Campaign 2008 – Congress – Page 2

Conservatism – “way out there”?

Yes, that’s what our favorite “independent” (who’s taken almost $2 million from his party brass) is saying in his latest commercial, called “Untrue Attacks”:

First of all, he’s not on my side (nor is he “independent”, but I already covered that). And how about the evidence of “untrue attacks”? Just because you say they’re untrue doesn’t necessarily make them so.

Let’s go further. If I heard correctly, Frank has a claim that he “fought for new laws to arrest and deport illegal immigrants.” So what law was it? If it’s the one I’ve heard Kratovil talk about, which is making driving without a license a jailable offense, how do you think it became law? My educated guess is that it made it through the General Assembly with the seal of approval of one State Senator Andy Harris – if not, you can bet that Kratovil would be jumping up and down, yelling about that vote.

Frank also claims to be “for middle-class tax cuts”. Why not just keep in place tax cuts for everyone, the ones President Bush passed in 2001/2003 which face elimination in 2010? I guess Frank would rather “spread the wealth” like Barack Obama, because that sounds a lot like Obama’s plan where 95% of taxpayers get a “tax cut” but in reality only about 60% actually pay taxes. The rest get another government check, just like welfare.

I’ll give Frank credit for one thing: he actually corrected the citation I couldn’t find before. It’s SB335 from 2000. What this bill did was raise the income eligibility level to get the credit slightly, but also capped the amount of credit to the amount one paid in tax, so a refund of excess credit could not be given. Personally I think that if you’re going to have these sorts of behavior-based items, there should be no income cap placed on them. In theory, Frank’s claim is correct but it’s very tenuous at best.

The other claim Frank makes is that Andy “voted against lower college tuition.” Here’s what really happened. SB110 in 2006 was the budget bill, and as is customary in the General Assembly at budget time a lot of horse trading goes on. The Senate’s version of the bill passed its third reading 47-0, obviously with there being 47 Senators Andy voted for it. In that bill was this paragraph:

To add an appropriation on page 115 of the printed bill (first reading file bill), to provide sufficient funding to cover the cost incurred to freeze undergraduate, resident tuition to academic year 2005–2006 levels for University System of Maryland and Morgan State University. The Governor, in consultation with the University System of Maryland and Morgan State University, will develop a schedule for allocating the funding.

This is what Andy voted for. What Frank is deviously leaving out is that the overall bill changed when the House of Delegates revisions were added. This particular portion regarding tuition stayed the same, but other things in the Conference Committee report did not and Harris decided to vote against the bill as a whole, regardless of his agreement with what the Senate had worked out. By that same token, I can call Frank Kratovil a liar because I have a recorded vote in favor of tuition breaks too. Is that the kind of twisting the truth we want in Congress?

Unfortunately, I couldn’t attend today’s debate but perhaps there’s a good question for Frank to ponder as he slams Harris’s support for privatizing Social Security – would he rather see 401.(k) contributions be socialized like some of his friends and contributors favor? Even moreso, doesn’t it beg the question whether Frank Kratovil would trust you to plan your own retirement?

Now I’ll get to the good commercials. No spin or twisting truth, just a simple pair of messages from Governor Bob Ehrlich. Yes, he appointed Frank Kratovil to some obscure committee but when it comes to Congress Bob’s backing Andy Harris:

I guess the Kratovil strategy is one of a guy who once had momentum but is falling behind after people take a hard look at the company he keeps and say, “you know, these guys are the ones who messed things up in the first place.” Give me the guy who will keep freedom in my hands anytime.

WCRC meeting – October 2008

Last month we heard from the anti-slots side, so this month Tom Saquella of the Maryland Retailers Association came to sell his position on the video slot machine Constitutional Amendment, Question 2.

Naturally we had some other business to take care of before we heard from Tom, and that’s what we did. The minutes and Treasurer’s report were quickly taken care of, so we got to hear several reports from the other groups who monthly keep us updated: Central Committee, Young Republicans, Andy Harris’s campaign, and the local McCain-Palin forces.

County chair Dr. John Bartkovich led off by telling us the polls were “meaningless,” giving the example of Ronald Reagan’s 1984 re-election where he trailed in the polls late but ended up winning 49 states. The message was simple: we need to keep fighting and turn out our side. The Young Republicans touted their recent Relay for Life fundraising (over $1,700) and announced they’ll soon be putting together a canned food drive for the holidays.

Mark McIver represented the Harris campaign and revealed some very good new poll results to us, results which showed both Harris and McCain were narrowly leading in the First District by nearly identical margins. We were also getting a positive response from independent voters. It was also made clear that the Democrats had plenty of money to buy campaign commercial time, spending over $100,000 a week to flood the district’s two media markets with anti-Harris diatribes. McIver remarked that “we can’t let the Democrats buy the First District.” While the liberal Democrats in Congress have been helping Frank Kratovil out with fundraising and advice, we’ll have some help of our own from the office of Florida Congressman David Weldon.

