Archive for the ‘2012 Primaries’ Category

From the mouths of babes…

March 25, 2011 2 comments

Official Seal of the Government of the United ...

Image via Wikipedia

Let me start with a basic statement of facts.

  • I favor legal immigration and I favor increasing the number of people allowed to legally immigrate into the US.
  • Immigration must be managed in a way that brings people based on their ability assimilate and be productive citizens.
  • I am unalterably opposed to illegal immigrants, from whatever their home country.
  • I favor laws, at the state level if necessary, that makes housing, employment and education as close to impossible as we can make it.  I favor the use of e-Verify or a similar system to validate the right of every individual to housing, employment and education and I favor harsh penalties aimed at employers, landlords/property managers and school administrators who allow illegal aliens to live, work or attend school.
  • I favor an interpretation of the concept of “birthright citizenship” that grants US citizenship to children born of parents who are legal immigrants to the US and disallows citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

Read more…


Hi. I’d like to introduce you to reality.

BackhoeSo, the public employee unions and their lap cats the Democratic Party have drawn a line in the sand with a back hoe.  Union membership and representation is a God given right and since Thomas Jefferson was a union organizer the right to organize and hold the American taxpayer hostage is somewhere in the Constitution.  And I can guarantee that there is no shortage of judges who will have no trouble finding said “right”.  In the meantime, the Wisconson Democrats have discovered that if the Democrats have somehow been unable to either win or fix enough elections to hold majorities in state legislative bodies, they can leave the state and there will be no negtive consequences from the country club Republicans – including the Tea Party variety – and they can play the issue for the front pages and for time.  The bottom line here is simple, the Democrats and the unions are at war.  Republicans are just simple.

My bet is that Democrats and unions will “win” on the issue of contracts, wages, benefits and pensions.  Please note the scare quotes.  They’re gonna “win” in court and in the short term, in the court of public opinion.  The reason they’ll win in court is because the judiciary is stacked, roughly right up to the SCOTUS, where eventually they’ll lose.  Eventually.  Public opinion will sway their way because they are a lot like Chinese water torture, constantly repeating lies until people believe them.  People will believe them because for the most part, they are products of the US unionize education system and can’t do independent research or put two rational thoughts together in the same month.  So, the Unions “win” and keep their money.  Democrats “win” and keep their number one source of funds, taxpayer money passed through the hands of union members to their bosses to the DNC.  I used scare quotes because, while they will almost certainly be able to work the courts and the voters for a while, they won’t beat the fundamental laws of mathematics and economics.

Read more…

Mitch Daniels, toast to me thank you.

March 13, 2011 1 comment

Mitch Daniels has been oft mentioned as a possible candidate for President in 2012.  He’s done some good things as Governor of Indiana and appears to be popular with the folks in his state.  He’s also tarnished his conservative credentials a couple of times with some “missteps” like his proposal for a “truce” on social issues until we can get the fiscal problems facing us on the way to being fixed.  And then there’s his opposition to a bill in the Indiana legislature that would make his state – where he eliminated some collective bargaining ability by unions by executive order – a Right To Work state.

Frankly, I can live with the concept of the truce.  Mostly because in the real world, social issues – primarily abortion – isn’t going to come off the table, it’s just not going to be front and center but there will still be ongoing legislative actions to curtail the practice when the opportunity presents itself.  See the Congress working to defund Planned Parenthood as an example.
Read more…

What a difference a “D” makes…

…and that would be “D” as in “D”emocrat, not “d” as in “d”ay.

