Ben Cardin – Page 9

McDonough: Obama ‘should be impeached’

I won’t be able to make his press conference later today, but I suppose the question now is whether Pat wants to draw up the articles of impeachment next year or serve as one of the jurors. He delivered a scathing indictment of the President, part of which is detailed here:

“President Obama has created a backdoor amnesty law for 15 million illegal aliens through an unlawful policy that circumvents Congress. The consequences and impact of this reckless action on the people of the United States is enormous.”

“Mr. Obama’s administration with its characterization of citizens as terrorists, creation of enemies’ lists, and the attack against state laws with tax payers’ financed litigation is beginning to make Richard Nixon look like a Boy Scout. Lawlessness and disrespect for justice are promoting the illegal alien agenda,” said Delegate McDonough.

It’s obvious Pat is a hardliner on immigration, as evidenced by his role in the recent SB167 petition drive. But it would be the longest of shots that President Obama would actually be impeached, and it’s not even certain that he’ll be in office if Pat is indeed elected since polls show a number of Republicans neck-and-neck with him at this stage in the game. (I know, that and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.) Yet Pat “maintains that if he were a member of the Senate or the House of Representatives, he would initiate the articles of impeachment process.”

Perhaps it’s a good thing he’s not there, though, since Bill Clinton became the object of sympathy during his impeachment. And just like in the case of Slick Willie, if Obama is challenged in such a manner it’s a sure bet the press will be hounding the GOP for putting partisan politics above what’s best for the country and blaming the TEA Party for the whole situation. And it’s even harder to explain to a basically spoon-fed and ignorant American public how Obama is violating the Constitution with his “disrespect for the rule of law” (as McDonough puts it) than it was to maintain that Clinton’s impeachment was not about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky but the fact he committed perjury in front of a grand jury.

Continue reading “McDonough: Obama ‘should be impeached’”

Fight the power

It’s late notice to be sure – and that was probably intentional – but Senator Ben Cardin is holding a Medicare and Social Security Forum TONIGHT (Thursday) at 7 p.m. in the Worcester Room of Salisbury University’s Commons.

The reason I say this omission was intentional is that the TEA Party wasn’t exactly welcomed at the last event, nor is this meeting on Ben’s public schedule insofar as I can tell. But in order to get a full hearing and not just something from a relatively pre-selected crowd, it might be a good idea for the younger generation to attend as well – after all, we’re paying for seniors’ health care and Social Security.

While the protest outside may or may not occur, getting the right people inside may open a few eyes.

McDonough: Senate decision comes after redistricting

Perhaps we were a bit too hasty in assuming Pat will run for the U.S. Senate – a lot depends on what his district looks like after Martin O’Malley and his cronies get through with it. At least that’s what he’s saying now:

As you may know, I have been testing the waters for a possible campaign against Dutch Ruppersberger for a seat in the 2nd Congressional District.  The Second District is a difficult challenge and an uphill fight for a Republican.  However, polling results and reaction from the voters during the last 6 months, including a powerful show of support in the annual popular July 4th Dundalk parade indicate my chances are good.  Radio and television exposure over many years and support for issues such as opposition to illegal immigration have provided me with high name recognition and voter approval.

Despite these advantages, that district still remains a challenge.  Of course, the re-districting and the new district will not be revealed until October.  At that time, if the 2nd Congressional District transforms from ‘uphill to impossible,’ my personal decision will become clear.  It will not make any sense to ask family, friends, and supporters to engage in a campaign that cannot be won.  That will be a choice forced upon me by political powers over which I have no influence or control.

My decision to consider a run for Congress is based on two simple conclusions:  1) Washington is a mess.   2) I believe I can help make a difference.  My top priority is to serve in Washington as a representative of the people.  After much thought and consultations with others, I have decided that if the 2nd Congressional District is gerrymandered rendering it impossible to win, I will take a serious look at seeking the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate seat in Maryland.

There is very little difference between Dutch Ruppersberger and Ben Cardin.  They are liberal political twins and Obama clones.  My vision for America is completely different than their tax and spend big government agenda.

I recognize that my critics will falsely charge that this plan may be indecisive.  But, as I clearly stated before, my desire is to serve the people in Washington to help clean up the mess and make a difference.  It does not matter whether that service is in the Senate or the House of Representatives.  These are unsettling times where the pathway is not always clear.  Unfortunately, the decisions that we make are overly controlled by outside forces.  During the weeks and months ahead, I will continue to conduct my vigorous exploratory campaign.  It is my desire to inform my supporters and colleagues about what may occur in the future.  It is still early in the campaign season and I would ask everyone to be patient and wait until it is clear regarding everyone’s intentions.  Thank you for your consideration and understanding.

Fortunately for Pat, he can also maintain his radio show as long as he’s not a declared candidate, and that message resonates well beyond the confines of the Second Congressional District. It means he can wage at least a somewhat effective statewide campaign while the redistricting process is at work. (Not to mention he’s running ‘from cover’ in either case since he wouldn’t have to stand for election in his Delegate seat until 2014.)

Perhaps the better question, though, is why not make a decision now? Waiting on the results of redistricting does convey that indecisiveness Pat’s critics will feast on. But we can deduce from the message that Pat is running for some federal office. We also know he has a name recognition advantage over most other members of the House of Delegates thanks to both his radio show and work on certain key issues, and can indeed believe that there may be radical changes in the makeup of every one of Maryland’s Congressional districts because the Democrats are running the show and don’t really care about anything but maintaining political power.

So in reading this missive it appears McDonough’s preference would be to run for the Second District seat and he’s using a Senate bid as a fallback option. That may indeed be the case, but, since I like to think an election or two ahead, there’s a scenario which argues instead that he’s going statewide.

Obviously if Pat runs for and wins a U.S. Senate seat, he’s in a good position for the next six years and the country would gain a conservative voice from one of the most unlikely places. But if he takes the shot for Cardin’s Senate seat and loses, well, we all lose. But McDonough still would have built a statewide campaign organization and it could prove useful in 2014 since that election presents the opportunity of an open Governor’s seat. Remember, Pat flirted with the idea in 2010 but chose not to challenge Bob Ehrlich.

