Sobhani closes in on $5 million mark

Nice work if you can get it.

Financial reports can be interesting reading, and it was interesting to find out that just 23 people have donated to Rob Sobhani’s upstart U.S. Senate campaign. 22 of them contributed a total of $27,595, an unknown number of others have chipped in $3,025, and Sobhani has dropped $4.61 million. Yes, you read that right: $4.61 million. All told, Sobhani has almost outspent all 23 of the other candidates who have ran for the Senate seat this cycle combined.

However, without Sobhani that distinction would fall to Ben Cardin as he’s spent $3.62 million himself. Dan Bongino is a distant third with just over $916,000 in spending. For comparison’s sake, those who ran for Maryland’s other Senate seat in 2010 spent just over $5.5 million in aggregate, with incumbent Barbara Mikulski accounting for just shy of $4 million and Republican Eric Wargotz spending just over $1.2 million. It appears that both the Democrat and Republican in this race are on track to spend in roughly that ratio.

Interesting as well is that just 8 of those 22 Sobhani contributors live in Maryland, with one being former Sixth District Democratic Congressional candidate Milad Pooran. Most of them also have what could be best described as ethnic names, and there is an expenditure from Sobhani’s report to a website called Iranian.com for advertising. Obviously there’s no law which prohibits those of a particular ethnicity from participating in politics, but I think this reflects statements he made in previous campaigns regarding his thoughts on being Iranian-American as opposed to a different, more common ethnicity.

Sobhani’s campaign yesterday released an internal poll which showed him at 20 percent support. (While Rob calls that a surge, it’s worthy of note that the number is little changed from the Maryland Poll last month while a recent Washington Post poll had him at just 14 percent.) But let’s say he gets that 20 percent and the total number of votes matches the 2004 election (the last Maryland U.S. Senate election in a Presidential year.) The 2004 turnout was 2,321,931 votes, which means 20% of that total is 464,386 votes. It also means that Rob may well spend over $10 per vote. That’s Presidential election territory, but Rob is running in just one state.

Of course, this third-person candidacy is possibly the greatest news Ben Cardin ever received because he can draw the same 54% he received last time and still win by 25 points because Sobhani draws far more votes from the Republican than he does the Democrat – it’s nearly a 60-40 ratio according to the Maryland Poll, which was conducted before Bongino got on the airwaves.

Starting tomorrow, though, Rob Sobhani will get his wish and be allowed to participate in three remaining debates: a radio debate on WOLB-AM in Baltimore tomorrow morning, a debate in front of a live audience here in Salisbury on October 30, and a televised debate on October 31 in Washington, D.C. Perhaps Rob can flesh out his platform, which so far has been rather sketchy.

A volunteer effort

Those of us who are political junkies have likely done a sign wave someplace where you gather a few supporters and simply stand in a high-traffic area excitedly promoting your candidate. Normally we do these in front of our headquarters or along U.S. 50 to catch weekend traffic bound for Ocean City.

But this one would be hard to top – 2 1/2 miles along Rockville Pike in Montgomery County, Maryland. Yes, it’s considered a liberal hotbed but in the words of the subject of this excitement, “we concede no ground.”

Campaigns can be interesting things; the stuff lifelong friendships are made of. But one has to ponder how people who have their best interests at heart couldn’t vote for a candidate with a good background of public service as a law enforcement officer and Secret Service agent; a guy whose stance on the issues is a great match for the state in which he lives and who has backers who care enough to get out on a Saturday, spread out along this busy thoroughfare, and express their support.

Ben Cardin can count on his special interest money and perhaps union thugs bused in for the day and given a box lunch to be his Astroturf support base. Rob Sobhani is simply trying to buy votes with 30-second commercials promoting his independence when it sounds like the only thing he’s independent from is a consistent set of principles. Maybe he could hire those few political mercenaries who would sell themselves out to the highest bidder.

Unfortunately, passion and grassroots support don’t always translate into votes, and far too few know who Dan Bongino is at this late hour. But the only way to get that name recognition is to put it out there as much as we can and hope for the best. We have a candidate who qualifies.

Bongino outraises remainder of Senate field in third quarter

I stand with Dan. Do you?An interesting piece of news from a hard-working campaigner.

I have not been able to confirm one piece of the puzzle, but according to FEC records Ben Cardin raised $636,375.27 in the third quarter while Dan Bongino amassed $735,157.75 in the same time period. I’m told by the Bongino campaign that independent challenger Rob Sobhani only raised $30,000 from outside sources during the same period but have not been able to confirm this as the Sobhani campaign hasn’t released third quarter figures yet. Most of the millions spent by Rob have come from his personal fortune. If this is indeed true – or relatively close – this means the leading fundraiser was the challenger – who raised more than the rest of his opponents combined – and that’s somewhat of a rarity in this political day and age. That’s especially true when the seat is considered by most conventional wisdom to be a safe one for the incumbent.

Of course, cash on hand is also important and the incumbent Ben Cardin has a wide lead there of about $2 million to $300,000 for Bongino. If not for the nearly $2 million in PAC contributions Cardin has accepted this cycle, though, the money race would be nearly even. Special interests have made over 1,000 individual contributions to Ben Cardin to keep him in office; on the other hand just 25 contributions of that sort have found their way to the Bongino coffers and they are mainly from other Republican clubs and candidates. Meanwhile, according to a Maryland Reporter story from earlier this month Sobhani had spent $4.4 million, so the claim of $5 million by the Bongino camp is probably accurate.

And after months of carping about debate exclusion, the state will have its chance to hear Rob Sobhani in that forum on October 30 here in Salisbury, according to Salisbury University’s Institute for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement, the debate sponsor. Yes, it’s a 3 p.m. debate and I’m not sure if it will be televised; moreover, the trio will have to share the stage with Libertarian Dean Ahmad and write-in Democrat Ed Tinus. But this will be Sobhani’s chance and our opportunity to ask him questions as well.

I suspect there will be plenty of press there from both regular and pajamas media.

Update: I meant to add a comparison to the 2010 cycle, which did not feature a third-party candidate but did have a later primary. But at this same point in that 2010 campaign, incumbent Senator Barbara Mikulski had $1.8 million cash on hand to Eric Wargotz’s $466,000. Unfortunately, the contributions for the reporting period (which was shorter in this case) for Mikulski were about $290,000 while Eric’s campaign-to-date outside contributions were just short of $225,000. (He ended up with an overall total of about $266,000.)

Long story short: Dan Bongino has outraised (in one quarter) the entirety of Eric’s campaign by a 3:1 margin. Getting that national exposure has certainly helped make him more competitive.

Winning ad and endorsement

It’s almost like Dan Bongino wanted to hit the reset button.

No, he hasn’t made any sort of campaign gaffe that I’m aware of (although Rob Sobhani alleges one of Dan’s campaign volunteers did) but the confident challenger to Ben Cardin of a month ago has had his horse shot out from under him via Sobhani’s insurgent, predominantly self-funded campaign. So Dan’s going back to what built his campaign in the first place: another key endorsement and the re-release of a 90-second campaign commercial I felt was one of the best presented in this campaign.

