So welcome to monoblogue, and I hope you come back often. And thank you for the “big show business break” Rush!!!

P.S. There’s been many great comments so far and I’m going to spend some time this weekend answering them. I’ve always been proud of those who comment (I think I have the best readers of any website) and you folks continue the tradition. Plus you’ve given me valuable insight on good websites, some I already knew of and a few I didn’t.

And for those who ask, in maybe two hours you’ve topped my best WEEK ever. Now the challenge is to keep all of my new readers, and I look forward to it. My thanks to you and to Rush for taking my call.

Looking at the Keyes campaign

Faithful readers know I went through all of the Presidential candidates and how I felt about their stances on the issues. It culminated in mid-August with my endorsement of Duncan Hunter for President. That post also links to each issue as a reminder.

However, Alan Keyes jumped into the race after I did all of these evaluations so I wanted to see where he stacked up. Thus I’ll go through the issues as I did with the others – luckily with one candidate it’s one post. Keyes has a laundry list of topics on his website but fortunately for keeping this a short post I can link to each as needed!

We’ll start with eminent domain. Keyes talks about the broader subject of property rights on his site. It doesn’t really read to me as addressing the issue of eminent domain, so I’ll give him just 1/2 point of 5 possible. So he has 1/2 point so far and would rank 4th.

The next issue in line was the Second Amendment. Keyes goes deeper into this issue and I agree with the sentiment, but without more specifics I can’t give him many points. I noted in July that Duncan Hunter had a similar statement without specifics, so I’ll give Keyes what I gave Hunter: 3 of 7 points. That brings the Keyes total to 3.5 points and he’d slip to 7th place.

On election and campaign finance reform, Keyes makes quite a statement and also has a video link. I agree with part of what Keyes says, the second principle and the idea of repealing McCain-Feingold. But I can’t abide the first portion because corporate entities and unions, despite their donation patterns, don’t forgo their First Amendment rights. In the video, he does show support for term limits which gave him a couple bonus points.

For that I’m going to give Alan 4 of a possible 9 points. Now he has 7.5 points and a tie for second.

Trade and job creation was my next pet issue. Keyes has a long spiel on the subject of fair trade. Alan really didn’t address the area of job creation, and while he makes some good points I thought he went a little too far toward protectionism. He is a little like Duncan Hunter in that he wants to renegotiate bad trade agreements so I think 5.5 out of 11 points is fair. It would bring Alan to 13 points overall and keeps him in second. At that time Ron Paul led with 13.5 points.

My next step up deals with education. Here’s what Keyes has to say about school choice. He wasn’t doing very well until the last sentence, which saved him to an extent but it’s still sort of vague what concrete steps he’ll take to achieve that end to the government monopoly. I’ll give him 5 of 13 points. At 18.5 points so far, he’s right up near the top – second behind the leader at that point, Tom Tancredo.

Surprisingly, Keyes had nothing on veterans’ affairs or energy independence so he gets no points on either subject. Luckily for him, no one else really made a big move in that time period so he only fell to fourth place overall.

On entitlements, here’s what Keyes states on health care and Social Security.

There were 19 points at stake in my original post. On the plus side for Keyes is his advocacy of HSA’s and his eventual Social Security stance, although it doesn’t go so far as to eliminate it. Deductions include drug importation (which would harm the drug companies) and the preventative care portion, which is similar to something I jumped on Mike Huckabee about. Since Huckabee is in favor of a national smoking ban in public places, would Keyes react the same way? No one had more than 9 points in my original posting and Keyes is not better than any of those. I’ll give him 7 points of 19. That gets him up to 25.5 points and bumps him to third place overall.

Now we move to taxation. Keyes has this to say about the subject and also covers the next area with it as well (role of government vis-a-vis spending.) Had Keyes talked about the other necessary step of repealing the 16th Amendment, he’d get all the points. I’ll match what I gave Tom Tancredo as the highest total for a candidate: 14 of 21 points.

And while I like the idea of a balanced budget amendment, I can just see how many devious ways the government and courts will come up with to get around it. Fiscal conservatism doesn’t need a Constitutional amendment, just a President with cajones to risk a government shutdown to get a steamlined budget to pass. With a lack of specifics, I have to match what I gave similar remarks from Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, 10 points for that aspect. By combining the two and adding them to his total, Keyes is moving smartly up the list – 49.5 points at this stage is one point off Tom Tancredo’s lead at the juncture.

Two to go, immigration and the Long War. On immigration Keyes is for enforcing existing laws. While it’s well put, just wish he were a little more specific on how you’d secure the border and treat employers who hire illegals. It’s reasonably close to what Ron Paul advocates, so I’ll say it’s worth 15 of 25 points. Surprisingly, Keyes grabs the lead at this point with his 64.5 points.

Unfortunately for Alan, this is where he blows it. When he talks about the war in Iraq, he notes:

I will not for the moment go into the question of whether it was right or wrong to choose Iraq as some kind of strategic priority in the war against terror. I frankly have said in the past and would say now — and not with the wisdom of hindsight either — it was not what would have been my choice.

I take that to mean he would have left Saddam Hussein, a member of the Axis of Evil, as a continuing supporter of groups like Hamas and al-Qaeda. Unacceptable. In particular, I think the statement contradicts what he says in the video here. Since the video is from his Illinois U.S. Senate campaign in 2004 and I’m assuming the statement above is more recent, to me it could even be considered a flip-flop.

Alan makes some good points with what he says about the Long War in general but I cannot let the first part stand. I’m not going to hammer him like I did Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo, but he does deserve some deduction so I’ll dock him 5 points. He’s at 59.5 points now before I look at intangibles, some of the other subjects he goes into on his website that are minor issues to me.

On the intangibles:

Add ponts for being a supporter of Israel, against embryonic stem cell research, abstinence-based sex education when parents allow it, and his stance on the United Nations.

Subtract points for supporting a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. I’m pro-life but don’t think that belongs in the Constitution because it’s a states’ rights item.

His net on intangibles is +3, so his final total is 62.5 points. Here’s how the field now stacks up with Keyes included:

Duncan Hunter, 82 points
Rudy Giuliani, 79 points
Mike Huckabee, 76 points
Alan Keyes, 62.5 points
Mitt Romney, 45 points
Tom Tancredo, 41.5 points
Fred Thompson, 37 points*
Ron Paul, 34.5 points
Sam Brownback, 20.5 points
John McCain, 18 points

*Thompson will be discussed tomorrow since he’s updated the information on his positions for some of the issues since I originally did the list.

I sort of suspected Keyes would be up there and if not for his misunderstanding of the role of Iraq in the Long War he would’ve at least made the “recommended” list. But if you’re one who lies strongly in the “moral conservative” camp Keyes would be at or near the top of your candidates for President.