John Smoltz: Didn't Work Out With The Red Sox. Maybe Congress?

 

As a Red Sox fan I noticed with interest that Rep. John Linder's (R-GA) announced that he won't seek a 10th term in Congress,  and there  is speculation that former Atlanta Braves and Red Sox pitcher John Smoltz might make a run. 

 

Reports Jim Galloway. "Smoltz has been paying down some dues in several Republican contests in Georgia over the last two years."

Even though his time with the Red Sox did not go the way he wanted, he really carried himself like a true professional. I'd be interested to hear him out.

Crist: Independant or Republican?

As a moderate I generally am in favor of Independents entering politics. As a center-right nation, most Independents tend to slant right (see Joe Lieberman and Lincoln Chafee). While these sorts of candidates generally infuriate the party the are most closely aligned with, I tend to see them as free to make more principled decisions without having to play to the base. And at the end of the day I am just as happy with an Independent who organizes with the Republicans as I am a down the line conservative. There will never be a shortage of partisans, so some independent thought mixed in has to be good for debate- as long as it doesn't get in the way of leadership.

All that said, I am not sure what to make of Florida's Charlie Crist.  From The Hill

Either Charlie Crist realizes he can’t escape the stimulus, or he’s leaning toward an independent run for Senate. 

Crist is saying some curious things for a man in the midst of a conservative primary challenge.

An independent run is easily the most tempting scenario for political junkies, and polls show Crist would stand a better chance of winning in a three-way race with Marco Rubio and Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.) than he would of winning the GOP primary. He’s got to know that he will probably never win the presidency as a Republican, so now is as good a time as any to reevaluate.

He is sounding more and more independent lately, but Rubio is a solid conservative candidate that I would welcome in the Senate as well. If Crist makes the jump it could be an interesting race. If he is successful, would Bayh entertain and independent bid for the White House? Just asking.

Republicans Surge in MA Gov Race

Charlie Baker (R) is now within striking distance of Gov. Deval Patrick (D) in a three-way gubernatorial race. Deval Patrick (D)  leads with 33%, followed by Baker at 25% with Tim Cahill (I) at 23%.

Pollster David Paleologos: "Charlie Baker has nearly doubled since the Scott Brown win. Baker is where Brown was two weeks before the Senate election -- he still trails, but he is surging and within striking distance."

Is this evidence of a further "Scott Brown Effect"? I hope so.

Heal Care Summit Highlight

Did you watch the televised infomercial yesterday? I watched it off and on throughout the day and found most of what was said to be recycled talking points. But we did learn a few things. We learned that Obama is fully behind this plan. Win or lose it is his baby. We learned that the President favors Reconciliation. While I don't have a problem with this tactic in general, to use it on something that affects 20% of our economy and in spite of overwhelming public protest seems politically, and policy-wise a suicidal move.

The third thing we learned is that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is clearly a rising star. Below is what I thought of as the highlight of the day. It is a little long for a blog video clip at 6 mins- but it is worth watching to see him prove that the funding for this bill is basically a ponzi scheme.

Health Care Summit: Day of Reckoning?

For those with the time and stamina today could make for interesting TV. No, I am not talking about the Olympics, though I have enjoyed hockey this year (Go USA!). No, what I am talking about is President Obama's infomercial with the Republicans: Health Care Summit 2010. What is the avergae American to make of this show? Will anything get done or is it all optics? Over at The Hill, Sam Youngman and Jeff Young pose ten questions for today. Here they are:

1. How deferential will Republicans be to the president on his home turf?
2. Who will win the debate?
3. What happens next in the message war?
4. Who will win the endurance contest?
5. Does Obama have anything up his sleeve?
6. How will the GOP demonstrate unity on solutions?
7. Will the dissension among Democrats show through, especially the mistrust between the House and Senate?
8. Will America get bored?
9. Will Obama and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) go toe-to-toe?
10. Is there any chance of a bipartisan deal?

The article further defines these questions but the authors do not look into their crystal ball to predict any answers.  What do you think? 

Gingrich on the Bipartisan Health Care Summit

New featured video. It is from a couple weeks ago, but seeing as the summit is tomorrow it is a timely viewing.

Job Bill Passes With Significant Republican Support

While Scott Brown has been catching a lot of flack lately for blocking a filibuster on the $15 billion jobs bill he clearly was not the only Republican who thought the bill at least was worth a shot. The controversial jobs bill passed the Senate today with over 30% of the Republican caucus supporting it. Here are the names:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Kit Bond (R-MO)
Scott Brown (R-MA)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
George LeMieux (R-FL)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
George Voinovich (R-OH)
Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Van Jones From The White House To Princeton

Conservatives felt they had a victory when they were able to force the resignation of Van Jones, President Obama's former Green Jobs adviser.

Jones had a controversial past because of his connection to 911Truthers. He had singed a petition in 2004  that questioned whether Bush administration officials "may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war." He was also involved with the Bay Area radical group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), which had Marxist roots. He had also advocated for death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of shooting a Philadelphia police officer in 1981. 

All in all, Van Jones is a pretty fringe guy, so the Right was justified in being glad they had a hand in his demise. However, now he is doing something worse; he will be teaching at Princeton:

Van Jones, a former adviser in the Obama Administration, has been appointed a visiting fellow in the Center for African American Studies and the Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy at the Wilson School, the University plans to announce today.

This is how the far left keeps a toe hold in a center-right nation; they find homes in academia and attempt to indoctrinate our youth. I realize this sounds a little conspiracy theory, but when was the last time a college hired a far right radical? Never. I have nothing against exposing students to radical viewpoints, but how are they to make value judgments when they only see one side.

Maybe we would have been better off if Jones had stayed hidden in a Green Jobs adviser role.

The Best Health Care Possible

While the new watered down health care plan may be more palatable to many in the political center, no one should ignore the fact that this is simply an opening salvo. The Obama administration's new strategy is to do a little at a time rather than one big move. We can not ignore what is going on with the assumption that something bigger, like a public option, is not coming down the road. With that in mind here is an interesting tidbit from our neighbors up north:

An unapologetic Danny Williams [Newfoundland and Labrador Premier] says he was aware his trip to the United States for heart surgery earlier this month would spark outcry, but he concluded his personal health trumped any public fallout over the controversial decision.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, Williams said he went to Miami to have a "minimally invasive" surgery for an ailment first detected nearly a year ago, based on the advice of his doctors.

