But it’s also ensnared a collateral victim in all this, as recently nominated U.S. Senate candidate Dan Bongino is a former Secret Service agent who apparently knew some of those involved. Needless to say, those on the Left have been quick to tar him with the same brush and Bongino has responded:

With regard to the ongoing investigation into the activities of a group of Secret Service Agents in Colombia, I have chosen to defend the agency publicly & will continue to do so. I will not defend the abhorrent choices made by the individuals involved as they have tarnished the reputations of an elite group of men & women I am proud to call friends. I have been clear from the beginning both publicly & privately that I had close personal relationships with those involved but out of respect for their families, I adamantly refused to release their names. A left wing media outlet intentionally leaked the name of my brother without the surrounding facts. ALL of those involved, without exception, pursuant to a thorough investigation, must be held responsible for their choices. Integrity and leadership matter.

Already several of those involved have faced punishment or termination from the Secret Service, but if you look at this in a political sense this is a needless distraction in a race already made an uphill climb by Ben Cardin’s financial advantage – David Moon of Maryland Juice mocks Dan, writing that Bongino has “dustballs in (his campaign) wallet” while bragging about Ben Cardin’s millions in the bank. (Living in a high-tax Democratic state too many of the rest of us working Marylanders have dustballs in our wallets too, David.)

Now I’m not paranoid enough to see this as a conspiracy against a single Senatorial candidate in a race that’s really not on the national radar screen yet, but this sort of attention is going to be detrimental to Bongino until it clears its way off the front pages for the next scandal. This is true even though Bongino left the Secret Service nearly a year ago, when he began his campaign.

Instead, the campaign should be reset – even if some of us have to force the agenda in that direction – to speak about the real issues. Let’s look at a Facebook statement Bongino made Monday, for example:

It’s time to have a genuine conversation about what the administration refers to as “fairness”. What is “fair” about a limitless spending agenda which places untold burdens on my children? What is “fair” about a tax code written by insiders, paid for by insiders and benefiting insiders and their political acolytes? What is “fair” about telling parents just looking for a fair shot that education is the govt’s choice and not their’s? This is a conversation, we as Republicans, should embrace.

Ben Cardin supports all these things: the escalating spending, the tax code cronyism, the blind throwing of money at a dysfunctional public education system; above all, it’s all about preserving political power and he’s played that game at a variety of levels for 45 long years.

The early April primary makes the campaign a marathon – with just a small fraction of the voters casting their ballots most haven’t gotten into the political frame of mind yet and probably won’t do so until the national conventions later this summer. So the scandal comes at a good time insofar as Dan is concerned because it will be forgotten by this fall, but it also takes just that little bit away from the movement building we’ll need to oust an entrenched incumbent.

This one’s a bit controversial.

It’s only 37 seconds and while it makes a great point, I find it intriguing that the “dislikes” are running 2-1 over the “likes” on YouTube. Truth hurts? Any questions?

One thing we can’t question is the fact that as of Sunday the United States had the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. But the Republican Study Committee makes a good point:

Of course, volumes and volumes of special credits, deductions, and loopholes mean similar companies often pay very dissimilar tax bills. It’s natural for people and businesses to use every means available to hang onto the money they earn. We wouldn’t be an entrepreneurial nation if we didn’t. But the more time and money we spend navigating our ridiculously complex tax code, the less we produce of real value.

And that was part of the point in the Cain video. Not only is the tax rate high, but those who can afford lobbyists and campaign contributions tend to be the ones who pay the least in taxes – meanwhile, the mom and pop operation takes it in the shorts again. (That’s why 9-9-9 appealed to me. Any questions?)

The state of Maryland doesn’t get this either, according to Kimberly Burns of Maryland Business for Responsive Government.

As the Governor said himself, all this proposal does is delete the word ‘gas’ from ‘tax.’ A sales tax increase is an easy, unacceptable short-term fix to the longer term problem of business competitiveness. Just like the gas tax, it hits every Maryland working family and business right in the wallet.

Say hello to more factory outlet stores near Maryland’s borders in Delaware and Virginia. When you’re a small state like Maryland, sandwiched between two low-tax states, it’s foolish to think increasing the sales tax won’t effect Maryland’s competitiveness and the behavior of consumers.

If the 7% sales tax is passed – and remember, anything is possible in these desperate last days of the session – Maryland would have one of the highest sales taxes in the country and Delaware merchants will be licking their chops as their price advantage jumps to seven percent.

Maryland Republicans in the Senate point out another misconception on the offshore wind boondoggle by citing a Sun letter from Teresa Zent which makes an interesting charge: that $1.50 per month price is only “a cap on what a developer can plug into its proposal. It is not a cap on what a ratepayer might actually have to pay.” And that’s a tremendous point, because if your electric bill is figured on a price of perhaps 11 cents per kilowatt hour and wind energy will cost a quarter per, someone has to pay and the utilities (which, remember, have a monopoly on servicing a particular area) aren’t in it to lose money. By necessity, Maryland would be stricken with a further competitive disadvantage in electrical costs.

And while the election is over, I have to commend the participants in the U.S. Senate nomination battle for the campaign which was waged. They differed on issues, but when it came to attacking the opponent that was reserved for the real opponent, Ben Cardin. And even those weren’t personal but focused on how Cardin is out of touch and lacking in leadership in fighting for Maryland’s working families.

So it wasn’t unexpected that the two leading contenders released statements in this vein after the counting was done. Rich Douglas conceded thusly:

I want to congratulate my opponent on a hard-fought race in the Republican primary. Republicans and Democrats challenging Ben Cardin know that defeating elite royal family rule in Annapolis and incompetence on Capitol Hill is an enormous undertaking. I urge like-minded Democrats and Independent voters to close ranks with Mr. Bongino to replace Ben Cardin in November. It is time for a strong Maryland voice to be heard in the U.S. Senate. Today was the first step toward that goal.

