January 2010 – Page 4

Like this will happpen…but we can dream, can’t we?

GOP hopeful for Governor Larry Hogan is at it again, stating what’s obvious to anyone with common sense and who lives outside the I-95 corridor:

On Wednesday, January 13th, 2010 the Maryland General Assembly will convene its 427th Session. It is the final session of Martin O’Malley’s term and much of the focus will be on how to close the $2 billion structural deficit he created.

“O’Malley increased spending by more than a billion in each of the last three legislative sessions. Before Maryland can get out of this recession, Martin O’Malley must stop the spending spree, stop raising taxes on job creators, and stop asking taxpayers for bailouts,” Hogan said.

“In typical O’Malley style, he will let the legislators do the heavy lifting. Then, he’ll take the credit or pass the blame,” charged Hogan. “The state’s Spending Affordability Committee has recommended a zero-growth budget. The big question will be whether or not Martin O’Malley will listen.”

“If history is the judge, the answer is no,” said Hogan. “First Martin O’Malley blew through a $1 billion surplus we left him. Then, he increased taxes by over $1.6 billion. And when that was not enough, he then took a multi-billion dollar federal bailout which he used to increase spending three times higher than the Spending Affordability Committee recommended.”

“Martin O’Malley is no leader on fiscal restraint and his record tells the real tale. Increased spending, record tax increases, and a failed fiscal policy has caused Maryland to lag behind 42 other states,” Hogan said.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Maryland is one of just 8 states that lost jobs in its most recent monthly report.

“Maryland’s families are hurting. Our small businesses are leaving, or worse, closing altogether. We deserve better,” said Hogan. “It’s time for someone to take the reigns (sic) of the state and lead it out of our current crisis with fiscal policies that encourage long term job growth and businesses to stay in Maryland.”

“During these tough economic times, Marylanders deserve a Governor who will roll up his sleeves and get to work addressing these tough issues,” Hogan concluded.

Whether he has to beg (his friends in Washington), borrow (from whatever funds still have money), or steal (from the pockets of unwitting taxpayers), Martin O’Malley will get his wish. I don’t care what the SAC said about a zero increase, my prediction is that spending will increase as much or more in this budget as in any of O’Malley’s previous ones because it’s an election year and Martin O’Malley has to make sure his special interest buddies get more than crumbs so they’ll support him come November. The rest of us will get the crumbs now and the tax increase will come soon enough, in 2011 when all are safely re-elected.

Yet General Assembly Republicans can do Hogan and the rest of the ticket a favor by proposing a sound alternative to the budget (as they can since the General Assembly doesn’t set the budget) but more importantly just saying no to what O’Malley presents. There’s nothing more frustrating to the rank-and-file GOP member as seeing their Delegate or Senator selling out because they happened to get some goodie in the budget for the district – meanwhile that small favor is paid back many times over in higher taxes, fees, and the like. I’m going to be damn disgusted if there’s fewer than 37 GOP votes in the House of Delegates and 14 Senate votes against the O’Malley budget. (Yes, that means all hands on deck for this one.)

Maybe the Maryland GOP doesn’t like primary fights, but when there’s a member who deserves to go because they play ball too much with the opposition, I want to see them. We all deserve a choice, and if the Delegate or Senator thinks they deserve re-election they need to secure their base by convincing the Republican base they’re worthy of support on principle, not on simply having “Republican” on their ballot line.

If there’s one thing I dislike about Larry Hogan on a political level, it’s the fact that he would bow out if former Governor Ehrlich finally decides to get in on the race. I don’t think Ehrlich deserves a coronation because there may be someone out there who would better govern Maryland by conservative principles. I haven’t heard Ehrlich taking it to O’Malley like Hogan has and Bob needs to show me he has the fire in the belly again before he can earn my support.

Perhaps it’s not the “establishment” thing to say, but no one ever said I was conventional anyway.

