Conservative victories – wherever you can get them

Tuesday is a big day for a Maryland-based PAC as they attempt to broaden their reach and influence.

That evening the Conservative Victory PAC is sponsoring a fundraiser for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli, with plenty of influence from Maryland: Dan Bongino will give  “special remarks”  and the host committee features both former Maryland governor Bob Ehrlich and lieutenant governor Michael Steele. As they note, “proceeds will be provided to the Cuccinelli Campaign Team,” and there should be plenty of proceeds seeing that the admission prices start at a steep $135. This ain’t no little spaghetti dinner fundraiser.

My erstwhile Red Maryland colleagues Brian Griffiths and Greg Kline have been critical of the CVPAC on their website and radio show this week, contending the group should be paying attention to local races in Annapolis and Frederick. But unlike last year, Diana Waterman stated to me in a recent conference call that there were no plans for the state party to help in Virginia as they did for Mitt Romney. So in that respect the CVPAC is taking up that slack.

Yet there’s a factor which makes the CVPAC decision less surprising for me. With the exception of Jim Rutledge, the CVPAC Board of Directors lives in the Washington metropolitan area, so they likely follow Virginia politics almost as closely as Maryland’s because their local media deals with both. And while I disagree that the host committee is necessarily the shining example of conservatism, certainly Ken Cuccinelli would be considered a conservative rising star and perhaps future Presidential material in 2020 (after his one term in Virginia would be completed) if he succeeds in winning this year.

And it’s not like this should be a surprise, coming from the CVPAC. If you recall their trailer for 2014, the video narrator intoned that “alliances will be formed” between Maryland and Virginia. Moreover, their stated goal for Maryland is 19 State Senate seats and if they can get some reciprocal help from the commonwealth to our south – yes, that’s a big ‘if’ but they’re trying to form the alliance – we may be able to tip those scales. (Meanwhile, a member of their Board of Directors is running for governor here, so one might think CVPAC may be looking for assistance there, too.)

Are the races in Annapolis and Frederick a big deal? To an extent, yes – perhaps they can succeed and show us a path for success in Salisbury come 2015. (By population, Salisbury is quite comparable to Annapolis and is Maryland’s ninth-largest city; it’s also the largest on the Eastern Shore.) But every political operation has its priorities and it sounds like CVPAC is trying to leverage conservative success in Virginia into victories next year in Maryland.

But you have to have the Virginia success first for that plan to work.

Sound advice

Amongst the voluminous fundraising chaff that comes at the end of each quarter from politicians and candidates alike, there sometimes comes valuable information. It’s worth reminding people again that Congressional candidate Dan Bongino knows something about security as a former Secret Service agent, so an item he wrote yesterday which ended up on my Facebook page is, to me, worth repeating:

I do not want to unnecessarily alarm you, nor do I intend this post to be a call for more “police-state” actions but I feel it important to sound the alarm.

The terrorist attack in the mall in Kenya is indicative of two troubling trends. The first is a tendency for previously parochial terror groups to look for international targets to leverage the media coverage of their carnage and the second is a renewed interest by terror groups in “soft-targets”.

If you are the owner or manager of any facility which attracts crowds (i.e. malls, arenas) be aware that your facility may become a target. From my experiences in the Secret Service, there are a number of relatively painless steps you can take to help mitigate the threat.

First, use your relationships with local law enforcement entities to determine what the law enforcement response would be to an “active-shooter” in your facility. Your employees should be intimately familiar with this plan.

Second, make sure law enforcement cooperation includes a blueprint of your facility. It is no coincidence that this is one of the first things an attacker or group of attackers looks for.

Third, rehearse your escape plan. In moments of profound fear and stress, your body will revert to your LOWEST level of training as blood is diverted to major muscle groups and clear thinking becomes nearly impossible. Your escape must be second-nature and require little to no conscious focus.

Sadly, we are in a new era of “sole-proprietor” terror where anyone with an Internet connection and a troubled mind can cause untold carnage. Ignoring this will not make it go away and there is no need to live your lives in fear but there is no good excuse for a failure to plan.

God bless America and all those who defend her.

To me, the key point is the third one because it makes the most sense – it all goes back to the animal instinct of “fight or flight.”  Yet there’s a lot I see between the lines as well.

Now I certainly don’t want to encourage any more of a police state than we already have. Unfortunately, though. these are the cards we are dealt when we live in a jurisdiction which is making the personal protection of a firearm harder to come by and the idea of (legally) concealing it nearly impossible. (Many of those commenting on the Facebook page make that same point.) Look at the Navy Yard shooter for example: it’s the latest case where the people who had weapons to stop him weren’t on site and a further example where a “gun-free zone” makes the occupants less safe than they otherwise should be. “Sole-proprietor” terrorists know this.

Unfortunately, since the “fight” option is off the table because one is unarmed, the “flight” option is the more viable. Having worked in the architectural field, I understand the life safety aspect of multiple exits from a space – although their idea of a life-threatening event is a fire – but places like shopping malls don’t always make them obvious because they don’t want their merchandise walking away through the necessary but rarely-used exits; it’s the reason they are normally tied to the fire alarm system (if opened, the alarms go off.) It goes back to the second point Dan makes, because if someone can understand the blueprints and has a team of terrorists they can block off possible egress points and trap occupants inside.

