The Republic Square

Truth Be Told

2007-03-08T23:26:00.000-08:00

In 2005, as chairman of the Catholic University College Republicans, some students and faculty agitated against one of my planned speaking engagements. The event was a speech on leadership presented by Newt Gingrich, and the protesters' complained that Newt's sorted personal life violated the school's prohibition against speakers not in communion with church doctrine. Illogical theological absurdities aside (never discuss religion in polite company, I always say), yours truly argued in an NPR radio interview that Newt's personal life did not compromise his stock as a great speaker for the event. After all, it seemed obvious to me that failing to conduct oneself morally and the open advocacy of immorality were easily distinguishable actions.

Now, as then, the libs among us proved overwhelmingly unable to appreciate philosophical nuance. On Thursday the media went and worked itself into an excited frenzy over the revelation that Fmr. Speaker Gingrich has admitted to having an affair during the Clinton Impeachment. Ever capable of defending himself, Newt eloquently explained why the media's charges of hypocrisy continue to ring hallow:

"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not
rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."

We all fall down, and certain beloved friends and family among us do so with greater frequency and force than others. Nevertheless, there remains a demonstrable difference between failing to do good on the one hand, and attempting to rationalize and even idealize bad behavior on the other. Individuals need something to "shoot for," so societies safeguard moral norms to encourage just and communally as well as personally beneficial behavior. Newt's affairs retain their disgracefulness, but his sin remains his own to reconcile with the women he disrespected and hurt. Who can Fmr. President Clinton apologize to for making "bj's" and numerous "definitions of is" part of the vocabulary of every elementary school student?

Candidate Profile: Rudy Giuliani

2007-03-02T10:14:00.000-08:00

Name: Rudolph William Louis Giuliani III

Age: 63

Marital Status: Married (Judith Nathan)
Twice Divorced

Party: GOP

Position: Fmr. Mayor of NYC, Fmr. Federal Prosecutor, Security Consultant and Businessman

Famous for: NYC Mayor during 9/11

Nickname: "Rudy", "America's Mayor"

Would be: First Italian American President
First NYC Mayor to be President
Second Catholic President
First North East President since JFK
First NY President since FDR
-----------------------------------------------

Political Ideology: Right of Center

Fiscally: Conservative

Socially: Moderate

Foreign Policy: Hawk

Campaign Fundraising Prowess: Very High

Current Field Ranking: #1 in GOP Primary
#1 Overall (Beats Hillary, Obama, and all known
contenders solidly in current TIME and NJ Quinnipiac
polling)

Strengths: Rudy has cultivated for himself the perception of strong leadership due to a strong resume as prosecutor and mayor. He is popular with Americans across the political spectrum. Conservatives largely view the former mayor as a tough on crime and terrorism. Liberals and Moderates see a personally affable Republican who has distance from Bush and a socially moderate platform. Giuliani can also command large sums of donation cash as well as loyalty from numerous politicians for which he has campaigned since 2001.

Weaknesses: Rudy may encounter ire over his dicey personal life (having married and divorced a second cousin before cheating on his second wife). The later sorted personal saga had damaged his approval ratings, only to be resurrected by his 9/11 leadership. Social Conservative Republican Primary voters may also take issue with his liberal positions on civil unions and abortion.

Analysis: Rudy is the clear frontrunner, and his Washington CPAC speech today was warmly (if cautiously) received. As Rush Limbaugh skillfully noted, McCain is suffering for insisting on running for president of the US before the contest for president of the GOP is decided. Giuliani has not made that mistake, as illustrated by his willingness to address CPAC and McCain's suspect refusal.

Nevertheless, Rudy has three major strikes against him for national electability. 1) He's an Italian Catholic from the North East 2) Women may find his personal life too much to take 3) If millions of social conservatives sat home in 2000 because of uber-socially conservative George Bush's 20-year old DUI, will these churches actually show up for socially moderate and thrice divorced Rudy?

Stay Tuned....

Republic Square POWER RANKINGS, Week of February 26th

*Once a week we will estimate the chances for each candidate to win their respective party nomination for president. The top five from each party are then ranked accordingly.... sorry Bidens of the world, we only have enough time for those having national prospects.

GOP POWER V:
1. Giuliani- As of now, Giuliani is running the best campaign. Nevertheless, we are still a long way out and the first debate isn't until April. Giuliani should begin talking about his relationship with Reagan-era judicial minds like Alito and Roberts in order to slake the fears of social conservatives.
2. McCain- Shit or get off the pot, my Grandmother used to say. Senator McCain may have simply burned too many Conservative bridges, and his snub to CPAC reminds conservatives of why they think the Arizona Senator cannot be trusted. McCain needs to find an inner energy and start running for the nomination, or face defeat at the hands of a more aggressive challenger.
3. Gingrich- If Newt really wants in, he could make a real go of it, polishing up fond memories of the glory day that magic November 1994. Then, the less-glorious days of 1999 will remind pundits why he won't be on the ticket.
4. Romney- Sink or swim, pal. Romney needs to prove he's something more than a pretty face with a questionable abortion track record FAST.
5. Brownback- A real potential VP... needs to increase exposure, hope for/work towards a Romney collapse to open up potential caches of conservatives disaffected by the big 3 (McCain, Giuliani and Romney)

DEM POWER V:
1. Clinton- It's hard to see Bill Clinton not getting what he wants in the Democratic Party... in this case, it's a house in NY to himself. Clinton has been running a campaign as flat as John McCain, but Hillary has much more room to slouch. The institutional advantages inherent in being a "Clinton" may just be too enormous.
2. Obama- Barrack is the only candidate with a serious shot at the former First Lady. He represents a different, fresh face at a time when Americans seem to desire experimentation with something new.
3. Gore- Fresh off of an Oscar win for his home movie discussing melting ice cubes, the former Vice President could have Nixon-mojo if he decided to run.... but it's unlikely that he would want to risk losing his new-found niche as the Left's premier spokesman on all that is cooky.
4. Edwards- Polls suggest he is leading in Iowa, but the newer and dare I say smoother Obama may have sucked any available air from Edwards sphere. Altitude sickness, John? Drink water.
5. Richardson- If this were the VP power rankings, the order would be inverted (removing Gore, of course). Richardson could help make the American SW blue and attract more Hispanics, but his conservative leanings on many issues sadly exclude him from a serious chance at the top Dem post.

Retrospective

2007-01-04T14:35:00.000-08:00

In one of those moments that can't really be scripted, I was flipping through a recent issue of Newsweek Magazine with the news on in the background covering the start of the new Congress when I came across an article entitled Decline and Fall. It was an article that told the all too familiar story of how the Republicans of 1994 were betrayed by the institution of Congress and forced to capitulate on principles.

The reason I say it was a profound moment is because the story centered abound former Congressman Steve Largent of Oklahoma, a man who according to the story recognized what was happening to the GOP Congress. Largent lost in a bid for Governor of Oklahoma in 2002, one of very few losses suffered by the GOP in that year. Largent's defeat was in large measure due to an independent former Republican who pulled in nearly 15% of the vote.

So what does this all mean? It means that Largent was a true conservative who would now have four years of executive experience under his belt, a great family, a winning smile, and a compelling story and message (he is the only Seattle Seahawk in the Football Hall of Fame). In a time when so many Republicans I speak to are not thrilled about any potential nominee for the White House and are looking at Barak Obama (more next week here at TRS) and Hillary Clinton with more interest than suspicion, a leader like Largent might have been the answer so many are looking for.

I'm not saying...I'm just saying.

Media Plays Fast and Loose with Ford Legacy

2006-12-27T19:04:00.000-08:00

When President Gerald Ford stood for election in 1976, the Press mercilessly assaulted the 38th president for his pardon of Richard Nixon. One of the most decent men ever to rule in the Oval Office, after decades of service in the military and government, Gerald Ford was painted as a co-conspirator in Tricky Dick's crimes against the democratic process. Ford never second guessed his decision to spare the nation the spectacle of a presidential criminal trial. A cynical and blood-thirsty America Left were equally unwavering during a calculated character assassination, resulting in the disaster that was the administration of Jimmy Carter.

Today, when the network news programs and newspaper retrospectives recall Ford's decency and all-around goodness in the face of the great trials of the 1970s, it is important to remember the agents responsible for depriving the nation of Ford's leadership in an hour of national darkness.

Senators Sort-of for Free Speech

2006-12-19T07:53:00.000-08:00

The foundational tenant of modern American politics is that free speech, defined as the ability to have an opinion without fear of persecution or violence, applies only to those championing Liberal viewpoints.

If you stubbornly refuse to accept the reality presented above as fact, friends, enjoy this juicy news nugget from across the Atlantic in the United Kingdom. A British Lord has called for the resignations of United States Senators Rockafeller and Snowe, after the duo demanded that ExxonMobil cease funding scientists disagreeing with "mainstream" global warming hysteria. Has our political situation deteriorated to a point when European lords are left to rebuke United States congressmen for undemocratic acts? Apparently so, and everyone should interpret the Rockafeller/Snowe manifesto as the genuine threat to liberty it represents and the unbelievable embarrassment their letter creates for the United States.

The same elected officials that loudly protest denying Muslim terrorists a night of shut-eye at Gitmo would just as soon fine or jail an American for disagreeing with Al Gore on climate change. And voters harbor little respect for federal servants? I don't believe it...

Of course, if you are an uber-environmentalist friend of all living things ugly and beautiful, you are not required to agree with me. That's your right, at least until the 110th Congress is seated.

Bush Heeds the Battle Call?

2006-12-15T08:53:00.000-08:00

President Bush may be on the verge of sending more troops to Iraq, representing what may be one of the most controversial moves of his tenure in office at a time when his approval rating remains mired in the mid thirties.

Although prospective presidential front runner John McCain and the incoming Democratic Intelligence Chair both recommend an infusion of troops, the reality of what must be done to win in Iraq will not sit well with many talking heads and weary Americans. Eli Lake of the NY Sun has even suggested that Bush's move could be a "parting shot" at his old rival McCain, whose presidential chances may wither if the troop reinforcement strategy fails. Respectfully, I do not think that Bush has proven himself to exercise such an extreme level of pettiness. Like Lincoln in late 1862, coming off electoral defeats and military thrashings, President Bush may have finally realized the necessity of hard war and be ready to engage the enemy aggressively in Iraq. Time is the only measure that counts in this respect.

Certainly, as Charles Krauthammer has observed, the complete failure of the Iraq Study Group Report to inspire anything but depression among those alert to this issue has given the president a unique opportunity to right the ship in the 11th hour of his power to do so. Insert cynicism here, but any honestly-American witness to our contemporary struggles in the Middle East owes his or her country some optimism and an earnest hope for the best out of Bush in the next couple weeks.

Energy Reform is Answer to Iraq

2006-11-30T19:02:00.000-08:00

Sometimes, as the popular idiom goes, it is difficult to see the woods for the trees. I was having dinner with a group of Republican friends on Tuesday, and when Iraq was brought up, I could not help but launch into my patented tirade regarding the extent to which general reluctance to fight a hard war had doomed the effort. Staying on message should be worth something, even if it gives all of my friends indigestion. Nevertheless, on the way back to the apartment, your favorite Colorado blogger and mine Frank Morroni once again hit the nail square on the head. In his unnervingly casual style, Frank reminded me of the only real and permanent way to win a war against fundamentalist Islam: pass comprehensive common sense energy reform.

Lest this answer's beautiful simplicity disturb your cynical sensibilities, consider the following 5 Step Rooney Rationale to reengage a serious discussion of energy policy:

1. We Can't End 1,500 Years of Muslim Infighting: Islamic history is very complex, but here is a basic summary. Since the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632 A.D., Muslims have been fighting over who is the rightful heir to the Prophet's legacy. Is it or isn't it Ali? It no longer matter, as Sunnis, Shias, Wahhabists, Sufis and a greater devolution of various schools and minor sects harbor ill-feelings that will not soon dissipate. This kind of hate, hardened in the hearts of men by centuries of institutionalized brainwashing and bad theology, will not easily find its resolution in the arrival of western generals.

2. We Can't Always Clean-up Europe's Messes: As with most international debacles, including two world wars, the Balkans, Africa, Vietnam and the Middle East, the fingerprints of European imperialist mischief can be easily discerned at every step. Iraq is but the most recent of a long-line of poor sociopolitical arrangements facilitated by European colonial ambitions. Perhaps Iraq should never have been one country, but now it must be to counterbalance Iran's insanity. That does not make Iraq any less dysfunctional, comprised of multiple cross-cutting ethnicities and religions not cleanly divided by region. And I have yet to hear a practical plan of resettlement.

3. Half-Hearted Wars are Immoral: Although I remain convinced that a general like MacArthur or Sherman, allowed the proper strategic liberties, would have been able to clean house in Iraq, such a situation failed to materialize. Now, with the war spiraling out of control, western countries have lost the will to fight on. If we are not going to fight to win, as Rush Limbaugh recently asked, "Why wait to cut-and-run? Get the troops home for Christmas." Amen.

4. Damn Right This is a War for Oil: Whenever the professional protesters of America invoke the mantra "War for Oil," how can I help but scream back "Damn right!" America is too fat to ride bicycles, and I do not see anyone in congress walking to work or working by candlelight. If we did not need regional fuel reserves to power our economy, the Middle East would be little more than a distant backwater that geography buffs alone could properly identify on a map.

5. Energy Reform Makes the Middle East Irrelevant: An America with an adequate number of refineries, extensive nuclear power supplies, the license to drill ample oil reserves and actively making strides toward cars that run on hydrogen cells is an America safer than any administration could achieve with a million man army. President Bush has made some form or another of this argument, but Congress killed energy reform with the same recklessness exercised when spending your federal tax dollars on state rodeos and bridges to nowhere. If the wacko environmentalists love wildlife as much as they profess to, let them dodge bullets in the desert. The rest of us would prefer to make use of the bounty God gave us in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaskan Wildlife Preserve, and other, more hospitable, domestic locales.