(Of course, winning the Governor’s seat after serving in Congress from the Second District worked for Bob, but that was nearly a decade ago – way past a political lifetime in this day and age.)

So McDonough remains a ‘theoretical’ candidate for the U.S. Senate; in reality just three GOP candidates have filed with the FEC (Daniel Bongino, William Capps, and Corrogan Vaughn) while Capps and Rick Hoover are on the ballot at this early stage. It is presumed from other sources that Robert Broadus and Eric Wargotz are in the race as well, although we await a formal announcement from 2010 GOP nominee Wargotz.

In the end we should have between 7 and 10 enter the U.S. Senate race on the Republican side, if past history is a guide. If McDonough does decide to jump in this fall then we’ve reached the lucky seven mark with just a few weeks to go before the filing deadline. Everyone has until January 11 to make up their minds.

U.S. Senate interview: Robert Broadus

This is the first of what I’m looking to be a series of interviews with candidates for Maryland’s U.S. Senate seat, now held by Ben Cardin. Think of it as an extension of my old “Ten Questions” series.

Robert Broadus is a former naval officer and current small business owner who may be most familiar to Maryland voters as the head of Protect Marriage Maryland, a group opposing the imposition of same-sex marriage in the state. He also ran unsuccessfully for Congress in the Fourth District in 2008 and 2010, finishing third out of four candidates in the 2008 Republican primary with 21.8% of the vote and losing the 2010 general election to incumbent Donna Edwards with 16.4% of the vote.

To begin, I was a bit confused by his website.

monoblogue: Let me start out by getting one thing straight: I was told (by a friend of mine) that you’re running for the Senate, but your website advertises “Broadus for Congress.” Having run for Congress twice before (once losing in the primary and once in the general) how does that show you’re committed to the race?

RB: Congress includes both the House and the Senate. Keeping the committee of the same name offers me a chance to save money. You can hear in my several public statements that I am running for Ben Cardin’s Senate seat.

monoblogue: I sort of suspected that, but it may be confusing to some who simply know you by website and recall you ran for Congress before in 2006 and 2008. So why the leap to a statewide seat?

RB: I have always believed that the Constitution puts the decision-making power of the United States into the hands of the Congress, which is the body designated to represent the will of the people and their states. I considered running for the House of Representatives in ‘08 and ‘10 (I did not run in ‘06) because a) the House is by design supposed to be closer to the people, and b) it is only the House that has the power to introduce bills for the appropriation of funds. I saw many of our financial problems, the reckless spending, and the multi-trillion-dollar debt coming from the mal-appropriation of funds, and I saw election as a fiscal conservative to the House as a means to remedy this problem. I additionally saw that both Al Wynn and Steny Hoyer were Democrats who had voted out of step with their party for the invasion of Iraq, and I believed at the time that this would make them weak with their constituents. I correctly gauged that Al Wynn was the weaker candidate; unfortunately instead of replacing him with a fiscally responsible Republican, his voters chose to replace him with the ultra-progressive Donna Edwards.

My ultimate decision to run for Senate was prompted by the fact that Ben Cardin was the first Senator to introduce Obamacare to the public, holding the very first townhall meeting in the majority-black setting of Prince George’s Community College. Part of my encounter with Senator Cardin can be viewed here.

I was also interviewed by Neil Cavuto afterwards.

So, although the event was almost 2 years ago now, I believe that if voters really care, and if they are truly angry enough about the destruction of their liberties, they will support my efforts to take the issue of Obamacare directly to Cardin in serious debate, and to make him pay for what he and his party did to us by giving him a pink slip in November 2012. I believe that the issues of loss of freedom, if framed correctly, will resonate with Black Americans, and the issues of unconstitutionality should appeal to Republicans in such large numbers that they will vote together to get better representation in the Senate.

I also recognized other statewide issues that needed to be addressed, and which were not being heard with me running in a single congressional district. Issues like same-sex marriage and illegal immigration were clearly issues that crossed party lines, and got people from all demographics to come out and challenge their legislators about what was being done almost in secret, against the will of the voters. So, I realized that I also needed to make these issues part of my Senate campaign. I very much believe that if we can unite the social conservatives throughout the state, the fiscal conservatives who recognize the tragedy being inflicted on us by the Democratic Party’s monopoly over Maryland, and inspire them to fight for their freedoms and demand that government respect us as people—as full-grown men and women—as the true rulers of this country, then not only can we win this election, but we can also achieve the goal that our founders and even Abraham Lincoln spoke glowingly of: the goal of self-government, which is in reality the goal of independence: EMANCIPATION.

The people of Maryland need to hear the message of freedom again, and that is why I am running for Senate.

monoblogue: I’ve noticed on your issue page that you cite the Constitution frequently – that’s a good trait to have in a Senator.

I’d love a comment on your call to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment – given Maryland’s longtime love for all things Democratic, isn’t that going to cost you a job in the Senate? Or were you planning on term-limiting yourself anyway?

And a more important question: how do you get out the message of freedom in an era when 30 second sound bites are the norm and Ben Cardin is sitting on a cool million dollars? How much do you think you need to compete?

RB: I consider that a great compliment. While I believe that there have been many violations to the Constitution over the years, I note that there are a small handful that can be looked at as absolutely the most egregious, the most anti-American, and the most destructive of liberty. We can point to the “progressive” amendments as being some of the most dangerous changes to our American system of government—even to the point of taking us backward by making the Constitution an instrument of oppression rather than one of liberation and freedom. The 16th, 17th, and 18th Amendments were all passed during what was known as the “progressive era.” The 18th, as we know, was justly repealed by the 21st. The other two should be as well. The 16th was implemented to make certain the Congress had a power to tax people’s property in the form of their only means of sustenance—their incomes. The 17th was implemented to destroy the critical functioning of the States as an integral part of the federal government.

