A confidential blueprint for David Cameron's controversial bid to impose more women, gays and ethnic candidates on reluctant party activists has come to light. The explosive six-page document proposes the use of subterfuge to end the white, male and middle-class image of the Conservative Party.
It emerged on the eve of another grassroots revolt over the modernisation of the party.
Action Plan for Candidate Selection in Safe Seats is a fascinating insight into how modernisers have planned a gradual Tory party takeover.
Their efforts finally paid off last month when Mr Cameron imposed shortlists of 'suitable' Parliamentary candidates.
The move has incensed the grassroots - who have always had a say over which candidates appeared on shortlists - and triggered a wave of protests and resignations.
And the language in the document will further exacerbate tensions between the Tory high command and its army of hard working volunteers.
The document suggests using 'stealth' and stresses the importance of keeping 'quiet' over the plans to ensure more women, ethnic and gay candidates. 'Like a conjuror, we'll get more applause if the audience cannot see exactly how the trick is performed,' the document says.
Mr Cameron is unrepentant and his decision to seize power from local associations, say his friends, is the culmination of the secret plan on how to neuter the party faithful in the country.
These members of the Tory grassroots, cruelly nicknamed dinosaurs, are seen by modernisers as impediments to a progressive party. Mr Gove's and Mr Godson's document was written in February 2002.
'The party has little direct leverage over associations, consisting of volunteers who guard their local autonomy jealously and value their ability to choose future MPs. Nevertheless not only can objections be overcome, they MUST be overcome. 'The clever approach is to maintain the illusion that a good cross-section of approved candidates is being offered.'
Suggesting a degree of subterfuge, the document goes on: 'There are several reasons why the Party should not publicly proclaim the new methodology.
'The more that the profusion of women, black, Asian or gay candidates appears to be the result of spontaneous open-mindedness on the part of grassroot activists the greater will be the accolades.
'Most Tories loathe political correctness and positive discrimination. If one tries to be 'in your face' about the fact that positive discrimination is taking place activists are much more likely to rebel; a version of 'don't ask, don't tell', is called for.
'Yet another factor that should persuade us to do our good work by stealth is the fact our opponents don't believe we have got a cat in hell's chance of passing their test [for the selection of candidates]. It would be counterproductive to tip them off.'
#1
Worked here. Fill the R part with McCains, Snowes, Grahams, Chafees and Bennets and pretty soon no one dares call themselves a Republican anymore, let alone votes for one.
Think Americans are angry at Washington today? Just you wait.
Even as President Obama yesterday formed a panel of Washington graybeards to find ways to control the national debt, the Government Accountability Office was reporting in eye-popping detail on a $5 billion "stimulus" program to weatherize the homes of some 600,000 low-income families.
The point, purportedly, was to increase energy efficiency and create "green jobs" -- whatever they may be. But GAO found that, as of Dec. 31 (nearly a year into the program), barely 9,000 homes had, in fact, been weatherized.
The problem? The bill contained, among other flaws, a mandate that everybody hired to do work on the homes be paid a "prevailing wage" -- which snarled the program in red tape for months as Energy Department bureaucrats came up with such a figure for every county in the nation.
How many "green jobs" could 9,000 houses have created?
Plenty -- for the aforementioned bureaucrats: ABC News reports that, despite the mere trickle of actual work going on, DOE had burned through a whopping $522 million for the program, or more than 10 percent of its stimulus pot.
Now, not to oversimplify things, but that works out to roughly $57,000 per weatherized home.
Meanwhile, a recent report by Texas Watchdog found that of the $3.7 million that state had spent through the program last year, $3.5 million -- or 95 percent -- went to administrative costs.
All in all, the scheme is functioning . . . about as you'd expect a government program would.
But while this kind of waste is annoying in good times, it's intolerable now -- and goes a long way toward explaining why Americans en masse have stopped believing their government has their best interests at heart.
And who's to say they're wrong?
The notion embodied in Obama's stimulus -- that Americans can't be trusted to spend their own money -- has always been the height of arrogance.
Now the real-world consequences of that mentality -- trillion-dollar deficits and the loss of the nation's global stature -- are being laid bare.
Americans increasingly understand this, which explains their anger.
But there's more of that to come.
Wait until the stories of misspent stimulus funds start making the rounds.
Fifty-seven grand just to weatherize a house? Grotesque.
#1
“The problem? The bill contained, among other flaws, a mandate that everybody hired to do work on the homes be paid a "prevailing wage"…”
Let me get this straight. ThereÂ’s a government program that has a provision to pay off the unions and it ends up soaking the taxpayers? IÂ’m shockedÂ…shocked I tells ya!
#4
That $5 billion created lots of jobs. Nice green office jobs doing studies and writing regulations and such. Once all that was done there was not enough money left over to do but a few thousand homes. Give them another $5 billion and they'll do the weatherization. Or maybe pay the 25,000 bureaucrats for another year. Either way it creates jobs.
#7
A similar program here in Oz has, so far, resulted in four insulation installers being electrocuted and about a hundred house fires.