Since their message was pretty much the same, all that Bob Laun added on the McCain campaign’s behalf was a reminder of our victory party on November 4th. It was also noted that the excitement hadn’t waned as signs and bumper stickers were still being snapped up from our headquarters as quickly as they arrived.

With the reports dispatched, it was time to hear from our guest. Tom Saquella was representing the group known as For Maryland – For Our Future. He made it clear that he’d been supporting slots since they were first introduced under Governor Ehrlich, but “the General Assembly couldn’t agree” on a proposal during that period, so they decided to place the decision in the hands of the voters. As far as his organization was concerned, Saquella claimed that 85% of their members backed the proposal, noting their assertion that slots would be “good for retailers” and bring jobs and business to the state.

Tom gave us a brief history of the structural deficit which slots were envisioned to assist in rectifying, noting that it stemmed from two decisions: a tax cut enacted in the late 1990’s and the Thornton school funding mechanism, which Saquella explained was passed to avoid a much more costly lawsuit and a judge deciding how much “adequate” funding of schools would be. With the current revenue stream, there was “no way” to fund Thornton – thus we needed Question 2 to pass “more than ever.” Slots were the third leg of the stool to address the structural deficit after tax increses and spending cuts – however, they couldn’t yet address this year’s deficit that Saquella termed “cyclical.”

While Tom admitted the General Assembly took the “chicken way out” by placing the Constitutional Amendment on the ballot, he pointed out Maryland’s Constitution isn’t as sacred as one might think, using the example of City of Baltimore parking regulations enshrined in the document. And because the voters have to amend the Constitution to make changes, this amendment was “no slippery slope” to extended gambling.

Much of his argument centered on the questions of why we should continue to send money to adjacent states who have slots and what the alternatives would be if the ballot issue failed to pass. For the first question, Saquella claimed that slots would create 5,000 new permanent jobs and add $100 million in disposable income. “The economic pie will get bigger,” Tom argued, also pointing out the potential boost in tourism. There was also the potential of avoiding cuts in local funding should slots pass – in all, this was “taxpayer friendly.”

On the second point of alternative financing if slots fail, Saquella posited that 80 percent of state funding went to education, health care, and public safety – what would you cut? And the argument foes of Question 2 make about social costs was specious, as Tom called them “minor” and cited studies which showed crime and problem gambling were not increased in other locales which already had slots, like Delaware. Taxes and budget cuts have a social cost too, said Saquella.

Most of the questions focused on why the General Assembly couldn’t do its proper job and pass the issue without going to the voters – one comment was that “two wrongs don’t make a right,” referring to Democrats in the General Assembly creating the financial mess but being rewarded with more money to spend. And nothing was set in stone about the funding proportions in the Constitutional Amendment – Tom could only retort when asked about the likelihood that the 48.5% devoted to schools being reduced by the General Assembly at some future date that if education were cut it would surely bring about a lawsuit.

In all, Saquella made some compelling arguments but most of those in the room were already set against the issue for various reasons. Only time will tell whether the voters in Maryland will alter the Constitution some more and bail the state out of making tough decisions.

At the moment we have no speaker set for our next meeting which will be on Monday, November 24. Quite possibly this will be a review session on our election strategy and finalizing any details on the club’s Christmas party later in December.

Big checks for card check

One thing that we can bet the farm on is that Big Labor is going to try again in the 111th Congress to get the Employee Free Choice Act passed. In essence, the act eliminates the secrecy from union elections by eliminating the election and simply having a signed card be “proof” that an employee wants to join a union. Would you want someone looking over your shoulder in the voting booth? EFCA would allow union organizers to do just that.

It’s worth pointing out that Frank Kratovil has taken over $140,000 from Big Labor in this campaign, and they’re not going to spend this kind of money in a district that doesn’t have a lot of union workers without some sort of quid pro quo. I know people have been up in arms about all the money the Club For Growth has given to Andy Harris, but those contributions are bundled from individual donors giving of their free will. While it’s possible to ask your union not to use your dues for political purposes, in practice that’s difficult to achieve – so thousands of workers are contributing to a candidate they may not agree with, but apparently the ends justify the means insofar as Big Labor and concentrating political power is concerned.

This also gives me an opportunity to reintroduce readers to a group I link to called the Center for Union Facts. Actually, they in turn introduced me to this video of one very pushy labor union leader:

It’s the same kind of thinking that turns the unions onto seek-and-destroy missions like the plumbers’ union letting loose the attack dogs on “Joe the Plumber.” Because of that we know that the national plumbers union were early supporters of Barack Obama.

