Hi RedStaters.  My understanding is that, under RNC Rule No. 40, a candidate needs to have won a plurality of delegates from at least five states to be eligible for the party’s nomination:

“Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.”

So wouldn’t this mean that, assuming Gingrich and Paul don’t make the 5-state threshold (a pretty safe assumption I think), a contested convention would simply be a contest between Romney and Santorum?  What am I missing here?

Thanks for your input on this.

Recently, I found myself wondering who I would vote for if Batman ran against Superman for the US presidency.  But then it suddenly occurred to me that the frontrunners in the race for the Republican nomination are in fact kind of like Batman and Superman, so this isn’t just a hypothetical exercise.

One candidate/superhero led a privileged childhood, attending the finest schools and consorting with the ‘best’ families.  He took full advantage of these opportunities to grow up to become a very successful businessman and public figure, with a vast fortune and formidable political influence.  While happy to indulge in a life of luxury, with its requisite charity balls, expensive toys and family estates in all the cool places to summer and winter, this just isn’t enough for him.  Something is missing from his life, perhaps living up to the expectations of his late father?  After all, his father wasn’t just successful, he was also respected, even beloved, by the people.  But there’s the rub.  It’s tough to get them to like you when you really need for them to like you.  Especially when you don’t understand them, since you’ve never really been around too many ‘regular’ people.  So this candidate/superhero puts on a mask to disguise himself, and goes out into the gritty streets to be among the people to try and dispel the charge that he is detached and disconnected from the common man.  But he knows deep down inside that he would much rather be in the secret underground hideout beneath his favorite mansion, ringing his butler to bring down some more old brandy.

The other candidate/superhero’s upbringing was much different.  He grew up in a small town in the Midwest and went to public school.   His father, who was from somewhere else, dreamed that one day his children would have a chance for a better life in a new land.  And this candidate/superhero grew up with a deep appreciation for the opportunities that living in America afforded him.  He would study hard, work even harder, and make his way to the big city where all the action was.  And while people might claim that the sunny, “golly gee” disposition he still maintains after all these years is corny, the truth is that it’s really kind of endearing in a time when it’s hard not to be cynical about a guy who claims to fight for truth, justice and the American way.  And for this candidate/superhero, suiting up involves taking off his glasses, putting on his signature tight-fitting garment and, quite interestingly, producing an effect where we get a better look at his true self.

I doubt that anyone would need any more hints as to which GOP candidate is the most like Batman, or the most like Superman.  But just in case, the Batman candidate is the only one whose last name has the same number of letters as the word “Batman.”  And even though there are two candidates whose last names have the same number of letters as “Superman,” the one I’m thinking of has a last name that begins with the letter “S.”  And if even this isn’t enough to clarify matters, and you tend to think visually, just imagine which candidate has the squarest jaw, which is Batman’s most prominent and only visible facial feature, and you will probably guess the right guy.  Then consider Superman’s most famous feature, his trademark cowlick, and look up the Wikipedia entries for the four remaining GOP candidates.   You’ll find that one of them was nicknamed “Rooster’ for his “cowlick strand of hair and assertive nature” and you’re there.  Or just visualize which candidate you would cast if you were producing the sequel, “Superman: The Presidential Years,” and you’ll probably be spot on.   

So this has all been good fun, but the question still stands, and I will finally use names: “Does America need Batman/Romney or Superman/Santorum as its President?”  I will attempt to answer this question in my next diary posting.  So stay tuned…

We last saw you in South Carolina, and we supported and cheered for you there, because we’re angry too.  We’re angry with a President who is ‘fundamentally transforming’ away America into his grotesque and unrecognizable utopian vision.  We’re angry with a mainstream media that functions as his propaganda arm.  And we’re angry with a two-party establishment that is more concerned with the preservation and accumulation of personal power and riches than the future of our country.

But then you went away.  You were replaced by someone else in Florida.  This fellow was also angry, but not on our behalf.  He was angry for himself, and what the machine (Republican establishment + liberal media + Romney campaign) was trying to do to him.  We understand.  You are, after all, only human.  And it’s hard to stay focused on other’s needs when you are being savaged.  But we still need you.  And the best way to defeat them is to stand with us, because then we will stand with you. 