Remember back a couple of years when oil prices went over a hundred dollars a barrel and gas prices broached $4 a gallon. You will also remember the screeching from Democrats and their media slaves about how George W Bush and Dick Cheney were profiting from the suffering of American families who were paying big prices at the pump. In March of 2008 the Washington Post ran a story – one of thousands, so yes, I’m cherry-picking but it’s not much different than of the ilk they published on this subject – where they made the following note…
Read more…

2012 Winning Issue #1: Illegal Immigration.

January 1, 2011 2 comments

Homeland Security at Work

This subject is near and dear to my heart for several reasons.  First of all, I am a proponent of LEGAL immigration.  We are a nation of immigrants who came to America to be Americans, to experience freedom and liberty.  Nothing should ever change that.  We are also a nation of laws and we should expect and demand that immigrants obey the law, especially when it comes to how they come into the country.  For most of the Bush Administration and for most of the last couple of years, it looked like amnesty and the rule of lawlessness would rule the day on this issue, but I honestly think we’ve turned the corner and that the conservative view on this issue will win the day.  Over the past year we’ve seen some very encouraging things happen in regard to immigration.

  1. Even as Obama’s ICE has worked t find obscure regulatory methods to stop processing illegals, their other hand has been hard at work enforcing federal law with regard to employment of illegals and, in fact, we will deport a record number of illegals in 2010, around 400,000.  That’s a huge jump from the previous administration and it’s certainly a good thing.
  2. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070 into law, making it against state law to be in Arizona illegally and empowering Arizona police agencies to detain suspected illegal aliens.
  3. The Obama Administration file suit in federal court to block enforcement of SB1070, the case is currently making it’s way to SCOTUS.
  4. The attendant publicity around SB1070 brought an interesting result.  People favor it by a huge margin, 55-60% favor it and polls show many states where people want a similar law passed by their state legislatures.
  5. As we noted here earlier in the week, Rep Lamar Smith is going to hold hearing with the intent to bring new immigration laws based on requiring eVerify for hiring in the US.  This is a great first step and may actually end up being a solidly bipartisan piece of legislation because Obama’s Immigration folks are looking forward to testifying and support the legislation in concept at this point and it’s an issue that can be rightly painted as a “jobs” issue.  Illegal aliens are taking jobs from unemployed American citizens.  Come on Nancy & Harry, oppose this one.  Please.
  6. The DREAM Act, legislation aimed at nibbling away toward blanket amnesty, was killed in the Lame Duck Session.  With Republicans in control of the House, it’s dead as my white cat for at least two years.
  7. As we noted in the above linked piece, AZ State Sen Russell Pearce and his allies will be holding a press conference on January 5 to outline new legislation that will be introduced in at least Arizona that will go after “birthright citizenship”, effectively nullifying it for children of illegal aliens.  See the earlier piece for our commentary on that, but suffice it to say that we feel Pearce is doing the right thing and the state level is the place to start the fight.
  8. In Kansas, Kris Kobach was elected Secretary of State.  This is important because Kobach worked with Russell Pearce to write SB1070 and he is coming into office in Kansas with legislation ready for committee review with respect to illegal aliens and voter fraud.

In a year end piece in the New York Times, they note that the battle on illegal immigration – and they even call it that – has shifted from Washington DC to the States.  This is critical to getting the problem addressed for a couple of reasons.  First of all, any major piece of legislation coming out of DC will likely be an amnesty bill – see the DREAM Act.  By moving the battle to the states, the focus of the legislation changes 180 degrees to incremental enforcement.

Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish employers who hire them.

Next week, at least five states plan to begin an unusual coordinated effort to cancel automatic United States citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents.

Opponents say that effort would be unconstitutional, arguing that the power to grant citizenship resides with the federal government, not with the states. Still, the chances of passing many of these measures appear better than at any time since 2006, when many states, frustrated with inaction in Washington, began proposing initiatives to curb illegal immigration.

The battle lines are already drawn for this fight.  Conservatives, people who believe in the rule of law and advocates for legal immigration are on one side.  The Left, which includes the entire Democratic Party machine and some liberal Republicans, along with an interesting alliance of Mexican nationalist groups (LaRaza, etc) and the US Chamber of Commerce who oppose businesses having to deal with immigration status not to mention their love of cheap labor.  This was will be fought in the courts, the key is to get the right legislation before SCOTUS, because that’s where it will end up.  The SB1070 ruling from the federal judge in Phoenix was expected.  I expect the Ninth Circus to affirm her ruling and from there it will go to Justice Roberts Court.

For a quick roundup of who’s on our side, The Times article has a good outline.