Posted by: Grunter in Oz ||
02/19/2010 21:35 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Plus some neat scams. One group of Indian students will insulate a house belonging to friends, have it inspected, collect the check, remove the insulation, and move it to the next house.
Posted by: Grunter in Oz ||
02/19/2010 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
You did the responsible thing. You saved in your IRA or 401(k) to support your retirement, when you could have spent that money on another vacation, or an upscale car, or fancier clothes and jewelry. But now Washington is developing plans for your retirement savings.
BusinessWeek reports that the Treasury and Labor departments are asking for public comment on "the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams."
In plain English, the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years. That would be the point at which we'd see barricades in the streets ...
They will tell you that you are "investing" your money in U.S. Treasury bonds. But they will use your money immediately to pay for their unprecedented trillion-dollar budget deficits, leaving nothing to back up their political promises, just as they have raided the Social Security trust funds.
This "conversion" may start out as an optional choice, though you are already free to buy Treasury bonds whenever you want. But as Karl Denninger of the Market Ticker Web site reports: "'Choices' have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market -- so they will effectively tax you by forcing your 'retirement' money to buy them." Argentina did this a year back. A lot of good it did, too, though the Kirchners enjoyed spending the boodle ...
Moreover, benefits based on Treasury bond interest rates may be woefully inadequate compensation for your years of savings. As Denninger adds, "What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI inflation index) so as to guarantee that you lose over time compared to actual purchasing power."
This proposal follows hearings held last fall by House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Soviet Wash., of the Ways and Means Committee focusing on "redirecting (IRA and 401k) tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute," as reported by InvestmentNews.com. Obliged as in mandated, as in the pols take your 401k ...
The hearings examined a proposal from professor Teresa Ghilarducci of the New School for Social Research in New York to give all workers "a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government" in return for requiring workers "to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration."
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It won't be just barricades in the streets, either. Just try it, you bastards. I understand there's PLENTY of lampposts in DC.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
02/19/2010 1:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is why we need to throw the bums out. This starts with your congressman, not everyone else's.
#3
They have been talking about this in Congress for over a year. There is more here.
There won't be enough tar, feathers, pitchforks, and lanterns to go around if they do this.
And to make matters worse, since they will blow the money to finance the debt they are running up, they will likely have to euthanize us and take 50% of that nest egg via the death tax and then only have to pay out 50 cents on the dollar.
#4
The mere discussion of such concepts is a big win for the liberal tax and spend pols. The fear of such a scheme will drive investors to cash out of their 401k's and IRA's and immediately incur the tax liability.
#5
these people really want another revolution don't they? Whichever pol brought this up and actually thinks it's a plausible idea needs to do the mussolini swing...
#6
If you're working on "the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams." then try and work away from the windows, or if you do watch out for light planes.
#8
you may want to throw each and every incumbent out, but my rep is Duncan D. Hunter, son of Duncan Hunter and a fine man, Marine artillery LT (later Capt.) with two tours in Iraq (including Fallujah) and one in Afghanistan. He's solid on all the issues. So if you want a grab-bag "throw em all out" you can count me f*cking OUT.
/I'm getting tired of silly slogans - you won't find a better Rep, and tantrums don't fix anything
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/19/2010 8:23 Comments ||
Top||
#9
by the way - I'm not singling out Gorb, there's been a lot of "throw em all out" here. If your Rep doesn't meet your standards, by all means, work to do so. There's also nothing against contributing in other district's races to get your agenda forward. I recommend you do so
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/19/2010 8:33 Comments ||
Top||
#10
@#7 Soon, real soon. I have concluded there is a 50/50 chance we get to November before the shooting starts.
#11
And do you think they will hold back from 'redistribution' of your 401K and IRA to those who didn't save?
That would, in their eyes, buy a lot of votes.
I'd rather withdraw my 401K, take the 10% hit off the top (better than the 50% the government will take for 'fees and redistrubution') and manage it myself. There are a lot more reliable investments then then US Government out there.
#14
CF, Bambi's people can always back-date the point of seizure, find your cash in the Caymans, take it all from you, and then assess a penalty on top of everything. They're the government, after all.
Frank: point taken. As the old joke goes, it's the 95% of rotten apples in Congress that make the rest look bad.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/19/2010 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Bambi's people can always back-date the point of seizure, find your cash in the Caymans, take it all from you Ample precedent for something like this can be found in FDR's outlawing of possession of gold by commoners, inadequate compensation for the seizure of the gold, the nullification of gold clauses in contracts, and the US Supreme Court's approval of same.
Another option is the negative interest rate, wherein the money you have in banks is docked every month by a set amount, which is then confiscated by the government. Also note there is no time deadline for the FDIC to make good on its deposit insurance program when a bank fails. Customarily FDIC support has been immediate, but it's not required. Since US currency is merely a US government promise, there are endless other possibilities to be indulged in.
#16
While I bow to no-one in hostility to the McDermott plan, this is just a Gingrich echo of that Businessweek article of a couple weeks back, there's no news in this 'un.