Meanwhile, Bongino praised his opposition for the races they ran:

I am grateful to the voters of Maryland who have given me this amazing opportunity. I would also like to thank the other Republican challengers. We all share the same concerns about the direction of this country and agree it is time Maryland had new representation in Washington. I hope they will join my campaign to bring an outsider’s perspective to the US Senate.

Dan also set himself up for November, promising a campaign devoted to “the economy, national security, energy and government accountability.” He also added:

The people of Maryland deserve a Senator who will fight for them, and not the Washington establishment. We need leadership in the Senate that will work to increase opportunity for middle-class Americans, that will provide a path for those in poverty to advance and ensure this nation will once again be a place where jobs are created and people are willing to invest.

Part of doing that will be encouraging entrepreneurs and small business by making the tax code simpler and fairer instead of what the Cain video depicted.

Lastly, some laughed when Newt Gingrich spoke about bold initiatives in the space program, as he did last week. But the Competitive Enterprise Institute posited a step even beyond mere space travel: private ownership of other celestial bodies?

A proposed law requiring the United States to recognize land claims off planet under specified conditions offers the possibility of legal, tradable land titles, allowing the land to be used as loan collateral or an asset to be sold to raise funds needed to develop it.

Such a law would vitiate the 1979 Moon Treaty, which does outlaw private property claims in space, but to which the U.S. is not a signatory. This should be viewed as a feature, rather than a bug. The law would not impose any new costs on the federal government, and would likely generate significant tax revenue through title transaction fees and economic growth from new space ventures carried out by U.S. individuals and corporations. It would have great potential to kick the development of extraterrestrial resources—and perhaps even the human settlement of space—into high gear.

It’s quite a fascinating report, and it points out the difference between development in similar areas deemed off-limits to private property (Simberg cites Antarctica as an example of government-controlled property) where little development is occurring, as opposed to the far northern reaches of the planet where several companies are exercising mineral rights. He theorizes that billions of dollars could be made if private property rights were granted in space, and I can’t disagree.

I’m not going to be the first in line to be a space tourist or worker, but if opening up space can help the economy and promote future prosperity for succeeding generations, what are we waiting for?

I’m going to begin with the Presidential race, on a statewide level. There have already been several polls on this, so there’s a little bit of cheating involved; then again, the polls actually pretty much mirrored my gut instinct all along.

In Maryland, I see the race like this:

1. Mitt Romney – 41%
2. Rick Santorum – 28%
3. Newt Gingrich – 16%
4. Ron Paul – 11%
5. Fred Karger – 2%
6. Rick Perry – <1%
7. Buddy Roemer – <1%
8. Jon Huntsman – <1%

The polls seem to have Romney winning bigger (Rasmussen has it 45-28) but I think Mitt’s people will tend to figure he’s got it in the bag and turnout will be better in certain areas where Gingrich and Paul may run a little stronger.

How about Wicomico County? This is more of a crapshoot but I think the top 4 results will be a little different:

1. Rick Santorum – 35%
2. Mitt Romney – 33%
3. Newt Gingrich – 18%
4. Ron Paul – 13%

The voters here tend to be more conservative than the state at large.

The other statewide race is for U.S. Senate. Now I’m really going to go out on a limb here, because there aren’t any polls I’m aware of (aside from the sure fact campaigns have internal polling I’m not privy to) but my gut is telling me we may have a barnburner on our hands:

1. Dan Bongino – 36%
2. Richard Douglas – 34%
3. Robert Broadus – 8%
4. Corrogan Vaughn – 5%
5. Joseph Alexander – 4%
6. David Jones – 4%
7. William Capps – 3%
8. Rick Hoover – 3%
9. John Kimble – 2%
10. Brian Vaeth – 1%

In Wicomico County, I suspect the top three will be Bongino (42%), Douglas (36%), and Broadus (8%). None of the others will be over 3 percent. Incumbent Ben Cardin will be the opponent, with the over-under line for me being 70% of the statewide vote.

And how about the Sixth District race? It’s the most talked-about Congressional primary since the 2008 First District primary, with the added benefit of mud flying on both sides.

On the Republican side, I think Roscoe Bartlett will hold on to his seat with 33% of the vote, with David Brinkley gathering 29%, Joseph Krysztforski 14%, Robin Ficker 10%, and Kathy Afzali 7%. The other three will split the remaining 7%.

What saves Bartlett’s bacon is the fact that there are so many in the race that people may just throw up their hands and go with the name they know. If there were just four or five in the race I think Brinkley has a shot, although the last-minute release of 9-1-1 tapes featuring his ex-wife may knock a point or two away from Brinkley and provide Roscoe’s margin of victory. It’s the voters on the extreme western end of the district who are likely most swayed by that because they don’t really know David that well.

On the Democratic side, I’m sensing a bit of an upset. We figured that this seat was drawn for Rob Garagiola, but I suspect the charges laid against him by John Delaney have done enough damage that Delaney will squeak out a close win, something on the order of 31-30. Milad Pooran will likely run a respectable third with 21%, while Ron Little grabs 10% and Charles Bailey the last 8%.

The Second District GOP race is also interesting, but I think Nancy Jacobs will win it with relative ease, probably with 40% or so of the vote. Larry Smith comes in around 28%, Rick Impallaria with 19%, and the other two with single digits apiece.

Meanwhile, I think John LaFerla will be the First District Democratic nominee against Andy Harris and he’ll end up just short of a majority – 49% district-wide against Wendy Rosen’s 43%. Kim Letke will get the last 8%. What puts LaFerla over the top in the primary is the endorsement of Wayne Gilchrest. What keeps him from winning in November is being endorsed by NARAL and Planned Parenthood.

GOP winners in other districts will be Eric Knowles (3rd), Faith Loudon (4th), Tony O’Donnell (5th), Frank Mirabile (7th), and Dave Wallace (8th). Wallace gets the nod because the other three candidates will likely split the Montgomery County vote just enough for him to win over Ken Timmerman. Of course, there will not be any upsets among the incumbent Democrats – all of them will get over 75% in their respective primaries.

