Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica appeared on FOX’s ‘On the Record with Greta Van Susteren‘ last week to discuss how the TSA is wasting hundreds of millions of dollars because of inefficiencies in its procurement, deployment and storage of airport security screening equipment.

Mica expressed “outrage”, saying that he has been after them for the past year and spoke of a how a whistle-blower recently informed them that the TSA had thousands of pieces of equipment sitting idle in a warehouse in Dallas, TX.

And at a joint hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on T&I held Wednesday, after asking TSA officials if they were aware of this, Mica said, “someone needs to get aware”.

All good and well, after all, our elected officials should be concerned about wasting hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money.

Except someone was aware… as far back as November 2009.

Starting with the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of Management and Budget, and the appropriate Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees – of which, Mica was Ranking Member of the T&I Committee and sat on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

The very committees that held the joint hearing last week that pounded TSA officials over the handling of equipment.

The DHS’s Office of Inspector General produced a report on Nov 13, 2009 that took a close look at the management of the TSA’s Logistics Center.

http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_10-14_Nov09.pdf

The report noted that the TSA had thousands of units of equipment stored at airports around the country, as well as in three warehouses it leased – including the one in Dallas, TX. It also pointed out that as of January 2009, the TSA stored new equipment more than 3 years.

It’s hard to fathom that the TSA would not have included the T&I Committee on the distribution list, and as Ranking Member, it’s more than reasonable to expect that Mica would have received a copy of the Office of Inspector General’s Nov 2009 report when it was issued.

Even more so when considering his unique interest in the TSA, which he is known to call “the little bastard child I created.” Evidence of this interest on full display when Mica penned an op/ed on June 28, 2010 for Politico titled; TSA bogged down in bureaucracy.

A hard hitting critique of the agency just eight months after the 2009 report, as he began to publicly advocate for an opt-out for airports to utilize private screening professionals.

All of which raises the infamous question, what did John Mica know and when did he know it?

Did Mica know of these equipment issues as far back as November 2009? And if so, why did he not respond then with the same fanfare we see from him today? Every issue currently being grandstanded was documented as existing a full 2 1/2 years ago.

Or did he fail to exercise due diligence upon receiving the 2009 report and had to rely on a “whistle-blower” to inform him of what he should have already known?

If Mica never received the report, how is that possible, given the circumstances? Reports that typically go to the Chair and Ranking Member of a given committee. Would this not suggest that then T&I Chair James L. Oberstar (D-MN) intentionally kept the report from Mica?

And even if he did not receive the report, is it believable that a widely distributed evaluation of his “bastard child” took place without Mica ever catching wind of it or being tipped off about it’s existence?

As usual, far more questions than answers, yet the side show continues…

Highlights from the Office of Inspector General’s Nov 2009 report;

As of January 2009, TSA had approximately 13,650 units of transportation security equipment at 457 airports nationwide and 2,302 units of transportation security equipment stored in warehouses at the TSA Logistics Center in Dallas, Texas.

TSA contracted for its first warehouse for equipment storage at the TSA Logistics Center in February 2005. As inventory increased, TSA added a second warehouse in FY 2007 and a third warehouse in FY 2009.

As illustrated in the table below, 224 units (10%) of equipment at the Logistics Center had been stored for more than 2 years and 826 units (36%) had been stored for more than 1 year as of January 2009.

Results of Audit

TSA did not efficiently deploy, redeploy, or dispose of transportation security equipment through its Logistics Center. Specifically, TSA stored new equipment more than 3 years without written transition plans for its deployment; did not perform timely assessments of the condition of used equipment to determine whether these items could be redeployed; and stored excess transportation security equipment longer than necessary.

This occurred because TSA did not have standard guidance for the deployment, redeployment, and disposal of its transportation security equipment. As a result, TSA may have lost utility of equipment as it aged in storage and did not have an accurate accounting of its inventory. In addition, the need to store excess equipment contributed to TSA’s decision to lease additional warehouse space in FY 2009 at a cost of $2 million.

Deployment of New Equipment

TSA did not always deploy new equipment efficiently or take action to resolve deployment delays. In some instances, new equipment was stored for years before TSA program office personnel designated an airport to receive it. For example, during the first 3 months of 2007, the TSA Logistics Center received eight explosive detection systems units at a cost of about $7 million. As of January 2009, all eight explosive detection systems units remained in storage at the Logistics Center.