"This was my heart, my choice and my health," Williams said late Monday from his condominium in Sarasota, Fla.

"I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics."

Scott Brown & a Renewed Republican Party

Scott Brown did more than simply scare the heck out of a few vulnerable Democrats in conservative districts. He did more than provide the 41st vote to stop Obamacare in its original Pelosi/Reid guise. Scott Brown did more than provide a fund-raising juggernaut to the GOP. He also provided Obama with Republican support for a "Jobs" bill this week. Brown, with Maine Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, Rust Belt Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, and Christopher Bond, R-Mo., voted to stop a filibuster from their more conservative GOP leaders on a bill with four main provisions, including a $13 billion measure exempting businesses hiring the unemployed from the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax through December and giving them another $1,000 credit if new workers stay on the job a full year. 

Why is a vote on a relatively small and insignificant bill that even the administration-friendly economist Mark Zandi, an economist with Moody's Economy.com, claims is not very efficient, important? Because it signals a new type of conservative. DaveG at Race42012 puts it this way, emphasis mine:

Today, instead of Reagan Democrats we have Brown Democrats. These are voters who are largely white collar, educated, from outside the South, and who often feel that the GOP is no place for voters “like them,” whether that be because of their secular nature, or their sexual orientation as in the case of the GOProud folks. The Brown Democrats are very conservative on issues of economic freedom, spending and debt, and size and scope of government issues, as well as on national security and law and order. They run moderate to liberal on many social issues, which has also made it difficult for them to enter GOP politics. But President Obama and current events are giving them little choice. A Republican Party infused with their blood would be eons more conservative than the current Republican establishment on entitlements, spending, and the national debt, and would probably begin giving new and better arguments for tough national security measures that Republicans no longer know how to sell. With their support, the GOP would become more regionally balanced, and the center of gravity of the party would no longer be in the buckle of the Bible Belt.

 These are all excellent points and a breath of fresh air for a GOP that has become stale over the past twenty years. Many conservatives were turned off after 8 years of GW Bush who governened more like a Democrat when it came to spending. A lot of these basically conservative voters, so fed up with the GOP and its hypocrytical spending, went for Obama in 2008. They mistakenly thought he would govern from the center- a Clinton-esque Democrat. We are now seeing how wrong that belief was.

Scott Brown gives voters who value fiscal responsibility and common-sense rule of law a place to go. The GOP needs to welcome the Brown Democrats into the fold.

Obama's Health Care Reboot

Well, you can't say he doesn't stick to his principles. President Obama doubled down on health care Monday by releasing a new $950 billion plan before the so-called health care summit with Republicans later this week.  This new plan largely copies the Senate plan with a few revisions. The Financial Times list the following differences between the President's plan and the Senate's:

1. The White House proposals create a new Health Insurance Rate Authority to provide federal assistance and oversight to help states review unreasonable rate increases and other unfair insurance practices.
2. They eliminate the special Medicaid deal given to Nebraska senator Ben Nelson, instead providing additional federal funding for all states to expand healthcare support for the poor.
3. They increase the starting point for the excise tax on the most expensive so-called Cadillac healthcare plans from $23,000 for a family plan to $27,500. The tax will be applied to all plans in 2018.
4. They strengthen the provisions to fight fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid.
5. They increase tax credits for families. According to the White House: “Relative to the Senate bill, the president’s proposal lowers premiums for families with income below $44,000 and above $66,000. Relative to the House bill, the proposal makes premiums less expensive for families with income between roughly $55,000 and $88,000”.
6. The president’s proposal includes the less-restrictive Senate language on abortion funding and does not include any provision for a government-backed ”public option” for healthcare insurance.

 I am reserving judgment for the time being as there is quite a bit to digest. Though my initial reaction to change #1 is not positive. Seems like a slippery slope to government cost controls which is fairly anti-capitalist. On the other hand if he is serious about #4 then I am in full support. Let's see what the Republicans bring to the table.

The Stimulus, Jobs and Politics

There is a lot of posturing going on right now over the effects of the 2009 Stimulus bill and the proposal for a second "Jobs" Bill. Democrats are claiming that while the economy continued to lose jobs it would certainly have been worse without the injection of nearly a trillion dollars of government capital into the system. Republicans are claiming that the stimulus dod not create a single job and that it was an utter waste of tax payers money.

The truth is, as always, somewhere in between.

If you look carefully at the data available you will see that since February of 2009, the economy has lost 3,179,328 jobs while the Obama administration claims to have “created or saved” 638,825 jobs. So for each job created or saved, over 6 jobs were lost. Furthermore, the majority of jobs created or saved are in the public sector. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, since the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act private industry has suffered a net loss of 2,610,000 employees, while the public sector has lost 46,000 employees from its payroll. 

So on the one hand, yes, some jobs were certainly saved. It is hard for a trillion dollars to have absolutely no effect whatsoever. Republicans who take a "zero tolerance" type stance on the effects of the Stimulus run the risk of seeming disingenuous. Governor Swarzenegger was right this past Sunday when he claimed-

I find it interesting that you have a lot of the Republicans running around and pushing back on stimulus money and saying this doesn’t create any new jobs, and then they go out and do photo-ops and they’re posing with the big check and they say, ‘Isn’t this great! Look the kind of money I provide here for the state! And this is great money to create jobs, and this has created 10,000 new jobs, and this has created 20,000 new jobs. It doesn’t match up.

On the other hand, most of these jobs are government jobs which in the end are not the kinds of jobs that will actually grow the economy. The first stimulus did not really deliver on the promises made by the administration. Democrats who claim all that was needed was a bigger stimulus are missing the point entirely. It did not stop unemployment growth or promote real job creation. It simply allowed the government to keep more people on its payroll. This is OK as a stop gap measure, but in the long run will not fix anything. 

