I have ridden the roller coasters this political season.

First came the roller coaster of who will run.

Next we were lead through the longest ever debate roller coaster.

Now it’s time for the primary roller coaster.

Mistakes and things that make you throw up

The first two coasters have made me a bit ill and yes there has been the taste of throw up in my mouth on occasion.  My choice for the whole ball of wax was Mitch Daniels, both before and after his “social truce” comments.  I’m still holding out hope for him at a brokered convention.

The debates were painful to watch unless you were a Newt fan (which I wasn’t).

I’m okay with anyone other than Ron Paul (more on that later).

Mostly, I’m disappointed with myself for forgetting the first war of presidential politics which is, of course, elect a governor.  The reason that this is important is that you want someone to run the country who has run something else as an executive.  Senators and house members for the most part are people who are designed to bring home more stuff to the folks back home.  They are by nature compromisers and they have always had the institution to hide behind.  Part of what I see in Obama is not simply the fact that he thinks that big government is the solution to everything, but that he just has no experience running the show.  Because of that, he tends to blame others and have an inflated view of himself (like claiming recently to have accomplished more in his first few years than every president other than FDR, Lincoln, and Johnson).

Laying Out Criteria

I said in early 2011 that people rather than getting caught up in the games needed to lay out their criteria for President and stick to people who met it.  At this, I have failed miserably.  Instead, I’ve gotten caught up in the polls and sound bites just like the rest of you.

If I were to design a perfect presidential candidate, this is what that candidate would look like:

1) He or she would have done time as a sitting governor.  This is number one for a reason and mentioned redundantly for a reason.  Governor’s do Presidential things on a smaller scale.  They are comfortable with going it alone when the situation warrants it.  They are comfortable with using the bully pulpit to get things done.  They are comfortable with leading and being hated.  Weight: 30%.

2) He or she would have at their core the instincts of being a small government conservative.  Our country (even our Republicans) are moving away from Freedom towards Security.  As someone pointed out the other day, there is no endeavor (whether it is starting a business, buying a gun, or even selling lemonade) where you don’t need some sort of permission from the government.  Heck, you aren’t even going to be allowed to buy the  kinds of light bulbs that you want any more.  Weight 30%.

3) We need someone who is strong on social issues.  As we weaken the social strata of the country, we weaken the country. Weight 20%.

4) I am afraid that I am out of luck on my fourth criteria and that is to find someone whose foreign policy is to represent the interests of the United States overseas.  To intervene only when the interests of the US are at stake instead of either ignoring the world and letting crazy countries get nuclear weapons (see Ron Paul / Iran) or thinking that we should go and be everywhere (everyone else).  Ronald Reagan did not fight for freedom everywhere.  He fought where it mattered.  Weight 20%.

5) Extra Credit: +10 points for having a world view that doesn’t classify you as crazy (either supporting truthers or thinking that the rest of the world is better than America).

The Candidates

So let me set them up and knock them down (there is a summary at the bottom of the page for those who don’t care about the details).

President Obama

I’m starting with Obama because I want us to understand how the current president stacks up (I’ll number the criteria as we go):

1) Grade 75%.  I feel the need to give him some credit for time served.  I suppose that he has learned about the job a bit while doing it.

2) Grade 0%.  Exhibit A — The Porkulus.  His grade is only this low because you can’t go negative.

3) Grade 0%.  (see #2).  Obamacare.

4) Grade 0%.  Let’s turn stable nasty dictators who just want to run their countries into unstable, Islamists who want to rule the world.  Egypt? Libya?!!!?!!!

5) No extra credit.  Sorry, America is special and if you want to run the place, you better believe at least that.

Final grade: F (about 25%)

Herman Cain

75% for his business experience, but an incomplete for the rest of class.

Final grade: Dropped out.

Ron Paul

0% on the first criteria. 100% on the next two. 0% on the last one. No extra credit.

Final grade: 50%.

Michelle Bachmann

0% on the first criteria. 100% on the next two. 25% on the foreign policy.  5 pts of extra credit because some days I’m not sure here.

