Erick Erickson's Blog, page 77
January 11, 2012
Morning Briefing for January 11, 2012
RedState Morning Briefing
January 11, 2012
Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
1. On Romney, Bain and Keeping Your Integrity
2. The Perry Campaign Has Reset and Refocused in South Carolina
3. Illinois Can Learn From Wisconsin's Success
———————————————————————-
1. On Romney, Bain and Keeping Your Integrity
We're far down the rabbit hole of primary season right now, and that inevitably means that charges and counter-charges are flying so fast that the news cycle can change dramatically from morning to afternoon. Naturally, when things are moving this quickly and emotions are running high, people get carried away. This happens to everyone. A lot of people who sit on the sidelines are too quick to say, "oh, so-and-so totally lost credibility with me by making that argument." But candidates and pundits in particular are making arguments all day long, day after day; they're going to grab hold now and then of a story they should know better than to believe or an argument they should know better than to make. Like anything in life, the test of character is not the occasional stumble but the long sweep of your record over time – whether you back off when you've dug into an untenable position, whether you learn from mistakes.
This comes to mind with yesterday's confluence of attacks on Mitt Romney's business record at Bain Capital and his ill-timed quip that "I like to be able to fire people." To varying extents, the Gingrich and Perry campaigns and their supporters jumped all over him on both counts. A pro-Newt SuperPAC is rolling out a 27-minute documentary attacking Romney's Bain record; as Erick notes, Perry's campaign has been pushing a more modest line of attack against the Bain record, but still one that has something of a whiff of desperation about it. Perry's camp also pushed a downloadable ringtone of Romney's "fire" line. With time and some context, both campaigns backed off hitting Mitt on the "fire" comment: Perry's people pulled the ringtone, and Newt told Fox News that the line had been taken out of context.
The "fire" comment is the easier call. Romney was making a completely valid point: that people should be able to fire service providers like insurance companies if they're not getting good service. That's one of the pro-consumer aspects of the conservative message, and where we part company from liberals who think first of protecting entrenched interests at the expense of consumer choice. That being said, the comment fed directly into the most damaging narratives about Romney, and was emblematic of how he's much like Rick Santorum in terms of his tendency to use cringe-inducingly tin-eared language when he's making even valid points.
The Bain storyline is a little more complicated, in part because there are a lot of angles to Bain's business; while Romney's record, as Jim Pethokoukis notes, includes a lot to be proud of, as Jonathan Last notes, you don't have to necessarily take that business record as a whole if there are aspects worth defending and aspects worth criticizing.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. The Perry Campaign Has Reset and Refocused in South Carolina
Here's what everyone thinks about this year. If Romney sweeps Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina he wins. It is conventional wisdom and conventional wisdom is usually right.
But this year there is an anomaly. The first several rounds of primaries and caucuses are not winner take all, but proportional. In fact, as you can see from the chart below the fold, there is still a long way to go.
That is one reason Perry stayed in after finishing fifth in Iowa and expecting to finish at the bottom in New Hampshire. Not only does South Carolina not care about Iowa and New Hampshire, but they are not really relevant to South Carolina, the first Republican primary in a consistently Republican state.
But the Perry camp knows what got them to this point isn't working.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. Illinois Can Learn From Wisconsin's Success
Some Wisconsinites have been pointing to our neighbors to the south as an example of fiscal responsibility hoping to follow their model. Those who think that Illinois is the way to go should think again and take a page out of Wisconsin's book.
The Illinois budgetary record is not pretty. Heading into 2011, Illinois faced a budget deficit of over $13 billion and passed a massive tax increase both to personal income and corporate income tax rates. They're still broke. With a pension system in shambles, Illinois also borrowed massive amounts of money to make this year's pension payment.
In September, Illinois laid off 1,900 public employees and closed seven state facilities. Also, much to the chagrin of Wisconsinites who drive to or through Illinois, toll rates in the state have increased on average by 88%.
