December 2007 – Page 2

So what’s in it for Newt?

I noted this back on Friday, but Wayne Gilchrest put out the press release yesterday:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will travel to Maryland next month to offer his personal endorsement of US Rep. Wayne Gilchrest and headline a fundraising banquet for the Gilchrest campaign.

Gingrich will be joined by former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele and an honorary host committee including Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold, and Harford County Executive David Craig for a dinner and reception on behalf of Gilchrest.

“This is a most distinguished gathering of state and national Republican leaders, and I am deeply honored to have them come together for this important effort,” said Gilchrest.

Speaker Gingrich is widely hailed as the architect and leader of the 1994 Republican revolution, charting the course for Republican control of Congress for the first time in more than a generation. He continues to be a national leader on key conservative causes and recently declined a national effort to draft him for a Presidential run.

Michael Steele served with distinction as both the Chairman of the Maryland Republican Party and as Lt. Governor in the Ehrlich administration before making an unsuccessful run for the United States Senate in a campaign hailed nationally as a flawless and well-run effort. Steele now chairs GOPAC – a national organization founded in part by Newt Gingrich – to promote the election of Republicans to office on all levels.

County Executives John Leopold and David Craig hold the distinction of being the highest locally elected Republicans in the First Congressional district, and both have offered their strong endorsement of Gilchrest.

“Wayne Gilchrest has a reputation of integrity and he’s a person of conscience who makes decisions on what he believes is in the best interest of our nation. That’s why I am proud to support him,” said County Executive John Leopold.

“I support Wayne because Wayne is one of us. And I don’t support him because he is an incumbent, but because he is a good person. He takes care of the people back home, he understands what public service is about, and he has served us honorably,” said Harford County Executive David Craig.

The dinner will be held Thursday, January 10th at the Westin Park hotel in Annapolis. For more information, contact the Gilchrest campaign at 410-778-1573.

Birds of a feather do tend to flock together. On the Harris side, we have many of the State Senators who work with Andy on a regular basis, while Gilchrest is getting support from his bailiwick, the halls of Congress. Meanwhile, John Leopold is fairly well-known as a moderate so his support of Gilchrest isn’t surprising. I’m not so sure about David Craig, but perhaps he feels that Gilchrest is the known quantity or just doesn’t get along with Andy Harris despite the fact Harris represents part of his county in the State Senate.

Most surprising to me is Michael Steele throwing his support behind Gilchrest rather than supporting one of those who would be on the “farm team” for a future run. Isn’t that the purpose behind GOPAC, to build a base of candidates for future runs? Many in the First District think it’s time for a Congressman who is more attuned to our views. It also splits Steele from his former boss, Bob Ehrlich, an avowed Harris supporter.

Then again, I notice that neither Gingrich or Steele is actually quoted in the release. Maybe they feel it’s loyalty to a fellow Republican that brings them to Annapolis to stump for Gilchrest; however, I don’t plan on paying the freight to find out what either will say on Wayne’s behalf.

Another thing about the Gingrich influence. It’s proven by the ACU ratings that when both he and Wayne Gilchrest served in the House, Gilchrest was at least a somewhat reliable conservative vote. Wayne has only topped the 60% ACU rating mark 8 times in 16 rating years (1991-2006) with 6 of those years spanning from 1990-97, a period that saw Newt’s rise and fall in the House. Conversely, in 4 of the last 9 rating years Wayne has failed to top 50 percent, including the last two years. It would be nice if Gingrich would talk a little bit of conservative sense into Wayne, but I’m not so sure Newt has maintained himself as the purest example of small-government conservatism. One thing that disappointed me about Winning The Future (although it’s still a fine book) is a touch too much reliance on federal solutions for my taste.

Most of all, this simply proves is that Gilchrest and Gingrich are friends. Readers may recall a letter I cited last spring from Wayne that read in part:

I was recently talking to my friend, former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich, and he agreed that our best – and possibly only – hope is to clearly articulate our positive vision for America, and to return to the core principles of our party which brought us the trust and confidence of American voters.

Wayne, if you’re going to return to the core principles of our party, it may help to start voting with them on a more regular basis – particularly the Republican Study Committee wing.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Presidential campaign news and views

While the calendar says we have just a week until Santa commences his worldwide reindeer-driven journey (by the way, I wonder if all that reindeer flatulence contributes to global climate change?), Presidential campaign politics continues to run in high gear with the Iowa caucuses just 9 days afterward. Over the last few days we had a series of endorsements and fundraising efforts that made news.