Final grade: 60%

Rick Santorum

0% on the first criteria.  50% on the small government. 100% on social. 25% on foreign policy (wants to fight everywhere). 10 pts of extra credit.

Final grade: 50% (yeah, I’m not thrilled with the boomlet).

Newt Gingrich

25% on exec experience.  90% on small government. 50% on social (personal behavior counts), 50% on foreign policy.  +10 pts.

Final grade: 65%

Mitt Romney

100% on the first criteria. 50% on the small government (Romneycare –no, lower taxes — yes). 75% on the social (I think, but ask him next week what he believes).  50% on foreign policy. 10 pts extra credit (almost tagged him here for the whole dog incident).

Final grade: 80%

Jon Huntsman

100% on the first criteria.  75% on small government (takes a hit on AGW). 50% on social (takes a hit on changing marriage). 60% on foreign policy (at least he understands China well). 10 pts extra credit.

Final grade: 84%

Rick Perry

80% on the first (we’ll hit him on debating for those who care).  100% on both small government and social.  75% on foreign policy (at least he has the right idea of asking people why we should continue giving them money).  10 pts extra credit for not being nuts.

Final grade: 99 %

The Summary

When they get to the Georgia primary and it’s time for me to vote, I’ll take the below list and whichever of these guys and gal are rated highest and still actively running then they will get my vote.  In November, I’ll use the same list.

A — Perry

B — Huntsman

B- — Romney

D — Gingrich

D-  Bachmann

High F — Santorum / Paul

Low F — Obama

What if, you had to pay X amount of taxes no matter what those taxes were spent like, but you were given a list of check boxes.

Your taxes would then be split across all of those check boxes.

Here’s what the check boxes would look like:

o Immigration reform

o Social Security

o Medicare

o Armed Services

o Department of Education

o Etc, Etc

I wonder if America could vote with their money instead of politicians deciding where the money went, how the American government would be different.

Back in 2010, I came up with an idea.  I passed it around to a few people and a few local tea parties used it to raise some money.

Now it’s time to reactivate the idea.

So October 2011 is approaching.

GOP debates are happening right and left.

Candidates are rising and falling.

In the House and the Senate, candidates are still filing and deciding.

But the time is now for you to start your work.

If the Tea Party brings the energy and the Precinct Committeeman Project bring the connections, the only thing missing is the cash.

Yes, we can fall back on fat cat donors, but isn’t the Tea Party and the grassroots all about ordinary people taking back the government.

The money part. That’s where you come and where the Change Jar Conservative philosophy steps up to the plate.

The philosophy is simple:

1) Get a change jar.

2) Every night or once a week throw all your loose change into it.

3) Decide on two candidates or races where you want to divide your money in half.

4) Wait for the opportune moment. (This might be early if you want to get in on the primaries or later if you want to focus on a general election).

5) Cash out your change jar and send in a check.

In the 2010 election, I had a total of about $37.50 to give. For 2012, I’m hoping it will be at least $50.

That doesn’t sound like much until you multiply it by the power of the people.

$50 x 100 = $5000

$50 x 1000 = $50000

$50 x 1,000,000 = $50,000,000

Do you think the GOP could use an extra $50 milllion?

Then spread the word to your tea party members, your friends, and your conservative websites.

Use change to change the world.

1) What is your plan to create full-time jobs in the private sector of this country?

2) Social Security and Medicare are going broke and and the Democrats don’t care. How specifically would you fix the current situation?

3) Illegal immigration is a problem in this country.  How specifically would you fix it?

4) America has been at war for ten years and the Democrats recently added another battle front in Libya.

a) How would you approach the problem?

b) When would you feel it was right to commit US troops to a warzone?

c) Do you think there is a position on foreign policy between “nation building” and “isolationism”?

5)  What current functions of the federal government would you dismantle and return to the purview of the states?

o Jim DeMint who said there was no way is now considering it.

o Sarah Palin is doing what ever the heck she is doing.

o Rick Perry is now re-considering it.

o Mike Huckabee said he might reconsider (please, no!)

o Chris Christie is talking to people in Iowa even though he says he’s not considering it

Personally, I blame Mitch Daniels (or maybe Cheri Daniels since the marriage thing appears to be the issue).