One small victory

Eventually it may be something which needs to be changed, but for now this is the prudent move as a fairly rare show of bipartisan support for fiscal responsibility. While this came to my attention last week it’s a good time to visit things which have to do with our General Assembly. This comes from the Maryland Senate Republican Caucus:

In response to harsh Republican opposition and taxpayer outrage, the Democrat leadership of the Maryland General Assembly issued a statement (last week) and conceded that there will be no proposals to increase legislative compensation over the next four-year term.

Senate Minority Leader Allan Kittleman issued the following statement with regard to the recommendations of the Maryland General Assembly Compensation Commission:

“With so much hardship facing Maryland’s taxpayers, now is not the time for legislators to consider pay increases or other enhanced compensation. Unfortunately, historic tax increases and bad policy decisions by Governor O’Malley has significantly added to the fiscal burden that has been placed on Maryland’s citizens. While Republican legislators have strongly opposed this “tax and spend” mentality, the Democrat majority has rubber-stamped the O’Malley agenda instead of stopping this economic “piling on” of our fiscally-stressed taxpayers. Maryland taxpayers are absolutely correct when they express their outrage on this process.”

We have been. Actually, many of the wealthiest taxpayers are voting with their feet and heading off to more friendly tax climates like Florida. (Admittedly, at the moment the weather there is no bargain.)

And the flight isn’t limited to taxpayers, as businesses are fleeing the state too.

Later this year, there will be an interesting test case of how Maryland attracts businesses in competition with other states. Defense contractor Northrop Grumman is moving from Los Angeles (yep, another business leaves California) to the Washington, D.C. area in order to be closer to its government customer base.

Unless Maryland figures out a way to sweeten the pot, my wager is that Northrop Grumman decides the better business climate of Virginia will be the right home for them. It’s a story repeated far too many times, to the detriment of would-be employees in Maryland.

A resurgence of number 10 in ’10?

One of my favorite amendments to the Constitution is having a good year, and now I’ve finally become aware that it has its own advocacy group.

In 2009, seven states passed sovereignty resolutions under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Two states passed laws nullifying some federal firearms laws and regulations. States with Medical Marijuana laws in direct opposition to federal laws reached thirteen. In 2010, some expect the ante to be raised significantly.

“Already, over a dozen states are considering laws or state constitutional amendments that would effectively ban, or nullify, any proposed national health care plan in their state, and we expect that number to reach at least twenty in 2010,” said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. “In conjunction with 20+ states that have already said “No” to the Bush-era Real ID act, another dozen or more considering state laws to nullify federal gun laws, and the steady growth of states refusing to comply with federal marijuana laws, some might consider what we see today to be an unprecedented state-level rebellion to the federal government.”

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state nullifies a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or non-effective, within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

“Nullification has been used to stand up for free speech, resist the fugitive slave laws, reduce tariffs and more. It’s a peaceful and effective way to resist the federal government, and might be our only hope for moving towards the constitution. Legislators drawing this kind of line in the stand should be commended,” said Boldin.

Grassroots activists around the country are looking to the Tenth Amendment and nullification to bolster their efforts too. Tenth Amendment rallies are planned in at least 10 states before the end of January, including Virginia, Washington, Alabama and Texas. “These aren’t tea party protests, or tax protests, or any of the other topics that were popular last year,” said Boldin. “These are rallies solely in support of the 10th Amendment, State Sovereignty or Nullification – something that indicates a major shift from the grassroots, and shows potential for the growth of a popular mass movement in support of the Tenth.”

A recent article in the New York Times included “Tenther” as a top buzzword for 2009. In response, Boldin said, “With people looking to resist D.C. through state laws on everything from national health care to medical marijuana, the 10th Amendment appears ready to be front and center in the national debate once again this year.”

Personally, I don’t see why there’s a national debate on the Tenth Amendment because it’s not debatable, the amendment exists. Just as a reminder, the Tenth Amendment reads:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

This was inserted by the Founding Fathers in order to limit the power of the federal government. While tyranny at the time was embodied by the British Crown, the tyranny of our time comes in the form of an overreaching government, and states are reacting to the usurpation of their local powers by faceless bureaucrats and overly zealous members of Congress in Washington.