“The federal government’s failure to enforce our border has functionally turned every state into a border state,” said Randy Terrill, a Republican representative in Oklahoma who has led the drive for anti-illegal immigration laws there.


Among the states expected to introduce bills similar to Arizona’s [SB1070] are Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.
In Kansas, Republicans won big majorities in both legislative houses and Sam Brownback, who just retired as a United States senator, was elected governor. Mr. Kobach, the law professor, was elected secretary of state after a campaign in which he vowed to pass a law requiring proof of citizenship for voters.

The Times article has the standard level of moaning about how Republicans will lose the “Latino” voting block, blah blah blah.  Arizona has a large Hispanic voting block and a very aggressive “immigrant” lobby.  The media are their lackeys.  Republicans swept every statewide office and took three House seats away from the Democrats.  Two more House seats in southern Arizona were within a couple of thousand votes each of flipping to Republicans and our candidates were first timers.  One of those districts, the incumbent had never run a TV commercial in any of his campaigns and won by about 3,000 votes.

Bottom line, this issue will be a clear winner for Conservatives and Republicans.  We’ve got the right people doing the right things at both the state and federal level and we’ve got momentum on our side.

A new RNC Chair. YAY!!!!!

December 31, 2010 Leave a comment

Republican Elephant

Well, maybe YAY!!!!!

The best part about January 15 will be almost certainty that Michael Steele will be fading off into the woodwork, hopefully NEVER to be seen again at or near the RNC.  I would suggest that the new head of the RNC get a restraining order to keep Steele at least 500 miles away from any Republican function, which will pretty much require him to move to Guam.  But hey, I’m sure he’ll be welcomed there given the RNC cash he shipped off to Guam to buy the votes of their RNC Committee Members.  That money might have made a difference in getting Jesse Kelly elected in a squeeker in AZ08 but hey, no hard feelings Mike.  On second thought, yeah, I do have hard feelings.  You were an affirmative action hire and guess what.  You turned out like all affirmative action hires – including the one currently sitting in the White House – a freaking disaster.  Oh well, that’s water under the bridge and it’s time to move on and boot your incompetent butt out onto the pavement.

So the question becomes, If not Mikie, who?

Well, the Chairman of the Wisconsin Republican Party, a fella by the unbelievable name of Reince Priebus (really!) is howling from the rooftops to the effect that he’s gonna have the job locked down in a few days.  He’s got some interesting qualifications, being Chair of the Wisconsin Republicans and he was also the General Counsel for the RNC.  While Mikie was Chair.  Priebus is running hard for the job and apparently has 24 votes committed.

It looks like it might turn out that Priebus is nothing more than a Steele retread.  As it turns out, a whole bunch of stuff is starting to steamroll down the mountain at him and there’s a school of thought that says he is nothing more than Mikie’s chosen replacement.  There are three interesting things that have popped up in the last couple of days, the first being the work being done by Priebus as an attorney and the work of his current law firm.  He was a clerk for the LA NAACP chapter while in law school, a job he sought because apparently he values diversity and in 2003 he was working to confiscate property of a small business through eminent domain.  His current law firm spent the last year actively working on ObamaCare.  Now I’ll be the first to say that none of those things are knock-outs for the RNC job, but they certainly raise questions about where Priebus is coming from and whether he’s thinking out of the right side or the left side of his brain.

Next is a statement released by the Wisconsin Republican Liberty Caucus, a state-wide Tea Party organization in Wisconsin…

Wisconsin RLC: Reince Priebus Should Not Be National Chairman of the Republican Party
December 6th, 2010

Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin: Reince Priebus Should Not Be National Chairman of the Republican Party

For Immediate Release: December 6, 2010
Contact: Michael S. Murphy, Chairman

MILWAUKEE, WI. — The Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin, a state affiliate of the Republican Liberty Caucus, encourages Republican Party leaders to look to candidates other than Wisconsin Republican Party Chair Reince Priebus to lead the Republican National Committee in the coming cycle.  “Mr. Priebus wants to take credit for a successful election night on Nov. 2, but it was actually Democrat policies and the over 65 grassroots Tea Party groups in the state of Wisconsin that made the real difference,” said Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin Chairman Michael S. Murphy.