In this case, there was no fundraising appeal in the piece, but it also brings up a question: what can (and will) Dan do if he’s elected? The Second Amendment isn’t among the key issues he highlights on his campaign page (although the palette of issues he speaks about touches on most basic concerns) so I guess the question is just how far would Dan like to go in terms of eliminating the federal restrictions on self-protection through firearms? In Maryland, the only people who can outgun the police are the criminals, and the tendency of state law is to place the common citizen at the mercy of both. There’s also a relevant discussion of the Supremacy Clause and whether Maryland’s new laws – or similar laws enacted by any other state – violate the Second Amendment, but that’s for another venue.

One has to ask in this day and age, though: why shouldn’t people be allowed to defend themselves with a weapon? If only the criminals and the government have them, the word describing the rest of us would be: victims.

Allen West: Dan’s the man

Once again taking what would normally be a fairly localized race and nationalizing it, Sixth District Congressional candidate Dan Bongino announced his first major national endorsement today: former Congressman and conservative darling Lt. Col. Allen West.

In a statement released today, Bongino simply noted:

I am both proud and honored to receive the endorsement of Lt. Col. West, a man who has developed a large national following due to his reliance on principles and not cheap party politics.

There will be a formal event October 10 in Washington, D.C. to officially make the endorsement, in which Dan is joined by three other officeseekers.

But this is important in nationalizing the race because West’s Guardian Fund has plenty of support nationwide, despite the fact West was a one-term Congressman from Florida. Needless to say, I don’t think Dan is going to honor opponent David Vogt’s call for a campaign finance limit in the race, perhaps because incumbent Congressman John Delaney has plenty of money himself.

Meanwhile, Dan continues to rack up support from potential TEA Party peers in Washington and beyond – but it brings a point to mind. Obviously. since we are nowhere near the Sixth District, I have no idea how the grassroots in that region are taking to Bongino since he’s an outsider to the district. I know he had plenty of support in his statewide race from a plethora of volunteers, but I need to be convinced that the same passion is there this time around. While some had fun at Vogt’s handling of the Richard Douglas endorsement, having someone familiar with the lay of the land like Bud Otis can be an advantage as well. It means Vogt might be showing up at the right events and meeting the correct people therein.

But can that compete with the influence and power of Allen West? Only time will tell.

Some Syria reaction

Among those who have weighed in on the Syrian issue are our Congressman and two would-be Congressmen from the Sixth District.

First District representative Andy Harris, who has a vote in the matter, put out this statement today:

After much consideration, including attending a classified intelligence briefing, I do not believe using military force against Syria is in the national security interest of the United States. At this point, I won’t be supporting any authorization to use military force if it is brought to a vote in Congress. The use of chemical weapons is a very serious matter for the international community that should not be tolerated, but this Administration has failed to lay out a coherent strategy for why using American military force in this situation is in the best interest of the country.

Fairly straightforward and boilerplate; I could probably find similar statements coming from six dozen other Republicans in Congress.

On the other hand, those who are running in District 6 had more of a rhetorical flourish. Since he was first to the post, let me present what candidate David Vogt had to say:

The Congressional vote on Syrian military intervention will most likely occur this week. While there is heated debate from many sides arguing for various actions, I am calling on Congressman John Delaney to consider the overwhelming opinion of the American people and to side with reason, not emotion, in this debate.

I suffer no illusions about Bashar al-Assad or the vile act of a leader murdering his own people. The suffering and death of the Syrian people are very real. My thoughts and prayers are with them.

However, the difficulty, as an outside nation, is in determining not only if we should intervene, but how? What is our objective, and what is our exit strategy? Are we accomplishing a goal, fighting for a stalemate, or further destabilizing the conflict? Would we be removing chemical weapons from the hands of a tyrant, yet creating the risk that they fall under the control of an unknown opposition force with their own agenda? After all, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Faced with more questions than answers and such little international support, we must balance our desire to police the world with our obligation to act rationally. This particular situation is one with no defined goal, and American interests are not threatened by a lack of action. Diplomatic options have not been exhausted, and it is not even clear that they have been fully explored.

The world should take a stand against the use of chemical weapons in any country, but the time to have made a direct impact on Syria has passed. This situation has devolved from a humanitarian mission to a political game in which the American people want no part.

In a case of the people versus the establishment, the people’s voice must always be heard. This Marine is saying no to the establishment and no to military intervention.

I would vote “No” on this resolution, and I am calling on Congressman Delaney to do the same. The Congressman should not vote to authorize military conflict, but should instead push the President and his peers to pursue a solution that places the chemical weapons under secure, international control.

This was actually quite perceptive because I think this is the solution currently being favored as the answer to avoid direct American military involvement. Vogt makes the great point that if action were to occur, it should have already commenced.

Meanwhile, fellow Republican candidate Dan Bongino had his own thoughts:

Last week during a Senate hearing on the use of force in Syria, Sen. Bob Corker asked what the United States is “seeking” in Syria. Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had no answer. “I can’t answer that, what we’re seeking,” he said.

This is indicative of the Obama administration’s lack of a discernible foreign policy strategy towards Syria. A limited strike in Syria is nothing more than a face-saving measure for President Obama which could potentially draw America into yet another full-scale war in the Middle East.