And Frank, while I agree that my current Rep is better than the clutch of alcoholic time-serving hacks that the Democrats might offer in my district, it's still a good idea to scare 'im a bit every two years by making "throw the bums out!" noises. He's no Duncan Hunter, and he could use a little constituent pressure to keep him on the straight and narrow.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
02/19/2010 10:21 Comments ||
Top||
#17
I don't have a 401K. Got out og it years ago. I do have an add-on CD. Are they gonna take that? I've already paid taxes on that.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
02/19/2010 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Deacon Blues....yeah, they're problabl working on that too
Posted by: Kelly ||
02/19/2010 10:33 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Throw the bums out. Except for Duncan D. Hunter, of course.
Ya gotta keep it simple if it's going to catch on. People will figure it out and keep the good ones. Unless they live in Pelosi's or Murtha's districts. Besides, I don't want to add a bunch of exceptions to the rule because I don't feel like typing that much.
Oh, and if they drive an F150 they get an exception, too.
#20
My representative is John Boehner (pronounced bay'nr, for some reason), head of the Republican caucus in the House. He's been one of the leaders in the fight against the Democratic Borg, so I think I'll keep him on. But all other incumbents out, certainly. ;-)
#22
In plain English, the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.
Just another scheme to loot the American people--just another Social Security Ponzi scheme. The government looted this trust fund long ago.
#24
#19 wise and judicious standards, Gorb. Drink up!
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/19/2010 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#25
I didn't find anything in a cursory search of the Federal Register's website, #23 NS. Don't have any more time to look right now since I have to go to work.
This might have been a trial balloon to see how people reacted to the idea; if it was, it just tells you how clueless the bureacrats are.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
02/19/2010 16:34 Comments ||
Top||
#26
There's also nothing against contributing in other district's races to get your agenda forward.
Excellent advice and worth repeating. I'm nowhere near Massachusetts, but contributed to Scott Brown (got others to do so as well) and feel it was money well spent. Got a nice letter from him yesterday, as well as an email from his 2 daughters.
#27
I'm nowhere near Massachusetts, but contributed to Scott Brown
If you are still feeling generous, consider dropping a few bucks Col. Alan West's way. He's the only politician who really understands what America is up against. Unfortunately, he's running for office in deep pockets and deep denial Palm Beach, FL.
Posted by: ed ||
02/19/2010 17:35 Comments ||
Top||
#28
By that I mean West is going to get clobbered in the money race, therefore publicity and name recognition. The district otherwise is winnable by West.
Posted by: ed ||
02/19/2010 17:54 Comments ||
Top||
#29
This might have been a trial balloon to see how people reacted to the idea; if it was, it just tells you how clueless the bureacrats are.
My thought too. But George Miller & Baghdad Jim McDermott were also mentioned so it could be some pinko staffer.
The White House announced Friday the awarding of $2.3 billion in tax credits -- the money comes from last year's stimulus bill -- to companies to create "green jobs."
The announcement was rather obviously timed to counter the news that the nation lost 85,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate stayed at 10% -- bad news for an administration that once promised to hold unemployment to 8% by the end of 2009.
So the administration sought to change the tune by talking about all those green jobs in the pipeline.
"Building a robust clean-energy sector is how we will create the jobs of the future -- jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced," President Obama said Friday.
Yes, but getting these jobs is burning a hole in the national wallet. The problem is that even advocates like Obama concede that these programs are not very cost-effective in creating jobs.
Obama says the grants will create 17,000 cleantech jobs. Well, get out your calculator. $2.3 billion for 17,000 jobs equals $135,294 per job. (And that's not including the eventual interest on this deficit spending). Those green jobs had better pay well over six figures to justify that expense.
Not to worry, the administration has a plan to solve this, too. It wants Congress to approve another $5 billion for "tens of thousands" more green jobs.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
$135,000 is just the mandated 'lving wage', right? Or maybe it's next year's living wage after inflation adjustment.
South Carolina Rep. Mike Pitts has introduced legislation that would mandate that gold and silver coins replace federal currency as legal tender in his state. As the Palmetto Scoop first reported, Pitts, a Republican, introduced legislation this month banning "the unconstitutional substitution of Federal Reserve Notes for silver and gold coin" in South Carolina.
In an interview, Pitts told Hotsheet that he believes that "if the federal government continues to spend money at the rate it's spending money, and if it continues to print money at the rate it's printing money, our economic system is going to collapse."
"The Germans felt their system wouldn't collapse, but it took a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread in the 1930s," he said. "The Soviet Union didn't think their system would collapse, but it did. Ours is capable of collapsing also."
The lawmaker believes that a shift to an economy based on gold and silver coins would give the state a "base of currency" should that collapse come. As one expert told the Scoop, however, his bill would likely be ruled unconstitutional because it "violates a perfectly legal and Constitutional federal law, enacted pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, that federal reserve notes are legal tender for all debts public and private."