A longtime complaint of mine has been those situations where Congress passes laws to withhold funding from states unless they adopt laws in line with the vision Washington has. Nanny state laws (like seat belt laws, motorcycle helmet restrictions, and blood alcohol levels) tend to come from these ideas at the federal level and put the state in such a position where they have little choice to adopt the law and keep the federal funding spigot open. As the states fall more and more into this trap, Congress exerts more and more power over their affairs – and by extension ours.

Yet while “Tenthers” are thought of as strictly conservative, items associated with the liberal side of the spectrum such as medical marijuana (along with possibly euthanasia and gay marriage) could also be beneficiaries of “nullification.” Truly, this isn’t a partisan issue but one of state’s rights, and with all the other claims for “rights” being bandied about these are cases where those seeking their rights have a legal leg to stand on.

Yet another call for transparency

It’s not just groups like the Sunlight Foundation (which I included as part of FNV 18 last week) that demand transparency. Bill Wilson and Americans for Limited Government are clamoring for it as well, at least when it comes to health care.

Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today called upon leaders of the Senate and House to “implement real transparency” and to “post the final version of the health care takeover on the Internet for 14 days prior to any votes.”

“In the age of the Internet, Congress should be able to get the final bill up on government websites for a legitimate public review and comment period lasting two weeks, where constituent comments would be directly forwarded to the people’s Senators and Representatives,” Wilson said.

“There is too much at stake,” Wilson said, adding, “this is a bill that will nationalize one-sixth of the American economy, downgrade research and development in the medical sciences, take private options away from patients forcing them onto a government-run plan, ration health care away from seniors, and bankrupt the Treasury.”

(snip)

Wilson said that “with real transparency, such an unseemly deal would never be allowed to occur,” and today along with 23 other free market and limited government leaders called on Senate and House leaders to take up C-SPAN’s offer to televise negotiations reconciling both versions of the legislation, fulfilling a campaign promise made by Barack Obama.

(snip)

The 24 leaders noted that Obama “made such a promise at least eight times, yet it was reported last Tuesday that the Democrat congressional leadership will bypass the traditional conference committee process.”

Wilson said the broken C-SPAN pledge was “just the tip of the iceberg,” and that “the American people need the time to weigh in on what is actually the eighth version of the government health care takeover.”

Wilson said the eight versions of what he dubbed “ObamaCare” were: 1-3) three House committee versions; 4) HR 3200, the House passed version of “public option”; 5) Baucus co-ops, the Senate Finance Committee version; 6) the Senate “public option,” which Senator Joe Lieberman and other lawmakers objected to; 7) the Reid substitute that the Senate passed, and 8 ) the current House-Senate version that Congressional Democrats are now meeting on to discuss.

“This is too much for the American people to keep up with,” Wilson explained. “The biggest advantage this bill presently has is its intentional ambiguity. Every time they create a new bill with new provisions, once the details get out, it proves unpopular, and so they go back to the drawing board with yet another bill.”

That is why Wilson said the final version should be posted on the Internet for two weeks prior to any votes. “With a sufficient period for comment by the American people, there will be no question as to where they stand on a bill that threatens to take over one-sixth of the American economy by government.”

“National polls have shown overwhelming opposition to this legislation for months on end,” Wilson noted. “A major reason for that has been the lack of transparency: the secret deals for Nebraska and Louisiana; the fuzzy numbers used to manipulate CBO budget scoring to achieve a ‘deficit-neutral’ score; the use of the Medicare Independent ‘Advisory’ Board for health care rationing away from seniors; and the upward pressure the bill will place on health premiums that Congress does not want you to know about.”

“Overall, the public is getting the sense that Congress is trying to pull a fast one on the American people,” Wilson said, concluding, “Instead, here’s a novel idea: why not be transparent about what’s actually in the bill and let it pass or fail on its merits?”