In the Federalist Papers, James Madison makes a point of arguing that while the original Constitution (the Articles of Confederation) provided for a “federal” system of government, the new Constitution would provide for what he calls a “combined” government—namely, a hybrid between a “federal” government (a confederation, or government of sovereign states) and a “national” government (a popular government.) To assure his critics that the States would not be destroyed, he argued repeatedly that their continuance was guaranteed by their constitutionally-guaranteed role of appointing Senators. For example, in Federalist 45, he writes: “The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or the organization of the former…The Senate will be elected absolutely and exclusively by the State legislatures.”

In fact, the entire argument of the Federalist Papers (and therefore, that of the Constitution) depends on the fact that the States were guaranteed not only representation, but EQUAL representation in the national legislature, much as they had been under the Articles of Confederation. To take this component away not only undoes the character under which the Constitution itself was ratified, but it also destroys the “federal” nature of our system of government. So, whereas the Federalists Papers are written to argue the need for a combined federal/national government, what the 17th Amendment created was a purely national government, in which the States are mere subdivisions of the country—no more sovereign or independent than counties or towns are to a State. We are seeing with Obamacare and other pieces of unconstitutional legislation just how insignificant and powerless the States have become.

While I support term limits for all federal offices, I do not have plans for what I will limit myself to. My primary motivation for running is that there is something dreadfully disastrous happening to our American republic, and it needs to be fixed. If I am able to affect the system (either from within elected office or outside of it) in a way that these problems will be fixed, then I will have no more need to be in the Senate, and will gladly step aside to allow other citizens to represent the State in that capacity. It is also important to understand that even in the House of Representatives, you are chosen to represent your State—not “the people” per se. Only in the twisted political worldview that emphasizes cronyism, pay-to-play, and “bringing home the bacon” has it been interpreted that members of the House only represent their districts (or certain special interest groups within their districts) and not the entire State. I further understand that Maryland’s political history means it is almost certain that the legislature will continue to appoint Democrats to the U.S. Senate. However, when it comes to the Constitution and Liberty, principle is more important than any political ambitions. If the Constitution says that Senators must be appointed by the legislatures, then I would not support a system that tries to subvert that just because I’d like to see a Republican in office. In fact, this is one of the motivations behind this rule—Senators should reflect the political disposition of the State. If enough people in Maryland really want a Republican Senator, then they will work to get a Republican State Legislature. In fact, I firmly believe that if more people focused on their local politicians rather than national offices such as the presidency, they’d have much more control over their government, and would be happier with the representation they were getting, both in Annapolis and in DC. This, I think we can do if we change the way we look at politics, and focus on making Maryland a 2-party state instead of a monopoly for the Democratic Party which it has been for its entire history.

Regarding how to get out the message of freedom in an era of 30-second soundbites, this is really up to the people of Maryland. If they want to hear my message, they will donate to my campaign and give me the platform to speak—in the form of TV ads, mailers, radio spots, etc. I don’t have to have the most money—I just have to have the backing of the citizens of Maryland, or even of the Republican Party. However, the grander question is, “Does the Republican Party want to be represented by the message of freedom?” Do they want it on their airwaves or plastered on billboards across the state? Last election, the message we heard in Maryland was extremely diluted down to “More Jobs, Lower Taxes.” Although the Tea Parties had a great influence, and basically saved the MDGOP from extinction, the establishment shunned the Tea Parties and rejected their message of a return to the Constitution and conservative values.

Ben Cardin is sitting on a lot more than a million dollars. One report I read from several years back showed his personal wealth above $5 million—which he could donate to his own campaign. But in 2006, Cardin raised over $9 million. Even though Michael Steele reportedly raised slightly more, Cardin won the election. So at the end of the day, it is not about dollar figures alone. With Barack Obama on the ticket and the future of America at stake, we can expect Cardin to exceed $10 million or more, if such amounts are needed to keep the seat in Democratic hands. Cardin basically has unlimited funds, and can raise whatever he needs. But more than money, it is the message that will make the difference of a win or a loss in 2012. If the people of Maryland are ready for a change to what they’ve been getting—a change from high unemployment, high taxes, high inflation, and high treason against the Constitution, then all of these messages combined can overcome those millions. If they are tired of their money being used to fund abortion clinics, violate their religious liberties, indoctrinate their children with socialist values in public schools, and dole out their money to entice illegal immigrants to settle here, they will also have motivation, regardless of party, to demand new representation. People can get out and start spreading the word that a renewed spirit of freedom is in the air, and that we must change our way of doing business if we want to pass on a Maryland (and an America) to our children and our grandchildren that was as vibrant and free as the one we grew up in. We are on the verge of an ideological split, and like in 1861, today we are very much a “house divided.” However, the division today is not over race and cotton. It is over freedom to live and work and do as you please versus subservience to an oppressive state that declares that all must participate in the “shared sacrifice” of a tyrant’s will. Such tyranny is not lodged in a single party—it is lodged in the will of all our politicians to violate the principles of the Constitution, the only thing that guards our freedoms.

I plan to offer the people a choice in the matter: freedom, not slavery—liberty, not death. If freedom is popular, and if the people value their liberty, then nothing can stop us from winning. But if they prefer anything above liberty—whether it be safety or security, wealth or celebrity, then they will receive anything but liberty.

To illustrate this point, I will quote Madison again (whom, because of his short-sightedness, I am not a fan of) but who recognized the dangers of Obamacare 224 years ago when he wrote in Federalist #57, “If it be asked, what is to restrain the House of Representatives from making legal discriminations in favor of themselves and a particular class of the society? I answer: the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America—a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it. If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate anything but liberty.”

There is a very serious problem that has arisen within our government, and we need someone who will go to Washington, who will fight for Maryland and its people, and who will not rest or cease from fighting until that problem is fixed.

monoblogue: Well, there’s not a lot I can argue with there, aside from the fact that I took the million-dollar figure from Cardin’s most recent FEC report. But speaking of getting out the message, are you finding your work with Protect Marriage Maryland and travel around the state in promoting marriage between one man and one woman is giving you a leg up for campaigning? How much influence do you think social conservatives can have in this state?

RB: I believe that working on the marriage issue has given people a subject to associate my name with. People who care about preserving traditional marriage very often associate me with it. At the same time, people who are opposed to preserving traditional marriage also know me as a pariah. In my view, this helps to separate the wheat from the chaff. People who outright reject social conservatism will most likely go and find other candidates to support.