Most prominent among the goings-on are a few items from the Republican side. Michelle Malkin chimes in with a report about Iowa Congressman Steve King endorsing Fred Thompson. However, while King is an important figure in Iowa politics, the overall GOP lead according to a compilation by The Hill website of Congressional endorsements belongs to Mitt Romney with 31, followed by John McCain with 28, Rudy Giuliani 25, and then Thompson with 21. It’s sort of surprising that Mike Huckabee, while surging in the polls, has just four endorsements from Congressional members – even fewer than Duncan Hunter’s seven. (Keyes, Paul, and Tancredo have none.) The Hill hasn’t added in the most recent endorsements yet, but the order should remain similar.

A much more intriguing endorsement comes from former Democrat VP candidate Sen. Joe Lieberman, who crossed the aisle to endorse John McCain. It was a bit of payback for Lieberman, who got McCain’s endorsement when Joe ran as an independent in his 2006 Senate race as he defeated Democrat primary opponent Ned Lamont along with Republican Alan Schlesinger. While conservatives like Lieberman’s pro-Long War stance, the idea behind the endorsement of McCain was to sway independents who can vote in the New Hampshire GOP primary to go McCain’s way. Senator McCain also garnered the endorsement of two prominent newspapers in the region, the New Hampshire Union Leader and the Boston Globe.

Another GOP candidate who’s making news is Ron Paul, who raised $6.04 million in one day, mostly from the internet. As Paul writes in an e-mail:

On just one day, in honor of the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, the new American revolutionaries brought in $6.04 million, another one-day record. The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors. And it was an entirely voluntary, self-organized, decentralized, independent effort on the internet. Must be the “spammers” I keep hearing about!

Obviously Paul has struck a chord among a lot of voters. It sort of makes an e-mail I received from Duncan Hunter’s campaign a lot paler by comparison:

You made the month of November huge for online giving! (…) In just over 3 weeks time, YOU raised over $25,000 to help take Duncan Hunter to the White House!

Now here’s the most amazing number: that was accomplished with only 1% of Hunter’s online supporters donating.

In other words, using my public school math skills it took about 6 minutes for the “Paulbots” to raise what the Hunter campaign raised in a month. But, excerpting again…

Duncan Hunter refuses:

-to throw hordes of critical cash to mass media advertising like the other guys
-to take money from folks who don’t share his principles, unlike some of the other guys
-to kowtow to special interests in dictating where he spends his time
-to allow the media to define him

(…)

The Hunter strategy of staying below the radar while maintaining a course of character and Reagan leadership is working!

I hate to say it, but I’m not so sure that it’s working. Maybe it worked for a Congressional campaign, but this strategy needs to go national. It would work a lot better if the first primaries were in March, but right now is crunch time.

Of course, I have to add that his fundraising prowess is about all that’s disappointed me about Duncan Hunter. If you look at everyone else in the race and some of what they’ve said or done, the race is otherwise devolving into a least of several evils:

Mike Huckabee is squishy on illegal immigration given his record in Arkansas, and he has some nanny state tendencies like advocating a nationwide smoking ban.
Rudy Giuliani also has some issues with immigration along with his moderate stance on several social issues and believing the hype on global climate change.
Mitt Romney raised his hand (sort of) on whether global warming is a problem but also put mandated health insurance on the map in Massachusetts.
Fred Thompson is pretty good on several issues but just doesn’t come across well in most of the debates I’ve seen. He’s probably my backup choice.
I’ve not liked John McCain since the days of campaign finance and the amnesty bill really did him in with me.
Ron Paul has some really good stances on domestic issues, but is completely off the deep end on national security.
I really like Tom Tancredo’s work on immigration, but he also doesn’t seem deeply committed to winning the Long War.
Alan Keyes has many good issues, but rubs me and a lot of other voters the wrong way with his bombastic personality. It’s why his TV show was such a resounding success. (/ sarcasm)

So that leaves Hunter, who unfortunately can’t get out of single digits in the polls. I think his hope is to be a second choice of a lot of Iowa caucus-goers and create buzz with an unexpectedly high finish there.

It’s a shame because, for all the talk of resurrecting a Reagan-style conservative that could win nationally, only Hunter seems to have most of those attributes going for him. Unfortunately, movement conservatives seem to be in a compromising mood – just give them anyone who can defeat Hillary.