In addition, since gold and silver regularly fluctuate in value, they could not easily function as stable currency.
But Pitts maintains that his state is better off with something he can hold in his hand and barter with as opposed to federal currency, which he described to the Scoop as "paper with ink on it." He says he resents what he considers the federal government's intrusions on states' rights.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Many more like this and private ownership of gold will once again go the way of the Edsel.
#3
So everyone shifts over to plastic. How has Mike Pitts solved his states' problems then? And if the world falls apart who really thinks Gold will be valuable still? Yeah its rare but so will gasoline be. He should ensure gasoline is the next currency, just in case.
And North Carolina should ensure bullets are their currency so they can take all that gasoline.
This is just stupid on so many levels. I hope he had a point and wans't actually serious.
#6
This could be very good! The Federal Reserve is its own government. It has never been audited and since they changed from backing money with gold and silver, NO ONE knows what the paper money is worth. No one knows where the money has gone and is going.. Its the greatest ponzi scheme ever conceived. This is one way to either end it, or find out exactly what our money is worth.
#1
Reid has got to be living in a different reality. Obama has proven to be the kiss of [political] death. When Reid loses will it because he ran a poor campaign?
Posted by: Mike R. ||
02/19/2010 12:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The man who drove away business and jobs from Vegas [I'm sure all those union members now collecting reduced hours or unemployment are still koolaid drinkers] is going to NV to help? Sorta like punching another hold on the other side of the Titanic to balance out the list.
#6
HENDERSON, Nev. – President Barack Obama turned an economic appearance in Nevada into an extended campaign plug for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, whose re-election fight could have a big impact on the balance of power in Washington and the fate of Obama's own proposals.
Obama wrapped his arms around Reid at the start of the event on Friday and embraced Reid's work throughout. The president rarely missed a chance — on the economic stimulus plan, on health care, on the effort to regulate big banks — to put himself and Reid in the same sentence.
The political goal was to shift the emphasis from the unpopularity of some of Reid's votes to, in Obama's view, the courage it took to take expensive steps to save the economy. Obama needs to protect every vote he can in the Senate if his own agenda is to succeed.
"I can personally attest that Harry Reid is one of the toughest people I know," Obama told a friendly crowd packed into a high school gym here. "Sometimes he takes his licks. But he gets back up. Harry Reid has never stopped fighting."
Reid is up for election this year and is seen as one of nation's most vulnerable incumbents. He introduced Obama at the event and then sat behind him, basking in each applause line.
#7
I just listened to his speech. Once again, he managed to call the American people stupid without appearing to call the American people stupid. Kind of like he says 'screw you' when he scratches his nose with his middle finger.
#8
The president rarely missed a chance...to put himself and Reid in the same sentence.
This is the kind of skill and professionalism we've all come to expect from this administration. Send a socialist clown to right-of-center Nevada to tell everyone that Reid is his loyal bitch. Well done!
In a new Rasmussen poll, Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold (D) fails to garner 50 percent against two announced Republican challengers, while he trails former Gov. Tommy Thompson, who has yet to say whether he will run. Thompson led Feingold by a similar margin last month.
Feingold's resume and bank account make him formidable, even in an anti-incumbent year, but his polling numbers -- sub-50 percent against businessmen Terrence Wall and Dave Westlake, and behind Thompson -- could be a sign of trouble ahead for the three-term senator.
Thompson 48
Feingold 43
Feingold 47
Wall 39
Feingold 47
Westlake 37
The survey was conducted Feb. 17 of 500 likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 4.5%.
#2
No worries. Obama will fly out there and try to buy off the voters in that area with our tax dollars just as he tried to do today for Reid in Vegas.
Augusta authority admits "inflating" stimulus job creation number
AUGUSTA---Augusta is one of several cities being spotlighted for having agencies that reported bogus stimulus jobs.
Augusta's Head Start program got more than $700,000 in stimulus funds. News 12 was there as old windows came out and new windows went in at some of Augusta's Head Start schools.
"Oh," grunted Chris Whitely about the application process. "It has just wore me out."
Chris Whitley is fiscal officer for the Central Savannah River Area Economic Opportunity Authority. The authority oversees the Head Start program. Chris spoke with News 12 about the formula he used to justify the number of jobs created.
"And in my case it would be .03 people," said Chris.
So Chris tuned to Washington for answers.
"He was just as dumbfounded as I was," said Chris of the person who answered his call. "Then he came back and said, 'Put 317 jobs down. That will be the jobs retained.'"
"But how many jobs did you create?" we asked Gloria Lewis, director of the CSRA Economic Opportunity Authority.
"We actually hired one new person," Gloria said. "We reported 317 because that was the directive that we got." DIRECTIVE??? Directive from WHOM??? Who is going to press for these answers? I reluctantly accede to the fact that we may never know, given the pathetic state of journalism in this country and, worse, the sad state of the opposition party, unfortunately being held back by its racially-appointed 'leader'
"I'm not going to blame anybody," said Chris. "I will say I eventually put the 317 down. I will say I should have put zero."