As a grassroots network of concerned citizens dedicated to upholding of individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party, the Republican Liberty Caucus questions Mr. Priebus’s commitment to core constitutional principles as well as the rule changes that disenfranchised Wisconsin GOP primary voters under his watch.

This is of particular concern to me because we need the new RNC Chair to be someone who can actively work well with Tea Party groups around the nation.  Mr. Priebus doesn’t seem to be that person.

Third, from Politico, is an email that Connecticut RNC Chair Chris Healy is sending out to RNC members.  Basically, he’s saying Priebus was Steele’s go-to-guy at the RNC.

As the race for the Chairmanship enters its final stages, it is critical we focus on the tasks ahead but also review how we got here through the tangled relationship of Wisconsin Chairman Reince Preibus [sic] and RNC Chairman Michael Steele.

The candidates are making their case, and let’s hope there is more than the usual banter and endless metaphors and overripe cliché’s when the candidates meet on Monday. As we listen, it is essential that each of us examine the role each of us played over the last two years.

This would apply in particular to Chairman Preibus, who was until a few weeks ago, the Chief Counsel to our Party and Chairman Steele’s wingman throughout his stormy tenure. At no time until he chose to run did Preibus issue any directive, memo or public utterance on Steele’s disastrous tenure. Now he wishes to walk into breach and rescue us from Chairman Steele, his legions and supporters who have done quite well for themselves at the expense of our Party.

When Steele was elected Chairman, he had good will, eager groups of employees and supporters and $22 million in the bank. Chairman Steele chose Preibus to be his General Counsel, an unpaid appointed post, which is supposed to keep an eye on all legal and policy matters that the committee embarks on. Reince earned this spot by being Steele’s campaign manager. During the campaign, up to the vote in D.C., they were inseparable. Indeed, they remained in firm allegiance during Steele’s tenure and often, Preibus was dispatched to put out fires.

You can read the whole email at Politico.  Bottom line though, Steele and Priebus were joined at the hip.

Given the evidence that I’m looking at right now, I have to say that Reince Priebus is not the person we want replacing Michael Steele.  Looks to me like we’ll just get more of the same and that’s the last thing we need.  Steele took over the RNC at a time when it’s credibility with conservatives was at an all time low.  Steele did the impossible, he drove it down even further.  We don’t need more of the same.  I don’t have a candidate that I’m endorsing, although I do like Saul Anuzis, but right now I am in the “Oust Steele & Stop Priebus” mode.  I will be contacting the four RNC voting members from my home state, Arizona, and I would urge you to do the same.  If you don’t have current contact information for the RNC voting members in your state, please leave a comment and I will get the information, with a current email address, to you.

It’s a war folks. A REAL war…

December 28, 2010 1 comment

No prisoners!

And to quote Lawrence of Arabia, “No prisoners!”  Because there will be none.

The Christmas Day editorial in the New York Times lays out the battle ground and Al Qaeda isn’t one of the combatants.  In fact, in this war Al Qaeda poses no threat.  This time it’s face off between the folks who think government knows best and the peasants should pay for it and, of course, the peasants who pay.

It actually looks like The Times is having a “Come to Jesus” moment – appropriate for Christmas Day – with respect to spending by governments.  The interesting part is that it’s not federal spending that is driving the train wreck, it’s the states.  This is happening for a couple of reasons.  First of all, many states have constitutional amendments that require a balanced budget.  Secondly, states can’t print money, although I’d quibble about that one with their ability – and that of municipalities – to issue bonds.  And those puppies are a who ‘nother story.  Think mortgage/housing times ten.  But we’ll save that for another day.  The bottom line for today is that the states and cities have spent themselves into a big hole and The Times is calling for a bigger backhoe.  Here are some lowlights from the article…

For most of this year, the state of Illinois has lacked the money to pay its bills. Some of its employees have been evicted from their offices for nonpayment of rent, social service groups have laid off hundreds of workers while waiting for checks, pharmacies have closed for lack of Medicaid payments. Faced with $4.5 billion in overdue payments…
Starved for revenue and accustomed to decades of overspending, many states have been overwhelmed. They are facing shortfalls of $140 billion next year. Even before the downturn, states jeopardized their futures by accumulating trillions in debt that they swept into some far-off future.