So what do you think? Am I all wet or do I have a good chance of being correct – and why? As opposed to yesterday, I’m going to leave this up all day until results come in.

Video streaming by Ustream

The Maryland GOP was heavily promoting this event, so if you haven’t made up your mind yet, this is a chance to do so.

But I can’t help noticing parallels between the 2010 and 2012 GOP Senate races. The two things which got eventual 2010 nominee Eric Wargotz through the primary and into a general election shellacking by Barbara Mikulski were the tacit backing of the state party establishment (as opposed to Jim Rutledge, who was perceived as more of a TEA Party candidate) and a lot of the candidate’s money. Fast forward to 2012 and you find that, on the first point, Richard Douglas has retained the services of Lawrence Scott’s political consulting firm. Lawrence Scott is the son of former MDGOP Chair and National Committeewoman candidate Audrey Scott, who has also endorsed Douglas.

I don’t doubt that Scott Strategies has had its share of successes over the years, but FEC records show his firm has received over $27,000 from Douglas. By comparison, the campaign has raised just over $26,000 in individual contributions.

So where is the money for what the Douglas campaign describes as a “six figure advertising buy focused on statewide radio, direct mail and voter turnout phone calls as the April 3 primary nears” coming from? Richard has secured over $100,000 in candidate loans, meaning his campaign is (as of the March 14 filing date) nearly $111,000 in debt with just over $20,000 cash on hand.

This is similar to 2010, where Eric Wargotz had over $500,000 cash on hand before his September primary but was $575,000 in debt based on campaign loans (he ended up raising just over $250,000 from outside contributors for the 2010 campaign but spent $1.24 million overall.)

By comparison, Dan Bongino raised over $187,000 in individual contributions by March 14, and had only loaned $3,000 to his campaign. A significant portion of his expenditures went to several paid members of his campaign rather than to an outside consultant. But maybe he needed a better audio feed for this spot, because it doesn’t compare well with his radio ads.

Of course, financially neither holds a candle to the nearly $1.9 million Ben Cardin had on hand. Ben obviously didn’t sleep through the class on how to shake down unions, PACs, and other special interests for campaign cash.

I also wanted to add a few words about early voting in Maryland. So far, according to the latest figures which now include five days of the six-day process, not even 2% of voters have come out. Even if the final day is as busy as Saturday was, fewer than one out of 40 registered voters will partake in the process. So I must ask: why are we bothering?

The only counties which may have significant early turnout (that being on the order of seven to eight percent) are Talbot and Kent counties; on the other hand some of the largest counties will likely lag under 2%. (Wicomico is at 2.37% with 1,063 voting at the Civic Center so far.)

As far as party affiliation, the GOP is ahead in terms of percentage with 2.17% turnout compared to 1.97% for Democrats. That’s a little ironic given the fact the GOP didn’t care for early voting when it was presented to the General Assembly, but  both parties have encouraged its use since.

As for me, I’m going to the polls Tuesday like we should.

Of course we did our usual bit of club business, reciting the Lord’s Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance before I read a rather lengthy accounting of the February meeting. We even had a hiccup in the treasurer’s report that I pointed out. But none of it dissuaded the Republican who boldly proclaimed for his opening, “I’m here because I want to beat Ben Cardin.”

To illustrate his point, Douglas took us back about three decades. When he left the Navy in 1979, he took his GI Bill benefits and enrolled at the University of South Florida where a professor told him the Soviet Union would be eternal and America would have to learn to live with it. Well, we saw how that turned out, and while there are those in Annapolis who would have us believe that one-party rule in Maryland is eternal as well, that’s not necessarily so.

Rich compared Ben Cardin to a brick in a wall – as the mortar is wearing away, soon the brick would drop from the wall and the remainder of the house would follow. And Douglas wasn’t going to be timid in his role, either, warning “Martin O’Malley is going to be one unhappy fella” when Rich wins. “(He’ll) wish he’d never heard my name,” continued Douglas, because he has a “duty to speak” as a Senator. Douglas promised to be our voice and vote in the Senate.

Drawing upon his experience as a staffer for the late Sen. Jesse Helms, Rich noted that the Senate behind closed doors “is not pretty.” But he pointed out one of the endorsements he had was a sitting Senator, Mark Kirk of Illinois. However, he concluded his initial remarks by saying “the endorsement I want is yours.” He also vowed to ask Ben Cardin the questions no one else does after he wins the primary.

One other key point Douglas made was saying that he would serve no more than two terms, contrasting himself to the lifetime politician Ben Cardin has become.

Opening the floor to questions, Rich was asked if any of the Democrats running against Cardin could beat him. Sure, there was a “remote” chance, said Douglas, but the early Cardin endorsements by the Washington Post and President Obama were a sign of “weakness” in the general election, Rich assessed.

He remained in an anti-incumbent mode when asked the next question about our $15 trillion deficit. The problem in Washington was that self-interest came first, followed closely by party interest and then maybe the country’s interests. “One person can make a difference in the Senate,” said Douglas, but there was a “lack of will” to face the deficit.

In fact, Rich revealed that it was the debt ceiling debacle last August which drove him into the race. “Actions speak louder than words,” said Douglas. The duty of a Senator is to try to find ways to generate jobs and create options, removing obstacles to success, opined Rich. We had a great economy for a number of decades, and that prosperity masked the problems we’re now having to face today.

When asked if he drew any lessons from Senator Helms, Rich answered that “the guy had principle (and) resolve.” He was the leader who took the arrows, Rich continued, and there was nothing wrong with being divisive. We have to draw a line someplace. Current Senators he admired were Mark Kirk, Jim DeMint, and Marco Rubio, although he also had kind words for John McCain, a “terrific member” of the Senate. “If you can work across party lines, do it.”