On that note, I do believe that social conservatives can have a great influence in this state, but like everything else, it depends on them wanting to make their voice heard. The first question Republicans must ask themselves is, “Why am I a Republican?” Some will just be Republicans because their parents were Republicans and they were raised to like the Republican “brand.” But if anyone is a Republican because they truly believe in a set of principles, they will most likely find themselves describing conservative principles. Is there a difference between social conservatism and other forms of conservatism? On the surface, the answer seems to be, “yes,” but in reality, the answer is, “no.” When you look at issues like abortion, single-parenthood, inner-city violence, illegal immigration, same-sex marriage, etc, these all boil down to economic issues, even moreso than being issues of faith. The chief distinction of where we fall is whether we let our particular circumstances interfere with our own willingness to support the conservative message.

(It is important to note that like most Blacks in America, I did not start as a conservative, and would not have identified myself as a conservative 10 years ago. But the more I have thought on the issues, the more I realize that I either have been a conservative all my life, but didn’t know it, or that I want to be a conservative on certain issues, but just can’t bring myself to give up certain idiosyncrasies that I’ve grown up with, such as identity-politics or a deep-seated belief that there are some things people can’t do without government.)

To that point, the question of being a conservative (and more importantly a social conservative) rests largely with the MDGOP & the National GOP’s desire to push the message out to voters that conservatism is cool. As long as the MDGOP’s mantra is that we have to moderate on some issues to win over liberals, we will never be in a position to win the argument. What they are really saying is that they do not feel confident enough about their own ideology to convince others that it is the right philosophical approach to life.

The reality is that like myself, most Marylanders have been conservative all their lives, but didn’t know it. They believe in liberty, fiscal responsibility, and that justice is best achieved by adhering to the rule of law. They believe in treating other people the way they’d want to be treated—which means not only giving lovingly from your heart, but also showing “tough love” by withholding charity when instead what the person needs is a swift kick in the rear. They believe in doing “what’s right,” and that means sometimes you’ve got to tighten your belt and delay gratification to get through the tough times and see better days.

The unfortunate thing is that liberalism (or statism) teaches people that government can solve all their woes, and even better than that, it can solve them instantaneously—all they have to do is believe that government is the answer to all their problems and serve it unerringly. Whenever government fails, just turn a blind eye or blame the other party; and whenever things go well (no matter how slightly,) showcase it as evidence that government works. Yet the truth is that government cannot ever make your life significantly better. It can only make you dependent. And it is unraveling this fallacy that causes the fiscal conservative (or conservatives of another category) to eventually arrive at the same point as the social conservative. The social conservative isn’t so because he worships a certain religion (although he may have found conservatism because of his religious beliefs.) The social conservative is so because he wants to stand on his own two feet. To do so, he must act with wisdom, which means avoiding foolish risks and frivolous lifestyle choices. If he does make such a bad choice, then he must be prepared to live with the consequences—he does not expect society to pick up the slack for his personal decisions.

And this is the difference. Every time you hear a Republican say something like, “I’m normally against government welfare, but…” you are witnessing a fiscal conservative cave in to his own principles. And the liberal (statist) has a million ways to pry us from our values. Their favorites are words like “compassion,” “love,” and “pity.” Another one is a hyphenated form of the word, “justice.” Recently, they’ve begun toying with the words “sacrifice” and “tolerance” to achieve the same effect. Conservatism (which is self-reliance or at least a desire for independence) requires the ability to reject all these things when they drive us away from our better selves. Liberty requires that we can place something above grandiose ideas like “love” or “tolerance.” Indeed, we can put our needs before the desires of others, and we can put our families before other families, and we can put our faith in God before other noble ideas like “love” and “tolerance.” Even “fairness,” sometimes, will fall to our greater sense of self-preservation—but that’s what liberty is all about. Liberty is not the idea that you have to do what others want—it is the idea that you can do what you want, even if others disagree.

This is a lesson that my ancestors learned and passed down through the generations, as they yearned for liberty from the slavemasters’ plantations. This is the lesson that our founders fought for as they rebelled against their King and created a new government to protect their liberties. And I believe that if we promote this message effectively, the people of Maryland will see it is a fire that still burns in their hearts and minds.

So, I do not see social conservatives as being the minority in this state—not by a long shot. I see them as being the dominant majority. It is a bit sad that their strength is not self-evident. It is just a matter of time before they awaken and realize that what they want in their hearts can be achieved by voting for a guy like me, running on a Republican ticket, and that what they want can be achieved in this next election. It won’t take 20 years of being a career politician, nor will it take a complete turnaround of the statehouse. Putting the right person in the House or Senate can magnify their voice 1,000 times beyond what they have now, which is complete silence. Not only that, but they will not get this magnified voice with any other candidate—Ben Cardin is actually stifling their voice. I will not pretend that it won’t be a struggle to get them to realize this, but I do believe that in the near-term, it can be done.

monoblogue: I think this has been a pretty thorough discussion. Is there anything else you want to add to “close the sale”?

RB: Thanks a lot, Michael.

I would simply close by saying that identifying with conservative values has enabled me to better consider why we instituted a government among ourselves, and what the Constitution is really all about. It has enabled me to see–as many abolitionists like Frederick Douglass did well before 1865–that the Constitution is a “freedom document,” which in its best interpretation should be looked at as embodying the spirit of Independence that fueled the founding of these united States. It has also caused me to take a more serious look at how money is created and used in our financial system. No government that preserves an individual right to property (as our 5th amendment requires ours to) can do so without supporting a capitalist economic system based on sound money. And it has enabled me to see that in our current struggle, the Republican Party is the party that stands for the liberty, independence, and even the equality of opportunity for all people willing to put in the required work and remain dedicated to achieving success, happiness, and prosperity.