I hate to acknowledge truth in anything Frank says. We are college roommates, and I can not take the resulting ribbing between quarters of Madden 2006. However on this issue, Frank clearly sees the woods; both Frank and I have come to realize that this country is indeed dangerously distracted by a tactical argument that seems to ignore the larger strategic elements relevant to our war against Muslim extremists. Ironically, it is only appropriate that solid legislation is the superior remedy to bombs, boots and ballistics for the world's greatest democracy's most dire policy dilemma. Why kill your enemy when you can bankrupt and starve them into irrelevance? Damn the trees! Full speed ahead to American energy self-sufficiency.

Republic Square Contest: Name the Baker Report and Win a Shirt!

2006-11-29T11:51:00.000-08:00

The Baker Report is being positioned by the talking heads as the definitive analysis on Iraq. In reality, everyone seems interested in little else than surrender and no one has offered a solution. Victory, however defined, isn't even on table. So, in the spirit of the current cut-and-run "oh shit, let's get outta here" attitude of the world's last great superpower, try your hand at naming the Baker Report! If our leaders insist on selling us up the river to crazed Islamic jihadists, we might as well create a reason for distracting/comforting laughter.

The winner will receive a free t-shirt from the TRS.com store, providing the lucky contestant with bragging rights and at least one less Christmas present in need of purchasing.

My pick is "Peace in Our Time." It's a classic, yet always popular with the kids/academics/sweaty-palmed armchair generals in Congress.

Let's hear what you think...

Forcing the Issue

2006-11-25T19:44:00.000-08:00

A new Israeli poll shows Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party decisively leading Prime Minister Olmert's faltering Kadima unity movement. Disillusionment over the government's handling of the war with Lebanon seems to be driving Israelis to seek new leadership, much as the Iraq War dealt a blow to the GOP in America.

But while America has chosen to retreat from its current aggressive stance in the world, Israel appears headed on a fatefully divergent course. Netanyahu is comparing Iran to 1938 Germany, as a country endeavoring upon a new Holocaust. If his party ascends to power and the Middle East continues to deteriorate, the United States may not enjoy the luxury of choice regarding its current military entanglements.

Others will force the issue for us.

Lincoln's Holiday is a Prayer for His People

2006-11-23T09:21:00.000-08:00

When the United States of America was mired in the nightmarish throws of the American Civil War, the horrible realities of warfare became brutally apparent for a weary President Abraham Lincoln. Previously favoring a "soft war," concentrating on destroying armies and minimizing civilian strife, the events of 1862 proved cathartic for the embattled war time president. He realized that the disastrous Union defeats at Bull Run, Chancellorsville and Fredericksburg foreshadowed the possibility of a bloody and endless generation, precluding expeditious American reconciliation. Worse still, the Union was losing its will to fight under the weight of mounting setbacks and casualties. Lincoln fully expected to lose the 1864 election, and America was on tract to surrendering the South to history. A losing war was ripping the United States asunder.

Considering his options under the dim candlelit glow of White House nights, Lincoln resolved that his only remaining solution was to wage an all-out"total war" against not only the armies of the Confederacy, but to take that war to Southern towns, farms, cities and plantations. The Civil War ceased to be exclusively about reunion, as battle alone seemed unlikely to accomplish the task. This was to be a war to remake the South, shattering the southern slavocracy perpetuated by a backwards social and economic system. It was to become a war to set men free, and create a new union that would fulfill the lofty promises of the Declaration of Independence yet unfulfilled. The proud South would not yield to arguements for brotherhood and peace; the sword alone would rescue America from Europe's fractious fate.

As contemporary Americans cram turkey and stuffing down their gullets, they seem to have decidedly less for which to be happy than this time last year. America looks dangerously weak in the world, and superpowers cannot afford to appear weak. Our leaders and generals are fighting a losing strategy, our enemies around the globe are emboldened, and morale on the home front is more frigid than the holiday cranberry mold. What would the great leaders of the Civil War, which killed nearly 1,000,000 American civilians and soldiers, impart to us in these uncertain hours of self-doubt, concern, and indigestion? The Thanksgiving commemoration began at Lincoln's initiative, declared as a national day of prayer in 1863 in the interest of restoring national unity, morale and purpose in the middle of the bloodiest and most devastating conflict in our entire national history. Today, this beloved feast renews its original meaning as a moment of clarifying grace for a wounded country. Lincoln reaches across the fabric of time to remind Americans of all the blessings, advantages and opportunities the nation he saved continues to offer its citizens and the world. Yet these benefits are not idle treasurers to be squirreled away and squandered within the safety of our walls.

Engaged in a modern war against the tyranny of bellicose Islamicism, America's only option, as Lincoln determined over 143 years ago, is to recognize and boldly pursue the necessary course to save American civilization. Sherman was relieved of duty early in the Civil War, believed to be crazy for suggesting the measures and cost in lives and fortune required to preserve the union. Now, those that suggest the War on Terrorism is a global struggle that must cripple radical Islamicism are castigated as the sanguine stalwarts of a discredited conflict. Yet not one critic of this war has been able to intelligently challenge that we are in real danger. Forward thinking Americans are coming to realize nothing short of resolute commitment to a total war in Iraq and Afghanistan will win a war for which there is no turning back. As Sherman stormed to the Sea to break the spirit of as Grant described it "the worst cause for which men have ever fought," western armies must breathe fear into the hearts of terrorist organizers and radical theocrats that will respond only to bullets and bombs shredding their empire of death and lies. "Enshrined" in the hearts of his countrymen, Lincoln's Thanksgiving prayer cries out for his nation to collect the resolve to do what it must to deliver his cherished Union from new threats.

To make good on Father Abraham's historical call to arms is to start fighting for our values like we mean it, with fully engaged measures and full-throated words of defiance to retain the reigns of our American destiny. Sherman observed that "War is Hell," and so it must be for those who challenge our liberties and values until their end.

Ebenezer Edwards Grinches Wal-Mart

2006-11-16T20:05:00.000-08:00

With the Holiday shopping season just one week away, the Associated Press has shed light on one of our favorite liberal's gifting habits.

Fmr. U.S. Senator, Vice Presidential candidate and golden-haired leftist rockstar John Edwards (D-NC) has long validated his "progressive" credentials by bashing the one American institution substantially combating inflation- Wal-Mart. But when it comes to finding a cool new Playstation 3 for the Edwards family tree, where does Pretty John turn?

That's right; Wal-Mart is claiming that Edwards attempted to procure the expensive game station via a staff aide through a local superstore for that horribly affordable and competitive Wal-Mart price. Hypocrisy abounds with these people, folks... even at Christmas! I suppose a company that enhances the purchasing power of average Americans is evil UNLESS a multimillion dollar trial lawyer and hippie-windbag needs a yule tide fix for his kid. Humbug!

The Uncomfortable Truth of American Economics

2006-11-15T07:56:00.000-08:00

U.S. Senator-elect Jim Webb (D-VA) actually raised some good points in today's Wall Street Journal opinion section.

The DOW is at an all time high, economic growth is marching along and unemployment is near the floor. Then why are Americans upset enough about the endangerment of the American Dream to vote into office 28 more Democrats? The truth is that America's economic success has not greatly improved the standard of living for Americans. As Webb illustrates, "hidden costs" resulting from astronomic health care, education and insurance increases have strained the American pocketbook. Sure, both parents have historically well-paying jobs, but these hard-working adults are finding it somehow harder to meet the demands of modern life. Webb is not incorrect when he warns of a "protectionist backlash," one that would doom the U.S. to the economic dark ages. What can be done?

Tax cuts of the Bush mold are a nice start, but who do they reach? The greatest Liberal lie of all is that the "rich" have been successful in shifting the tax burden to a hapless middle class. Even after the Bush cuts, the richest 1$ pay more than a 1/3 of federal income taxes, while the top 50% shell out nearly 97%! The class distinctions of which Webb is so thoroughly wary have been created by the same big-government tax 'n' spend shenanigans entrenched by years of federal fiscal liberalism. Many estimates suggest the top 50% of Americans will pay 100% of the taxes by 2010. Is that democracy? Are we truly fostering an egalitarian economy? Double taxation via corporate and income taxation give the average wealthy entrepreneur reason enough to avoid direct reinvestment, low-income Americans remain without the educational tools to participate in the market effectively, and the middle class continue to get screwed by chasing a social mobility that is increasingly too expensive.

Republicans did not lose this election simply due to angst over Iraq. The real story is more complex. In order to enjoy a reasonable chance of retaking Congress in the near future, Congressional Republicans must offer a real contrast between the Liberal Democratic vision for America and a Conservative Republican map for progress. The Democratic sweep of rust-belt congressional seats should serve as a morbid example of America's doubts about free market policies. Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders and other newly-ascended kooks will push for an attempted return to 1956, when you "grew up to do what your daddy had done" whether you liked it or not. Pelosi, Jim Webb and their leftist cohorts will rant about college loan reforms and text book price hearings for the first 100 days; it won't be long before they gloss over the real problems plaguing our nation's health and return to their darker socialist tendencies.

Republicans must again embrace the conservative pragmatism championed by Ronald Reagan to regain the trust of the American people and save them from a class-segregated tomorrow Nancy Pelosi is anxious to engage.

Civil War and Reconstruction

2006-11-09T14:23:00.000-08:00

And I'm not talking about 1865.

The 2006 midterms resulting in Democratic victory have predictably set in motion a tough fight for control of the Republican Party:

Leadership of the House looks to be attainable for the long-ostracized super-conservative Mike Pence (R-IN). Flake is also a candidate, but Pence's superior name recognition with the base makes him the most prominent choice to one day be speaker.
The Senate is somewhat less clear. Mitch McConnell seems to be the establishment candidate, but John Kyl and Kay Bailey Hutchinson are also in the leadership mix. Not to be discounted is Trent Lott, who has made a real recovery and is once again a major power player in the Senate.
Michael Steele is too excellent a resource to waste. Reports whizzing around Washington regarding his possible ascension to chairman of the RNC are premature. Nevertheless, Steele would provide a fresh perspective and renewed vigor that the national party desperately needs.
NRCC Chair is going to be a critical post to fill, presented with the fundraising and organizational demands of trying to retake at least 15-20 House seats. The primary candidates are Phil English (R-PA) and Pete Sessions (R-TX), with Tom Cole (R-OK) joining the fray this afternoon. While not the odds-on favorite, keep an eye on Sessions. I've had the opportunity to meet some of Rep. Sessions' people and they are aggressive.
NRSC Chair is in the air. John Thune (R-SD) was the obvious choice, but the popular freshman senator and current Inner Circle Chairman turned his nose up at the seat. So have most other GOP senators, wary of a difficult Senate cycle ahead in which the GOP has many more defenses. Look to Norm Coleman (R-MN) as a strong candidate.

Should be interesting. Get some popcorn if you're not faint-of-heart...

The Death Toll

2006-11-08T17:03:00.000-08:00

We didn't get back until about 4:30am Wednesday morning, and I have developed some sort of bad head cold from marching around in the wet and damp weather. My CR chapter worked our fingers to the bone, but failed to save Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R, PA-8) from the wave of apathy and discontent that swept the nation November 7, 2006. Fitzpatrick and his family are great people who this country can ill afford to lose as community representatives. It's going to take some time to digest the disaster, but here are some initial observations/notes of analysis on the past 48 hours:

The GOP has taken a serious hit on the state government level, including 6 governorships in OH, MD, NY, CO, AR and MA. In addition to the direct effects yet to be felt on the local level via future legislation, the Republican infrastructure for a 2008 presidential campaign has been weakened.
Republicans look to have lost 30 House seats, which while consistent with 6-year itch losses for the White House party, is still significant particularly in the age of gerrymandering. Some Republicans fully deserved to lose their seats; others (notably Mike Fitzpatrick) most certainly did not. Surprises included the loss of seats belonging to Republicans previously considered safe, including Melissa Hart in and JD Hayworth, who have now been unceremoniously tossed to the curb. A tiny bit of good news for Republicans is that they look to narrowly stay above the 200 mark, a psychologically important level of representation.
Perhaps most disastrous is the Senate, where 7 seats appear to have fallen. Additionally, many great GOP challengers like Michael Steele never had a chance. A real shame. Losing two seats in "Dixie" also presents a serious demographic problem for the GOP.
President Bush's life is a living hell. He has to present the State of the Union speech this winter with Nancy Pelosi grinning from behind. Rumsfeld's resignation is too late, and now appears to be more a sign of surrender than a response to a concerned electorate. Bush normally preforms best when his back is to the wall, but the Dems are now in the drivers seat and he will have to react.
Washington, DC is about to get a lot more Democratic. Power changes result in mass firings, as the victors cut the losers funding for staff. Additionally, K Street will conform to match the new environment.

We'll discuss more in the coming days. For now, I need some Advil and a good night's sleep.

NO MISTAKE: John Kerry Speaks for Democrats

2006-11-01T17:45:00.000-08:00

The last 24 hours has seen a rush by Democrats to create distance between their respective campaigns and John Kerry's idiotic ramblings. Whether or not they are successful remains to be seen, just as any rallying effect on the GOP base will be hard to gauge. But make no mistake: John Kerry speaks for national Democrats.

Moderate Democrats are as plentiful in the modern Democratic base as polar bears in Africa. Voting for Democratic congressmen, or staying at home to protest the lack of a border wall, is an endorsement of radical, leftist stewardship of our government.

Look at this man (if he could be called one with his $1,000 nails and hair)... does he deserve to have a Senate committee chairmanship? More importantly, what have we as the American people done to deserve such a cruel fate?

Sit on your hands and John Kerry, the man who has such a disdain for our military, would be the chairman of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs. That'll help dealings North Korea and China. Still want to make a point because you're angry over healthcare reform? Save it for the primary!