The endorsement comes from former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, who also served as President Bush’s first Homeland Security Secretary. In a statement released by Bongino’s campaign, Ridge said:

Dan’s qualifications for a seat in the Senate reach beyond his experience in law enforcement and national security. His personal initiative, diverse education, and impressive achievements in community service as well as private enterprise, will well-serve the people of Maryland.

It would be interesting to see how much further assistance Ridge or any of those others who endorsed Dan will provide now that he’s being attacked from both the left and (mostly) from the left-center. Personal campaigning would be particularly helpful since Dan and Paula can’t be everywhere.

Through the grapevine I have heard a little bit of muted criticism of how Dan is running his campaign, basically from people who either a) are disgruntled because Dan is not addressing their pet issues or b) believed Richard Douglas would have been a better Republican nominee (even though he got into the race later and, like Sobhani, also had primarily self-funded his campaign.) Personally I don’t necessarily agree with every plank of Dan’s platform and I certainly would have been comfortable had Richard won the primary, as he actually did in my home county.

Yet in looking at Rob Sobhani’s key issues I’m left wanting – for example, why isn’t a 15% tax rate good enough for everyone? And level with us about where this $5 billion in “public-private partnership” money is coming from – are we going to socialize risk and privatize profit? We already have a Senator who’s great at spending money; something particularly irksome when his party can’t even be bothered to put together a budget.

Even some of Rob’s not-so-key issues bother me: on his petition, Rob’s nascent campaign expressed that Sobhani was “pro-choice and supports gay rights.” Granted, these aren’t as important as the economy but since I’m pro-life and read the latter as support of Question 6, I can’t support that when I have a much better conservative alternative who would support private investment targeted as those individuals wish because the government would take less of their sweat and toil, not at specific projects which may be helpful in limited instances but would more likely enrich Sobhani’s cronies.

So Dan is working back to square one, resuming the important endorsements which bolstered his campaign before Sobhani even considered getting into the race. He also has something just as important: plenty of grassroots support. Once the air war is joined, which is a given because of Bongino’s solid fundraising quarter, the early advantage Sobhani enjoyed by not having to survive a primary will dissipate.

This isn’t about “hitting the jackpot,” nor is it about putting someone back in office so he can make it a half-century on the public’s dime as an elected official. It’s about serving the people of Maryland.

Remember that on Election Day.

More questions on the third man

Now that Maryland voters have been introduced to Rob Sobhani, the vetting is coming full force. Take as an example the Red Maryland crew, which has been hammering him mercilessly on a number of subjects, including their “Broadside” radio show.

Listen to internet radio with redmaryland on Blog Talk Radio

The same goes for Jim Jamitis at Anthropocon, who questioned Sobhani’s journalistic integrity as a CNN Middle East expert.

But now Rob has drawn fire from his Republican opponent Dan Bongino, whose campaign posits their own set of unanswered questions (via Sharon Strine, Deputy Campaign Manager for Bongino):

After 16 months of countless interviews, surveys, and a grueling primary election Dan Bongino’s candidacy has been thoroughly examined. Senator Cardin’s 45 year record of voting for tax increases is extensively recorded. Rob Sobhani, however, has had far less scrutiny regarding his background, thanks in part to the convenient timing of his entry into the race for U.S. Senate.

Our campaign just announced our best fundraising quarter to date thanks to the support of thousands of donors throughout Maryland. Mr. Sobhani, lacking that grassroots support, is self-financing his campaign.

Individuals funding their own campaign is not wrong, but valid questions do become more apparent that are simply not getting asked.  Especially if, for example, that individual obtains ballot access by hiring a company with a history of being associated in several states with accusations of deception and illegalities in their signature-gathering practices.

This, along with two previously failed Senate campaigns and a job on Capitol Hill, are not the typical resume one would expect from someone presenting himself as an independent, Washington outsider.

Mr. Sobhani recently joked about hitting the jackpot and that is why he decided to run for office instead of buying another house. Maryland’s future representation in the U.S. Senate is no laughing matter.  With so much at stake this election, we cannot be too careful or too diligent in our efforts to learn more about those seeking higher office.

Perhaps this isn’t the most elegantly worded assessment of Sobhani, but there are legitimate questions regarding the company which circulated their petitions and alleged previous shady practices of theirs.

Needless to say, many Maryland Republicans aren’t thrilled with the late entry of Rob Sobhani into the race, which is why the long knives seem to have come out. After all, even an article from Eric Ostermeier of the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Political Affairs and found on Sobhani’s site claims:

At 21 percent, Sobhani is clearly cutting into the support of the Republican Party this cycle.

The Ostermeier article goes on to talk about Sobhani’s platform, which to me is perhaps best described as centrist. It weaves red meat issues for conservatives like immigration reform and English as a national language with feelgood pap like “We must cut programs, but not leave people without safety nets” and “I favor a simple, 15% flat rate for most working Americans. Those who are making a lot more can pay a little more.” Sobhani’s platform would certainly be to the right of Ben Cardin’s, but well to the left of Dan Bongino, who also addresses a number of issues Sobhani does not.

But other questions not yet answered give me pause. Rob got into some hot water for this statement attributed to him:

There’s a young lady here in the United States who is in her mid thirties. She’s a Deputy Secretary of Education in the United States, an American Iranian. That same 30-something in Iran has to prostitute herself to make ends meet.

When pressed, Sobhani blames “well-known and identified apologists for and supporters of the clerical regime of Iran (who are) grossly misrepresenting and cleverly spinning out of context my words from various speaking engagements and media interviews.” Fair enough. But what about statements I found earlier about the plight of Iranian-Americans, like this from an earlier Senate run?

As a United States Senator what I hope to achieve for Americans of Iranians descent is straighforward (sic): end the demonizing and stereotyping of Iran and Iranians. In fact, my first act as an elected official will be demand a public apology from Senator Barbara Boxer (Democrat from California) for calling the Iranian nation “terrorist” in her interview with CNN last February.

Beyond this significant symbolic act, I hope to channel available federal funds to non-profit organizations in the United States dedicated to the preservation of our heritage. Also, and more to the point, I will work very hard to end the discrimination against Iranians who wish to visit the United States to see their relatives and loved-ones.

Yet perhaps even more pronounced than Rob’s homage to his Iranian heritage is his advocacy for big business deals. And if the Americans can’t do them, perhaps Canada can. This is a portion of testimony given to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, April 11, 2000:

The Chairman: The problem we have a little bit is the problem of priority and resources, because you’ll appreciate that we’re told the same thing when we go to China, we’re told the same thing in various parts of Africa, and we’re told the same thing in practically every developing economy. It’s almost a sine qua non that there’s a role for government that exceeds that of business in say Europe or the United States. I think we might even find that we would get the same story in Latin America. It then becomes a question of how we allocate government resources, and whether or not the Canadian interests in the region are substantial enough and whether the potential of the region is substantial enough. However, that’s for us to grapple with, and we’ll look at that.

