Contributing Editor

This post by James Pethokoukis should cause lots of alarm within the business community. Here’s what Mr. Pethokoukis wrote:

I have been arguing that Barack Obama’s tax hike plan represents a floor, not a ceiling. (And even that floor seems to fluctuate.) I recall that some House Democrats, like Charlie Rangel, were pushing a for a “millionaire” surtax during the last Congress.

Now this: My guy Dan Clifton, superanalyst at Strategas Research, has noticed that Speaker Pelosi is pushing for a permanent refundable tax credit on payroll taxes paid. Clifton thinks that tax credit could be paid for by a five percent surtax on higher income taxpayers. “While this achieves the same goal of raising the top tax rate, to achieve the permanent middle class tax cut, the 5 pct. surtax will fall on top of the higher income tax rates after the Bush tax cuts expire (39.6% + 5%).”

Raising taxes that much, especially early in his administration, would tell people that President-Elect Obama is an extremist. It would disintegrate his image as a centrist. Most importantly, it would deepen and lengthen the recession that we’re in. (continue reading post »)

The AP is reporting that Team Franken Lawyer David Lillehaug asked the Hennepin County canvassing board to reconsider 461 ballots that had previously been rejected. Here’s what they’re reporting:

Minnesota’s largest county has declined a request from Al Franken’s Senate campaign to reconsider some disqualified absentee ballots.

Franken trails GOP Sen. Norm Coleman by a little more than 200 votes and the race is headed for a recount starting next week.

Attorney David Lillehaug asked the Hennepin County canvassing board to reconsider 461 absentees that he said had been improperly rejected.

The Coleman campaign just issued this press release:

“The Al Franken campaign today tried to stuff new ballots into the ballot box in a brazen, last minute act of desperation. We have raised concerns repeatedly about these types of tactics by the Franken campaign. Today is further evidence of their intent to use whatever means necessary to counter the decision of the people of Minnesota. We applaud the actions of the Hennepin County Canvassing Board in rejecting this blatant, desperate act.”

Hennepin County is a big DFL stronghold, which leads to this important question: Why is it that only DFL strongholds have had difficulty with processing ballots? It isn’t like I’ve heard of rural counties having difficulty handling ballots. I haven’t heard of 32 previously unforeseen ballots show up in an election official’s car in Lac Qui Parle County. I haven’t heard of 100 new votes being added to Franken’s and Obama’s totals in Kandiyohi County. (continue reading post »)

Forgive me for saying this but the more I read about the chain of custody procedures being employed by the election officials for the Coleman-Franken recount, the less faith I have in these procedures. They sound more like the methods that helped Christine Gregoire defeat Dino Rossi in the third counting of the vote after losing the count the night of the election and the mandated recount. Here’s a refresher of Rossi-Gregoire 2004:

King County election officials yesterday admitted a major error in tallying votes in the governor’s race that could reverse the results and make Christine Gregoire the winner in the hand recount now under way.
The discovery that 573 (formerly 561) votes were improperly disqualified super-heated backers of Republican Dino Rossi, who for weeks have worried that King County, a Democratic stronghold, would find a way to give Gregoire the edge.

That’s the charitable way of wording it. Here’s what Stefan Sharkansky wrote about that process in December, 2004:

King County is still unable to provide conclusive information to validate their vote count.

The voter file, which I obtained earlier today, contains the names of only 895,660 voters recorded as voting on Nov. 2, a significant discrepancy from its hand recount certified total of 899,199.

The Elections Office informed me that they’re still doing “quality control” and adding in the names of some of the absentee voters. Even that wouldn’t explain the entire discrepancy, as there appear to be discrepancies with the polling place and provisional vote counts as well. I’ve asked the Elections Office for further clarification and will convey their explanation as soon as I receive one.

Fast forward to Coleman-Franken, 2008. Here’s Fritz Knaak’s quote on the matter: (continue reading post »)

One glaring weakness that the GOP has, both nationally and locally, is their indifference towards the Internet as a tool. Last night, I was channel-surfing when I spotted Shep Smith interviewing Frank Luntz. They were talking about a study that Dr. Luntz did. Here’s the question they discussed and what Luntz’s study found:

Q: Where do people get their political information from?
1) Internet–28%
2) Cable TV–27%
3) TV News– 23%
4) Radio– 7%
5) Newspapers– 6%

Shep Smith went on to praise President-elect Obama’s use of the Internet. Having visited Obama’s campaign website, I know that President-elect Obama used it for everything from fundraising to GOTV operations to event planning. President-elect Obama’s online fundraising was unprecedented. While this study is sobering, it also highlights the fact that we need to find solutions to our problems. Fortunately, some very talented people are working on this. The principles and ideas at this website are this week’s must reading. Here’s an example of how we reform the party: (continue reading post »)

This post is a great explanation why the GOP should focus on shoring up the base first. Here’s the part I agree most with:

5) It’s conservatives, not moderates, who contribute the money, work on GOP campaigns, and are generally going to vote Republican, if they vote at all.