For New Jersey, A Moment of Truth

2006-10-30T07:32:00.000-08:00

Going to school in Washington, DC, it is not too difficult for classmates and co-workers to peg me as a New Jerseyan. The distinctive vowel noises and pronunciations of pet names (like "dawg") make for easy joke fodder. What I find harder to suffer is the endless jabs about New Jersey corruption. Despite my best attempts to explain that we all don't grease Tony Soprano's palm or knee cap political opponents in Elizabeth dock warehouses, the perception that Jersey is a festering nest of political bossism is irrepressible.

And to be fair, what have we as citizens of New Jersey done to convince anyone anywhere otherwise? Our tolerance for malfeasance is unbelievable, and the general apathy shown toward criminality on the part of state leaders is pathetic. Toricelli, Menendez and McGreevey are just the most recent and prominent names in a long line of disappointments. When the statehouse more closely resembles that bar from Star Wars than a legitimate legislature, does it come as a surprise when the rest of the country fails to take New Jersey seriously?

November 7th is evolving into a moment of truth for New Jersey in more ways than political outsiders or beltway pundits could ever comprehend. Sure, the outcome of the Senate race may very well affect control of the United States Senate. But for those of us who call the Garden State home, this race is about hope, pride, and the future of Jersey. Outside of a few rogue congressmen, Jersey is on the road to becoming not that much different than Massachusetts: an overtaxed and poorly served one-party fiefdom. Liberal Democrats dominate every branch of state government, and New Jersey's quality of life in declining. New Jerseyans are a hard-working, principled and prosperous people, but our industry is squandered by elected officials serving machines and special interests. Taxes break our backs and we receive the worst return on our federal income taxes of any state in the union. A vote for Menendez is unavoidably an individual affirmation for the status-quo. If New Jersey sends another corrupt, unethical, uninspiring party man to the Senate, what hope will the state ever have of achieving honest, competitive government that can tackle the issues New Jersey so desperately needs to confront?

A vote for Tom Kean is a battle cry; it is a vote for a new day in a state that is crying out for an honest man with principles worthy of its people. Property taxes, war votes and stem cells are secondary to New Jersey's need for fresh leadership that will enliven the statewide political discourse and change the nation's perception of our home. A vote for Tom Kean is an act of confidence in New Jersey as a place worthy of real leaders that treat their constituencies with respect, not as dollar signs. A vote for Tom Kean is a defiant gesture, telling the world that New Jersey will not be the milk cow for any political machine, crooked politician or statewide party. Will we learn our lessons after sustaining habitual abuse from the same old snake oil salesmen, or will we encase our self-respect in cement and leave it at the bottom of the Hudson?

I don't know whether it will be Tom Kean or Bob Menendez thanking voters on the morning November 8th, at some cheerful and delicious diner in Bergen County with great coffee and conversation. Maybe we won't know the result until Wednesday night, if the current polling is at all accurate. Nevertheless, I do know that a Menendez victory will do little to reverse the trends currently bleeding New Jersey of its children, fortune and dignity as they respectively flee to other locales, just as I know that a Tom Kean triumph will herald a new lease on life for my home state. Forgive me for getting excited, and hoping against all hope that my fellow New Jerseyans have come to the same realization. Thus is the nature of a genuine, cinema-quality moment of truth, in t-minus 8 days...

TRS Ratings Change: MD Senate Toss-up, Brighter GOP Fortunes

2006-10-28T07:02:00.000-07:00

When we here at TRS were in the process of handicapping races last week, we made it infinitely clear that of all the races at that time clearly leaning toward one party or the other, MD had the greatest potential to become competitive.

And so it has. TRS officially amends her most prestigious ratings to reflect the fact that the MD Senate Race has moved from lean Democrat to toss-up.

So what's happened? In 1000 words or less (much less):

1. Steele has run an extraordinarily aggressive and attractive campaign. Simply put, his TV ads, stump speeches, and televised debate performances have been superbly inspiring and endearing when compared to Cardin's boorish appeals. Ben Cardin may have thought this was going to be a walk, explaining the lack of energy on his part. Guess again.

2. The Lt. Governor demolished Cardin in the last debate. Not even close. Even The Washington Post, which also oddly enough has endorsed MD Governor Erlich (R) for re-election, remarked how deflated Cardin appeared under the Steele assault. Hasn't this guy been a congressman for some time?

3. This particular item is the most intriguing to the political analyst. The Democratic Party regularly does little for African Americans in exchange for the overwhelming support this demographic has afforded. This could be ending, at least for the purposes of our current race. Michael Steele was the first African American elected statewide in MD's history, and I can't believe that counts for nothing. In addition, he has received a series of high profile endorsements from members of the black community, including Russell Simmons and the son of his former opponent Kweisi Mfume. But most critically, Cardin has snubbed blacks left and right. Recently, the congressman ducked appearances with black groups. Anger might be building and Cardin cannot afford to lose 35% of the black vote, but recent polls indicate this nightmarish reality is a distinct possibility for Ben Cardin.

*********************************************
So does the Race for the Senate 2006 stand?

If Republicans win in NJ and MD, Democratic hopes to recapture the Senate are dashed. As of today, Democratic gains look to be somewhere between 2-4 seats... not enough. Also, keep an eye on MT this week. While Burns has been down for some time, word has it that some recent polls and movement on the ground may cause the GOP to make one last play for the Treasure State. Crazier things have happened, especially for the electoral ambitions of Conrad Burns.

LEAN/LIKELY DEM: PA, RI, OH, MT +4 Dems

TOSS-UP: NJ, MD possible +2 GOP or +/- for Dems

LEAN/LIKELY GOP: VA, TN, MO +/- GOP

Overall, the election forecast is showing some brighter skies for Republicans. How bright will depend on how much momentum the GOP can build in 10 days.

STUNNER: WEBB CRACK-UP

2006-10-26T19:18:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

Wow. Democratic Senate candidate Jim Webb has a lot of explaining to do. Apparently, he uses one hand to sling slime at George Allen, and the other to write gross pedophile prose in his novels. Neither hand is enlisted to remove the plank from his own eye.

So long as this story turns out to be everything it promises to be, TRS may be able to switch VA to likely Republican within 72 hours. October is full of surprises...

Developing...

Orwell Realized

2006-10-25T08:02:00.000-07:00

Great Britain, the exalted democracy that once liberated European Jews from the clutches of the Nazis, has now developed
furnaces of its own...

Forget the Queen. God save us.

Michael J. Fox Reminds Me Why I Vote Republican

2006-10-23T12:03:00.000-07:00

Alex P. Keaton may have been one of television's most famous feisty Republicans, but the actor who made Keaton a household name is making headlines as a left-wing pawn. Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, agreed to shoot an advertisement in support of McCaskill and the pro-cloning "Amendment 2" on the ballot in Missouri this year. An emotional and heart-wrenching appeal, mainly because of how sick Fox appears to be at this stage of his disease, the ad does its best to paint Senator Talent and embryonic research's opponents as enemies of "hope" for millions of suffering Americans.

No one can seriously blame Michael J. Fox for invoking hope as a powerful and real motivator for progress and a font of strength in difficult situations. Nor could Nancy Reagan, Cindy Sheehan, or any other person in the immediate throws of loss, illness or despair be held fully accountable for desiring solace- even if it comes at the expense of Reason. But cooler heads must prevail, and campaigns/candidates/pundits who exploit persons in such desperate situations are sadistic, soulless, and destructive individuals unworthy of a place in the public dialogue.

Under 3 Weeks to Go: TRS Senate Ratings

2006-10-19T08:05:00.000-07:00

With only 18 days to go until Election'06, it's time to update TRS's race ratings. 2 weeks can still change a lot in this business, but here is where we stand:

***S E N A T E***

VA: Allen v. Webb- Likely Republican Retention

Allen has maintained a modest yet undeniable lead in most recent polls. Having weathered everything that the Dem research team had to throw at him, I have more confidence in Allen's ability to hold on than most other analysts. He remains a Republican candidate in a Red state with a good pedigree and an extensive political network that will be difficult to overcome. Webb's candidacy has not been perfect, either.

MO: Talent v. McCaskill- Lean Republican Retention

Jim Talent deserves to win, more so than any candidate up this year. And as of now, I believe that he will. While Claire McCaskill has offered a strong challenge, Talent has pulled ahead in recent polling. I've never thought McCaskill was a good candidate, and have always thought that Talent's troubles were more indicative of MO and the nation-at-large being electorally divided. MO is also a number one target for the GOP's superior stream of resources and manpower, which while I refuse to believe can win you the season alone, has to be good for winning at least one ball game.

TN: Corker v. Ford- Lean Republican Retention

If the GOP can't beat back a liberal Democratic challenge in TN, expect election night to be ugly. Luckily, I am confident that the GOP will. Ford is a charismatic candidate, but TN is a conservative state that likes their candidates a little more well-worn. I can't wrap my head around Tennessee electing a politician who wears some of the outfits Ford sports to weekend BBQs and county fairs. Corker's campaign has not been flashy enough, but recent staff changes and positive polls seem to speak of good news for the Republicans.

NJ: Kean v. Menendez- Toss-up

Easily the race in which I am the most emotionally invested. My home state needs an independent voice, and Tom Kean may be just the man to buck the machine. Menendez's ethics problems have bestowed upon him issues more akin of Republicans in this cycle, and in most polling, as had trouble breaking through the 44-46% range. Not good news for an incumbent. Granted, the Democratic machine and the state's natural liberal-leaning adds a couple points to each poll for the Democratic candidate. Nevertheless, if the last batch of polls before Election Day show "Kean 48, Menendez 45" or "Kean 49, Menendez 46", this contest could turn out to be the juiciest piece of irony in recent American political history.

MD: Cardin v. Steele- Lean Democrat Retention

I refuse to let this one go. Certainly, MD is a very blue state in a year that does not favor Republicans almost anywhere. That aside, a very conveniently ignored phenomenon this cycle has been seemingly historic apathy among black voters. Normally a given for the Democratic column in numbers around 90%, a recent Zogby survey shows African Americans either remaining unaffiliated or declining to vote in significantly higher numbers than '04. In a close race like this one, black apathy or mutiny could make this race more competitive than preelection polls would indicate. Steele is also the better candidate, and polls show his supporters considerably more likely to be voting for him than against Ben Cardin. Watch this one for serious clues regarding GOP 2006 fortunes. If Steele loses by 15%, hold on to your rear. If Steele's eeks it out or loses by less than 5, Republicans should survive nationally.

RI: Chafee v. Whitehouse- Likely Democratic Pick-up

It cannot be under-emphasized how strange it is to have a Republican anything this far north in New England, even if said Republican voted against Bush in 2004. Even if Chafee were a great candidate, the current national mood would probably not spare his job in this bastion of blue sentiment.

OH: DeWine v. Brown- Solid Democrat Pick-up

This is a painful one to watch. Sherrod Brown, who doesn't believe in free trade and also doesn't believe in wearing shoes around his congressional office, would make a horrible U.S. senator. However, when the Republican governor of OH has a 12% approval rating and the state barely went for Bush in 2004, this rust-belt behemoth is primed to do something (sorry Ohio) emotional and stupid. I would not want to sit next to Brown or Bernie Sanders in the Senate Chamber for fear of contracting, as South Park's Cartman would diagnose, a hippie disease. Mike DeWine took this one seriously at a date that made effort irrelevant, if it would have helped at all anyway...

MT: Burns v. Tester- Solid Democrat Pick-up

Burns always had close elections. Both times, he ran a solid campaign and pulled out a victory. The present difference with this campaign is that it is not at all solid. His inability to control his image, as he was able to do in prior contests without the shadow of Abramoff to haunt him, has doomed his seat to Tester control.

PA: Santorum v. Casey- Solid Democrat Pick-up

Perhaps the saddest of them all. Regardless of where you stand on Rick Santorum's controversial positions, one has to have a degree of fellow feeling for a candidate that wants to win this badly. I can empathize with a confrontational Italian guy from Northeastern blue collar town (I am one). That said, Rick has made too many mistakes in a state where conservatives must be flawless to win. He'll have a great career at a think tank.

MN, MI and WA, while close before, are all Democrat retentions that now appear out of the realm of competitiveness and unreachable for the GOP. The same goes for AZ's Jon Kyl, where the veteran GOP senator is no longer in serious danger.

SUMMARY

Of the 9 seats profiled above, the Democrats are almost assured 4 pick-ups. That puts the Senate at 51-49. The GOP has a good chance of retaining MO and TN, but this result is by no means certain. The DEMs losing MD or NJ, or the GOP dropping VA are the wild cards that could make election night very interesting. As of today a 51-49 or 50-50 Senate split looks like the most probable outcome, leaving Republicans with weak but effective control of the chamber. But what could happen? ...

***GOP Best Case Scenario***

Retain VA, MO, TN, as well as manage upsets in MD and NJ. Senate would be 53-47 Republican, a net lost of 2. Maryland is a long-shot, but watch to see if Steele gets any momentum from some solid ad buys.

***DEM Best Case Scenario***

Run the board, racking up all 6 leaners/toss-ups and grab VA as the icing on the cake. Senate becomes 52-48 Democratic, a GOP net loss of 7.

Stay tuned. Keep an eye on all of these races, particularly TN, MO, NJ, MD.

DNC BANKS ON VICTORY

2006-10-18T10:10:00.000-07:00

National Journal's Hotline Blog is reporting that the DNC will take out $5-10 million in loans in order to adequately fund candidates locked in heated 2006 Senate races.

James Carville astutely called for this strategy last week, adopting the logic that Democrats need to take full advantage of the current political environment. Whether or not this strategy yields results remains to be seen, but certainly it represents an historically unique move by a very confident national political committee.

How would you like to be Howard Dean's loan agent?

When it Rains, Yeaahhh...

2006-10-16T12:24:00.000-07:00

Breaking

The latest in a string of GOP disasters may be unfolding in Eastern Pennsylvania, where Republican Congressman Curt Weldon is under investigation for corruption. Earlier today, FBI agents executed six raids in connection with the inquiry.

Weldon denies any wrongdoing, but does it matter at this point? Water makes you wet, no matter where it comes from. And the GOP's umbrella ain't big enough...