Report Distribution

Department of Homeland Security

Secretary
Deputy Secretary
Chief of Staff for Operations
Chief of Staff for Policy
General Counsel
Executive Secretariat
Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office
Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy
Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs
Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs

Transportation Security Administration

Assistant Secretary Transportation Security Administration
TSA Audit Liaison

Office of Management and Budget

Chief, Homeland Security Branch
DHS OIG Budget Examiner

Congress

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as appropriate

/

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

Last weekend, a Senate Forum was held in Orlando at the tail end of a statewide tea party gathering, followed by a straw poll. Of those who attended the forum and chose to participate in the straw poll, just under half of the overall attendees, George LeMieux was the heavy favorite.

Now there have been those who’ve disputed the validity of that straw poll, primarily supporters of Rep. Connie Mack, however, what cannot be disputed is that LeMieux did a better job connecting with the room that night than the other two candidates present, Mack and Col. Mike McCalister.

As one attendee attested; “I did not vote for LeMieux in this straw poll, but I would have to say that he definitely had the best performance of the three candidates.”

So how is that possible?

With the constant reminder of George Lemieux’s connections with former Gov. Charlie Crist, an unforgivable act in the eyes of some, how is it that his message resonates with tea party activists? It’s not as if those present last weekend overlooked this little nugget, LeMieux barely had both feet on stage before he was ambushed with the question and Mack was also quick to bring it up.

And with Col. McCalister having spent months on end touting himself as the ‘tea party candidate’, how is it that LeMieux comes into what should be McCalister’s home turf and carries the day?

Perception often trumps reality and nowhere is this more true than in politics. Millions are spent carefully crafting a candidate’s image or shaping his opponent in the eyes of the public. Our senses are assaulted with cleverly designed ads, often with so much spin we’re left not knowing which end is up. On the campaign trail every candidate promises milk and honey, while every opponent is the spawn of Satan himself.

Often times, when we look at the actions and words of a politician when he is not campaigning, we get a little more accurate picture of his true self. So in an effort to solve this great mystery of how George LeMieux is appealing to the grassroots, we’re going to climb aboard the way-back machine and take a look at the man before he started campaigning.

LeMieux was appointed to replace retiring Senator Mel Martinez back in August, 2009, the first time he has held public office, and formally announced his intentions to run for Sen. Bill Nelson’ s seat on April 5, 2011.

In February, 2010 LeMieux joined with Sen. Jim Demint (R-SC) and others to introduce legislation to impose a moratorium on earmarks and also a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution. He said at the time;

“Washington is addicted to spending and earmarks are the gateway drug to enormous debt. We need to stop earmarks and require a balanced budget. The American people don’t trust Washington to do the right thing with their money – and for good reason. The longer we do nothing about our debt, the longer struggle toward prosperity our children and future generations face.”

In May, 2010, LeMieux was a guest blogger for The Heritage Foundation and the topic was the president’s nominee to the United States Supreme Court. He opined;

“Congress’ tendency to expand government power is as real today as it was in [Alexander] Hamilton’s time. Healthcare mandates, exponential increases in the federal debt, and the recent spate of government bailouts all reflect that, left unchecked, government will expand into every nook and cranny of our commerce and our lives.”

In June, 2010, during a a meeting with the St. Petersburg Times editorial board, LeMiuex said;

“Fiscal responsibility is nothing but background music in Washington.”

In August, 2010, LeMieux hosted the “Fiscal Solutions Forum” in Orlando and Tampa, along with former U.S. Comptroller General David M. Walker and Concord Coalition Ex. Dir. Robert L. Bixby, two national budget experts. The forum focused on the national debt and the net interest paid on that debt. His comments then;

“We’re going to have to look across the board. My view is that we don’t have a revenue problem in Washington. We’ve got a spending problem. We’re going to have to look at our spending programs. We’re going to have to prioritize. No one even looks to see whether or not we’re spending our money efficiently and effectively. It’s going to take some principal people to go up there and try to do the right thing.”

