I am sorry to say it, but I believe that conservatives are once again setting themselves up for severe disappointment. On the issue of spending (and therefore by definition taxing) it is obvious that the Republican leadership, and the Beltway Right as a whole is worse than useless. One of the problems is that so much of the wasteful and un-constitutional spending is legislation they voted for; and more importantly they likely support. I am thinking in particular of Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, and Kyl.  In 2009, the proposed GOP budget introduced by Paul Ryan is almost as bad as Barack Obama’s.

http://www.house.gov/budget_republicans/press/2007/pr20090401_gopbudget.pdf

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/954

In fact, the budget would have shortfalls of over $500 billion until 2019. This is absurd, but completely forseable. No on should be surprised that the Republican leadership is as stupid as Obama is evil. In fact, even now I have not heard of any proposed cuts by the Beltway Right (and I live inside the beltway) other than stopping the rest of the stimulus and TARP (which many Republicans voted for). The fact of the matter is that Republicans have voted for many dumb big-government programs, even into Obama’s presidency.

Unfortunately, at RedState, I have not really heard about any systemic changes to government spending, other than occasional support for a Balanced Budget Amendment. I have some ideas, and I’d like to know what people think. Almost (if not all) of these programs are unconstitutional, so there is legal, as well as fiscal rationale for oppposing them.

-End all of the “National Endowments”, including Arts, Humanities, and Democracy

-End funding and participation in the International Monetary Fund

-End all foreign aid, including the much celebrated (and unpaid for) Bush Global anti-HIV initiative

-End the Dept. of Education and do not end further student loans

-End Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Housing & Urban Development. Aka Homelessness and Urban Destruction. End all federal involvement in Home loans

-Eliminate much of the pork driven military spending including the useless in the War on Terror F-22

-Federal pay freeze per employee until the unemployment rate is less than 8% (after all, Obama promised that it would never get that high)

-End all groups such as DemocracyCorps, PeaceCorps, AmeriCorps.

-End all assistance to states

-End the Federal Highway Commission and privatize the highway system

-End the U.S. Postal service (yes I know it is in the constitution).

-End the Departments of Commerce and Labor, which are basically giveaways to crony capitalism and bribes to whoever gives campaign $ and votes

-End al welfare and subsidies for illegal aliens

Here is a good publication with some other ideas (I also borrowed some). For the time being, I do not think that Social Security and Medicare should be brought up. At the end of the day, though, I think the most important thing will be to prevent Trent Lott and the Beltway Right from co-opting Tea Party candidates like Ken Buck, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey and Mike Lee. We need a serious bloc of Senators dedicated to blocking Big Government proposals. The leadership will not come from the Republican Party leaders.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb111/hb111-4.pdf

Quite frankly, I think that the actions by John Boehner and Eric Cantor on pushing a secondary Health Care Reform repeal, are a theater of the absurd, that would be humorous to watch if this were happening in Spain or Italy, but is very pernicious. It appears to me, that in order to “re-assert control” over the caucus, they have felt the need to walk all over back bencher Steve King’s legislation, with a lesser bill, nonetheless. We have to remember that these guys are politicians first. Number one on their agenda is increasing their own power. The Republican leadership has dropped the ball and ignored (deliberately?) the Health Care fight in favor of picking losing battles on non-issues like Financial Regulation. This is poor policy, and poor politics. Outside of immigration, there is no issue where the public as a whole is to the right of the Republican caucus in the house and senate. However, when it comes to repealing this Health Care legislation, Americans are dead set for repeal, and it has been that way for months. Since the bill passed, Rasmussen Reports has been polling support for repeal. The highest opposition to repeal, in any poll is 42%. The least support for repeal, in any poll, is 52%. In the latest poll, July 1, support for repeal is at 60%, and opposition is at 36%. The May 22 poll, showed 63% supporting repeal, and only 32% opposing repeal. On average, I would say about 58% have supported repeal, and about 38% have opposed repeal. That makes it a 60-40 issue. I’ll link to the polling data, so you can see for yourselves.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

The Republican leadership is dropping the ball on this one- big time. It is equally true in the Senate. Simply put, while I do not like Mitch McConnell, he is going to remain the leader in the Senate. However, I think after November, Boehner and Cantor must go. They deserve no credit whatsoever for any resurgence being shown in the ‘generic ballot’ congressional polls.