The 1994 Republican "Correction"

2006-10-16T09:00:00.000-07:00

34 Democrats lost their jobs. Stalwart liberal heavyweights like Dan Rostenkowski and Jack Brooks were sent packing, and Newt Gingrich solemnly declared November 1994 a "Republican Revolution." As an idealistic young conservative, the allure of the Speaker's phraseology has always been overwhelmingly compelling. It also proved dangerously intoxicating for national GOP leaders. Many seemed to believe that liberalism, if not dealt a definitive deathblow, had been put on the tract to ultimate extinction by a wave of conservative revivalism within the electorate.

12 years later Newt's glorious revolution seems like a fading dream, much as Lenin's or Robespierre's. But what happened to the Republican Revolution? To start with, it was not really a "revolution" at all. After the dust settled on that long ago election night, the GOP had 230 seats to the Democrats 204. A 54-seat swing and a dramatic realignment of Congress, certainly. A new era in American politics? Undoubtedly. A revolution? A 26 seat majority pales in contrast to the 196 seat advantage the Democrats won in 1932, or even the 82 seat control the Dems commanded just two years earlier in 1992. Admittedly, the "1994 Republican Correction" is a less-than-sexy way to label a historic victory. Taking over Congress after 40 years of uninterrupted opposition control was a tremendous accomplishment. Nevertheless, a revolution by definition constitutes a momentous change in government which, in the case of 1994, never took place. Partly due to its small majority, largely as a result of the corrupting trapping of Congress, no conservative revolution took place. Some great legislation was produced, including real welfare and tort reforms. Other efforts failed, notably (and tellingly) The Citizen Legislature Act which would have constitutionally mandated congressional term limits. Certainly Republicans like Tom Delay acted as if they commanded a massive ideological mandate, believing that all-day votes and ridiculous spending would go unnoticed. A decade later, many of the courageous "revolutionaries" who compelled President Clinton to declare big-government "over" now treat taxpayer's resources very much like a 16-yr old girl with a credit card in the mall. Freedom fighters have become the tyrants, liberators devolved to conspirators.

The House Of Representatives circa 1992 was not representative of the nation at large. America is not a liberal country, and as Fmr. Speaker Foley found out, unwilling to long-indulge socialist tendencies in their national leadership. Nevertheless, the United States is not now a bastion for Milton Friedman libertarianism or Barry Goldwater conservatism. I would contend that the U.S. is considerably right of center, especially in contrast to Europe or Central America. Yet, the American polity remains equally divided between two broad philosophical camps. How else can one explain Sherrod Brown's Senate race lead in Ohio, or the continued market for Pat Buchannan books with conservatives?

The most sensational claim that could rightly apply to 1994 was that it gave birth to a resistance. It's coming was foretold by Goldwater and Reagan, and that wonderful Fall saw conservatives battle back after half a century stained by leftist dominance of the federal government. The fatal folly of conservatives was to assume that hope is unto itself sufficient for victory. Somehow, many posited, the awesome righteousness and intelligence of the Right will bleed liberalism to death. But concepts like the free market, personal responsibility, and constitutional primacy are a tough sell. Many in our own party remain unconvinced, and many in power treat the principles behind the Contract with America as inconvenient platitudes. Consequently, the voters will sow a crop that yield a bitter Republican harvest.

Until then Americans are waiting for a revolution, one that 12 decades of Republican rule failed to enact and Democratic leadership will never embrace. We are thirsting for a real defeat of 19th century backward socialist idiocy, signaling a victory that will move a nation forward to a brighter future. We demand a realization of a City on a Hill, of which Reagan foretold and for what millions of conservatives have labored. Whether it arrives through a visionary in 2008 or means unknown in 50 years in the future, American businessmen, truckers, doctors, engineers, lawyers, homemakers and students will not cease the endless call to return to a form of government that is by, for, accountable to and cognizant of the timeless persons and principles that ensure the greatness of these United States.

Three Reasons for Conservatives to Smile

2006-10-12T14:10:00.000-07:00

The last few months have been a rollercoaster for conservative Republicans, characterized by more dips than inclines throughout the whole of the stomach-churning ride from Hell.

That said, here are three reasons to calm down and buck-up with just 26 days to go:

1. BUSH BOOM BUSTS DEBT

Fellow fiscal conservatives, long depressed and nearly suicidal, finally have something to celebrate in a disappearing federal deficit. Despite record spending, the Bush tax cuts have helped spur tremendous economic growth. For the benefit of the many friendly libs in our audience, here is (again) a brief economics 101 lesson:

a) Tax cuts give taxpayers more to spend.
b) Taxpayers spend money, either on retail goods or some other form of positive reinvestment.
c) Citizens with more cash are then able to pay more in taxes to the government, leading to increased government revenue.
d) Consequently, America can pay more of its bills.

This doesn't excuse wasteful spending any more than it represents permanent relief for U.S. credit. Nevertheless, a solid step in the right direction for a country financing two wars.

2. WARNER OUT- HILLARY IN

Fmr. VA Governor Mark Warner announced Thursday that he has no intention of seeking the 2008 Presidential nomination. Many pundits and party insiders looked to Warner as the only viable candidate to confront McCain, outside of Bayh (who, frankly, is not as exciting a candidate or speaker).

What does this mean? The liberal majority of the Democratic Party no longer has a moderate to block its nominating another fire-breathing liberal. Today's unexpected press conference opens the door for a Clinton-Gore struggle that should make every right-of-center politico downright giddy. It's infinitely too early to make any solid predictions, but Warner's departure has undoubtedly complicated Democratic chances of re-taking the White House.

3. ASIAN EARTHQUAKE MAY WAKE BASE

This last item is a tad more speculative. With the GOP in virtual free-fall after weeks of negative press, it is unrealistic to assume that nuclear fears will shock most Americans into rallying around President Bush. The media has done their best to spin North Korea's success as just another Bush Administration failure, and the current political environment is fertile soil for such recriminations.

More possible, and worth watching, is whether or not Poyongyang's ambitions prompts the GOP base to rally on November 7th. Base discontent may be somewhat soothed by the realization that the United States can ill-afford a change to liberal-Democratic government at this time. Sure, many Republican Congressmen has been spending, fighting and (in some now infamous cases) tramping around like a college frat boys... but is our anger worth two or more years of Speaker Pelosi, as if the Dems would clean-up anything? The question begs asking. Yet even if some dissatisfied conservatives come home, would they return in ample numbers to save the day? Perhaps just enough to turn precisely the needed amount of tight congressional races into the red column?

Only time will tell the tale of the GOP faithful, federal spreadsheets and '08 hopefuls. I'm not trying to impart warm 'n' fuzzy feeling among TRS readers: this election will be painful with or without my words or morphine. Just please remember that, if you look hard enough, there is always something to smile about in politics.

It Ain't Over Until It's Over

2006-10-09T23:57:00.000-07:00

Events are happening fast now.

Bush is also down. Way down. But is he out? Maybe, but history cautions the savvy student of politics to avoid a rush to judgement. The Weekly Standard, as usual, offers some sage council on the subject.

Sunday News Brief

2006-10-08T08:48:00.000-07:00

-While we argue over whether or not the government can listen in on people who receive collect calls from Tora Bora, consider a country with a real crisis of liberty. You have no idea what real tyranny is...

-Republicans are tanking in the polls, erasing gains made in early to mid September. While its still a bit too early for hoisting the white flag, my belated grandmother's favorite axiom is a sage warning to GOP candidates: "Shit or get off the pot." If it's not too late...

- ...largely because of mounting ethics problems. Sure, the Dems are no less crooked (certainly more so), but that is a deflection, not an excuse, for a real crisis of purpose for the national GOP.

-The most cruel of all ironies asserts itself, as the Church demands clarity from Mark Foley. What a miserable time in history for Republicanism and Catholicism to have identity issues...

-The real question remains: Why do illegals even have the right to sue? This better not raise prices and destroy the Value Menu....

Have a great Sunday, folks. Keep the faith, never surrender, and enjoy football!

Foley Unbelievably Ordinary for DC

2006-10-03T06:00:00.000-07:00

Fmr. Rep. Foley did something very wrong. And for that he will be punished, ironically, by the same laws he helped enact during his tenure in the House of Representatives. This much is highly probable. Whatever else can be expected from "Foleygate" remains, for now, shrouded by government intrigue. Certainly calls for the Speaker of the House to resign and an already close election conspire to make prognostication attractive, but unfortunately, no more advisable as a practice. This political situation is simply too extraordinary, weird, and without precedent.

Or is it? Perhaps not, at least from a perspective jaded inside this accursed Beltway. The strange, perverted and downright criminal behavior of congressman is a tastelessly celebrated Washington institution that occurs free of variables such as full red moons, biblical weather patterns and moribund Republican majorities. The figures guilty of hiring prostitutes, groping women or even more serious transgressions are largely familiar: Gary Condit, Bill Clinton, James McGreevey, Barney Frank, Wilbur Mills, Bob Livingston, Grover Cleveland, Thomas Jefferson, Bob Packwood, Drew Nixon, Lester Crawford, most Kennedy men, and hundreds of other here unnamed power brokers. Even in now distant 1983, two congressmen (Gerry Studds and and Dan Crane) were outed for having engaged in sexual relationships with pages. And many more of these men did indeed commit crimes as least as reprehensible as solicitation of a minor. Particular acts were arguably more heinous. Ted Kennedy infamously left a sweetheart at the bottom of a Massachusetts estuary, and Gary Condit's suspicious circumstances beg equally troubling speculation. Rape, murder, harassment, betrayal, and numerous grave sins have stained Capitol soil.

Far from an attempt to rationalize or trivialize Mark Foley's alleged crimes, my grim analysis of sexual wickedness in Washington is meant to convey sad truths about power, corruption and evil. Too many Americans view these depressing instances as either isolate incidents or the wild corollaries of grand corruptions. Often these are not the case, as the root problem is as old as time. Even back to when King David spilled innocent blood out of covetous greed and lust, men of power have let their often dominance genes go wildly unchecked. Powerful people seek to control in all aspects of their lives, and the result is too often the treating of the weak as chattel. Seducing an intern or hitting on a page are just two more twisted examples of a disturbing, primal assertion of power by the strong over the powerless.

Acknowledging fully that my assessment is overwhelming bleak, I still summon little in the way of adequate consolation. Politics will continue, as it has for millenia, to attract a number of unbalanced individuals who will treat ethical and moral consequences as irrelevant issues for "great men." But we are not without recourse in a democratic system. Free elections and independent courts are the primary levers of justice, and other reforms like tougher term limits could help check previously unregulated egos. Most difficultly, and therefore most unlikely, citizens must decide to move their culture in a direction that rejects the roots of criminal government. A country that tolerates The Real World, gangster rap and the rationalizations of William Jefferson Clinton has to expect a certain degree of value-related decline.

Yet in the end, unless the next Congress approves genetic selection at birth (which, if Democratic, is a potentiality), some politicians will remain sadistically warped, and Mark Foley will continue as an unremarkable example of just more of the same.

Pelosi Gets Biblical, Rooney Gets Creeped

2006-09-30T17:48:00.000-07:00

It's been a crazy 48 hours. And it's only going to get wilder for the next 38 days, as Election 2006 moves closer still. Need a remedy in the interest of mental clarity? Here's a moment of Zen, compliments of a San Fran liberal, straight from the King James Bible:

"'Forty is a number fraught with meaning in the Bible, whether it is the Jews in Gaza, Noah and his wife and the ark, or Christ in the desert,' Pelosi said she reminded the House Democratic caucus."

Judging by the events of the last few days, coupled with Nancy Pelosi's apparent conversion to Christianity, I feel more than confident declaring this election the first sign of the Apocalypse. Despair.

Report: GOP Picks Twin Cities for 2008 Convention

2006-09-27T10:31:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

As of 1:30pm Wednesday afternoon, Drudge has reported that the Republican National Committee has chosen the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul as the site for the 2008 Republican Convention. Buzz surrounding a Twin Cities convention has been circulating DC for a few days, but this is the first public report indicating that a decision may have been finalized.

With recent national elections showing the Upper Midwest as a crucial swing region, this would prove to be a potentially savvy pick on behalf of Ken Mehlman and the convention committee.

Developing...

Republicans Open Wallets, Get Down in DC

2006-09-26T20:52:00.000-07:00

Earlier this evening, I had the pleasure of attending the National Republican Senatorial Committee's Majority Celebration in Washington, DC. It turned out to be a great event, and the committee raised a good deal of much needed funds for the final six week push to victory. The melt-in-your-mouth beef and heart attack-inducing chocolate cake weren't bad either. I even got to bust a move (to the horror of all present) while the band played "Guantanamera." Que divertido! And for the record, George Voinovich cut up the rug with his lovely wife (but not to "Guantanamera").

Many of the Senate Republicans were in attendance (few of which also "busted moves"), including many of the party's most endangered incumbents. Nevertheless, the mood among the donor base was chipper and optimistic, and the checkbooks got a solid workout. Additionally, the Vice President gave a great speech on elections, and Liddy Dole delivered a nice tribute in honor of outgoing Majority Leader Frist. Even a cynical conservative like myself found it hard to not enjoy being a Republican for the evening.

But for now, I desperately need to get out of this monkey suit and iron a shirt for work in the morning. Sleep well, conservatives, knowing full-well that the Senate (and yours truly) raised money and partied hard for a very worthy cause.

The Clinton Bill doesn't want you to see

2006-09-26T20:36:00.000-07:00

Political pundit Dick Morris usually has an interesting perspective on current political events, I generally find his articles worthwhile reading. Morris is especially insightful when current events tie in with the Clinton Administration. (Morris worked on Clinton's gubernatorial campaigns in '78 and '82 and helped craft Clinton's successful move to the center leading up to the 1996 election). Following Bill Clinton's appearance on "Fox News Sunday" in which Clinton became defensive after his counter-terrorism methods and decisions were questioned, Morris wrote an interesting article for the Hill. In it Morris claims that the Clinton seen in an interview with Chris Wallace is the real deal, not the public persona most of the nation has become accustomed to.