Hillary can easily beat herself; if she survives to get the Democrat nomination there’s enough of middle America out there to sink her candidacy. She’s running with a negative number near 50% so her best hope is for the GOP to pick a candidate that conservatives can’t get excited about. There’s still time to pick a principled conservative who can energize the GOP base, but the hopefuls need to get their act together. I’m putting my money where my mouth is and encourage others to do the same.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Lions lament part 50

Yep, that’s how many seasons it’s been since the Detroit Lions have won an NFL title (not to mention 16 since they last won a playoff game.) And after being humiliated 51-14 at San Diego, losing their sixth straight game after a 6-2 start, and allowing the Chargers to clinch the AFC West title, I have one thing to say (again…)

A fan expressed his desire for Detroit Lions GM Matt Millen to be sacked in a late-season 2006 game. AP photo by Paul Sancya.

I used this photo last year too, but nothing ever seems to change. Expect to see duplicates of that sign next week in the Lions’ home finale against Kansas City. Maybe we’ll even get the fans with the bags over their heads. The Ford family might make fine cars, but their football team sure is an Edsel.

Of course, when you stop and think about it, the bigger fools are the fans who come in and carry the signs. I know there’s a sunk cost in season tickets but somewhere along the line the fans will quit showing up, even in Detroit. Every team has a down cycle, but 50 years? Come on.

Fortunately, for all of the Lions’ woes, at least they’re not the Ravens losing to an 0-13 team.

A response to the Annapolis need for LEED

I began to write this as a comment to Brian Gill’s Red Maryland article regarding Annapolis Mayor Ellen Moyer’s push to have new buildings LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) accredited. But after writing for awhile I decided to make it a stand-alone post in response.

_______________

Red Maryland readers probably wouldn’t know this, but as part of my “real” job I’m a LEED Accredited Professional. So I know a little bit about the subject. LEED is overseen by a group called the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and the rating system has been around in various forms for a decade or so – it’s only in the last few years that they’ve come into prominence because of the global warming scheme.

First of all, unless they’ve done so in the very recent past, LEED for Homes hasn’t been released yet. There is a pilot version that’s still being evaluated so those regulations are subject to change. Of course, most new and existing construction types other than homes have a LEED program set up for them. Thus, I’m not sure if Annapolis would adopt the pilot home standard or wait until the official one comes out. My guess is LEED for Homes will become official in 2008.

As an architect, I can appreciate the idea of energy efficiency that is part of the LEED aim. There’s a lot of common-sense approaches that the USGBC folds in as part of the rating system, ones that have a relatively short payback time for the added expense.

On the other hand, they do get a little wacky with some of the provisions. To be Certified as a LEED-compliant building, a building must achieve 26 of a possible 69 points (that’s for the LEED for New Construction rating system, the one I passed my exam in) along with about 10 or so prerequisites, including among others construction site recycling, commissioning of the building’s energy systems, environmental tobacco smoke control (in other words, no smoking) and an erosion and sediment control plan (generally the state of Maryland requires this anyway for sites of a certain size.)

I heartily agree with Gill’s assessment of global warming as a whole, and the push for “green” buildings is part and parcel of allowing federal and global regulation on those things that should be controlled locally. Insofar as the specific idea that the city of Annapolis should dictate construction in such a way, while it is the right of a locality to enforce building codes as they see fit, I don’t agree with this idea. Unfortunately, I also belong to a group (the American Institute of Architects) who supports a mandate that federal buildings be LEED compliant now and carbon-neutral by 2030. (Note to AIA: you make excellent contract documents and advocate for good design. Stay away from kowtowing to the purveyors of junk science, it’s not your area of expertise. And I could do without the continuing education crap, too.)

One last point as I return to the subject at hand. For several years the state had a tax credit program for LEED compliance. While it’s not something I would have spent state tax money on, at least they understood that there was a need for some sort of incentive for developers to take a chance and spend a little more to achieve the increased energy efficiency and other generally positive aspects that go with it. Obviously Ellen Moyer has pulled the carrot away and just wants the stick to remain.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Antiwar general has a change of heart?