Whether or not you believe the allegations by Erick, I think is irrelevant to the big picture. The important things are (1) how the senator will vote (2) will the senator speak up when needed (3) will the senator cave to the D.C. “celebrities” (4) can the senator make coherent arguments. Mike Lee is terrific on all four counts. Tim Bridgewater is not. Mike Lee is an expert on the constitution. This is so much of what the Tea Party is about, at least in my eyes. It is obvious that Bridgewater is more interested in the “practical solutions”, which always turn out to be rackets. Take two of the worst pieces of Bush – era legislation. On “No Child Left Behind”, which might be more accurately titled ‘No Child Gets Ahead’, Mr. Bridgewater was wrong. NCLB is not a “practical solution”. It has led to cheating, dumbing down, and leveling. The MMA bill in 2003, was a disaster. It is a unfunded liability of $14 trillion. It was insane, bottom line. Furthermore, Bridgewater has indicated support for “comprehensive immigration reform”, which is not amnesty, but is in fact, much worse. There are other lower profile issues where Lee is right, and Bridgewater is wrong. But let’s face it, why is Bennett endorsing Bridgewater? Because Bridgewater is closer to his views. We need Mike Lee.

So much for the conservatives being too extreme! Rasmussen Reports Poll showed Angle 50 Reid 39. And in Colorado Buck leads Norton 42 to 32. Buck also polled better in the general election, leading Bennett by 5 and Romanoff by 6.

Meanwhile, the “moderator” at Politico thinks Sharron Angle’s “extreme” poisitions, like liquidating the Dept. of Education and leaving the beast on the east river, will prevenet her from winning. When will they learn?

It is clear from Rasmussen, that we have 2 major winning issues this November- Immigration and the Health Care bill.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/health_care_law

This shows, that since the passage of the legislation, no more than 42% of people have opposed repeal. In contrast, no less than 54% have supported repeal. Indeed, it seems that on average over the last two months, about 60% want the bill repealed. That is a major, major, winning issue.

The other big one is immigration, where so many Republicans over the years have been absolute disasters. Poll, after poll, after poll shows that in most states support for the AZ immigration law is 2:1 or greater. 75% of votes think that there is not enough being done to secure our borders. Recently, a Rasmussen poll showed that 58% oppose giving citizenship to children of illegal aliens, while only 33% support it. It is a winning issue, and a vital one, that many Republicans have ignored.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/70_support_crackdown_on_those_who_hire_illegal_immigrants

The rest of the major senate primaries this year are taking place in the West. In California, Fiorina, who I support, is going to win. In Nevada, it is likely either Sharon Angle or Danny Tarkanian. I like them both, but I think Tark will be better in the general election. Colorado is the most important race on June 8. Norton is basically a McCain clone. Ken Buck is truly an outstanding candidate, and should be the favorite to win in November also. In Utah, Mike Lee is simply the best canidate for the senate, across the country. In my opinion, from what I know, Lee would be the best senator in the country. We need to make sure he beats Bridgewater who seems like a wimp on Healthcare and Education.

However, the two most important primaries will happen in August. In Alaska, Joe Miller will be taking on corrupt Lisa Murkowski, appointed by her father in 2002. She is awful. Truly, one of the worst. Beating Murkowski is essential to remove cronyism from the new Republican Party, which is needed for any genuine political success. To remind you, Lisa barely one the primary in 2004, and she also only won the general 49 to 46 in a very conservative state. Miller will win the general, so there is no need to worry about losing this state. In Arizona, it is clear that we must nominate J.D. Hayworth. He leads solidly in general election match-ups, but is trailing by roughly 10 right now in the primary. J.D. is a very solid candidate (98 acu) who has an unfortunate habit of making some not so sharp statements. The current anarchy in the southwest is directly attributable to John McCain’s treason for the last 20 years. McCain must be called on this. He is a liar, who has moved way right of where he used to be.

Redstate, after Tuesday, we need to focuse on replacing Murkowski and McCain with Miller and Hayworth. We have not been talking about these races much recently, but we need to act now.

As I noted in a post, I oppose Jim DeMint attempting to become the Republican senate leader. The first reason, is that he will not get elected. It is simply a fact, that we must face although it is unpleasant, that Mitch McConnell will be the leader at least for another session of congress. Why is this? Well, one he has power in assigning members to committees, and as the incumbent, voting against him could be costly for the careers of other members. Also, if the opponent was DeMint (and he is the only senator that I have heard might challenge), he would have a hard time getting a dozen votes. If this happens, it would be damaging for DeMint, because those in power would be even more resentful towards him. From the perspective of “pragmatism” this would be a disaster. We/he should not alienate senators, unless we are going to defeat them when they run for election again.

Let us assume now, that someone else was going to challenge McConnell- though I expect that this would not happen until 2013 or 2015. The reasonable contender would be Whip Jon Kyl- who is usually very solid. Another clearly ambitious senator would be Lamar Alexander- who is a part of “leadership”, and ran for Whip against Trent Lott, losing by a mere 25-24. Alexander is wishy-washy. However, I think it is unlikely McConnell will be challenged.

