On one side – the liberal or Massachusetts Moderate – we have Mitt Romney.  On the other side, we have the rest trying to pit themselves as the poster child for conservatism (and the word “conservative” seems to be open to debate and interpretation this year as well).

I think this GOP primary is shaping up to be something more though, something that the Democratic Party had to go through in 2008 – Old Guard vs New Guard or better yet Old Establishment vs New Establishment.

Let me define “establishment” in these terms for our purposes here as those that are in a position of power within the party structure.

This thought first came to me awhile ago, but I was reminded about it and made more of a connection when John McCain endorsed Mitt Romney.  This endorsement was really no surprise and in fact, I wrote a piece detailing that Mittens was actually McCain Version 2012.

McCain’s endorsement coupled with the endorsement of former President George HW Bush and the less than tacit snubbing of TX Gov. Rick Perry there is a power struggle within the GOP (carried out almost daily on Fox News anytime Karl Rove opens his mouth).  In effect, it’s the Bush wing vs. all challengers to the Bush legacy.

We saw the same thing playing out in 2008 and since – the Clintons vs all challengers to the Clinton legacy.

As former Presidents, both Clinton and the Bushes, had the opportunity to place their supporters and loyalists in positions within their respective parties.  Both the Clintons and the Bushes continued to shape their parties until someone came along to knock them off the proverbial hill.  In the Clintons’ case, it was Barack Obama’s hostile takeover of the Democratic Party and when President Obama leaves office, his loyalists will control the Democratic Party until someone unseats the Obamaites’ chosen successor(s).  Right now, Obamaites have already fanned out across the country to lay the ground work to stay in power within the Democratic Party.  Mayor Tiny Dancer in Chicago is a prime example of this, much like how Clintonites Bill Richardson ran for governor, Hilary ran for Senate, etc.

Likewise, we see this same situation taking place during the GOP primary.  The Bushes, with their preferred candidate John McCain of 2008, have tried to crown their successor through Mitt Romney.  Mittens will of course promote his people into positions of power, but those people will be aligned with the Bush wing.

Hence, we see one of the roots of the conservative vs moderate/liberal problem within the GOP just like we saw the battle between the center-left vs far left in the 2008 Democratic primary.  The non-Mitt candidates represent varying different variations of conservatism different than George W Bush “conservatism”.  We have Reagan Republicans, Libertarian Republicans, and Clinton Era Republicans vs Bush Republicans.

I know I am working in grand generalizations here, but it’s a working thesis.  I would ask you to pay attention to who the pundits and commentators are talking up or down.  Right now, it seems Mittens is largely getting pass from the conservative intelligentsia while these same critics are pointing out how Candidate X or Candidate Y doesn’t have the money, doesn’t appeal enough to independents, didn’t make the correct speech, etc.

We are left with a power struggle for the GOP that could ultimately result in Obama’s re-election.

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

• Romney has held consistent conservative values for years now.  I would hope we welcome solid converts to the movement, right?
• Romney was endorsed by numerous editors here at RedState in 2008, and hasn’t taken a vote since then…what has changed since that time?
• Romney has a laudable and robust conservative fiscal plan and has promised to repeal Obamacare.  Is that insufficient for you?
• He’s articulate, holds his own in debates and has the ability to win over moderates and even liberals who are disillusioned with Obama.  That’s a good thing right?

Ahh but the past is prologue.  Romney’s list of policy stance flip-flops are well documented and will not be revisited here other than to point you in the direction of this blog post which lays out a very nice portrait of Mitt Romney’s past.

We have two people to fight against this election cycle in my opinion – President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Once again it’s primary season and we have splintered off into our separate corners to battle each other’s preferred candidate.  However, the divisiveness between people and even my friends is wearing on me.  Early on, I saw support then derision of Michele Bachmann as she quickly rose and fell in the polls.  Rick Perry was next as he rose and fell in the polls following the pattern of praise/scorn.  Then it was Herman Cain’s turn for support then attacks from Republicans and conservatives as he rose and fell in the polls.  Now, we are seeing Newt rise in the polls and praise is already starting to turn to attacks on his past. Who will be next?  Who remains?

Mitt Romney.

I’m getting real tired of watching all of us trash one another’s preferred candidates – which is fine in itself – but we fail to highlight how our preferred candidate is better than Mitt Romney and ultimately, better than Barack Obama.

Romney is a candidate that cannot and will not energize the base of the Republican party.  “Not Obama” will not be enough to get Romney elected as President.  Romney is the bland, safe, “establishment” candidate who makes the squishy Beltway types and Blue State Republicans (I’m thinking Chicago Republican types like here in my home state) comfortable enough to say they are Republican at their liberal friends’ parties.  We need the candidate with whom the liberals are most uncomfortable.  We must have someone that can stand up on stage and deliver conservative principles and call out Obama for the last 3 years of absolute failure instead of worrying about the other side asking which vintage of Romney we are getting – 1994, 2002, 2008 or 2011.  Romney is not and should not be our candidate.

Personally, I don’t care who endorsed who in 2008.  I don’t even care about who is most popular in whatever state.  Give me the person that will destroy Obama in a debate and annihilate Obama at the ballot box.

We say “anyone but Romney” but yet our failure to go after him with the same veracity we do about the other candidates in the field has left Romney still at the top or near the top in polls.

Don’t get me wrong.  Promote your preferred candidate but remember to go after the guy we want our candidate to beat FIRST before he/she gets a chance at defeating President Obama!  I just hope we haven’t done so much damage ripping on the other candidates that Romney squeaks by and seals the nomination.

Thanks for sticking around for my rant.  I feel better now all that’s off my chest.