And;

“Washington spending is out of control and the size of our debt proves it. From the time I came to Congress until now, the public debt has increased by one and a half trillion dollars. We have a responsibility to the American people to rein in spending and ensure that every taxpayer dollar is spent wisely, not wastefully. Now is the time to make the difficult decisions, not somewhere down the road after we’ve passed along the burden to our children.”

So when George LeMieux stood before tea party activists and identified the national debt as our “number one threat”, stated that “career politicians, both parties, are as great a threat” and spoke of the future of our children as being the motivation behind his run, it’s very likely he wasn’t just pandering to his audience, but was speaking to his convictions.

He was also speaking the tea party’s language. He did not bluster and he did not tell the audience one thing, then spend the following days walking it back in the media. He was speaking to what he has been saying all along, to what most in that room have dedicated three years of their lives to; fiscal responsibility, limited government and free market solutions.

Which may be what prompts responses such as this from a reader;

“I watched George LeMieux’s voting record after he took over as interim senator. To my surprise, he voted along Small-Government, Tea Party lines repeatedly. I had expected to find another Charlie Crist pattern since Crist had appointed him. Yet, LeMieux voted as an actual Reagan-style conservative would have voted… at this point, I’d choose George LeMieux. And am personally quite surprised to find myself in this position.”

LeMieux closed out his comments last week by saying, “I’m not a show horse, I’m a work horse.” It would be hard to disagree that we have plenty of show horses already in Washington, D.C.

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

In a brief respite from the joys of the circular firing squad known as conservative politics, today’s column focuses on the left… the far left… the ‘progressive left‘, a.k.a. the Democratic Party.

The Florida Progressive Coalition Blog put out a piece yesterday titled The Constitution Is NOT the Bible. Typically, I avoid the drivel coming from the far left for selfish reasons, namely to keep my head from exploding, however, this piece so accurately captures the state of mind of the far left that it makes an excellent case study.

Before I get into the content, a little background on the FPC Blog. It’s the product of Kenneth Quinnell, who describes it as “a network of concerned citizens, bloggers and activists that believe in a commitment to equality, fairness, justice, effective and efficient government, protecting our natural resources and moving our state and country forward.”

Quinnell is a professor at Tallahassee Community College who teaches American history and political science – surprise, surprise. According to ‘Rate My Professor’, he’s “strict”, “very liberal”, “bitter” and “extremely anal about grammar” – he’ll have a field day with this column should he stumble across it.

He identifies himself as a “political activist” and has been an active blogger here in Florida for some time. He has written for Daily Kos, Crooks & Liars and a few other left wing outlets, occasionally under the moniker T Rex. He also advocates on behalf of SEIU and other union organizations.

He is also listed as a ‘Senior Advisor’ for Progress Florida, a nonprofit organization that promotes progressive values such as social justice, health care reform, environmental protection, economic fairness and strengthening public education.

In short, fellow tea partiers, this individual is the epitome of what we have been up against for the past three years.

If you click on the ‘About’ tab on the Florida Progressive Coalition Blog web page, you will find the word ‘progressive’ used 6 times in a short description listed – and a cheap shot at Republicans. Typical of the left, there seems to be an intentional avoidance of defining what ‘progressive‘ means. Look the word up in the dictionary and here’s what you’ll find;

Now that Sen. Marco Rubio has taken the bold step to endorse in the GOP presidential primary, the critics have come out in force. Given the significance of the decision, the fallout has been of equal magnitude.

With so much at stake, the emotion is understandable.

In an interview this week with the Daily Caller, the freshman Senator from Florida let it be known that Obama’s recent ‘open mic’ gaffe with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sparked his endorsement of Mitt Romney;

“It’s been weighing on my mind all week,” he said.

“I’ve never thought about this as a political calculation,” Rubio said of his endorsement. “I’m just sitting back here and watching a president that just got back from overseas — where he told the Russian president to work with him and give him space so he can be more flexible if he gets re-elected.”

“The stakes are so high. We’re not running against John F. Kennedy here,” he said.

“We have to win this election in November. We have to!” he averred. “If we don’t win this election in November — and we get four more years of Barack Obama — I don’t know what that means … But I know it ain’t good.”

This is a clear indication that Rubio gets the difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. And why shouldn’t he? His family has lived the experience of socialism first hand and have seen the debilitating effects it has on the human spirit.