It was no surprise that he was asked about his position on Obamacare, which Rich believed could rightfully be named after Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid – all Obama did was sign it, intoned Douglas. To him, the individual mandate was unconstitutional but the question before the Supreme Court would be whether Congress overstepped its interstate commerce power. Douglas believed it did, but was convinced that a truly conservative SCOTUS would pass the buck back to Congress to resolve. As it was, Douglas thought the Senate was the “last line of defense” against the executive branch and we had to be mindful of the two branches working too closely together.

Before I finish with Richard Douglas, I want to thank him for running a campaign where he focused on the opponent he will have instead of trying to destroy the opponents he does have. If he doesn’t win this time around, he’s positioned himself well for a future run should he choose to do so and he hasn’t poisoned the well for the others.

After the officers present were sworn in by county Chair Dave Parker, he gave the Central Committee report. It focused on the upcoming primary, where he encouraged us to vote for the people running and not necessarily the candidate next to their name, and our upcoming state convention which will feature elections for National Committeeman and National Committeewoman.

Dave also decried the maintenance of effort bill which has passed the General Assembly. (I guess instead of Norm Conway’s monoblogue nickname being “Five Dollar” I should begin calling him Norm “14 Million Dollar” Conway. That’s what he just cost the county.) Parker also slammed the two-year-old Obamacare bill, saying the “everything (we were told about it) was a lie.”

One other housekeeping note for the fall: we will need to find a new location for our headquarters, since the old one is being torn down to make way for a pharmacy.

Shawn Jester gave an Andy Harris report, commenting on a bill recently passed by the House allowing further development at Wallops Island, Virginia. And once we got the announcements that a WCRC scholarship was edging towards reality, we had picked up well over 100 voters on the Democrats in the last month, and early voting had been “very light,” I made the meeting interesting.

One thing touched on during the January meeting was a comment that, despite a 6-1 majority on County Council, the Republicans weren’t performing like a body that dominated by a conservative party should. What I was interested in was how far the WCRC wanted to go in terms of being more issue-oriented and it seemed like the mood of the club was that they had been there and done that, to the detriment of membership.

Well, if I can put on my editorial hat for a few moments, it didn’t look like we had all that much to lose. I was somewhat embarrassed by the smaller-than-normal turnout for a leading U.S. Senate candidate. And the fact there was a competing event is sort of telling because they are being activists and the WCRC maybe not so much. Now I could be way off base, but I would seem to think that a Republican club in a county similar to ours should draw at least twice as many for a monthly meeting regardless of the speaker. Perhaps what we need to do is find out what other, seemingly more successful clubs are doing to bring people to the meetings.

It’s just like economics – if we don’t grow, we die. I’d prefer not to be among those standing around lamenting what happened to the Wicomico County Republican Club.

I don’t have to be the most popular person at the next club function, but I think things may need a little bit of shaking up. In the meantime, I’d like to thank Richard Douglas for adding his perspective to our meeting.

When the filing deadline came and went in January, we ended up with ten people on the ballot seeking to challenge incumbent Senator Ben Cardin on the Republican side. (There are also eight Democratic challengers who, with the exception of State Senator C. Anthony Muse, will be lucky to see 20 percent of the vote as a collection.)

But if you look at the ten on our side as a group, you can start to pick out those who have a legitimate chance pretty early. Some have been on the ballot before, but have never come close to grabbing the brass ring. You know, one would think guys like Corrogan Vaughn or John Kimble might get the hint at some point but they soldier on nonetheless, appearing on ballot after ballot every two years for some office. This is Vaughn’s fourth Senate try (counting an abortive 2010 run) and Kimble’s third, although he’s been on a ballot every two years for some federal office since 1996. Another 2012 candidate, Joseph Alexander, ran in the 2010 Senate primary and finished a distant third with 5.9% of the vote.

Others have been in local races and lost. Rick Hoover ran twice for the Third District Congressional nod in 2004 and 2006 and didn’t distinguish himself enough to not be an also-ran. William Capps took on an incumbent State Senator and lost in 2010, while Robert Broadus had the unenviable task of attempting to win as a Republican in the Fourth Congressional District. While Broadus only gathered 16% of the vote, it was a better showing than the Republican winner had in 2008 against Edwards. But even Broadus lost in the 2008 primary – he was unopposed in 2010.

There are four others who are making their first run for statewide office, with Brian Vaeth and David Jones the lesser-known duo of the group. I haven’t heard anything from Vaeth, but David Jones is a candidate who, with some polish and a more appropriate race for a single dad to get into (on the scale of a countywide or House of Delegates district contest) could have a future in the political arena. He had a message which was trying to come out, but a statewide campaign presents an awfully steep learning curve.

Out of the eight I have cited so far, the battle for third place shapes up between Broadus, based on his performance in a difficult district and the ready-made issue he has with his position as head of Protect Marriage Maryland, Alexander (simply based on 2010 results), and Jones (as a hard worker who’s quite likable.) One of the others might surprise me, but these are the guys who seem to me as the aspirants for Miss Congeniality.

Yet the race is really coming down to two men. Each brings something unique to the table.

Richard Douglas began his campaign with some advantages: as a staffer for the late Senator Jesse Helms, he knows about how the system works and where it can be taken advantage of. He also garnered the support early on of two key groups: foreign policy experts, personified by Ambassadors Roger Noriega and John Bolton, and many among the Maryland GOP brass, most notably former Chair Audrey Scott.

A lot of what Rich spoke about early on came from the realm of foreign policy, the understanding of which is a Senator’s duty. But it didn’t seem to be a message which resonated much beyond the five percent or so of Republicans who truly follow that aspect of political life. So in the last month Douglas has shifted his approach to emphasize more of a populist, anti-incumbent appeal. He’s hammered Ben Cardin of late on a number of taxation issues, many of which come on a state level, and blasted Ben for a lack of interest in job creation.

On the other hand, Dan Bongino has mainly stuck to economic issues as his strong suit. But he also brings a willingness to not concede the votes of the minority community; instead he wants to broaden the Republican base by exploiting certain wedge issues which resonate with urban voters – a prime example is school choice. Moreso than Douglas, he notes a background which plays well with certain aspects of the community as Bongino grew up poor and worked his way to success in the law enforcement field.