To answer Bill’s last question, there are no merits to the health care bill so they can’t be transparent.

Have you ever noticed that things which Congress isn’t required to do, such as pass this Obamacare monstrosity, they try to rush through – but those tasks which they are supposed to do (like pass a budget) take forever? Remember, we were supposed to have this passed last summer but the outcry was so great that we’ve gone back to the drawing board. Too bad the bill is about the same even after all this time.

I was grousing to a friend of mine earlier this morning about the state of politics in Washington.

Perhaps it is “all politics” because this is an election year. But every year is an election year somewhere and frankly I’m sick of politicians catering to special interests and their craving for power rather than helping out Americans by getting out of the way.

I guess the true problem is that people like me who have such an attitude are also the ones who have no interest in directly solving the problem. Now if you could get 534 others who share my attitude into Congress I might be persuaded to step into the cesspool – but I don’t foresee that anytime soon.

With all that was promised about “transparency” it’s disappointing that Washington feels the need to hide and obfuscate those items they pass and regulations they come up with. Sure, there is often a public comment period for new regulations but there’s only so many hours in the day to attempt to catch up with everything offered from inside the Beltway. So comment usually falls to those lobbyists who specialize in the subject and wish to fix things more to the liking of their backers.

In short, government at all levels has simply become too big for its britches and, like many others at this time of year, it’s time for them to go on a crash diet and get into better shape. Talk about your biggest loser – if the government could somehow enter the competition and take slimming down seriously it would win hands down.

And so would we.

Ehrlich(s) to speak in Salisbury

It’s become an early February tradition around these parts, and once again the Wicomico County GOP delivers.

Our annual Lincoln Day Dinner will be held in the Bistro Dining Room of the Guerrieri Center (aka the Commons) at Salisbury University on Saturday, February 6th, with dinner served at 7 p.m. – the cash bar opens at 6:30. Tickets are $40 for individual, with couples at $75 and students $25. Sponsorships are also available and range from $15 to $50.

Featured guest speakers will, as noted in the title, be Bob and Kendal Ehrlich.

For information or tickets, contact Bob Laun at (410) 543-2116 – reservations must be made by January 27th and tickets are limited, so they’re sure to go fast!

That’s pretty much the extent of the “official” information. Now I can let you in on some inside stuff.

The Bistro has a listed capacity of 250, but normally we don’t set the room for quite that many since we need a little space for podium and presentation, plus a side table for campaign literature. And with this being an election year, many of the statewide candidates (such as Andy Harris) will buy themselves a block of tickets for their staff so it makes tickets just a bit more valuable. However, we also secure a larger room so it has the opportunity to even out in the end.

If you’re looking for a blow-by-blow account of the Lincoln Day Dinner, I’ve covered the last four so you can have some idea of who gets to speak. But before and after they speak you have the advantage of a limited group of competitors for their attention so it’s an opportunity to meet up close and personal the person who could be (or already is) your Delegate, Senator, or represent you in the halls of Washington. Obviously they’re present to impress upon those who care enough to attend because chances are this is the pool of leaders and volunteers they’ll draw upon as the campaign wears on.

Plus this year you may have the opportunity to hear an exciting announcement. Governor Ehrlich may decide prior to our dinner to jump into the fray for Governor, but then again he may be holding out to tell us as part of an announcement tour…you never know.

GOP political junkies would be well advised to attend. I’m writing my check tomorrow.

2009: The year of Obama

Given the fact that the weeks leading up to Christmas and New Year’s Day are typically a dead zone for newsworthy items, it’s probable that whatever headlines aren’t made by the continuing battle over health care in Washington and feel-good holiday stories will be dedicated to a continuing series of year-end wrap-ups. The editorial page is seldom different, so this column takes a look at the year’s accomplishments of our nation’s most prominent news figure, President Barack Obama. (You were expecting Tiger Woods?)