I’m sure Bill wouldn’t like me either. It’s because something tells me he’s also an Obama backer and he’d love to have people like Barack’s ally Frank Kratovil in Congress.

It’s back to peas in a pod

Talk about news that’s unsurprising:

Yesterday Wayne Gilchrest declared he voted for Democratic Governor Martin O’Malley in 2006, giving just one more example of his tilt to the left.

Gilchrest and Kratovil’s shared support for Martin O’Malley should come as no surprise. Martin O’Malley, Wayne Gilchrest, and Frank Kratovil share many of the same liberal policies. “O’Malley, Kratovil and Gilchrest support higher taxes, more wasteful government spending, and amnesty for illegal immigrants – that’s liberal,” said Chris Meekins, Harris Campaign Manager.

All three candidates have also stated they will be voting for Barack Obama on November 4th. In his primary campaign, Frank Kratovil campaigned throughout the district with Governor O’Malley by his side. “O’Malley is the glue that holds the liberal family together in Maryland,” Meekins added.

Frank Kratovil has made clear whom he will represent in Congress stating, “I want to be an ally of the Governor (Martin O’Malley) in Washington.” (Star Democrat, 6/7/2007)

“The last thing voters in the first district want is O’Malley Jr. – Frank Kratovil – in Congress” said Meekins. “Andy Harris will be the independent voice who will vote for lower taxes and less wasteful government spending in Congress.”

Chris piled on slightly because Wayne used to be somewhat conservative in fiscal matters; however, Gilchrest recently voted for both bailout packages (as Frank Kratovil likely would have for the second porked-up version) so perhaps that worm has turned too. I do find the idea of Harris adopting an “independent voice” mantra interesting; then again, both men are on record as running against the current Congress so it’s not wholly out of character for both to describe themselves as independent. Personally, I still like the term “conservative” though. We already have a Congressman who describes himself as “independent and courageous” and we all know how that turned out. In these times when folks from everywhere else on the political spectrum seem to enjoy dumping on conservatism in order to curry favor with the media (beware, we see how well that worked with John McCain), true courage is sticking to your principles.

Now another item I found to be worth mentioning is that the venue for Gilchrest’s remarks was a dinner honoring him and others for their environmentalism, one where Gilchrest earned the honor of “Admiral of the Chesapeake” from Governor O’Malley himself. Wayne also drew praise from fellow Congressman Steny Hoyer, as noted in the Capital article by Pamela Wood.

“Wayne Gilchrest, I respect you, I am proud to be your colleague … I am hopeful you will be serving for many years to come,” noted Hoyer. This makes me wonder whether Wayne has thought about his future plans and whether they include a party switch in order to set up a possible Andy Harris – Wayne Gilchrest rematch in 2010’s general election. I’m not sure that the Democrats wouldn’t welcome that possibility with open arms.

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that Wayne wouldn’t vote for Bob Ehrlich, given the bad blood between those two at times. But as one who was the recipient of Congressional courtesy in the form of a primary endorsement from Newt Gingrich, it’s disappointing that Wayne hasn’t been giving out that same sort of respect recently.

Fact-checking Frank

Well, now I know where Bud the Blogger got some of his (mis)information. I stopped by the Democrats’ table at the Autumn Wine Festival and secured a flyer which claimed Andy Harris wasn’t on our side and cited a number of votes. A few of them I’ve already covered and Andy Harris chimed in with his own defense as well.

There are six votes on the card where it’s claimed Andy Harris is the only State Senator to vote against particular bills. Here’s the dirty half-dozen Kratovil wants us to believe were poor votes:

CLAIM: “Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against extending the child care tax credit to help more middle class Maryland families pay for child care expenses (SB355, 2000).

FACT: I’d love to blow that one out of the water, but in looking up that particular number I find the bill is actually listed as a bill that expanded jury pools to include those who have drivers’ licenses along with registered voters. In fact, Harris did vote against the bill but was joined by Senator Alex Mooney. I happen to think that was a proper vote since that allows non-citizens to become jurors. Perhaps Kratovil’s writers may want to do a bit more fact-checking.

CLAIM: Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against creating the State’s cancer prevention and treatment program (SB896, 2000).

FACT: The programs in question were to be created from money extorted from tobacco companies as part of their settlement in the late 1990’s. Included therein were a number of restrictions on how to use the money, mandated budgeting amounts, and the potential for the state to supplant local health departments in their usage of the money if they so deemed. Revised fiscal note is here and the bill itself here.

Personally, I’ve never thought it made sense to, on the one hand, try to prevent a product’s usage but on the other hand derive millions of tax dollars from it in an effort to make the budget balanced.

