annoytheleft

Archive for the ‘Elections’ Category

DNC: ‘It’s the Political Equivalent of a Temper Tantrum.’

In Congress, Democrat, Elections on September 22, 2010 at 1:12 pm

On a tip from NooneOfAnyImport, I signed up at democrats.org to receive one of a limited supply of their fancy new bumper stickers featuring their groundbreaking new logo. I also put myself on their mailing list because I find the idea of mail addressed to annoytheleft from democrats@democrat.org amusing.

This morning my inbox was graced with a fund-raising email from DNC Chairman Tim Kane [emphasis original]:

All around the country this fall, Republicans are trying to convince voters to hire them for a job. But they keep saying that one of the first items on their agenda would be to go on strike.

A government shutdown would cut off the programs, benefits, and services relied upon by millions of seniors, veterans, and families around the country. Veterans’ hospitals would be closed; Social Security checks would not go out.

This is the political equivalent of a temper tantrum — and it hurts those who need help the most.

I’m sure that Kane’s intended audience would just eat that up. For the rest of us who comprise the wave of discontent that brought about the primary wins of Joe Miller in Alaska, Sharon Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, the notion of shutting down the Federal Government is not as distasteful as it might have seemed in prior years. And, despite to the scare-tactic employed in the letter, essential services continue during a shut down.

Kane’s letter mentions Newt Gingrich as the “mastermind” behind the government shut down in 1996. The fact is, however, that legislation funding the Federal Government was passed by Republicans in 1995 but Clinton vetoed it.

The most recent shutdowns occurred in FY1996. There were two during the early part of the fiscal year. The first, November 14-19, 1995, resulted in the furlough of an estimated 800,000 federal employees. It was caused by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution (P.L. 104-31) agreed to on September 30, 1995, and by President Clinton’s veto of a second continuing resolution and a debt limit extension bill.

The truthful message from Kane should be if we lose majority and the Republicans don’t bend to our will anyway, our Democrat president is going to veto Grandma’s Social Security check. That is a temper tantrum.

Advertisements

Unable to Call the Plays, Clint Didier Sits on the Sideline and Pouts.

In Elections, Republican on September 15, 2010 at 7:44 am

Clint Didier

Clint Didier, the Republican third place finisher in Washington State’s “top two” primary offers “an open letter to all Republicans” in which he attempts to justify his petulant refusal to endorse #2 finisher, Republican Dino Rossi.

In a blue-state race that promises, under the best of circumstances, to be close, Didier has announced that his endorsement is conditional upon Rossi’s agreement to never, ever vote to raise taxes, never vote for a program that will increase Federal spending and to introduce Rep. Ron Paul’s “Sanctity of Life” bill in the Senate.

Didier is concerned that, if elected, Rossi will compromise and make deals for political favor. In order for Rossi to prove that he’s not the kind of politician who will do that, Didier wants him to, you know… make a deal for a political favor.

I’m all for electing to office citizens who are not career politicians or beltway insiders, but I do insist that they possess some intelligence. Didier is not one of those. Didier is a special kind of stupid.

Didier’s “open letter”

I want Patty Murray to lose in November as much as any Republican. That is exactly why I have chosen the course I have in making a conditional endorsement.

“I want Patty Murray to lose so I’m going to insist that the candidate running against her in a liberal state take a hard anti-abortion stance.” Okay, not following that logic.

Those more heavily involved in Republican Party politics know there are two camps within the GOP.  One camp is more concerned with fiscal issues, while the other believes in both social and fiscal causes.

Clint, those only cursorily involved in Republican Party politics know that there are two camps within the party and that there are even subsets of those. You’re not breaking new ground here.

We know that the ideal of limited government is rooted in our founders’ belief in individual liberty – which was the very reason for the birth of the GOP in the first place.  Yet, every time Republicans have been in control in recent decades, they’ve abandoned these ideals and left us with bigger government than Democrats.

Wait… Remind me which party you’re a part of again? Even if this were true (it’s not), it’s nothing compared to the size of government that we’ll end up with if Patty Murray and Obama get to continue unabated. We’re already looking at legions of new IRS agents to enforce health care provisions and a 1099 form for every flat screen TV sold at Wal-Mart.

I placed a phone call to Dino Rossi the night before my press conference offering him my endorsement upon his agreement to make a public commitment to honor [my wishes]. He refused.

Look, Clint… You got 12% of the primary vote. It’s a hell of a lot better than “Good Space Guy” managed but it’s not exactly “clout,” you know?

Under the Bush presidency and a Republican controlled congress, we saw the largest growth of spending in federal government and the biggest loss of personal freedom in our history.

No, when you say “largest growth of spending and biggest loss of personal freedom in our history” you’re thinking of Patty Murray, Obama and the Democrats. You know, the bailouts? Nationalization of private industry? The health care takeover? Try to keep up, buddy.