1. Ron Paul wins the online straw poll

2. Mitt Romney wins the walk-in straw poll.

3. The Illinois GOP loses again.

I have long detailed the failures of the Illinois GOP but the straw poll just seems to keep that losing streak alive.

Regarding the online poll, are we surprised that Ron Paul would win?  I’m not.  The Paulites have a long tradition of stuffing the ballot box and here we have yet another example.  Seriously Illinois GOP?  An online straw poll?  Did they expect different results?  The straw poll couldn’t have been solely about raising money since the buy-in to the straw poll was set so low so I guess we should chalk it up to incompetence.

Regarding the walk-in straw poll, to my knowledge most of the polling stations were in northern Illinois which accounts for Romney getting the most votes at 35% but Cain, despite the ongoing Politico crap shoot, came in with 29% of the vote.

So why is this straw poll a failure for the Illinois GOP?  Outside the Ron Paul ballot stuffing, it was a failure because the Illinois GOP continues to list like a sinking ship as it slowly takes on water before its inevitable demise.

The Illinois GOP continues to put their stock in “activism” through phone calls via Illinois Victory and doing PR stunts like straw polling.  It’s great, grand and wonderful that Illinois Victory “identified” the most voters than any other state that ran similar programs or that more people voted in the the Illinois GOP straw poll than other large electoral college voting states that conducted their own straw polls.  But what did it accomplish other than a news headline and possibly a bragging point for not one, but two candidates?  Isn’t one of the goals of a straw poll to find one winner?

On November 28th in Illinois, the filing period for petitions to be Precinct Committeman.  Has the Illinois GOP tried to recruit people?  No.  I have not heard a single word from IL GOP Chair Pat Brady – publicly – about Precinct Committeemen.  Nothing.  In fact, when I met with Pat Brady at the Illinois State Fair GOP Day, he stated to the group of Tea Party leaders present that he believed that the PC doing GOTV is going to the wayside because of online outlets such as Twitter and Facebook.

Nothing beats boots on the ground.  Nothing. You can Twitter and Facebook all day long and it either gets lost in the noise or your message doesn’t reach a large enough audience.  This “strategy” also relies on everyone you are trying to contact being a member of some sort of online community.

But everyone does physically live in a real world community and therefore they can be reached by the PC knocking on their door to inform them about a candidate and/or to remind them to vote.  The Illinois GOP doesn’t seem to want or care about informing voters or GOTV, just identifying them.  The Illinois GOP strategy of voter ID can be summed up like this:

That’s their idea of getting people to vote.  Furthermore it’s apparent that the Illinois GOP leadership thinks that we will turn into Chris Farley when PCs do GOTV…

I have three stories of successful GOTV campaigns.  The candidate didn’t always win, but if this effort was multiplied across Illinois and within other states we could make a serious difference.

1.  Bill Brady (R) vs Pat Quinn (D) Illinois Governor race 2010.  Bill Brady lost by just shy of 20,000 votes.  In my county, my girlfriend and just a handful of others walked door to door in each precinct for Brady and to GOTV.  The result?  Our county had a 58% turnout in an off year election with Brady winning by the second largest percentage than any county in the entire state.

2.  Judge Doug Jarman.  Running for Circuit Judge against a candidate who was related to and shared the same last name as the long serving retiring incumbent which equaled strong name ID. Jarman did not have as strong name ID as his opponent. We used Illinois Victory to try GOTV via phone calls but most callers would not give us a hard answer as to which judge candidate they preferred (a serious flaw within the Illinois Victory strategy) and actually seemed a bit insulted we were asking (a huge flaw in the Illinois Victory strategy).  So we went door to door distributing literature and reminding people to vote.  We walked our city’s Halloween parade and we were able to distribute over 3500 pieces of literature for Judge Jarman.  The results? Judge Jarman won his 9 county election with our county returning a considerable higher percentage of votes for him than any of the 9 counties in his circuit.

3.  My city council election.  I had some name ID because of our Tea Party efforts in town, but I was not running and did not run as the “Tea Party candidate”.  I ran solely on the issues.  Our city council is an at-large bid so GOTV was important to success.  My girlfriend (also doubling as my beautiful campaign manager) led the GOTV effort for my election as I was tight for time because I was doing my student teaching at the same time as running for office.  We sat down and identified which precincts had turned out the largest number of voters the last city council elections and we targeted those precincts with our door to door campaign.  The result?   I won and I saw first hand the election result difference between the precincts we walked versus the precincts we didn’t.  GOTV was singlehandedly the deciding factor in my victory.

Why the Illinois GOP continues to waste time with PR stunts as straw polling instead of recruiting PCs so that we have our ground game in place is beyond me.  Perhaps the Illinois GOP is stuck in a loser mentality and needs a shake-up at the top.  Or perhaps we should make sure we are on the ballot to be Precinct Committeemen so we can snatch victory from the grasp of  defeat because of the Illinois GOP leadership.

If you live in Illinois, November 28th – December 5th is the filing period for Precinct Committeemen.  If you live out of Illinois, get on the ballot to be a Precinct Committeeman!

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

In the August 7th Chicago Tribune, Clarence Page asks the question “Is the tea party over?‘.  Towards the end of his article, he quotes Edmond Burke – father of conservatism – to help try to prove his argument.  I have to laugh at the left these days quoting Reagan and Burke.  The left thinks quoting Reagan and Burke to conservatives is like using a crucifix to ward off vampires.  If that’s how the left wants to play it, we’ll examine a few quotes of Burke to repudiate Mr. Page’s arguments.