The stimulus was a band aid, and for what they are worth, band aids work. However, what we need now is not another band aid; we need a new policy that is focused on growing the private sector and starting the real engine of the economy.

CPAC Straw Poll Results...Really?

Ron Paul wins almost a third of the vote, of course about half of the voters were students, his mainstay of support. So while the results mean almost nothing it is still and interesting tidbit for a Sunday.

Ron Paul – 31%

Mitt Romney – 22%

Sarah Palin – 7%

Tim Pawlenty – 6%

Mike Pence – 5%

Newt Gingrich -4%

Mike Huckabee – 4%

Mitch Daniels – 2%

Rick Santorum – 2%

John Thune – 2%

Haley Barbour – 1%

Tommy Thompson Could Beat Russ Feingold in Wis.

From The Hill:

A Rasmussen Reports poll released this week showed Thompson(R) with a 48-43 lead over Feingold. The two Republicans currently in the race, developer Terrence Wall and businessman Dave Westlake, both trailed Feingold in the survey of 500 likely voters. In all three matchups, Feingold polled under 50 percent....

Thompson would have an edge on what could be a central issue in the campaign — healthcare. While he was Health and Human Services secretary in President George W. Bush’s first term, Thompson pushed for the classification of obesity as a disease. Now, he’s prepared to make obesity an issue in 2010.

“If you want to address [healthcare] costs, 75 percent of the cost and the underlying cause is obesity,” Thompson said. “I’m passionate about it.”

I Didn't Want to be Right About This

I said yesterday that it was only a matter of time before some in the mainstream media began linking the Austin plane crash to Tea Party activists.  It certainly didn't take them long to prove me right. Here is a sampling:

 Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart: “[I'm] struck by how [Stack's] alienation is similar to that we’re hearing from the extreme elements of the Tea Party movement.”

New York Magazine: “a lot of his rhetoric could have been taken directly from a handwritten sign at a Tea Party rally.”

Time Magazine not too subtly included links about Tea party history all over it's article about the crash; they later removed the links after protests. To see the original click here.

A left-wing blogger at Daily Kos fumed: “Teabagger terrorist attack on IRS building...After months of threats on the United States government, and government institutions, the Anti-Government forces known as the teabaggers have struck with their first 911 inspired terrorist attack.”

The Biggest Miscalculation in Modern Political History

Ouch. When Charlie Cook thinks you have screwed up this bad you know you have had a bad year. For those who do not know Cook is a well-respected political analyst who specializes in election forecasts and political trends. Before he started his career as a forecaster he worked on Capitol Hill for Sen J. Bennett Johnston, Jr., a Democrat, in addition to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Policy Committee. So he is hardly biased against the current administration. Never-the-less when asked by The National Journal what Obama should do to reach out to the American people? Should he try to appear more populist? Cook responded with this:

 I sort of reject the notion that there is a communications problem with President Obama. I think it's just fundamental, total miscalculations from the very, very beginning. Of proportions comparable to President George W. Bush's decision to go into Iraq. While Bush went, "We're going to go after Afghanistan as a reaction to 9/11," and then just pretty soon got distracted and obsessed with going into Iraq with varying rationalizations that sort of evolved over time.

This was a case where I think the White House people could see, look at the president, the White House and congressional Democrats as sort of checking the box on stimulus, but found that kind of boring, and moved on to health care and cap-and-trade. And the thing is, Democrats piled all this cotton candy and pork and junk and pet projects into it, so it discredited the stimulus package in the minds of a lot of voters and at the same time, it wasn't big enough. It was totally insufficient, yet they wanted to keep it under a trillion dollars because they didn't want to spend a lot of political capital on a really big stimulus package because they wanted to save it for cap-and-trade and health care. And so we start off with the original sin of a very imperfect and inadequate economic stimulus package and then moving off the economy almost entirely going into cap-and-trade and health care.

And then when unemployment numbers started proving to be much, much tougher and it started becoming more clear that the stimulus package hadn't worked properly, they just kept plowing ahead on health care. And this isn't a communications problem. This is a reality problem. And I think they just made some grave miscalculations and as it became more clear that they had screwed up, they just kept doubling down their bet.

And so I think, no, this is one of the biggest miscalculations that we've seen in modern political history.

Palin, Edwards and Media Bias

Great article today in The New York Daily News. I highly recommend to anyone who doubts there is significant media bias out there. Here is the best part IMO:

One of the media's favorite attacks against Palin revolves around her failure to tell Katie Couric what magazines and newspapers she regularly reads. The clumsy answer was an early flash point that led many to scoff that the Alaskan governor didn't read anything at all.

But guess who doesn't read very much either? That would be John Edwards, if you believe John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's new book "Game Change." According to their reporting, when a friend inquired if John Edwards read a particular tome, his wife, Elizabeth, apparently found the idea of her husband reading laugh-out-loud funny, saying, "Oh, he doesn't read books."
Yet this impression of her husband as an anti-intellectual "hick," as Elizabeth reportedly referred to him, never became a common undercurrent during his his 2004 campaign for vice president or his later run for President.

Austin Plane Crash & The Mainstream Media

Short post today, and really it is more of a question for readers than a post. How long will it be before those in the media begin making tentative connections between today's act of cowardice and the perfectly reasonable Tea Party anger. I can almost see Chris Mathews making a subtle jab in a day or so and before long it will become an Olberman rant. I hope I am wrong, but somehow I don't think I am.

What happens if this is labeled domestic terrorism? Will the government crack down on groups that speak out in protest. Things can get scary from there.

What do you think?

Pay-Go Already Being Bypassed

From The Hill:

The ink is barely dry on the pay-as-you-go law, and Democrats are seeking to bypass it to enact parts of their job-creation agenda.

Democratic leaders said extensions of unemployment insurance and COBRA healthcare benefits should be emergency spending that isn’t subject to the pay-as-you-go statute, which requires new non-discretionary spending to be offset with spending cuts or tax increases.

Laws only work if you actually follow them. The American people can't keep expecting something for nothing. With Greece defaulting on loans and much of Europe in danger of following them when will Congress wake up to the fact that drastic cuts need to be made if we are to avoid becoming the biggest national bankruptcy since the fall of Rome. ( OK I know that is a little hyperbolic- but you get the point).