To all those who are saying I owe Mr. Rossi an open endorsement I say:  it’s time to ask Dino Rossi to either honor these simple platform planks or get out of the way for those who will.

The time for making those kinds of statements was leading up to the primary. We’re past that. Move on, buddy. Screw this up and we get Patty Murray who, and I can guarantee this, won’t honor any of your planks.

Ronald Reagan’s message to Clint Didier

The bottom line here, Clint, is that if you had studied your Reagan, you’d know how far off base you are with this stunt. Reagan addressed this very issue way back in 1977. Learn at the feet of the master:

You know, as I do, that most commentators make a distinction between [what] they call “social” conservatism and “economic” conservatism. The so-called social issues — law and order, abortion, busing, quota systems — are usually associated with blue-collar, ethnic and religious groups themselves traditionally associated with the Democratic Party. The economic issues — inflation, deficit spending and big government — are usually associated with Republican Party members and independents who concentrate their attention on economic matters.

Now I am willing to accept this view of two major kinds of conservatism — or, better still, two different conservative constituencies. But at the same time let me say that the old lines that once clearly divided these two kinds of conservatism are disappearing.

In fact, the time has come to see if it is possible to present a program of action based on political principle that can attract those interested in the so-called “social” issues and those interested in “economic” issues. In short, isn’t it possible to combine the two major segments of contemporary American conservatism into one politically effective whole?

…[Ideological purity] always conjures up in my mind a picture of a rigid, irrational clinging to abstract theory in the face of reality. We have to recognize that in this country “ideology” is a scare word. And for good reason. Marxist-Leninism is, to give but one example, an ideology. All the facts of the real world have to be fitted to the Procrustean bed of Marx and Lenin. If the facts don’t happen to fit the ideology, the facts are chopped off and discarded.I consider this to be the complete opposite to principled conservatism. If there is any political viewpoint in this world which is free from slavish adherence to abstraction, it is American conservatism.

This is not about you, Clint. It’s really not even about the Republican Party. It’s about what you and I owe to our grandchildren. We owe them our very best effort at reversing the course that Patty Murray has helped to set us on. You cannot do that by playing games with your supporter’s loyalties.

Ronald Reagan Weighs In on Delaware, Washington State.

In Elections on September 14, 2010 at 9:46 am

In the weeks leading up to today’s primary election in Delaware, great gigabytes of bloggity attention has been devoted to weighing the merits of Republican Christine O’Donnell vs. Republican Mike Castle.

Jim DeMint, Sarah Palin and Tea Party groups in general favor O’Donnell’s espoused positions as more conservative. The thinking is “principle trumps popularity,” at least as far as the general voting public of Delaware goes.

Others, both within conservative circles and among “establishment” Republicans, view it as an issue of electability. The logic here is that, while Castle’s votes as Delaware’s sole House Representative were largely in line with Democrats’, he’s more likely to be elected in that blue state. The advantage, they say, is that at least there will be an “R” in that seat that will sometimes vote with the party. Further, dare we hope, Castle might be the butt in the seat that gives Republicans a Senate Majority.

Washington State is in the midst of its own Republican vs. Republican drama. Tea Party favorite Clint Didier took third in Washington’s “top two” primary in August, sending Republican Senate hopeful Dino Rossi up against Democrat incumbent Patty Murray.

In a blue state like Washington, Didier’s 12% is respectable, especially in light of his Republican opponent’s name recognition (Rossi twice ran for Governor of Washington state). But as time ticks away to the November election, Didier is holding his supporters hostage, refusing to endorse Rossi unless the Republican candidate agrees to sign a pledge to introduce anti-abortion legislation.

Hopes that Didier’s supporters will see past their candidate’s childishness and do the right thing fade as one reads through comments on Rossi’s Facebook page where “I will not vote for the lesser evil” is the calling card of the Didieite.

Ronald Reagan’s thoughts on conservative principle vs. ideological purity, given in a speech to the 1977 CPAC Convention, are relevant to both races. Quoth Ronaldus Magnus:

I have always been puzzled by the inability of some political and media types to understand exactly what is meant by adherence to political principle. All too often in the press and the television evening news it is treated as a call for “ideological purity.” Whatever ideology may mean — and it seems to mean a variety of things, depending upon who is using it — it always conjures up in my mind a picture of a rigid, irrational clinging to abstract theory in the face of reality. We have to recognize that in this country “ideology” is a scare word. And for good reason. Marxist-Leninism is, to give but one example, an ideology. All the facts of the real world have to be fitted to the Procrustean bed of Marx and Lenin. If the facts don’t happen to fit the ideology, the facts are chopped off and discarded.

I consider this to be the complete opposite to principled conservatism. If there is any political viewpoint in this world which is free from slavish adherence to abstraction, it is American conservatism.