CLAIM: Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against reducing class sizes for Maryland first and second graders (SB127, 1999).

FACT: Again, Kratovil’s fact-checkers strike out. That particular bill was not voted on, it was an effort to lower the state’s BAL from .10 to .08 and comply with federal mandates. However, I’ll give them the break on a typo, because the bill in question was actually SB137. And what Harris actually voted against were grants to each school system which were contingent on having a proper number of provisionally certified teachers and could only be received AFTER any federal grants were spent.

One thing these brilliant minds in the General Assembly may not have figured out is the cost to the district of hiring all of these new teachers, building any needed facilities, and their future retirement benefits – especially when the fiscal note states that 2,000 new teachers overall would need to be hired but the state could only provide for 800. I see no problem with voting against the bill and being the fiscal conservative he is, I think Andy was looking out for the long-term interests of each school district.

CLAIM: Andy Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against a program to help clean up toxic land right here in Maryland (SB513, 2000).

FACT: Andy voted FOR the third reading bill that passed the Senate, but when House amendments were added that restricted the usage of the funding and made it possible to change the interest rate of money loaned, that may have changed his opinion of the bill. This is the third reading Andy voted for and the enrolled bill he voted against. Had the House amendments been rejected in the conference committee, Frank wouldn’t have had this to complain about.

CLAIM: Andy Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against allowing women access to qualified OB/GYN providers of their own choosing (SB567, 2000).

FACT: Andy states his case here, although I notice he seems to have reversed the bills in question. No worse than miscitation on literature.

CLAIM: Andy Harris was the only State Senator…to vote against extending the time during which children with special needs are eligible for public education (HB552, 2000).

FACT: The bill was an unfunded mandate to local districts and serving students through age 21 was already a practice in the areas Harris serves, according to the fiscal note. By the way, the extension was for one extra year.

I’m still waiting on the actual citation where senior citizens are referred to as a new “welfare state”. And while the Eagle Forum is against women in combat, they also have a number of core beliefs most agree with as well.

As a whole, I guess Bud’s BS meter failed him in this case, because a lot of what Frank’s talking about here is a pure load of crap.

Wine Festival day 1

I apologize for the somewhat short post, and I will have pictures of the event for a post tomorrow. In truth, I’m putting this up in anticipation of something else you may enjoy.

But I did want to comment about how our reception was today at the event. First of all, while the crowds were down somewhat from the 2007 version (understandable given the cloudy and very chilly weather for mid-October) the excitement of people visiting our booth was hard to miss.

When I stocked the items, I opted to bring about a half-dozen McCain/Palin yard signs and roughly 60 McCain/Palin bumper stickers. As it turned out, I made two trips back to our headquarters to replenish the yard sign supply and also picked up another 50 or so stickers – by 5 p.m. we had gone through everything McCain including placards. Most of my Andy Harris stuff was gone too except for maybe a dozen bumper stickers and two yard signs.

The good news is that we’ll be able to sell McCain/Palin buttons and T-shirts tomorrow and something tells me those will go like hotcakes.

Obviously with all those trips back and forth I didn’t exactly keep track of our opposite number on the local political scene; the Democrats made their every-other-year pilgrimage to the AWF (we’ve had a booth for at least the last three years straight.) What I do know is that they were gone well before the actual end of festivities but it wasn’t because they were out of items. I did see a few Obama items carried about so it wasn’t a total shutout for them; however, I believe they didn’t have nearly the interest we did.

Well, I got the items I was waiting for so I’ll start on that post. But I had a good time and met some nice folks at the Wine Fest – tomorrow the gates open at 12:30 and we’ll have more stuff.

I have egg on my face, and it ain’t cooked as I like it…

Okay, you got Andy Harris and I me on this commercial (thanks for the grammar lesson). Trust me, I’m not pleased about it because, despite the fact the sentiments are true, reusing the footage from earlier this year is a little misleading and doesn’t quite pass the smell test. In the Daily Times story by Greg Latshaw, Harris campaign manager Chris Meekins explains:

Chris Meekins, Harris’ campaign manager, confirmed that the people in the ad were the same, but declined to say if the footage was new or shot before the February primary.

“The core issue is that Frank Kratovil is a liberal,” he said. “That’s the message, that he and Gilchrest are two tax-and-spend liberals.”

Well, Meekins is correct in his message but much as I like Chris and he seems like a nice enough guy in the few times I’ve spoken to him, in this case I have to call this faux pas sheer laziness on the part of him and whoever else created the commercial. If you needed a few more seconds of fresh footage, you could have called me up. I’d have looked square into the camera and uttered the truthful words:

Frank Kratovil will go to Washington and be a lap dog for Nancy Pelosi.