It wasn’t something that got a lot of play in the MSM, but last weekend a major figure in the military anti-war movement came out in support of many of our Long War objectives. Writing on the American Thinker website, Rick Moran notes that retired General John Batiste apparently is switching his allegiance from the anti-war Votevets.org, where he was a member of the board of directors, to the supportive Vets for Freedom group. As evidence for Moran’s thinking, Batiste, as part of an op-ed in the Washington Post with Vets for Freedom head Pete Hegseth, noted:

We are veterans of the Iraq war with vastly different experiences. Both of us commanded troops in Iraq. We, too, held seemingly entrenched, and incompatible, views upon our return. One of us spoke out against mismanagement of the war — failed leadership, lack of strategy and misdirection. The other championed the cause of successfully completing our mission.

Our perspectives were different, yet not as stark as the “outspoken general” and “stay-the-course supporter” labels we received. Such labels are oversimplified and inaccurate, and we are united behind a greater purpose.

It’s time to discuss the way forward rather than prosecute the past. Congress must do the same, for our nation and the troops.

Overall, the column was meant to tell recalcitrant Democrats who continue to hold funding for the Long War hostage to get with the program and united behind a cause. But with that advisory also came a message for the Bush Administration to begin working on the diplomatic side in Iraq as well as with Iran. Another point made by the duo is summed up thusly:

(O)ur military capabilities need to match our national strategy. Our military is stretched thin and will be hard-pressed to maintain its current cycle of deployments. At this critical juncture, we cannot afford to be weak. Numbers and capacity matter.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, America was not mobilized for the Long War. This was an opportunity lost, but it is not too late. Many Americans are frustrated by the war effort, the burden of which has been shouldered by less than one percent of our citizenry. Our country is accustomed to winning. We deserve a comprehensive strategy that is focused on victory and guided by decisive leadership. America must succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we also cannot focus too narrowly on those conflicts. We need a regional and global strategy to defeat worldwide Islamic extremism to ensure a safer world today and for future generations.

Moran also cites a column by Weekly Standard writer Michael Goldfarb that agrees with his assessment. I’m not totally convinced yet, though. To me, time will tell if Batiste is truly changing his stripes or has a different agenda.

I regularly read American Thinker, but what jumped out at me about this particular article was the Votevets.org angle. Some of my readers may recall that the group sponsored a radio commercial for Wayne Gilchrest back around Labor Day. In fact, Batiste was the man who recorded the spot on Wayne’s behalf. Whether that will bend Gilchrest’s views on the conflict is doubtful – in fact, some of the items in the Post op-ed were among the things Gilchrest sought in the conflict. He just did not agree with the surge aspect, and some of us don’t forget these sorts of things.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Gilchrest picks up a couple heavy hitters

When I was invited to be a contributor to Red Maryland and began crossposting, I was making an effort to get a wider audience and possibly more leads for keeping voters informed. That paid off today via a comment there about my article discussing John Leo Walter’s withdrawal from the First District race. In that post I didn’t discuss the other big announcement from Harris’s side about his endorsement by the Washington Times; however, seeing that the Times only serves a small portion of the First District, maybe that’s not something locals get terribly excited about.

Something that locals may not get terribly excited about either but could make a difference in the contest is the news that this unknown commenter on my Red Maryland post alerted me to, a CQpolitics.com article by Michael Teitelbaum announcing a January Gilchrest fundraiser hosted by Newt Gingrich and special guest Michael Steele. (I notice on his GOPAC calendar Steele is slated to appear at a January 17 Annapolis fundraiser. Perhaps this is the event in question?) Obviously Gilchrest is using some of his Congressional clout to snare Gingrich, who at first glance would not seem to be a ideological mate of Wayne’s. But Newt has been known to team up with those who might be considered political enemies before, such as his health care dalliance with Hillary Clinton a couple years back. As for Steele, the logic in his appearance escapes me with the exception of his GOPAC connection with Gingrich (who also chaired the organization.) It’s noteworthy that he’s lending his name to the opponent of Bob Ehrlich’s chosen candidate, Andy Harris.

Either way, this does give Gilchrest the opportunity to be pictured with prominent figures in both Maryland and national Republican Party politics. Don’t be too shocked if we get a full-color mailing toward the end of January featuring the smiling Steele, Gingrich, and Gilchrest with a message about Wayne’s toughness on taxes and illegal immigration.

It’s just another indication of the stakes that are being placed on what’s turning out to be one of the highest-profile Congressional races in the country, right here on the lil’ ole Eastern Shore.