The real Clinton emerges

Check out our competitors (We wish)

2006-09-26T20:35:00.000-07:00

The political commentary site Real Clear Politics is far and away one of the best resources for political information (not to sell The Republic Square short, but we're taking baby steps) on the web. They have recently updated their commentary on the major Senate races, including New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia. Check it out here.

When Clinton Attacks

2006-09-24T12:00:00.000-07:00

WOW. Be sure to watch clips from FoxNews Sunday today, featuring a segment in which Chris Wallace bears the full brunt of Fmr. President Bill Clinton's ugly side.

Clinton usually tries his best to be cool under pressure, but his infamous good 'ole boy temper rears its violent hand in the face of yet another "right-wing" conspiracy. Looks like some one's legacy is in danger... one day, the truth will land his biography between James Buchanan's and Jimmy Carter's in the back room of an unfrequented public library.

Click here to "feel the pain" of history's poetic justice...

Change in Minnesota?

2006-09-21T18:01:00.000-07:00

Check out this nugget from our friends over at Powerline. Many observers had given up on Rep. Mark Kennedy's Senate bid, but this might just change that.

Desperate Menendez Summons Ghosts, Whores

2006-09-19T14:07:00.000-07:00

How do you know that a candidate is desperate? When said politician has to rely on ghosts and "whores" to show up at the polls and vote on Election Day (accepting the fact that you don't live in a city where such practices are standard procedure).

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), in a fight for his life amid allegations of staggering ethics violations, has resorted to raising the specter of Vietnam to rally New Jersey to his cause:

"Then, like now, the American people suffered the consequences of a president who simply could not come clean about a war that was draining our treasury and costing thousands of American lives."

Severe historical, political, and contextual objections aside, Menendez continues to epitomize the exact bungling, directionless, corrupt and selfish leadership that Americans and New Jerseyans do not need particularly in a time of war. Remaking Iraq into Vietnam may satisfy Menendez's personal and political aims, but it does little to help the U.S. win a battle already engaged. Does a United States senator truly expect the people of New Jersey to be spooked sufficiently by 30 year-old phantoms to affirm his "inspiring leadership" in the voting booth?

Perhaps so, considering his condescending strategy is not restricted to the supernatural. Menendez also has placed faith in a pair of "media-whores" (thanks, Rush) to sway state sentiment away from his darkening personal image. I refer of course to disgraced media-tramp Joe Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame, who recently accompanied Menendez to a news conference and a speech at Rutgers. Discredited even by liberal newspapers, with one media outlet recently lamenting that readers took Wilson "so seriously," white knight Wilson has lost his luster. Why bring him campaigning unless already low on options; why reach for a down-and-out has-been unless an increasing number of politicians have problems stumping for you? They can't ALL be tied up with dentist appointments, Bob.

Menendez's back is to the wall, and people in scary situations do desperate things. Like tell ghost stories or lay down with pigs. Luckily, since the citizens of New Jersey are not dumb or corrupt (contrary to national opinion), Bob Menendez's tactics are doomed to fail. Talking as if Nixon or Bush are on the ballot cannot change the fact that Tom Kean is his November opponent. Kean remains a respected lawmaker who, if you believe the polls, has kept voters focused on Menendez's numerous and embarrassing shortcomings, in addition to the way in which Kean will better serve the great state of New Jersey. This unavoidable reality alone looks to spell disaster for Menendez, his ghouls, and whatever other dregs can be fished out of the sewer between now and Election Day.

Read more at National Review Online about Wilson and Plame's lies.

Bush Battles Back

2006-09-15T06:00:00.000-07:00

The latest polls across the wire suggest that September 2006 may be a political springtime for George W. Bush (or at least a much needed Indian summer).

ABC News, NBC/WSJ and Fox News have all released polls showing the President at 40% or above. A Rasmussen poll released today shows the President at a long-lost but much welcomed 47%, a level of support not all that far off of his 2004 high. What factors are generating Bush's apparent comeback? Here are five potential Bush-buoying variables:

#5- Gas prices have plummeted, and by as much as a dollar or more in some regions of the country. A barrel of oil is now nearing the low price of $63, as compared to well over $70 earlier this year. Among other reasons for this lucky turn of events is a massive oil find in the Gulf of Mexico, in addition to Saudi prognostications that the world has tapped as little as 18% of its fossil fuel resources. Well now they tell us.

#4- The events surrounding the anniversary of 9/11, and the recent foiled terror plots in Britain, have undoubtedly refocused Americans on the seriousness of the international War on Terror. Not that everyone has suddenly re-embraced the GOP plan; more certainly, we are seeing considerable trepidation at the thought of Democratic leadership in troubled times. Maybe the GOP is not inspiring the masses at present, but the alternatives leave something to be desired for many likely voters.

#3- Americans are also paying increased attention to the election in general, one in which the GOP still (amazingly) retains a considerable GOTV and monetary advantage. The electorate remains in an anti-incumbent posture, but Democrats worry that their less-than-ideal mobilization strategy may hamper efforts to capitalize on electoral discontent. These types of factors are good for at least a few extra points in the final stretch, particularly in battleground states which the RNC will soon saturate with 60 million dollars worth of advertising (to the DNC's 12 million). Way to go, Howard. Yeaaaaaaaaaah!

#2- The economy has stayed strong. Very strong. The only potential problem on the horizon is the faltering housing market, but most experts remained divided on the seriousness of possible economic strains. Simply put, no matter how grave matters may become short of nuclear war, the health of American pocketbooks remains the most reliable indicator of voter preference. Why wouldn't it be? Why SHOULDN'T it be. Prosperity is the name of the game, and whether or not people can identify the specific cause or act impatiently from time to time, most know that money has been made during the Bush presidency.

#1- Finally, Bush is bringing the base back by refusing to blink. The President has been expected to retreat during the last weeks of the campaign, avoiding the limelight and saving face for his endangered party. To the chagrin of leftists, President Bush has characteristically struck out boldly in an attempt to make the case for his policies one final time. The cowboy analogies are too plentiful and overly cliched to type. It is unclear how successful Bush's stand will be, but the immediate effect seems to be a re-energized base.

What does all of this mean? I'm too smart for that trap. Just as in 2004 the country is moving into uncharted territory, when polling says little more what we already know: too close to call. Entirely frustrating, but a familiar tale in the current political age. What we can say has been expressed in recent Republican briefings around town, which suggest a sizable reduction in the amount of competitive House races held by Republicans. Long story short, the House is no longer a lost cause.

Soldier on, conservatives!

Chafee Wins, Cardin Looks to Defeat Mfume

2006-09-13T00:30:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

Primary day in 9 states and the results are pouring in! The big news as of 12:30am Wednesday morning is one more competitive Senate race back on the electoral map. Embattled U.S. Senator Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) has beaten back a difficult primary challenge to earn the Republican nomination with 99% of returns tabulated. Chafee's victory moves this race solidly into the toss-up column, as the nomination of the conservative upstart Laffey would have surely doomed the seat to Democratic occupation. Perhaps more importantly, the Democrats must now pour precious funds into the Rhode Island race that could have been spent in Jersey, Ohio, or the Keystone State to dislodge stubborn Republican opponents.

Other races of note this evening:

-In Maryland, Rep. Ben Cardin (D, MD-3) looks to defeat former NAACP leader Kweisi Mfume, who trails by approximately 9 points with 64% of precincts reporting. However, reported mechanical issues at polling places throughout the state may give the Cardin campaign a minor headache heading into the general. A Cardin/Steele match-up has not been polling well for the Lt. Governor, but minority discontent could hurt Democratic turnout in two months. Stay tuned...

-A bonified dogfight is underway in Arizona's 8th, as Randy Graf and Steve Huffman are but 600 votes apart in that seat's GOP Primary. Conventional wisdom asserts that Huffman has a better shot at holding the seat for the Republicans, but Graf has run a tough campaign blasting the NRCC. Ugly.

-Not a race so much as a truce to announce. Evidently, Howard Dean and DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel have brokered a strategic compact for the fall campaign. Theoretically, this should release millions of DNC dollars to help up to 40 Democratic candidates across the country. So much for the 50 state strategy... I wonder how Dean's Alaska and Utah GOTVs are shaping up?

In Memoriam: Robert Lawrence, Jr

2006-09-11T08:46:00.000-07:00

On this most hallowed of anniversaries, in solidarity with 2,996 other blogs, The Republic Square pays tribute to a fallen American victim of the 9/11 Terrorist attacks. Please set aside some time out of your busy day to visit the 2996 tribute project site, and take a moment to read at least a few of the many touching memorials posted by the project's participants. Today we refuse to focus on death, terror, and war, but choose to celebrate the lives of our 2,996 dearly departed brothers and sisters.

The Republic Square remembers Robert Lawrence, Jr, a 41 yr old father, brother, and friend to many hailing from Summit, New Jersey.

On September 10, 2001, Robert started a new job as managing director of Sandler O'Neill & Partners on the 104th floor of Tower 2, having previously worked for a firm in Edison, NJ. A graduate of the University of Vermont, Robert was an expert in the securities field in which he excelled. He was also famously afraid of heights, but confronting challenges came naturally to the ambitious and competitive financial star. Robert tackled tennis, business, and family with characteristic zeal. "Bobby," as the family affectionately calls him, served as the family's linchpin, organizing family gatherings and holding the large clan together through good and bad times. As his sister fondly remembers, Robert's love of his family often led to well-meaning over protection, making it hard to secure a date immune from Bobby's scrutiny.

Robert's intensity did not mask a large and generous heart. A lover of music, sports, and time spent with his two children and wife, Robert particularly enjoyed playing hockey or singing and strumming the guitar with his kids after a long day at the office. Relatives recall his unique sense of humor, especially when entertaining at large family gatherings. He was also the kind of person who would give the shirt off his back to someone in need, and his community remembers Robert tearfully as a great neighbor and friend.

Robert Lawrence is survived by his two children, his wife, parents, siblings, cousins, friends, and dozens of others who miss his reassuring smile and loving soul.

RIP, Robert Lawrence, Jr.
-------------------------------------------

To learn more about Robert, read personal testimonials and pay your respects, click here.

Montana proving a head scratcher.

2006-09-11T01:15:00.000-07:00

The Republic Square Senate handicap returns this week as we preview another fiercely contested Senate Race: Montana. Incumbent Republican Conrad Burns faces a strong challenge from State Senate President Jon Tester. Burns is no stranger to close races, having barely bested now-Governor Brian Schweitzer in 2000.

To be perfectly frank, the minds here at TRS are having a hard time pegging the nature of this race. Burns has been tainted by his connections to Jack Abramoff, his several verbal gaffes, the perception that he might becoming too old and disinterested to represent the state. Tester leads in virtually all polls to date, but there has not been much movement either way.

Montana is quite possibly the reddest of the red states, a state, while being the setting for Brokeback Mountain, did not buy many tickets to actually see the film. President Bush is still popular with Montanans who gave him one of his largest margins of victory in 2004. Burns has recently become more vocal in his support for the current policy in Iraq. This kind of tactic flies in the face of virtually every other Republican candidate in the country this year, which leads us at TRS to believe that internally the Burns people view this a good strategy. Without a strong base of support for the war in Montana, in the estimation of the incumbent's campaign, such a strong endorsement of the war would be nearly suicidal.

Tester's plan for victory seems to mirror that which sent Schweitzer to Helena in 2004. Schweitzer ran as a non-partisan good guy (with a GOP Lt. Governor, no less) in the wake of a disastrously unpopular Judy Martz. Schweitzer was widely seen as a known quantity due to his aforementioned loss to Burns in 2000, a strength that Tester does not share. It is certain though that Tester will receive plenty of support from Schweitzer throughout the campaign.

Montana has forgiven Burns many times for his tendency to be, ahem, less than sensitive. Tester has to overcome a vast numerical disadvantage as well as Bush's lingering popularity in Montana. It will be interesting to see if this race becomes a proxy battle between Bush's popularity and Schweitzer's, or whether or not Burns has one last comeback in him. The most striking characteristic in this race from the TRS perspective is the virtual lack of movement in the polls to this point. It would seem that this is a race where one event could change the dynamics so much that the campaign becomes a slam dunk.

Until that dynamic shifts, TRS maintains that Montana remains a tossup.

The State of Our "Union" Has Been Worse

2006-09-11T01:00:00.000-07:00

Yes, Americans are pretty angry at each other right now. Sometimes is seems as if the growing differences between conservative and liberal, red stater and blue stater, Fox News fan and NPR listener will dangerously challenge our national unity in ways that frighten most American. No one likes in-fighting, especially at a time when foreigners are doggedly attempting to blow us up. That being said, all things truly do cycle. Take comfort in two historical examples:

At the dawn of the 19th century, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists nearly tore each other, and the country, to shreds. With radically different views regarding a course for the new Republic, agrarian gentlemen and capitalist high-Anglicans battled it out for the soul of America. Some even begged Washington to be a king, and Alexander Hamilton ruminated over the possibility while laying the groundwork of a standing army fit for Napoleon. Washington just barely adverted a coup attempt by unpaid military officers. With no sense of what "America" meant before the age of nationalism, it feel to Washington to hold the young republic together. The politics of the era matched the emancipated colonies' dark and tortured mood. Accusations in a typical circa 1800 newspaper (then much like supermarket tabloids) made today's politics seem warm and fuzzy. Jefferson's sex life, Washington's mental fitness and John Adams' weight were all fair game and regular topics of heated discussion. At least no one has called Bush fat.