Let us lay to rest, once and for all, the myth of a small group of ideological purists trying to capture a majority. Replace it with the reality of a majority trying to assert its rights against the tyranny of powerful academics, fashionable left-revolutionaries, some economic illiterates who happen to hold elective office and the social engineers who dominate the dialogue and set the format in political and social affairs. If there is any ideological fanaticism in American political life, it is to be found among the enemies of freedom on the left or right — those who would sacrifice principle to theory, those who worship only the god of political, social and economic abstractions, ignoring the realities of everyday life. They are not conservatives.

via Reagan 2020 – Ronald Reagan – The New Republican Party.

A Gathering on The Mall is Not Going to Change Government

In Conservative, Elections, Republican, Tea Party on September 8, 2010 at 11:22 am


As inspiring as the sight of hundreds of thousands of people gathered on the Washington Mall during the Restoring Honor rally is, and as inspiring as the gathering of even greater numbers during the 9/12 rally will be, neither of these can or will change anything in our government. In fact, President Obama “didn’t pay much attention” to the Restoring Honor rally.

That’s not to say that these rallies are unimportant. On the contrary, the gathering of people with a common purpose is hugely important in that it energizes both those who attend and those who observe. But what good is an energized battery if that charge isn’t used to do work?

Ron Robinson at RedState lays out five steps that will lead to real change and real hope. Neither of which can be handed to us by a popular leader. As it was with our founding, hope and change comes from getting off of our asses and taking control of our own governance from the ground up. That, my friends is grass-roots. To wit:

1. Get Out The Vote
Learn how to develop a functioning precinct organization in your neighborhood that can turn out the vote and educate your neighbors on crucial issues. This does not mean you walk the precinct by yourself. It means that you identify and use your willing neighbors to help you do it.  Take that walk in the sunshine.

Really  owning our precincts would mean that the votes that the Democrats purchased with big media buys for $10 million in 2008 would cost them $15 million in 2010 and $20 million in 2012 – to buy the same number of votes.   Once established a precinct operation neutralizes big money.   Elections can’t be bought in the media if the electorate is serviced (registration, permanent absentee ballot registration, knowing who’s turning 18 next month, etc.) and owned at the grassroots level.  A good precinct operation also neutralizes efforts at electoral fraud.

This will prepare you for the next Task.

2. Become a Precinct Committeeman
It’s different in every state, but you should endeavor to have a vote on your county party (GOP) Central Committee. In LA where I live, it’s called being a member of the Central Committee for the county. It means you have a vote in county party policy and officers. State party committee members are usually chosen from among the ranks of the county party officials. RNC committee members are usually chosen from among the ranks of the state parties. The only way to change the policy and direction of our party is to be involved in the governance of that party.  Read everything RedStater guru Cold Warrior has written on the topic.

Once you have been seated on your local county GOP committee, you will find that a lot of the seats around you are vacant.  Help fill them with your friends.  Most county bylaws allow for appointments to fill vacant seats and alternate appointments to allow for absences of the primary voting member (in LA, an alternate can vote if his/her primary is absent – my own current status until I am seated in my own right in Dec.).  Get one of these appointments if you have to!   The hard workers will be quickly identified and will be drafted upwards to work on the state party committee.  Starting to get the idea?  Get to work on it.  An online resource will be available soon to help you understand how to become a precinct committeeman in your own state.

This will prepare you for the next Task.

3.  Stay Beyond November
Our government is overwhelmed with deeply entrenched liberals because we went to sleep (or went on autopilot) for 40 years while the liberals took over.   What is the next election in your area after Nov 2, 2010?  Don’t know?  Proves my point.  The democrats know, and that’s why they are safely ensconced on every sewer commission, water commission, city council, and county commission in the country.  It’s why you and I tend to think of every government employee as a part of the liberal machine.  Because they are.  So we don’t get to hang it up in Nov and relax until 2012.  We need to use the precinct machine we built in Task 1 and the party connections we built in Task 2 to fill those small local offices with our people.  Then we change the government culture everywhere to conservative and genuine public servants.

This will prepare you for the next Task.

4.  Donate Often and Wisely
I’ve posted so little here lately because  I joined the staff of John Colbert, R candidate in CA for CD29 to toss out D incumbent Adam Schiff.  I have to answer emails from voters.  I’m getting a real education.  One voter wrote recently and wanted my candidate to change this and that (you fill it in, you already know…) about the GOP.  I wanted to hit him.  I thought, ‘you want a candidate who is trying to get everything he can from the party to get elected to change the party for you??!!??’  This voter threatened to withhold his contribution unless my candidate could promise changes in the party.

Well – that’s just the way to guarantee that the party never changes.

You should open your checkbook now to help assure that when my candidate is offered that ‘Young Guns’ money, he’s well-funded enough to turn it down!  That is how you start to change the party.  If the party has to come to the candidates for money instead of the other way around, the party will follow quickly.