Many in the conservative movement drone on about Romney being Obama-lite and there being no difference between the two. And the further right you go, the louder the outcry. This opinion being uttered by those who’ve lived a life of relative security, having never faced the experience of losing everything a family has spent generations building, including the ground beneath it’s feet.

It is in this light that I suggest Marco Rubio is uniquely qualified to make this judgement…

Serving as a stark reminder is a photo of Marco sitting next to his father that hangs in his Washington office – not in his private quarters, but on display out in the reception area. A conscience decision, I submit, hung there to remind all who come calling of Rubio’s heritage, so that they in turn will hold him accountable to that legacy.

Mitt Romney is a capitalist, through and through. Barack Obama? Not so much. And therein lies a profound difference that every American should be aware of and of whom Rubio decides to cast his lot with should weigh considerably.

As a tea partier, Mitt Romney has never been my first choice. Yet, there is a saying; ‘to the victor goes the spoils’. The other candidates in the race have had their chances and then some to prevail and have failed to seize the opportunity. The tea party has had the opportunity to push a candidate more to their liking forward and have also failed, for the same reason as always. An excruciating inability to coalesce around a common objective, or common candidate in this case.

The real strength of the tea party has always been the power behind it’s numbers. Thin those numbers out over a myriad of issues and/or candidates and it becomes just another voice in the wilderness.

And with a series of actions, culminating with today’s announcement that Rep. Paul Ryan will be endorsing Romney, the Republican Party is serving notice that it will do whatever is necessary to prevent a brokered convention.

Simply put, it’s over folks. It’s time to focus on the real challenge and that is defeating Barack Obama and the progressive left ideology that threatens all that has made America the greatest country in human history. An ideology of which four more years we cannot stand.

It is time to do battle. It is time to grab the weapon you have, enhance it as best you can, and commence to fighting.

Are you to count yourself among those standing shoulder to shoulder in the quest to secure the future of a country that our Founding Fathers sacrificed so dearly for on your behalf? Or are you to be but a witness calling from the sideline in this age-old struggle for self reliance that has only once in all of history seen the people emerge victorious?

Marco Rubio gets it… and I stand with Marco Rubio.

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

It’s official, I am now against the war in Afghanistan.

In the wake of the ‘sensitivity’ of the Koran burning incident and the U.S. soldier who went off the deep end, killing 16 Afghan civilians, we are now learning of the death a 22-yr-old Marine who was shot in the back of the head by an Afghan soldier at an outpost last month.

In what is a previously undisclosed case of apparent Afghan treachery, the incident marked at least the seventh killing of an American military member by his supposed ‘ally’ in the past six weeks.

As tragic as this latest act of cowardice may be, and I can only imagine the incredible stress this must place on our soldiers, it was not the act itself that led me to finally say enough is enough. It is the realization that the news we’re getting from Afghanistan is now being censored and we are not being told the truth – it was initially stated that the soldier had died “while conducting combat operations”.

In short, Afghanistan has become a politicians’ war and that is when the ghosts of Vietnam come calling. And for that I say not one more life should be lost, bring our troops home now!

The truth is, the Obama administration is quietly negotiating our surrender anyway, just as Henry Kissinger did so many years ago. And just as no one expected the South Vietnamese government to stand very long in our absence, no reasonable person expects the Afghan government to fare any better.

The only remaining mission I can see in Afghanistan is to prevent President Karzai from fleeing in exile to some exotic location with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars while allied troops are still on the ground. That and preventing the country from completely reverting back to the 7th century before we’re out.

And since the politicians can’t avoid playing war, here’s an opportunity for the Republican Party to take the lead on calling for an immediate withdrawal.

Not only will the GOP gain favor with the vast majority of Americans who have grown weary of a war our troops are not being permitted to win and now just want these brave Americans brought home, but they will also put Obama and the Democrats in the position of defending our continued presence there.

And if Obama concedes and acts, Republicans can then take credit… either way, America is all the better for the decision.

Well, who says I can’t dream…

The real irony here is the anti-war movement that was at a fever pitch when Bush was in office is now completely silent. When’s the last time you’ve heard Cindy Sheehan’s name mentioned? The entire anti-war crowd has proven to be little more than hypocritical far left ideologues who only complain when war is being waged by the right.