Just going on the potential of the region, can any of you help me with one question? What is the size of Canadian… We have some idea about the mineral activities in these countries, but in the Azerbaijani oil play, we hear the figure that Canada’s participation is around 4% or something like that. Is there any way to quantify what the Canadian participation in that region is?

Dr. Rob Sobhani: Canadian participation in Azerbaijan is very minimal. The major presence is the company that I represent, the Alberta Energy Company. They have 5% of a major structure in the South Caspian, which, if proven and discovered, is 9 billion barrels of oil. That’s a sizeable structure.

The Chairman: What does that do to their share price?

Dr. Rob Sobhani: If you’re an AEC shareholder, you’ll be a very rich person.

To give you a comparison, the partners in that one project in which AEC has 5% are BP Amoco with 15%, Exxon-Mobil with 15%, the Turkish Petroleum Company with 10%. And I know that if you take the totality of all the contracts, you will find that Exxon-Mobil and BP Amoco are by far the dominant players. Beyond Alberta Energy, there is very little Canadian presence.

The Chairman: Do you see a future interest of Canadian oil and gas companies in that, given what you said about the resources that are available in Alberta at this time?

Dr. Rob Sobhani: Absolutely, and not only in the upstream discovery, but also in the downstream—refining, pipelining, and getting the oil out. There are enormous opportunities. As I’ve said, $10 billion needs to be spent to build these pipelines.

The Chairman: I understand the opportunity, but do you get a feeling that Canadian companies are starting to come as well? Or have they even realized—

Dr. Rob Sobhani: At least in Azerbaijan, I don’t, because I think there is this gap. They’re there, but their flag is not there. The way it works, the Maple Leaf needs to be there. If they don’t see the Maple Leaf, it’s difficult, because when they’re negotiating with the president, the prime minister, or the oil minister, his first question is to ask where the ambassador is. The response is “Sorry, Canada doesn’t have an ambassador”. That immediately takes away from the bargaining position. (Emphasis mine.)

The reason this is important to me is that Sobhani is hinging a large part of his campaign on the promise of billions of dollars of investment for Maryland. There’s a line between being an outsider with business experience – Mitt Romney is an imperfect example, but one nonetheless – and someone who could be enriching himself with the deals he makes. Perhaps Canada followed Rob’s advice and made him a very wealthy man, since he admitted to working for the Alberta Energy Company.

In an era where government seems to strive to socialize risk while privatizing profit for the well-connected, I have to wonder what’s in it for Rob. We really haven’t had an honest accounting of where this promised money will come from, nor has the obvious question of why this investment needs Rob Sobhani to be involved been answered. If it were such a great deal, one would think it would already be underway.

Beware of men who make big promises.

Poll results disappointing to MD conservatives

The most recent Maryland Poll by Gonzales Research came out on Wednesday, and the results can only be described as disheartening to Maryland conservatives, who have their work cut out for them in the last month of the campaign. (Hat tip to Maryland Reporter for the link.)

First, the terrible topline numbers here in the state:

  • President: Barack Obama (D) 55, Mitt Romney (R) 36
  • U.S. Senate: Ben Cardin (D) 50, Dan Bongino (R) 22, Rob Sobhani (I) 21
  • Question 4 (in-state tuition for illegal aliens): For 58, Against 34
  • Question 6 (legalizing gay marriage): For 51, Against 43
  • Question 7 (expanding gambling): For 45, Against 46
  • President Obama has a 54% favorable rating, with 32% unfavorable
  • Vice-President Joe Biden has a 47% favorable rating, with 34% unfavorable
  • Mitt Romney has a 35% favorable rating, with 50% unfavorable
  • Paul Ryan has a 36% favorable rating, with 38% unfavorable

Gonzales did not poll on Question 5 (redistricting) or any of the Congressional races; in the latter case it’s likely because the sample sizes would be too small for reliable results. 813 self-proclaimed likely voters made up this sample.

One thing I have always liked about the Gonzales surveys is their willingness to provide the actual numbers. Instead of massaging the results to a certain turnout model, the Maryland Poll is set up to reflect the electorate based on party registration – so 56% of the respondents were Democrats, 30% Republicans, and the remainder unaffiliated. This closely matches the state’s current voter registration totals.

Because of that, some trends can be determined. For example, as a percentage fewer Democrats are behind Barack Obama (81%) than Republicans backing Romney (86%). This is because there’s always been a percentage of Democrats in Maryland who are simply registered as Democrats but often vote for Republicans. It’s President Obama’s 88% approval rating among black voters (which matches their lockstep 88% support) that saves his bacon in Maryland.

On the other hand, though, Democrats strongly back political lifer Ben Cardin (74%) while Republicans are just 60% behind Dan Bongino, their U.S. Senate nominee. The presence of onetime Republican-turned-independent Rob Sobhani is all but destroying GOP chances of posting an upset in the race, since Cardin is only at 50 percent. This is because Sobhani is taking more votes away from Bongino (22% of Republicans) than Cardin (16% of Democrats.) More troublesome is that these numbers are undermining Bongino’s stated intention of making inroads into the minority community, because just 8% of black voters support him but 15% back Sobhani, who was born in America but is of Iranian origin.

Meanwhile, the political correctness bug seems to be biting some of the squishier members of the GOP. While the state party has come out against these issues in a broad manner by supporting the idea of “repealing O’Malley’s laws” the Maryland Poll finds 29% of Republicans are for in-state tuition for illegal aliens, 17% support gay marriage, and 35% are in favor of expanding gambling. Could this be the Bradley effect manifested in a different manner? There’s no way to tell.

Overall these numbers are quite disappointing, but the silver lining which exists in them is now we know where to focus our efforts. For one thing, we are close enough on some races that enhancing GOP turnout could turn the election, particularly on Questions 6 and 7.

It’s also important to remember that a number of Congressional races could hinge on turnout as well. Simply based on voter registration numbers it’s clear that Eric Knowles, Faith Loudon, and Frank Mirabile have the steepest uphill battles but there’s more possibility of an upset from Tony O’Donnell, Nancy Jacobs, or Ken Timmerman. Even Roscoe Bartlett could fall into the “upset” category based on the gerrymandering Democrats did to make his seat endangered for Republicans.

There is one other observation regarding the races I need to make. Given the 19-point advantage Barack Obama enjoys here in the formerly Free State, it’s clear he probably won’t be spending any money in the local Baltimore television market. (Washington, D.C. is a different story because Virginia is in play.) Yet that commercial time is being vacuumed up by the millions of dollars both sides are spending on debating Question 7.

Because of that simple fact, it will be harder for those advocating other ballot issues and downticket candidates to afford television time, and that works against both sides equally. This makes the retail and social media campaigns that much more important because one easy outlet is no longer as readily available.

You may ask why I’m so strident on some of these issues. In my case, there’s a lot of areas where they crossed my line in the sand a long time ago and I’m simply fighting a sort of guerrilla war trying to beat things back where I can. But like Benjamin Netanyahu, we need to pull out our red Sharpie and draw our own line this time around because once that’s passed there is no putting the genie back in the bottle.