McConnell has many faults, chief among them his voting record on several important issues: immigration, TARP, foreign aid and many others. His lifetime ACU rating is 89- which puts him in the middle of the current Republican caucus, which, if 2010 goes well, should be much larger and more in line with our principles. There are also important things that I think he is good at. Yes, he is uninspiring, and his involvement in Grayson/Paul is awful. But, he has done several good things. One, he got every one to stand their ground on Health care- even Snowe & Collins (who I was sure would defect). Second, I think he is generally well liked in the Republican caucus, which helps him to keep votes on our side. Third, on the budget issues, which are when we may very well need bipartisanship, he could bring along 1 or 2 Democrats.

Now, why, even if he could get elected to the post, would it be bad to have DeMint as Senate Leader? At first, this seems irrational, as I have called him the best Senator. Being majority leader affects what an individual senator can do. McConnell, it is noted, rarely intervenes in primary contests. DeMint on the other hand does, and we need this to continue. As the Senate majority/ minority leader he would have so much on his plate trying to swing votes, negotitate, talk with the media etc., it would limit his ability to bring more people like Lee, Paul or Rubio into the  Senate.  Also, I do not think that DeMint would handle the P.R. the right  way.  Additionally,  he  would have a hard time (1) maintaining party discipline and (2) getting the few halfway decent Democrats to vote with us.

Therefore, if there is one thing I do not think DeMint should do, it is run for Senate Majority/Minority leader. It is futile, and counter-productive.

These are some thoughts from Paul Weyrich on recent leadership contests and strategy

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/weyrich/060125               (House in 2006)

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/weyrich/070109

While many of us our focused almost exclusively on the 2010 elections, and with good reason, the 2012 Presidential election has gotten almost no coverage. Without trying to deny the significance and importance of the mid-term elections, the 2012 Presidential election will be the most important election since 1980. Quite simply, if we do not have the executive it matters not that we have the congress. Of course, the opposite is true as well. It is just that in congress we have more room for error.

First, we must ask what is the significance of the 2010 and 2012 elections. There will be three main purposes, (1) a repeal of the Health Care bill (2) ending the huge budget deficits and (3) stopping the tide of illegal aliens. 2010 is looking up, and I think that we will take back the house- but the senate is far more important. After all, what really matters is what congress looks like in 2013, not 2011. Therefore there are a few races that I am concerned with. One, is the Florida race. We should not take a Rubio victory for granted. In fact, at this point I’d say he has slightly better than 50-50 odds. Two, is the Colorado race. I know many here on Redstate are supporting Ken Buck. So am I. But if Norton looks to be a much better general election candidate we must support her. She is a solid candidate and Colorado is the type of state where we must have the seat in order to win back the senate. Period. Three, is Nevada. Right now, I see no reason why we can not win. But I am worried, very worried about a devastating primary. There are three strong candidates. Tarkanian is probably the best, but the establishment is supporting a candidate who really can’t hit Reid very hard.

Let us assume that by 2012 we have 52-55 seats in the senate and over 225 seats in the house. I think that both of these scenarios are probable, if not very likely. The big question then becomes can we nominate someone (1) who will be a strong general election candidate and defeat Obama and (2) who is a strong lower case g governor with the guts to repeal Obamacare and take on the flood of left-wing legislation that we have seen in recent years. Unfortunately, while there are many candidates who might meet requirement 1 OR requirement 2, there are much less who meet BOTH requirements. I know that many people here like Mitch Daniels- I think he would be a disaster. Why you ask? Well, (1) he was a go to guy for the Bush budgets (2) he is uncharismatic and ugly which will hurt us with the boob vote in the general election (3) he is questionable at best in areas like immigration, education, various “initiatives” and the like. We do not want another Bush. That includes Jeb Bush, who has shown his true colors in recent times. A vote for Jeb is a vote for subsidizing the invasion of America, and for further foreign follies. Mitt Romney has problems in both categories 1 and 2, although he has some unique qualities. He is a go-to guy on the economy, he is very intelligent and no one can paint him as a so-called wing nut. The downsides are obviously, (1) do we really know where he stands (2) flip-floppers seldom do well and (3) is he committed to repealing Obamacare? These questions can not be ignored. I think Tim Pawlenty would be a bad nominee, and I don’t think he will even finish second in any primaries. Maybe a V.P. pick for him. One guy I like, who I think that we could generally count on to meet both requirements is John Thune. Basically, his problem at this point is that nobody knows who he is. He has a pretty good voting record and is intelligent and can appeal to the swing voters. However, it is questionable if he will run. Still, as for me, Thune is the #1 choice for 2012 as of right now. What do you think?

Erick was right. Bob Bennett will be gone- and Orrin Hatch might be going in 2012 also.

Check out this link

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14964318

The best part is a head-to-head matchup between Bennett and Lee. Lee wins 51 to 18. This means that of the remaining 31%, Lee needs to only get 9% to win at the convention. Furthermore, Bennett has a 61% unfavorable ranking from delegates. At this point, the big question is whether the nominee will be Mike Lee or Tim Bridgewater. I like Eagar also, but I think she’s definitely in third or fourth right now.