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

Ned Ryun, founder and president of American Majority, has written a very insightful article titled ‘Evolve or Die; The Tea Party Movement is at a Crossroads‘.

In this piece, Ryan lays out ‘the good, the bad and the ugly’ and opines that the tea party must “become sustainable with a more concise mission and ability to fundraise… But if it cannot get past the negative impressions and the internal dissension, it will become nothing but a footnote in American political history.”

As someone who has lived the tea party experience the past three years, I feel an overwhelming need to comment on Ryan’s thoughts.

While he touches on some of the real challenges of the tea party, Ryan only skims the surface when it comes to the damage being done by the national groups. He talks about the internal dissension, the battles for control and the money-making schemes, yet fails to go into sufficient depth here.

Ryan takes a hard hitting approach with Tea Party Express, but doesn’t follow suit with Tea Party Patriots, barely mentions Tea Party Nation, gives FreedomWorks a total pass and there’s no mention whatsoever of the latest of what seems like an endless line of opportunists, TeaParty.net.

It seems highly unfair when you consider any one of the above is as detrimental as the other. In each case, don’t look too closely behind the mirror. I have my theories as to why Ryan doesn’t delve further into the abyss, but that’s for another day.

From the very beginning, the media has been trying to define the tea party. Initially, this proved to be an exercise in frustration because there was no central leadership, no one to isolate. At the same time, this quest helped add to the vacuum that existed. And that’s when the human element in all it’s glory rose up, with no shortage of individuals willing to fill the role.

At both the national and local levels, the hucksters are out in force. Books are being written and peddled for profit on an ongoing basis, the demand on the speakers tour has never been greater. It seems everyone has their own particular process or angle on how to go about solving the many challenges we face and none are shy about making the pitch.

And when the national media needs a spokesman to help further the narrative it drives, there’s a long line of ‘personalities’ willing to step up to advance their public profile – if there is no central leadership, the media will simply prey on the human frailties of ego and greed to create it.

Ryan accurately touches on the the reality that if the national groups could go away tomorrow, the movement would be fine. But the local level is beset with many of the same issues, just on a lessor scale. Ironically, those who are quick to condemn what’s happening on the national scene are just as quick to emulate the very behavior, yet can’t seem to equate the two actions as being one and the same.

Again the human element. Local groups remain shackled by political correctness and the fear of being ‘left behind’ should they speak out on the opportunists manipulating the tea party, and thus only add to the problem.

And in this carnival atmosphere, average everyday Americans that made untold sacrifices in the beginning, people like myself, simply walk away from it all realizing that the Tea Party has evolved into that which we initially rose up to fight against.

Just as the politicians endeavor to manipulate the movement daily for personal gain, so too do those within who were bold enough to step to the front of the parade and proclaim themselves leaders.

So, yes, the tea party is losing the ‘battle over definition’ because the focus long ago shifted away from the message and settled on the messengers.

It was T.A.R.P. and the Stimulus Bill that led to the birth of the Tea Party, however, consider this sobering fact; projected federal spending in 2012 is higher than 2011, which was an increase over 2010, which was higher than 2009.

Who among the self proclaimed leaders is leading the charge here? From my perspective, only one – Americans for Prosperity.

As for evolving, we saw the Tea Party ‘evolve’ from rallies protesting the spending to fighting healthcare reform and it’s hard to argue that the movement has ever been more effective than it was at this point. The transition to advocacy was quick and simple, brought about by a clarity in purpose. It is in this light that Ryan is most on target in a call for “a more concise mission”.

But all is not lost. In reality, the Tea Party has always been the people. It’s source of strength the raw numbers. And it’s motivation an out of control federal government. All of which still exist in abundance.

We understand that the mission at hand is to defeat Barack Obama and the Progressive Left, who have added more to the national debt than one would have thought possible just three short years ago. All in the quest to shift America away from the traditional values that made it the greatest nation in the history of man.

And just as we saw in the 2010 election, we the people will be heard at the ballot box.

In an appropriate metaphor*, I liken the tea party to a car nearing the end of a NASCAR race, having been told by it’s crew chief that it’s two laps short on fuel. So like any good driver, you start trying to save fuel to ensure you make it to the end. You lift up off the accelerator a little early going into the turns and ease back into it as you come out. You try to maintain a steady speed and coast whenever the opportunity permits.