Come back, angry Newt, and rage against their lies and deception, their hatred for America and its mission and their disdain for morality and virtue.  Call them out on their intellectual dishonesty, historical ignorance and personal hypocrisy.  Do it in the way that only you know how to do it. 

Your greatest gift is your ability to recognize and articulate the truth.  This is your time.  This is your place.  Seize it.

Gingrich/Santorum have to stop the Romney juggernaut in at least some of the upcoming contests in the month of February before Super Tuesday on March 6^th, or we’ll really be able to put a fork in it and hand the nomination over to Romney.  And I still believe, in fact now more than ever before, that the only way to do this is with a unified Gingrich/Santorum (Pres/VP) ticket.  This is the only way to achieve even a modicum of balance versus Romney’s massive campaign war chest, his backing by the Republican establishment, and the mainstream media’s collusion with it.  Again, I plead with Newt that he declare Rick as his pick for running mate, and Rick, it’s time to transition from a run for President to a Vice Presidential run. 

You guys can do it, but you have to do it together.  Do it now, and millions of us will stand with you.  Do it later, and it just won’t matter.

See my full plea from last week below:

Dear Newt and Rick, It’s Time for a Unified Ticket

Dear Speaker Gingrich and Senator Santorum,

As a lifelong conservative Republican, I support you both in your bids for our party’s nomination for the presidency.  I recognize the courage that you have both demonstrated throughout your careers of service to America, in standing up for true conservative principles, in spite of the heavy personal and political costs you would have to bear by doing so.

A prime example of this was the overhaul of the American welfare system which you both led.  This was the first and still only major reform of an entitlement program in the US.  You challenged the failed utopian thinking that had gripped the mainstream media, the political establishment and academia, who were steering the country toward escalating spending and debt, and generations of Americans toward ever increasing dependency on the government’s ability to redistribute the wealth generated by a constrained and besieged productive sector.  You transformed welfare into a program that incentivizes work and practical skills training instead of addiction to government handouts, and for this you were accused of ignorance, heartlessness and even racism.  However, unlike the self-proclaimed champions of the ‘working class’, we conservatives saw only fellow Americans, and were therefore not surprised to see a new culture of work and responsibility rapidly emerge where before there had only been helplessness and dependency.  Poverty declined precipitously and the unburdened economy flourished for everyone.

I believe that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 steered the country away from the path of economic catastrophe and cultural decay.  Europe stayed on this path and is now reaching its unfortunate destination.  I believe that your landmark legislation effectively saved America’s economic future, if only for a time, since others have placed the US back on this road to despair and have been hitting the accelerator.  But now we need you both to get us on the right path again.  Your joint experience is the best model we have for how to confront the very similar domestic challenges America faces today:  bankrupting entitlement programs, paralyzing regulations and the crippling ObamaCare system.

Looking at you both, I see a veteran Cold Warrior who stood at Reagan’s side and stared down the Soviet Union, helping to seal its fate, and two unrepentant foes of the new yet very old threat of pan-global Islamism, a totalitarian movement more dangerous than Communism or anything else the US has ever faced before.  America needs leaders who are willing to make a stand, be clear in their understanding and communication of the existential threat we are facing, and be steeled in their resolve to confront it.  And just as in the case of America’s domestic challenges, based on actual track records, the only candidates that I trust to faithfully and competently assume this unenviable responsibility are you both.

So now here is my problem.  By both of you remaining in the race for the nomination, you are making it very unlikely that either one of you will be our nominee to lead America.  Yet in fact our country needs you both.  One does not have to be a political genius to see that Governor Romney’s greatest asset isn’t his campaign war chest or his organization.  Nor is it the establishment and mainstream media, with their disingenuous attempts to crown him as heir inevitable to the nomination since the start of the race.  If Romney does eventually win, it will only be because the Republican Party’s most important base of voters, people like me, are split between the two of you.