CPAC Straw Poll

The Conservative Political Action Conference is this week.  I look forward to seeing who wins this year’s CPAC Straw Poll.
Here’s the list. Who do you think should/will win?

CPAC ballot order:

Haley Barbour
Mitch Daniels
Newt Gingrich
Mike Huckabee
Sarah Palin
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty
Mike Pence
Mitt Romney
Rick Santorum
John Thune

New Featured Video: Pain Medication and the Fed

What if you were injured and developed severe pain that wouldn't go away? Would your government let you take the kind of pain medication you need? If federal officials follow the recommendation of a Food and Drug Administration panel, many of the most effective prescription painkillers—including Vicodin, Percocet, and countless generics—would be banned.

The new featured video on the top right of the page explores this topic. At just five minutes it is well worth a viewing.

Tea Parties, Progressives and Liberty

In the past I have recommended the book Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg as one of the most transformative books I have read in the past few years. Today I read a two page article that did a nice job of making a similar point all while tying in the phenomenon of Tea Parties as well. Party Like It's 1773 by Richard Samuelson makes the case that the original tea party has some real connection to its modern version and that the common bond is a distrust of a governing elite. 

What do today's tea partiers want? According to the Christian Science Monitor, the movement "is about safeguarding individual liberty, cutting taxes, and ending bailouts for business while the American taxpayer gets burdened with more public debt. It is fueled by concern that the United States under Mr. Obama is becoming a European-style social democracy where individual initiative is sapped by the needs of the collective." Broadly speaking, the tea parties reflect a growing anger in America that the government seems to be a closed circle, run by an elite in both parties. These elites, combined with a class of bureaucrats, lawyers, journalists and businessmen, use government power to serve their own ends, and not the public good.

Samuelson is the 2009-2010 Garwood Visiting Fellow at Princeton University's James Madison Program, and an Assistant Professor of History at California State University so his opinion on matter historical bears listening to. That he can see a kinship between our Founding Fathers and a modern movement that many (including myself) find questionable is intriguing. He goes on to make the point that Goldberg made in his book: that the Progressive movement of the early twentieth century attempted to rewrite the social contract between the governement and the governed.

In the early twentieth century America's leading intellectuals concluded that our constitution was out of date. Woodrow Wilson said quite bluntly that "we are in the presence of a new organization of society. Our life has broken away from the past." The founders, he noted, "speak of the ‘checks and balances' of the Constitution." Such ideas were passe. By replacing checks and balances with a simplified administration, he would update and rationalize the American state. Wilson, we should recall, was our first and only PhD president. The social science PhD was a new invention in his day. Wilson believed that experts, armed with PhDs and law degrees, could make better choices than the common people and the politicians they elected. Armed with expertise, Progressive bureaucrats would rule effectively and fairly. Checks and balances, he thought, were no longer necessary.

This, in essence, is what makes  many Americans nervous about the Obama administration. I for one do not think he is an evil man, hatching devious plots in a backroom of the White House with plans to turn the U.S. into a 1950's style U.S.S.R.. However, I do think he is a highly educated, well-intentioned man, who believes he knows better than the rest of us how make choices about our future. As a thought experiment let's assume he is better than the rest of us and he really does know how to "remake" our country. There is a fatal flaw in this argument. Progressives want to take the power out of the people's hands and place it in a benevolent dictator's. Once that happens it is not a simple process to reverse. Inevitably, people who are not benevolent will rise to power and then we have a situation like the former U.S.S.R.. Some on the left today do not seem to realize this simple fact.

When Thomas Friedman, the voice of the establishment, declares that "one-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages," he reflects the goal of Progressive politics since Wilson's day. He also echoes the ideas of the Tories of the 1760s and 1770s. Like the Tories, today's would-be elites claim that better training and education gives them the right to rule, although the Progressives and their children have largely dropped birth and wealth as criterion for rule.

 In short, the modern Tea Party has it's place in our national dialogue. Though some of what they say and do is uncomfortable or extreme, the core of their message is true. "When the government is unresponsive to the views of the people, and, beyond that, when our administrative and judicial branches restrict the scope of the people's legislative rights, protest rises." Those protests are the Tea Party.

Centrists Looking For a Home

A recurring theme here the past couple weeks has been the pushing out of centrists from both the Democratic and Republican Party. With Bayh's exit yesterday, and Hayworth officially challenging McCain in Arizona more damage is being done to the practical center.

CNN Senior Political Analyst Gloria Borger said Bayh "feels that he doesn't have much of a home in the Democratic party anymore."

"Just as much as we see the centrists in the Republican party shrinking, you also see the centrists in the Democratic party shrinking," she said. "I think these folks are looking for a home."

If Republicans are going to push out their former presidential nominee and the Democrats have disenfranchised a successful governor turned senator with a strong pedigree then some hard wuestions need answers.

Who is next to fall?

What does this mean for either parties short term health?

What does this do to governing?

Does this mean the legislative branch will become even more partisan? Is that possible?

Bayh, Obama & Presidential Primaries

On January 19th, the very night Scott Brown won the MA special election, Sen. Evan Bayh said, “[t]here’s going to be a tendency on the part of our people to be in denial about all this, if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up.”

Apparently Bayh feels his Democratic Party is playing Rip Van Winkle. I blogged last week about how party purists tend to wean out the moderating influences that would allow them to govern successfully, and now it appears the Obama administration's far left agenda is pushing moderate Democrats out.

Bayh had often been mentioned as a VP candidate, or even as a potential president one day. One has to wonder if he is toying with a challenge from the center for 2012? It would be interesting to see a serious primary challenge for a sitting president- the political junkie in me salivates over the prospect. But more importantly, the Democratic Party has tilted way too far left believing they had a mandate to do so even though Obama largely campaigned from the middle. A pull back to the center in the form of a strong primary challenge would be good for them, and for the country as a whole.

Sen Evan Bayh to Retire

WOW. Huge developing story. From The Hill:

Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) will not seek re-election in 2010, according to a statement from his office.