Once we allow illegal immigrants in-state tuition, the next thing they’ll want is full amnesty and voting rights – never mind they have broken numerous laws by crossing the border (or overstaying their visa) while thousands who try to do things the correct way are denied or face long delays in receiving what’s due for them. Crime is not supposed to pay.

Once we tell Democrats it’s okay to ignore geography and cynically make up Congressional districts which place people with little in common together for base political interests, there’s no telling what other steps they’ll take to dictate what they determine is fair representation. Obviously political affiliation is a fickle standard, but when only 56% of voters are registered Democrat should they have 88% of the Congressional representation? Obviously it could work out that way even if the state was scrupulously and evenly divided based simply on existing geographic lines, equalizing population, and contiguity, but I suspect it would not.

Once we allow gay marriage to pass, then the question becomes what will be legitimized next: plural marriage, marriage between adults and children, or some other bastardization of the concept? Where does the line get drawn? Despite common misguidance, marriage is NOT a right and despite the best efforts of the gay lobby to promote the idea this quest shouldn’t be equated with the civil rights movement of a half-century ago. As this group points out, there are no “gay only” drinking fountains.

Certainly people of any gender can be in a loving relationship with one of their own gender, but as far as the legal concepts of marriage our state already covers it. What was wrong with civil unions? I could live with that as a compromise which preserves, as much as possible in this day and age, the sanctity of marriage.

I’ve seen elections where people down double-digits in polling have come back to win in the last week, and a month is an eternity in political circles. Just a month ago Wendy Rosen was a game but underfunded challenger to Andy Harris until the startling allegation she voted twice in two consecutive elections, and now Democrats are reduced to pinning their hopes on a write-in candidacy. So anything is possible, good or bad.

But polls make news, and this poll certainly garnered a lot of attention across the state. The question is whether we can make it a “Dewey Defeats Truman” moment.

Odds and ends number 59

You know them, you love them…bloggy bits of goodness I expound upon which run from a sentence to a few paragraphs. Here’s my latest batch from a chock-full mailbox all but neglected over the weekend.

Actually, the first item doesn’t come from my mailbox but was shared with me on my Facebook page by Jim Rutledge, who urged me to read and share this piece by Diana West about how we’ll never win if we kowtow to Islamic radicals.

West writes about the saga of Marine Lance Cpl. Greg Buckley, Jr., who was killed in a “green-on-blue” attack last month. Chillingly, Buckley predicted, “one day they are going turn around and turn those weapons on us.” And so they did.

Of course, that leads to the obvious question of why we remain in Afghanistan, which has no clear-cut answer. At this point, it truly makes no difference to the most radical Islamist whether we stay or go as we’re the Great Satan just the same. Right offhand, I have no idea what the body count is on their side, but I’m sure it could be a lot more if we didn’t pull our punches. Once we bombed Tora Bora back to the Stone Age to get Osama bin Laden, but it was a more precise Seal Team Six which sent bin Laden to those 72 virgins, with Obama trying to heist the credit. Certainly there are those Afghans who love the accolades they receive from their comrades when an American is cut down as well.

All in all, the Patton rule still applies: “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.” Just substitute “religion” for “country” on their part.

Another old saw from the Left is that not throwing money at education produces inferior results. But that theory is debunked by a study recently released by State Budget Solutions. If the liberals’  theory was correct, then states which spent the most per pupil would have the best results – but the numbers suggest otherwise. In announcing the results, SBS noted:

From 2009 to 2011 the national average for state educational spending as a percentage of total spending dropped from 30 percent in 2009 to 29.3 percent in 2011. The top state spenders across all three years were Texas, Vermont and Arkansas, all spending at least 4 percent more than the national average. Michigan made the top five in 2010 and 2011. Virginia earned the #4 and #5 position in 2009 and 2011, respectively.

The states that spent the least as a percentage of total spending during 2009-2011 were Alaska, which came in last all three years, Hawaii and Tennessee. New York and Massachusetts also made the bottom five in 2010 and 2011.

For states that spent the most, only Vermont saw significant results from 2009 to 2011.  In fact, four out of the five states spending the most on education failed to produce correspondingly high graduation rates or ACT scores. Arkansas remained in the top five states in spending for all three years, yet Arkansas’ average ACT scores consistently fell below the national average, and continue to decline annually. In 2010 and 2011, Texas ranked first in the nation in spending, 36.9 percent each year, but fell below the national average in graduation and ACT scores.

One can have whatever educational Taj Mahal the taxpayers willingly – or begrudgingly – pay for, and teachers who receive the highest pay around, but if they can’t teach then all the money is essentially wasted. Otherwise, why would bright homeschooled children be the academic leaders of this country?

At this time in the election cycle, endorsements are always news. Recently the Conservative Victory PAC added two new Republican hopefuls to a growing stable of CVPAC-backed candidates as Second District Congressional hopeful Nancy Jacobs and Third District candidate Eric Knowles got the CVPAC blessing.

On Jacobs the group wrote:

CVPAC supports Ms. Jacobs’s education reform agenda, including expansion of Charter Schools in failing school districts, means-tested tax credits for parents with children in religious schools and other private schools, and tax credits for Maryland businesses that invest in schools or hire graduates from local schools.

CVPAC Treasurer Ruth Melson had this to say about Knowles:

Let me tell you why Eric Knowles must be your next United States Congressman from Maryland District 3.  Eric knows about defending the United States Constitution against foreign enemies and he will defend it at home the same way; he is a US Air Force veteran.   He knows about our terrible economic plight; he works as a bartender talking to regular folks every day.  In the United States Congress, he will always represent the interest of Marylanders like you and me.  He is not an ivory-tower politician building castles in the air; he is pragmatic.  Government, he says, must stay within its constitutionally enumerated powers; government must be rolled back to what we can afford.

Along with U.S. Senate candidate Dan Bongino, the Conservative Victory PAC has endorsed four of Maryland’s six Republican Congressional challengers: Ken Timmerman, Faith Loudon, Jacobs, and Knowles. I suppose they have a few weeks to add Fifth District challenger Tony O’Donnell and Seventh District aspirant Frank Mirabile to the list.

Bongino, meanwhile, keeps adding to his national profile by getting key endorsements of his own; most recently Lt. Col. Allen West added his vocal support:

The differences cannot be any clearer in the race for United States Senate. Ben Cardin has been an elected official for 45 years and you need to question ‘Is Maryland better off than it was in 1967?’ It is time the people need to elect someone who has some real experience, and that is why I am endorsing Dan Bongino for U.S. Senator for Maryland.

We need someone who has walked a police beat and not someone who all he knows how to do is walk into a chamber and vote aye and nay all day long!

West is a conservative darling who some believed would have been a great VP pick.

On the other hand, “establishment” Republicans may have been enamored with an endorsement closer to home – former Governor Bob Ehrlich:

Dan has the unmatched integrity and unique depth of experience necessary to defeat an entrenched incumbent like Senator Cardin. His background in law enforcement and federal investigations, combined with an entrepreneurial spirit and business acumen, afford not only a broad overview of the political arena but also personal expertise in job creation, fiscal responsibility, and community involvement.