It just pisses me off because there was no shortage of people who would have said essentially the same thing about Frank Kratovil that they would have said about Wayne Gilchrest. This leaves me in sort of a moral dilemma because I definitely don’t condone the tactic, but voting for the Libertarian would be throwing my vote away and I’m not going to vote for a Pelosi lapdog, nor will I stay home or skip the race. But this story (of course, the Daily Times is all over anything to make Kratovil look good, even on their supposed misquotes as the Latshaw piece later notes) might well be the difference in a close election and the last thing the First District needs is someone who would be in lockstep with Barack Obama if he’s elected.

Certainly the commercial needs to be pulled although the damage is done. While it’s arguable that a further statement regretting the error should also be put out, perhaps the better statement would be to contact the two whose original footage was reused and see if they agree with the sentiments about Kratovil, too. I’m actually surprised the Daily Times didn’t try to track these two down, then again the pair may have stood by their earlier statements in the belief that they relate correctly to Kratovil as well.

As I noted earlier, the Daily Times “misquoted” Frank Kratovil then turned around and blamed Andy Harris for using the misquote in a commercial. This is the spot in question:

Truthfully, the commercial would have worked better if it tied Kratovil to the people (among them are several contributors to Kratovil’s campaign) who helped create this mess: Nancy Peosi, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Christopher Dodd, and Barack Obama. Say what you want about “Wall Street greed”, these were the people who “encouraged” (at times under threat of legal action) banks to make these unwise mortgages. And don’t forget ACORN’s part, such as this example. (I like the “non-traditional income” euphemism myself.)

Unfortunately, campaigns don’t always go as one would prefer they do. Given the current economic climate, the party that has the most to do with it may yet be rewarded on Election Day with enhanced majorities in both houses of Congress and their Presidential candidate being handed the keys to the White House. For the sake of my adopted district and despite my misgivings about this particular campaign tactic, I’m still pushing the screen next to Andy Harris’s name in order to fight the potential damage to our nation.

Security risks

Yesterday I came across a newly-released voting scorecard put out by the Center for Security Policy, one that grades everyone in Congress on certain votes during the 110th Congress that’s just wrapping up now. While the presentation leaves something to be desired, the important part is how our local representatives in Washington scored. That also left something to be desired.

Actually, the issue I have with Frank Gaffney’s group is their scoring method because a person who came into office midway through the term can’t get a very high score based on the total number of votes overall (either 23 or 24, depending on body.) If I only had the opportunity to participate in five votes because I assumed office midstream I’d only have a rating in the 20’s even if I voted their way. (That’s why I have a different method for my monoblogue accountability scorecard which divides the votes proportionally. I would base the overall score on fewer votes if a member joined up late; however, this has yet to happen in 3 sessions.)

Regardless, of all the full-term House members our own Wayne Gilchrest was the second-lowest Republican rated with a score of just 35 percent. (Ron Paul had just 18 percent but did not vote on 13 occasions.) For our Delaware friends, Mike Castle was in a group of three who were tied for the third-lowest mark among full-term Republicans, scoring a somewhat more respectable 54 percent. However, the vast majority of Republicans were in the eighties and nineties, conversely most Democrats had scores under 20. That group naturally included two of the Senators representing Maryland and Delaware, as both Ben Cardin and Joe Biden scored a big fat zero on their cards. Somewhat better were Maryland’s Barbara Mikulski (33%) and Delaware’s Tom Carper, who managed a score of 44.

This is yet another reason I believe Andy Harris should take over Wayne Gilchrest’s Congressional seat. It’s almost certain that Harris would have a score comparable to most other GOP House members who take national security seriously. (In this case, many of the votes were related to Iraq but others were on border security and missile defense funding.) Frank Kratovil may score better than average for a Democrat but I don’t find a 35% score acceptable and I doubt the voters in the First District would either. (My score would have been 96 based on the brief descriptions given, the only vote which I would have been against Gaffney’s group on would have been REAL ID funding.)

I particularly liked the Pearce Amendment:

The Pearce (NM-2) amendment sought to remove $10 million in funding for energy conservation on military installations and increase funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead program by $10 million.

The mission of the military (and I learned this from listening to Rush Limbaugh, although I believe he was actually quoting someone else – that’s a reference just to annoy my friends on the left some more) is “to kill people and break things,” not to promote energy conservation.

While I know at least some of my readers don’t like Gaffney because he falls into the neocon classification, he does have some expertise in the field of national security and should be taken seriously. (Conversely, I’m not too crazy about his continuing effort to mandate flex-fueled cars, something I’ve written about previously.) This effort is good for discussion purposes because, even though the economy has taken front and center position amongst key 2008 election issues, national security can’t be placed too far onto the back burner.

Hey, drive-by media, here’s a sex scandal!