You do whatever it takes to get to the finish line clearly marked as November 6, 2012. Hopefully, just as we see in NASCAR, a win there provides the necessary momentum to carry us into the next race… a day of reckoning for the political class in America.

*American Majority is sponsoring a car in this weekend’s Nationwide race at Daytona and will be on hand with it’s Pledge to Vote: Keep America Free voter registration initiative.

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

Mitt Romney thumps Newt Gingrich… Romney handily defeated Newt Gingrich… Romney cruised to a dominating victory… The Romney victory a decisive win… Romney obliterated Gingrich.

Gingrich’s performance has been pretty disastrous… Comparatively poor showing by Gingrich.

While scanning the news this morning, the above captions are from various national outlets reporting on yesterday’s Nevada caucuses. In case you haven’t figured it out yet, Mitt Romney won.

With 71.1 percent of precincts reporting, the former Massachusetts governor had 48% of the vote, with Newt Gingrich in second place with 23%, followed by Ron Paul with 19% and Rick Santorum was in fourth with 11%.

I’m not sure why only 71% of the precincts are shown as reporting the morning after, however, when you consider this is Harry Reid country, it makes sense that it may take a little time to “sort” out the results.

And for those paying attention, the totals show that non-Romney (52%) continues to outperform Romney (48%).

Just after the Florida Primary, there was a report that the media would now ‘pull the plug on Newt’;

Presidential candidates survive on the oxygen of media coverage. It’s what keeps them going, enables them to keep raising money. Once the coverage is withdrawn, it’s only a matter of time before their candidacies expire. Out of sight, out of mind, out of money.

Which appears to be a tactic well underway… unless there’s bad news to report which serves to further the task at hand.

So Romney wins Nevada. The only shocking thing about Nevada would have been had the race been tight. Romney carried the state in 2008, where eventual nominee John McCain finished a distant third, behind even Ron Paul. 

And Mormons account for 25% of registered Republican voters and overwhelmingly support Romney.

Here’s another tidbit that puts the opening terminology in a little better perspective, Nevada allocates its 28 delegates proportionally, which means that Romney picked up 10 delegates to Newt’s 4.

Yet, a leading Romney backer in Nevada was calling for Gingrich to drop out of the race instead of continuing to divide the party. Naturally, this ally was not as insistent on Dr. Paul and Santorum, who continue to split the non-Romney vote ensuring Romney’s success, to follow suit.

The supporter, Nevada Rep. Joe Heck, almost comically stated in reference to Ron Paul, that he should quit when it becomes apparent that there is “enough critical mass in terms of delegates”, probably sometime after Super Tuesday.

In a press conference held in Las Vegas, Newt Gingrich said, “We will continue the campaign all the way to Tampa. I suspect this debate will continue for a long time… I’m not going to withdraw. I’m actually pretty happy with where we are.”

So the only real news coming out of Nevada is that the national media continues to serve up their choice for the GOP presidential nominee, as was the case in ’08, and most Americans continue to belly up to the buffet line asking for seconds.

Cross Posted at Florida Political Press

We are now two days away from the Florida presidential primary.

If you are to believe the narrative in the media and the results of most polls, Mitt Romney has pulled out to a substantial lead in the race, up by an average of 8-10 pts.

It’s worth noting that the polling has been schizophrenic…

Romney held a commanding double digit lead here prior to the South Carolina primary, which Newt Gingrich erased entirely as he rode the momentum of his dominant win in that primary to a strong lead of his own. We then saw the ‘machine’ go to work on Newt, giving us the current results. And this has all occurred in the past 10 days.

What the polling suggests is that this is a very volatile race that can turn quickly and with two days to go, anything is possible. But for the moment, let’s assume that Romney prevails in Florida. What does that mean?

It will mean that, in spite of the great awakening of the American people brought on by Rick Santelli’s famous Chicago rant, money still controls politics.

It will mean that the politics of personal destruction and negative campaigning prevails as an effective path to winning elections.

It will mean that after three years of trying to restore honor and integrity in the political arena, these virtues remain lost in the wilderness.

It will mean that all the sacrifices over the past three years by so many to reestablish government of the people, by the people and for the people has been for naught. That such a concept is still but a distant memory.

