Erick Erickson's Blog, page 158

Loyalty, Honor, and Faith. Virtues We Should Prioritize.

In the past 48 hours, I have received a lot of criticism for my takedown of Jon Huntsman. Some of it was not surprising, i.e. when you want to see the traitor Jonathan Pollard freed instead of hanged, you can't be expected to understand arguments about loyalty and honor. Some of it was surprising.

The most interesting aspect of it all is that the older the conservative or the further south the conservative lives, the more likely they are to understand and agree with my point. The Texans I know are largely uniform in agreement that the act is both dishonorable and disloyal.

Ultimately that is the point. In the past 48 hours, in addition to the incoming fire, a lot of people both inside and outside the Huntsman camp have wondered if this is all cover for some other grievance against Huntsman. Put as clearly and simply as I can — no.

I view being an American a higher thing than being a Republican or a conservative. And I view what Jon Huntsman did — openly plotting a Presidential bid against the President of the United States while serving the President of the United States in China — to be both profoundly disloyal and profoundly dishonorable.

However, the more I learn about Jon Huntsman's character, the less it surprises me.

In a Salt Lake Tribune article from yesterday it is clear Jon Huntsman, a Mormon, does not take his faith very seriously.

Huntsman hasn't addressed his faith to the same degree, though he hinted last year that he wasn't a devout Mormon.

In a 2010 interview with Fortune magazine, Huntsman, then serving as the U.S. ambassador to China, talked briefly about his personal faith, with the magazine terming his Mormon credentials "soft."

"I can't say I'm overly religious," Huntsman said. "I get satisfaction from many different types of religions and philosophies."

I'm sorry, but I want a guy who takes his faith seriously. And if he is not going to take his faith seriously, if he has no honor in his conduct while serving the President of the United States, and if he is not loyal to the President he serves, count me out.

I think we do not value honor, loyalty, and faith enough in this country and the embrace of many of Jon Huntsman and the dismissal of these concerns by many as frivolous are just added indicators in how far down the road to Gomorrah we have gone.

Now, one of the common reactions has been, in effect, "Well, surely Obama knew and had no problem with it."

Let's just get this out there — Barack Obama started his political career in the home of a terrorist. He's not exactly known to embrace traditional American virtues. He's certainly, as President, never shown himself to give a damn about precedents of the office.

And because Barack Obama cares so little about the office in which the nation has entrusted him, I think we are forced to care more for it. We must be willing to say it is dishonorable, disloyal, and a terrible precedent for an Ambassador of the United States, while still on the job, to begin openly and publicly contemplating a challenge to the President he serves.

We should not reward people like Jon Huntsman.

Morning Briefing for May 11, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For May 11, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Loyalty, Honor, and Faith. Virtues We Should Prioritize.

2. The Strategic Wisdom of Barack Obama

3. The Big Energy Lie, Revisited

4. Brutus was Right

5. The Latest Fad from the Left: Blatant Misinformation and Hoaxes

6. Senate GOP allows judicial confirmation of ex-Planned Parenthood director

7. Richard Lugar Insults Conservatives, Indiana GOP County Chairmen

8. 5.1.11

———————————————————————-

1. Loyalty, Honor, and Faith. Virtues We Should Prioritize.

In the past 48 hours, I have received a lot of criticism for my takedown of Jon Huntsman. Some of it was not surprising, i.e. when you want to see the traitor Jonathan Pollard freed instead of hanged, you can't be expected to understand arguments about loyalty and honor. Some of it was surprising.

The most interesting aspect of it all is that the older the conservative or the further south the conservative lives, the more likely they are to understand and agree with my point. The Texans I know are largely uniform in agreement that the act is both dishonorable and disloyal.

Ultimately that is the point. In the past 48 hours, in addition to the incoming fire, a lot of people both inside and outside the Huntsman camp have wondered if this is all cover for some other grievance against Huntsman. Put as clearly and simply as I can — no.

I view being an American a higher thing than being a Republican or a conservative. And I view what Jon Huntsman did — openly plotting a Presidential bid against the President of the United States while serving the President of the United States in China — to be both profoundly disloyal and profoundly dishonorable.