We cannot continue down the same non-productive road we’ve traveled for the last 45 years. It’s time we elect someone new – someone who can relate to the needs of the average Maryland family. Dan’s message resonates strongly with both Democrats and Republicans alike, and he is the right person at the right time to represent Maryland and shake things up in Washington.

Gee, Bob, that sounds a little bit like your 2010 primary opponent I voted for. While it’s nice to have the endorsement, honestly I’m not sure the Ehrlich name carries the cache it formerly did among rank-and-file Republicans, let alone those who call the TEA Party home. They were more enthused by the Allen West statement, I’m sure.

Speaking of those who have spanked Ehrlich electorally, Martin O’Malley is once again getting beclowned by Larry Hogan and Change Maryland as they point out Maryland’s unemployment rate is rising as the national percentage drops:

Maryland’s unemployment rate inched up to 7.1%, marking months of consecutive upticks since January’s rate of 6.5%,  in the latest state employment picture released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The preliminary August numbers show a slight gain in employment due to July numbers that were revised downward by 1,600 jobs.  In August, Maryland payrolls increased by 1,400 over July.

The slight change in employment numbers, however, is not enough to lift Maryland out of the doldrums when it comes to competing with neighboring states.

“We are lagging in job growth in the region and are simply not competing with our neighbors,” said Change Maryland Chairman Larry Hogan. “This year’s performance on job growth is abysmal as it has been since 2007.”

On a percentage basis of jobs lost, Maryland’s decline of 1.4% since January of 2007 is the second-worst in the region after Delaware.

And Change Maryland had even more fun at O’Malley’s expense, reminding its audience that each and every Republican governor berated by DGA head O’Malley scored higher on job creation than he did:

In recent remarks in Iowa, O’Malley said, “We are the party that grows our economy; they are the party that wrecked our economy.’ This false statement is borne out today in the latest August employment numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics that show Maryland’s loss of nearly 7,000 jobs this year is worse than Florida, Ohio, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Virginia, Texas, New Jersey and Maine. In some cases it is much worse.  For example, under Gov. John Kasich, Ohio has created 68,300 jobs this year; Florida Gov. Rick Scott, 50,500 jobs; and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, 26,200 jobs. So far this year under Gov. Rick Perry, the Lone Star state has created 140,000 more jobs than Maryland, which some have dubbed the “Fee State” as opposed to the official “Free State.”

“Martin O’Malley has no credibility whatsoever talking about jobs,” said Change Maryland Chairman Larry Hogan.  “What he can talk about, but chooses not to, are the 24 taxes and fees he has raised since taking office which remove $2.4 billion annually from the pockets of struggling Marylanders.”

I know Jim Pettit doesn’t necessarily write these releases to be laugh-out-loud funny, but when you consider the material he has to work with, you have to laugh to avoid crying – particularly if you still live in Maryland. As I’ve put myself on the record saying, take away the nation’s capital and Maryland is Michigan without all the lakes – or the jobs. (By the way, even that state is creating jobs much faster than Maryland.)

A surefire way to curtail job creation, however, is to overregulate land use to a point where no growth is possible. Whether consciously or not, the effect of new state rules may be the eventual death knell to the Eastern Shore’s economy.

There is an upcoming “Growth Offset Policy Meeting” Thursday morning to discuss these proposals, dryly described as follows:

The meeting will include a presentation by staff from Maryland Department of the Environment about the draft Growth Offset policy and the proposed timeframe for acceptance and implementation of the policy. Following the presentation, the remainder of the meeting is dedicated for a question and answer period. Participants are invited to ask questions and express concerns to staff from Maryland Department of the Environment, Department of Agriculture, and Department of Planning.

The Harry R. Hughes Center for Agro-Ecology is organizing this event and would like to thank the Town Creek Foundaiton (sic) for their generous support which allows the Center this opportunity.

You can register here; it’s no surprise that plenty of seats are still available. I’m sure the Radical Green in this area will take time off their public-sector, taxpayer-funded jobs to try and convince these people that every acre in Wicomico County not already developed needs to return to its pristine, pre-settlement state.

If we were to take a path, I say join the one being blazed by Cecil County and say “to hell with the maps.” If Rick Pollitt wants to do something useful for a change, this is something to consider when you think about how similar Cecil County is in population to Wicomico.

Finally, turning to the national race: there’s a constituency group out there which is always assumed to be a solidly Democratic bloc and that’s the Jewish vote. But according to this ad from the Republican Jewish Coalition, voters are turning away:

Perhaps borne out by this ad, a survey by the American Jewish Council of 254 registered Jewish voters in Florida showed only 69% would vote for Obama. It’s noteworthy the survey was conducted prior to the 9-11-12 Islamic attacks on our embassies in several Middle Eastern countries, most notably Libya. On the other hand, they didn’t ask about the respondents’ 2008 vote so in that respect the survey has limited value – we have no basis of comparison to truly determine a trend.

But another number from the AJC survey serves as a way to tie this post together: 62% of those Jewish voters surveyed either strongly or moderately support U.S. military action against Iran’s nuclear program. 74% of them would support Israel doing the same.

It all comes back to wars and rumors of wars, doesn’t it?

Upon further review…

You can tell I was beat last night when I wrote my previous post – driving for the better part of 10 hours will do that to a body.

But there was a key element I forgot to bring up about the 1,100 mile overall trip I took with Kim and her daughter to see my daughter become a wife. I saw a lot of farm fields, cows, and even a few horses and buggies riding through Ohio’s Amish country. One thing I didn’t see, though, was a whole lot of Obama or Romney signs or stickers in the two states which are considered the “battleground” states of my trip – Ohio and Pennsylvania.

That’s not to say there wasn’t some element of politics at play, and perhaps the fact I did the vast majority of the driving along interstate highways may have had something to do with the dearth of political propaganda. This may have been particularly true in Pennsylvania, where the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-70 simply served as a conduit for my passage. But it seemed the only place where I saw Romney and Obama battle it out was in Maryland, and that was a one-sided contest in Mitt Romney’s favor. Most of these signs were along U.S. 50 on the Eastern Shore.

Yet even driving through Ohio it seemed like there was much more interest in Josh Mandel’s U.S. Senate campaign than in the presidential sweepstakes. I saw a number of his signs dotting the landscape of rural northeastern and central Ohio. Similarly, there were quite a few Dan Bongino signs in Maryland with far fewer calling for Ben Cardin’s re-election.

Obviously these anecdotal results are skewed by the small, relatively conservative enclaves I drove through – perhaps driving through Montgomery or Prince George’s counties or through suburban Cleveland one is regularly greeted by signs professing undying support for Democratic candidates. That may mean a little more as these roads are somewhat more heavily traveled than the byways through Amish country in Ohio or U.S. 50 on the Shore. (On the other hand, a pocket of rural Obama support can be found just across the state line in Virginia through some of the hamlets along U.S. 13. The small Obama yard signs are in front of houses ranging from decently kept to barely structurally sound shacks, while the larger Romney, Scott Rigell, and George Allen signs are usually next to farm fields.)