According to a letter from the Department of Health and Human Services, the grant money was never meant to create jobs. The money would provide a COLA, or one-time pay raise for--get this--all 317 employees. It would also provide quality improvement funding for work like replacing school windows. So what happened?
"It was inflating jobs created that should not have been done," said Chris. "I guess now in hindsight after all this I would [have] put a big fat 0 in there and just moved on."
The office suggests they will have an opportunity to revise the numbers. Chris say it will never happen again.
#1
The office suggests they will have an opportunity to revise the numbers. Chris say it will never happen again. They'll surely figure out new ways to monkey with their reported numbers, just like the federal government has monkeyed with its CPI (inflation) and unemployment reports, which have been scarcely believable for years now.
It was common knowledge that the Commerce Department was cooking the GDP and employment numbers under Clinton to create the impression of a "recovery"...just like the employment numbers from Obambi's Commerce Department.
These morons are shameful and the straight faced reporting of these rectal extrapilations by the media is even more disgusting...
Posted by: Karl Rove ||
02/19/2010 15:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
You guys are missing my point, and the only 'surprise' of this article:
This liberal admits there was a 'directive' to misrepresent the numbers.
If 'we' don't ask the hard questions, who the hell will? (certainly not the 'media'...)
#5
Not a surprise. Have come to expect a pack of lies and Alice in Wonderland distortions coming out of Washington. What is surprising is they admit cooking the books.
Ex-Rep. Charlie Bass (R-NH) is the latest former member of Congress who wants his old job back. Bass, who lost his seat in '06, said he would run again in a conference call this morning.
Bass will face a GOP primary and the winner of what looks like a competitive Dem field. A centrist, Bass will face ex-state Rep. Bob Giuda (R), radio host/'08 nominee Jennifer Horn (R) and local officials from Bristol and Milford.
The man who beat him, Rep. Paul Hodes (D), is vacating the seat to run for Senate. Bass beat Hodes in '04 by a wide 58%-38% margin, but in '06, aided by the national wave that favored Dems, Hodes came back for a 53%-46% win.
The district, based in Nashua and Concord, runs all the way north to the Canadian border. It has given Dems a majority in at least the last 3 WH elections, handing Pres. Obama a 56%-43% win in '08. But few states flipped faster towards Dems than NH did, and in the current national climate, the GOP is favored to have a good year in the Granite State.
Bass joins ex-Reps. Steve Chabot (R-OH), Steve Pearce (R-NM), Tim Walberg (R-MI), Mike Sodrel (R-IN), Richard Pombo (R-CA) and Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA), all of whom are seeking their old seats.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sorry, Charlie, no do-overs. I don't give a rat's backside about how centrist you are, your experience, your contacts in the gummint, blah, blah, blah. You might not be an actual incumbent, but having been a SIX-TERM congressturd means you HAD to be able to see the mess we were about to get into, didn't do jack squat to prevent it, and therefore qualify as being part of the phuecking problem.
NO INCUMBENTS. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
02/19/2010 1:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Ricky, I think you are right. I don't remember hearing about Bass warning us about this collapse and trying to do something different. The GOPs only bright spot is that they aren't quite as bad as the Dems.
Posted by: Formerly Dan ||
02/19/2010 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
One concern I have with the 'no incumbents period' approach is that then you run the risk of a Congress full of inexperienced people who haven't learned the lessons there to be learned.
As the current Administration demonstrates, there are risks involved in going that way.
"Charlie Bass, that bigmouth, is running for office again....There's something fishy about him...you may have thought thought he was washed up, but he's back, slimy as ever, selling the same old line, carping about the president just for the halibut.
"Don't let Charlie Bass hook you again."
Posted by: Mike ||
02/19/2010 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You should be ashamed of yourself, Mike, but I rather imagine you aren't in the least. ;-)
Blue Dog Democrat Jason Altmire, who represents Pennsylvania's 4th District, could be getting a tough challenger this year in former U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan. Two other Republicans -- Edgeworth lawyer and former Department of Homeland Security official Keith Rothfus and salesman John Vinsick of Hopewell -- have already entered the race.
Altmire's race is a likely bellwether. Altmire seems like the type of conservative-to-moderate Democrat who wouldn't have a tough time winning re-election, even in a bad year for his party. If he loses, then Nov. 2 will surely be a very bad night for Democrats.
I just put Election Day on my calendar. I do not want to forget to vote this year.
Although the 4th District voted for McCain in 2008, Altmire defeated former Rep. Melissa Hart by a healthy 56%-44% margin. It was a rematch of their 2006 race when Altmire unseated Hart with 52% of the vote. Altmire voted against both cap-and-trade and the health care bill, so he is not vulnerable on those issues. (Altmire had made positive comments about the Senate health bill, but never had to vote on a final compromise.)