Don’t get me wrong, I’m fine with Tea-Paw if that’s where we need to go.

My platform would be pretty standard fair for a conservative:

o Cut the size of government by getting rid of federal regulations and putting a hiring freeze in place and eventually getting rid of some departments.

o Put the Ryan plan or something very close to it into place.

o Ask congress to pass a balanced budget amendment.

o Check all current federal laws to see if they meet the enumerated powers clauses and revoke the ones that don’t.

o Would require all companies to use E-Verify

o All illegal alien males of working age would be sentenced to six months of construction on the border fence until it’s complete.

o I’d take some prison fencing architecture and turn it inside out to use on the border.

o I would take the conservative parts of Newt’s platform that he spoke of on MSNBC (i.e. cut corporate taxes, cut regulations, make equipment 100% write-offable in the first year, rollback Sarbanes/Oxley etc).

o Permanently get rid of the death tax.

o Implement a flat tax somewhere in the neighborhood of 19% and get rid of all tax deductions.

On the financial end of things I would differ from my conservative friends a bit, I would create the Keep American Money at Home plan which would have three main parts:

PART ONE

– For any product where two or more distinct USA companies produce the product in the 50 states, 100% of money spent on said product by the Federal government would need to be spent with those companies.

– In order to increase the number of companies doing such business, for any product that wasn’t already manufactured in the US, I would offer cash incentives for companies that started producing those goods and did so for each of five years (rewards would be increasing as the five years went on).

–

PART TWO

I would replace social security with a massive mutual fund scheme that would be divided like this:

– 40% of funds would go into publicly traded US companies with more than 50 US employees and 75% of their employees are US citizens.(reward the behavior you want to encourage).

– Another 20% of funds would go into US headquarters based companies with more than 50 US employees and 50% of their employees were US citizens.

– Another 20% of funds would go into any company stock (no matter where they are based) that has at least 25% of their employees as US citizens.

– This last part is trickier.  The last 20% of funds would go into the company stock of foreign companies who meet two criteria: a) Are in proportion to the percentage of their employee base that are US citizens; b) Are co-signers of some new whizbang anti-terror treaty that cuts off all funding to Hamas, Iraq, etc.

PART THREE

o I would identify any “too big too fail” or “too key to fail” and do whatever was necessary to remove that label including breaking up monopolies or forcing said companies to hold less than X percent of market share.

o Once the first section of this plan was done, I’d start letting those companies fail — it’s the American way.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

o I’d give Israeal the go-ahead to nuke Iraq’s nuke facilities (play with fire/get burned).

o I’d implement Stephen Pressfield’s plan for Afghanistan ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJsB9-wFAEQ ) ….

o I’d get out of Libya

I was a Daniels supporter until he dropped out.  Now, I’m leaning heavily towards Pawlenty.

LAST MONTH’S NUMBERS:

Individuals:
Obama 46% (but the only DEM)
Pawlenty 9%
Romney 8.25
Huckabee 7%
Barbour 5.5%
Bachmann 4.5%
Palin 4%
Daniels 3.25%
Guiliani 3.00%
Huntsman 2.75%
Cain 2.5%
Trump 2.25%
Gingrich 2.0%

NOW TO MAY:

METHODOLOGY
1) Estimate the chances of a certain candidate to win the GOP primary
2) Estimate the chances of that person to win the general against Obama
3) Do the multiplication to get each individual Republican’s chances of winning
4) Do the subtraction and addition to compute a Democratic president vs Republican president

GOP PRIMARY — Chances to win

Pawlenty, Romney — 20% (best organizations)

Palin, Huntsman  — 15% (Palin is Palin, Huntsman has the media on his side)
Gingrich, Cain  — 10% Really running and have some things to say, but also have baggage
Bachmann,  Guiliani — 5% (very long shots)

Yep … that’s how I see the GOP race …Romney and Pawlenty have the edge so far.