The news is a big loss for Democrats, opening up a very competitive seat in what's shaping up to be a tough cycle for Democrats.

Bayh had over $13 million ready to wage a re-election campaign against former Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.), and Democrats had already begun to portray Coats as a Washington lobbyist who abandoned Indiana.

Has America Lost the Space Race to Russia?

Last week I wrote about the downsizing of NASA and waxed nostalgic for the days when the shuttle missions were events of national consequence. Today Charles Krauthammer details the real long term danger of the United States loosing its preeminence in space.

By the end of this year, there will be no shuttle, no U.S. manned space program, no way for us to get into space. We're not talking about Mars or the moon here. We're talking about low-Earth orbit, which the U.S. has dominated for nearly half a century and from which it is now retiring with nary a whimper.

Our absence from low-Earth orbit was meant to last a few years, the interval between the retirement of the fatally fragile space shuttle and its replacement with the Constellation program (Ares booster, Orion capsule, Altair lunar lander) to take astronauts more cheaply and safely back to space.

But the Obama 2011 budget kills Constellation. Instead, we shall have nothing. For the first time since John Glenn flew in 1962, the U.S. will have no access of its own for humans into space -- and no prospect of getting there in the foreseeable future.

 For the foreseeable future we are going to have to rely on the Russians and the Chinese if we need men in space. It seems as though America has given up on the final frontier at the same time it has re-upped for FDR-styled socialism. *sigh*

Texas Tea Party candidate suggests she may be 9/11 truther

Just what the Tea Party didn't need- a party backed candidate linked to 9/11 truthers. I was feeling cautiously optimistic about the Tea party movement, but if much more of this line of thought persists I don't think the movement will be around for long.

Democrats Propose a Payroll Tax Credit

The Senate has included a payroll tax credit in its jobs bill, and while some are claiming this is nothing but a political ploy- the tax break might only be used by companies already planning to hire additional workers- we have to support a tax break wherever we find one. Not everyone agrees though.

“[A] cynic might say it is an effort to bail out terrified Democrats by paying companies to hire new workers before the November elections,” writes Howard Gleckman st the blog, TaxVox. 

However, if Republicans are going to have credibility they need to support items that fit their ideology even when they may help the opposition. Are we here to safe guard the nation, or win a political game?

The "New" Old Mitt Romney

From the Boston Phoenix:

Romney is now de-emphasizing social issues like abortion, same-sex marriage, and illegal immigration" and he has "scrupulously avoided association with the Tea Party movement." The book tour for his forthcoming No Apology and a series of planned speeches "will drive home that shift in emphasis."

"Interestingly, this latest incarnation is probably the closest we have seen to the 'real' Mitt Romney -- who close observers believe doesn't care much about social issues, isn't very ideological, and revels in applying management skills to large organizations to help them achieve their goals and function

This sounds like the Romney I knew as Governor of MA for four years and wanted to vote for in 2008.

2012 Paths to Victory

Nate Silver does his normal wizardry and analyzes the 2012 Republican primary calendar complete with frontrunner handicaping. I know he is an unabashed liberal, but the baseball statistician turn politico is a political junkie's best friend when it comes to predictions and stats.

His conclusion? Mitt Romney currently has the best path to victory while Huckabee looks like a nonstarter. Interestingly he also mentions a possible Brown run.

Scott Brown to Write Book

From CNN:

Newly minted Sen. Scott Brown has plans to write a book about his life story and improbable win in Massachusetts last month.
Brown - who rocketed to stardom in the Republican Party after scoring the upset victory to fill the seat of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy in January - has been "approached by many people who want him to tell his inspirational personal story," spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said.
"He will tell his story in a book in hopes of providing insight and encouragement to others and also to ensure that the record is complete and accurate," Gitcho also said in a statement. "Part of the book proceeds will be donated to charity. Senator Brown will work with a collaborator so he can continue to focus fully on his service to the people of Massachusetts, which is, and always will be, his first priority."

Does this mean the whispers of a possible run at 2012 are more than just noise? It would certainly be hard pill to swallow for all those who condemned Obama for his lack of experience. I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

Blue Dog Democrats Push Back

It looks like the more conservative members of the Democratic caucus are going to push the President to do more than just freeze discretionary spending. That move would save $250 billion over the next decade. A large number, but really just a drop in the bucket in terms of the deficit. (For an earlier post detailing our deficit woes click here.)

From The Hill:

Blue Dog Democrats want Congress to go further than President Barack Obama’s proposal to freeze spending in next year’s budget.
The group of House centrists will soon introduce a bill capping discretionary spending at specific levels. The move would challenge their leadership and the president, who are balancing concerns with the nearly $1.6 trillion deficit in 2010 with those who say government spending on job creation is the way out of the recession.

Of course the Blue Dog Democrats have some extra motivation to push the President into the center. 2010 is going to be very challenging for Democrats who represent more conservative districts. Ironically this could have the effect of shrinking the party and making it more dogmatically liberal at the same time, which is basically what happened to Republicans last cycle. The very centering influence a party needs tends to get voted out of office right when they are needed most.

*picture credit Bearman Cartoons

Oh' The Irony

Couldn't help but share this one. I was reading an article on the Huffington Post, Sebelius: Obama Will 'Accelerate' Health Care Bill After Meeting. The article details how President Obama has no intention of hitting the reset button, and that despite the fact that the country overwhelmingly disapproves of the bill he will go forward, (Big Government knows best after all).

But here is the ironic part. Smack dab in the middle of the article is a large block ad...for a Titanic exhibit!

So is health care the ship, or the ice berg?

House Plan to Raise Taxes

What should you do in the midst of a recession? Why ballon the deficit and raise taxes of course. I detailed in an earlier post the long term damge the ever-expanding deficit will do. Now Democrats are planing on letting some of the Bush tax cuts expire, which is of course a tax raise. House Democrats admit their leadership has a tough sell convincing the public to support a tax increase on those making more than $250,000.