50 years later, The Civil War seems to be a self-explanatory example. Nevertheless, it is worth remembering how ugly the national situation had become even before Ft. Sumter and secession. Canings on the Senate floor, bloody engagements between Kansas settlers, and wholesale rioting across the fruited plains now seem extreme when contrasted to current divisions. The country was coming unglued, because as before, Americans possessed little fellow feeling toward their antagonistic countrymen. A major catalyst for regional angst was an unpopular war with Mexico instigated by President Polk, during which many state legislatures, politicians, citizens and media pundits fiercely protested what was seen as an "unjust war". Deja Vu, anyone? Or am I blogging to the wall? Later under the leadership of the now beloved Abraham Lincoln, Americans were frequently and loudly displeased with their president's conduct and policies. Elected with less than 50% of the vote and suffering from a string of staggering military victories and inept generals, Lincoln narrowly survived political death before succumbing to the deadly forces arrayed against American unity.

What do these distinctly ugly periods have in common? America survived all of them, only to emerge stronger and more united. This nation has survived revolution, invasion, natural disasters, civil war, world war, depression, scandal, the threat of nuclear obliteration and now, terrorism. And while it would be nice to say that the people of the U.S. always confront challenges with one brave and bold front, such romantic revisions of history are neither true nor helpful to understand our own troubled times. Furthermore, our quarrels are not necessarily bad or unhealthy things. The beauty of a democratic system is personified when voters and 527 groups supplant gunmen and hangmen as the agents of dialectical change. Now 230 years old, America has evolved and matured as a democracy, and can therefore handle pluralist differences of opinion and, frankly, some pretty vicious political conflicts. We will continue to grow and survive as one people, so long as Americans can continue to accept the impossibility of perpetual agreement between us. Flexibility in the face of trials spawned by peril and punditry will always allow these united states to stand together. After all, things have been worse.

Bush Isn't Deep? Think Again

2006-09-09T08:27:00.000-07:00

"I would remind the critics of the freedom agenda that the policy prior to September 11th was stability for the sake of stability: Let us not worry about the form of government. Let us simply worry about whether or not the world appears stable, whether or not we achieve short-term geopolitical gain. And it looked like that policy was working, and frankly, it made some sense when it came to dealing with the Middle East vis-a-vis the Communists."

"The problem with that philosophy, or that foreign policy, was that beneath the surface boiled resentment and hatred, and that resentment and hatred helped fuel this radical Islam, and radical Islam is what ended up causing the attacks that killed 3,000 of our citizens. So I vowed, and made the decision that not only would we stay on the offense and... get these people before they could attack us again. But, in the long run the only way to make sure your grandchildren are protected, Paul, is to win the battle of ideas, is to defeat the ideology of hatred and resentment."

-President George W. Bush, interviewed by Paul A Gigot of the WSJ, 9/9/06

Democrats invest in a losing strategy

2006-09-06T08:30:00.000-07:00

The recent decision of the DNC to change it's primary season lineup is an unwise political maneuver that will undoubtedly favor the GOP in the 2008 Presidential season. The DNC has decided to reduce the influence New Hampshire and Iowa have on the selection of their 2008 candidate by adding Nevada and South Carolina to the early primary schedule. In the updated calender the Iowa caucuses would remain first followed by the Nevada caucus, New Hampshire primary and finally the primary in South Carolina. The stated goal of the move is to include more minority voices in the selection of a candidate. Donna Brazile political commentator and former Gore campaign manager was quoted as saying "This is a net plus for democracy, but it is also a net plus for the Democratic Party which is trying to rebuild from the bottom up and also trying to include more voices in the process." However as Peter Brown pointed out in an article the Democratic Party has no problem receiving minority votes in Presidential elections, Kerry received over 85% of the African American vote and 55% of the Hispanic vote. The key to understanding the move by the DNC is understanding the motives behind it. In 2004 George Bush won Nevada by only 21,000 votes, making Nevada a state the Dems believe they can pick up in '08. In the same way South Carolina although solidly Republican is seen as a way for the Democratic Party to make inroads in the solid GOP south, upon which any successful Republican Presidential candidate relies. A more detailed look at the statistics shows Republicans increasing their percentage of the Hispanic vote from 35% in 2000 to 45% in 2004. With this knowledge it's easy to see why the DNC would be interested in Nevada's 23% Hispanic population as opposed to 3.5% in IA and 2% in NH.

The DNC's decision seems on the surface to be a good move, however increasing their percentage of the minority vote is not the reason they continue to lose Presidential elections. Issues aside Democrats are never able to gain a majority of the white vote. Furthermore Democratic Candidates will spend valuable resources to gain the nomination, while Republicans have the ability to tailor their nominee to defeat whoever the Democrats nominate. Another argument against the change is that Democrats will be vying for the nomination when no one is watching, leaving the public's attention to the GOP nominating process. Finally by bumping New Hampshire the DNC has created the conditions that may help the GOP regain NH in 2008, given the circumstances 9,000 votes doesn't seem like a lot to overcome. NH Democrats will likely schedule their primary before any other primaries, bypassing the DNC and creating a showdown between Dean and New Hampshire voters. A Republican pickup of New Hampshire in 2008 would all but assure victory in the election and continued control of the White House.

The Democratic Parties most recent controversy highlights the parties disarray. Instead of focusing on a primary schedule that has produced mostly losing candidates, the Democrats should retake the party from the far left that has increasingly influenced candidate selection in recent years. In this way Donna Brazile was correct in saying more people need a voice in the nominating process, luckily for the GOP the DNC did not take her advice as traditional Democrats are becoming fringe members of the Democratic Party. The Republican primaries have no clear favorite luckily for us all we may have to do is wait and watch for the Democratic primaries to self destruct.

The Republic Square Joins "2,996" 9/11 Tribute

2006-09-06T06:00:00.000-07:00

The Republic Square is proud to participate in the 2,996 9/11 Memorial Tribute, to be held this upcoming Monday on the 5th anniversary of those fateful attacks.

2,996 bloggers including Matt Rooney, Katie Favazza, and Michelle Malkin will each sponsor one victim with a tribute that honors their lives as hard-working, decent American citizens. The project's leaders have requested that the focus be not on terror or death, but for just one day, a celebration of life.

To learn more about the project please visit the 2,996 site, and definitely be sure to check back here on 9/11/06 to share in this extraordinary mass memorial.

American Voter Batusi

2006-09-03T10:57:00.000-07:00

In the midst of liberal and press corp salivation over "brightening" Democratic electoral prospects, the Associated Press observes what we here at TRS have regularly diagnosed as a more generalized "Anti-incumbency fever."

To summarize the AP article, it can be said that while GOP congressmen are in trouble across the country for accomplishing nothing, Americans are even more apprehensive to replace Denny Hastert with Nancy Pelosi. Sure, President Bush is less-than-popular and his policies are being met with increasing skepticism. Nevertheless, thanks to the Joker (pictured right) and her gang of strung-out peacenicks and other assorted Batman villain impersonators, U.S. voters may give the Republican Party a stay of execution. Charles Rangel would made a half decent Penguin, wouldn't he (no offense to the late Burgess Meredith)? Unless something big breaks soon, it looks like voters will be "batusi-ing" through November, uncommitted to either party and as discontent as Adam West will be when I decline to pay royalties for use of the phrase "batusi".

Holy election misdirection, Batman!

A Weary Jersey, and Rooney, Want Change

2006-09-01T17:00:00.000-07:00

My state, affectionately called the "Dirty Jerz" by those of us who call her home, is not what you would call a Republican friendly environment. In fact, Jersey has been bluer than blueberries (a pitch for the home state industry) since Clinton's ascension to the throne in 1992. New Jersey has subsequently been without a statewide elected Republican official since Christine Todd Whitman left for the EPA in 2001, and with a few notable exceptions, has become a virtual one-part fiefdom.

Imagine my surprise, and the amazement experienced by my fellow Jersey conservatives (few but proud), when it became clear that State Senator Tom Kean has a fighting chance to knock off Democrat Bob Menendez. A recent Fairleigh Dickinson Poll shows Kean leading the unpopular appointed Menendez 43% to 39%. Friends, when you live in a region where Democrat politicians are the default governing class, and in which Republican victors are as rare as desert rain, good election news is not easily embraced. It may take awhile to digest the reality of a competitive Republican with an actual shot at victory in November. I'm still waiting for a union hack, sleazy Trenton operative or North Jersey machine thug to pull a lever and give Menendez a magical 10pt bounce. You call me cynical; I say scarred is a more appropriate diagnosis. Just as poor Doug Forrester. But then again, your humble Republic Square political team predicted this very potentiality. I have been arguing (and you have been dutifully absorbing) that the prevailing mood is anti-incumbent, not necessarily anti-GOP. Menendez is one of the least popular and little known U.S. senators, and his closet is over-flowing with 20 foot-tall skeletons from his years as a party chieftain. Recent NJ budget battles have also jostled the image of Democratic state legislators. The only thing preventing a solid Kean lead, the Dickinson people correctly note, is his redstate affiliations while running in a hostile blue environment. Again, however, not bad enough to turn down a visit from Bush '41.

Although logic cautions to remain guarded in my optimism, I am dying to feel good about New Jersey politics again. Post-Labor Day polling, as in all things, will tell the full story. Jerseyeans do have a high tolerance for corruption, but only because they have had little in the way of alternatives. A decent candidate has presented himself, and a weary populace seems to be willing to embrace change. Therefore, TRS is declaring this race an official toss-up. As Bon Jovi so eloquently refrains, "It's now or never! I ain't gonna live forever!"

The Long Awaited September Senate Handicap, Part 1

2006-08-30T15:36:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the first edition of The Republic Square's Senate race tip sheet. Every month we'll explore the top Senate races in the nation, with the kind of insight and edge that you will only find one place on the web: The Republic Square!

In this installment we explore: PENNSYLVANIA!

The buildup for this race started almost immediately following the close of the polls in 2004. Incumbent Republican Rick Santorum faces a strong challenge from State Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr., the son of a popular former governor. Both candidates have extremely high name-recognition.

Santorum is no stranger to tough campaigns, unseating incumbent Harris Woffard in 1994 and holding off popular Congressman Ron Klink in 2000. He is also no stranger to controversy, having made public comments regarding same-sex marriage that drew national attention. Santorum's lightning rod status has made him a target for national Democratic fundraisers. There are also rumblings that Democratic insiders would see the defeat of GOP Conference Chairman Santorum as partial retriburion for the ousting of their own Senate minority leader two years ago.

Casey's reputation is one of a pro-life Democrat, a powerful positive in heavily Catholic Pennsylvania. Otherwise, his platform is more or less the anti-Republican message that is being emailed to the talking heads by the DNC. Polls have consistently showed Casey with a comfortable lead, but more recent surveys show a tightening race. Santorum has the reputation for being a better "on the trail" campaigner, and he is expected to far outpace Casey in their televised debates. These factors could give Santorum some momentum, but he does have a large hole to dig himself out of.

Other factors contributing to this race are the undeniable Bush fatigue in the Keystone State as well as the momentum for incumbent Governor Ed Rendell. A stronger push is expected in the coming months from Republican Lynn Swann, but a major effort will be necessary from both campaigns to stem the anti-GOP wave that has covered Pennsylvania in recent elections.

In the end, Santorum will have much to overcome. National Democratic fundraisers have been salivating for two years at the prospect of taking down Santorum and PA Democrats have thrown their best candidate (minus Rendell) into the battle. This could easily be the closest watched race in the nation on election day.

TRS Assesment: Leans Democrat, but stay tuned.

P.S. Comments are especially encouraged on posts regarding political races. If you live in Pennsylvania, or any future state we profile, please share your insight (or tell us what we've got wrong in our analysis). That's what TRS is all about.

When We Learned to Love the Bomb

2006-08-29T20:51:00.000-07:00

57 years ago Tuesday the Soviet Union detonated its first atomic weapon, "First Lightening", in the woods of rural Kazakhstan. With a terrible glow and a mighty roar, the Cold War became a frigid reality for the inhabitants of a shaken globe. In recognition of their gruesome victory, Joseph Stalin and the Politburo awarded the responsible soviet scientists the prestigious "Order of Lenin." Relieved, the soviet team realized that they had narrowly escaped the sure penalty for failure- certain death by immediate execution or indirectly in the labor camps of bleak Siberia.

The onset of the Atomic Age was frightening, as it represented the coming of a different era in human history. An old, pre-WW2 system of nation states was fading before a new bi-polar order. It was the struggle between the United States and the U.S.S.R., democracy and communism, free commerce and agrarian labor, freedom and servitude. While the Iron Curtain had already slammed closed in the days immediately following Berlin's collapse, the first Soviet nuclear test presented a moment of historical and political clarity. Harry Truman understood the urgency of his station in time, and answered the Soviet's challenge by testing the world's first hydrogen bomb "Mike" in 1952. Our course, generated by Truman's initiative, led to ultimate victory over communist Russia.

It may be worth remembering, 15 years after the demise of the Soviet Union, that we are again in a period of great and tumultuous historical transition. The crash of two towers in New York which we will commemorate soon, smoking and smoldering embers still yet unsettled, has signaled yet another violent change in the political order of the planet. A world balanced between two powers has mutated into a battlefield of interests seeking the security of a symbiotic geopolitical arrangement. New technologies and attitudes have accelerated events, perhaps too quickly to comfortably comprehend. Consequently, the next 10 years may very well determine the make-up of the world's political identity for the next 100 years. Change is not an option. How we handle it is.