But that future is not so distant, and the crushing debt has made recovery far more difficult to achieve. As The Times reported, Illinois, California and several other states are at increasing risk of being the first states to default since the 1930s.
The most immediate cause of the states’ problems is the decline in tax revenue caused by the downturn, just as the demand for services has increased.
Many conservatives have said the revenue decline is a good incentive for states to cut their spending. That is precisely what almost all states have done, because they are legally barred from running deficits. State spending fell by 3.8 percent in the 2009 fiscal year and 7.3 percent more in the 2010 fiscal year, the only significant declines since at least the 1970s, even as the cost of education and health care rose.
But cutting spending will not affect the heaviest burden: the accumulated debt that comes from passing off the biggest problems to future generations. States and cities have nearly $3 trillion in outstanding bonds, and more than $3.5 trillion in shortfalls to pensions. Promised health benefits alone are more than $500 billion.
states are going to have to acknowledge that more effective, targeted tax increases are inevitable, and can be achieved if they are structured properly. Governors also must explain to voters that they have cut spending. The nation’s richest taxpayers just got a windfall in the federal tax deal extorted from President Obama by Republican senators. States should not shy away from asking for more help from those most able to pay.
states are going to have to acknowledge that more effective, targeted tax increases are inevitable, and can be achieved if they are structured properly. Governors also must explain to voters that they have cut spending. The nation’s richest taxpayers just got a windfall in the federal tax deal extorted from President Obama by Republican senators. States should not shy away from asking for more help from those most able to pay.

OK, so I hope you’ve got a good picture of the battle lines. Please note that The Times makes passing reference to “cutting spending” but the concept of reducing the size and reach of government is nowhere to be found in the discussion. And you can bet your last nickle that the talking points for this editorial came straight from the staff lounge at the DNC. There is no discussion of the hundreds of billions spent by the states every year because the federal government abrogates it’s responsibility on immigration law.  Hopefully, thanks to men of courage like Representative Lamar Smith, that will begin to be addressed in the 112th Congress.  There’s barely a peep from The Times – one line thank you – that collaboration between elected officials and unions is a major part of the problem, and even in that admission they can’t miss an opportunity to take a pot shot at Chris Christie.  And the real crime in this editorial is the pap about windfall tax deals “extorted from President Obama”.  Just who the hell does the New York Times think pays the taxes.  Keep in the back of your mind that in addition to the following chart on personal income tax, the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed nations. According to the National Taxpayers Union, the tax distribution looks like this…

Personal Income Tax paid in 2008 by Adjusted Gross Income

% by AGI AGI Threshold % Tax Paid Incremental Tax %

Top 1%




Top 5%




Top 10%




Top 25%




Top 50%




Bottom 50%

less than $33,048



Percentages have been rounded.

OK, so the US currently has the highest corporate tax rates in the real world and when it comes to personal income tax, the the people who actually produce the most pay 70%+ of the taxes collected and half of the people who file pay essentially zip.  And let’s not forget that Democrats are continually whining about a lack of progressiveness in our tax system.  And that we don’t collect enough taxes.  And nary a word is said from the left about spending too darn much money even though The Times even gets that part – see the blue quote above.  And yes, it’s blue for a reason.

I do have some strategy for fixing this, but this particular diary isn’t the place to haul that out.  This diary is simply to put us on notice that it’s finally Game ON!!  We’ll see where it goes from here, but one thing I can guarantee you, there will be blood in the streets.  Let’s hope it’s just political blood, but I wouldn’t be surprised by much of anything when push comes to shove.  There is one thing that neither The Times nor the Democrats get, and that’s an important thing.  At the local level when taxpayers are asked to pay more, they say “NO” about every time.  Even, and especially in deep blue states.