Disappointment

Page argues that the Tea Party and Obama share the same 40% disapproval rating.  Then why is it that the Tea Party is over, but yet the left believes Obama will be re-elected?  Same disapproval rating, but different results?  Huh?

“Obama’s, whose approvals slid to a new low of 40 percent in another recent poll, knows how it feels to disappoint the people who sent you to Washington. Now the tea party does too.”

What would Burke say about Mr. Page’s claims?

“Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intending to go beyond promise, it costs nothing.”

Divisiveness

Page writes:

The tea party movement grew out of conservatives’ frustration with a Washington they saw as taxing and spending too much — by both parties. Republican leadership, still shaken from 2006 election losses, welcomed the new energy that led to a comeback in the 2010 midterm elections. But fissures in the uneasy alliance between the teas and the party establishment showed themselves.

As House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio pushed to strike a deal to increase the nation’s borrowing authority, some of the tea party faction argued whether the debt ceiling should be raised at all. The Founding Fathers would have quaked.

These issues undoubtedly will be put to the voters in next year’s presidential races, reviving divisions between the Grand Old Party’s conservative purists and the pragmatists who want a candidate who appeals to independent swing voters. Tea party freshmen faced a more conservative electorate in the 2010 midterms than the larger turnout that’s expected in a presidential year. Yet they continue to push further right. Let the voters decide.

Page is somewhat right here.  There is a divisiveness in the Republican party because of the Tea Party.  The party establishment did love the rejuvenated base that sent a majority Republican House back to Washington in 2010.  However, it was that same party establishment who thought that once they got their guys and gals elected could just go along their merry way without any regard to the reasons they were put there in the first place – fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free-market principles.

Instead, the party establishment began their same political games.  Instead of the party establishment standing by Cut, Cap, and Balance and forcing the Democrats to come up with something resembling a plan, the party establishment played budget tricks to show “cuts” where none existed or those “cuts” were pushed off to the distant future for some other Congress and President to worry about.

Besides, Mr. Page argues against himself here.  If the Tea Party is over, then what was Speaker Boehner and other Republicans so scared of?  Why did Harry Reid, John Kerry, the MSM, et al. slamming the Tea Party as terrorists, etc.?  How can a movement be so influential as to effect policy in Washington last weekend but yet “be over” the next weekend?  Which is it liberals?  Is the Tea Party a force to be reckoned with in politics or have they “peaked” as Mr. Page suggests?  But then again, when was the last time liberals cared about double standards or contradictions?

What would Burke say about Mr. Page’s argument?

“Tyrants seldom want pretexts.”

Dangerous Disregard

Page writes:

Even fellow conservatives are beginning to speak out against the frightening radical ax tea party folks want to swing at government spending. “Don’t call them conservatives,” fumed conservative Hal Gordon, who wrote speeches for the Ronald Reagan White House and for Colin Powell, in a blog post. “Call them Banana Republicans if you like — or Republicans-Gone-Bananas.”

We can play the “one conservative says” game all day long.  Why is it so wrong to Mr. Page and Hal Gordon that we control spending?  The debt deal did two things.  First, it guaranteed our bond rating would get downgraded.  Second and most importantly, the debt deal forced Republicans to concede that economic growth can only be achieved through government spending. Keynesians of the world celebrated.  As a result, Congress raised the debt ceiling by the largest amount ever in US history.

The debt deal was dynamically opposed to the beliefs of the Tea Party – fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free-market principles.  The absolute horror of it all!  That government should live within its means!  Oh the humanity!

In reality and much to the chagrin of the left, the disappointment comes from the Democrats refusing for nearly 3 years running to pass a budget, and the fact that we have no hope and no change in our pockets.  The divisiveness comes from the Democrats refusal to admit their $787 million stimulus package and $6.3 trillion QE1 and QE2 were miserable failures resulting in a 9.1% jobless rate and a downgrade of our bond rating.  The dangerous disregard comes from the Democrats’ reckless spending via Obamacare, addition of another war, and an absolute commitment to higher taxes to fund their runaway spending and government programs.  Meanwhile, we are bankrupting our children, and putting not only our economy in jeopardy, but also the entire world economy at jeopardy.  Did we not learn our lessons from 1925 until WWII?

I just find it humorous how last weekend the Tea Party was so powerful and was the reason there was gridlock over a debt deal, but this weekend, the Tea Party has peaked and over.  Amazing how the liberal mind works.

What would Burke say about Mr. Page and the Left’s assertions?

Circumstances give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing color and discriminating effect. The circumstances are what render every civil and political scheme beneficial or noxious to mankind.

We simply cannot afford to continue down the noxious path we have all been led down.  We all were guilty of fiddling while Rome burned, but now that some of us have awaken from our stupor and are manning the water buckets, we are told that the Tea Party is the problem not the solution.

The Tea Party is not over; it has not peaked – the left (and some Republicans) only wishes it had as we head into another election cycle.

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

Republican Party and Democrat Party leaders, and incumbent U.S. House and Senate incumbents, as well as state legislators and governors, have expressed serious concern regarding the surge in attendance by grass roots “tea partiers” and “9.12-er’s” and other members of grass roots conservative organizations at their respective local Republican Party committee meetings. “It seems our worst fears have become realized,” said one long-time incumbent Republican U.S. House member, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It looks like these wing nuts have figured out what we’ve been neglecting to say to them: that the people can take over the Republican Party if they just spend a little bit of time and effort, united, participating in party politics.”

And this is a real story outlining the fear of the Tea Party within the Republican Party in the present:

“They can exist as long as activists control the Republican party nominating process,” says Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia. “Under our system many districts are controlled by one party. All you need to do is elect your candidate in the nominating primary and you’ve got the seat.”