Romney’s strategy is clear.  As the campaign proceeds, he is sure to intensify his onslaught of propaganda against you, Mr. Speaker, chipping away at your support.  But he will make sure to avoid any more direct attacks against you, Senator, because he realizes that every point you gain is a point added to his lead over the Speaker.  In fact, he will be rooting for you.  He has a solid ten to fifteen point lead in the imminent Florida primary, and a win there will, I believe, vault him into clear frontrunner status.  The bandwagon effect will then give him a huge tailwind heading into the early February primaries, and I am afraid he may become unstoppable.

So here is my suggestion – or plea really.  Senator Santorum, please withdraw from the nomination process and make clear to your supporters, in case they don’t know it already, that you support and would like for them to back Speaker Gingrich.  And Speaker Gingrich, I ask that you name Rick Santorum as your running mate before the Florida primary.  You have already bravely put forth your choice for Secretary of State, and the early declaration of your intended Vice President will further foster the clarity and openness with which you have conducted your campaign.

By standing together and forming a single ticket now, I believe you will catalyze the immediate coalescence of the conservative majority in our party behind you both.  Disaffected conservatives and independents resorting to Romney or Paul will close ranks and unify behind an allied ticket.  Even before this ‘knock-on’ effect, by combining your current support you will be able to transform your Floriday poll deficits versus Romney into a solid lead for a unified ticket.

I cannot remember a more critical time for Americans to have the right leaders in place to navigate our nation through a perfect storm of domestic and foreign policy challenges.  If I can cast a ballot for a Gingrich-Santorum ticket in November, I think that at least we will have a fighting chance.  And I look forward to a Santorum presidency as well, starting in 2020, God willing.

The media’s fixation with Mitt Romney’s personal finances recently crescendoed with ABC News’s much trumpeted revelation that the ex-CEO of Bain Capital has millions of dollars parked in Cayman Islands and other offshore investments.  And in its typical fashion, this has led to a barrage of questions:  “How big were Romney’s investments and profits?”  “Did he pay the taxes on his gains and at what rate?”  But these are all the wrong questions, bereft of relevance and intended merely for spectacle.  Romney’s investments in these funds were a matter of public record before the story even broke.  Evading taxes on these investments would have been politically suicidal and criminally reckless behavior that is clearly foreign to Romney’s genetic makeup. 

There are, however, some very relevant and potentially troubling issues that the Cayman Islands funds do raise, and they have virtually nothing to do with Romney’s personal finances, but everything to do with his integrity and honesty vis-à-vis the people whose votes he is seeking.  These investments were in a subset of the one hundred and thirty-eight limited partnership private equity funds that Bain Capital had registered in the Cayman Islands.  So Romney wasn’t just an after-the-fact, passive investor in the latest and hottest funds commanding bragging rights around the cocktail circuit.  As its co-founder and CEO, Romney would have been the one responsible for siting these Bain Capital funds in the Cayman Islands in the first place.  And although this decision was perfectly legal, and not uncommon for a hedge fund chief, it contrasts sharply with the image Candidate Romney is trying to project of himself as a businessman who worked to help the US economy.  

In fact, by siting his funds in the Cayman Islands, rather than, say, Massachusetts, where Bain Capital is headquartered, Romney was potentially enabling foreign investors, like the Chinese, to avoid paying any US taxes on their Bain Capital investments, and was also making it a whole lot easier for investors who would have owed US taxes on these investments to engage in tax evasion if they so chose.  This is because the primary reason why private equity firms and other hedge fund managers use the Cayman Islands is that it does not charge any taxes on investment funds that are registered there.  This fact, combined with the shroud of secrecy such offshore havens provide regarding investor information, attracts investors who are not interested in paying US taxes.  And this all happens at the expense of American taxpayers and the US economy. 