Expect his GOP opponent to fire away at Altmire's vote for the stimulus bill, his one potential weakness. Further, having interviewed Altmire quite a few times, he comes off as a likeable, easy-going person, one that connects well with constituents. Thus, Altmire is a hard target to knock off. If the GOP succeeds, then it is posed to have a very, very good year.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Marco Rubio, the 38-year-old son of Cuban immigrants and candidate for an open Senate seat in Florida, electrified thousands of conservatives Thursday morning with an impassioned defense of American exceptionalism.
In the opening address at the three-day Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington, Rubio delivered a fiery assault on President Obama's economic policies and his administration's handling of national security.
The annual conference, known as CPAC, comes at a time of heightened optimism among the nation's conservatives about their chances in November's midterm elections, when they hope to knock off not only Democrats but Republican moderates such as Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, Rubio's opponent in the state's Aug. 24 primary.
Hosted by the American Conservative Union Foundation at a Washington hotel, this year's CPAC features speakers including radio and television commentator Glenn Beck and several Republican politicians mentioned as potential 2012 presidential candidates. Among the latter are former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (who also addressed the conference Thursday), Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.).
Former vice president Richard B. Cheney made an unscheduled appearance onstage at CPAC, stepping out after his daughter, Liz, spoke. The crowd erupted with cries of "Run, Dick, Run!"
"Knock it off," Cheney said. "A welcome like that's almost enough to make me want to run for office, but I'm not gonna do it."
Cheney said he was at CPAC merely as "arm candy" for his daughter, but told the audience that Obama would be "a one-term president."
"It's a remarkable time to be an American; it's a remarkable time to be a conservative," Cheney said, "and good luck!"
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Very impressive young man. I hope he is elected.
The Tea Party crowd now has its first elected office holder. He's Dean Murray, a 45-year-old Long Island businessman, who won a lengthy recount in a special election for a New York State Assembly seat.
Murray, a Tea Party organizer from the protest movement's very beginning last year, also ran on its anti-tax, anti-big government platform. He takes the official oath of office Monday.
While Tea Party supporters have played influential roles in other elections such as Republican Sen. Scott Brown's upset win in Massachusetts, others are now running in GOP primaries elsewhere. Murray is believed to be the first to take office. He'll have to run again in this fall's regular election.
As advised by Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin, Murray picked a political party, the Republicans. He defeated Democrat Lauren Thoden by about 160 votes out of 8,000 in the 3rd Assembly District of eastern Long Island that has been represented by Democrats for the past 13 years.
"Whether they are active in the Tea Party movement or not," Murray told Fox News, "we want a smaller government. We want fiscal responsibility. We want accountability from our political leaders, and we want personal responsibility."
Murray said he wants to take a Ronald Reagan-type common sense attitude to Albany, adding, "What this movement is about is ordinary citizens, taxpayers, hard working people who have just had enough."
During the winter campaign, Murray's opponents argued against him because, they said, his election would send a message well beyond the district's borders. Murray says he hopes so.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Former Vice President Dick Cheney rallied conservative activists today during a brief yet surprise appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "I think 2010 will be a phenomenal year for the conservative cause and I think Barack Obama is a one-term president," Cheney said to a standing ovation. He walked out to applause, chants of "Cheney" and a standing ovation as he appeared after daughter Liz Cheney's speech. "A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for office," Cheney said, laughing. "But I'm not going to do it."
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Maybe he'll get impeached if he tries to shove health care takeover down our throats and be a half-term president.
#2
Although his rhetoric says otherwise (imagine that) Barry has secretly given up on the Health Care bill as a source of revenue for fixing the economy his social programs, midnight basketball, 60 new federal agencies and hundreds of thousands of federal patronage jobs. We must now be punished incur massive new tax schemes, hence bipartisan commission to address the government's budget problems.
#3
He'll only be a one term president if the repubs manage to get through to the drooling mass of halfwits that voted Obama in. Which is a pretty tall order .
That being said , it took a Carter administration to get a Reagan administration .
As Obama said , Hope and Change !
Posted by: Oscar ||
02/19/2010 5:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Tall order, Mr. VP.
Two groups have to be dented before Obama loses in 2012, blacks and single urban white women.
Blacks will vote for Obama no matter what. He could set fire to twenty buildings full of school children and immolate them all and more than 95% of the black voters in this country would cheerfully vote for him in 2012. Forget about peeling them off to Republican. As long as Obama runs they will vote for him out of ethnic solidarity and tribal loyalty regardless of his actions or policy.
Single urban white women will continue to vote for him (with rare but notable exceptions) because a. they want to sleep with him and b. he's a Dem, and the Dems promise these women the one thing they want most in life - protection from negative consequences in case of unplanned pregnancy (either easy abortion or welfare to raise the kid if they have it).
Running a charismatic sexy guy might peel away some single women in terms of the sexual attraction thing, but for many election cycles now the Dem promise of no liability for illegitimate pregnancy has kept over 75% of single urban white women well in the Dem fold. Good luck changing that.
This leaves us with the necessity of everyone else voting 65%-35% for a Republican candidate. Not impossible, but not hugely likely, either. I hope I'm wrong, but.....