After a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan where billions of dollars were spent and thousands of lives were lost, a military intervention in a Syrian civil war that is not connected to the national security interest of the United States is the wrong course of action for our nation.

Dan makes the case, by tying this situation into that in Iraq and Afghanistan, that Americans are tired of war – and he’s right. I’m not as sure this situation is equal because we have no al-Qaeda or Taliban to use as an enemy; in fact, the solution advocated assumes that only the Syrian government has chemical weapons, not the rebel groups. If the rebels have secured their own supply we just barked up the wrong tree.

For his part, District 6 Congressman John Delaney was coy on his Syria stance in a September 1 interview with WTTG-TV in Washington. He hasn’t made a public declaration on Syria since that point.

If there will be a vote of Syria – after President Obama’s remarks this evening, it’s anyone’s guess whether one will occur – it’s plain that Andy Harris will be a “no” vote, siding with the American people unconvinced our national interest would be at stake from events there and having no desire to lob a few cruise missiles into the beleaguered nation. I suspect that will meet with the approval of his district.

Finally, as an aside: shouldn’t we be hearing from Republican candidates from the other six districts on this?

Bongino: I won’t be a lifer

Expanding on a possible “outsider vs. establishment” theme to get him through a Sixth District primary against at least two challengers (David Vogt and, more recently, 2012 aspirant Brandon Rippeon) Dan Bongino promised “I will always be one of you. I will never be one of them.”

At this time, the front of his campaign website has four promises he’s vowing to keep: in brief, they are donating half his salary to charity, not voting for anything which “exempts the political class”, no free vacations (or as he calls them, foreign junkets), and most importantly to me, a six-year term limit. On that point Dan says:

I will serve no more than 6 years or three terms in the House of Representatives. One cannot speak of term limits within a specific office while insulated within that office from the very people they are elected to serve.

That’s only half of what Andy Harris promised informally when he took office in 2010. But what’s most intriguing to me is that Dan will only be 46 when that time is up, in a year where nothing will be on the ballot except a Presidential election and his seat. I know the 2020 election seems a long way off, but if Dan holds true to his word he would be on the ballot in 2014, 2016, and 2018.

Now that doesn’t mean, of course, that Dan couldn’t serve just two terms in Washington and then decide to run for governor, presumably in this case against a Democratic incumbent. Another option would be what one could call the Martin O’Malley option: spend the two years between the end of the term and the election stumping for higher office. That would mean a 2022 run for governor, when the seat would be open unless a new governor is elected in 2018.

Needless to say there’s a whole lot of speculation in all this, but one has to ask: when Bob Ehrlich won a Congressional seat in 1994, did anyone foresee it as a springboard to the governorship eight years later? Maybe lightning could strike twice in Maryland.

Another vote for Vogt

It’s beginning to look like a race out in the Sixth District, but the question is now becoming one of whether the establishment Republican is really Dan Bongino, who earned his stripes by garnering the Maryland GOP’s senatorial nomination last April. Consider that Dan’s closest opponent in that race, Richard Douglas, is now backing Vogt:

Service in the armed forces is not the only quality required of a conscientious member of Congress. But it is an enormous asset. For this reason, I believe that former Marine rifleman and Afghanistan veteran David Vogt is the best choice to represent Maryland District 6 in the U.S House of Representatives.

During the last twelve years, our nation’s most important national security enterprises have been combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. After September 11, 2001, Americans like Mr. Vogt enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps and other branches of the armed forces to perform our nation’s dangerous and demanding work. They volunteered without fanfare, fully aware that they would be deployed to combat theaters, rifle in hand. Their willingness to go in harm’s way is the essence of service and sacrifice.

Even Americans who opposed U.S. operations in Iraq or Afghanistan can appreciate the worth of such badly-needed qualities, today, in every walk of our often-troubled national life. These qualities are important because the interests of Maryland and our nation often demand that elected representatives in Congress, regardless of party, cross swords with the people who govern us from the White House, the Pentagon and other Executive branch departments and independent agencies.

Staring down the President, the Pentagon, a massive bureaucracy, or your own party leadership to serve the people takes genuine courage. But that is a House member’s duty, regardless of the political consequences. Armed forces veterans — particularly those with combat experience in the ranks — understand and have lived the duties of self-sacrifice and courage. They are less likely to become the star-struck cheerleaders for bad military, foreign, and domestic policy which, sadly, populate Congress today.

Service, seasoning and wisdom matter. Marylanders have had a bellyful of tough-talking lightweights in public life. Mr. Vogt is a step forward. He is the Republican primary candidate who has demonstrated the courage, seasoning and experience required to represent Marylanders well.

Mr. Vogt’s Afghanistan service in the U.S. Marine Corps did not make him a better American than his electoral opponents. But it will make him a better member of the U.S. Congress.

I’ll leave aside the question of Douglas’s backing vis-a-vis the question of establishment vs. conservative for the moment, because it’s worth pointing out that Bongino and Douglas were rivals for the same job last year, and the backbone of Richard’s campaign was his foreign policy experience as well as his tenure as a Senate staffer. At the same time, the question of Afghanistan was still in the air and Dan made a compelling case for pulling out, which automatically and immediately puts him at loggerheads with the Afghan campaign veteran Vogt. For that reason alone, I’m not surprised at this endorsement, which could help Vogt most in the extreme western part of the district where Douglas prevailed in the 2012 primary.