Walter drops First District bid, endorses Harris

The first casualty of the Congressional race didn’t even make it to primary day, as Centreville attorney John Leo Walter ended his effort at winning the First District seat and endorsed his fellow challenger, State Senator Andy Harris.

In the press release, what I found most interesting was the quote from Governor Ehrlich:

John represents the future of the Republican Party in Maryland. He is steadfast in his convictions and conservative on the issues. The Republican Party needs a solid farm team to be successful in the future and John is one of the brightest members of that team.

Having spoken on a few occasions to John, I couldn’t agree more. While I endorsed Andy Harris a few weeks back, Walter was a close second. Aside from a disagreement in principle on the issue of tort reform, I found myself closely aligned with many of John’s positions, and it’s a shame that this race brought out two good candidates when only one could win. Meanwhile, the Republicans are having trouble filling out the ballot in two nearby Congressional districts.

It’s just idle speculation, but I wonder if there may be a quid pro quo going here, particularly since Walter lives in the same District 36 that E.J. Pipkin represents in the State Senate. If Pipkin should win this time or decide to run again for Congress in 2010, obviously John becomes the leading candidate to replace Pipkin or the Delegate who moves up to assume Pipkin’s Senate seat. By getting behind Andy Harris quickly in this effort, Walter gains the favor of two of the three men who would arguably be the most influential Republicans in Maryland if Harris wins the Congressional seat.

Walter’s departure won’t change the face of the race a whole lot, since it’s doubtful that he was getting more than 10% of the vote. But it does unite the conservative wing a little bit more, and with competition for right-wing voters likely the linchpin of the primary race, even gaining a 5% share of the vote will assist Harris in his efforts to unseat Wayne Gilchrest.

This also brings up another thought. I must have 50 to 100 “Walter for Congress” buttons in my possession from his visits to the WCRC and other campaign stops, plus a few bumper stickers and a bunch of literature. Too bad that except for the bumper stickers they’re dated 2008. I guess it’s one less bag for me to lug to party events though. (People may wonder why I have such a collection, but monoblogue isn’t the only weapon I use to inform voters.)

So it’s back to five on the GOP side. Since yesterday was the last day to withdraw from the ballot, the field’s now set.

Another item of interest to me is the field hoping to be elected delegates to the respective national party conventions. On the Lower Shore, four are seeking to head to Denver as Democrats and eight Republicans look for their ticket to Minneapolis.

The Democrat list has one quite prominent woman of local repute among them. I’ll list the contenders in alphabetical order, ladies first since the Democrats segregate by gender, with the candidate they’re pledged to in parentheses.

Sandra Henry-Stocker, Dorchester (Barack Obama)
Barrie Parsons Tilghman, Wicomico (Hillary Clinton)
Jack Hughes, Wicomico (Hillary Clinton)
Don Westbrook, Worcester (John Edwards)

The GOP is more equal opportunity, but splits the lists between delegates and alternates. Aspirants need not be pledged to a candidate.

Delegates:

Gail Bartkovich, Wicomico (Rudy Giuliani)
Addie Eckardt, Dorchester (Mitt Romney)
Bonnie Luna, Wicomico (not committed)
Jeanne Lynch, Worcester (not committed)

Alternates:

Greg Belcher, Wicomico (not committed)
John Daliani, Worcester (not committed)
Dottie Griffith, Dorchester (Mitt Romney)
Ryan Hohman, Wicomico (Ron Paul)

All of these candidates are part of a much more crowded First District field. A total of 14 Democrats (7 of each gender) and 45 Republicans (23 for delegate, 22 for alternate) make for a LONG ballot.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Another political theory too good to leave in a comment box

Today Michelle Malkin liveblogged the Iowa GOP debate. As one would imagine a number of people have commented, with some asking about just how Alan Keyes got into the fray and a few others who like Duncan Hunter as I do wondering why he doesn’t get more in the way of polling. As sometimes happens, I meant to leave a short answer to these questions but got on a roll!

*****

Way up yonder, several wondered about a) when Alan Keyes got into the race and b) why a solid conservative like Duncan Hunter is not well-known.

To answer the first question, not many have noticed Keyes was in the race because he didn’t announce for it until the middle of September, a few days after Fred Thompson made it official. I know he’s on the Maryland ballot so I assume he’s managed to get on the other state ones as well. Some may recall he also ran for President in 2000 and (as I recall) was a late entry into the Senate race in Illinois in 2004 when the original GOP candidate dropped out. It was that race which put B. Hussein Obama in the Senate.