CHANCES IN THE GENERAL(These are the same as previously):
Romney vs Obama — 55% (would be 60% if not for RomneyCare)
Pawlenty vs Obama — 60% (the anti-obama)
Palin vs Obama — 40% (I know a lot of conservatives who won’t vote for her)
Bachman vs Obama — 45% (house member, lots of brash stuff out there to paint her as crazy)
Huntsman vs Obama — 55% (loses 5% for involvement in Obama cabinet)
Gingrich vs Obama — 40% (still are a lot of people with a negative opinion about Newt plus the soc-cons aren’t exactly going to rally to his side (wifes 1 to 3) … total squish on global warming as well)
Cain vs Obama — 50% (the lack of political experience will hurt him more than his executive experience will help him)
Guiliani vs Obama — 60% (I think Da Mayor will play well against Obama)

RESULTS
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT LIKELIHOOD — 54%
DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT LIKELIHOOD — 48.5%

Individuals:
Obama 48.5% (but the only DEM)  Up by 2.5% from previous diary
Pawlenty 12%
Romney 11%
Huntsman 8.25%

Palin 6%
Cain 5%
Gingrich 4%

Guiliani 3.00%

Bachmann 2.25%

CHANGES

Daniels and Huckabee dropping out helps Obama’s chances of re-election because they were two of the Republicans who had the best chance to beat him.  It’s not saying that these others can’t, it’s just saying that Huckabee would have been a formidable challenge in the general if he survived the primary.

Newt had an amazing performance on economic issues over on CNBC.  By far the best, I’ve seen from any candidate (and he is low on my list).  Not a fan of Newt, but I was impressed:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000023703

ASSUMPTIONS
I start with the assumption that Barak Obama is fairly beatable at this point in time.
The economy sucks.
Obama is trying to raise taxes while the economy sucks.
And in the meantime, he’s started a third war that we have no business fighting which should push down the left’s willingness to come out and fight (at least on the Coasts).
His “deserves re-election” and “country is headed in the right direction” numbers are horrific.

This leads to this:

Any Republican who doesn’t come across as “scary” or “stupid” has a good chance to win this thing (60%).

DISCLAIMER:
I prefer Daniels or Pawlenty (i.e if got to pick the next president and couldn’t pick me)

METHODOLOGY
1) Estimate the chances of a certain candidate to win the GOP primary
2) Estimate the chances of that person to win the general against Obama
3) Do the multiplication to get each individual Republican’s chances of winning
4) Do the subtraction and addition to compute a Democratic president vs Republican president

GOP PRIMARY — Chances to win
Pawlenty, Romney — 15% (best organizations)
Palin, Barbour, Bachman, Huckabee, — 10% (have a base to start with)
Daniels, Huntsman, Gingrich, Cain, Trump, Guiliani — 5%

Yep … that’s how I see the GOP race … I think we probably end up with Pawlenty or Romney, but they aren’t as far ahead as we might think.

CHANCES IN THE GENERAL:
Romney vs Obama — 55% (would be 60% if not for RomneyCare)
Pawlenty vs Obama — 60% (the anti-obama)
Palin vs Obama — 40% (I know a lot of conservatives who won’t vote for her)
Barbour vs Obama — 55% (loses 5% for the accent and what it represents)
Bachman vs Obama — 45% (house member, lots of brash stuff out there to paint her as crazy)
Huckabee vs Obama — 70% (would be a disaster for the country, but he would win handily)
Daniels vs Obama — 65% (a bit of my bias, but I think the country is ready for an adult conversation, I dinged him in the primary for his “social truce”)
Huntsman vs Obama — 55% (loses 5% for involvement in Obama cabinet)
Gingrich vs Obama — 40% (still are a lot of people with a negative opinion about Newt plus the soc-cons aren’t exactly going to rally to his side (wifes 1 to 3) … total squish on global warming as well)
Cain vs Obama — 50% (the lack of political experience will hurt him more than his executive experience will help him)
Trump vs Obama — 45% (we’ll never elect an actor … oh wait)
Guiliani vs Obama — 60% (I think Da Mayor will play well against Obama)

RESULTS
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT LIKELIHOOD — 54%
DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT LIKELIHOOD — 46%

Individuals:
Obama 46% (but the only DEM)
Pawlenty 9%
Romney 8.25
Huckabee 7%
Barbour 5.5%
Bachmann 4.5%
Palin 4%
Daniels 3.25%
Guiliani 3.00%
Huntsman 2.75%
Cain 2.5%
Trump 2.25%
Gingrich 2.0%

Have at it!

