Diary

Michelle Nunn's Hoodwink Georgia Campaign

Beginning with her first campaign commercial, Michelle Nunn has been attempting to convince voters she is not a liberal, and perhaps not even a Democrat. Prior to her campaign commercials becoming standard-fare attack pieces that play fast and loose with the facts, the message they contained was clearly focused on hoodwinking Georgians into believing she is politically conservative.

Her campaign web site continues that theme. Portions of it appear to have been written by a Republican political campaign consultant. Perhaps they were. With respect to the major issues currently facing Georgians, Nunn espouses policies of reduced federal spending, less onerous regulations, energy independence and entitlement reform.

From Nunn’s web site:

“Budget deficits. In order to grow our economy and create jobs, we must rein in federal spending.”

“Energy. North America could become energy secure by 2020, ensuring our independence from Middle Eastern oil.”

“Entitlements. We must pursue bipartisan entitlement reform to preserve Medicare and Social Security for those currently in or near retirement, take action to strengthen these programs for the future and do both in an affordable manner.”

“Deregulation. We need to do a better job of assessing the cost of government regulations before any new ones are imposed as well as undertake a thorough review of the regulations that impact all businesses to ensure that they are necessary, streamlined, and have a minimal impact on job creation.”

Nunn also claims to support securing our borders, spurring job creation and simplifying the tax code. However, she opens a window on her true political convictions in stating she supports raising the minimum wage– an action that would be accomplished through the same type of government regulation she allegedly opposes. She also sees extending unemployment benefits as a means of encouraging people to continue looking for work. That is, she favors increasing government dependency as a means of reducing government dependency.

Which brings into question the sincerity of her conservative positions, and the means by which she would attempt to implement them. While she’s working on that, her fellow Democrats– Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and their compatriots in the House and Senate—will continue their liberal agenda of increased federal spending, blocking attempts to reduce dependency on foreign, creating unprecedented numbers of regulations and all but assuring a financial armageddon for Social Security and Medicare.

Michelle Nunn would argue that she would be a fresh voice within the Democrat party. A voice that would cry out for fiscal sanity, reduced government overreach and for legislation that would reduce the size of the dependency class. Such an argument has as much credibility as one that claims ice will not melt in hot water. Current political reality breaks clearly along party lines.

To be effective, a senator must build alliances. If Michelle Nunn is to be successful in implementing her claimed conservative policies, she would have to cultivate Republican allies. That would mean turning on her own party, including the out-of-state Democrats who have heavily contributed to her campaign. That would also mean turning against the policies of Barack Obama, after having said she would defer to his judgment.

That won’t happen. It can’t happen. Michelle Nunn is too indebted to liberal Democrats and were she to be elected, she would have no choice but to fall into ranks behind Harry Reid. If she doesn’t understand that, she is terminally naive. That’s highly doubtful, given the information contained in her leaked campaign documents. The reality is that she understands full well to whom she would be indebted should she be elected. The reality is that liberal Democrats didn’t donate to her campaign because they expect her to support conservative policies. And that leads to a second reality– the only way Michelle Nunn can win election is to hoodwink the voters into believing she’s something she is not.