Illinois' budgetary moves failed miserably to solve their problems and the state is still projected to end this fiscal year on June 30th with a budget gap upwards of half a billion dollars and unfunded obligations of up to $8 billion.
As a result, this past week, Moody's lowered Illinois' credit rating, giving the Prairie State the lowest rating of any state in the nation.
January 10, 2012
The Perry Campaign Has Reset and Refocused in South Carolina
Here's what everyone thinks about this year. If Romney sweeps Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina he wins. It is conventional wisdom and conventional wisdom is usually right.
But this year there is an anomaly. The first several rounds of primaries and caucuses are not winner take all, but proportional. In fact, as you can see from the chart below the fold, there is still a long way to go.
That is one reason Perry stayed in after finishing fifth in Iowa and expecting to finish at the bottom in New Hampshire. Not only does South Carolina not care about Iowa and New Hampshire, but they are not really relevant to South Carolina, the first Republican primary in a consistently Republican state.
But the Perry camp knows what go them to this point isn't working.
I'm being told reliably the campaign has gotten the message and has reset its South Carolina operation. Gone are the flashy national ads with the national ad buyer and the national staging. It is very South Carolina focused, hoping to build upward momentum.
That campaign is relying less on national consultants and more on instate players. The campaign ads are focused on local market buys and local market newsmakers. The message is a more tailored message and less erratic than what we saw in Iowa — more about small government and sticking up for South Carolina's conservative fighters in Congress.
If it works, we should see some uptick in polling. The Perry camp made a wise choice to rely more heavily on South Carolina operatives than national consultants. It could be a model moving forward if it works.
In the mean time, the Perry campaign took all of our concerns under advisement and intends to show it can reset, retool, and reboot to victory in South Carolina.
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
Iowa caucus
28
1.20%
Jan 3, 2012
-
1.20%
NH Primary
12
0.50%
Jan 10, 2012
past
1.80%
SC Primary
25
1.10%
Jan 21, 2012
past
2.90%
FL Primary
50
2.20%
Jan 31, 2012
past
5.10%
NV Caucus
28
1.20%
Feb 4, 2012
-
6.30%
ME Caucus
24
1.10%
2/4-11/12
-
7.40%
CO Caucus
36
1.60%
Feb 7, 2012
-
9.00%
MN Caucus
40
1.80%
Feb 7, 2012
-
10.70%
AZ Primary
29
1.30%
Feb 28, 2012
Jan 9, 2012
12.00%
MI Primary
30
1.30%
Feb 28, 2012
past
13.30%
WA Caucus
43
1.90%
Mar 3, 2012
-
15.20%
Pre-Super Tuesday
345
15.20%
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
AK Caucus
27
1.20%
Mar 6, 2012
-
16.40%
GA Primary
76
3.40%
Mar 6, 2012
past
19.80%
ID Caucus
32
1.40%
Mar 6, 2012
-
21.20%
MA Primary
41
1.80%
Mar 6, 2012
past
23.00%
ND Caucus
28
1.20%
Mar 6, 2012
-
24.20%
OK Primary
43
1.90%
Mar 6, 2012
past
26.10%
TN Primary
58
2.60%
Mar 6, 2012
past
28.70%
TX Primary
155
6.80%
Mar 6, 2012
past
35.60%
VE Primary
17
0.80%
Mar 6, 2012
Jan 9, 2012
36.30%
VA Primary
49
2.20%
Mar 6, 2012
past
38.50%
Vir Islands Caucus
9
0.40%
Mar 6, 2012
-
38.90%
WY Caucus
29
1.30%
Mar 6, 2012
-
40.20%
Super Tuesday
564
24.90%
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
KS Caucus
40
1.80%
Mar 10, 2012
-
41.90%
AL Primary
50
2.20%
Mar 13, 2012
Jan 13, 2012
44.10%
Haw Caucus
20
0.90%
Mar 13, 2012
-
45.00%
MS Primary
38
1.70%
Mar 13, 2012
Jan 14, 2012
46.70%
Am Samoa Caucus
9
0.40%
Mar 13, 2012
-
47.10%
Missouri Caucus
52
2.30%
Mar 17, 2012
-
49.40%
Puerto Rico Caucus
23
1.00%
Mar 18, 2012
-
50.40%