Shays Missteps on Iraq

2006-08-28T22:13:00.000-07:00

Having newly joined the Republic Square Blog I've decided to begin by discussing Iraq the issue dominating headlines throughout the nation, the issue that will decide the fate of the GOP House in the upcoming election. There is an increasing perception espoused by the media that the war in Iraq is going horribly wrong and that an immediate withdrawal will rectify the current Iraqi political climate. Put simply it won't, an immediate withdrawal may cleanse American hands of the turmoil in Iraq, but this answer is only a short term vacation from reality and indicates to the people of Iraq that we do not value their security and have lost hope in their future. Illustrating this perception is Christopher Shays (CT-4). In a 2003 letter sent to Donald Rumsfeld Shays states that "unfortunately Americans are receiving mixed messages from the media and the administration. My experiences in Iraq have provided me a crucial understanding of the challenges the coalition faces and a perspective on what it will take to bring stability and progress to this long-oppressed nation." Yet Shays own recent calls for a timetable for the withdrawal of troops in Iraq is itself a mixed message. Once an ardent supporter of the war in Iraq, Shays is now calling for a timetable, not a timetable for victory but a timetable for defeat. In a state that was affected as much as any by the attacks on our nation, Shays should be more attuned to the importance of securing a peaceful middle-east and ending the inner religious violence that has plagued Iraq. Although errors have been made in post-war Iraq, leaving the nation would be a mistake. In many places US and coalition forces are the only units ensuring order and stability. By leaving the US will not help end the violence, it will instead serve to create a power vaccuum that will invite ethnic and religious conflict. Chris Shays should take his own advice and stop sending mixed messages to the American public and instead stay the course in Iraq. Hopefully Shays will learn a valuable lesson from the Iraq debacle (his opponent rejected a timetable for troop withdrawal), never change your position based on a perceived public outcry; support the commitment the United States has made to the Iraqi people, a commitment that will one day pay dividends for Iraq and the security of our own nation.

August Hope

2006-08-27T10:00:00.000-07:00

Fred Barnes:
"The message in the August bounce is not that Republicans are now sure of holding on to the House and Senate. They are not. The message, rather, is that they can save themselves. A lot depends on what Bush does. If he stands out as a fighter against terrorists and an uncompromising foe of a nuclear Iran, he will gain stength politically and will deserve to. But he and Republicans on Capitol Hill must act. Resting on nonexistent laurels will lead to catastrophe on November 7."

Can only mean one thing, my friends: The Weekly Standard editorial board must subscribe to The Republic Square...

Get out there and start fighting! 1 week until Labor Day and the real race begins...

Reports of Santorum's Death are Greatly Exaggerated

2006-08-25T08:57:00.000-07:00

Nothing would make liberal pundits happier than to bury the political career of Sen. Rick Santorum. In that spirit, his enemies have gone ahead and picked out the plot, carved the headstone, and retained the caterer.

The problem is that this corpse still has a pulse. This week, race front runner Bob Casey agreed to hold a series of debates this Fall for the hotly contested PA Senate seat. The Casey concession is the clearest sign yet that this race is a toss-up. While poll rolling averages still has Sen. Santorum down by a few to several points, Pennsylvania's junior senator has everything to gain from a head-on, knock-down drag-out brawl with the less experienced and woefully ineloquent Casey. As Pennsylvanians return from the Jersey Shore, tanned and refocused, they will witness a veteran political fighter contrasted against someone who (no offense) has thus far coasted on an excellent family name. At that point the race becomes exclusively local, and turnout may be the ultimate broker of victory.

Do not be mistaken: Rick Santorum is still in extreme peril. He may very well lose, weighted further by a weak GOP gubernatorial campaign. But when analyzed in the context of the larger picture, the competitiveness of Pennsylvania's senate seat is disastrous news for Democrats. Santorum was target numero uno for Chuck Schumer and the DSCC. If a member of the Republican leadership can hold on in a blue state against the Pennsylvania equivalent of a Kennedy in Massachusetts, then the much anticipated title wave of disapproval is little more than a passing breaker for the GOP and a very much living Rick Santorum.

Iran is Cruisin' for a Bruisin'

2006-08-24T13:11:00.000-07:00

Whenever I would fight with my little brother or act in an obnoxious manner (imagine that), grandmom would feign an aggressive stance and admonish, "You are cruisin' for a bruisin', mister!" I clearly understood who was in charge, and hastened to apply the brakes to my immaturity. Iran, however, is that dumb kid in the schoolyard or spoiled younger cousin that just does not know when enough is enough. Yesterday, Iran announced that it is ready to get "serious", agreeing to hold talks with western powers regarding its illegal nuclear program. Predictably, European diplomats are glowing over the prospect of lengthy summits with expensive food and private Olympic sized pools. But is Iran capable of being serious on this issue? Or, like any other little monster that has not been put in its place, is she willing to push the West to its limits? Perhaps beyond?

Iran needs a bruising, folks. But who will step up? In fact, who is left? If I were the president of Iran (an amusing thought), I would not be overly concerned at the prospect of a serious objector. The world community, in its reaction to Iraq, has publicly declared that conflict is not to be a part of any western-led Middle East solution. And anyone who thinks Amhadinejad is blind to this development is engaging a wild fantasy. The Jerusalem Post has suggested in this morning's edition that Israel may be willing to deliver a long-overdue bloody nose to the Iranian bully. However, even Israel seems weaker and less determined in the wake of its retreat from Lebanon. At the same time, America is busy fighting wars on both of Iran's borders, with virtually no support from a cowering global community. Where is the will to fight? Was World War II democracy's last great stand?

The enemies of freedom are on the march, and by all indications, will continue to strengthen unabated. The possibility that free nations will take the Iranian threat seriously and begin to meet this dangerous challenge head-on diminishes every day, as more and more Americans and Europeans refuse to stand up for their civilization's right to exist. Worse, more and more people insist that any percieved threats exist only in George Bush's head. Sigh. I believe in miracles, but realism forces this observer to assume that Iran will be allowed to play its games until North Korea wakes one day to find a new, nuke-slinging ally. Let's pray that someone will break Iran's nose before an ICBM becomes our only recourse.

Incumbents out in the cold?

2006-08-24T08:19:00.000-07:00

I had intended for my first contribution to The Republic Square to be a handicapping of the top Senate races this year, but this nugget from USA Today caught my eye. I should know better than to give America's McNewspaper any of my time, but there's nothing more laughable than tremendously slanted regional news.

WASHINGTON — Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski's defeat in his state's Republican primary is the latest sign that incumbents are facing tougher races than usual, political analysts said Wednesday.

Murkowski got 19% of the vote Tuesday, placing last in a three-way race. His loss sets up a fall contest between Republican Sarah Palin, 42, the former mayor of Wasilla, and Democrat Tony Knowles, 63, who held the governor's seat for two terms from 1994-2002. Murkowski was burdened by a number of controversies of his own making, including his decision to appoint his daughter, Lisa Murkowski, to succeed him in the U.S. Senate. Even so, the decisiveness of his defeat is an indication of the “surly” mood of the voters, according to Jennifer Duffy, an analyst with the non-partisan Cook Political Report.

“Generally speaking, incumbents get the benefit of the doubt from voters,” Duffy said. “They're not getting it this time."

Murkowski lost for one reason: his appointment of his daughter to his Senate seat (to which she was reelected in 2004, defeating the aforementioned Tony Knowles). While I will grant that the current climate does not favor congressional incumbents, the primary defeat of an already unpopular governor in a politically squirrely state does not seem to me to be the harbinger that the Beltway reporter from the USA Today leads us to believe. After all, it was only 1990 when Alaskans put Independent Walt Hickel in the big chair in Juneau.

By my count, Murkowski is the third incumbent in any federal or gubernatorial race to lose this year. He joins Cynthia McKinney (big surprise there) and Joe Lieberman, who's primary defeat has been discussed ad nauseum (including right here at TRS). In each of these cases, it would seem that the electorate dispensed of the incumbent for a very specific reason. I thus find it difficult to reach the same conclusion as Jennifer Duffy (who I normally agree with in assesing electoral politics).

Frank Morroni Joins The Square!

2006-08-23T15:15:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

The Republic Square Blog welcomes Frank Morroni as an associate blogger. Frank is an experienced Republican campaign and hot-air dispensing pundit, and will specialize in Election '06 updates. He also has the same poly-sci degree as yours truly, and therefore, can't make things any worse than they already are for you, the suffering reader. Welcome Frank!

Peace is NOT an End

2006-08-20T13:51:00.000-07:00

The newest fad among lefties is to adopt the phrase “waging peace” as an anti-slogan against the perceived policies of the Bush Administration. While this hardly represents a new ideological direction for a group of people who still insist that “real communism” has never been given a fair shot, it is worth noting the extent to which the meaning of peace has been mutated in our culture.

Peace, according to Dictionary.com, represents a state characterized by an “absence of war or other hostilities,” an agreement to achieve such an arrangement, or my personal favorite, to attain “freedom from quarrels or disagreements.” While the first two definitions are uncontroversial, the later seems rather ostentatious. Is it possible to have a workplace or household, let a lone a country or world, without “quarrels or disagreements”? With few exceptions, most faiths and philosophies deny the absolute realization of, as the herald angel famously sang, “peace on earth, and mercy mild.” It is not that peace is disagreeable. No one finds conflict, particularly of the violent variety, an acceptable first option for redressing grievances. Nevertheless, the more realistic among us (mostly those who missed the 60s), find attempts at a world without conflict a dangerous fiction.

Why is universal peace impossible? Human nature precludes the ability to deal with all persons in a rational, non-violent matter. Many of the world’s inhabitants have been brought up with value sets, or under circumstances, that make them immune to diplomatic overtures. What do Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and Hitler truly have in common? All of them were or are insane, and despite the media's efforts to humanize them, are without exception persons incapable of operating within the bounds of civilization. Basic, contractual agreements that lift men out of the state of nature, like agreeing that impulsive murder and seizure of another’s property are illegal, are forever lost on such degenerates. Then why is believing in perpetual peace dangerous? Even beyond the nutcases discussed above, human nature is universally unconquerable. Someone somewhere, defying every anti-nuclear or anti-SUV treaty the UN can muster, will try to maim someone else in pursuit of treasure, power, sex, property, resources, or even the divine right to spread their religion with the butt of a gun. Sure we are a leap above the animal kingdom. Not far enough, however, to expect that everyone will play by the rules that most follow under normative circumstances. Hence men have to be willing to forcibly assert the rule of law to preserve life. That’s why we have administrators, police, courts, and military to execute laws.

Now, my aim isn’t to paint an overly dark picture of the human condition. Most humans are good at their core, and working to make the world more civilized in a noble goal. In fact, the world is a place more full of hope thanks to democracy. Our current system of elections, courts, and free markets provide a humanizing mechanism for civilizing conflicts. The problem arises when too many western democratic leaders, thinkers, and voters begin to view peace as an acceptable end to human history, as both a possible and sustainable aim that makes confrontation forever unnecessary. For subscribers to this ideology of neopacifism, war is no longer acceptably waged to free a people or protect national interests. Now the aim of every battle must be “peace,” or by our earlier definition, creating a world or region devoid of “quarrels or disagreements.” Conflict avoidance is the order of the day because antiquated ideas of individual freedom, justice, life, liberty, happiness, etc, are all subordinated to the desire to bypass hostile and unpleasant confrontations.

How did westerners, the descendents of the martial Romans, develop such an intense, wholesale distaste for conflict? It begins at childhood. How often do we read articles describing baseball leagues where everyone wins, teachers that let kids run amok, and school councilors and authorities that pride mediation over punishment? Fighting, arguing, teasing, bullying, and other practices are deemed more intolerable than cheating, lying, stealing, or general academic laziness. The home front merely reinforces these foolish notions. Parents try to be their child’s best friend, giving timeouts and refusing to raise their voices. Maybe if I had grown up in a postmodern parenting environment I would be less confrontational (and more palatable to you the reader), but better adept to face the real world? Doubtful. As a consequence of this bizarre cultural development, adults are displaying an equally moronic approach to confrontation. You need look no further than today’s politics. The Senate’s “Gang of 14” was hailed as peacemakers, inventing a fake “tradition” to protect the glorious Senate, accomplishing nothing but to undermine a democratic debate. Maybe I wanted to hear senators, elected to defend the interests of their constituents and the country, have an actual discussion over what that best interest might be! Whenever two candidates ferociously argue a controversial bill or issue, media pundits immediately bemoan the “incivility” of politics and plead for someone, anyone, to make everyone shake hands and have a picnic on an arbitrary common ground. One wonders why liberals have been so effective in making Americans feel guilty about Iraq. After all, saving the lives of millions of Middle Easterners and protecting our civilization from destruction does little to alleviate the discomfort caused by fighting for it.

A generation is now graduating college that knows nothing of the necessity of confronting those with whom no bargain is attainable. It is my generation; a group of students with all the benefits of a society that has not known real conflict for decades- until now. Faced with the challenges of the War on Terrorism, many Americans seem curiously and frighteningly confused by the challenges at hand. 9/11 horrified us, but the subsequent analysis and response has been woefully inadequate. Some think that the battle against terrorists can be won through economic and verbal diplomacy. Then simply give jihadists a time-out in Gitmo, but don’t dare feed them gruel or forget to leave a mint under each pillow! Others react to our current situation by feeling guilt. It must be something we did, just as it must have been my fault when little John Doe hit me in 3rd grade because I wouldn’t let him play with me. Therefore, let’s apologize to the mullahs, abandon Israel, and operate under the assumption that America should be the world’s patsy because, after all, it’s our fault! How did your oil money get in my pocket, Mr. Hussein?

We must stop treating peace as an end unless we want others to determine an end for us. Peace is a state of affairs that can allow for freedom, justice, life, liberty, happiness, love, humanity, the arts, virtue, and many other wonderful things, to flourish. But a peace that keeps millions under the steel boot of oppression, leaves families under constant threat, and does nothing to advance the causes upon which this nation was founded is not acceptable. It is time to relearn that conflict is not always bad. In fact, they *gasp* often have positive outcomes. To avoid the responsibilities we have in the world and to ourselves, simply to give idealists some temporary security, is to wage stupidity.