In short, if you sit back and bitch about the country, if you sit on your butt and bitch about what’s become of the Republican Party then I have news for you:You are the problem. Knock it off.

Dear Lisa Murkowski…

In Elections, Senate, Tea Party on August 28, 2010 at 2:22 pm

Senator Murkowski calls for primary "do-overs."

Senator, I’m interested in taking our country back from the progressives who have taken it so far off course. By your record I, and apparently many Alaskans, see that you are not.

There is a special kind of contempt that the public has for the likes of Al Gore and Al Franken for their electoral childishness. Senator, by your actions in this primary you are on the verge of reserving yourself a spot at that same table.

If you are indeed considering making a switch to run in the General Election as a Libertarian candidate then I have to question what that means for your beliefs and priorities. If choosing a party is a matter not of convictions but political expediency then I daresay you, Senator Murkowski, are a part of the problem in Washington D.C. and the Tea Party is right in looking to replace you.

It’s time to concede, Senator. The race was close and hard-fought but it’s done. Further tantrums on your part may succeed only in handing the General Election to your Democrat opponent.

Rossi Wastes No Time, Issues Debate Challenge to Murray

In Congress, Elections, Senate on August 20, 2010 at 1:59 pm

Challenger Dino Rossi (R) issues debate challenge to Senate incumbent Murray (D)

With the Washington State Primary just days behind him, Republican primary winner Dino Rossi has challenged Democrat incumbent Patty Murray to a series of public debates as he vies for the Senate seat she has occupied since 1993. From Rossi’s press release:

The U.S. Senate race is one of the most important elections in the State of Washington in 2010.  Given the importance of this election, and the desire for voters to make an informed decision this fall, I propose we hold five debates in Washington State, in addition to one nationally televised debate.  I further propose we hold one debate in each media market hosted by local civic organizations, with two debates in the Seattle area.
The five debates in Washington State would be Lincoln-Douglas style, in which we would be allotted equal time to make opening statements, ask questions of each other, introduce new ideas, or defend policy positions.  A timekeeper would ensure each side adheres to time limits which are mutually agreed upon.

This is an opportunity for us to question each other on various policy positions in a manner which allows the public, not the press or interest groups, to dictate the issues covered.

The Washington Primary was flush with Republican contenders, some of whom earned noteworthy numbers. Pooling the votes cast for various candidates into “Rossi” and “Murray” voters (see graphic below), the two candidates are dead even heading for the General Election in November. In a left leaning state with a Democrat incumbent, that’s a significant statement.

Washington State Primary results. Candidates whose supporters would likely vote for Murray in the General Election are designated "D" while supporters who would likely vote for Rossi are designated "R".

Leftist Spin: “Scott Brown Backfired”

In Congress, Elections, health care on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 pm

Scott Brown (R-MA)

The passage of Obama’s health bill in spite of the election of Scott Brown sends a message, but not the one Democrats want you to think.

In a special election last January, Massachusetts voters sent Scott Brown, a Republican, to fill the seat formerly occupied by the late Ted Kennedy’s wide posterior. Brown’s election, fueled by grass-roots support from the Tea Parties, thwarted the Democrat’s filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Republicans knew that he was not the second coming of Ronald Reagan but he was, by God, a Republican butt in that seat.

Now, Democrats and the leftist media are taking up a new Rumpelstiltskin gloat in the wake of the passage of health insurance reform legislation. The left contends that conservatives are “having second thoughts” about Brown and that the right is disappointed in his election. One can see how the veracity of such a characterization might be… questionable, considering the source.

None the less, the Boston Herald has this:

“If he were a milk carton, he would be expired,” said Massachusetts Democratic Party chairman John Walsh

In fact, Democrats now say Brown’s election as the so-called “41st vote” to block Obama’s health-care overhaul inspired them to seek procedural means to bypass GOP efforts to derail the bill.

“Scott Brown’s election actually delivered health-care reform, because we didn’t need the 60 votes to make it happen. He delivered a significant victory in that,” Walsh said.

Ron Chusid, a repeat offending idiot at Liberal Values (a contradiction in terms if I ever heard one), asserts that “Besides falsely seeing his win as a victory for the far right, winning in Massachusetts led many Republicans to let down their guard, making it easier for the Democrats to pass health care reform.”

Despite the twisted logic that would lay blame at Scott Brown’s feet, the fact remains that his election caused Democrats to formulate a new plan to thwart the will of the American people. By taking away the cloture option, Brown caused Democrats to tip their hand, sending the message that there is no low to which they are unwilling to stoop in order to run rampant over the nation. As a result, “Deem and Pass”, reconciliation and the Stupak sell-out, not to mention Obamacare itself, are going to turn around and bite Democrats in the ass come November.

Cross posted at Conservative Firestorm