In the past, we have had far too many empty precincts within the GOP across the country.

But that can change….

At 3pm on August 5th, I picked up my new precinct maps (which also double as County Board maps via districts consisting of various precincts).  I called a week after our County Board voted on the remap of the county to request they print up maps for me – at little cost to me.  It took some time for the County Clerk to fulfill my request as our county hadn’t redistricted in 20 years.  Yes, they got away with it 10 years ago because nobody objected to the maps unredistricted 10 years ago.  As a result, the county was left with some precincts having 1300 voters and others with just 358 voters.

Why would I need the maps?  Did the County Clerk and the County Board draw something wrong?  Was there politics at play with the county redistricting?  Keep reading…

With the census, there has been a certain fixation on the redrawing of state and federal election districts and rightfully so.  The Democratic Party in Illinois redrew the lines to reverse the 2010 elections while in Texas, the GOP redrew districts to marginalize the Democratic Party.  But almost no focus has been present on the redrawing of County Board and Precinct Committeeman districts.

I know. Local politics is soooooo boring.  Sure, local politics doesn’t have the pizazz of someone tweeting their junk or the gravity of raising a debt ceiling, but both County Board and Precincts are vitally important for two different reasons but yet the same two reasons – getting conservatives elected.

Many County Boards are a partisan affair.  Republican and Democrat.  If your County Board is like ours, there are times when I can’t tell where a Republican starts and a Democrat ends.  With the census, your county board districts should have been redrawn.  If they weren’t, file an objection or your county’s precincts will look like my county’s has the last 10 years.  The County Board is an often overlooked governmental body that has the power to tax your property amongst other powers depending on your state. You should be recruiting County Board candidates to challenge those who do not practice conservative values at the local government level.  For whatever reason, political party and ideological allegiances tend to diminish the further down the government scale you go.  Conservatives in positions of local government power are vitally important to you as tax payers and many times, those same local government positions are spring boards into higher office – so you are not only recruiting conservative office holders now, but also for the future!

Back to my 37 freshly minted precinct maps.  As you well know, taking back the party (either one) is one of the most important jobs we have going into the next election and the precinct committeeman position is the easiest way to taking back our party.

With my 37 precinct maps, I plan on taking my old Voter Vault lists consisting of GOP primary voters addresses and superimposing the addresses relative to the new precincts to find out where my GOP primary voters are in the new districts.  In some precincts, we – our Tea Party – have already recruited prospective precinct committeemen.  In other precincts, we must find people to run for precinct committeemen, which our Voter Vault list will also help us locate.  See how being involved in the party can work for you??

The fear that our respected politicos and elected officials have will become reality, but it won’t happen unless YOU do it.  In some precincts, we will have challengers to long time local GOP people who have connections with the party seemingly going back to the beginning of time.  In others, we will have challengers to friends.  Because of the redistricting of precincts, I myself may have to run against a friend to maintain claim to my elected precinct committeeman status.  It won’t be pretty, but it is necessary.

But don’t recruit just any conservative as a warm body to hold a position with the party.  It goes deeper than that.  We have too many of those type of conservatives and regular precinct committeemen now who get elected (or appointed) and do nothing more than show up to a monthly meeting to say they “did something” like some the local GOP meetings are some kind of “Democrat-haters Club” where they tell anti-Obama jokes, then go home.

We need to recruit those that are willing, – no, anxious – to walk precincts on behalf of candidates.  We need people who will man phone banks.  We need people who will walk in parades, man county fair booths, volunteer to help fundraise for the local party, and just be there when the party needs someone to help.

Recruit local candidates for local government.  Recruit conservatives who will work as precinct committeemen.  There are Tea Parties in your county or city who are willing to help you recruit people and put their own people up to take over the local parties.  Once you have elected conservative precinct committeemen, they then can vote who the Chairman of the county party will be.  Is your county chairman a yes-man or yes-woman for the party establishment?  You can help sever those ties.  When the establishment’s minions are gone, who is left for them to listen to?  You.

” the most destructive posse of misguided “patriots” we’ve seen in recent memory.”

Teri O’Brien, conservative talk-show host/blogger, states at Illinois Review that the Tea Party is President Obama’s new BFF (Best Friends Forever) and is already laying the blame for Obama’s re-election at the feet of the Tea Party as well:

I pray that my Tea Party friends will come to their senses. Otherwise, I hope that the warm feeling of self-righteous satisfaction and certitude that they were absolutely right makes them feel better on January 20, 2013 when the democrats are celebrating the re-election of the Anointed One.

Now the Right joins the Left in hating on the Tea Party whereas the Right just loved the Tea Party darlings going into November 2010.  The Republicans loved the Tea Party as the Left and the Democrats were busy trying to marginalize, condemn, and destroy the conservative movement.

To date, Tea Partiers have been accused of being racist, nazis, homophobes, bigots, amongst other names and now….saboteurs – by the Republican party!

Funny how it is great, grand and wonderful when the Tea Party went after the Democrats and President Obama but when they turned their sights on lack-luster Republicans, oh well, that is a whole different story!  When Mike Lee won the primary, the Tea Party was blamed for turning Utah’s Senate seat over to the Democrats (Mike Lee won).  Conservatives loved it when the Tea Party helped push Governor Charlie Crist out of the Florida Senate race in favor of Marco Rubio.  However, despite getting conservatives elected to the Senate and the House, it was the Tea Party’s fault because Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell lost thereby losing an opportunity to win the US Senate away from Harry Reid and his merry band of thieves.