Here’s the rules:

1) In the comment section, using only POSITIVE phrases about your candidate, attempt to persuade me that your candidate is the best candidate for the GOP nomination for 2012.

2) Do not use phrases like “my candidate is the only candidate who XYZ” unless it is completely factually (i.e. Haley Barbour is the only candidate  who has been the president of the RGA and the NRC).

3) Do not comment negatively on any other candidates even if you disagree with the statements given by that candidates backers.

4) Do not write pitches for more than two candidates.  Let’s let everyone play.

5) Do feel free to give your pitch even if someone else has given a pitch for the candidates.

AWARDS

1) Anyone who breaks one of the rules above will be counted as a LOSER in the contest.

2) After a few days, I’ll choose what I think the best pitch for each candidate was and post this group of people as the WINNERS.

3) Anyone who keeps the rules but isn’t a WINNER will get a mention in an HONORABLE mentions comment.

So have at it.

Most of you are familiar with ColdWarrior’s push to fill the Precinct Committeemen slots of the Republican Party with conservatives and push the GOP to the right in all facets of the party platform.

To me, this should be especially true in our most conservative states, where we should be putting forth strong, Jim DeMint type conservatives.

Georgia is such a state and now is the time to take it over.

The precinct level meetings

This website will get you started on what you need to know on how to become a precinct committeeman and a delegate to your county and perhaps the state GOP convention.

Along with using that page to find out your precinct, you will need to search for your county or precinct meeting site (Cobb County where I live is having a massive meet up in one location and then having breakouts by precinct and I suspect many other counties are as well).

Here are the important dates:

• Saturday, February 12th — Counties larger than 80000 residents meet for precinct level elections
• Saturday, March 12th — Counties meet for county level elections (small counties combine this with their precinct level elections).
• Friday/Saturday May 13th/14th — State GOP convention in Macon

Keep in mind that the May dates are likely optional for you since not everyone will be able to be a state delegate.  However, even a two Saturday commitment will offer you the opportunity to help push conservative candidates higher up both your county and the state GOP.

Looking for some help

ColdWarrior (since he’s being a driving factor here), Erick (since he knows Georgia), and any others, I’m looking for some advice to be posted in the comments both on known conservatives in Georgia whose names I should be looking for on the above dates as well as some good questions to ask to be able to distinguish “true” conservatives from those who will turn into squishes moving forward.

Any advice from others who have taken this journey would also be appreciated in the comment section.

At the bottom of my list after the 2008 primaries was Mike Huckabee.  I mean the bottom, as in, behind Guiliani. 

This week, Huckabee confirmed that he hasn’t really changed much when it comes to how he would govern.

Here is a quote from The Corner’s report on Huckabee’s speech at King’s College:

Huckabee flatly denied being a “pro-life liberal,” an accusation often made in certain quarters on the right. Not a trace of defensiveness could be detected on this point. To the contrary, the governor gave an all-out defense of his tax hikes while governor of Arkansas on the grounds that they were the only responsible course of action to repair state roads. He snorted with derision at “libertarians” who fail to recognize that “we don’t have a health care crisis in this country, but a health crisis.” He spoke with passion and knowledge on the need for preventative care to bring down exorbitant costs. And then, without the least amount of prompting, he mustered a vigorous defense of Mrs. Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign against childhood obesity. This was the “art of governing,” he argued, rather than the cheap “science of campaigning.” He finished his call to a compassionate conservatism by echoing recent comments made by governor Daniels touting prison reform. Invoking a “Biblical standard” of crime enforcement, he granted that criminals must be punished while stressing that the status quo needs to be replaced. Opposed though he is to the decriminalization of drugs, he endorses a more “hopeful,” therapeutic approach that would thwart the creation of “monsters” within our prison walls.