But there is a value in yard signs as well. When I dabbled in precinct organization, I always wanted to have more yard signs on the block than the other guy did. If I couldn’t do that, I wanted at least one because it presented the fact that not everyone was willing to follow the commonly accepted norm that Democrats were entitled to rule my birthplace by fiat. Now while I rarely won the overall war, I think I did pretty well in my own precinct – not much of a consolation prize, but one nonetheless.

Yet that’s how political battles are won – one precinct at a time. Moreover, areas where one is strong can be used to provide more help to weaker areas. That’s why it burns me – and many others – up when resources which can be used to pick up the parts of (and races in) Maryland which serve as chinks in the armor of the majority party here are instead diverted to other states. While the other side is off trying to tip the scales someplace else, we can be effective in a rear guard action and plant our flag in a place they wrongly believed was safe.

Wouldn’t it be nice to wake up on November 7 realizing we have not only preserved a Constitutional republic by ousting a President thoroughly detrimental to America’s interests but removed a Senator who hasn’t held an honest job in four-and-a-half decades and picked up a couple House seats from right out under the nose of the Democratic establishment? I believe it’s quite doable, so let’s get to work!

Bongino gets another conservative endorsement

Adding to his pocketful of meaningful conservative backers, Dan Bongino’s U.S. Senate campaign announced the endorsement of the FreedomWorks PAC today. Max Pappas, Executive Director of the PAC, noted in a statement:

Dan Bongino has the rare ability to simplify and effectively communicate limited-government economic principles. As a small business owner himself, he has seen first-hand how excessive regulations and taxes punish the risk-taking entrepreneurs at the heart and soul of America’s economy. Bongino has also been a vocal leader for allowing parents to have a choice in their children’s education.

Bongino’s opponent Senator Ben Cardin is an automatic vote for President Obama’s failed policies, which have dramatically increased the federal government’s spending and debt while stunting economic growth. In contrast, Dan Bongino understands that bailouts and stimulus spending do not create jobs, entrepreneurs do, and he will fight to get big government off their back so they can resume growing the economy.

Naturally, Dan was happy about the support:

I have long been a supporter of FreedomWorks and their tireless efforts to engage and mobilize the conservative grassroots. FreedomWorks is on the front lines of the fight for smaller government and fiscal sanity – a fight I gladly join them in. I am proud to have the endorsement of FreedomWorks PAC.

I did a little research on the FreeedomWorks PAC and, while they have a low six-figure amount (about $116,000) in the bank as of July 31, the real benefit to Bongino may be the publicity and awareness this endorsement will bring. The PAC is but a small portion of the overall FreedomWorks umbrella.

As the PAC boasts:

In the 2010 midterms we ushered in the largest electoral landslide in more than 70 years, electing a huge freshman class committed to lower taxes, less government, and more freedom.

The 2012 election is our chance to do even more: growing our House majority, flipping the Senate for fiscal conservatives, and making Barack Obama a one term president.

Obviously Bongino would fall under the “fiscal conservative” heading, and he seems to have a pretty good head on his shoulders regarding that point.

One thing which characterizes Dan’s stump speeches is some variation on the theme that Republicans prefer low taxes, but few if any are radical enough to say we should pay no taxes – after all, we need to support the construction and maintenance of public infrastructure, provide for the common defense, maintain our system of justice, and so on through basic functions of government spelled out as duties under the Constitution. At one time we could do this almost solely through tariffs, but that day has long past as government – even its most basic functions – gets more expensive. Unfortunately, we also have to consider what we owe and the unfunded obligations we have to those who are living now but expect Social Security, Medicare, and pensions in the future. (Hint: don’t hold your breath unless we make radical changes like I spell out in my book. A little self-promotion never hurts.)

Of course one can argue that Bongino has no record of fiscal conservatism to fall back on because he’s never voted for (or against) a budget, a government program, or any other item of public interest for that matter. But my counter to that is that the incumbent has voted against fiscal conservatism every chance he got, so the absolute worst we could do is a wash and I have a lot more confidence in Dan than that. To use another state’s example: even though once in awhile he’s quite maddening to conservatives and the TEA Party, taken as a whole Scott Brown has been a vast improvement over Ted Kennedy or Martha Coakley.

By the same token, there are some among the 28 candidates FreedomWorks PAC is endorsing who might lead me to scratch my head, but in toto they would present a much better opportunity to advance the conservative cause in the right direction than electing their Democratic opponents. I would rather the debate be between right-of-center and far-right than middle-of-the-road and far-left, as the case seems to be now.

So Dan should be pleased with this newest endorsement, but the trick will be that uphill battle to get the endorsement of 50% +1 of Maryland’s voters come November 6. It should be easy to convince the thoughtful ones, but those who just sort of hazily walk in and cast their ballot need to know the name Dan Bongino. Let’s make sure they do.

Hammering home the point

If there’s one thing which can be said about Dan Bongino, it’s that he is very, very telegenic. Here’s an example: this interview with Ginni Thomas at the Daily Caller. (I had issues last night with this video so sorry, no embed.)

The only complaint I would have about the video is questioning why they had to use the profile camera angle when both parties aren’t involved in the shot. It makes Dan look like he wouldn’t look you in the eye and in my dealings with him there’s nothing further from the truth.

But if you have forty minutes this is a valuable chance to hear what Bongino has to say, in depth. It’s the raw video from one which was culled by Anthropocon‘s Jim Jamitis and praised by conservatives like Sarah Palin. I didn’t know it existed until I looked for a better source to embed the first video.

Having been involved in politics for almost twenty years, I’ve found there are rare people who seem to cut through the political crap and are genuine. I would put Dan in this category, even though I don’t necessarily agree with everything he says. Let’s just put it this way: unlike his opponent, I wouldn’t have to be convinced he’s my friend.

So how is the Bongino campaign going? Well, the conventional wisdom is that Ben Cardin is safe, so there’s no recent polling. The most recent poll I found is a PPP Poll from 2010 which had Cardin defeating a generic Republican 51-33. (The poll was intended to match him up with Michael Steele, who Cardin beat 58-28.) But it’s telling that in the poll Cardin only had a 42% approval rating, with 28% disapproval. Against the current partisan breakdown of Maryland voters, the poll oversamples Democrats by 4 points and Republicans by about 1 point, so I suspect Cardin would be polling under 50 percent now. More recently, the Gonzales Research Maryland Poll from January had Cardin with 51% approval, but it didn’t project a primary opponent.

The same polling company did a survey last October which stated Cardin had 32% who “definitely would” vote for him with 25% saying the opposite. Supposedly 1/3 of Republicans would consider voting for Cardin, but they hadn’t met Dan Bongino yet. Considered in that respect, with that seven-point margin it’s a little surprising that people believe Maryland is safe Cardin territory, but they’re probably basing that simply on the 56-26 Democrat partisan advantage in the state. One thing about a significant percentage of Maryland Democrats, though: they’re not necessarily party loyalists.

Yet Dan Bongino is ceding no ground and Ben Cardin’s not covering a whole lot of it. Apparently Ben’s counting on that $1.5 million in the bank to carpetbomb the state with 30-second commercials, but it’s possible Cardin may be aced out by the massive spending on issues like Question 7. There’s only so much commercial time available and television stations are licking their chops, imagining a robust bottom line thanks to at least $11 million spent so far by gambling interests.