It will mean that the ‘politics of old’ reigns supreme.

My greatest fear, that the American people will not comprehend all that is at stake in this election, seems to be playing out before my very eyes.

When Ronald Reagan ran in the 1980 presidential race, he took his case directly to the American people, not depending on the media and the political class, both of whom were aligned against his candidacy, to get his message out.

When you take an honest look at Mitt Romney, he has taken the exact opposite path.

As we Floridians have witnessed over the past week, Newt Gingrich has maintained a punishing schedule to get before the folks, with thousands turning out to hear his visions of America. Meanwhile, there is but a ripple on the ground from Camp Romney.

Yes, it seems Romney has avoided the great unwashed for the most part, endeavoring instead to ensure the support of the political class and the ‘machine’ it controls through the Republican Party. Even if it requires peddling the potential influence he acquires should he prevail, right Ms. Bondi?

Beyond the courting of Florida’s political elite, Romney has also put his sizable financial advantage to work inundating the airwaves with negative ads targeting Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment be damned.

And speaking of, exactly when did we become a people who ridicule big dreams and grandiose ideas? Was America not built on dreams? Is that not the very foundation that made this the greatest country in the history of the world? And we embrace the purveyor of this ridicule?

So what does a Mitt Romney win mean Florida?

It will mean the moderate wing of the Republican Party, the very faction that gave us John McCain in ’08, is firmly in control of the conservative movement in America.

It will mean the tea party message will become just another populist movement that came and went. And most importantly, it will mean that government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite is still how things get done in America.

Two days… so much can happen in two days.

Cross Posted at Florida Political Press

It is only fitting that the mudslinging now coming out of the Mitt Romney camp is occurring here in Florida. When it comes to dirty politics, the Sunshine State stands in a class all it’s own.

After Newt Gingrich’s overwhelming victory in the S.C. primary and subsequent surge in the polls, a real sense of desperation set in for Romney.

Desperation that manifests itself in the aggressive demeanor he’s taken on and in the negative campaign ads that have inundated the airwaves in Florida.

Such as the ad that falsely claims that Gingrich “resigned in disgrace” which Romney is still running and even had aired during last night’s CNN debate. A claim that none other than Charles Krauthammer himself has stated is not accurate.

Although, were you to ask Mitt Romney about this ad, odds are you will get feigned ignorance. A bothersome trend from the former Governor, whether you’re asking about sleazy campaign ads or Swiss bank accounts, is for him to deny knowledge and divert the responsibility to others.

Yet, desperate times call for desperate measures and fortunately for Romney, his chief campaign strategist and several of his most senior campaign staff were Charlie Crist’s top political advisers who are ever so familiar with the political turf here in Florida.

And this ‘win at whatever cost’ approach now seen coming from the Romney camp is eerily reminiscent of good ol’ Charlie, leaving one to wonder if this is driven by the sense of entitlement that seems to be inherent in the political class, a.k.a. the establishment?

And make no mistake about it, the ‘establishment’ is fully behind Mitt Romney, as evidenced by the likes of John McCain and Connie Mack IV out stumping on his behalf. Individuals who are always quick to rail against the very system they have become an embodiment of.

In truth, McCain’s appearance signals something far more sinister. Mitt Romney has not put forth much effort to court tea party support, much like Crist’s moderate, ignore-the-tea-party strategy. Which makes sense considering the same individuals are behind both campaigns.

As we often see in both Washington and Tallahassee, the political class is first and foremost about outmaneuvering it’s opponents and the tea party needs to understand that the moderate wing of the GOP sees it as much of an opponent as it does the Democrats. Perhaps more so, since both parties share a common benefit from a continuation of the status quo.

And if Mitt Romney can secure the nomination without so much as crossing the street for the tea party, it will serve the dual purpose of ensuring the establishment retains control with ‘their guy’ and will go a very long way toward suppressing the rightward shift of the party brought on by the tea party.

Yes, the GOP presidential primary comes down to the moderate wing versus the conservative wing of the party – the establishment vs. the tea party.

With Newt Gingrich, in all his glory, representing the conservative tea party position.

In reality, this has been a two man race for some time now. Rick Santorum is reportedly pulling up stakes on Sunday and returning home two days before voting takes place. Simply put, he just doesn’t have the resources to compete in an expensive state like Florida where it’s winner take all.