Now for my theory about Hunter. Let’s look at the nine candidates on the stage and their backgrounds.

We have one man (Rudy Giuliani) who made an abortive run for U.S. Senate but is most known for being mayor of America’s most populous city on the darkest day of my lifetime. (Being in the front row at all those Yankee playoff games didn’t hurt either.)

Then we have two men (Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney) who served as governor in their state. Obviously they play on that executive experience during their campaigns – bear in mind that four of our last five Presidents spent time in a governor’s chair.

The next group of two serve (or recently served) in a body that boasts only 2 elected officials from each state, the U.S. Senate. Both are from relatively populous states and also have at least one other claim to fame, whether it is a prior run for President (John McCain) or a TV gig (Fred Thompson).

Also falling into the onetime run for President category is the aforementioned Alan Keyes.

That leaves three candidates who have one thing in common – they are all members of the House of Representatives. As such, their political base is only about 650,000 people as opposed to the millions who vote for U.S. Senator or for President. So they don’t have a lot of name recognition outside their district. Frankly, Ron Paul has done the best job of gaining popularity despite the small political base but it’s by and large been through taking a page from John McCain’s playbook and being a “maverick” Republican, particularly on the Long War.

Because both Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are pretty solid conservatives and haven’t built up a lot of name recognition nationwide by grandstanding to the press, they aren’t going to get a lot of play in the partisan media. Both are better known among people like me who study the issues but that hasn’t worked as well with the general public who’s still focused on the “horse race” aspect of the race. Unfortunately most of those people won’t pay a lot of attention until a week before their primary, a point where the candidates with the most money will do a saturation bombing on television with 30 second spots saying “vote for me”, hopefully not pandering too much.

As for me, unless he pulls the plug and withdraws from the race beforehand (sadly, a fair possibility) I’ll be touching the computer screen on February 12 for Duncan Hunter. I studied the issues and he came out on top.

*****

Michelle put up a nice post, with plenty of linked video. I don’t know whose brilliant idea it was to do this in the middle of the afternoon, but I guess they were cognizant of the old 6 p.m. news cycle and the Des Moines Register, being dead tree media, probably is put to bed pretty early.

I believe this is the final debate before the Iowa caucuses, so now the candidates will have to use the press to get their message out, including the blogs. I’m always looking for good material to comment on, you know.

Making BDS dreams come true

Normally I don’t repost unsolicited e-mail like this, but it was just too good to pass up. It came with a batch of other e-mail I get from one of our other WCRC officers. Wish I knew who the real author was.

If Bush resigned today, this is what his speech would be…..

Normally, I start these things out by saying “My Fellow Americans.” Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don’t know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you’re really not fellow Americans any longer.

I’ll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There’s been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.

The reason I’m quitting is simple. I’m fed up with you people. I’m fed up because you have no understanding of what’s really going on in the world. Or of what’s going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let’s start local. You’ve been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that’s despite record numbers of homeowners, including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we’re mentioning minorities, I’ll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton administration. I’ve mentioned all those things before, but it doesn’t seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there’s increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don’t give me this “blood for oil” thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would’ve already seized Iraq’s oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don’t give me this ‘Bush Lied; People Died’ crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could’ve easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be ‘discovered.’ Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.

Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ‘Clinton’ established that policy. Bet you didn’t know that, did you?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to out spend and out-tech them.

That’s not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don’t care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That’d be fine, as long as they weren’t also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven’t gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you’re not. That’s because you’ve got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I’m disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of ‘Survivor.’ Instead, you’ve grown impatient. You’re incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops. Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat’s political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it’s easy enough to find the truth. It’s all over the Internet. It just isn’t on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you’d be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch ‘American Idol’.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you’re too stupid to leave a city that’s below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.

I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I’ve come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads. So I quit. I’m going back to Crawford. I’ve got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I’m done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I’ll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, and by the way, Cheney’s quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that’s it. God bless what’s left of America. Some of you know what I mean. The rest of you, kiss off.

Somehow I don’t think he’d actually say all these things, but a lot of Americans would agree with him if he did so. I’d be one of them, since sometimes I wonder if I’m beating my head against the wall too. But those on my side soldier on because we know in our hearts and minds that we’re right.