But this is also shaping up to be yet another establishment vs. outsider proxy battle, with Bongino again playing the role of outsider against Douglas in an election with few established names. It’s true that Vogt has no elected political experience, but the same could be said for Douglas – yet he was embraced by a number of MDGOP insiders as well as those inside the Beltway.

I find it interesting, though, that Bongino hasn’t chosen to begin rolling out endorsements yet. Maybe he feels less need to since it’s implied that many of those who backed his Senate run will do the same for a Congressional bid, but if Vogt’s ball keeps rolling he could make it a race. While it’s very unscientific, the most recent Red Maryland poll gives Bongino a solid – but not convincing – 17-point edge. Considering his name recognition from being on the ballot last year, that’s got to be too close for comfort.

So how will Dan Bongino play this? I can only speculate, but I suspect the big push will begin after Labor Day and it will center on pocketbook issues.

Meanwhile, there are some in the online media who are questioning the way the Vogt campaign is being run, particularly staffing decisions. There’s no question that Dan Bongino has rubbed some in the Maryland GOP the wrong way, but one name in particular continues to pop up on the radar screen of Jeff Quinton and his Quinton Report, and apparently that person is now involved in Vogt’s campaign as well.

Leaving aside the personality aspect, Jeff makes a valid point – why would a story like this be buried on a weekend? (I received this word before this evening, but it was embargoed to today and I respected the campaign’s wishes.) One might posit that a release on Saturday assures more attention during a slow news period and perhaps placement in the Sunday paper, but having done this gig for awhile I know the ebb and flow of readership and when certain material works best and Saturday is an unusual day for political activity like this. And having noticed a similar line on a Facebook posting from Monday, arguably that would have been the time to lead with it if the endorsement were in the can.

So far we have proven that first-time campaigners make mistakes. The question is whether the unforced errors will doom the Vogt campaign.

The Bartlett influence

Vogt and Otis

The photo on the left would seem to be a fairly normal stock shot of two people standing in front of a political logo. But its significance is that of tying one generation of Republican office holder with a new generation of GOP office seeker.

Perhaps the name Bud Otis has no meaning to most of you reading this, but those in the know out in the Sixth Congressional District are aware that Bud was a longtime Chief of Staff for former Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, splitting with the former Congressman late in his tenure over, among other things, the idea of Bud running to replace Roscoe.

But as the electoral cycle turns to 2014, it’s interesting to note that Otis is already behind a candidate, and it’s not the apparent odds-on favorite in Dan Bongino. Instead, this photo and an accompanying release I’ll quote below came from the campaign of fellow Republican hopeful David Vogt, who’s trying to recover from one of the political missteps to be expected from a neophyte candidate. Those remarks don’t seem to have an effect on the former Bartlett staffer.

David Vogt, Republican candidate for Congress in the 6th District, is happy to announce that Bud Otis, who served as Chief of Staff to former 6th District Representative Roscoe Bartlett, has joined his campaign. Otis served the citizens of the 6th District in Bartlett’s Congressional office from 2001 until 2011. Otis fully endorses Vogt and will serve as Senior Campaign Advisor to Vogt.

In some respects, this will play into the hand of Bongino as his typical modus operandi is to portray himself as a political outsider, so having one of his primary opponents endorsed by the chief of staff of a former officeholder would just be the work of yet another Washington insider. While David tries to portray himself as an outsider, too, perhaps Otis’s influence will convince Vogt to junk his plea for a $500,000 spending limit on the 2014 campaign. That’s the sign of a weak candidate who is afraid he won’t get his message out, particularly against a fairly proven fundraiser in Dan Bongino and a multimillionaire incumbent in John Delaney.

Yet there is something to be said for political experience, and Vogt indeed lives in the Sixth District, unlike his two major opponents. It also means that any influence from the former incumbent will be behind the scenes, as Otis was thought to be a viable candidate leading into 2012 before Roscoe axed him. Still, Bud sat out that race, and remember: Bartlett was respected in western Maryland, which is the home base for a significant portion of Sixth District Republicans, so having Bud as a political adviser shouldn’t hurt.

50,000 strong – but where does it go?

Last week, in another story sort of buried in the runup to the Tawes event, the fine folks at Change Maryland hit the 50,000 “like” mark on Facebook. (Today it appears they have surpassed 51,000.) It bears recalling that in the spring of 2012 they were just at 12,000 – although I noted at the time their cake was much more optimistic. Perhaps by the spring convention of 2014 that extra zero will come in handy.

It seems the rule of thumb is that their membership grew in year two at a rate twice as fast as it did in Change Maryland’s first year – if this continues they would be in the 115,000 range by this time next year. But is that too optimistic of a goal?

The bread and butter of Change Maryland has been its strident opposition of Martin O’Malley’s numerous tax hikes and pointing out his incompetence at job creation, especially when compared to peer states. But having covered many of those revenue enhancements now – and knowing 2014 is an election year for his anointed successor, Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown – the process of raising taxes may come to a halt. Bear in mind as well that most of O’Malley’s increases are now occurring automatically like clockwork; for example, the sales tax charged on gasoline increases in July during both 2014 and 2015.