GOP Gains Steam in New Polling

2006-08-17T12:35:00.000-07:00

DEVELOPING
Just a Senate polling update for today, fellow citizens:

- Santorum at 41%, trailing Casey by 6pts. 8% is still undecided... a strong debate performance could swing a cliffhanger to Rick. (Strategic Vision)

- Lieberman up BIG in CT, leading Lamont 53% to 41%. Heavy support among Republicans and stronger than expected Democrat support seem primed to carry Joe to another term. if the anti-war wave cannot succeed in CT, November may look different from current prediction models... (Quinnipiac)

- Kean trails Menendez by 2pts (42%-40%, well within the margin of error) in New Jersey. The key to this race is how much has yet to be decided by the electorate, as a whopping 18% of likely voters remain undecided, and even larger numbers express no opinion regarding either candidate. With his job approval among the lowest in the Senate, Menendez may have trouble hanging on. (Quinnipiac)

- Despite Rep. Ford's dashing young image, he is finding trouble gaining traction in a very red state. Corker leads Ford 48% to 42% out of the primary gate. Dems would probably need this pickup to have any hope of capturing the Senate in '06. (Rasmussen)

The moral of the story is keep the faith! The GOP has an uphill battle, but new polling suggests that a Dem landslide is anything but a lock. That hasn't stopped K Street from hedging their bets by taking on more liberal lobbyists, but influence peddling is a conservative (little "c") business!

Long live the Republic!

Bobby Jindal, MD

2006-08-16T18:39:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) delivered his own child Tuesday evening. The congressman and former LA gubernatorial candidate followed 911 instructions and safely facilitated the 8lb, 2 ounce and 21 inch long baby's entrance into the world while his two younger children slept!

We are all big fans of Rep. Jindal here at The Republic Square, and can't help but think that Louisiana missed out big by passing on this guy for the comparatively worthless Kathleen "the Hurricane" Blanco. For God's sake- he is a conservative, intelligent, family-oriented baby delivering machine!

Congratulations to Jindal and his wife.

Key to GOP Victory '06, Tip #1: Bush is No Failure

2006-08-15T15:31:00.000-07:00

As Republicans head into their toughest congressional election in 12 years, nervous incumbents have decided to agree with the leftist portrait of the president as a complete failure. President Bush has been remanded to the corner of the political sphere like a crazy uncle at Thanksgiving. Surrendered to his enemies, Bush's antagonist biographers have gleefully judged Iraq, the War on Terrorism, and all policies he championed as unpleasant remnants of a fast-fading nightmare. Accepting, not to mention endorsing this rubbish, is an unfortunate and damning strategy for Republicans. To agree with Rolling Stone and the rest of the liberal cabal that Bush is one of the nation's great failures is to forsake the truth of what has been accomplished over the course of 6 years.

As president-elect, George W. Bush inherited a country without focus. While the 90s saw great economic prosperity, President Clinton undertook little preventative maintenance on the American homestead. By January 2001, the American economy was already grinding to a halt, the seeds of corporate greed were already sown, and Al-Qaeda was already concluding its planning for the 9/11 attack, having been buoyed by years of lax scrutiny. George W. Bush inherited a weakening America, but unlike his predacessor, chose to act boldly. Unfortunately, as with any neglected property, costs are augmented by long periods of disrepair. The recession, 9/11 attack, and collapse of several major corporations represented the price of complacency in a changing world. Rather than redefine America's place in the global economy or in world security, Clinton was busy tinkering with the definitions of "is" and "sexual conduct."

Circumstances forced President Bush to confront more than any American leader had been compelled to shoulder since FDR simultaneously fought depression and fascism. Nevertheless, the country's 43rd head of state displayed determined and inspired vision. He insisted on economic strategies that would grow the American economy and market. He sought to transform a judiciary astray and an educational system broken. Most importantly, Bush will be remembered as the first western leader to fully appreciate and respond to the threat of Islamic fascism. He acted quickly and decisively to neutralize the Taliban and put terrorists and their supporters on the defensive. Yet, the difficulty of the job at hand has disarmed perspective. FDR's struggle to restore the American economy and the longevity of western democracy was not realized for twenty years long after his death. 5 years into the War on Terrorism, Americans have chosen to assume the worst about Bush and his legacy. Conservatives, typically indignant over government expansion and spending, have abandoned the President to the cold ravages of a history written by one, hostile side of the ideological spectrum. A roaring economy and no major attacks since 2001 have done little to earn Bush respect among his contemporaries.

Certainly, Bush has made mistakes that have served to damage his position. But worst president ever? A complete failure? Moronic wannabe leader of a weakened state? Hardly. History will record that President Bush was a good man and president who, at worst, confronted enormous, perilous challenges with great vision and less-great strategies. Now, when we stand on the brink of Americans choosing to go back to a pre-1994 mode of government, one that gave birth to the dangers of the post-9/11 world, is there really any doubt that President Bush has done much right? And if America is better for confronting terrorism head-on when his Democratic opponents refused to acknowledge a defined threat, how can we honestly believe that electoral victory is contingent on being complicit to a sad and dangerous lie about our president?

I'm not suggesting that 8x10 glossies with Bush, plastered on prime time TV ads, is a wise strategy for endangered Republicans. My contention is best articulated as a plea for Republicans to remember that he who bangs the table loudest defines political reality. If the GOP accepts the liberal judgement of Bush and the past 5 years as gospel, then what sane citizen would vote for term extensions? Iraqi quagmires and economic morasses are not the ingredients for electoral stability. Thus, the key to victory in November is a firm, united, and powerful renunciation of liberal myths about American success over recession, terrorism, and pessimism in a new and uncertain epoch of U.S. history. These United States are safer, wealthier, and stronger for Republican leadership, representing an outcome less certain under increasingly loony Al Gore or perpetually unimpressive John Kerry. For campaigning GOPers to accept a version of history that accepts anything less than the triumphs of the Bush years is to seal their doom.

*picture by Ken Hendrickson... click picture for link to site

---------------------------------------------------------------
News

-Santorum pulls within single digits of his opponent in the PA Senate race- after a great ad-blitz discussing positive accomplishments. Keep the faith!

-Bill Clinton hates being 60. Too many jokes are coming to mind.

-Dem Senate hopeful in MD promises to cure cancer. Why didn't we think of that?

Lieberman Loss Spells Trouble for Menendez in NJ

2006-08-12T23:21:00.000-07:00

The conventional wisdom this election goes something like an LSAT logic problem:

"Congress and the President are unpopular. The GOP has a majority in both chambers and controls the White House. Therefore, Congress will soon have less Republicans."

The problem with this configuration of variables is that it leaves out the X factor- in this case, the equally low approval ratings of Democratic leaders. Joe Lieberman is not the only Democrat experiencing the angst of angry voters. Sen. Daniel Akaka from Hawaii is in danger of losing his primary, Sen. Cantwell is faltering badly in Washington State, and the Canadian-immigrant governor of Michigan looks to be on the way out. The mood of the nation is too complex to be simply " anti-Republican." Republicans just happen to have the unhappy distinction of owning more seats. No, voters are in an anti-incumbent mood this time around the electoral block, and Democratic incumbents in swing areas should be just as frightened as their GOP colleagues.

Case in point, Robert Menendez of NJ is in great peril. Recently appointed after the departure of now Gov. Jon S. Corzine, Menendez is undergoing a tough challenge from independent-minded Republican legacy Tom Kean, Jr. Typically, my home state is a Democratic lock for statewide contests. However, the Dems have an ironically similar situation in Trenton to that of the Republican debacle in DC. Recent budgetary problems (which kept me away from my beloved casinos) and sales tax hikes (which is draining my wallet faster than the slots) have seen the blame fall on the legislature also controlled by Democrats. After an equally long tenure of Democratic rule in Jersey, corruption and taxes remain out of control. SOMEONE has to take at least some of the blame eventually, and Menendez should not assume that he is automatically immune from general discontent just because of his well-oiled machine. After all, appointed officials make the most vulnerable candidates for reelection regardless of party or position.

Recent Republican losses in Jersey have been due, in part, to weak candidates. Kean may be stronger than Menendez can handle, and Sen. Bob should be wary lest he soon join Lieberman and others on the retirement golf circuit.

--------------------------------------------------------
News, if you please:

-Terrorists nearly strike America's airways, but terror is the unavoidable result. Many subsequent arrests in the US, UK and Italy. Terrifying and timely reminder that elections matter.

-Israel agrees to UN brokered ceasefire with Lebanon. Mission accomplished or botched? Time will tell.

-National disgrace Cindy Sheehan goes down in Crawford, TX from her self-induced fast. All I can ever think when Cindy rears her ugly head is how sorry I feel for her late son. The woman's personal situation makes humor almost impossible.

Principles, not Lieberman, Frighten Liberals in Wake of Primary

2006-08-09T15:03:00.000-07:00

The two-party system took one to the chin Tuesday night, as three-term Senator Joseph I. Lieberman was defeated 52%-48%. An extreme-left upstart toppled a respected moderate statesman, raising serious questions about the future credibility of the Democratic Party. Yet no one, including Lieberman, seems to be depressed over his loss. Except, of course, for an awkward-looking Democratic leadership whose pained countenance contrasts strangely with Ned Lamont's used-car salesman grin. What is going on here?

Sen. Lieberman has the potential to be the ultimate spoiler for the '06 election cycle, and the mainstream Democratic leadership is all too aware of the consequences. In the heat of a contest where most indicators point to the Republicans losing their shirts, Lieberman now becomes the ultimate chink in the Democratic Armor going into the final stretch of the battle for Congress. Most seem to agree. Dick Morris and Eileen McGann argued today that Joe has tactical and policy advantages going into a three-way fight. ABC's the Note reports on, among other things, how Democratic senators are already divided on whether or not to support their old colleague. Even major news outlets seem torn between running with a fantastic political underdog story and slamming Lieberman for the vile, Bush-loving poor-sport they take him to be.

Yet even the most skilled analysts seem to be glossing over the crux of the current wave of Joe-mentum. Lieberman scares the Left because he represents a bold, underlined, seventy-two font sized footnote attached to the Democratic triumph already authored by Liberal pundits, reading:

PRINCIPLES!

A good conservative has to be cautious not to overstate the situation by canonizing the junior senator. Lieberman has been wrong on quite a few key and critical issues. However, what separates Joe from other Democrats and earns this observer's respect is a firm and passionate allegiance to his core beliefs and convictions. Particularly of relevance here, Sen. Lieberman's courageous choice to back the war to save Western civilization has earned him the ire of the liberal mobs that are currently completing their hostile takeover of the Democratic Party. He had opportunities to flip-flop on the war, as so many of his one-time supporters have done. But Joe Lieberman stuck to his guns on capital gains tax cuts, affirmative action, and numerous issues that led to rejection by the same party that almost made him Vice President six short years ago. He believes what he says and says what he means, embodying a trait absent from modern Liberals.

Now Joe Lieberman, once held up by his party during the 2000 election as a model of civility and statesmanship, has thrown down the gauntlet, struck his colors, and declared himself a rebel against the far-Left insurgency. As an Independent with intense media focus, he may become to many Americans the convincing and definitive example of why the Democratic Party is not to be trusted with stewardship of the U.S. Government. For this reason, more than any other, Lieberman will undergo an assault unwitnessed in modern political history. Whether or not he survives, let alone wins, the crucial lessons uncovered by the betrayal of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman are invaluable. Lieberman now has the awesome opportunity and responsibility to shine a light on the moral bankruptcy and unprincipled state of the liberal movement, and consequently, stop it before it consumes the Capitol.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other News from Around the Globe:

-Israel steps up Lebanon invasion, posting thousands of new troops on the border. Meanwhile, an Iranian dictator spews garbage about Bush, America, and Western values. But, we're not at war. Right, Ned Lamontites?

-Cynthia "Rocky" McKinney goes down for the count. Throw in the towel- a victory for common sense.

-Check out Hillary's new look... ?!

Until next time, long live the Republic!

West Won't Fight?

2006-08-07T14:04:00.000-07:00

"What if liberal democracies have now evolved to a point where they can no longer wage war effectively because they have achieved a level of humanitarian concern for others that dwarfs any real cold-eyed pursuit of their own national interests?"

The NYP's John Podhoretz, quoted above, raises a stark and troubling dilemma that is confronting the United States. Quoting Podhoretz in her Globe column, Cathy Young toys with the notion that democracies can become, in effect, unable and willing to engage in violent confrontations in the Middle East or anywhere else. Young determines that such reasoning, while thought provoking, is dangerous and counter-intuitive for a society as morally advanced as America.

I offer another reason, less complex, for the West's war jitters: we aren't scared. While terrible and scarring, 9/11 and its 3000 dead represent but a week, month, or year for persons in Israel, the Sudan, or other parts of the globe challenged by the carnage of warfare. 9/11 was an emotional tumult that awoke a country to the possibility of ominous horizons, but the threat seemed distant, abstract, and shockingly, easily fixed for far too many westerners.

Stubborn to the end, my friends, I refuse to believe that Americans or any people are somehow "above" self-defense! Human nature, while able to be shackled, cannot be overcome. Certainly, one of the 21st centuries great lies is the notion that war can somehow be easy, if not entirely unavoidable to begin with. The first Gulf War buoyed this fantasy, and now, Europe and the U.S. are faltering perilously before the dangers of Islamic fascism. But fantasies are not the result of achieving moral purity, but arise when the endangered subject feels no threat.

I am not negative by nature. Yet, as a reader of history and observer of my fellow men, I cannot help but think that only a nation as embattled as Israel, or as threatened as 1941 Russia, can appreciate and tackle attempts at its ultimate destruction. If the fateful and dark day dawns when New York City or Los Angeles resemble besieged Tel Aviv, Americans won't be restricted by liberal notions of "high purposes," dressing suicide up to appear acceptable to academic scrutiny. Americans, realizing the threat to their lives, liberties, and mortal happiness, will wage war decisively, passionately, and with impunity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Other News-nuggets from the WORLD at-large:

- Santorum and Lieberman, according to new polling posted at realclearpolitics.com, appear to be closing on their respective opponents. May be too late for Joe, but Santorum still might have a shot at keeping his seat warm for the GOP.

- The mayor of LA apologizes for appearing to take Israel's side in the current conflict, after angering Islamic citizens of his city. I'm glad I don't try to please everyone... looks exhausting!

- Bob Ney, embattled OH GOP congressman, bows out and hangs it up... the lobbyist scandal fallout claims another victim.

-Castro is still alive. I guess only the good do die young, Mr. Joel.

Until next post,