Now, when the Tea Party stands firm and refuses to play along with politics as usual in the DC circles, it is once again our fault that Speaker Boehner is in the position he is in.  It is our fault that President Obama and the Democrats refuse to pass Speaker Boehner’s debt bill because it is too conservative and many Tea Partiers keep pushing for Cut, Cap, and Balance.

But, is it our fault Speaker Boehner didn’t stop with Cut, Cap, and Balance and force President Obama and Harry Reid to actually come up with a debt plan?  What’s wrong with “take it or leave it”?  If the Senate refused to act on CCB, it’s their fault then, not the GOP or the Tea Party.  Is it our fault that the GOP leadership has yet to force the issue regarding the 815+ days since an ACTUAL BUDGET WAS PASSED?!

One would figure that the Tea Party, being on the scene now for just over 2 years, would finally be understood.  Instead, we can add “ideological purists” to our list of accusations toward the Tea Party.  Instead, we get lectured on what a “true conservative is”.  Instead, we get the blame.  I think the GOP is finding out what the Libertarians found out going into the last election cycle, we stand for more than just “a third way” or as an effort to destroy the 2 party system as we know it.  Libertarians that I have run into don’t like the Tea Party either because they feel they are nothing more than a wing of the GOP – a claim also leveled by the Democrats and the Left.  Yet now, we are Obama’s BFF and the GOP is tired of bowing to the 87 freshmen House members who just seem so unwilling to compromise.  Politics versus substance.

In a conversation with a friend of mine yesterday, he mentioned that the Tea Party is fantastic because they are not ideological purists as most think, but they value substance over politics.  Not ideological substance mind you, substance in the form of doing what you promised and fixing the problems we elected you to fix.  A great point.  The Beltway Boys and Girls think that the Tea Party seeks ideological purity.  While there is a fixation on fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free-market principles that the Tea Party stands for, it is more about doing what is right for our country – politics be damned.

This is what I believe scares both Democrats, Republicans, and their soap-box writers/pundits/bloggers/hosts.  We’ve heard everything Washington has said before, enough with the rhetoric, just do the job we elected you to do.  We are tired of political games.  Right the ship.  Control your spending.  Get the economy rolling again. Even now 2 1/2 years later, GOP still whither in the presence of Obama and his teleprompter or Harry Reid’s commanding (sarcasm) 53 seat vote majority in the US Senate.  Perhaps it is Mitch McConnell that should be taken to task for not keeping all his 47 Republican Senators in check?  But no, it’s those rascally Tea Party Senators like Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, and Marco Rubio who are misguided patriots dedicated to destroying what is left of our Republic.

We are tired of hearing that “just vote for it now, we’ll do a commission or promise to vote on something big later”.  In other words, we are tired of hearing (and tired of hearing the phrase itself) “kick the can down the road”.  No more political games of who will look the best and how it will effect the elections.  It’s that mentality that has gotten us into this mess we are in.  We’re tired of commissions.  We’re tired of empty promises.  We’re tired of budget gimmicks showing cuts where there are none.  We are tired of reform disguised as regulation or tax increases.  The horror of it all!

How much can we spend to court the elderly vote?  How much can we spend to court the minority vote?  How much can we spend to court the soccer-mom vote?  How much can we spend to court the __________ vote?  Meanwhile, our debt continues to rise, and our budget deficit (actually a guesstimate because there has been no written budget in over 2 years) continues to rise, and our country continues down the path to insolvency at a 9.2% jobless rate.

But hey, it’s all the 2 year old Tea Party’s fault for decades of deficit spending.  I guess somebody has to be the goat; this time around it’s the Tea Party.  Soon though, election time is around the corner and the GOP will be coming back to ask for the Tea Party’s help once again to defeat Obama and his gang.

Crossposted at Downstate Illinois Advocate

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

So true. But another quote of his I believe can be twisted in my own certain way to prove a point.

Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

Now we are not dealing with Russia, but out prospects of hitting the debt ceiling on August 2nd, and there not being a “deal” on how to avoid this car wreck.  So channeling the spirit of Churchill, I see the debt ceiling crisis as:

A series of complex games consisting of Chicken, Russian Roulette and Three Card Monte.

First, DC is playing a game of chicken.  The federal government has always raised the debt ceiling and then proceeded to keep on spending until DC had to raise it again. President Obama is seriously looking at a financial crisis in the face.  He sure doesn’t want to go down the President who defaulted on our commitments.  As I was watching the political news shows, only now have the pundits started stating that foreign governments would get paid before our own citizens – especially those on social security – should the debt ceiling be reached.  Not good for a President who would like to be re-elected.

Second, DC is playing a game of Russian Roulette.  Who will pull the trigger and find the bullet?  As each side jockeys for position, the game gets more and more dangerous.  There is almost too much on the line 10 days out from the deadline for either side to cave or give an ounce of credit to the other side.  The fact that the pundits are talking about the “Biden talks” shows that the GOP has failed to get ahead of this story.  I blame Speaker Boehner and especially Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.  Failures in leadership. Should the GOP keep the House, Boehner should be replaced.  Should the GOP take the Senate, McConnell needs to be replaced.  I’m a Republican, but for God’s sake, if I was in DC there is not enough kool-aid for me to drink that would bring me to vote either of these gentlemen back into leadership positions.

Third, DC is playing a game of Three Card Monte.  It has been over 800 days since Washington has had a budget.  You heard it right.  The media has not been talking about it, conservative pundits and bloggers have been, but not the media.  The federal government has not been operating under a budget framework.  They just spend as they go.  So Obama and Congress use make-believe numbers to create imaginary spending bills with REAL consequences.  The result is the largest “budget” deficit ever and the largest national debt ever.