A second item affecting Hogan’s organization is a change in personnel. Jim Pettit, who worked with Change Maryland during its run to 50,000, recently joined the campaign of gubernatorial candidate David Craig. Perhaps this is a good time for a transition, knowing that much of the issue advocacy occurs during and immediately after the General Assembly session, but I don’t discount the experience Pettit brought to the table. He’s been replaced by Matt Proud, who has plenty of political experience for a youngster and may bring some youthful enthusiasm to the effort, but will still need a little time to transition into the task.

But what does having 50,000 Facebook followers really mean? Change Maryland explains:

(Change Maryland) has built a dominating presence on social media with more people engaged online than the Maryland Democratic Party, the Maryland Republican Party and all of the potential statewide candidates of either party, added together. Change Maryland’s Facebook page has a total weekly reach of over 341,153 people. No other citizen group in the state has ever accomplished what Change Maryland has, in just over two years.

So they are influencing over 300,000 people of all political stripes with a fiscally conservative message. But will founder Larry Hogan upset the apple cart by making his own bid for Governor? Hogan was coy at Tawes, being quoted in an AP story as noting:

I just think it’s very, very early to be here in the hot, dog days of July the year before the election to be out campaigning. At some point, we might have to take a serious look at it. I don’t think we would do that for quite some time, though.

The way I interpret that is the question of whether Michael Steele jumps into the race later on. None of the others on the GOP side could reasonably be interpreted as Bob Ehrlich loyalists in the way Hogan or Steele would be.

In some respects Hogan is faced with a similar question Newt Gingrich faced in 2008: fresh off the formation of American Solutions, Newt had to decide whether to jump into the presidential race or continue to grow his group. He eventually decided to take a pass on the 2008 race, choosing to maintain his American Solutions leadership role. Conversely, once Newt decided to enter the 2012 presidential race his group withered on the vine.

If Change Maryland becomes interpreted as a campaign entity for Larry Hogan’s gubernatorial bid, its influence would wane. But if Hogan becomes a kingmaker of sorts, using his organization to promote candidates with a fiscally responsible track record in the same manner Sarah Palin lends her hand to certain conservative hopefuls on a national scale (such as Dan Bongino) he could retain his following and influence the 2014 election up and down the line.

There’s no question Maryland needs a change from the liberal philosophy dragging the state down, and Hogan’s group is succeeding in getting out the message. The next step is motivating these disciples to action, and we won’t know the success of that mission until November of 2014.

It’s not hypocrisy, it’s just time for a change

Here’s the problem with running against a freshman legislator: he’s not always responsible for the messes put in place by members of his own party. Congressional candidate Dan Bongino can’t pin a vote for Obamacare on his Democratic opponent John Delaney because Delaney wasn’t there in 2010. Perhaps John was cheering them on, but there’s nothing there which says Delaney voted for it – although there is a vote he made this year against the measure’s repeal, which passed the House with a unanimous GOP and two Democrats supporting repeal. That’s actually true to Delaney’s campaign promise, although it’s unclear how he proposes to reconcile the second part:

I will fight attempts to repeal this landmark legislation, but I believe it is necessary to refine the ACA to create a framework that will lower long-term costs.

Um, Congressman, that would probably involve repeal. And by the way, health care is NOT a right.

On the other hand I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for this:


How many days will it be to the 2014 election? That will be Dan’s count.

To that end, Bongino stepped up the pressure in a release yesterday announcing Delaney’s “stunning act of political hypocrisy”:

In a stunning act of political hypocrisy, Rep. John Delaney now supports legislation that seeks to prevent political targeting from the IRS, but he remains unwilling to withdraw his support for Obamacare, which uses the IRS to target the American people through higher taxes, fines, and penalties.

Obamacare is failing because of one inescapable economic truth: cost and quality can only be effectively controlled when individuals in the marketplace control the system, not government bureaucrats.

I challenge John Delaney to immediately withdraw his support for Obamacare because it is hurting working families and small businesses in District 6. Delaney has voted with Nancy Pelosi and President Obama over 90 percent of the time. But it is time to put the people of District 6 ahead of party politics.

I will have to challenge one statistic Bongino uses, as practically any Congressman outside of a Ron Paul clone will vote with the opposition well over 50 percent of the time. A large percentage of the votes are unanimous or with token opposition, and that ratchets up the total for everyone.

On balance, though, Bongino makes a sound point. One thing he’ll have to use is whatever media he can get to counteract the full-court press by Barack Obama to get younger and healthier people to sign up for Obamacare as those kids are the largest factor in “bending the cost curve” so they’ll be enticed, whether through the schools, the libraries, or just the media cheerleaders in his corner, to sign up. (NFL cheerleaders are a different story, though, as the league rebuffed the advances of HHS head Kathleen Sebelius.) Regardless, he’s depending on the young to subsidize the old, just like many other entitlements we’re now saddled with.