Although it’s fine to reach out to moderates, if you go too far and alienate the conservative base, it will hurt your fundraising, leave you without enough campaign volunteers, and may depress turnout amongst your most loyal supporters.

Our ‘alphabets’ fundraising has stunk the last 2 election cycles. That’s because the activists have refused to support candidates that would be as comfortable in the Democratic Party as they’d be in the GOP. The Democrats hire their GOTV machine. The GOP doesn’t. That’s why we need enthusiastic activists. The perfect example of this is in Minnesota’s 2nd District.

John Kline has impeccable conservative credentials. As a result, Rep. Kline’s had a big base of volunteers this campaign season: (continue reading post »)

I just got this email from the Pence office:

WASHINGTON, DC—US Congressman Mike Pence announced his candidacy today for House Republican Conference Chairman for the 111th Congress. Pence informed his colleagues of his intentions via the attached “Dear Colleague” letter. Excerpts below:

“As we choose who will lead us in the days ahead, it is essential that we learn the lessons of 2006 and 2008 with an eye toward 2010. We must be forward thinking, develop winning conservative strategies and communicate them effectively to the American people.”

***

“If you elect me as your new Chairman, I would take a page from the playbook of President Ronald Reagan who taught us that it is not enough to believe great things, we must effectively communicate great things to the American people.”

In addition, Pence received the following endorsements:

Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)

“Mike Pence is a gifted communicator and a principled conservative who played a key role in helping House Republicans win the energy issue this year, an effort I believe must serve as a model for our Conference as we build a majority coalition issue by issue. I’ve encouraged Mike to run for the job of Conference Chairman because there is no one in our ranks who does a better job of articulating the GOP message of freedom and smaller government, and he’s also proven himself to be a team player with the ability to bring our members together. We need him at the leadership table in the 111th Congress.”

RSC Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)

“The Conference Chairman is responsible for the message and communications effort of the Republican Conference. House Republicans have no better communicator or Member with communications expertise than Mike Pence. He is one of the most respected conservative leaders within our conference and the nation and I am proud to call him my friend. I am even prouder to support him as our next Conference Chair.

“Mike Pence was always my first choice for this position; I asked him to run several times, and pending his final decision I was prepared to run for Conference Chair should he have chosen not to. If we are to begin the process of rebuilding a bigger, better, and stronger Republican Conference, we must make decisions based upon the good of the team rather than ourselves. I believe that Mike Pence will make an excellent Conference Chairman and will make all House Republicans proud.”

U.S. Congressman Steve LaTourette (R-OH)

“If there’s one thing I constantly hear back home from Republicans it’s, ‘When are you guys going to start telling your story?’ From working with Mike Pence on the ‘Stolen Vote’ issue, I firmly believe he’s the guy that can message the Conference back to the Majority.”

U.S. Congressman Devin Nunes (R-CA)

“With his background in broadcasting, Mike has the experience and talents needed to effectively communicate our conference’s goals and ideals. He brings a strong work ethic and will meet the challenges of the job with unquestionable integrity.”

It’s time for Mike Pence to have a high-profile leadership post. He was the driving force behind the House GOP oil party this summer. His conservative credentials are impeccable. He’s a man of integrity.

That’s all that needs to be said, isn’t it?

Technorati Tags: Mike Pence, Jeb Hensarling, John Boehner, Conservatism, GOP

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

First, let me say that I greatly admire John McCain’s heroism and his integrity. Nonetheless, it’s time to critique his campaign and candidacy. Monica Langley nails it with this WSJ article:

But in a strategy session of five McCain advisers, campaign manager Rick Davis, pollster Bill McInturff, strategist Steve Schmidt, ad-maker Fred Davis and strategist Greg Strimple, the back and forth revealed a fundamental problem. Fred Davis posed a question designed to give the campaign a central focus: “Why should we elect John McCain?” Tellingly, after several hours of debate, the five couldn’t reach a consensus.

“Without an overriding rationale, our campaign necessarily turned tactical rather than strategic,” one adviser recalls. “We focused more on why Obama should not be president, but much less on why McCain should be.”

This is the biggest reason why senators shouldn’t be our presidential nominee. Executives make decisions. They monitor things that affect the big picture. Senators don’t think that way. PERIOD. Legislators think in terms of nuts and bolts of sausage-making rather than paying attention to the big picture. (continue reading post »)

Michelle Malkin and Gateway Pundit have posted on the McCain aides trashing Sarah Palin story. I have a theory about what’s happening with that.

It’s my theory that these trashtalking Palin-bashers are the same people that kept trying to undermine McCain’s campaign by having Sen. McCain pick Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge. I further suspect, though it’s just a hunch, that some of these gutless cowards anonymous sources are former Romney staffers that migrated to McCain’s campaign. These gutless cowards should be discounted because they’re either RINO’s, sore losers or elitist snobs.

They should be part of the coming purge. After talking with several reputable bloggers, both here in Minnesota and across the nation, I’m more convinced than ever that our first priorities must include getting rid of the Beltway strategists who are afraid of their own shadow. They’re too prevalent. If we want a healthy, vibrant GOP, we need people who aren’t backstabbers like these gutless cowards trash-talkers. We need visionary leadership. We need leadership that listens first and acts second. (continue reading post »)

Sen. Obama’s statements on the coal industry are getting incredible amounts of attention. Salena Zito’s Forty-Fourth Estate blog has posted this statement from Mike Carey:

Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association issued the following statement in response to Obama’s remarks about the nation’s coal industry:

“Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America’s coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it.

These undisputed, audio-taped remarks, which include comments from Senator Obama like ‘I haven’t been some coal booster’ and ‘if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them’ are extraordinarily misguided.

It’s evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state’s voters.

Senator Obama has revealed himself to be nothing more than a short-sighted, inexperienced politician willing to say anything to get a vote. But today, the nation’s coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to ‘bankrupt’ our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.

In addition to providing an affordable, reliable source of low-cost electricity, domestic coal holds the key to our nation’s long-term energy security, a goal that cannot be overlooked during this time of international instability and economic uncertainty.

Few policy areas are more important to our economic future than energy issues. As voters head to the polls tomorrow, it is essential they remember that access to reliable, affordable, domestic energy supplies is essential to economic growth and stability.”

Mr. Carey’s statement wipes away one of the Obama campaign’s first spin tactics. Team Barry said that it’s suspicious that this news is just surfacing days before the election. Clear-thinking people couldn’t care less about the circumstances of the information’s release. They care that Sen. Obama’s coal policy is a disaster waiting to happen.

Here’s the paragraph that’s likely to hurt Sen. Obama’s campaign the most:

But today, the nation’s coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to ‘bankrupt’ our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.

This is a warning siren to people living in northern tier states who already are pinched with high energy prices, inflation and rising unemployment. People in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia will notice. Ditto with Colorado. People living in coal mining cities will wonder how this will affect their economies. If coal industries are severely hampered, the first that’ll happen is that they’ll lay off employees, thereby deepening the impending recession.

This policy, if implemented, will have a ripple effect on our national and local ecnomies. City governments will pay more for heating and electric at a time when state government revenues are shrinking. That’s significant because state government will likely cut LGA payments to cities. School districts will be similarly affected, as will small businesses and homeowners.

In other words, this information affects almost everybody.

I suspect that the Obama campaign is retreating from Obama’s January statements. I’m betting that they’re saying that his statements are either (a) being taken out of context or (b) not Sen. Obama’s current position on coal-based energy. If they’re saying that he didn’t really mean his SF comments, that begs the question of whether people can take anything Sen. Obama says seriously.

It’s impossible to take Sen. Obama’s statements out of context. They provide their own context. It’s quite possible, though, to not trust anything that Sen. Obama says. Like Mr. Carey says, Sen. Obama has proven that he’ll say anything to anyone to get votes.

That isn’t the type of change I can support. Instead, it’s the type of change that I’ll reject without giving it a second thought.

Technorati Tags: Mike Carey, Ohio Coal Association, Coal, Economy, Unemployment, Heating Bills, Obama, Election 2008

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

Salena Zito’s post is all over the comemnts Barack Obama made to the San Francisco Chronicle’s editorial board. Here’s a transcript of what Sen. Obama said in January, 2008:

What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.

That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.

The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.

That isn’t what Sen. Obama says now. These days, he’s saying that he’s “open to drilling on the OCS” (as long as it’s part of a comprehensive package). He’s also saying that he’s a proponent of clean coal technology. Here’s a short video that sums things up pretty well: (continue reading post »)