Much like former Gov. Sarah Palin, who wants to see the nomination process continue to play out, Santorum supporters AND the tea party movement in Florida must see the long term effects of a Romney win. If he prevails here, the race is all but over.

A vote for Newt Gingrich ensures a continuation of this process and all parties involved live to fight another day.

One thing is clear, with Romney as the Republican nominee, the tea party may as well pack up and go home – it will have zero influence in his organization.

The moderate wing of the party is counting on the political immaturity of the tea party to prevail, the fierce independence of the many groups to prevent it from seeing the long term strategy playing out.

What is really encouraging here is that just as it has been from the very beginning, the people have it within their power to control the outcome. The question is do we choose to exercise this power.

Cross Posted at Florida Political Press

With the Iowa Caucus about to begin, we are just hours away from the official launch of the critically important 2012 presidential electoral process.

About the only thing that is certain at this point is that the Iowa results, be what they may, will be spun six ways to Sunday by the campaigns, their supporters and the talking heads in the media.

In these analyses, motive will be long and truth hard to find as everyone tries to seize the momentum. Which is really about the only role Iowa plays as it is far from a microcosm of the American people and the caucus process itself is suspect in many ways.

As things stand, the odds makers say Mitt Romney will prevail with Ron Paul coming in a very close second, the results of which could easily flip flop. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum will battle it out for third place, with Rick Perry potentially factoring in. It’s very likely that Iowa will spell the end of Michele Bachmann’s 2012 efforts and Jon Huntsman, who’s putting all his eggs in a New Hampshire basket, will be an afterthought.

With the media being diligent in it’s never ending quest to remove all obstacles to the progressive Shangri-la it so desires, a trend already beginning to play out is to cast the electoral results as the death knell of the tea party.

We will be told that this is supposed to be the year that the tea party picked the Republican presidential candidate, a ‘great opportunity for conservatives to finally get a nominee without compromising’. And any success by Romney, Gingrich or even Ron Paul will be used as the measuring stick to point out the utter failure of this objective.

Newsflash… no it’s not!

The success or failure of the tea party will be predicated on one fact and one fact alone, that being the fate of Barack Obama. Replacing the current occupant of the White House is the key aspiration of the tea party, a fact confirmed in a recent Rasmussen poll. Not to suggest that it doesn’t matter which candidate accomplishes this, but it’s not the driving factor.

Of course, politics being what it is, it will be confusing because at the same time the media is selling you on the impending doom of the tea party, the frontrunners will all be trying to convince us that they are the tea party candidate. Particularly Ron Paul.

News flash… no he’s not!

Ron Paul will be the one candidate that will get an assist from the media in propagating the idea that he is the tea party choice because it serves their ultimate goal to associate the movement with some of his more quirky ideas. If successful in that endeavor, the media will then expose those ideas for what they see them as, ‘killing two birds with one stone’ if you will.

Additionally, any lack of success by Bachmann, Perry or Santorum will also be hung around the neck of the tea party, used by the media to highlight the inability of the movement to push the candidates that best represents it’s values to the forefront. Particularly Bachmann, being Chair of the tea party caucus in Congress.

Newsflash… no it’s not!

Since the historic success of it’s early days when there was a laser focus on T.A.R.P., Stimulus I & II and ObamaCare, the tea party has become very fragmented and it’s purpose waylaid by far too many self serving principles calling themselves ‘leaders’. The one consistency that remains is the understanding of how damaging four more years of Obama can be. The realization that this man has emboldened the enemies, both foreign and domestic, of a free and prosperous America like no other.

In what may very well be the only remaining success of this great awakening known as the tea party, defeating Barack Obama in 2012 is job one and the average, everyday Americans who’ve always been the strength of the tea party are looking for that one candidate that can accomplish this, ideology aside.

Which explains why Bachmann, Perry and Santorum struggle to resonate more than they do – the perception being that they do not have what it takes to defeat Obama in the general election.

Some may call placing ideology aside selling out, capitulating or simply the maturation of the tea party toward the realities of politics, but I think it’s indicative of something else all together. And that is, when it comes to defeating Barack Obama, failure is not an option.

Cross Posted at Florida Political Press