The greatest threat to our future can be described in two ways that are closely related: the first is forgetting that we were created as a republic of free and independent States. It is the States that serve as a check on the national government to protect the rights and sovereignty of the people. We are losing this as we embrace an increasingly nationalist government. The second is in neglecting the vital importance and proper interpretation of the 10th Amendment, which locked into the Constitution the very principle of the rights and sovereignty of the States. The 10th Amendment tells us how to read the rest of the Constitution, and defines its character completely. The notion that the government’s powers are limited, and that it does not have the authority to employ any means whatever to achieve its desired ends over the rights of the people are contained nowhere else in the Constitution but there. Obamacare represents an unbridled assault on the heart of the Constitution in the form of rendering inert the 10th Amendment. I have had several occasions to speak with Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, and he expressed the same concerns. I stand by his efforts and the efforts of other States’ Attorneys General to defend the rights and sovereignty of their States regarding an issue that the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved with. We all need to stand in this critical hour—in 2012–to save our States and protect our republic, as that is the only way we will protect our liberties.

**********

Personally, I think Broadus lays out a very compelling case as a conservative Senator. He obviously has the strikes against him of a lack of name recognition in most of the state and perhaps being too closely identified on the surface as a one-issue candidate. However, in this interview he displays a depth of thought which should be able to convince voters he has sound positions on most issues outside the narrow range of social conservatism.

That narrow base of support could be his downfall in an election year such as 2012, where the primary is early. That gives an advantage to candidates who already have a support system in place.

Yet Robert reminds me a little bit of 2010 U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rutledge – not necessarily in style, but in the way he speaks at length and depth about conservative issues. If Robert’s as good of a speaker as he is a writer, I’d love to watch him mop up the stage with Ben Cardin in a debate – that’s probably why you won’t see one.

35th Annual Tawes Crab and Clam Bake in pictures and text

As the old saying goes, there are two sides to (almost) every story, and the annual event in Crisfield provides plenty of comparisons.

Take the location for example – a marina filled with boats valued in the tens of thousands of dollars hard by low-income housing. Denizens of the immediate neighborhood look forward to the Clam Bake as it provides an opportunity to sell parking spots to people who don’t wish to walk as far to the event.

In short, they create their own economic development. But bringing 3,500 visitors to Crisfield is an economic boost to the area.

While the event has a reputation as a political stop, there is a business element there too. Some companies look to get or keep their name out in the area.

Others use it as a reward to their customers, hosting elaborate parties within the party.

But the crowd was noticeably smaller than last year’s. Yes, this is not an election year but even the number of businesses which took tent space seemed smaller. How often do you see this?

Maybe it’s something about Area 51? But this is a shot I took around 1:30 or so at the peak of the festivities.

Compare that crowd to this still shot from last year.

Even the mugs weren’t being snatched up as quickly.

As you’ll notice in the panoramic picture, there are two main areas where crowds gather. On one side are the smaller tents set up for businesses and groups. But many people sit in the pavilion and enjoy musical entertainment.

I can’t say I’m a fan of country or bluegrass, but a number of people sat under the pavilion to listen.

I know, I know – you readers are saying, “Michael, you have a political website. What’s the political dirt?” Well, there are two sides to that as well.

One guy who seems to straddle that line is Bruce Bereano, who annually has among the largest tents and his own “corner.” However, with a revised setup this year he was more in the middle.

In a nice touch, Bereano has honored a local leader for the last couple years.

If you don’t believe he works to both sides of the aisle, consider that the following two signs were close together on his tent.

Could this be the gubernatorial matchup for 2014? Peter Franchot could obviously be entrenched as Comptroller for as long as he wants to be but my feeling is he wants something more. Meanwhile, David Craig is term-limited as Harford County Executive but obviously has a run for something in mind three years hence. My guess would be that “something” is a long-term stay in Government House.

A matchup which will occur sooner is a statewide battle for the U.S. Senate seat held by Ben Cardin. Presumably he was a little busy today, but a number of volunteers were sporting his colors and registering voters as they stood in the food lines.

Arriving a little later was a man who’s aiming to be his Republican rival, Dan Bongino. Here he’s talking to Bill Harris of Cecil County.

I also spied Eric Wargotz there with his wife. But he wasn’t openly campaigning at this time.

Like Senator Cardin, Congressman Andy Harris was likely a little busy today but had volunteers and signs with a sharply pointed message about. Eventually a lot of folks were wearing yellow Harris shirts.

By gosh, I think Andy is right. But there was someone quite familiar to him there.

Allow me to pose a question. Why would you spend $200 on tickets and a half tank of gas to come down and eat crabs one can probably get just as readily in Queen Anne’s County? Perhaps it’s a case of best two out of three? For all his talk about time with the family I don’t think, given the power and prestige of a seat in Congress, he can let it go just to be a cheerleader for Ben Cardin.

And there were a few cheerleaders for our state’s junior Senator.

Yet the Democrats had a modest, unassuming presence compared to the GOP.

That’s not to say both parties weren’t represented, to be sure. Here’s two of our best freshman Delegates, Charles Otto and Justin Ready.

They weren’t the only freshmen Republicans there, as I saw Michael Hough, Kathy Szeliga, and of course my Delegate Mike McDermott at the event.

Meanwhile, Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt was reaching across the aisle, greeting old friends in the Somerset County Republican tent.

On the other hand, Norm Conway was holed up around the Democrats’ base.

Even the unaffiliated were there. Yes, last I checked Laura Mitchell of Salisbury City Council doesn’t state a party affiliation. I did catch up to her just outside the Democratic tent, though.

Nor was national politics forgotten. Kevin Waterman (who some may know for the Questing for Atlantis website) came supporting his choice for President, Gary Johnson.

Republican politics must run in that family – his mother Diana (who I cut off in the photo) is First Vice-Chair of the Maryland GOP.

Needless to say, the media was there as well. WBOC-TV was on location shooting footage, and I saw print reporters and fellow bloggers about, too.

But I’m curious if anyone else will report on this tidbit.

Notice the flag placed in the corner of the Democrats’ tent? It’s the Wicomico County flag.

Now I’m not convinced that the official imprimatur of our fair county should be in that tent – granted, Democrats have a plurality of voters here but Republicans hold more elected seats in county government. If it’s an endorsement of Democratic principles (such as they are) for our county, consider me as a conscientious objector.