Harris v. Pipkin heats up

My mailbox has been bombarded with Pipkin papers this month!

Today in my mailbox I found the third in what seems to be a regular series of mailings designed to remind me and anyone else on the mailing list that E.J. Pipkin hails from the Eastern Shore and is a hawk when it comes to lowering taxes. While I’m all in favor of keeping more money in my pocket, I’m also curious to know whether Pipkin is doing any mailings to the parts of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, and Harford counties that also inhabit the First District.

As a counter to the Pipkin mailing offensive a supporter of Andy Harris, former Delegate Herb McMillan, penned an op-ed in the Washington Times yesterday. While McMillan notes that both Harris and Pipkin are on the taxpayer-friendly side, Pipkin compares more with Gilchrest in certain aspects of his voting on social issues. Particularly damning in the eyes of McMillan was E.J. Pipkin’s support for pro-choice and pro-civil union legislation that came up in the General Assembly, along with his vote for Governor O’Malley’s huge budget last spring. That’s the one that took a huge bite out of the budget surplus Governor Ehrlich had before losing the 2006 election in an anti-GOP tide.

But a funny thing is happening on the way to the 2008 primary election – there’s still an incumbent in the race. Standing on the sidelines in this cat fight between state senators, Wayne Gilchrest gets to enjoy keeping his powder dry as his two biggest competitors claw and scratch each other up. It’s apparent Harris’s strategy is to place both opponents as “two liberal peas in a pod” while Pipkin seems to be attacking neither of his two main competitors in the race directly, choosing to stress his conservatism in comparison to Wayne Gilchrest and his domicile in the case of Andy Harris. If anything, the Gilchrest camp is attempting to instill fear in the Republican party, the fear of losing the seat to a Democrat should Andy Harris win the primary because he’s too conservative. Thus far we haven’t seen much of an anti-Pipkin effort out of Wayne’s campaign. Whether that’s by design or just because Pipkin’s still fresh to the race remains to be seen.

One of the other contenders is making noise in the contest as well. According to the PolitickerMD website, First District aspirant Joe Arminio has declared himself as “officially join(ing) the Ron Paul ticket” as of December 1st. That’s not too surprising, considering that Arminio regularly bills himself as running against a number of “neocons” for the seat and also based on his comments at the Wicomico County Straw Poll back in September. (Arminio’s also the scheduled speaker at our January meeting.) Ron Paul has a small but extremely passionate following and that stance by Joe Arminio could deflect voters away from the three top contenders.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Holiday spirit from Michelle and Jim

Last week I told you my friends from Semiblind were on the Live Lixx radio show. Here’s a song they did to put all of us in a holiday mood. (It may take a moment or two to come up on your particular audio player.)

I’ll have to make a note to myself to repost this on Christmas Eve. In the meantime, enjoy!

One set of answers to my Ten Questions

Yesterday I received my first answers to my Ten Questions that I posted last month, having sent the questions to most of the First District Congressional participants [except the late-arriving E.J. Pipkin, who can answer them after he reads them here, just e-mail replies to ttownjotes (at) yahoo.com.] However, these particular answers aren’t from a participant in our local election.

Instead, they come from a gentleman who’s running in Maryland’s Fourth District race, a district currently represented by Rep. Albert Wynn. His name is Michael Starkman and he’s one of the four Republicans vying for that seat. Part of his campaign site tells about his interesting background, particularly his faith.

Some may ask why I’m printing his answers despite my base on the Eastern Shore, far from the Montgomery/PG County area District 4 lies in, and I have three reasons. First of all, Mr. Starkman found my website, introduced himself, and willingly answered the questions when the opportunity was extended to him.

Secondly I’ll crosspost this article as a contributor to Red Maryland, which is read by people all over the state, including his district.

Third and most importantly, it shows that someone is interested in having a campaign that’s based on the issues. Perhaps another aspirant from that district – or any other – will see that someone is willing to answer these questions that I think are tough but fair.

Here’s how Michael Moshe Starkman (which is how his name will appear on the ballot) answered the Ten Questions. As in past Ten Questions practice, I do not edit the remarks so any misspellings, poor grammar, and the like is reflected in the answers. They are in standard type with my questions in italics.

Right after the 9/11 attacks President Bush noted that the retaliatory fighting soon to ensue would be a long-term effort. Since then the focus has been on military targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. How do you best feel we can achieve victory in this effort?