Moreover, the trick for Dan will be to come up with something better that can’t be demagogued by Delaney and used to scare low-information voters into believing the end is nigh with a Bongino election. As an example, Democrats for decades used to scare seniors into thinking Republicans would take away their Social Security check, despite the lack of actual legislation to do so. While the idea of cancelling Obamacare may not be such a tough sell with voters, the system indeed needs some reforms aimed at curbing the spiraling costs. (In my view, getting  the government out of health care entirely would work well to that effect. Just like anywhere else, those in the health care provider system can’t resist a huge pot of “free” government money.)

Yet I’m not sure this will be the hot topic come the fall of 2014. To draw a parallel, in the summer of 2008 we were screaming about high energy prices but an economic calamity has a way of making people sit up and take notice. No one cared about gas prices (which, by the way, had retreated far off their summertime highs) by the time the election was held – instead, we were on the verge of “abandon(ing) free-market principles to save the free-market system.” Obamacare could be an expensive sideshow by then, considering the President is now arbitrarily pushing back the deadline for business compliance to after those midterm elections.

Long story short – sixteen months is three eternities in politics. So while this is good publicity for Dan, I’m sure he’s also working on more specific ideas for the debates with both his GOP challengers and Delaney himself, assuming John doesn’t lose to a more liberal opponent in the Democratic primary.

No opposition desired

It seems like I’ve heard this story before, but now an incident involving Congressman Chris Van Hollen and his recently-redistricted constituency in Carroll County has drawn the attention of law enforcement there.

Van Hollen has scheduled a public townhall meeting at Carroll County Community College (CCCC) for this coming Monday, a fact not lost on Michelle Jefferson of We the People – Carroll County, a nonpartisan local group which states as its purpose:

WTP exists to inform and educate anyone who has a desire to hear and learn about the political goings on in a nonpartisan approach. Every political party is represented in WTP – we believe we are Americans first and foremost and there’s no sunshine between the two major parties.

Locally, however, they’re known for being a group sympathetic to the TEA Party. So when Jefferson said about the CCCC townhall meeting, “I say we give him a WTP welcome to the neighborhood. Bet (Rep. Van Hollen) can’t find Westminster with his GPS,” the sarcastic tone was taken to be a threat by Carroll County Democratic Central Committee member Don West.

Bear in mind that this is a public meeting. Yet, as reported at Frontline State, the threats perceived by West have led to a peace order being slapped on Jefferson, of which a copy can be viewed at FLS. In it, West affirms that he “contend(s) that the respondent has engaged in a malicious course of conduct in which the respondent approached or pursued you with the intent to place you in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death?” as a stalker. All this over Jefferson calling West “a weenie & a jackass.” and pointing out that he had previously tried to secure a peace order against her – this was his second try, according to the complaint. It’s worth noting the same document lists Jefferson as being 5′-5″ and 120 pounds, so I don’t see her as an imposing physical presence to Don West, who I have never met so I can’t ascertain his size. Chances are, though, he’s larger than Jefferson.

But Michael, you may argue, she’s inciting a mob to riot at the event!

Please tell me where a TEA Party has gotten out of hand and trashed the venue at which it was held or committed physical violence to someone there. And even if you find an isolated incident I’m not privy to, won’t there be security at the Van Hollen townhall meeting? Certainly the words may be a little bit heated, but if anything one would think those who oppose Van Hollen would be on their best behavior given the knowledge of this so-called threat and the penchant of anyone in the media to assume the TEA Party is a bunch of troublemakers. (This, of course, assumes Van Hollen goes through with the meeting given the political climate created by his Democratic supporter, who believes the TEA Party has “violent tendencies.”)

In the meantime, answering the peace order will cost Jefferson part of her day at work and may serve to exempt Jefferson from the Van Hollen townhall meeting, because attending could be a violation of the order – one could reasonably expect West will be there as a Van Hollen backer. However, he is also an elected official so one would have to question the legal standard used by the court commissioner, Michele L. Keys.

I found the reaction from Sixth District Congessional candidate Dan Bongino interesting, given his background in the Secret Service. In a release, Bongino stated in part:

After a 2012 campaign marred by vehicle and property vandalism and a more recent, brazen display of government intimidation by the IRS, the Democrats are at it again. Now they are attempting to use law enforcement to intimidate and silence one of my former volunteers and a female Conservative activist in Carroll County, Maryland.

As a former law enforcement officer and a Secret Service agent with specific expertise in evaluating political threats, the Maryland Democratic Party should be embarrassed by this shameful attempt at intimidation and the corresponding waste of law enforcement resources. I am calling on the Maryland Democratic Party to issue a public apology to the Carroll County law enforcement officials involved and Mrs. Jefferson, immediately.

Apparently Dan knows Jefferson and didn’t perceive her as a threat; then again, she’s not likely to ask tough questions about Dan’s political views.

But the question of whether this so-called threat as a political weapon remains; on the other hand, it could serve as a call to arms for our side. The newly-christened Citizen Action Network (still MDCAN, but with a new “C”) added:

If you wish to show your support for WTP and demonstrate your displeasure with the Democrat party’s continued harassment of tea party activist groups, you can attend the public “meet and greet” with Congressman Van Hollen.