So while the turnout was smaller than in years past, it was still a good event for the Crisfield community. And the rain, which I noticed on my drive back, stayed away.

Look for an interesting cast of characters for next year’s event, which should fall after the 2012 primary on July 18, 2012.

WCRC meeting – June 2011

If you missed this meeting, you missed an opportunity to meet one of the leading candidates to unseat incumbent U.S. Senator Ben Cardin.

Of course, we went through the usual business of doing the Lord’s Prayer, Pledge of Allegiance, and reading of the minutes, but those who attended were really there to hear from and interact with Senate candidate Daniel Bongino.

With his family and campaign advisor Brian Murphy in tow, Bongino told those assembled that this was his fourth trip to the Eastern Shore in 20 days – however, he was hoping his campaign wouldn’t be broken by upcoming toll hikes for the Bay Bridge. Dan portrayed the meeting as a “job interview…you don’t need me, I need you.”

Dan related that he decided to run for the U.S. Senate with “no Plan B…I left it all on the line for this.” But he got into the race to run an “aggressive” campaign against the incumbent. “The other side is not taking prisoners,” said Bongino.

Citing the three key issues as education, health care, and the economy, Dan laid into the left’s three-pronged philosophy espoused by Cardin. Their agenda items always include a price control mechanism, a third-party payer, and coercion of some sort. There’s little or no market component with government involvement.

Government has created a number of systems, particularly in health care, that are ‘designed to fail,” including the Great Society. “We made poverty comfortable” during that era, and to Bongino that was “a travesty.”

He also answered a number of audience questions on Medicaid, competing against Ben Cardin, the PATRIOT Act, our involvement in Libya, ending the Federal Reserve, and immigration. For these queries Dan had a number of compelling answers.

Bongino gave a short economic treatise on why one is more likely to die if they’re on Medicaid than they are with no insurance at all. When one considers cost and quality in spending other people’s money on other people (i.e. how government works) “the most inefficient way to spend money is government, every time.” And since there is no regard for either cost or quality with a third-party payer system “(Ben Cardin) is going to sell everyone up the river with this healthcare plan, and he knows it,” stated Bongino.

In competing against Cardin, Dan said it’s a matter of not forfeiting the minority vote as Republicans are prone to do – telling him otherwise is “garbage.” Yet the Democrats have done nothing for the minority population, said Bongino. “We’re not knocking on the doors (in minority areas,” he continued, “Let them slam the door in my face…but I’m going to fight there.”

Those of the libertarian persuasion may have a couple objections, but Bongino thinks that “we need the PATRIOT Act (because) to abuse it takes an act of God” and dismisses the idea of ending the Fed: “Every country needs a central bank.” Yet there are provisions of the PATRIOT Act he would like to see sunsetted, and his support for a central bank comes with the caveat that they need to eliminate one part of the Fed’s dual mandate to control inflation and unemployment. We will either default on our debt or inflate our way out of it, said Dan.

On the other hand, Dan doesn’t support the War Powers Act. He questioned why we are in Libya and Afghanistan, saying “our boys” were being killed there as thanks from the people who we were trying to save. “We need our kids back…(the Taliban and tribal supporters) will kill us every minute we are there; they don’t know they’ve been defeated.”

He concluded with conceding that there’s “zero chance of deporting 12 million (illegal immigrants)” but believes we need to secure the border first before attempting any sort of immigration reform.

Afterward, the reaction to Dan was generally positive, save for a few items he knew could rub some the wrong way. “Honest and refreshing” was the verdict from one observer.

And you can decide for yourself as I recorded Bongino’s remarks last night.

Still, we weren’t finished. Dave Parker gave us the rundown on Central Committee happenings, which included recommending two new members to the Wicomico County Board of Education. Not that it may mean much – “Martin O’Malley doesn’t care” about the Republican party’s desires, conceded Parker – but we did our assigned task.

He also talked about the Catholic Conference and their support of the DREAM Act (against the SB167 petition drive.) “(Their flyer) reads like Democratic Party talking points,” asserted Dave. CASA de Maryland with their aggressive tactics at public places where petition signatures are being solicited and other illegal immigrant supporters were “looking for ways to disenfranchise voters,” Dave said. A copy of the petition was passed around, with more signatures being added to those already in.

Shawn Jester informed us the next Lower Shore Young Republican meeting will be August 9 and talk about redistricting.

Julie Brewington made a pitch for a new group called the Constitutional Conservatives for Maryland PAC, which is holding a raffle fundraiser. (Once their website is up, there will be a link to it from my site.)

Other internal business discussed was a membership drive and potential scholarship. We also decided not to skip the July meeting, as has happened previously in non-election years. One suggested speaker was Robin Holloway, who is leaving the Wicomico County Board of Education after two terms.

So, since we decided it would be so, our next meeting will be July 25. While it’s likely Robin Holloway would be our speaker, stay tuned. We have about a half-dozen U.S. Senate candidates to go.

Murphy’s man

After teasing the Maryland public over the last week, 2010 gubernatorial candidate Brian Murphy made it official: he’s not running for the U.S. Senate. Instead, he’s backing a first-time candidate who’s spent most of his professional career in law enforcement and who believes, “we did nothing wrong, government failed us.” If you look at this hopeful’s issue page it reads as a fairly conservative platform both economically and in foreign policy.

Daniel Bongino is a 36-year-old Severna Park resident who has no political resume, but instead has worked for both the Secret Service and the New York City police department over the last sixteen years. It would seem a curious choice for Murphy to be backing this neophyte, but Brian hasn’t played by the conventional wisdom yet and probably won’t be doing so anytime soon.

Of course, the obvious question is whether Bongino will be able to take advantage of Murphy’s backing to vault past the other contenders for the GOP’s U.S. Senate challenger slot. Most figure incumbent Democratic Senator Ben Cardin a virtual lock for re-election for a second term but Daniel joins a fairly diverse field of five Republican contenders; a field which includes 2010 GOP nominee Eric Wargotz. Other Republican aspirants are former District 31 State Senate candidate William Capps, political neophyte Rick Hoover, and perennial candidate Corrogan Vaughn.