When the President makes his State of the Union speech next month it’s likely he’ll point to the passage of his health care plan as his major victory. Most odd about this, though, is that he never actually had a health care reform plan, instead leaving Nancy Pelosi and House Democratic leaders in charge of crafting the bill which made it through the House while Harry Reid and assorted Democratic minions in the Senate came up with a completely separate proposal. By splitting the duty of health care reform, not only did the plan have to deal with constantly shifting aspects like the in-again, out-again “public option” but it also lost the “transparency” Obama promised when he took office.

Transparency was the least of the Obama’s problems, though. He had a raft of economic issues to address, most of which he adroitly blamed on his predecessor and “the last eight years.” And for putting up $787 billion in a stimulus program, the promise was that unemployment wouldn’t rise past 8 percent. Perhaps it’s because a large chunk of stimulus money went to propping up various state budgets instead of the “shovel ready” jobs originally slated for funding, but unemployment eventually jumped to 10.2 percent in October before easing slightly to a round 10 percent in November. The stimulus has been so successful that Newsweek glowing predicted high unemployment to be the “new norm.”

Yet unemployment isn’t such a problem at businesses the President deems “too big to fail.” By expertly revamping the concept of paying creditors in a bankruptcy, General Motors and Chrysler went from publicly-owned businesses to enterprises bailed out by government funding and turned over in large part to the United Auto Workers. In response, sales at Ford have been the lone bright spot for Detroit.

But the auto industry in general was aided by $3 billion spent on the “Cash for Clunkers” program, which paid Americans to buy over 700,000 new cars. Never mind that new car sales plummeted immediately after the program ended and having the old clunkers rendered unusable all but destroyed the used car and parts markets – the program is still considered a success.

Perhaps the biggest triumph of Obama’s year, though, was avoidance of a foreign policy mistake. In fact, not only did Obama not have “an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test (his) mettle,” as Vice-President Biden warned, but based on a scant few months in office he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Perhaps it was a tribute to Obama’s charisma that he received the prize despite ramping up a war in Afghanistan by sending over 30,000 more troops, but it’s more likely that his deliberation in taking months to decide on that number was the factor that sealed the deal.

Or maybe he bowed to the right people. Whatever the reason, it’s certain that President Obama can consider this year a success; after all, he gave himself a B-plus.

And to think – America has three more years to see if he can get to an A.

Michael Swartz is a Liberty Features Syndicated writer.

This op-ed cleared on December 23rd and was featured in the Walterboro (SC) Press and Standard December 31st. Had they done it a couple days earlier I could have bought the paper on my way back from Florida!

A use for Al Gore’s writings is found!

I think this is hilarious. Sad for those reduced to enduring the situation, but hilarious. It comes from a group called Freedom Press, which is part of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. They’re the same group whose “Freedom Minute” I occasionally feature on my Friday Night Videos:

It has been reported in the London press that poor old-age pensioners are having to resort to buying books at thrift shops to burn to keep warm during the prolonged bitterly cold weather in the United Kingdom. In response to this humanitarian crisis, Freedom Action is calling on former Vice President Al Gore to join an effort to collect and airlift copies of his science fiction bestsellers to British people in dire need.

“We are collecting copies of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Our Choice, and Earth in the Balance and will send them to Oxfam in the UK to distribute for free to vulnerable people trying to survive the cold weather,” said Myron Ebell, Director of Freedom Action. “We call on Mr. Gore to co-operate in our effort to relieve human suffering by providing copies of his books for burning in stoves and fireplaces.”

“It is appropriate that Al Gore’s books should be used to help keep poor people warm,” Ebell explained, “since the principal reason the British government is totally unprepared to deal with the brutally cold weather is because they have fallen for the global warming myths propagated by Gore himself in his bestselling books. Burning Gore’s otherwise worthless books to keep people from freezing is their highest and best use.” (Emphasis in original.)