And it’s even in the very same district that Mark Foley resigned from two years ago, the 16th District of Florida. In this case his Democrat successor, Tim Mahoney, reportedly paid his former mistress $121,000 in hush money – not only that, he also got her a job at a political consulting firm. Nice work if you can get it.

For those of you who have forgotten, the Foley case revolved around inappropriate e-mails to some of the pages who worked around the Capitol and the cover-up by GOP leaders. Between that and “macaca”, the drive-by media had a field day assisting the Democrats who were running on a platform of cleaning up Washington.

Well, guess again. Even more damning are the allegations of a cover-up on the Democrat side:

Senior Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives, including Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), the chair of the Democratic Caucus, have been working with Mahoney to keep the matter from hurting his re-election campaign, the Mahoney staffers said.

A spokesperson for Emanuel denies that account, but said Emanuel did confront Mahoney “upon hearing a rumor” about an affair in 2007 and “told him he was in public life and had a responsibility to act accordingly.” The spokesperson added that it was a “private conversation” that had nothing to do with Mahoney’s re-election prospects.

Right, because they knew if this came out at the wrong time Mahoney wouldn’t have any re-election prospects. Then again, how long did it take for someone to get John Edwards to ‘fess up about his “love child?” That came out in the National Enquirer for gosh sakes.

What makes this different and more serious than anything Foley did was the money involved. Definitely, the woman in question also has a lot of court time in store for her but you have to wonder where the investigation will be on this compared to the supposed abuse of power Sarah Palin exercised as Governor – a case hurried by a Democrat State Senator to arrive prior to Election Day and extended past its original scope. As originally brought up, Palin was cleared of any wrongdoing in sacking her Public Safety Commissioner because he was an at-will employee.

(If you want to read all 263 pages of the Palin report, you can do so here. It’s noteworthy that the report assumes Palin wasn’t worried about her ex-brother-in-law because she let go part of her security detail. I think the woman can handle firearms herself!)

And I’m not even going to go into the controversy about whether Barack Obama was actually born in America. We know John McCain wasn’t born in the United States but in the Panama Canal Zone (when we still held the Panama Canal,) however Obama’s been less forthcoming. My blogger friend Bob McCarty has been all over this one, beginning with this post of his and culminating with yesterday’s video link.

In any of these cases, if the situation were reversed don’t you think the evening news would be wall-to-wall with it? The answer is blatantly obvious and reveals part of the reason we in the pajamas media are more popular than ever.

Pictures (and text) from a fundraiser

Originally I intended to take a couple pictures of yesterday’s fundraiser for Andy Harris which featured our county Sheriff, Mike Lewis, as one of the hosts, and add them at the end of my previous post. But then I found out we had other company:

As it turns out, McCord also interviewed me so it’s possible my interview may be on the WYPR airwaves as part of the fundraiser story. He asked me not about Andy Harris but how I felt about John McCain. You may figure out why in a few paragraphs, or I’ll clue you in.

Andy actually spoke twice at the event, which was good for those who were a little late in coming.

Like I said, I didn’t exactly go to play reporter but I’m glad I did bring a little pad of paper to jot down a few observations on what Andy Harris and Mike Lewis said.

Harris on the economy:

It was “liberal policies” that got us in trouble, and we would have a recession. Andy decried another $160 billion bailout pushed by Nancy Pelosi that won’t work.

On the bailout:

Washington has had a “complete breakdown” and a “total disconnect” from the people over the last 3 weeks. Barney Frank and his allies in Congress “fiddled while Rome burned” and now are “putting gas on the fire.”

On foreign affairs:

We’re “still living in a dangerous world” and people are “scared about the wrong outcome” in this election. Harris also noted that “Barack Obama doesn’t sell in the First Congressional District.”

On John McCain:

Andy said that McCain “goes against the grain” of Washington, but there were a few places where John McCain went against Andy’s grain too.

Mike Lewis was more brief, telling us that we “need to secure this Congressional seat.” Obviously his concern was about crime and law enforcement, and Lewis also brought up the fact that Harris had come to him over a year ago to seek his support.

Now the final picture.

And Andy said this picture wouldn’t come out. I do know a little about Photoshop, so I just added the flash my camera didn’t. As you can see, I have my McCain/Palin shirt on and two Sarah Palin buttons. (Do you think I like her?) That’s why Joel McCord wanted to talk to me about McCain, and I was honest – he wasn’t my first choice but he’s the best choice now. (I had to fill Joel in a little bit on who Duncan Hunter was as part of explaining my evolution through the GOP Presidential candidates I supported as one by one they dropped out. Hopefully Andy and the younger Duncan D. Hunter, who’s running for his father’s seat, will be two among a large GOP freshman class.)