IL Primary
69
3.00%
Mar 20, 2012
past
53.40%
LA Primary
45
2.00%
Mar 24, 2012
past
55.40%
DC Primary
19
0.80%
Apr 3, 2012
past
56.30%
MD Primary
37
1.60%
Apr 3, 2012
Jan 11, 2012
57.90%
WI Primary
42
1.90%
Apr 3, 2012
Jan 11, 2012
59.80%
Conn Primary
28
1.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Mar 2, 2012
61.00%
DE Primary
17
0.80%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 24, 2012
61.70%
NY Primary
95
4.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 9, 2012
65.90%
PA Primary
72
3.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 14, 2012
69.10%
RI Primary
19
0.80%
Apr 24, 2012
Jan 21, 2012
70.00%
IN Primary
46
2.00%
May 8, 2012
Feb 10, 2012
72.00%
NC Primary
55
2.40%
May 8, 2012
Feb 29, 2012
74.40%
WV Primary
31
1.40%
May 8, 2012
Jan 28, 2012
75.80%
NE Primary
34
1.50%
May 15, 2012
Mar 7, 2012
77.30%
OR Primary
28
1.20%
May 15, 2012
Mar 6, 2012
78.50%
Ark Primary
36
1.60%
May 22, 2012
Mar 1, 2012
80.10%
KY Primary
45
2.00%
May 22, 2012
Jan 31, 2012
82.10%
CA Primary
172
7.60%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 23, 2012
89.70%
MT Primary
26
1.10%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 12, 2012
90.90%
NJ Primary
50
2.20%
Jun 5, 2012
Apr 2, 2012
93.10%
NM Primary
23
1.00%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 16, 2012
94.10%
SD Primary
28
1.20%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 27, 2012
95.30%
OH Primary
66
2.90%
Jun 12, 2012
Mar 14, 2012
98.20%
UT Primary
40
1.80%
Jun 26, 2012
Mar 15, 2012
100.00%
Post-Super Tuesday
1355
59.80%
Total Delegates
2264
100.00%
Attacking Bain
I have to be honest that I do not have a problem with or feel the level of outrage some of you do about Newt Gingrich attacking Bain and Mitt Romney. It's not because I necessarily agree with Newt on the attacks, but because these are the attacks the left will throw at Mitt and, should he be the nominee, the early attacks help him refine his message.
The Perry attacks are, actually, a bit more carefully nuanced and, I think, work better. According to Perry, "There is nothing wrong with being successful and making money, it's the American Dream. But getting rich off failure and sticking someone else with the bill is indefensible." His attack was based on one aspect of Romney's work, not the entirety of it.
All that said, I think it is important for us on the right to remember that we typically have an intrinsic faith in the free market and understand the creative destruction of capital in a way most voters do not. We eat, breathe, and sleep this stuff. The typical voter does not. The typical voter does not understand private equity, leveraged balance sheets, etc. They see it as some mystical black magic abused by greedy people on Wall Street.
There are, frankly, a lot of Republican primary voters who view it that way too.
We can disagree with the strident attacks against Romney as a greedy vulture capitalist, but the reactions of many on our side surprise me because many are premised on the idea that no person could agree with the attacks and the attacks are inherently wrong.
First, I am willing to bet there are a lot more people in the country who are likely to agree with the attacks than most of us realize and second, there are a lot of people even on the right who see private equity as a collaborator in the economic mess.
While we should be prepared to defend capitalism, we should not be caught unprepared by the attacks and act as if no one could think differently from us on the issue when, I venture to say, we are in the minority on this issue. Frankly, I think these attacks are what Barack Obama is going to use to try to win the election. And I think they are going to work much better than Romney backers expect.