So in this case grassroots may be more important than money, and I’d rather side with the true conservative believers than the hired guns who are in it for the box lunch or time off work on Election Day, like this rent-a-mob.

As Bongino said:

I will not let the Republican Party cede the moral high-ground to a Party driven by lofty intentions and failed results. Time to take off the gloves and fight for what we know is the right path forward.

Speaking of Dan, this also gives me an opportunity to update yesterday’s post on the Libya response. Bongino added these remarks in a release today:

The Administration’s continuing claims that the Libyan protests, which resulted in the horrific deaths of four Americans along with our Ambassador, were the result of unpredictable, spontaneous protest activity are either intentionally deceptive or demonstrate complete incompetence.

Having spent over a decade reviewing threat assessments from all over the world, it is hard to believe that given the amount of information Libyan officials claim to have passed to the U.S. government regarding the active terrorist threat to our personnel on the ground, that the Administration sincerely believes this deadly assault to be spontaneous. There are only two potential answers, either the threat to our personnel was ignored due to incompetence or political concerns regarding the approaching election influenced the allocation of security forces to the region. I am calling upon the State Department to immediately release any information related to the threat assessment which led to the sub-standard and deadly security footprint in Benghazi.

The Hillary Clinton State Department? I’m not holding my breath that she’s going to fall on a sword for Obama. Interesting times indeed.

But returning to my main point: we have to believe this race is winnable because a lot has changed in the six years since Ben Cardin eked out a surprisingly close 10-point victory over Michael Steele – in an awful year for Republicans. Cardin is not the shoo-in people think he is, so let’s get to work and prove the conventional wisdom wrong once again.

The third man

The U.S. Senate race in Maryland became a lot more complicated when businessman Rob Sobhani formally kicked off his campaign last week.

Sobhani, who petitioned his way onto the ballot by gathering over 77,000 signatures, announced his bid in a three-city tour last Tuesday. And while he’s slowly built his self-financed campaign over the spring and summer, he comes into the race with an issues page which reads as relatively conservative in some areas, more moderate in others.

Most of what he has spent of the $227,000 he’d loaned to his campaign through June 30 went to gathering the signatures for his petitions, so the signatures amassed at a cost of over $100,000 weren’t necessarily through a grassroots effort like those to place several issues on the November docket. Yet Rob got them and made it to the ballot, so apparently there is a group in Maryland who wants to think outside the two-party box. (It would be revealing to find out the overall political configuration of the signers, though.)

It’s also interesting to hear – admittedly, this is second-hand hearsay so you can assign whatever credibility you wish to it – that the Sobhani campaign was paying $4 per signature to out-of-state petition signature gatherers. He turned in 77,000 signatures when he needed 37,128, with roughly 1/8 of the required number coming from each Congressional district. If this $4 allegation is true, though, it will be very interesting reading when we see Sobhani’s next financial report since the current one is the June 30 filing and he needed to have signatures in to the state Board of Elections by the August 6 deadline he met.

There are also questions posed by blogger Jim Jamitis regarding Sobhani’s role in CNN’s “dubious journalistic practice of accepting ‘sponsorships’ from the very regimes they are supposedly investigating.” While Jamitis can be perceived as a biased observer because he has volunteered as a producer of online videos for opponent Dan Bongino, he still raises a valid set of queries.

Moreover, Rob is no stranger to politics, having made runs as a Republican for the U.S. Senate in 1992 and 2000, finishing fifth and second with 6% and 17% of the vote, respectively. So he’s not exactly an outsider, but he either decided he probably wasn’t going to win a Republican primary or that the GOP brand in Maryland was too tarnished.

To burnish his independent credentials, it’s worth noting that the two-time Republican candidate’s last political donation went to Democrat Milad Pooran, who was an also-ran in the Sixth District Congressional primary this spring. The $1000 donation was given last December, with a Potomac mailing address which matched the address given for Sobhani’s 2000 Senate campaign.

And it’s interesting what I’ve found about that 2000 campaign.

In October 1999, Sobhani was the beneficiary of a fundraiser put on by the Iranian-American Republican Council, San Francisco Chapter. Of course, it’s not terribly unusual for a candidate to attend an out-of-state fundraiser for a federal office, but some of what is attributed to Sobhani under “Issues of Interest to Americans of Iranian descent” is intriguing:

We asked Rob Sobhani (candidate for U.S. Senate from Maryland) to tell the Iranian-Americans about some of the issues that he will address if he is elected:

  • Taxation without representation.
  • Ending the demonizing and stereotyping of Iran and Iranians.
  • Streamlining non-immigrant visa requirements for Iranians applying to visit relatives and loved-ones in the United States.
  • Giving Iranians the choice of applying at any American embassy and consulate abroad for a non-immigrant visa.
  • Ending the harassment of Iranians entering and leaving the United States for the simple reason of being an Iranian.
  • Abolishing the current IRS codes and replacing it with a flat tax of 17% on personal income would help many Americans of Iranian descent who are self-employed or owners of a small business.

If all Americans of Iranian descent united . . .

Rob Sobhani added to the above that: Also, if elected, I will establish satellite offices in California under the umbrella of “Khan-e-Iran” to assist American-Iranians with their problems.

There’s more where that came from, although the latter article contains an interesting anecdote about how Rob went from campaign volunteer to staffer for former Congressman Connie Morella.

But isn’t the idea of America “E Pluribus Unum“? Making a protected class out of Iranian-Americans doesn’t make them any more American, just more protected. Imagine if an officeholder did the same for members of a particular religion or a more common ethnicity, such as Germans or Poles like myself.

It’s also interesting to see that Rob’s taxation stance hasn’t changed a whole lot in the last twelve years, although instead of 17% on everyone it’s now 15% on almost everyone, or as he now states:

I favor a simple, 15% flat rate for most working Americans.  Those who are making a lot more can pay a little more.

Why? I think we should all pay the same rate as a consumption tax – that’s the most fair solution.

I also fail to understand how a public-private partnership doesn’t use taxpayer money, since Sobhani is pledging to create over 100,000 jobs primarily through that vehicle. I suppose I need a little enlightenment on that point.

Of course, the real question is this: since Dan Bongino announced his candidacy long before Sobhani decided to jump back into the political arena – Rob started the campaign Facebook page April 25 and filed with the State Board of Elections on June 25 – coupled with the fact that his last political activity was a sizable donation to a Democratic candidate, is it possible that Sobhani is a stalking horse for Ben Cardin? With the success of Dan Bongino’s campaign becoming obvious after his April 3 primary win, perhaps our friend Ben needed a little insurance policy?

Granted, with his late start and limited funding Sobhani will be fortunate to crack double digits come November. But if those digits come out of the Bongino camp, Republicans may suffer a heartbreaking defeat in a race which was winnable.

The varied reaction to MOM

Obviously I have my differences with our governor, but when he misinterprets the state of the state of my birth, Ohio, well, that’s not going to stand.