When the campaign was relatively young, I realized that the race would probably come down to Bongino and Douglas. It was at that point that I assessed the following:

So the question for voters is going to be an interesting one if you presume Rich Douglas and Dan Bongino are the two leading candidates. It’s obvious that Richard’s forte is foreign affairs, while Bongino seems to have a lead with those who favor smaller government – the TEA Party crowd. So how will the pair cover themselves on what would be perceived as their weaker points?

Obviously it appears Douglas is trying to move into the territory Bongino set for himself early on. But while I didn’t necessarily agree with Bongino’s Afghanistan stance at the time, the more I study on the subject the more I think he could be correct. And something Dan related to me after the Lincoln Day Dinner, in a conversation I didn’t elaborate on at the time, convinced me he isn’t completely naive about foreign affairs. When you’re placed in charge of a security detail in a war zone, you must either know a little bit about the lay of the land or you’re a quick study. In either case, Bongino was given that responsibility.

So it comes down to this. If Richard Douglas is the GOP nominee on April 4, I would be very comfortable working for his election to the Senate. He’s a candidate who’s shown me that he has the skills necessary to be a Senator and also that he’s not afraid to take on his opponent. Of course, he’ll be at a distinct financial disadvantage against Ben Cardin and his later entry in the race has taken the time away from developing the grassroots support he’ll need by November.

But there are two key areas which have set Dan Bongino apart, and they’re the ones which tip the scales in his favor.

One is the willingness to fight for every vote that I have cited and the reason he’s doing so is because, as Dan has often stated, he has no “Plan B.” One could say he was foolish to give up a Secret Service gig but if love of country is that important to him then Dan should be commended for his sacrifice. I don’t think he’d be unemployed too long if he lost.

But another important thing Bongino is doing is nationalizing the Maryland U.S. Senate campaign. To some extent, Andy Harris showed us how this could be done: the Club for Growth was instrumental in putting him on the map and there was a huge amount of national interest in the First District rematch in 2010 because of it. It’s true that Frank Kratovil’s 2008 victory was somewhat of an anomaly because Barack Obama’s coattails were long enough for Kratovil to win an R+13 district, but beating an incumbent Congressman is a difficult task that Andy Harris has actually accomplished twice, in part by nationalizing the race. The effects of this show most in Bongino’s fundraising and grassroots support, both of which are formidable by GOP standards.

Thus, I finally came to the decision that Dan Bongino is the better choice. But if you’re already set to vote for Richard Douglas, I think you should since he’s a quite qualified candidate as well. It’s the 15 to 20 percent who were planning on voting for the other eight who should seriously reconsider their decision and instead press the screen to place the X next to Bongino’s name. Those eight are all good men who care about the state, but we need all hands on deck to defeat a man who has lived off the voters for 46 years, inheriting his original position from his uncle (who shared the Cardin surname.)

Now I want to say a few words about some of the Congressional races.

There are five Republican members of the General Assembly who have the luxury of “running from cover” in this cycle; unfortunately the timing of the primary has meant that all five have had to do so around the ongoing General Assembly session.

Honestly, I haven’t followed the races enough to be an expert on all of the candidates running for Congress. But what I can tell you about these five is how they have fared in the monoblogue Accountability Project.

In 2011, the candidates received these mAP scores:

1. Nancy Jacobs (running in the Second Congressional District) – 92%
2. Kathy Afzali (running in the Sixth Congressional District) – 88%
3. David Brinkley (running in the Sixth Congressional District) – 84%
4. Tony O’Donnell (running in the Fifth Congressional District) – 80%
5. Rick Impallaria (running in the Second Congressional District) – 80%

Bear in mind 2011 scores were based on 25 votes so each got between 20 and 23 “correct.”

Lifetime mAP scores (for all except Afzali, these are based on five years since I began the mAP in 2007):

1. Afzali – 88% (based on 2011 only)
2. O’Donnell – 85%
3. Impallaria – 77%
4. Jacobs – 77%
5. Brinkley – 75%

This is compiled over 5 years and well over 100 votes in most cases. Take from it what you will about my order of preference in those races, but as a measure of comparison Andy Harris had a “lifetime” score close to 90 percent in the four years I compiled his voting record.

At the eleventh hour before early voting begins, we have a war of words between conservative activist Andrew Langer and U.S. Senate candidate Richard Douglas, and something I reported is helping to stir the pot.

Yesterday, Andrew wrote the following on his Facebook profile:

Seriously, to my friends who are Richard J. Douglas supporters… are you aware that your candidate:

- believes the individual mandate in Obamacare to be constitutional; (he believes that Congress shouldn’t have enacted it, but that they have the power to do so)

- has not signed the Americans for Tax Reform “no new taxes” pledge;

- does not support the Balanced Budget Amendment.

I think Rich is a nice guy. I like him just fine. But a former congressional staffer who believes in expansive legislative powers at the expense of individual rights, who doesn’t think Congress needs to be reigned in with new rules to control spending, who won’t put his signature on paper that he won’t raise your taxes?

That’s not “new blood.” Not by a long shot.

Sorry.

Prior to that he had gone on and cited my reporting of the Wicomico County Lincoln Day Dinner as evidence Douglas “says that Congress HAS power to implement the individual mandate.”

Well, Richard Douglas didn’t take that lying down.

A social media activist posted false information about my record. Our campaign has provided this individual with a point of contact (a real live person to talk to) and we look forward to hearing from him in a timely manner so he can retract his comments.

This individual did not check his facts. I signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge.

Moreover, more than any other candidate, I have been calling attention to taxation at both the federal and state level.

Political attacks and distortions of records are nothing new in campaigns. Outright falsehoods are another matter.

We will keep you posted.

And in my e-mail box this morning was an e-mail copy of an efax.com receipt, with the recipient number matching the number on the Pledge, dated last November 11.