The fact that Boehner walked out of negotiations today really made the President mad.  Actually, I think Speaker Boehner not returning the President’s phone calls REALLY made him mad.  The GOP will get the blame for failing to come up with yet ANOTHER plan to avoid the car wreck of default we talked about earlier.  Meanwhile, Obama and the Democrats have yet to put forth a plan of their own (or an actual budget on paper).  When Obama walked out on negotiations last week, it was again the GOP’s fault. The media story line continues.

Personally, I feel that there was possibly even a fourth game being played – Politics.  The Cut, Cap, and Balance plan was a way to quell the uproar from the Tea Party and other conservatives including independents.  This way, the GOP can come back and say “we tried it your way, it didn’t work, so now we have to do it our way – the Mitch McConnell way”.  At the same time, I believe Cut, Cap, and Balance allowed the GOP to split the conservative and independent uproar between those that supported that plan and those that don’t want the debt ceiling raised – period.

The game of Politics is a dangerous one to play as well.  If the GOP capitulates and allows a deal through 2013, then two things will have happened.  First, the GOP will have given Obama cover until after the 2012 elections so the Presidential elections will be about ideological issues of Left vs Right instead of big overspending government vs responsible small government.  Second, the GOP will have passed on forcing Obama to cough up an actual budget thereby taking arguments out of the GOP Presidential field against Obama.  It’s hard to argue abstract imaginary budgets versus actual written budget.  Finally, the GOP capitulating will allow President Obama to show that he can lead whereas he has been drifting like a leaf in the wind since he lost his super-majority yes-men Congress.

The political pundits are already on TV this evening screaming about how the sky is falling.  Either we deal with the debt crisis now, or we can deal with it later.  One way or another we MUST deal with it at one point or another.  The debt crisis is not going to go away if Obama and Congress ignore it and keep spending like there is no tomorrow.  Washington needs to bite the bullet now and get it done with.

Wicked, dangerous games they play.  And in the end if our elected officials cannot fix the debt problem, who loses?  You and I.  Morning in America will have seen the sunset once and for all.

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

President Obama wants to be seen as a spender (to his leftist friends) and a cutter (to the independents that he has lost approval ratings to) at the same time.  Obama uses his class warfare arguments of soaking the rich to save the Democrats’ pet programs.  Obama threatens to stop Social Security checks for the elderly.  The US Tax Cheat-in-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has basically said the sky will fall if the debt limit is not raised.

Republicans on the other hand are using their own tactics.  Instead of class warfare and doomsday scenarios, they are using shell games and calling them cuts in the budget.  We learned our lesson the first time around when Speaker Boehner promised $100 billion in cuts, but fell well short, while in fact cutting only about $320 million dollars.  So we’ve been down that road before.  Only this time, Boehner has Rep. Eric Cantor taking fire for him from the Democrats and their media allies while seemingly throwing Rep. Paul Ryan and his plan on the trash heap.

To say Washington spends like drunken sailors is an insult to drunken sailors.  The fact is Washington has no intention of cutting the budget.  Both sides are basically arguing about how to rearrange the numbers to make it look like they are cutting the budget and jockeying for position on who will take credit for the “cuts”.

Both sides know they have created 2 monsters they cannot stop. Unfortunately, these two monsters will not be fighting each other like Godzilla and Mothra in another fantastic English dubbed movie.  Instead, Washington needs to feed the two monsters’ mouths, but they have run out of food – the debt ceiling (and our tax dollars, but that hasn’t stopped them from printing more…).

One monster Washington created is the growth of government itself, and that’s besides any argument about regulation.  I’m merely talking about spending.  Washington seems to never stop coming up with some new government program or some kind of “stimulus” package claiming “we must spend our way out of the recession”.  I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but that didn’t work under Herbert Hoover and it didn’t work under FDR (my apologies to Maynard Keynes’ ghost).

The other monster Washington has created is the entitlement society.  Social Security, Medicare, you can go down the list.  We have become a nation that is dependent on the government for better or worse.  Washington has spent trillions of dollars on the War on Poverty.  Washington has tried to “cut fraud and waste” out of Medicare (but will still pay for penis pumps).  Washington has even gone so far to create a new entitlement of Obamacare.  It seems now there is a “right” to everything from high-speed internet to owning a house.  And most of the time, those “rights” are an extension of some government program that Washington has no money to fund the programs.

As I stated above, both monsters are fed by the national debt and the debt ceiling is the bottom of the feed trough.  Like it or not, our government has run out of money.  Our national debt is now approaching 100% (and more) of our entire country’s GDP.  Despite President Obama saying we are not Greece, who has a similar problem; we are heading in that direction – fast.  Greece is a democratic socialist country who has a very generous entitlement system.  Greece’s entitlement program and its government spending helped topple that country’s economy.  To think we aren’t heading that direction is pure folly.

So what is left for Washington to do?  The Democrats want to raise taxes and make symbolic cuts.  The Republicans just want to make symbolic cuts.  But why?  Because they know if they go after the sacred cows of entitlements, the party that gets the credit for doing so is toast in the next election.  Cutting government is popular, but everyone wants smaller government until Washington cuts a program they like.

You’re probably saying to yourself “great, then we’re screwed”.  No we are not.  Instead of making false cuts or false cuts coupled with tax increases, reject the debt ceiling raise out right.  Let’s have the argument now, consequences to electoral politics be damned.  Besides, Erick Erickson on his radio show the other night put it out there correctly.  Erickson stated that the American people hate Congress, but they always give credit to the President for good times and bad.  If government shuts down that it won’t be Congress’ fault; it’ll be President Obama’s fault.  Starve the monsters to calm the beasts whether the beasts like it or not.