Let me tell you what I have problems with regarding Huckabee:

1) He has defended his tax hikes as the only possible approach to solving the road problem. Now, I understand that there are serious issues, but is this REALLY the ONLY possible approach? What about cutting government employees or at least freezing hiring.

2) Secondly is his fasicination with fixing the health of America. I understand that he had bad health, but the fact that he thinks that government should be a part of such a solution strikes me as again being a part of his “big government conservative” which is an oxymoron if you ask me.

3) He finished his call to “compassionate conservatism” … what ? This may be The Corner’s description rather than Huckabee’s intent, but ANY candidate who uses the term or implies that we need anything other than a smaller, streamlined government is off of my list for 2012.

As a long time pro-lifer, I find it inconceiveable that some pro-lifers are so willing to ignore all of Huckabee’s trends towards bigger government.

I will not forget that bigger government is always the enemy of liberty.

And while I supported Bush because there was a desperate need to get some conservatives onto the Supreme Court and he seemed like the only chance to win the general election, I will not be making the same mistake on a “compassionate conservative” (i.e. big government conservative) this time around.

Many of you know that I am leaning towards Mitch Daniels as the GOP candidate for 2012.

This diary is not about you giving Mitch Daniels a chance in 2012.

It’s more about me opening up my mind, and all of us opening up our minds, to all of the candidates as we move forward.

How many choices do we really have?

One of the issues as we move forward into the race for 2012 is “How Many Choices Do We Really Have?”

I think the answer to that question is somewhat time based.

For all of 2011, I think that are choices are wide open: Palin, Jindal, Gingrich, Trump, Romney, Huckabee, Daniels, Barbour, Pawlenty, etc, etc.

There is plenty of time for us to open our minds and see what type of candidate we are looking for without judging any of them.

This is a stretch for me since I like Daniels and carry strong apprehensions about several other candidates at this time.

And the truth is that what got me started on this was listening to Palin talk the other day and feeling like I needed to push back some of my bias against her as someone who “can’t beat Obama” and try to get a fresh take on her.

Make yourself a spreadsheet

Hey, I’m a spreadsheet guy so what can I say. If you prefer paper then make yourself a big table on a piece of paper. Put your top five items across the top and the ten or so candidates down the side of one piece.

What are your five issues? Abortion, Limited Government, Afghanistan, Experience, Ability to Win the General election, not a Washington type?

They could be anything that really makes a difference to you.

Maybe it’s not five issues for you. Maybe it’s three issues or even two issues this time around.

Do YOUR OWN research

Part of what we’ve learned from the tea party movement is to do our own research and talk these things through with our friends and lead from the ground up.

Crank up Fox News, read redstate and realclearpolitics, search google news for speeches the candidates are making or look at their record — what they’ve actually done not just said.

Do this for the next six months whenever you hear something from one of the presumed candidates.

When June rolls around, it will be time to cut back the list a bit — based on fundraising, who’s really in, and who you just do and don’t like after you’ve done you’re research.

We need to get this right

Problems happen in the Republican primary when we just line up to take the next person without really thinking about the true pros and cons that are out there in regards to who are next President could be.

We need to take an approach that will lead us to the Marco Rubio of presidential candidates — the one who will resonate with both the conservative base and the American people as a whole and it’s still too early to decide who that is going to be.

While the Republicans have generally made peace with regards to how they will proceed with earmarks, the fact that they consider them to be trivial and in the case of Jim Inhofe, the right thing to do, earmarks are the first necessary step in righting the ship.

Earmarking is a symptom of what is wrong with congress

James Madison said famously upon vetoing congressional spending that:

Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them, the terms ‘common defense and general welfare’ embracing every object and act within the purview of a legislative trust.

(H/T: Americans For Prosperity

The very problem that we have with both the Democrats and the establishment Republicans (not all are RINOs) is that they love the power and the control that they get from congress. Our money is seen by them (and by the Jim Inhofe’s in particular) as THEIR money.

Earmarks are used as Bribes on Other Issues

Who can forget such things as the Husker kickback and the Lousiana purchase as part of the healthcare bill?