Posted by: no mo uro ||
02/19/2010 7:05 Comments ||
Top||
#5
NMU the one main hope in your scenario is that those groups NOT vote. They won't vote Repub but they may not vote at all.
That was a big part of Scott Brown's victory here in MA. Many of the overwhelmingly liberal Ds stayed home.
#6
Fair enough Alanc. However, while the possibility of single urban white women staying home exists, the possibility of blacks staying home does not.
As long as this guy runs they will go out of their way to vote for one of "their own". Any strategy to unseat Obama has to take this fact into account.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
02/19/2010 7:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Dick Cheney: 'Barack Obama is a One-Term President'
If the left had its way, it would be true. President for Life(tm) only needs to get into office once.
#8
While they won't go for immigration reform this (an election) year, they'll push to get 12 - 20 million illegals amnesty and citizenship in 2011 so they can vote for the POS known as Obama.
#9
no mo uro, I mostly agree with your analysis but it really does point to what is wrong with America when voting blocks vote on such insubstantial things. Makes me sad.
#12
Iff lcoal restaurant, etc. Afro-Amer patrons here on Guam are any example, the BAMMER'S = DEM'S HOLD ON 2012 VEE BLACK VOTERS IS ALREADY ON SHAKY GROUND.
In any case, IMO the cincher for mainstream America will be iff RADIC ISLAM 2012-2013 formally declares that it possesses POTENT NUKULAAR + OTHER ADVANCED WMD WEAPS-TECHS. On that day, NUC IRAN = TEHRAN GOVT. WILL ALL BUT AUTOMAT STOP BEING AN ISSUE IN FAVOR OF MORE DUBIOUS, MORE GEOPOL DANGEROUS NUCLEAR MILITANCY-TERRORISM.
IMO again, the above is COVERTLY why the PERTS say the POST-IRAQ "OBAMA SURGE" IN AFPAK HAS ROUGHLY ONE YEAR-OR-SO TO PROVE ITS MERITS, + MIL OR TACTICALLY DEFEAT THE MILTERRS.
In the wake of Republican Scott Brown's election to the Senate in January, Democrats and liberal-leaning pundits began to grumble, yet again, about the need to eliminate the filibuster in order to accomplish anything on Obama's agenda. Claiming Republican obstructionism is at all-time highs and the watered-down healthcare reform bill is of historic importance, many people are calling for an end to the historic tradition of unlimited debate in the upper chamber. Those people are as idiotic as the memory-less goldfish in Little Plastic Castle, for whom the titular castle is "a surprise every time".
It wasn't that long ago that the obstructionist shoe was on the other foot: Republicans were, rather recently, in control of both chambers of the legislature and the executive branch, and had a strong urge and a supposed public mandate to change the country in their ideological image. What stopped them from eliminating the estate tax, passing a gay marriage amendment and confirming some judicial nominees liberals deemed more likely to make decisions based on ideology than law and legal precedent (among other liberal causes)? The filibuster -- and the threat thereof.
For instance, in 2005, after much gnashing of teeth and several other successful filibusters by Democrats, Republicans threatened to push through the so-called "nuclear option" to end Democratic filibusters of several judicial appointments -- one reason currently cited by Democrats for wanting to eliminate the filibuster in 2010. According to Republicans, the public wanted an end to the filibuster -- an argument made by retiring Senator Evan Bayh -- and the use of the filibuster and threats thereof by Democrats was unprecedented. Instead, a group of 14 bipartisan Senators brokered a deal among themselves to bring some more moderate-seeming candidates to a vote and reject others and the "nuclear option", ending that effort to eliminate the filibuster.
Where were today's liberal opponents of the filibuster then? The vice-president, Joe Biden, who today claims he's never seen a time when cloture votes were necessary to pass legislation through the Senate, was voting against cloture. So were Even Bayh, and Tom Harkin and Dick Durbin, all of whom are fans of ending the filibuster today, when it makes passing their legislation more difficult.
The fact of the matter is that a filibuster doesn't end a bill's chances -- a fact Harry Reid well knows, after he forced Republicans to actively engage in a filibuster in 2007 and then passed the legislation anyway. In fact, Reid knows that Republicans don't even have to talk all night to have a filibuster -- they need only stay up all night on the floor and demand a quorum call to prove the presence of a regular majority of the Senate when no one is speaking about the legislation at hand. Republicans could work in shifts for a period of time to force the Senate to make sure a quorum was present in order to all the chair to call for a vote but, eventually, they'd either just look foolish and stop, or slip up, or find themselves with a quorum when they called for one.
The fact that Reid (and, apparently, the White House, which loves the veneer of bipartisanship for increasingly opaque reasons) isn't willing to take the Republicans up on their threats isn't a problem with the filibuster, but with Reid's intestinal fortitude and unwillingness to sacrifice a chuck of the Senate's time to ride it out. If the watered-down healthcare bill was really that historic -- and the grumbling about the filibuster more than just political posturing -- then it would seem worth it, even to the minimally attentive American public. The fact that riding out a filibuster on healthcare isn't important to Reid when riding out one on Iraq war funding was, less than three years ago, says a great deal about how important the legislation is to Democrats, and even more about how they plan to position their lack of substantive policy actions in November.