For those of you who don’t know this – and I wager that’s most of you, because your backgrounds are in Maryland – Ohio was doing so-so for awhile under a pair of moderate Republican governors, George Voinovich (who went on to become a U.S. Senator) and Bob Taft. (We won’t count the 11 days Lt. Gov. Nancy Hollister was a caretaker between terms.) Unfortunately, Governor Taft was sort of like Ohio’s answer to Martin O’Malley and poisoned the well for a far superior Republican (Ken Blackwell) to succeed him in 2006. (Blackwell should have succeeded Voinovich in 1998, but the Ohio GOP is smarter than the voters, or so they seem to think. They convinced Ken it wasn’t his turn yet.)

Anyway, the upshots were these: the economy in Ohio got so bad that I moved to Maryland 8 years ago, and that 2006 wasn’t just a bad year for the GOP in Maryland but they also lost the gubernatorial election in Ohio as well, ending a 16-year GOP run. Ted Strickland became governor and promptly was even more of a disaster than Taft, which says a lot. In 2010, Strickland became the first Ohio governor to lose his re-election bid since fellow Democrat John Gilligan did in 1974.

(Trivia: John Gilligan is the father of former Kansas governor and now-HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.)

Yet Martin O’Malley deigned to criticize current Ohio Governor John Kasich, a Republican elected in 2010, in remarks made to the Ohio delegation to the Democratic National Convention. “If there’s one place to find buyer’s remorse, it’s Ohio,” O’Malley commented.

Of course, that “ultimate thorn in O’Malley’s side” (h/t Jackie Wellfonder) known as Change Maryland did a little digging into Ohio’s job creation record and found out that Kasich’s state had created three times more jobs than Maryland did since Kasich took office (122,500 vs. 37,300) and while Ohio’s cost of doing business has plummeted from 29th to 6th best in the country, Maryland continues to rank in the bottom 10.

While Ohio has roughly twice the population of Maryland, that doesn’t cover the fact it’s creating three times the number of jobs as Maryland is – not to mention Maryland has the advantage of nearby Washington, D.C. Like certain portions of Maryland off the I-95 corridor, Ohio has to work to use its own assets and not sponge off the government.

Change Maryland also took potshots at O’Malley’s record here at home, creating a “top 10” list of O’Malley’s economic fallacies. I could go through that as well but, to be quite honest, in that battle of wits the Governor is coming up far short like that hapless mouse in the corner. I do have to quote Change Maryland head Larry Hogan’s reaction to MOM’s speech before the national Democrats:

Governor O’Malley talks a lot about ‘moving forward’ but here in Maryland his policies have slammed us into reverse and have us stuck in a ditch.

(snip)

Under Martin O’Malley, Maryland lags behind our region in attracting jobs, businesses and those who pay taxes.  Make no mistake, modern investments in a modern economy is just code language for more tax-and-spend governing like we have had here in Maryland.

Not to be outdone, 2014 candidate David Craig felt compelled to criticize his would-be predecessor’s DNC performance as well:

This past Sunday, Governor Martin O’Malley, in a brief moment of candor, set aside his usual smoke and mirrors to admit that we are not better off today then we were four years ago. In a statement, which he immediately attempted to spin and retract, Governor O’Malley admitted what the people of Maryland have known as fact for years: both President Obama and Governor O’Malley have failed to curb record unemployment and revive a depressed economy. Most importantly, we know that we cannot survive 4 more years of these failed policies, which have led us down a path of endless tax hikes, ever-increasing deficits, and countless unfunded mandates.

After realizing his political mistake, Governor O’Malley proved once again that he is out of touch with the average Marylander. Governor O’Malley went on to say “…but that’s not the question of this election.”

(snip)

O’Malley, a frequent surrogate for President Obama, said Tuesday evening that the President’s policies “have moved America forward.” Can Marylanders honestly trust the Governor’s opinion of the past four years, after he raised taxes on the middle class and shifted millions of dollars in unfunded mandates to local government? The reality is Maryland has suffered a double dose of failed policies under the leadership of Governor O’Malley and President Obama.

Craig is definitely in a position to know about those unfunded mandates as a County Executive.

But more importantly, the economic disaster of the last four-plus years IS the question of this election. We have had three “recovery summers” without recovery, “shovel-ready jobs” which neither needed a shovel nor were ready – because they were never created – and, despite the fact it was “all about that three-letter word: J-O-B-S,” it seems it was really all about making as many people as possible dependent on a government check.

Fellow gubernatorial hopeful Blaine Young was more succinct (and humorous):

Martin O’Malley traveled to North Carolina to ‘tell the Barack Obama story’. Naturally Governor O’Malley wouldn’t want to tell the Maryland story because as Governor, he dumped $2.4 billion in tax increases on the residents of Maryland.

With a record like that I’d want to run away and not tell the Martin O’Malley story too.

Maryland is facing unprecedented challenges, from budget issues, to unfunded pension liabilities, to increased mandates on local governments and increased regulations on businesses, and Martin O’Malley is acting like an absentee landlord – draining Maryland taxpayer resources while in North Carolina focused on his own political gains.

It’s interesting to note that O’Malley has addressed pretty much everyone else in the country except for Marylanders. I’m not interested in seeing him on the television daily from a different location in the state, but once in awhile would be nice. I’m sure Mrs. O’Malley would like to see him home on occasion too.

I’m not sure where this came from, but I’m in possession of a series of talking points presumably put out by the O’Malley administration. The very first one states “Maryland has recovered over two-thirds of the jobs lost in the Bush recession – the 11th fastest rate in the nation.” Must be nice having a thriving Washington, D.C. next door.

But read that sentence again. We have been out of the recession since sometime in 2009, but we’ve only made up 2/3 of the ground in three years (after a recession which lasted less than two years, and actually began once Democrats took over Congress.) Obviously I have no context as to which states are ahead of or behind us, but that’s not something really worth bragging about.

These talking points also claim that Maryland has the third-lowest state and local tax burden as a percentage of income and the ninth lowest state and local taxes in the country. But there’s no need to keep shooting for number one! Nor does this distinguish between fees and taxes, even though we all know “a fee is a tax.” For example, does the $60 a year “flush tax” get included in that tax burden study?

Even Dan Bongino got into the act, neatly tying his opponent Ben Cardin into O’Malley’s statement:

As Maryland continues to hemorrhage businesses and jobs, Governor Martin O’Malley finally admits, on behalf of the administration, that we are not collectively better off than we were four years ago.

Senator Ben Cardin’s blind support of the current administration’s economic policies has severely damaged our nation’s economic well-being and, as a result, too many Marylanders are struggling to survive in this brutal economic condition. Mr. Cardin’s support of the Obama administration’s — and that of the Annapolis machine’s — irresponsible fiscal policies have made it extremely difficult for businesses to thrive in our state.

And if businesses don’t thrive, jobs aren’t created, and economic prosperity is impossible to come by. Seems like a logical progression to me.

Martin O’Malley actually told the truth for once, but you’ll notice he spun away from his statement just as fast as his little words would carry him.