While we are on the subject of the national debt, has nobody noticed how much President Obama has added to the national debt in only 2 1/2 years?  Under President George W Bush’s 8 years, the national debt rose from $5.727 trillion to $10.626 trillion (1/20/2001 – 1/20/2009).  Under President Obama, the national debt has risen from $10.626 trillion to $14.342 trillion (1/20/2009 – 7/15/2011 at 6:20pm).  +++By the way, if you notice, that is above the supposed debt cap of $14.3 trillion and the world did not end, the sky did not fall, and life went on+++

The difference in the rise in national debt between President George W and Obama is just $1.283 trillion and the projected budget deficit for this year?  $1.5 trillion.  If the US loses a jet or two pursuing Obama’s war in Libya, Obama will make up that gap pretty quick.  By my calculations, by this time next year President Obama will have exceeded George W Bush’s additions to the national debt by 5 1/2 years.  Not something that I’m sure President Obama wants to deal with during an election year, which I am certain is a major driver behind these current debt ceiling negotiations.

So excuse me for being cynical regarding this whole debt ceiling negotiation thing, but I’ve heard this all before like when President Obama promised to “cut the budget” with a mere $100 million in supposed cuts to various Cabinet budgets.  President Obama was even quoted as saying

“We also have a deficit – a confidence gap – when it comes to the American people,” he told reporters. “And we’ve got to earn their trust.”

No duh.

Boehner is no different and we outlined his ridiculous math regarding budget cuts earlier as well and he does not have the political backbone to challenge President Obama.

#headdesk

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

Illinois’ route of President Obama Executive Order 15302 – requirement of project labor agreements on contracts on public works – just took a turn for the worse.  As reported to us by State Sen. Kyle McCarter on Facebook last night:

Kyle McCarter.com, State Senator, 51st District of IL

SB 2987 forces contractors bidding on public works projects to sign a PLA (Project Labor Agreement), raising the cost of roads & schools by up to 18%. Why would we raise our cost and build fewer schools & fewer miles of roads when we are cutting services to balance the budget? I am going to defend the 84% of workers who are non-union, vote NO, and help put them back to work.

Yesterday at 4:11pm

The result of the vote?

Kyle McCarter.com, State Senator, 51st District of IL

SB 2987 passes 33 yes, 26 no. Not only is Illinois not a “right to work” state, it is a “forced to join the union” state. This is not the way to turn our state around and put our families back to work. One more blackeye for Illinois. Sad day.\

Yesterday at 4:20pm

I have to agree with State Sen. Kyle McCarter.  Of course, if you have been my posts for the last few weeks, it seems I have been stuck on one issue – Project Labor Agreements, and in particular, US Rep. Shimkus’ (R-IL 19th CD) continual support of such PLAs.  To read more about the damage that PLAs do, please read here.

I swear (unless something comes up), I will not say another word about PLAs for awhile.  As I said above, Rep. Shimkus has a problem with PLAs.   He’s heard it from local business owners and he’s heard it from local conservative bloggers here and elsewhere.  I put it to Rep. Shimkus right now.  Jeff Flake (R-AZ) added an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2012 Military Construction, Veteran Affairs, and Related Appropriations Act that would effectively bar PLAs mandated by President Obama’s Executive Order 15302.  This amendment is applauded by the Associated Builders and Contractors amongst other related pro-business groups. The appropriations bill with Flake’s amendment is scheduled for debate in the House in June.

In addition, there is a provision within the appropriations bill that requires contractors to use E-verify to ensure all their workers are legal citizens.

So the question is how will Rep. Shimkus vote when this appropriations bill comes up in front of the House in June?  You have to know that the Democrats will try to amend the E-Verify and anti-PLA provisions out of the bill.  If the Democrats try to amend out the E-Verify portion of the appropriations bill, I’m sure Rep. Shimkus will vote against it – he does have a good track record regarding illegal immigration.  But, will Rep. Shimkus vote with his Democrat friends across the aisle (again) and continue his support of PLAs?

On a side note, I’ve been told via a friend by phone, passing on a message from “someone high up in the GOP” that I need to “stop these articles about Rep. Shimkus now“.  Furthermore, a Rep. Shimkus surrogate via Twitter has told another conservative blogger that Rep. Shimkus has”heard us loud and clear” and to basically cease and desist (I have a copy of the Twitter and Twitter DM conversation).

If we have been “heard loud and clear” by Rep. Shimkus regarding PLAs, the real test will be June when this appropriations bill comes up for a vote in front of the full House.  Rep. Shimkus, we will be watching how you vote….closely.  One last thing, a “not voting/present” on the amendment or the bill at large will be counted as supporting the Democrats’ position on PLAs; we will settle for nothing less than a clear vote against PLAs.  No easy way out.  Show the conservatives that have consistently backed you that you have “heard us loud and clear”, then and only then will be be silent.

P.S. Govtrack.us is a God send.

Crossposted at Downstate Illinois Advocate

I’ve been walking precincts and helping get candidates elected since I was knee high to a ballot box.  I was doing door to door pollster work before I was even in high school.  I guess politics has always been in my blood.
1996.  John Shimkus was running for Congress.  I met him and was impressed by him.  Good conservative.  Anytime someone would point out what was wrong with Washington, DC in general or Congress in particular, I would gladly point to John Shimkus as an example of what was right in DC.  That was then, this is now.