However, the more I learn about Jon Huntsman's character, the less it surprises me.

I think we do not value honor, loyalty, and faith enough in this country and the embrace of many of Jon Huntsman and the dismissal of these concerns by many as frivolous are just added indicators in how far down the road to Gomorrah we have gone.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. The Strategic Wisdom of Barack Obama

The killing of Osama bin Laden has been characterized by two distinct phases. In Phase I the White House simply could not tell us what happened during the raid and eventually just decided to stop talking about it. Phase II has been a demeaning and unseemly grubbling for credit on the part of the administration under the guise of Obama having made a "gutsy call." Not only has the administration actively promoted this notion in press conferences but they are actively planting these stories in the tame and housebroken media that has become a hallmark of this administration.

The latest in the series of "Obama is as hard as woodpecker lips" stories comes from the New York Times.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. The Big Energy Lie, Revisited

Your President has been telling you things that simply aren't true. Things like "We can't drill our way out of our energy problems." Or "Oil and gas are the fuels of the past." Or, perhaps worst of all, "The U.S. consumes 25% of the world's oil, but controls only 2% of the world's reserves."

Well, that last one may be technically true, but it is used to convey the false notion that to strive for energy security is an exercise in futility. In a post called The Big Energy Lie (Dec. '09), I attempted to explain the deception. In this post, I'll attempt to demonstrate, in layman's language, using graphs based on the government's own data.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Brutus was Right

We have been moving steadily towards this calamity since the dawn of the Progressive Era. The object of government transitioned from defending the liberty of its people to buying votes on the promise of a more fair concept of liberty, fully funded by the Federal Government. Over time, the spending became ingrained into the culture of our government by the New Deal, the Great Society, and myriad other interest focused expenditures that fall outside of the traditional role, the intended role, of the Federal Government.

If we are to raise the Debt Ceiling, it must be combined with Sen. Lee's Balanced Budget Amendment, binding the hands of our elected representatives and restoring the object of our Government and its spending in the process.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. The Latest Fad from the Left: Blatant Misinformation and Hoaxes

Jane Corwin is a Republican running for Congress in NY 26. Here is her website: www.janecorwin.com. Nice, clean, professional. Now take a look at this website: www.janecorwin.org. Aesthetically indistinguishable, the designers cleverly use humor to paint Jane Corwin as a clueless hack, bent on destroying the district calling her "A proven millionaire. A real homophobe. The leader we fear." There is little reason to assume that a group would go to this much trouble without having the intention of spreading misinformation.

And now, a group that some claim is the same group responsible for a New York Times spoof in 2008 predicting the end of the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan as well as a revitalized economy, and dated July 2009, has a new website attacking the coal industry.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. Senate GOP allows judicial confirmation of ex-Planned Parenthood director

As so often seem to be the case, the GOP doesn't follow the Democratic playbook when it comes to obstruction. They caved when it came to a vote last week on the nomination of Jack McConnell as a US District Court Judge. He's only 52 or 53, so we can look forward to decades of his rulings.

Among the items on his resume are being the unpaid director of Planned Parenthood of Rhode Island and being involved in successful tobacco litigation, for which he's still due to receive $2-3M/year for another 13 years. He's been a trial lawyer for 25 years.

It's not difficult to figure out what we can expect in terms of his judicial philosophy.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

7. Richard Lugar Insults Conservatives, Indiana GOP County Chairmen

Yesterday, I received an interesting piece of spam from Richard Lugar's campaign. I call it "interesting" because it indicates that Lugar apparently intends to court voters who might be contemplating a vote for Richard Mourdock by calling them morons. And then speaking to them as if they were morons.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

8. 5.1.11

As many of you know, I'm a big fan of the Stoneridge Group and typically encourage candidates running for office to check them out. They do visually stunning mail and websites. They really are my favorite in the business.

To honor the SEALs and what they did on May 1, 2011, Stoneridge designed the poster seen here. If you want a print, go here. All profits will go to the Navy SEAL Foundation.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

More on Huntsman, Boehner on the Debt Ceiling, and Obama on Immigration #EERS

It's going to be a packed show tonight. You can tune in live starting at 7:05 p.m. ET tonight on WSB Atlanta.