On the surface, one can say what Langer did about Douglas and as a sound byte he would be correct. But there are reasons Douglas believes as he does, and in particular his defense of opposing a balanced budget amendment, or BBA, because it would remand the creation of the budget to whatever a judge says makes a lot of sense. Personally, I would still support a BBA but Douglas makes perhaps the best argument against the adoption of one I’ve heard. Besides, we shouldn’t need a BBA to have the gumption to spend no more than we take in. There truly is no such thing as a free lunch.

But one thing I’ve noticed about the Douglas campaign is the increased strain of populism, with a message more closely matching his main opponent Dan Bongino. And while Bongino has been closely cultivating the national profile he likely believes will assist him in knocking out an incumbent who’s politically long in the tooth – one example of that being his appearance on Sean Hannity’s show last night – Douglas is making his final push on a more local level with a series of radio appearances on the Shore yesterday and today. It’s likely he’s hammering incumbent Ben Cardin on his lack of support for the DeMint amendment to lower the federal gasoline tax and begin devolving the federal program to states, or Cardin’s reluctance to decry the “Annapolis tax-a-thon,” as Rich called it in a recent statement.

I’ve contacted Douglas for an update on this story today; since he was traveling and couldn’t follow the story he referred me to his press contact Jim Pettit. I contacted Pettit about 40 minutes before I put this post to bed and haven’t received a response; if events warrant I will update.

Douglas will also be a featured speaker at Monday night’s Wicomico County Republican Club meeting. Maybe Andrew Langer can come down here and get answers in person.

Update: I spoke to Pettit, who pondered whether Langer was working on behalf of Dan Bongino or on his own. But just now it was confirmed by Norquist’s chief of staff Chris Butler that ATR indeed has the pledge.

ATR’s Tweet at 4:42 p.m.:

Contrary to ATR’s first response to Andrew Langer, US Senate candidate Richard Douglas (R-MD) did sign the Pledge in Nov. 2011.

So now we can get back to our regularly scheduled debate on who best to oust Ben Cardin from our Senate seat via the issues and verifiable facts.

Update 2: Something I actually spoke with Pettit about, and an interesting thought topic: why now?

Let’s look at the timeline here. Richard Douglas started his campaign early last fall because one of his first campaign appearances was our Wicomico County Central Committee meeting on October 3, 2011. Apparently he signed this pledge sometime on or about November 11, with two witnesses from Montgomery County. Yet we went over four months without anyone noticing the ATR site had never added Douglas? Come to think of it, I couldn’t find anything on any Maryland candidate in my (admittedly cursory) search – one would think ATR would make a bigger deal of these.

Could this be a dirty trick? Perhaps, but I really don’t think so. There’s no question that Bongino and Douglas have ran their campaigns with contrasting styles, but I think the comparison is good. And say what you will about Andrew Langer, Rich Douglas has his overzealous supporters as well. Perhaps Rich could have verified this a little earlier, but when you get a fax receipt and don’t hear from the recipient that the fax didn’t arrive you generally assume there’s no issue.

The call itself was timed just before Dan’s “20 on 20″ moneybomb, which turned out to be, in his words today, “an incredible success” which “surpassed our one-day goal.” But Dan lauded the support of the Maryland conservative blogosphere, which had been “absolutely invaluable” to his campaign, arguably moreso than the mainstream media’s. I’m not sure I would agree with that totally, but when you stop to consider the interests of our audience (which is more attuned to politics and forms the backbone of donors, volunteers, etc.) I can see his point. The mainstream is more valuable for building up name recognition, though.

Speaking of volunteers, Dan assessed his campaign as “in great shape” as far as that goes; still he conceded “we need a little help” in fundraising – “but we’re doing okay.” Much of the fundraising would go toward media, and it’s no secret that whoever wins the GOP primary will have to contend with Cardin’s massive warchest, $1 million of which he’s purportedly spending on media buys in the runup to the primary. And while Cardin has a contested primary, with the main opponent being State Senator C. Anthony Muse of Prince George’s County, it’s probable that the lone question surrounding the April 3rd contest is the over-under on Cardin’s margin of victory. As others are finding out on a more limited scale, it’s difficult enough to run a campaign during the General Assembly session let alone attempt a statewide one as Muse is attempting. You can also factor in the tacit disapproval of state Democratic party brass as another hindrance to Muse’s upstart bid.

But Dan brought up a good point about Ben’s media buy – why is this necessary after 45 years in public office, particularly when he’s run for election 16 times? Granted, Ben hasn’t been on the ballot since 2006 but he’s obviously a familiar name in one of the state’s two leading media markets, and it’s not like he won’t get the covert backing of the state’s key media outlets either.

I asked a question of Dan regarding the Muse challenge and what it means to the minority vote: what percentage of the vote are you looking for? “All of them,” he replied. But to Dan that sphere of voters presents a “target-rich environment” where several conservative issues can resonate. There’s no doubt that Bongino is basing his campaign on kitchen-table issues – “I know what it’s like to be hungry,” he said, regarding his upbringing in a impoverished family – but there are other “wedge issues” out there like school choice, which “resonates strongly” in many areas, where the incumbent is working against the interests of minority voters. “We can do better” with them, assessed Dan.

Other issue-based questions dealt with the recent CBO re-estimate of Obamacare’s costs, which Dan remarked is “not realistic…not even close” to the true costs and what he felt were key issues: of course the economy and jobs topped the list. “Folks want to hear about putting Cheerios on the table right now,” said Bongino.

He was also pleased to get the endorsement from the Gazette website, which is based in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., along with additional coverage from Newsmax and the G. Gordon Liddy radio program. “Seven million eyeballs” saw the Newsmax piece, beamed Bongino.

All in all, the conference call, which lasted a few ticks short of a half-hour, was a valuable tool in gauging the strength of the Bongino campaign at this point. There’s no doubt he (or any other of the ten GOP aspirants for the nomination) will have an uphill battle this fall, but there are reasons to believe Democrats in general have cracks in their Maryland armor. Will the base turn out for Obama? And what about the two referenda which will most likely be on the ballot – will they drive conservative turnout?