According to The Hill:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Wednesday said tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush and benefiting those earning more than $250,000 likely would be allowed to expire at year’s end. The plan aligns with President Barack Obama’s pledge to raise taxes on wealthier individuals.

 
More fuel for a 2010 revolt?

Paul Krugman & Legislative Gridlock

First of all I am not trying to pick a fight with a Nobel Prize winning economist on monetary policy or economics in general- quite frankly, I'd lose. But Paul Krugman has remade himself into a political pundit for the left, and in that capacity he is clearly lacking. In his latest article he makes the case for the US Senate eliminating the filibuster. He does this by arguing two main points. First he seems to thunk we are turning into 18th century Poland, and second, every Republican is hell-bent on destroying the country.

First his comparison to Poland which fell due to governmental ineptitude:

In the 17th and 18th centuries, the Polish legislature, the Sejm, operated on the unanimity principle: any member could nullify legislation by shouting “I do not allow!” This made the nation largely ungovernable, and neighboring regimes began hacking off pieces of its territory. By 1795 Poland had disappeared, not to re-emerge for more than a century.

Today, the U.S. Senate seems determined to make the Sejm look good by comparison.

I understand his frustration with the filibuster rule, but it is in no way as bad as his Polish example here. It just makes the argument look foolish. There are also so many geo-political differences between 18th century Poland and 21st century America that this comparison is fairly useless.

Then he completely misreads the approximately 55% of the nation that is conservative or at least center-right:

It should be a simple message (and it should have been the central message in Massachusetts): a vote for a Republican, no matter what you think of him as a person, is a vote for paralysis.

Those of us on the right want paralysis if it means stopping an agenda we do not believe is good for the country. The very act of halting something is positive movement. But even if one takes Mr. Krugman's point at face value it is a false argument. What happens , from his point of view, when Republicans inevitably regain control of Congress? Won't the Democrats want the same say in government Mr. Krugman is now attempting to throw away?

Sometimes gridlock is good. That government is best which governs least- Thomas Jefferson.

Who Do Voters Trust?

This month it appears to be Republicans. While the November elections are a lifetime away, right now things are looking very good for conservatives. A new Rasmussen Reports surveyof likely voters finds that "voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on nine out of the 10 key issues" tracked by the poll. Voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on the economy by 46% to 42% and on health care by 49% to 37%.

Peggy Noonan's Must-Read

I read a very poignant and important article today that I can't recommend highly enough. To try and summarize and excerpt it here wouldn't do it justice. Suffice to say it perfectly illustrates what we face as a nation and what we need to do to combat it together. Click here to read it.

Sen. Shelby: With Friends Like These...

...who needs enemies? With the trinity of sweeps in NJ, VA and MA the wind is at Republicans' backs. The nation is fired up about reckless spending and a do-nothing congress. So what does the Republican Senator  from Alabama do? Pout about a lack of pork of course.

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has put an extraordinary “blanket hold” on at least 70 nominations President Obama has sent to the Senate, according to multiple reports this evening. The hold means no nominations can move forward unless Senate Democrats can secure a 60-member cloture vote to break it, or until Shelby lifts the hold.

According to the report, Shelby is holding Obama’s nominees hostage until a pair of lucrative programs that would send billions in taxpayer dollars to his home state get back on track. The two programs Shelby wants to move forward or else:

- A $40 billion contract to build air-to-air refueling tankers. From CongressDaily: “Northrop/EADS team would build the planes in Mobile, Ala., but has threatened to pull out of the competition unless the Air Force makes changes to a draft request for proposals.” Federal Times offers more details on the tanker deal, and also confirms its connection to the hold.

- An improvised explosive device testing lab for the FBI. From CongressDaily: “[Shelby] is frustrated that the Obama administration won’t build” the center, which Shelby earmarked $45 million for in 2008. The center is due to be based “at the Army’s Redstone Arsenal.”

I have always been a supporter of terms limits and this is a perfect example of why. And it is not just that he wants his share of the federal pie- all senators do, I get that. But how tone deaf do you need to be to be pulling a stunt like this now?

RI: Kennedy in Trouble

Well, that was fast. One day after Patrick Kennedy's tasteless remarks about fifty-year-old National Guardsman Sen. Scott Brown's election and he's got his own fifty-year-old National Guardsman to contend with, who just happens to have hired two of Browns top campaign strategists. From the Boston Herald:

The WPRI-12 poll showed the Rhode Island Democrat with a 56 percent unfavorability rating in his district - a negative that grows to 62 percent statewide.

Only 35 percent of voters in Kennedy’s district said they would vote to re-elect him. Another 31 percent said they’d consider a different candidate and 28 percent said they would vote to replace him, according to the poll.

WPRI-12 pollster Joe Fleming said, “This is the best-financed challenger he’s faced since the first time he ran, and his favorability numbers are way down. “Congressman Kennedy could have a very competitive race.”

Loughlin, a 50-year-old National Guardsman, is hoping to ride the same wave that swept Brown to victory. He got a head start by hiring Eric Fehrnstrom and Peter Flaherty, two of Brown’s top consultants.

*photo credit Boston Herald , too good not to include.

Some Thoughts on the Growing Debt

It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. The U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt.

As of December 1, 2009, the official debt of the United States government is $12.1 trillion ($12,089,226,465,642). This amounts to:

• $39,759 for every person living in the U.S.

• $103,519 for every household in the U.S.

• $246,000 for every U.S. household that pays more in federal taxes than they receive in benefits from the federal government which amounts to 50 million households.

Lets assume the recession ends. There are currently 15 million people unemployed, lets say all of them will be added to the 50 million who pay more taxes than they receive benefits which in reality is unrealistic. Charge all 65 million households and extra $5,000 a year to get $325 billion a year.
If you do the math that means it would take about 40 years to pay off the $12 trillion debt.
And that is with the government doing absolutely no deficit spending for the next 40 years! (And don't forget charging all those households $5000 extra a year would be disastrous in it's own right.)

Keep in mind these numbers are based on the debt as of December 2009 which is already obsolete.

New Featured Video: Citizens United Ruling

In 3 REASONS NOT TO SWEAT THE CITIZENS UNITED RULING Reason TV's Nick Gillespie says unlimited "corporate" speech in politics is nothing new. And nothing to worry about. To view this short and informative video just click the player to the right.