You can go to http://wsbradio.com and call in at 1-800-WSB-TALK.

Consider this an open thread.

5.1.11

As many of you know, I'm a big fan of the Stoneridge Group and typically encourage candidates running for office to check them out. They do visually stunning mail and websites. They really are my favorite in the business.

To honor the SEALs and what they did on May 1, 2011, Stoneridge designed the poster above. If you want a print, go here. All profits will go to the Navy SEAL Foundation.

This is really well done.

Are New York Tea Partiers Really Willing to Sell Out?

There's a special election happening in New York's 26th Congressional District and tea party activists up there look increasingly like they are either being duped or selling out.

There are three candidates in the race, a Republican, a Democrat, and a self-described tea party candidate named Jack Davis. As Democrats are doing more and more around the country, it appears they are setting up Davis to be the spoiler so a Republican can't win a Republican seat.

Even a cursory look at Davis makes you wonder why the hell anyone would consider him anything related to tea party material.

Davis ran as a Democrat in NY-26 in 2004, 2006, and 2008. His big issue has been trade and protectionism. In fact, Davis's big plan is imposition of major taxes to rectify trade imbalances. In fact, Davis adopts in large scale ideas from Paul Krugman.

It's not just that. Davis has been caught on tape yelling at tea party activists who question him, telling them to shut up.

I cannot believe tea party activists in New York would fall for this guy, but many apparently are despite his record and his rhetoric. The irony is that while Davis cannot win, he could be the spoiler to get the Democrat elected. If that happens, the media will use this race to claim voters are rejecting the tea party movement.

There is Time to Take Out Saxby Chambliss

Georgia Republicans will be going to their state convention this weekend in Macon, Georgia. While I live just a few miles from where the convention will be, I won't be going.

The only surprise that could come from the convention is if Sue Everhart, the incumbent chair of the Georgia Republican Party, loses. She has won every major straw poll working up to the state convention and I suspect she will win handily.

In two years, the State GOP will meet again somewhere else. Tea party activists in Georgia who want to make a big impact have two years to organize, mobilize, and lay the groundwork to get rid of Saxby Chambliss. The model they should use is Utah.

Now, why Saxby?

Well, forget his immigration stance. Forget his handiwork raising taxes on Americans via the Gang of Six. Just look at him going hand in hand with Johnny Isakson to the floor of the Senate last week, like two school girls, to vote for ending cloture on the Jack McConnell nomination — doing so only after it was clear McConnell had the votes he needed. That wasn't leadership. It was gutlessness. Saxby has consistently stabbed conservatives in the back and it is time to take him out.

What does Utah have to do with it? Well, it will be damn hard to beat Saxby in a primary, given lobbyist dollars. But Georgia has a hardly ever used law on the books that allows state parties to pick their nominees by convention. Just like Utah voters used to get rid of Bob Bennett.

O.C.G.A. § 21-2-180 et. seq. allows parties to nominate by convention. Specifically, § 21-2-180 states:

Any political body which is duly registered … is qualified to nominate candidates for state-wide public office by convention if:

(1) The political body files with the Secretary of State a petition signed by voters equal in number to 1 percent of the registered voters who were registered and eligible to vote in the preceding general election; or

(2) At the preceding general election, the political body nominated a candidate for state-wide office and such candidate received a number of votes equal to 1 percent of the total number of registered voters who were registered and eligible to vote in such general election.

The sections after §21-2-180 lay out the procedure for collecting signatures on a petition and the timing of a convention. With tea party muscle it would be very doable.

And it should be done, if just on principle. When Saxby Chambliss gets to Washington, he has a terrible tendency to drift to the left until about election time and then come back with some folksy lines and an aw-shucks demeanor.

As long as the grassroots of the Georgia Republican Party behave like they have battered wife syndrome and keep taking Saxby back after he beats the crap out of them in Washington, the guys in Washington are going to keep taking advantage of the grassroots.

As the Georgia GOP meets this weekend, the delegates should recognize that as long as they play by Saxby's rules — a primary fueled by lobbyist dollars — he's going to keep batting his eyelashes at them while stabbing them in the back in Washington both social issues and fiscal issues.