First, to better understand how the Bain Capital funds provided tax-exempt foreign investors with an advantage, we need to take a look at how the foreign investor is taxed versus how the US investor is.  For the American investor, as Romney’s defenders correctly assured us was the case for his personal situation, an investment in a Cayman Islands fund is taxed in the exact same way as an investment in a US based fund.  So the investor is required to pay the appropriate capital gains tax, usually the 15% long-term rate.  A tax-exempt foreign investor, however, is only taxed on investments based in the US.  So there is no tax obligation to the US for offshore investments.  Neither is there a tax obligation to the Cayman Islands, with their zero tax rate.  So even though these funds were created and managed by Bain Capital, a US based firm, and even though their investments were in US based companies and assets, these foreign investors would be able to avoid all US taxes, a very valuable perk unavailable to US taxpayers. 

In essence, to the extent that Bain Capital was creating wealth through their investments, much of it was probably exported to investors in other countries who could repatriate their gains without any obligation whatsoever to the US Treasury.  This came at the expense of Americans, who would benefit much more if these investment gains had been reinvested in the US economy, creating new jobs, and if these profits had provided tax revenues.  It also came at the expense of the employees and shareholders of the companies that were targeted for investment by Bain Capital.  The companies themselves did not have the same access to these tax loopholes in raising capital to expand, and would instead need to rely on traditional sources of financing like stock or debt issues, investment vehicles that do not offer foreign investors a free lunch.   Therefore, offshore private equity funds, even those controlled by US firms, are able to leverage their unfair financing cost advantage to essentially outbid the company itself in the capital markets and buy it out.

Now while there is nothing wrong with a firm legally taking advantage of existing loopholes in the US tax regime for the sake of its shareholders, it is time for Romney to stop pretending that the US public good was anywhere in his thoughts when he ran Bain Capital.  Plus it is hypocritical of him to publicly rail against Chinese ‘cheating’ at every turn without acknowledging that he took full advantage of opportunities that might enable foreign investors, including the Chinese, to game the US tax system. 

Therefore, in the interest of full disclosure regarding controversial matters, which he is continually demanding from his opponents, it would be appropriate for Romney to reveal how much money Bain Capital raised from the Chinese and other foreign investors to finance their buyout efforts in the US.  And in the same way that Romney demanded that Speaker Gingrich disclose his consulting contracts, which Gingrich cheerfully and quickly furnished, it would be very helpful to see any Bain Capital marketing documents geared toward foreign investors.

And then there’s the issue of whether or not funds like Bain Capital’s enable tax evasion.  In contrast to legal tax avoidance by investors who are exempt from US taxes, as described above, tax evasion involves the failure of investors to pay taxes that they legally owe to the US.  Now suppose you entrust your car to your neighbor while you are away, and it is stolen.  If he had taken care to keep the doors locked and had parked the car in the garage then the only person to blame is the car thief.  But if your neighbor had left the car in the worst part of town, with doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, he would bear at least some of the responsibility.  Well, the fact of the matter is that offshore tax havens like the Cayman Islands make it infinitely easier for those who are required to pay US taxes to evade their responsibility, primarily because of the almost complete secrecy these locales offer to investors.  So while a fund manager like Romney was technically not doing anything illegal himself, he would be helping those looking for a dark place to hide from the US tax authorities. 

Independent groups have estimated that the US Treasury suffers billions of dollars in losses from tax evasion enabled by offshore tax havens.  If this were of any real concern to Romney, he could have taken the simple step of forming his funds in the US, where investors would be subject to the light of day and it would be nearly impossible to conceal gains and evade taxes.  But of course he did not.  What Romney did do, in the debate a couple of weeks ago, was wag his finger at the audience and remind us that we should pay all our taxes.  One must wonder if he took such care to admonish all of his investors in the same way, or opted for the more convenient “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach .

Finally, it should be noted that Romney has promised to use the insights from his business experience to help the US economy and the American taxpayer.  So even if our interests were not a priority while he was a businessman, the least he could do as a presidential candidate is suggest that these loopholes be closed and that the playing field be leveled for American taxpayers, shareholders and workers.   But in spite of his intimate knowledge of this potentially multi-billion dollar problem, he hasn’t uttered a word about it.  Romney continues to demonstrate how American interests are secondary to his own self-interest.  Exposing these practices would mean exposing himself and his cronies, something he is unwilling to do, even if it’s the right thing.  It’s up to us to hold him to account in the ballot booth.