Given the recent IRS revelations alluded to by Bongino, the real threat may be coming from liberal Democrats. Whether it’s finding a court commissioner easily convinced by flimsy and circumstantial evidence or additional IRS scrutiny for TEA Party groups, our freedom could be at stake. But I would encourage people in every Congressional district to attend town hall meetings, regardless of whether they agree with the Congressman’s politics or not. It’s a very basic step toward an informed public, and should be taken advantage of when the opportunity is presented.

Playing pundit

She’s not known for the op-ed, but Maryland GOP Chair Diana Waterman tried her hand at the art of the written world recently, penning a piece called “Free Markets, Free People Eliminate Poverty.”

In last week’s edition of The Economist, it was reported that capitalism and free markets are credited with helping pull over one billion people out of poverty in the last 20 years. The article also pointed out that the biggest obstacle to bringing another billion people out of destitution are governments that progressively take over more control of the individual and only “boost inequality.” It said, “the biggest poverty-reduction measure of all is liberalising  markets to let poor people get richer.”

This discussion is very important to the future of the United States because the real battle is occurring in state capitals across the county. Republican Governors like Rick Snyder in Michigan, Bobby Jindal in Louisiana, and Brian Sandoval in Nevada are working to balance state budgets, lower dependency on government, and create an environment that is more friendly for job creators. However, in states like Maryland, Governor Martin O’Malley has continued a sense of hostility and rigidness that has only served to send businesses to nearby states where they are welcomed with open arms.

Prior to the release of that article, Governor O’Malley gave a speech to far-left Washington insiders at the Center for American Progress to discuss his policies here in Maryland, the same kind of policies that have limited the potential success of so many around the world. To highlight his delusion, at one point in the speech, he said, “We have cut, in Maryland, more spending than ever before in state history.” The facts say otherwise. Spending in Annapolis has skyrocketed nearly 30% from $28.8 billion in 2007 to $36.8 billion for 2014. This spending increase has been matched by sharply raising taxes 54 times for a total of $2.8 billion, or nearly $2,000 per family per year.

In his speech, Governor O’Malley attacked reform-minded Republicans like Governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin for the broad expansion of jobs and opportunity to all Americans. Well Governor, your tired rhetoric is wrong, your attacks are backwards, and The Economist agrees.  As Republicans, we do not want to limit success. We want every person who has the desire to be successful, a willingness to work hard, and play by the rules to meet their maximum potential.

Martin O’Malley and Anthony Brown’s method of governing has tried and it has failed. Liberalism has failed the unemployed among us. Liberalism has failed the small businesses struggling to survive. Liberalism has failed college students who cannot find a job when they graduate. And catastrophes like the Baltimore City Jail have proven that liberalism has failed the trust of the people of Maryland.

Now is the time for a new direction and new leadership. We invite you, your family, and your friends to join the Republican Party where we believe it is our role to make government smarter, more effective, and more efficient. If you believe that your taxes are too high, your freedom is under assault, and your government is out of control, then we welcome you to join your 1,000,000 fellow voters in the Maryland Republican Party. On Thursday, June 20th, we invite all voters to hear Congressman Paul Ryan discuss his “Path to Prosperity” at the 23rd Annual Red, White, and Blue Dinner at the Renaissance Hotel in Baltimore City.

Republicans are ready to serve and we need your help. If you would like more information about running for office or the Maryland Republican Party, please visit www.MDGOP.org or call us at 410-263-2125.

Waterman’s op-ed has a nice length, and makes some great points. But the message I got out of the piece in The Economist was twofold: it would take a global push to eradicate poverty around the world, sponsored by government, and a social safety net was required. At one point in the Economist piece they remark:

The world now knows how to reduce poverty. A lot of targeted policies — basic social safety nets and cash-transfer schemes, such as Brazil’s Bolsa Família — help.

According to Wikipedia, 26 percent of the Brazilian population is covered under the Bolsa Familia program, which has in the past been propped up by loans from the World Bank. In essence, this is the same sort of governmental wealth redistribution scheme which Martin O’Malley has been trying for seven years to perfect and shore up a permanent underclass which will continually vote Democratic. Perhaps The Economist lauds capitalism for its effect in creating wealth for governments to redistribute as they see fit, so perhaps Waterman picked a weak analogy for her point. After all, it’s those who succeed in Maryland – despite the headwinds put in place by state government – which drive the state’s economy.

A stronger thought piece was put out on Tuesday by Dan Bongino, soon to be officially a candidate for Congress. In speaking about the NSA scandal, he packed a lot of wisdom into a short release called “Why the NSA Scandal Matters”:

As a former federal agent who has appropriately used the judicial review provisions of our Constitution to gather information while investigating criminality, I am tired of the “If you are doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide” argument concerning violations of privacy. You may continue to ignore the government’s relentless pursuit of expansive new powers but I assure you, it is not ignoring you.

As Americans, we value our liberty and its corresponding privacy. We have the right to choose which part of our lives should be public and which should remain private. The fact that we do not want our private lives monitored by government representatives who can use the information for malicious purposes (exhibit 1: IRS), does not mean we have something criminal to hide.

It is the reason we put shutters on our windows, passwords on our accounts and phones and keep the doors to our homes closed. We want to choose when the public self begins and the private self ends and we certainly do not want the government to make that choice for us.