Wargotz would have to be considered as the odds-on favorite, but it’s worth noting that Eric only garnered 38% of the vote in a 10-man race last year so a better, well-funded candidate could defeat Wargotz in the primary. (In that primary Jim Rutledge, who had a much smaller campaign war chest but considerable TEA Party backing, finished second with just over 30 percent of the vote.) In theory, the blessing from Murphy, also a TEA Party favorite, could allow Bongino a 25-point base in the primary based on Brian’s support.

If events run true to form, the Republican primary for U.S. Senate next year will attract between seven and ten candidates for the nomination. Some of these will be on the ballot for the umpteenth time and others won’t even file with the FEC because they don’t (or won’t) raise enough money to wage a serious campaign. Given that background and the high-profile support of Murphy, a candidate like Daniel Bongino – even as a first-time officeseeker in a statewide race – will be one to contend with as next April draws closer.

Some reactions to bin Laden’s demise

A sampling of local and national political reaction to the untimely demise of America’s ‘Public Enemy Number 1.’

Let’s start with Congressman Andy Harris:

Last night, President Obama announced that American forces had killed terrorist and 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden. This is great news for the security of America, as well as for our troops at home and overseas who continue to protect us from terrorism every day. I want to thank and congratulate all of our men and women in the Armed Forces – their hard work and bravery made this possible. This is a great day for the United States of America.

As opposed to President Obama, who nearly broke his arm patting himself on the back in his statement, Harris was very restrained despite his actual military background as a reservist.

Senator Ben Cardin was a little more verbose, calling bin Laden a ‘murderer.’

The death of Osama bin Laden is an important milestone in the fight against terrorism and a relief to millions of Americans and others around the world who have felt his murderous destruction. Osama bin Laden was a murderer who devoted his life to the destruction of freedom, democracy and our way of life. Tonight all Americans can feel safer knowing that bin Laden is dead, but we must remain vigilant in the continued fight against al-Qaeda and any terrorists who seek to harm our nation. I join the President and all Americans in thanking the military professionals who carried out this mission. We depend on them and owe them our gratitude and our prayers.

Interestingly enough, as I write this at 11 in the morning, Senator Mikulski has no statement. Are things a bit slow around Barb’s office this A.M.?

Turning to some of the Presidential contenders, here’s what one of the frontrunners, Mitt Romney, had to say on his Facebook page:

This is a great victory for lovers of freedom and justice everywhere. Congratulations to our intelligence community, our military and the president. My thoughts are with the families of Osama bin Laden’s many thousands of victims, and the brave servicemen and women who have laid down their lives in pursuit of this murderous terrorist.

Score two for a variant of “murderer.”

Sarah Palin had this to say, also on Facebook:

Americans tonight are united in celebration and gratitude. God bless all the brave men and women in our military and our intelligence services who contributed to carrying out the successful mission to bring Bin Laden to justice and who laid the groundwork over the years to make this victory possible. It’s a testament to the hard work and dedication of these brave Americans who relentlessly hunted down our enemy.

This is a victory for the American people, for the victims who were heartlessly murdered on September 11 and in Al Qaeda’s other numerous attacks, and for all the peace-loving people of the world.

May God bless our troops and our intelligence services, and God bless America!

Perhaps it’s a matter of wearing one’s heart on their sleeve, but you can see the contrast in styles quite clearly between the cool, collected Mitt Romney and the passionate Sarah Palin. In either case, bin Laden isn’t an issue that will be on their plate anymore should either be the Republican nominee.

I have one more reaction to share, from Lt. Col. Allen West, who now serves in Congress as a Representative from Florida.

Congratulations to President Obama and his National Security Team for the capture and killing of the world’s most dangerous and evil criminal mastermind, Osama bin Laden.

Our appreciation and gratitude goes out to General Petreaus and the brave men and women in theater. Our Special Operations team executed a flawless, cross border operation, proving once again, our American Armed Forces are the most skilled, organized and highly trained forces in the world.

Although this is a time of exuberance, rejoicing and healing, America, as well as our allies, must be vigilant and on guard for retaliatory attacks from the extreme Islamic world. What strongly concerns me is that bin Laden was not found hiding in a remote cave, but in an urban area of Pakistan where the Pakistan Army’s premier training institution operates. This is a war that is no where close to being over.

That note of caution seems appropriate from someone who’s been there, as West served both in Iraq and as a civilian advisor to Afghan troops before returning to Florida and running for Congress in both 2008 (unsuccessfully) and 2010.

My take on this? Well, you’ll have to wait as I have an op-ed in with one of my national writing outlets. If it goes up in the next few days I’ll link to the post.

Update: I should have included former President George W. Bush:

Earlier this evening, President Obama called to inform me that American forces killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of the al Qaeda network that attacked America on September 11, 2001. I congratulated him and the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who devoted their lives to this mission. They have our everlasting gratitude. This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001. The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done.

Very classy gentleman.

Should he stay (home) or should he go (for Senate)?

As of yesterday, it’s been 19 weeks since Dr. Eric Wargotz was crushed by 26 points in his election matchup against Senator Barbara Mikulski. However, Eric carried 12 counties and managed to do somewhat better than 2004 nominee (and now State Senator) E.J. Pipkin, who lost by 31 points and carried only 7 counties.

But now Wargotz may have his sights set on a (presumably) more vulnerable target in Maryland’s junior Senator, Ben Cardin. (After all, Cardin ‘only’ beat Michael Steele by 10 points in 2006.) Yesterday he debuted a Facebook ‘event’ dubbed “Help Eric Wargotz decide to enter the Maryland US Senate race 2012.” Still, given the fact he’s occasionally updated his election Facebook page since his loss my suspicion was that he was bound to give it another shot regardless.

Moreover, Eric will have a few additional advantages this time around – name recognition with voters, experience gained from a recent statewide run, and (most likely) a fairly shallow primary field. The biggest name considering a 2012 campaign is Delegate Pat McDonough of Baltimore County, who thought about a run for Governor last year but this time may opt to challenge Second District Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger. Last year’s chief Senate contender, Jim Rutledge, is more inclined to wait for 2014 opportunities as rumor has it.