A convention would fire up the grassroots and give the Georgia GOP's grassroots activists control of the nomination in a way they've never had before. It's time to take back the party in Georgia.

With Chambliss not up again until 2014, there is plenty of time for the Georgia GOP and tea party activists to lay the ground work for a convention. They should start the conversation this weekend in Macon.

The Second Coming of John McCain

Some of you think I am too old fashioned in my post on Jon Huntsman. Silly me thinking a United States Ambassador should be loyal to a fault to the President of the United States he serves, regardless of party or person.

For those of you who are not concerned with the loyalty of an American Ambassador to his country and President, consider this break down of who all has signed on with Jon Huntsman.

It's like the second coming of John McCain.

Note to the GOP: The McCain camp had its bite at the Obama apple and lost. We need not have a do over.

John Boehner's Line in the Sand

Last night, Speaker John Boehner addressed the Economic Club of New York and drew a line in the sand in the debt ceiling fight. It was a monumental game changer for the GOP and puts them back on offense.

Let me back up briefing and note that the Washington Post's own left leaning editorial board came out swinging on Sunday against the Democrats' opposition to the Republicans' Medicare plans. Yes, *that* Washington Post.

It is with that buttressing him that Speaker Boehner gave last night's speech. It was a doozy.

In it, he said,

Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase. And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given.

We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions.

They should be actual cuts and program reforms, not broad deficit or debt targets that punt the tough questions to the future.

And with the exception of tax hikes — which will destroy jobs — everything is on the table. That includes honest conversations about how best to preserve Medicare, because we all know, with millions of Baby Boomers beginning to retire, the status quo is unsustainable.

Now, we are talking about a Speaker who promised $100 billion, then $70 billion, then $35 billion, and got only $353 million in non-accounting gimmick cuts. But this sounds like John Boehner has figured out that he is going to have to lead from the right.

Assuming Boehner is serious here and wants to move forward without typical Washington accounting gimmicks, this is a solid and bold move. The Democrats have yet to offer up any real cuts in Washington's budget. Every cut the GOP comes up with gets attacked for killing old people and kids.

It's time for Barack Obama to get serious. With John Boehner drawing a line in the sand at trillions of cuts, Mr. Obama better come up with some solid suggestions

And if that was not enough, Jim DeMint is drawing a line in the sand too. You want his support? You must hold the line on the budget. I hope he applies this to incumbent Senators and not just challengers and Presidential nominees.

Morning Briefing for May 10, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For May 10, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Why I Will Not Support Jon Huntsman. Ever.

2. John Boehner's Line in the Sand

3. How Much Will It Cost to Repeal the 'Oil Subsidies'?

4. Notes From "The Food Stamp Recovery"

5. Thinking Outside the Box: How Boeing's South Carolina Employees Can Strike Back

6. Obama Made A "Gutsy Call" And He'll Tell You So

7. Collective Money!? When Did Anybody's Earnings Become the People's Dollars?

———————————————————————-

1. Why I Will Not Support Jon Huntsman. Ever.

Ambassador Jon Huntsman is gearing up now to run for President of the United States.

If he is the Republican nominee, I will vote for him. But until that moment I will never, ever support him.

And if you are a patriot to the United States of America, you should not support him either. It's pretty simple why.

John Huntman's disloyalty to the President of the United States, regardless of the President or to which party the President belongs, should not be rewarded by any patriot of this country.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. John Boehner's Line in the Sand

Last night, Speaker John Boehner addressed the Economic Club of New York and drew a line in the sand in the debt ceiling fight. It was a monumental game changer for the GOP and puts them back on offense.

Let me back up briefing and note that the Washington Post's own left leaning editorial board came out swinging on Sunday against the Democrats' opposition to the Republicans' Medicare plans. Yes, *that* Washington Post.

It is with that buttressing him that Speaker Boehner gave last night's speech. It was a doozy.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. How Much Will It Cost to Repeal the 'Oil Subsidies'?