What to Make of the Tea Party Convention

I have been tentatively following the Tea Party movement over the past six months. The Tea Party movement certainly helped get Scott Brown elected here in Massachusetts and for that I am grateful. On the one hand I am just as fed up with government over reach as the next guy, but I have also read enough history to be wary of populist movements. The fact that Sarah Palin seems to be the de facto leader doesn't score too many points with me either.  However, reports on the event sound promising.

The genteel atmosphere of the first day of the convention - which is sharing the cavernous Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center with a Sherwin Williams Paint conference and a spa-related meet-up of ladies called "Wisdom Workshops" - was a far cry from the angry, raucous crowds usually associated with Tea Party protests. 

From reports on the scene it appears more people identified themselves as Independent than Republican, which could be a positive sign for a future center-right majority. It will interesting to see if the movement has real legs. Will they survive to influence 2010 elections? How about 2012? If they make it that far they just may be here to stay.

The Jobless Recovery

From The Hill:

The nation’s unemployment rate dropped to 9.7 percent in January but the economy shed another 20,000 jobs.

The job losses reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics were slightly worse than expected by some analysts, who had predicted the economy could see thousands of jobs created.

Adjustments over the last year that were first reported by Labor on Friday also show that job losses over the course of the recession were much worse than previously estimated. Christine Romer, chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said job losses during the recession were 1 million more than previously estimated.

It will be interesting to see if any Republicans break ranks and side with the Democrats on the new proposed jobs bill. Any guesses?

Reagan, Gingrich & The Club For Growth

 

The Eleventh Commandment was a phrase used by former President of the United States Ronald Reagan during his 1966 campaign for Governor of California. The Commandment reads: "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican."

The Club for Growth and Newt Gingrich apparently don't believe in this sage bit of advice as The Club is fighting back against Gingrich for criticizing the small government group during an appearance for Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT).

"The Club is actively working to defeat Bennett, who is seeking re-election in November."

"Several Republicans are challenging Bennett from his right flank as he seeks a fourth term, largely because of his vote in favor of the Wall Street bailout in 2008. While the Club has said they will oppose Bennett, they haven't said which candidate they will support instead."

Internal fighting isn't going to win elections.

Kennedy, Brown & Political Dynasties

Sen. Scott Brown's (R-Mass.) election has been shown to be "a joke," the son of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) said Thursday... "Brown's whole candidacy was shown to be a joke today when he was sworn in early in order to cast his first vote as an objection to Obama's appointment to the NLRB." 

Maybe Patrick is angry that the dynasty is over in Massachusetts? Maybe he is wondering about his own re-election prospects in RI after nearby blue states NJ and MA both elected Republicans to statewide office? Regardless, it was a pretty tasteless comment on the swearing in of a new senator. One wonders if Ted would have been so petty.

A larger, and to me more interesting, question is: what do average Americans think about the concept of dynasties in politics. There have certainly been plenty, the Adams', Kennedy's, Bush's, Rockefeller's, (Biden's?). It seems to go against the very thing we rebeled against in 17176, yet there is a certain appeal to it. Also of note is that most come from the Northeast. Is there something about the history of this area that lends itself to a quasi aristocracy?

Lego Gun Almost Gets Kid Suspended

This is just plain ridiculous.

TARP as Slush Fund for Legislative Largess

When TARP was first enacted many feared that it was just the beginning, and this week President Obama has made clear that our worse fears are starting to be realized. Originally all these bailouts were sold to the American people as loans, and loans the government might actually turn a profit on. Many bought that line and threw their trust to an omniscient fed to save the day. The more skeptical of us had the sneaking suspicion that once the government has money it spends money, and that TARP would turn into a permanent piggy bank for legislative largess. It appears we were right to be concerned.

First came word that we would need a second stimulus bill, another 100 billion to be precise. Turns out the first trillion didn't really do the job. Next we hear that Obama wants to transfer some of the money the banks repaid to a Democratically supported loan program instead of using it to pay down the deficit, which was the original plan. From The Daily Caller:

Republicans accused President Obama on Tuesday of taking a step toward using the $700 billion Wall Street bailout as a slush fund, a possibility many worried about when the Troubled Asset Relief Program was first created during the economic panic of 2008.

“Our TARP should not be a piggy bank. It was intended to stabilize the financial system. It has stabilized the financial system. As it is paid back with interest it should go to reduce the debt,” Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican and ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, said in a brief interview.

 This was not what the American people were sold a year and a half ago when we were all convinced the sky was falling. We were asked to lend the financial world money to get them over the hump and to unfreeze credit lines. We would then be paid back...we, the taxpayers, not the Fed.

Tony Fratto, a former Bush administration deputy press secretary who worked closely on the passage of TARP in 2008, said that the Obama proposal would be “making liars” of the Bush administration.

“We said this was not going to happen,” Fratto said. “Everything we said and Congress said when we created the TARP was this would be temporary, that this would not go on forever. That was one of the main selling points.”

Brown to be Seated

Well it is about time. The election was three weeks ago and place holder Kirk has been voting the whole time. Scott Brown, the successor to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy and Republican rally cry of the moment, will be sworn in to office Thursday afternoon, giving Republicans 41 seats in the upper chamber.

Illionois Could Go Red

Looks like the Massachusetts miracle is spreading.  According to  Tom Jensen  885,268 voters were cast in the Democratic primary for Senate and 736,137 on the Republican side in Illinois.

"Those numbers are awfully close to each other for a state that's overwhelmingly Democratic... Last night's turnout is yet another data point on the enthusiasm gap, showing that Republicans are much more excited about this year's elections than Democrats, even in a deep blue state."

More Tim Tebows

I do not often raise life issues at this blog because of the blinding heat on both sides of the argument. It seems too often when the topic of pro-life/pro-choice comes up people fall into their respective talking points and it is no longer a discussion, but dueling sermons. However with the Super Bowl commercial controversy brewing I felt I should at least broach the topic.