So it looks like Eric will be hitting the campaign trail once again; obviously those who have responded to his Facebook are urging him to go for it. (As if anyone would tell him, nah, skip this race.) Barring any big names out of the Maryland General Assembly jumping into the race, it would appear that Wargotz would be the odds-on favorite for the GOP nod once again.

Odds and ends number 25

Just a bunch of short items tonight.

Let’s begin at the national level, where another prospective 2012 Republican presidential candidate was brought out of the closet by the Washington Post. They devote five internet pages to Fred Karger’s story.

The play on words was intentional; Karger is billing himself as the first openly gay presidential candidate. I actually mentioned him before when Herman Cain jumped into the race, but this is the biggest splash about him I’ve seen. Leave it to the liberals at the Post to promote him, since Karger isn’t exactly the flavor of the month among Republicans and TEA Party regulars.

Having said that, though, Fred opens up a big can of worms – since establishment Republicans recoil in horror at the thought of being portrayed as racist, imagine the cacophony when they’re deemed homophobes because Karger’s not considered among the top tier of candidates.

Once the Salisbury election is over, I’ll start linking to GOP hopeful websites and Karger’s will be one, assuming he’s still in the race.

How Maryland will affect that race is up for debate. Because of rules adopted by both parties, those states with “winner-take-all” primaries like Maryland have to push their primaries back to April of next year. (Traditional lidlifters Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina will be allowed to hold primaries in February and states which allot convention delegates proportionally may go in March.) Thus, the earliest Maryland could hold its primary in 2012 would be April 3rd, which is the first Tuesday in April.

Compare this to 2008, when Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia held a regional primary on February 12 of that year. (The primary process started in Iowa on January 3 of that year; currently next year’s Iowa caucuses are slated for February 6, 2012.) We still didn’t have a lot of say in the process since 2008’s “Super Tuesday” of primaries occurred the week before.

Also up for change is the date for the 2014 state primary, which needs to be backed up to comply with federal law regarding military ballots.

If it were up to me, though, the national primary process would mirror our state’s to a greater extent. Run Iowa and New Hampshire around the middle of June, hold a half-dozen regional primaries over six weeks in June and July, and have the conventions in late August. A nice short process. Primaries shouldn’t even begin until June as far as I’m concerned – anything before that makes the campaign WAY too long.

The next item comes from being on the strangest e-mail lists. Somehow I have ended up on Barbara Boxer’s e-mail distribution network, but this item piqued my interest.

This week I introduced the West Coast Ocean Protection Act, a bill to permanently prohibit new offshore drilling along the Pacific coast. I was joined by all the Senators from the West Coast – including my colleague from California, Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) – in offering this critical legislation to protect the 570,000 jobs and $34 billion coastal economy of our three states.

Additional offshore oil development along the Pacific shoreline would needlessly endanger irreplaceable natural resources and our vital coastal economies.

Boxer goes on to note that there’s no plans for development until at least 2017, but wants to make sure it’s permanent. Why do I get the sneaking hunch that our two Senators will either try and amend the bill to include Maryland or have the brilliant idea to do their own measure? Substitute the word “Atlantic” for “Pacific” and you’d sum up their sentiments.

Of course, the difference is that we know there’s oil off the Pacific coast while the jury’s still out on whether there’s marketable reserves under the Atlantic. But there are some reserves of both coal and natural gas deep underneath the Free State and it behooves us to allow exploration – unfortunately, we have a governor who is woefully short-sighted in that department. (In fact, wind farms, coal mines, and natural gas wells can coexist in the same area.)

In the meantime, I’d lay odds on our not-so-dynamic duo of Cardin and Mikulski helping Boxer’s bill along.

After all, they don’t listen to their constituents who want nothing to do with Obamacare, instead voting along like good little Democratic sheep. Mikulski even voted to keep the onerous Obamacare $600 reporting requirement. (Ben Cardin had the good sense to vote yes, although, more likely, he realized that 2012 is fast approaching.)

Finally, there’s a casting call for another arrogant Democratic party leader in Maryland – seems Susan Turnbull is leaving her post. Benefits include fawning press coverage from most newspapers and plenty of special interest money to spend come election time.

Applicants may suck up to Martin O’Malley for consideration.

It looks like Maryland CAN

Following up on a story that was so last year…love those New Year’s jokes I can make for a few days!

Today I received good news from my blogging friend (Potomac TEA Party Report) Ann Corcoran. She’s helping to organize the first Maryland CAN (Conservative Action Network) conference in Annapolis next Saturday. Alas, I cannot be there due to a previous commitment but she tells me that they’ll break the 100 mark in registrations this week. When we discussed the event, I surmised that “50 is a success and 100 would be huge” – so color it huge!

Among the speakers will be a galaxy of conservative activists from Maryland and beyond, with perhaps the most nationally famous being ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief. She now heads up an organization called Emerging Corruption. Bios on many of the remaining speakers can be found here.

Considering we had about 250 for the GOP convention (held in the same building) and they were supposed to be there as elected officials, drawing triple-digits for this conference is a good first step. The idea is to work and plan our moves for the next two to four years in the wilderness (as far as state politics is concerned) and manuever ourselves into position for success in 2012 and 2014. For example, it may be a great stop for those who are considering running against Senator Ben Cardin and for Congress against a slew of Maryland incumbents.

Certainly I’m sure Ann and other Maryland conservative bloggers will be taking up my slack in covering this event. I’ll keep my ear to the ground and see what develops.

Pathetic fundraising pitches

Over the last few days I’ve received not one, not two, but three e-mail pitches urging me to donate to Barb Mikulski’s campaign for yet another re-election to her Senate seat before tomorrow’s quarterly filing deadline. Yes, it appears now my best friends in the world are now Ben Cardin, Martin O’Malley, and Paul Sarbanes and they all want me to donate to Senator Barb. Some of these appeals even have a nice little picture of her asking me to “help Barbara reach her $20k goal today” in that pseudo-hip Gotham font which Organizing for America likes to use.

But that got me to thinking (and doing a little research.) After all, with $2.7 million cash on hand at the end of March 20 grand is pretty much chump change.

(continued on my Examiner.com page…)