I believe victory will be achieved through redoubling efforts to engage allied countries; strengthening our human intelligence network in the Middle East; and demonstrating early, decisive advances against known terrorist entities.

Last year Congress passed a measure intended to begin construction of a security fence along the Mexican border. More recently the immigration bill that some decried as amnesty failed to attain cloture in the Senate. If you’re elected do you feel we should pursue border security first or deal with those illegal immigrants already here?

Fence first, there is no question.

While an energy bill (HR 6) passed through Congress this year it did little to impact gasoline prices. Renewable energy is a sound long-term goal, but reality is that we’re decades away from those sources being the mainstay of our energy use. For the short- to medium-term, what steps do you feel we should undertake to cut our dependence on foreign oil sources?

Identifying domestic energy sources and encouraging citizens to utilize energy efficient tools will begin the path towards independence. Energy is an issue that I am currently researching and retain the right to substantially revise my opinion upon further consideration.

While the current Congressional majority had as part of their 2006 campaign the promise to eliminate the “culture of corruption”, the reality has been that members of both parties have been caught in illegal or at least dubious actions since the 110th Congress got underway back in January. What reforms would you like to see enacted in the 111th Congress to make it more accountable to the voters?

I would like to see greater transparency in spending and a drastic reduction, if not altogether elimination, of earmarked projects.

In 2006 then-Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney signed a bill into law mandating the state’s residents carry health insurance of some sort, whether through their employer, privately, or via the state. Would you support a similar program as a federal initiative, leave it up to the states, or come up with another system – and why?

I believe diversity is the single best friend of innovation and civil development. In this light I would leave the matter of health insurance to the states so as to determine what is best for their respective inhabitants.

As you know the 2001/2003 tax cuts enacted by President Bush face expiration in 2010. While the debate has gone on whether these cuts have helped the economy or simply fattened the wallets of “the rich,” another alternative has been suggested, one of a national sales tax popularly known as the “FairTax.” Another idea is to simplify the tax system by going to a flat tax with few deductions allowed. Where do you stand on how the government collects its revenue?

I believe our tax codes are convoluted and support reforming federal tax collection. I support the FairTax initiative but would consider moving to a flat tax as an improvement as well.

Every month the U.S. adds a little bit to its trade deficit, particularly with China. Further, a common complaint I have (and I’m sure many others echo) is that you can’t find things that are made in the U.S.A. anymore. How do you think the trade imbalance should be straightened out and what role do you see Congress having in restoring a manufacturing base to our shores?

Congress retains the right to establish tariffs and other means of creating an economic environment that is favorable to US manufacturing. More than economics, the US-China trade deficit subjects the United States to considerable national security risks. China, who has been a hostile state towards the US, is the not type of government we want to see rise to the level of world power.

Much wailing and gnashing of teeth among those in local and state government occurs when they have to deal with the dreaded “unfunded federal mandate.” Where do you see the line being between the rights of individual states and the federal government – would you seek to fairly fund the mandate or reduce the burden on the state by eliminating it?

I believe the current engagements of federal government have extended past the original intentions of the Constitution. I advocate for a significant reduction in federal government and would oppose most legislation that enforces uniform policy on a citizen’s county or state.

The recent Minnesota bridge collapse has placed our nation’s infrastructure front and center as a political issue. Some say higher gasoline taxes are the answer, but critics of that argument charge that reallocating the federal share toward highways and away from mass transit and bikeways would eliminate the need for an increase. What would be your order of priority for transportation and infrastructure spending?

The safety and welfare of the US citizen is the premier concern for US government at every level. I believe that through better discretion, a reduction of wasteful spending, and prioritizing projects, the federal government is capable of meeting the needs of the country without further raising taxes.

Easiest question with the shortest answer. If you were to choose three Presidential candidates you’d prefer to work with in the 111th Congress who would they be?

It would be “the most conservative one”, “the one strongest on defense”, and “the one with strong faith and integrity”.

So this is how the game is played, politicians. Who has the guts to be the next to answer these questions? I’ve had a couple people promise me to do so but no takers until Michael became the guinea pig. For that I thank him and encourage people to look into his campaign further through his website.

It’s a good post for a milestone one, this is item number 750 on monoblogue. By the way, tomorrow should also be a milestone for my cohorts at Red Maryland, they’re approaching their 1000th post.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.