I’m not sure how much Bongino or any of the other Republicans who will survive the primary will tie themselves to these issues, as we have a long way to go to find out whether the gay marriage question will even be on the ballot. Moreover, and quite frankly, gay marriage can be characterized as a side issue in a race for federal office. But these ballot issues will bring conservative voters out and we know Cardin is foursquare behind placing the support of same-sex marriage in the Democratic party’s platform so we don’t necessarily have to be strongly against gay marriage in federal races.

But I appreciated being included in the call, and know that the campaign begins in earnest once nominees are selected April 3.

It’s worth noting that, while Bongino doesn’t have a local event scheduled I’m aware of, two of his opponents will be in the Salisbury area on Monday, March 26th. Richard Douglas is the featured speaker for the Wicomico County Republican Club meeting at the Chamber of Commerce building in downtown Salisbury while fellow GOP officeseeker Robert Broadus will address the Wicomico Society of Patriots meeting at Adam’s Ribs in Fruitland.

I’ll cut to the chase: here is the percentage score and rank among Maryland’s House delegation, by district. Bear in mind there are 435 House members:

1. Andy Harris, 95% (22)
2. Dutch Ruppersberger, 1% (419)
3. John Sarbanes, 8% (365)
4. Donna Edwards, 11% (335)
5. Steny Hoyer, 8% (372)
6. Roscoe Bartlett, 89% (42)
7. Elijah Cummings, 9% (353)
8. Chris Van Hollen, 12% (315)

On the Senate side, Barbara Mikulski scored 11% and ranked 72nd, while Ben Cardin attained a miserable 3% rating and finished 94th.

It’s obvious that Maryland can do its part to help enact pro-growth policies by helping to get rid of the anti-growth president we have now, but more importantly in this election ousting Ben Cardin and some of the low-performing House members we have. That’s not to say one of Bartlett’s GOP primary opponents wouldn’t have a similar score, though, so don’t consider this an endorsement of Roscoe Bartlett. (Harris is unopposed in the GOP primary.)

Is eliminating Ben Cardin a long shot? Yes, a prudent observer would have to admit it is. Cardin is a likable guy who reminds people of a kindly grandfather, and it’s obvious he has plenty of political instinct since he’s made a long career out of being elected every two to four years. (By my count, he’s won in 1966, 1970, 1974, 1978, 1982, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006. That’s sixteen elections, folks.)

But it can be done, and we have to state our case to Maryland voters. The same goes for several House seats where I think we have a fighting chance: the Second, Fifth, and Eighth districts are probably the most in play. Imagine holding our two we have now and winning those three – Democrats would be self-immolating themselves if their heads didn’t explode first.

There’s no question conservatives have the right ideas, it’s just that we have to get together and put them into practice. Of course, the Club for Growth isn’t perfect but I would argue it’s pretty damn conservative and this is a useful gauge on who needs to go in our current Congressional setup.

Tomorrow I have a sort of companion piece on one Senate candidate, although I could have probably written it regarding several others as well. He points out a truism about Maryland politics that I expand on.

If you want to see one up close and in person, you may simply attend the Republican Women of Wicomico’s Membership Lunch this Wednesday at noon at Brew River Restaurant, when Richard Douglas will be their featured speaker. Perhaps he’ll talk about the Israeli situation, where Douglas blasted the incumbent Senator for discussing postal closures and not making any statement on Iran in nearly six months. Or Douglas may tout his latest endorsement from Baltimore County Delegate Bill Frank, who called Douglas “the right candidate at the right time.” Certainly he’ll update those attending on his campaign to date.

The cost is $12, and reservations are available from Brew River. But call tomorrow (Tuesday) to assure a place.

Right now you can sit in the comfort of your easy chair – or wherever you access this site – and see a 90-second video put together on Dan Bongino’s behalf.

Interestingly enough, I saw my first Bongino yard sign today locally so the word is beginning to get out on him. “Government is not the answer. We are the answer.” It’s a good message. And who knows, perhaps I can get that video to 1,000 views by placing it here.

We have two good candidates for Senate who have a reasonable shot. That’s not to dismiss the other eight who are running, as all of them who I’ve met seem to be men of character and honor. But the realist in me sees this as now a two-man race for a number of reasons, particularly money and visibility.

Consider these social media facts. If you take the  footprint of their respective websites based on Alexa ratings and the reach of their Facebook and Twitter pages, this is what you would find among the U.S. Senate candidates. Granted, Alexa is sort of a weak indicator of readership but it’s a decent indicator of relative popularity between sites – I would be confident that a site with a rating of 3 million is more widely read than one at 7 million.

Alexa ranking (lower is better):

1. Dan Bongino – 2,652,827
2. Ben Cardin – 3,543,017
3. Richard Douglas – 3,609,731
4. David Jones – 6,604,886
5. Robert Broadus – 7,137,723
6. William Capps – 8,325,982
7. John Kimble – 10,628,905
8. Brian Vaeth – 11,095,766
9. Rick Hoover – 11,786,645
10. Corrogan Vaughn – no data (I think his site is new at the address.)

Not every candidate has a Facebook or Twitter page devoted to their campaign, but for those who do here are likes and follows, respectively:

Facebook:

1. Ben Cardin – 3,500
2. Dan Bongino – 1,680
3. Corrogan Vaughn – 157
4. Rich Douglas – 81
5. Brian Vaeth – 25
6. Robert Broadus – 17
7. Rick Hoover – 4

Twitter:

1. Dan Bongino – 1,317
2. David Jones – 819
3. Corrogan Vaughn – 149
4. Rich Douglas – 108
5. Rick Hoover -27

(Apparently, Ben Cardin’s campaign isn’t on Twitter.)

It’s fairly evident that Bongino has a good lead in the social networking area, but that doesn’t always translate into votes. I was told that Bob Ehrlich had more Facebook followers than Martin O’Malley did and we see how that turned out.