2011.  Rep. Shimkus was just elected to his 8th term as Representative for the 19th Congressional District in Illinois (which includes 3 terms as 20th Congressional Representative prior to 2000 Census/redistricting).  That is 8 terms despite pledging to serve only 12 years (6 terms).  Personally, I’m torn on term limits, but if you pledge you only intend to run/serve x amount of years, you had better live up to it.  At this point, I sadly cannot point to Shimkus as someone that is an example of what is right in DC.

Rep. Shimkus has passed into the realm of being part of the establishment GOP.  In September, 2009 (but actually August as it was widely known in our area), Rep. Shimkus endorsed Mark Kirk for US Senate.  There is nothing new to sitting Congressmen endorsing candidates, but what was really shady about this whole ordeal was endorsing so early – before petitions were due to be turned in.  The establishment had selected their Senate candidate – primary voters be damned.  Why does it matter?  Because by selecting their (GOP establishment) candidate, the money and support dried up quickly for other challengers, thereby clearing the field for the “preferred” candidate.

Mark Kirk had his issues as well with conservatives – he supports supporting gay marriage, is pro-choice, and voted for cap-and-trade, for example.  When asked about this in a meeting we had with Shimkus, we were assured that when Shimkus had given a tour of Wood River oil refineries to Mark Kirk, “[Kirk] had hopefully changed his mind” regarding cap-and-trade.  All three of the issues I outlined here are complete opposites of Shimkus’ positions over the years.  But establishment do as establishment do.

Recently, Shimkus made some headlines with his support of Project Labor Agreements and his less than tactful way of handling being called out on his votes.  But it goes deeper.  After the dust-up surrounding his support of PLAs, another article appeared detailing some relationships Shimkus has had with some former George Ryan people – including a IL GOP State Central Committeewoman/Madison County Chairwoman/Deputy Chief of Staff who testified against George Ryan after being granted immunity as detailed on the The Immoderate Blog and later, Illinois Review:

The situation with now former GOP State Central Committeeman Criag Pesek has been in the news recently, but he is in the 3rd CD. Somehow it just makes more sense when the news is about Chicago or Cook County politics and operatives than when one hears of situations in southern Illinois. I was shocked when I first heard that John Shimkus employed a lady who worked as the campaign finance director for George Ryan and testified against him after being granted immunity. $107,499.96 is a nice chunk of change to be paid by the taxpayers for this lady’s services in 2010. Did I neglect to mention that she is also a member of the Illinois GOP State Central Committee?

It is very disappointing to learn that not only does Congressman Shimkus employ this former Ryan operative (why would one who did nothing wrong require immunity?) but two or three other former Ryan people as well. I say two or three because one of them may now be employed by the state GOP instead. In 2009, the four former Ryan employees on Shimkus’ staff brought home nearly $450,000 between them. It is a further disappointment, unless the numbers at Legistorm.com are incorrect, that in 2010 Shimkus earned fifth place in staff salaries for Illinois’ congressional delegation with $1,167,833. I suppose it costs a lot to hire and maintain Ryan’s former employees. Shimkus’ staff salaries were only exceeded by those of Schakowsky, Davis, Rush, and Gutierrez.

Going further down the rabbit hole, Shimkus was once the head of the House Page Board and badly mishandled Mark Foley’s involvement with young pages (Shimkus knew about the inappropriate emails, ordered Foley to cease  contact, but failed to notify his colleagues).

Over the last few years, there has been an increasing displeasure about Rep. Shimkus within his district – some justified, other reasons not as justified.  What has been the alternative?  Vote Democrat?  I think not, but there has been no viable GOP alternative.  Since the PLA fiasco a few weeks ago, there has been an vocal opposition to Shimkus beginning to rise within his district – especially from the Tea Parties, but more recently from both political and financial supporters of the Congressman.  One supporter even crashed the Effingham County Lincoln Day Dinner to distribute fliers about Shimkus’ PLA problem and to hold up a sign in protest of Shimkus during his speech.  I believe the protester would have been more vocal had the Congressman not had brought his teenage son with him.  Believe it or not, there is civility in protesting.
The question remains, what shall Republicans do about Shimkus?  The answer at this point of time is simple and complicated at the same time.  The simple answer – especially with redistricting taking place – is to primary Rep. Shimkus with a GOP candidate.  The complicated answer is who should (or could) primary against a sitting Congressman with just over $1.1 million in the campaign reserve?

My answer is State Senator Kyle McCarter (DISCLOSURE: before Shimkus’ people read this and go off and call McCarter, McCarter has no idea that I am writing this).  McCarter has proven himself to be a strong conservative in Springfield who at times has butted heads with the IL GOP leadership – and doesn’t give two hoots about their displeasure.  I’m not sure if McCarter has the campaign cash to go up against Shimkus, but he definitely has name recognition needed and the support of conservatives.  In addition, upon talking with a Metro East Tea Party this afternoon, they are gung-ho about challenging Shimkus with McCarter in a primary.

Another possible choice would be Jason Plummer, former Lt. Governor candidate.  He has the name recognition and the cash, but he is still relatively unknown politically since running for Lt. Gov. did not give him a chance to really argue the issues.  A definite wild card if he entered the race against Shimkus, I am not sure if he could pull it off, but crazier things have happened.

In my humble opinion, if Shimkus is to be primaried, now is the time.  The hard part is finding a candidate who is willing to go up against a well funded, establishment favorite, veteran campaigner like Shimkus.  However, given the public’s mood towards incumbents and an increasing frustration with the GOP establishment in DC blocking real spending cuts, Shimkus could be vulnerable.  The redistricted map of Illinois should be out toward the end of the month or early June, so we’ll have to see how the boundaries are drawn to see whether the redrawing of the lines helps or hurts Shimkus if a primary race were to occur.  Stay tuned ladies and gentlemen…

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate