California Conservative

Glenn Reynolds posted a link to Scott Wilson’s article about what’s got the Democrats worried. Meanwhile, RealClearPolitics linked to Dan Balz’s article essentially declaring the GOP all but dead and buried. Let’s start with an examination of Balz’s article:

For the past few months, political analysts and demographers have been poring over the results of the 2008 election and comparing them with presidential results from the past two decades. From whatever angle of their approach, age, race, economic status, geography, they have come to a remarkably similar conclusion. Almost all indicators are pressing the Republicans into minority status.

Republicans are still capable of winning individual elections, but until they find a way to reverse, or at least minimize, these broader changes in the country, their chances of returning to majority status will be severely reduced.

Let’s compare that with what Mr. Wilson wrote:

After enjoying months of towering poll numbers, legislative victories and well-received foreign policy initiatives, the White House has become increasingly concerned that President Obama’s spending plans, which would require $9 trillion in government borrowing over the next decade, could become a political liability that defines the 2010 midterm elections.

The concern was reflected in the aggressive response from administration officials to criticism that money from Obama’s stimulus plan is arriving too slowly to help the languishing economy, as well as in the president’s public endorsement of “pay as you go” legislation, which would require Congress to make room for new non-discretionary spending with equivalent cuts to other parts of the budget. Yesterday, Obama also outlined billions of dollars in savings that would be used to pay for his health-care reform proposal. (more…)

This morning, the Washington Post is reporting that the DoJ is investigating a contractor with strong ties to Rep. Murtha:

The Department of Justice is probing a Pennsylvania contractor that has won millions in earmarks and contracts with the help of Rep. John Murtha, according to a new report.

The Washington Post reported Monday that federal investigators are looking into how Mountaintop Technologies got involved in distributing and monitoring local police grants.

The company has been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to distribute the money, according to the article, but has received at least $36 million worth of earmarks and military contracts over the past eight years, with the help of Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, and no competition. (more…)

This LA Times article says that the Obama administration isn’t thinking about bailing California out…yet. Earlier this morning, Rasmussen reported that 24 percent of American supported a bailout. This begs the question of whether the Obama based its decision on polling.

California needs to solve its financial crisis by itself and should not expect an emergency bailout from the White House, an array of Obama administration officials said Thursday, making clear they had no appetite to step in and provide financial assistance or loan guarantees.

“Look, we’re going to examine what we can do. What we need to do, however, is to treat states fairly and that means uniformly,” David Axelrod, senior advisor to the president, said in an interview. “Whatever we do for one state, there will be other states who also will want to do that. And there’s a limit to what the government can do.”

Hearing the Obama administration say that “there’s a limit to what the government can do” is a little bizarre. Hearing this administration say that is akin to hearing Ronald Reagan say that America is too prosperous and too free.

Here’s what Raasmussen’s polling reported:

Twenty-four percent (24%) of voters nationwide favor federal bailout funds for states like California that are encountering “serious financial problems.” The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 59% are opposed to such bailouts.

As for California specifically, again just 24% believe the federal government should guarantee the state’s loans. Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters nationwide oppose federal guarantees. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has said the state may request such guarantees.

I’m actually surprised that there’s that much support for bailing California out. I wouldn’t have been surprised if only 10 percent of the people polled supported bailouts.

I’m hard pressed to believe that the Obama administration’s decision wasn’t linked to their polling. The Obama administration hasn’t hesitated to bail others out. I’m thinking that the Obama administration didn’t want to upset California’s voters after they sent a shot across California’s politicians’ bow.

Technorati Tags: Bailouts, California, Schwarzenegger, RINO, Polling, President Obama, Deficits, Spending, Tea Parties, Elections

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

According to this article, Jon Huntsman was a Republican that the White House worried about. Before I’d believe that, I’d have to first believe that Cindy Sheehan will unseat Nancy Pelosi in next year’s Democratic primary. That won’t happen anytime soon.

Commentators pointed out that Mr Obama had cleverly removed a possible opponent from the 2012 election race. Mr Huntsman has won fans for his moderate politics and was the co-chairman of Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign last year. “I did not expect, as national co-chair of Senator McCain’s presidential campaign, to be called into action by the person who beat us,” said Mr Huntsman.

Thinking that Huntsman was a viable presidential candidate in 2012 is utter lunacy. Being a co-chairman to McCain’s campaign would’ve been a mark against him. Believing in the policies that McCain believed in would’ve been the disaster that sunk him. (more…)

This Strib article reads like a press release for another ‘moderate’ Republican group. Its thinking is as predictable as it is flawed. Here’s just one of its ad hominem attacks that’s as rooted in reality as Grimm’s Fairy Tales:

“Look for the Club for Growth to oppose Simmons…Castle and (Florida Gov. Charlie) Crist in favor of ideologues who can’t win,” the REP said. “Such political narcissism may make the purists feel good about themselves, but it is not a sound basis for building an electoral coalition that can win again in what is still a center-right country.”

First, it’s important to note that the GOP’s running of spineless moderates have contributed to blowouts the last 2 election cycles. It’s laughable to take their advice seriously, especially with that historical perspective. Second, it’s absurd to think that Charlie Crist is the GOP’s savior, especially considering Marco Rubio is a charismatic, eloquent true conservative whereas Crist might be to the left of Linc Chaffee. (more…)

Check out Sean Trende’s short post about the unexpected pickle Benedict Arlen finds himself in. Here’s my favorite line from Sean’s post:

So far, Specter’s best day as a Democrat was his first day.

I can’t tell you how much I enjoy reading that. I enjoy reading this, too:

Well, to start with, it increasingly looks as though Specter will have a serious primary opponent. While polling shows Specter is likely to win that matchup, it means he will (i) face the risk of losing, (ii) have to raise and spend money for the primary, and (iii) probably have to tack to the left to maintain his primary lead.

Prior to Sen Specter’s switch, conventional wisdom was that Toomey would defeat Specter in the primary, then lose to Josh Shapiro in the general election. That’s been turned on its head, especially after Joe Sestak worried out loud that Specter might not be a loyal Democrat following Specter’s announcement that he’d vote against EFCA and after voting against President Obama’s budget.

In announcing his intent to vote against EFCA, Sen. Specter alienated the unions, which play a major role in Democratic GOTV operations. In voting against President Obama’s first budget, he’s alienated the Nutroots’ activists. That’s not a great start to winning a general election. It’s an even worse way to win a hotly contested primary.

It couldn’t happen to a shiftier, less principled politician.

Technorati Tags: Polling, Arlen Specter, Joe Sestak, Josh Shapiro, Primary Elections, Democrats, Pat Toomey, Tom Ridge, Republicans, Election 2010

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

When I read the headline to this article, I nearly died laughing. Here’s the headline:

Specter says he jumped parties based on principle

Sen. Specter wouldn’t recognize a principle if it bit him on the backside. At least he’s honest about this:

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter said yesterday that his defection from the Republican Party was a matter of principle rather than opportunism, denied a report he had promised to be a “loyal Democrat,” and vowed to join filibusters against his new party when he believes it is wrong.

“There’s more than being reelected here; there’s the factor of principle,” Specter said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “The Republican Party has gone far to the right since I joined it under Reagan’s big tent…As the picture has evolved, I felt a lot more comfortable, as a matter of principle, with Democrats than Republicans.”

Sen. Specter is full of it. It’s insulting to hear him accuse the GOP of moving “far to the right” after watching the spending orgy that the DC GOP has engaged in over the last decade.

Only a liar who’s willing to talk down to his constituents and to this nation would make such an absurd statement.

What’s worse is that, now that he’s taking heat, Sen. Specter is telling us that he didn’t mean what he said at the press conference announcing his switch. Remember the part where he said he wouldn’t be denied re-election because the PA GOP would’ve defeated him in their primary.

What I’m betting is that Sen. Specter didn’t expect a genuine primary challenge within his new party. That’s what it’s looking like based on this:

Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), meanwhile, said on CNN’s State of the Union that he would not be dissuaded from considering a primary run because Obama, Gov. Rendell and other top Democrats were backing Specter.

“I’m kind of disappointed in the Democratic establishment in Washington, D.C.,” Sestak said. “What I need to know is what he’s running for. If he has the right answer, so be it. We move on…I’m not sure he’s a Democrat yet.”

I’d love seeing a bloodbath on the left, with Specter getting defeated and Sestak spending lots of money to defeat Sen. Specter.

For what it’s worth, I agree with Rep. Sestak that Sen. Specter is a Democrat. Personally, I think he’s the only member of the ‘Party of Arlen’, which is totally committed to getting Arlen re-elected. Party of Arlen doesn’t stand for anything substantive. In addition, Party of Arlen members don’t have to stand for anything substantive as long as they’re willing to help him win at any cost.

Technorati Tags: Arlen Specter, RINO, Democrats, Joe Sestak, Party Of Arlen, Benedict Arlen, Election 2010

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

Karl Rove’s weekly column in the WSJ is must reading for me, as I suspect it is for many people. This week’s column certainly doesn’t disappoint. It’s Mr. Rove’s belief that President Obama’s policy stumbles are creating an opportunity for revival within the GOP for 2010. I heartily concur. Here’s the opening paragraph of Mr. Rove’s column:

Something powerful is stirring in the land, and it may not be good news for President Barack Obama, his agenda or the Democratic Party. Mr. Obama said Tuesday night his budget moves America “from an era of borrow and spend” to “save and invest.” But people are realizing he would add $9.3 trillion to the national debt, doubling it in six years and nearly tripling it in 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). How can that be “save and invest”?

I suspect that the Rick Santelli-inspired Tea Party Movement has given people a rallying point. Families and small businesses are cutting back and prioritizing spending. Washington is on a spending spree. AIG-sized companies are the beneficiaries of Washington’s largess. Christopher Dodd is expressing outrage at the AIG bonuses that his legislation codified into law. People see Washington’s ineptitude, especially personified by Treasury Secretary Geithner.

Factor these things together and it’s easy to understand why “something powerful is stirring in the land.”

I further suspect that the stimulus bill was the initial catalyst. After Speaker Pelosi ramrodded the bill through the House and the bill was published online, bloggers started going through the bill line by line. What they found was a disgusting list of things. Most of the money was spent on President Obama’s political allies.

Mostly, though, President Obama is governing like the radical he is while trying to sound moderate in tone. Unlike the campaign, people aren’t buying into President Obama’s schtick. (more…)

This Michael Barone post suggests that there’s a momentum shift happening in the electorate. Here’s what Mr. Barone is reporting:

Yesterday I noted that Republicans are doing better in polls on the generic ballot question—which party’s candidate would you vote for in congressional races—better, Scott Rasmussen tells me, in his polls than they have done since January 2004. Now I see that Republican candidates lead in Bill Ballenger’s Inside Michigan Politics poll for governor of Michigan. This is at least a little startling. Barack Obama carried Michigan 57-41 percent and in 2006 Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm, ineligible to run in 2010, won her second term in 2006 by a margin of 56-42 percent and Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow was reelected by a margin of 57-41 percent: a pretty clear pattern. But now Democratic Lt. Gov. John Cherry seems to be running behind Republicans like Attorney General Mike Cox and Rep. Pete Hoekstra—with none of the three particularly well known to most Michigan voters.

(more…)

According to this AP article, President Obama’s legacy might well have already been written. It looks like we’ll experience trillion dollar deficits for the next decade:

The Congressional Budget Office figures, obtained by The Associated Press Friday, predict Obama’s budget will produce $9.3 trillion worth of red ink over 2010-2019. That’s $2.3 trillion worse than the White House predicted in its budget.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama’s policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

If the CBO’s numbers are accurate, President Obama will likely become the first president to run trillion dollar deficits during his entire time in office. Unfortunately, that’s only the tip of a Titanic-sinking sized iceberg. Rep. Michele Bachmann rightly points out in this Pi-Press op-ed that already-out-of-control spending is accelerating:

Washington is on a dangerous trend of excessive spending. In the past two months, Congress has already spent over $1.5 trillion of the American taxpayer’s money, and the release of President Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget is a good indicator that change is not imminent. (more…)