While I’m generally not a proponent of book burning as censorship, given the current weather we are facing here on Delmarva – with much below average temperatures forecast for the next several days – those who are in such dire straits that they can’t afford wood for their stoves might be well-advised to stock up on Al Gore’s books, which are likely to be found in the bargain bin at reputable closeout stores and flea markets everywhere.

I know, there’s a larger point to be made and perhaps it’s not politically correct to use the poor to make a political statement. (The other side never does that, do they?)

Great Britain is America in 40 years (or less) if we continue on the path we are on. Like Reagan, Margaret Thatcher did her best to stem the tide of socialism in her country but all her gains were reversed by those both inside and outside her Conservative Party. While there are a few voices of sanity “across the pond” (Daniel Hannan and Lord Christopher Monckton come to mind) most British political voices rival the shrillness of our own left.

We strive to emulate their “more equitable” system of health care and green policies without realizing that they are more equitable only in their misery. Why a former industrial power has fallen on such hard times is answered easily once you consider the political path they have taken over the last half-century or so (with the exception of Thatcher’s tenure.)

There was a reason we broke away from their kingdom in the first place, so let’s not go down their path now.

Somebody’s gotta say it…

Obviously this comes with apologies to author and radio talk show host Neal Boortz. But the title fits.

There are those who have dismissed filmmaker, author, and GOP loyalist Daniel Vovak, and perhaps it is rightfully so. But in a long (and link-filled) missive I received yesterday, he makes several valid points about a topic which indeed hasn’t been well addressed by GOP leadership. Let’s see if I can do a little prudent editing while maintaining his point. I kept many (but not all) of the links as well.

Following the failed attack by the Underwear Bomber in the final week of 2009, Maryland’s Congressman Christopher Van Hollen (MD-08) stated , “In general, we are facing the consequences of the Bush administration’s failures to deal with al Qaeda. The Republicans have no business in pointing fingers at the Obama administration on terrorism and national security. . . . The Obama administration has been much more aggressive about going after al Qaeda than the Bush administration, which turned its focus from al Qaeda to Iraq.”

Mister Van Hollen is criticizing Republicans for playing politics with terrorism, making a sweeping statement about the Republican Party. In the process, he has thrown down the gauntlet for any Republican to respond. For the past two weeks, I have patiently waited for a response to Van Hollen from National Republican Chairman Michael Steele, Republican Minority Leader John Boehner (OH-08), Maryland Republican Chairwoman Audrey Scott, or former Vice President Dick Cheney. Thus far there has been no response, so I will direct my attention to America’s current top Republican, Chairman Steele.

Mister Van Hollen, as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman, made his statements on an international stage, claiming Republicans were using terrorism as a partisan issue. Michael Steele has two critical jobs he is compelled to do: 1) Respond to Van Hollen by saying that partisan politics always ends at America’s borders, and 2) Find an opponent for Van Hollen. On both points Steele failed abominably. First, his de facto response to Van Hollen’s terrorism pandering about national security was by agreeing that Republicans could not win the House or Senate. Secondly, he initiated no pursuit of a challenger to Van Hollen.

Let’s stop right here with this. I agree with Daniel regarding Michael Steele’s mishandling of the “panty bomber” situation, and was truly distressed that he stooped to the age-old Washington insider tactic of lowering expectations for the 2010 elections. (In this case he may be lowering his own book sales too – so be it.) I didn’t have a vote in the matter, but it’s a matter of record that I would have preferred Ken Blackwell as RNC Chair. Perhaps it’s a case of Blackwell being a more known quantity to me from my years in Ohio politics, but Michael struck me as becoming too much the Beltway insider once he took over GOPAC after his failed 2006 Senate bid.

However, Vovak is a little hypercritical about getting a challenger for Van Hollen. It’s difficult at best to persuade a well-known and well-financed challenger to take on an incumbent who’s regularly garnered 75% of the vote in re-election bids. The GOP has put up an opponent in each of the three elections since Van Hollen barely ousted longtime Congressman Connie Morella, but Democrats simply have too much of an advantage in Montgomery County to make this a battle. It’s practically beyond the old Edwin Edwards line of not losing unless they find Chris Van Hollen in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. As far left as some in Montgomery County are that may be just the resume enhancement he needs to move to higher office.

In the next part of his release, Vovak makes a lengthy point about partisanship, noting that 131 Democrats (including Van Hollen) have a more partisan voting record than the most loyal Republican. Based on Van Hollen’s 99.3% loyalty mark, Daniel posits that:

…any Democrat could easily do Van Hollen’s job as he has become a mere robot who sits in a political seat and thoughtlessly and repeatedly votes Democrat. Without doubt, thinking people in Montgomery County and Prince George’s County must desire their elected representatives to be free to discern issues using bi-partisanship and compromise.

Vovak then returns to his criticism of GOP candidate recruitment:

(Thursday) I phoned every member of the Montgomery County Republican Central Committee and learned there is not even a rumored candidate against the congressman! Let me make it clear that I never thought I would need to respond to Van Hollen’s bogus claims, but since no Republican leader has responded over these past two weeks, I felt ethically driven to do so. Further, some Democratic leader should have publically told Van Hollen never to mix his partisanship with terrorism. Beyond the borders of America, we need our politicians to think in a bi-partisan way, especially about national security and terrorism. By his sadly inappropriate statements, it is clear that Van Hollen views terrorism through smudged partisan glasses.

Every pundit in America says the Democrats are vulnerable in 2010. Why should Mister Van Hollen get a free pass from National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Session? Surely, Maryland Republican Chairwoman Audrey Scott and Montgomery County’s Jim Shalleck have some bigwig in mind to challenge him!

Probably not, for the reasons I state above.

Then again, this can be an opportunity. Awhile back I read Al Regnery’s book on the conservative movement (Upstream: The Ascendance of American Conservatism,) which detailed in part that there was a sense that Barry Goldwater’s 1964 Presidential campaign was doomed to be a failure because of the times and situation, so why not run as an unapologetic conservative and bring out the ideas for future debate? Obviously success wasn’t immediate but this did blaze a trail for future leaders, most prominently Ronald Reagan.

It seems like the kind of election that a bright young team of Republicans could embark on, knowing they have little to lose but a vast amount of experience to gain. Certainly working in that kind of hostile element would make things easier when they face a more mainstream crowd.

Friday night videos episode 18

Well, well, well…after a three-week hiatus for the holidays I’m back with a bunch of stuff. You thought I’d quit just because the calendar turned? Au contraire.

Let’s begin by pointing out the REAL problem in Washington, at least according to the Center for Individual Freedom.

If the government would stop spending so much they would need less of OUR money. That sounds pretty simple, doesn’t it?

Spending on a state level is the message this protest was scheduled to address. From AFP-Maryland:

It’s going to be cold, but then again most state capitals outside of Honolulu are shivering these days. The national AFP group took a look around the recent global warming summit and this is what they saw.

As I recall, Copenhagen endured cold and snow all during the conference; then again, it’s winter. The Washington News-Observer dragged Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas up to the Capitol roof so his ears could fall off. Actually, he just had his take on Pelosi and climate change.

Now if we need a cool spell this summer, we could have this debate in Washington during the heat of July. Al Gore always seems to bring a chill.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is obviously raking in the big bucks now to up the ante.

Otherwise, it seems like only government has big bucks. But Rep.Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan tells the Washington News-Observer that we can’t spend our way out of a recession.

And he’s right. The only thing taking from the private sector to return it there does is create busy work on the pass-thru and allow government to pick winners and losers.

The folks at Our Country Deserves Better have one idea for a loser come November.

Since the Democrats have already had two of their members decide not to stand for re-election it’s going to be interesting to see if they have the same strategy in mind for Senator Reid if his poll numbers continue to tank as Dodd’s and Dorgan’s did.

The concept of “transparency” has been big in the news lately. The Sunlight Foundation chimes in with their belief that 2009 was a good year for the concept.

But when it comes to health care, the GOP begs to differ.

In truth, not all of the blame for this can be placed on the President because Congress sets their own rules – but he’s sure not showing any leadership on this.

Lastly, we have one of Maryland’s own who shows that she completely misunderstands the purpose of the census. Once again from WNO:

The census is to determine proportional representation for the House of Representatives, period, end of sentence. If I fill out the census form it’s going to say three people live at my domicile and that’s it.

On that contrarian note another edition of FNV comes to a close. I’ll surely have more fun stuff next week.

More jobs by the boards

In what’s become a familiar refrain, experts were “surprised” to find the economy lost 85,000 jobs in December instead of reversing the nearly two year trend of job losses.

Yet there’s one industry which has been crying out to help but gets the cold shoulder from the Obama Administration. While it may not be politically or environmentally correct, we still need oil and natural gas but the federal government doesn’t seem to want to play ball with their industry. Instead, they place more obstacles in the way.

When an industry directly or indirectly supports over 9 million jobs it seems to me they should have a better place at the economic table. But instead those in charge now are spending our stimulus money on “green” jobs that are little more than a political payoff to their union buddies (at the expense of some of their union brethren in the energy industry.) Needless to say, I would rather have an increase in jobs financed by the private sector than one where the funding is either confiscated from all of us or created out of thin air.

It’s pretty much beyond argument that the “stimulus” has failed to achieve its desired result of keeping unemployment below 8 percent. Since there is no logical manner of truly determining what constitutes a “saved” job the only yardstick we have to measure success is the government employment statistic which continues to show jobs being lost. The only reason the unemployment rate remained at 10% was the people dropping off at the other end who have become totally discouraged and stopped actively looking for work.

Yet here’s an industry which would love to spend its own money to create jobs, but needs government to get out of the way and open up land for exploration. Unfortunately, those who value endangered species over endangered livelihoods hold sway in the government right now and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is having so much fun being an obstacle he won’t go back to Colorado and run for their suddenly vacating governor’s chair.

With this sort of attitude from Washington, don’t be surprised if double-digit unemployment isn’t here to stay.

And the blog poll winner is…

It really came down to two finalists, but after trailing nearly the whole time afterthegoldrush came from behind and won my “best local blog” poll. Over 300 votes were cast and ATGR garnered precisely 50% of the vote, beating Salisbury News by 6 votes 152-146. The other six votes went to Twirling, Twirling, Twirling Towards Freedom. It appears that camp placed itself squarely behind ATGR in order to win and the strategy paid off.

While there’s no prize for winning, I suppose Ridgely Griffith can link to this post and the poll itself as proof he has the best blog in Salisbury. I’m not arguing with that sentiment considering his competition, but it is somewhat humorous that the first time ATGR and Salisbury News faced off in the opening round, Salisbury News won. Yet Joe Albero lost when it really counted.

All right, back to more serious stuff for both the blog and the poll.

Minor promoted to Shorebirds manager

It’s not often that the Shorebirds make news during the off-season, but one of Salisbury’s favorite adopted sons will get his opportunity to manage his hometown team. Ryan Minor will be the team’s fourth manager in the last four seasons and the only coach retained by Delmarva. 2009 manager Orlando Gomez and pitching coach Blaine Beatty both move up to the same roles at Frederick.

Joining Minor on staff will be longtime Oriole Mike Devereaux as the hitting coach and Troy Mattes to handle the pitchers. Ironically, both Minor and Mattes are former Shorebirds – Ryan played here for the 1997 championship season while Mattes was an original 1996 Shorebird as a farmhand of the old Montreal Expos.

Mattes moves up from Bluefield, where he mentored their pitching staff for the last three years. Devereaux is expected to work heavily with the outfielders on their defense, which leads me to believe Xavier Avery might be back in 2010.

While we’re 14 weeks out from the season opener and probably 13 1/2 weeks away from finding out the roster, the 15th season for the Shorebirds promises to be an exciting one.