Further digging by the Sunlight Foundation shows that the 11 “pro-life” Democrats who compromised their beliefs for expediancy also received larger earmarks than they had previously put in for.

Earmarks Give Ownership

The biggest issue, however, regarding earmarks is a more simple principle: earmarks give ownership.

Why is ownership a bad idea?

The reason is that while Senators due represent their state, they also are suppossed to be taking care of the Republic and protecting the constitution not playing a game of how much money can I steal from other states and take home.

Let’s say that you and I are running a small business and we sit down to cut spending. Now what happens if I control 60% of the business and you control 40% of the business and any extra money that we don’t cut comes home to one of us in a bonus? Now, how easy is it to cut. Do we cut across the board or do we argue a bit more over how that money will be spent?

Inhofe and McConnell argue that earmarks don’t cost extra, but is it easier to cut ten percent of the Department of Education’s budget or cut the extra money for Kentucky magnet schools?

Earmarks are the first step to sanity

Earmarks are the first step to sanity.

It’s like cutting hot fudge sundaes when starting a diet. It may only be once a week and it might be a small amount of your total calorie intake over the week’s time, but if you can’t stop eating sundaes, there’s very little chance that you’re going to give up seconds and thirds of normal food and make other hard choices in your diet plan.

Change Jar Conservative … formerly known as Oz

Many of you know that I was a pro-life Democrat until they went instinct. I chose that road for the fondest of reasons — I knew it would drive my dad crazy if I became a Democrat (Dad thinks Rush and Hannity are moderates).

Whenever my birthday falls on the election, I do five things:

1) I go and vote (although I early voted this year)
2) I call my mother and wish her a happy “birthing day”
3) I make sure my friends know to go vote (thank you facebook)
4) I spend the day praying that God would elect the right people to lead our nation regardless of if I think I know who those people should be.
5) I spend the evening with some pizza, some pepsi, and the TV on

Now I’m going to ask you for two birthday presents today (I’m greedy that way).

#1) VOTE (you knew that was coming)
#2) Please share your “turnout” stories with us … they may not tell us ANYTHING about ANYTHING but they sure help pass the time (feel free to use my comment section)

Finally, I’m predicting +92 / 11 Senate seats for today even if the consensus seems to be 65 / 8.

I don’t believe that we won’t flip the Senate and I think that Gallup is right and if they are right, a lot more is going to go red than the “experts” say.

A few points before my projections:

1) I think that the polls are still underestimating GOP turnout by 2 to 3%.

2) I think things are moving in the GOP’s direction.

So here is my, overly optomistic prediction going forward, please add your own:

House +86 (yes it’s a crazy number but if Cook says we can get 55 then I think we can push beyond it).

Senate +11 (although +8 won’t surprise me. Something between those two would surprise me).

Governors 33 at the end of the day.

I think Barney Frank will survive although I most certainly hope not.

The first should go to someone on the RCP “Leans Republican” list and the second to someone in the tossup category.

My first donation to John Raese was met with mild applause, but my second made to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads was derided by a few people because of the Rove connection. The defense I made (and stand by) is that while I didn’t like what Rove did in the primaries, I think that American Crossroads is invaluable in their funding of house races.

Be that as it may and in the interest of keeping my conservative brethern (and sistern) on the same page, I want to make an additional donation (though it’s not coming out of my change jar money) to someone that I think we can all agree on:

Nick Popaditch

Nick is a true American hero who would be a great addition to the Congress.

His patriotism is beyond question and his stands for a strong border, lower taxes, and most of all limited government are what this movement is all about.

And to those who disagreed with my last donation, hopefully, we can agree on this one.

Onward to victory in November.

Let’s roll.

In the first of my posts, I talked here about using your change to take back America and here I discussed why Jon Raese was my first of two donations.

Instead of giving my second donation to someone I picked up off of the list for RCP, I went ahead and sent the money to Karl Rove and American Crossroads.

Why American Crossroads and not an individual donation?

There were several factors that lead to me going against what I said about giving to someone on the “tossup” category of RCP’s house list (my plan as outlined).