Commentators like Ezra Klein of the Washington Post have argued that getting rid of the filibuster is the "right" thing to do, because rolling back gay rights, repealing taxes willy-nilly and installing ideological demagogues in lifetime judicial appointments is more democratic-minded than allowing the minority party any right to determine their country's policy agenda. I'd rather let a healthcare reform bill that lacks too much in the way of reform (and a great deal of popular support) fall by the wayside than a Senate rule that meant my friends in same-sex relationships might someday be able to enjoy the federal benefits of marriage.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I suspect that they will change their mind on the filibuster after November.
Former Rep. Thomas M. Davis III, the architect of previous Republican campaign successes, says outer-suburban voters eager to place a check on President Obama and Democrats are swinging back to the GOP and will power a Republican resurgence in New England, while aiding GOP "tsunamis" in Virginia, Colorado and Iowa. Just don't get over-confident. The Dem machine hasn't been dismantled.
Mr. Davis, the current president of the Republican Main Street Partnership, a group of the party's more moderate lawmakers, told reporters Wednesday that the GOP has had its best-ever year of recruiting candidates for congressional elections, which has helped put so many seats into play.
He said Democrats are having a tough time reaching a balance of keeping regular voters happy while also appeasing the liberal voters who surged to the polls in the 2008 election.
"Those are the problems Democrats have coming in. The surge voters right now, they're asleep. And the outer suburbs, the South, the mountain states, I think you can look for Republican tsunamis," Mr. Davis said. "You're going to have big years."
A sign of how bad Republican fortunes have been the past two elections is their ouster from New England, where the GOP no longer holds any House seats. But Mr. Davis said Republicans will capture seats there this year, including both New Hampshire districts.
On Wednesday, Mr. Davis' predecessor at the Main Street Partnership, former Rep. Charlie Bass, said he'll run to try to recapture the House seat from New Hampshire that he lost in 2006 to Rep. Paul W. Hodes. Mr. Hodes is vacating the seat to run for the Senate.
Mr. Bass, who must face a bruising primary, drew immediate fire from New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley, who said running a repeat candidate was bad news for Republicans.
"The last thing we need right now is to go back to the policies that Bass' record represents. Charlie's call for a U-turn to those failed policies shows how grossly out of touch he is with the need to move our country forward and get our economy back on track," Mr. Buckley said.
Democrats are eagerly watching primary battles such as the one Mr. Bass will fight with candidates born out of the "tea party" movement.
"The GOP civil war is alive and well and it's playing out in House races all over the country," said Ryan Rudominer, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/19/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Might be interesting to keep an eye on Washington; our Democratic majority legislature, led by a Dem govonr; have overturned an initiatve that the citizens approved 3 times that requires a 2/3 majority vote to raise taxes. this AFTER the Gov campaigned on a no tax platform. lots of people are royally pissed, and the anti-dem mood might just spill over to the federal office holders.
stay tuned.
#2
I think someone on the Republican side should try to insert a knife or two into Union Solidarity. Comments about Union connections to organized crime are not the American way. Comments about Union Representatives paid out of the check of the workers with a plan to continue agitating to ensure their own jobs and importants. Comments about how that strike fund (and strike) could have been part of everyones paychecks. How the union keeps the worst workers employed which holds the rest back, notably the teachers who have been unable to improve education despite ever increasing spending on education. That sort of thing...
Not everyone in a Union backs the Union or even thinks about it. Someone should start sewing the seeds of doubt so that the Union fold start to think and vote for themselves. Even if you peel off as mall number it would be worth it.
Yes Unions had their importance once. A few select industries might really need them still, but in more and more areas they are a hinderance.
#3
Why do I not believe that a huge majority of Republicans would be any better than a huge majority of Democraps?
It may appear to be more palatable on the surface, but their ideology would surely fail us if left unchecked also.
A new paradigm of political thought is needed here, or at least a major adjustment to all those asshats' thinking.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Think Americans are angry at Washington today? Just you wait.
You did the responsible thing. You saved in your IRA or 401(k) to support your retirement, when you could have spent that money on another vacation, or an upscale car, or fancier clothes and jewelry. But now Washington is developing plans for your retirement savings.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney rallied conservative activists today during a brief yet surprise appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "I think 2010 will be a phenomenal year for the conservative cause and I think Barack Obama is a one-term president," Cheney said to a standing ovation. He walked out to applause, chants of "Cheney" and a standing ovation as he appeared after daughter Liz Cheney's speech. "A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for office," Cheney said, laughing. "But I'm not going to do it."
Former Rep. Thomas M. Davis III, the architect of previous Republican campaign successes, says outer-suburban voters eager to place a check on President Obama and Democrats are swinging back to the GOP and will power a Republican resurgence in New England, while aiding GOP "tsunamis" in Virginia, Colorado and Iowa.