One of the blogs I frequent, Rod Dreher at Beliefnet, quoted from an article by Sally Jenkins and I would like to share the excerpt here.

Here's what we do need a lot more of: Tebows. Collegians who are selfless enough to choose not to spend summers poolside, but travel to impoverished countries to dispense medical care to children, as Tebow has every summer of his career. Athletes who believe in something other than themselves, and are willing to put their backbone where their mouth is. Celebrities who are self-possessed and self-controlled enough to use their wattage to advertise commitment over decadence.

You know what we really need more of? Famous guys who aren't embarrassed to practice sexual restraint, and to say it out loud. If we had more of those, women might have fewer abortions. See, the best way to deal with unwanted pregnancy is to not get the sperm in the egg and the egg implanted to begin with, and that is an issue for men, too -- and they should step up to that.

"Are you saving yourself for marriage?" Tebow was asked last summer during an SEC media day.

"Yes, I am," he replied.

The room fell into a hush, followed by tittering: The best college football player in the country had just announced he was a virgin. As Tebow gauged the reaction from the reporters in the room, he burst out laughing. They were a lot more embarrassed than he was.

"I think y'all are stunned right now!" he said. "You can't even ask a question!"

That's how far we've come from any kind of sane viewpoint about star athletes and sex. Promiscuity is so the norm that if a stud isn't shagging everything in sight, we feel faintly ashamed for him.

Instead of endlessly debating life issues maybe we would get further by discussing sexuality in general. Jenkins herself is a self-professed pro-choicer, yet she can appreciate Tebow's message here. This is the door through which the pro-life movement should walk.

No Clear Frontrunner For 2012

Looks like there is plenty of room for an outsider to come in and catch the Republican wave in 2012.
Research 2000/Daily Kos Republican Survey
If the 2012 Primary for President were held today, which of the following would you vote for?

• Sarah Palin 16%
• Mitt Romney 11%
• Dick Cheney 10%
• Newt Gingrich 7%
• Mike Huckabee 7%
• Tim Pawlenty 3%
• Ron Paul 2%
• John Thune 2%
• Undecided 42%

NASA a Budget Victim

As a child of the 80's there is something quasi-magical about NASA. When I was in elementary school everyone I knew wanted to grow up to fly the space shuttle and we even got out of class to sit in the gym in front of a TV to watch the first few launches live. When I was in middle school I remember sitting in french class and hearing about the Challenger disaster. By high school my day dreams of flying the shuttle to Mars had largely gone, but the romance of NASA never really died.

So it is with some real sadness that I read Sen. Shelby's comments this morning about the possible end for the program. President Barack Obama's proposed budget represents a "death march" for United States space flight, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) said Monday.

President Obama has apparently proposed outsourcing the space program to private commercial providers.  On the one hand I think this scientifically, and financially makes sense. Space doesn't belong to a government, it belongs to the adventuring entrepreneur who can get there and turn a profit at the same time. We always knew the day would come when the private sector would become the main driver in the final frontier. On the other hand, if this means a long, slow death, a march to oblivion, for that once bringer of childhood dreams, NASA, then I can't help but be nostalgic.

Amazongate Further Discredits Global Warming Alarmists

The news coming out of the investigations surrounding global warming activist/climatologists just keeps getting worse and worse.  The Telegraph reports:

The IPCC made a prominent claim in its 2007 report, again citing the WWF as its authority, that climate change could endanger "up to 40 per cent" of the Amazon rainforest – as iconic to warmists as those Himalayan glaciers and polar bears. This WWF report, it turned out, was co-authored by Andy Rowell, an anti-smoking and food safety campaigner who has worked for WWF and Greenpeace, and contributed pieces to Britain's two most committed environmentalist newspapers. Rowell and his co-author claimed their findings were based on an article in Nature. But the focus of that piece, it emerges, was not global warming at all but the effects of logging.

A Canadian analyst has identified more than 20 passages in the IPCC's report which cite similarly non-peer-reviewed WWF or Greenpeace reports as their authority, and other researchers have been uncovering a host of similarly dubious claims and attributions all through the report. These range from groundless allegations about the increased frequency of "extreme weather events" such as hurricanes, droughts and heatwaves, to a headline claim that global warming would put billions of people at the mercy of water shortages – when the study cited as its authority indicated exactly the opposite, that rising temperatures could increase the supply of water.

However, as much as my inner Republican likes to see some of the more extreme leftists get their comeuppance, I am concerned that all this negative news will lead to the feeling that we can continue to trash the planet at no long term cost. Clearly the science behind global warming is atrocious.But I still believe as I stated at the inception of this blog, that part of being a true conservative, is to conserve. That means nature as well as finances.

Possible Rebirth of the New England Republican

I have been saying this for a while, but now the national media is staring to agree. From Congressional Memo:

The successful run of Scott Brown in the Senate race in Massachusetts, coupled with the front-runner status of Representative Michael N. Castle in Delaware in his bid for the Senate and other strong candidacies, could bode well for Republicans in a region that has been shedding them because of a sense that the party had grown too conservative and focused on the South.

Mr. Brown’s victory has already produced some new Republican contenders, raising party hopes of reclaiming lost House and Senate territory. Republicans are mounting a strong effort to grab an open Senate seat in Connecticut, as well as two formerly Republican House seats in New Hampshire.

Democratic Senator Feingold May Be Beatable

After an 18 year career in the US Senate, Russ Feingold may finally be beatable according to the Journal Sentinel. Many local Republicans are openly speculating about a challenge including former Govenor and HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson.

It's a sign of how quickly things have changed that running against Feingold is starting to look less like duty and more like opportunity. Feingold, until recently considered a lock for a fourth term, is now being talked about by national handicappers as beatable.

Pollsters have been asking. One in October pegged Thompson as the surprise 43%-39% winner over Feingold in a hypothetical matchup. Last week, pollster Scott Rasmussen tested a Feingold-Thompson race and found likely voters going for Thompson, 47% to 43%. Independent voters favored Thompson 53% to 36%.

If it happened in Massachusetts, it can certainly happen in any state. Here is hoping a quality challenger actually jumps into this race.