Still, I had fun, ate probably a little too much (but the pig was really good!), and just got a little more motivated to help Andy get elected. We have three weeks plus a day of work to do, but it can be done.

Air sortie counterattack

Wow, the ads are flying fast and furious now. This is the latest from Andy Harris’s Congressional campaign:

Surprisingly, I only recognized one “regular” person in the ad so he didn’t just get a bunch of shills. Maybe you’d count Governor Ehrlich as a shill but remember he was on board with Harris even before the primary.

And as I’d hoped, those contributions from regular folks like you and me to the Club For Growth have paid off. The cavalry arrived with not one, but two spots:

It’s interesting that no one has asked Frank about his stance on the misnamed “Employee Free Choice Act”, unless it came up in one of the debates I didn’t attend. While the Club For Growth may be making a misplaced assumption in that commercial, they are fairly dead on in the second example. Here’s what I wrote in my coverage of a Democrat forum last November:

(Kratovil) felt that the government “(has the) responsibility that families have health care,” and we should pool our resources to insure everyone.

When I use quotes, that’s the words out of his mouth. It’s also reflected right on his website. Under “Universal Health Care…Means Universal” Frank notes:

For nearly a century leaders in Washington have been talking about universal, affordable health care for all Americans.

(snip)

Universal coverage cannot be achieved until we accept the premise that every adult and child must be insured. If elected to Congress, I will support and advocate for true universal coverage and will provide leadership in forging consensus on a policy that provides such coverage without harming employers.

I strongly disagree that every adult and child MUST be insured; the choice should be up to the end user. I certainly recommend that they have health insurance, but that market should be opened up to allow more options and make the cost more bearable – not via mandate but by freeing people to buy insurance across state lines, reducing the amount of mandated coverage, etc. etc. I’ve frequently covered this ground before.

But Frank still contends that Harris is the one backed by special interests:

There they go again. For over a week now, Andy Harris has been attacking me the same way he attacked Wayne Gilchrest and E.J. Pipkin in the primary. Now, with his poll numbers continuing to slide, he has called on his old friends at the Club for Growth to come to his rescue and join the TV ad wars attacking me. Together, Andy Harris and his Club for Growth backers are distorting my views on health care, ignoring my proven record of cracking down on illegal immigration, and flat out lying about my commitment to middle class tax cuts.

It says a lot about Andy Harris that in the midst of our nation’s worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, he is cozying up to an extreme special interest group whose agenda includes eliminating taxes on Wall Street speculators, risking the future of social security on the stock market, and eliminating government regulation of our financial markets. He rails against “Wall Street fat cats” during our debates, but he has no problem accepting over $1.2 million worth of support from those same “fat cats” when he needs help smearing his opponents.

Personally, I’m honored to join Wayne Gilchrest and E.J. Pipkin in the ranks of those who just aren’t extreme enough for Andy Harris and his buddies at the Club for Growth. We’re in the midst of a crisis caused by corporate greed, fiscal irresponsibility, and a failure to provide proper oversight to our financial markets. I’m running against an opponent who is pushing more of the same failed policies that got us into this mess. As for me, I’m running for Congress to fight for Maryland families, not Wall Street special interests.

Frank, you’re not Ronald Reagan, so don’t use his phrase. And personally I’d prefer his old friends at the Club For Growth – the people who make America work – to your new Beltway insider friends at the DCCC, those guys whose lack of regulation in reverse, such as their mandates to banks to make mortgage loans to people who hadn’t the assets to cover them (like making banks count unemployment payments and welfare checks as income), set the foundation for the financial house of cards coming down around us. I hold them personally responsible for the devaluation of my investments, not the “Wall Street fat cats” who fairly negotiated their benefit packages.

I also just proved above that the Club For Growth is NOT distorting your views on health care, you want universal health care. It says that right on your website.

And quit pandering to families! As a single person I’m just as (if not more) concerned about the issues facing our nation today. If you were really concerned about families you would stand for ways to help them prosper by leaving more money in their pocket for them to spend or save as they like. (Included in that is keeping the capital gains tax low, which the Club For Growth stands for. Do you?)

Besides Frank, while you cherrypick some of what those producers of society who back the Club For Growth’s efforts purportedly support, do you support school choice as they do? How about legal reform to stop the abuse of lawsuits? (Oh wait, you’re an attorney. Never mind.)

Being conservative is NOT being extreme and I refuse to accept even the premise that it is. Mr. Kratovil, you may be talking a moderate’s game in the campaign, but I saw you when you were running for the Democrat nomination and you had no problem being associated with those radical tax-and-spenders in Annapolis then. You embraced Martin O’Malley until you realized that most of us in the First District are taking it in the shorts with his fiscal incompetence and are the bulk of the reason his approval numbers dipped into the mid-30’s, then you threw him under the bus.