The overwhelming majority of Americans are good people who make mistakes on a regular basis but very few of these mistakes involve criminality or deadly intent and I object to being monitored using the exact same tactics for both.

If an American’s private life does not include criminal behavior or infringe on the rights of others, why should government representatives be allowed an open door into our lives while using their expanding government bureaucracy to hide behind their own?

If you believe, like I do, that we should stand up against big government overreach, please join our campaign today and contribute to our cause.

Now it helps Bongino’s message when he has some personal experience with the subject, but he goes farther to personalize the situation for the intended audience using a number of simple real-life examples. Furthermore, he appeals to the good in all of us while realizing that many of us slip up on occasion – although I would be interested to know what he defines as “mistakes.”

I will make the point here that Dan Bongino has spent the last two years running for some office or other and in that time he’s had many opportunities for refining and honing his message for mass consumption. On the other hand, Diana’s been behind the scenes as an organizer who’s never really had to create a message which appeals to the masses. She did a reasonable job with this opinion piece, as on the surface it makes very good points. And while I have my interpretation of the underlying message of the Economist piece, quite frankly, 99 percent of the people who read this op-ed in their local paper (should it show up there) will never see it. The reference is truly there simply for gravitas.

On the whole I believe we can – and should – point out Martin O’Malley’s many foibles, although it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. But we also have to present a credible alternative, so hopefully Waterman (or whoever is writing these under her name) will continue to work on that side of the equation. Indeed, it’s likely we will be running against a continuation of the O’Malley-Brown regime here in Maryland, but Republicans need to make their intentions clear and defensible against the oncoming onslaught by the state and national media.

The exit strategy

I wasn’t going to crack the whip again on the rapidly expiring horse known as a week of furious activity in the 2014 governor’s race until I followed a link at Maryland Reporter and found this Daniel Leaderman piece in the Gazette on Michael Steele. The most interesting sentence to me was this one:

“I’ve stated several times that I think Michael Steele’s our best shot,” (gubernatorial candidate and Frederick County Commission President Blaine) Young said, adding that he will not run if Steele does. (Emphasis mine.)

It’s interesting to note that Young first alluded to this possibility of Steele entering the race in my presence back in February, when he was here speaking with the Wicomico County Republican Club.

Unlike the 2010 race where everyone was waiting to see what Bob Ehrlich would do – even in July of 2009 at the Tawes event we only had two gubernatorial contenders, Mike Pappas and Charles Lollar – this time around no one waited for Michael Steele. Yet if Michael gets into the race, he’s probably the leading contender as most rank-and-file Republicans (the ones who only pay attention every couple years as opposed to junkies like me who write about these races on a constant basis) probably have fond memories of the Lieutenant Governor; moreover, Steele can take some credit for the electoral successes for Republicans in 2010 – and probably will on the campaign trail.

Blaine’s admission that he would withdraw if Steele gets into the race sort of sets the tone for other contenders as well. We found out late last month that Dan Bongino would take a pass on a statewide race next year in favor of a Congressional run – perhaps he knew something not yet cleared for public consumption? – and Blaine could comfortably slot himself into a bid for the newly-created Frederick County Executive post, albeit not without GOP opposition. At just 41 years of age, there’s certainly time for Young to work on a future run for statewide office in 2018 or 2022.

Other contenders find themselves in different positions, though. Because of a residency requirement snafu, Charles Lollar had to downgrade his 2010 campaign to one for a Fifth District Congressional seat. Unlike some of his cohorts, though, Lollar doesn’t have a long resume of elective office to fall back on so it may be logical that, if Charles can’t build on his base of support within the TEA Party community for a statewide race, he could go for a local Delegate or State Senate race – his home county is fertile ground for GOP challengers because the incumbents are Democrats and Lollar only needs a top-three finish for a House seat.

Ron George could obviously run again for Delegate if he decides to abort his statewide plans early enough, but as a guy who’s turning 60 later this year, his prime days of grabbing the brass ring may soon be behind him. In the last 50 years, only one governor (William Donald Schaefer) has been initially elected beyond the age of 60, so this may be Ron’s one shot at glory.

That being said, history is definitely not on the side of David Craig, who is term-limited out his current job as Harford County Executive and has been essentially running for governor over the last two years. Of all those mentioned, I think he’s most likely to stick the race out and challenge Steele should Michael get into the race. Craig really has the most to lose in terms of time invested in the race to just roll over for Steele.

I don’t see this as a four-way race (Craig, George, Lollar, Steele) all the way to the primary, but I don’t see this as a Steele walkover either. In fact, given certain circumstances we could see this split the party into several different factions, not unlike the recent Chair race.

Yet if Michael Steele is planning to jump into the race, it would be best to not keep everyone hanging until just a few months before the primary like Bob Ehrlich did in 2010. That sense of entitlement exhibited by getting in at a late date – and particularly this time, when several have stated their desire for the race and amassed funds and volunteers hoping to dismantle the Democratic status quo – would probably do more to harm the Maryland Republican Party’s chances for downticket success than the 2010 Ehrlich debacle did. That was a year when success was created in spite of the state party, not because of it.

Once upon a time Michael Steele was Chair of the Maryland Republican Party. The best thing he can do for it now is make his intentions known sooner rather than later, so other pieces can fall into place.