This week, the Senate is set to consider the repeal of certain provisions of the tax code as they relate to the oil and gas industry. By styling these tax breaks as "subsidies", the Administration and other opponents of the industry wrongly equate them with the benefits enjoyed by ethanol, wind and solar energy. But the tax credits for alternative energy production are true subsidies, essentially cash payments to producers of energy that cannot compete in the marketplace without help.

Randall Hoven at American Thinker gives a good breakdown the specifics of the tax breaks targeted by the Administration. I'll not rehash those details, but will add three points worthy of emphasis: 1) the tax breaks are not as unique to oil and gas as has been advertized; 2) two of the tax breaks in question are "cost recovery" deductions against income, not handouts (try telling your company's CFO that his depreciation charge is a government subsidy); and 3) the brunt of the tax increase will be felt by independent companies, not "Big Oil", which lost most of the benefit of these categories of deductions years ago. Energy state Democrats like Rep. Dan Boren of OK, former Rep. Martin Frost of TX and LA Senator Mary Landrieu agree that Administration proposals would indiscriminately punish "small oil", damaging American energy security in the process.

Some 9.2 million jobs depend on the domestic oil and gas business. Oil and gas activity also creates plenty of revenue for the public coffers. It's altogether possible that these effective tax increases could be a net negative for government revenue. Shouldn't someone ask "Can we afford it?"

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Notes From "The Food Stamp Recovery"

n case you missed it, Jay Cost had a great piece on Friday on "the Food Stamp recovery", laying out the ways in which the currently-underway "recovery" is the weakest in memory. His bracing conclusion?

"[I]f the economic recovery does not begin to show substantial improvement, the likes of which we have not really seen in the last two years, and if the GOP nominates a reasonably acceptable alternative, this president is going to lose in 2012, and the final result will not be close. Nobody gets reelected with employment way down, real income way down, and 14 percent of his fellow citizens on food stamps. Nobody."

Let's add a couple of items that help explain why the economy may be looking up for managers of corporations large enough to collect government favor but not for most Americans.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. Thinking Outside the Box: How Boeing's South Carolina Employees Can Strike Back

There's been a lot of ink spilled of late over the union-controlled National Labor Relations Board's decision to prosecute Boeing for allegedly locating its second 787 assembly plant in South Carolina in retaliation for the Machinists' union employees engaging in past strikes.

Despite the NLRB's Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon's statement that there is "nothing remarkable or unprecedented" about his prosecution of Boeing, his basing his decision to prosecute Boeing on the logic that "[a] worker's right to strike is a fundamental right guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act" is a selective use of the National Labor Relations Act's Section Seven Rights.

Solomon's logic is also a double-edged sword that, if they so desire, Boeing's union-free employees in South Carolina can use to try to help save their jobs.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. Obama Made A "Gutsy Call" And He'll Tell You So

Last week my colleague, Dan McLaughlin, noted that the website gutsycall.com referred visitors to the Obama 2012 campaign website.

The website redirects to the Obama campaign and there was much squalling from the Obama camp that they had nothing to do with this. There is much to doubt in their denial and there is little doubt that Obama will run for a second term by attempting to capitalize on the "gutsy call" to kill bin Laden.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

7. Collective Money!? When Did Anybody's Earnings Become the People's Dollars?

It seems that The Democrats have a strategy for addressing the higher gas prices that are killing American consumers. They intend to blame oil companies and saddle them with revenge taxes. In fact, the Senate Finance Committee has plans of hauling the executives of multinational oil companies to discuss tax subsidies and government incentives at a hearing on Thursday.

The Democrats are doing this in order to deny oil companies $21Bil in tax breaks for activities such as R&D and deposit this money into the Federal Treasury. President Obama wanted the collective money of the taxpayers to build clean energy projects such as the bird-hacking windmills built by his close, personal friend Jeffrey Immelt's GE Corporation in China.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

The MRC Gala and Why Patriots Should Not Support Jon Huntsman #EERS

Tonight on the Erick Erickson Show, I'll play audio from the Media Research Center Gala from Saturday night and get into the details of why patriots should not support Jon Huntsman for President of the United States.

You can listen live at http://wsbradio.com and call in at 1-800-WSB-TALK.

Consider this an open thread.