This ought to bring some good responses. Oh, by the way, Final Frontier, congrats on having your Daily Times comment included in the Kratovil newsletter. I really don’t think that Andy Harris will alienate himself from everyone else in Congress, he’ll just be alienated from the ones who have steered our financial Titanic. The common-sense ones will accept him as their own – you can bet on it because I’ve already asked Andy Harris that question.

By the way, I may add some pictures here later so check back tonight. I have a fundraiser to attend. I decided I had enough pictures and text from the fundraiser for a post, so it’ll be my noontime post tomorrow.

A more spirited debate

I wish I’d been at this debate, too. At almost 1,000 words, perhaps Danny Reiter of PolitickerMD took some pointers from the monoblogue school of debate coverage. More importantly, it was a point/counterpoint exchange that accentuated the differences between the two.

Perhaps the most interesting passage was one that Kratovil made, referring to bipartisanship. Reiter notes:

“I’ve had appointments from both sides of the aisle unlike you,” said Kratovil, who claimed Harris only takes positions with a finger in the wind. “What people wanna do is say what people want to hear. That’s what my opponent consistently does.”

That might be something the DCCC would like to hear, considering their commercial dumps on Harris for being “lonely.” Doesn’t sound like “finger in the wind” to me! Maybe Frank is trying to show his “independence” by not being on the same page here? There’s a little bit of slack in that leash I suppose but it’s not going to get too far.

While I’m at it, did that $800 billion-plus bailout solve our problems or not? When Frank was at Salisbury University Monday, the answer was yes. From Sharahn Boykin’s article in the Daily Times:

Even though Kratovil opposed the initial bailout plan, he said he was happy to see Republicans and Democrats come together on the issue.

“We solved the crisis, but we don’t always do something to solve the issue,” he said.

Notice the article said, “initial bailout plan.” Was it the extra pork slathered on that changed Frank’s mind? We don’t know. Naturally, Andy Harris responded to the lack of clarity too:

“Kratovil is dead wrong. The crisis is far from solved, and the Wall Street bailout was the wrong approach” said Andy Harris. “I will go to Washington to solve the economic issues facing our nation, because there is a lot more that needs to be done.”

Added Harris campaign manager Chris Meekins:

“If you ask the mom who has to pay over $50 to fill up her minivan to take her kids to soccer practice; she won’t say the crisis is solved. If you ask a factory worker who is getting laid off at the end of the month; he won’t say the crisis is solved. If you ask a recent college graduate who is struggling to find his first job; he won’t say the crisis is solved. If you ask a retiree whose pension is shrinking daily, she won’t say it is solved. Kratovil’s statement shows he is not ready to go to Washington.”

Actually, Frank Kratovil is ready to go to Washington – whenever a special interest group or DCCC head Congressman Chris Van Hollen has a fundraiser for him, I’m sure he’ll be there.

In fairness, here’s the actual reason Kratovil showed up at SU: to talk about federal financial aid programs.

“A college education is more important now than it has ever been, if we want to compete globally we need to get rid of the barriers, make loans accessible, and lower the cost of higher education so everyone who has the desire to learn has the opportunity,” said Kratovil. “Access to safe and secure education loans should not be jeopardized by the current economic woes; education is the ultimate investment in the future and it should be treated as such.”

As disclosure, about half of my college education funding came from a loan from a local bank guaranteed by the federal government. The biggest issue I have with Frank’s stance though is a question: what barriers do we have now? Granted, I haven’t been in the education loan business for about 23 years but what are you saying? Are you trying to put even more young people in hock? Wasn’t the first loan problem faced by the federal government students not being able to pay back their loans? With a refinance I made, it took me fifteen years to pay off my student loans and the total amount I owed might pay for a semester now. I can only imagine the hardship placed on young people starting out because college is so expensive.

But perhaps college is expensive because the administrators and beancounters have figured out how to get their own hands into the federal pot, and those funds aren’t always going into the educational side. Much like public schools, administration seems to take a bigger bite of the campus budget.

The federal government also places strings on the money they give to colleges, particularly in who they choose to admit. With some exceptions (Hillsdale College in Michigan is one which comes to mind) schools gladly accept the federal largesse and tend to promote the experience rather than the education.

If you’ll pardon a brief digression, perhaps it’s time to rethink the value of a college education in our society. At the very least, it’s time to demand that they return to those educational values that carried our students for almost two centuries in America.

Returning to topic for one more point, it’s obvious Frank (and Senator Mikulski, who graced our side of the bay with her presence – maybe she reads here too?) was playing to the crowd at SU – remember his words? “What people wanna do is say what people want to hear.” Sounds like politics-as-usual to me.