And if you compare these numbers to a well-read website like Red Maryland, which perhaps has the best social media presence of any statewide political website, you’ll see all of them fall short on at least one count: Alexa for RM is 859,533 and they have 616 Facebook followers along with 761 on Twitter. Of course, a blog has far longer to build an audience so the Alexa should be expected; on the other hand, creating buzz should work in the favor of the campaigns yet only a few do better than the website.

But regardless of who wins this race on April 3rd, we need to close ranks behind them so that Ben Cardin is retired from public life come next January.

I’ve heard so much over the last week about the gas tax: first it was off the table in favor of an income tax hike, and now it’s just being backed up to the end of the General Assembly session. The Senate Republican slate is still pressing the anti-gas tax website, though, also making the point that the Transportation Trust Fund is about the least trustworthy option for placing extra revenue.

And gas prices aren’t just a state issue. The Republican Study Committee, a group of conservative Congressional Republicans, raises a valid argument:

Oil production on private and state-owned land – land beyond the federal government’s grip – grew 14% last year. At the exact same time, production on federal land fell 11%. Gas prices have nearly doubled since Obama’s inauguration, and energy analysts predict that more Americans than ever before will pay $5.00 per gallon this year.

The President’s response to soaring gas prices is to shrug his shoulders and say, “There’s not much we can do.” And his Secretary of Energy Steven Chu has actually called for raising gas prices to European levels. Italians currently pay about $9.00 per gallon!

This isn’t the energy policy Americans deserve. Aggressively increasing our energy production will help lower gas prices and create more jobs. To do it, we must unlock more areas for exploration, cut through the red tape that slows production, and green light common sense projects like the Keystone XL pipeline.

The smart and responsible path to American energy security is clear, and the Republican Study Committee’s Jobs Through Growth Act shows the way. We quite literally cannot afford to wait. (Emphasis mine.)

Read that first sentence again – oil exploration on private land grew, but public lands waned. And the Democrats’ response? They want to once again raid the Strategic Petroleum Reserve rather than admitting their culpability in holding up production for a decade or more – oil which could have already been on the market.

I’m a strong believer in the concept of “highest and best use” when it comes to land, although I adapt it somewhat to consider the resource value. Furthermore, I feel that recreational usage, preservation, and energy extraction need not be mutually exclusive over large tracts of land. It wouldn’t be any worse to see an oil well or fracking operation than to have a wind turbine hovering hundreds of feet in the air, either offshore or land-based, or a field full of solar panels.

As an example of how energy is becoming a national campaign issue, even in local races, I can direct you to Second District Congressional candidate Larry Smith, who both put forth his energy plan and challenged opponent Dutch Ruppersberger to” support the Keystone XL pipeline” and “stand up to President Obama and the special interest groups in Washington. It is time for him to fight for the people of his district and begin taking constructive measures to help end the pain at the pump.”

It’s good that Smith is another Maryland Republican who is taking the fight to the Democrat rather than his primary opponents. We can leave that for the other side, even when they’re correct in pointing it out.

Another race where this is occurring is the U.S. Senate race, where both the leading contenders are hammering the opponent. Dan Bongino recently called Ben Cardin the “milquetoast senator.” Bongino continued, “I like to say that Maryland is missing two senators because they just vote the party line. No reason for Maryland to get any national interest because there is no diversity of political thought.”

Richard Douglas called Maryland “desperate for leaders” and blasted the state’s junior Senator for being out of touch:

For most Americans, longevity brings wisdom. In Congress, longevity brings isolation. Isolation from the people invites tyranny. Such isolation is visible in Baghdad’s fortified ‘Green Zone,’ whose original architect was Saddam Hussein, not the American soldier. America must not tolerate creation of a Green Zone around Congress by politicians-for-life.  A Senate leader who is truly concerned about the interests of his state and nation knows this. Like General Washington, he understands the critical value to the nation of a Farewell Address. He leaves on a warhorse, not a gurney.

Ben Cardin has held elected office since 1967. His time is up.

Indeed, it is time for a change, and these two gentlemen lead a group which would do a far better job representing the true interests of Marylanders.

And Free Staters could be well served without the need for tax increases, simply by adopting a more austere budget than the one proposed by Governor O’Malley. But it certainly wouldn’t be bare-bones, says Delegate Justin Ready.

Negotiations are taking place to avoid what liberal interest groups are calling a doomsday budget – one that would reduce approximately $500 million from Governor O’Malley’s proposed $36 Billion budget.  A reduction of 1.4% out of the largest projected budget in Maryland history does not sound like doomsday to me, it sounds like a very good idea to get our state’s finances back on track.

It’s important to note that a cut of $500-$700 million out of Gov. O’Malley’s proposed FY2013 budget would still leave Maryland’s state government spending more than in last year’s budget.  That’s not an unreasonable request to make of our government in a time when families have seen their budgets reduced dramatically.

So we would STILL spend more, but that’s not good enough for Annapolis liberals. They seem to want the whole enchilada, middle class (and everyone else not on the government teat) be damned.

But before I get to my new links, I wanted to add a quick news update: Mitt Romney won the Washington caucuses, although in truth it doesn’t mean much because the hard work of picking delegates to the national convention comes later on. Of course, I’m waiting for the Ron Paul cult to tell me that he’ll end up with all the delegates despite the fact he finished a distant second.

But there’s a simple truth at play: even if Paul got EVERY delegate from EVERY caucus, he would still be far short of the number needed for nomination. And getting 10 percent of the primary vote in a particular state isn’t going to get it.

I have one new link to share. She’s a California-based conservative who is most famous for the message below.

She’s also spoken about the Sandra Fluke imbroglio in this classic, no-holds-barred style. Her name is Kira Davis, and her website is quite interesting, so check it out.

And to close, another sad note of passing. Fellow Maryland blogger T.J. Grogg (The Grogg Report) passed away last week. She was 68.

Update: I had to add this in because Robert Stacy McCain just destroys Sandra Fluke and her $3,000 for birth control argument.