Just wait for the Batman tie ins over the summer with Bain. You ain't seen nothing yet folks. It is a sad day when Republicans attack a Republican for being a capitalist, but it is equally sad that the Romney camp seems flat footed by attacks that will be central to Obama's strategy to defeat him.
In Conclusion
I have made known my thoughts and objections to the various candidates in the field. I have come to accept that the ones I think would be best are the ones running the most perplexing campaigns. I think we will wind up with Willard Mitt Romney as the nominee.
I see a path to victory for Rick Perry. I don't see him taking it.
I see a path to victory for Newt Gingrich. I see him taking it so zealously that it winds up hurting him.
I see a path to victory for Jon Huntsman if he makes it out of New Hampshire with a respectable showing and I'd rather him than Romney or Santorum.
Ironically, I do not see a path to victory for Rick Santorum. He made the Illinois ballot, but without a full slate of delegates, and I think he doesn't have the ability to build out as it took so long for him to rise.
I see the clearest path for Mitt Romney and barring him underperforming in New Hampshire, I suspect he could sweep the races.
I am as excited as a fly flying through a frog filled swamp.
But ultimately there is this — Barack Obama is worse than even Jimmy Carter in that Obama, in addition to being an economic menace, peddles a brand of liberal social politics that even Jimmy Carter dared not peddle. Should he win re-election, Barack Obama might have the opportunity to fill more seats on the Supreme Court including, potentially, Antonin Scalia's and Anthony Kennedy's seats.
We cannot let that happen.
The regulatory regime an Obama second term would unleash, no longer restrained by the fear of electoral defeat, would be economically destructive to the free market and the middle class.
Any and all of the Republican candidates would be better than Barack Obama. We have an obligation to support the nominee whoever it may be.
I just hope the voters choose wisely.
As for me, in focusing on Campaign 2012 for President, I have neglected the fight against SOPA, the fight to election conservatives to the House and Senate, and the on going battles at the state level. It's time to refocus a bit on those and let this primary season where good friends are at each others throats over the nominees sort the season out. I will have to necessarily chime in on Presidential politics, but don't want it to be as all consuming as it has been.
Morning Briefing for January 10, 2011
RedState Morning Briefing
January 6, 2012
Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
1. In Conclusion
2. The Choice
3. The 2012 Election and the 'Inevitable' Mitt Romney
4. Who are the Democratic gun-grabbers in the US Senate? Let's find out!
5. Why is Ron Paul allowed to Continue Participating in Debates?
———————————————————————-
1. In Conclusion
I have made known my thoughts and objections to the various candidates in the field. I have come to accept that the ones I think would be best are the ones running the most perplexing campaigns. I think we will wind up with Willard Mitt Romney as the nominee.
I see a path to victory for Rick Perry. I don't see him taking it.
I see a path to victory for Newt Gingrich. I see him taking it so zealously that it winds up hurting him.
I see a path to victory for Jon Huntsman if he makes it out of New Hampshire with a respectable showing and I'd rather him than Romney or Santorum.
Ironically, I do not see a path to victory for Rick Santorum. He made the Illinois ballot, but without a full slate of delegates, and I think he doesn't have the ability to build out as it took so long for him to rise.
I see the clearest path for Mitt Romney and barring him underperforming in New Hampshire, I suspect he could sweep the races.
I am as excited as a fly flying through a frog filled swamp.
But ultimately there is this — Barack Obama is worse than even Jimmy Carter in that Obama, in addition to being an economic menace, peddles a brand of liberal social politics that even Jimmy Carter dared not peddle. Should he win re-election, Barack Obama might have the opportunity to fill more seats on the Supreme Court including, potentially, Antonin Scalia's and Anthony Kennedy's seats.
We cannot let that happen.
The regulatory regime an Obama second term would unleash, no longer restrained by the fear of electoral defeat, would be economically destructive to the free market and the middle class.
Any and all of the Republican candidates would be better than Barack Obama. We have an obligation to support the nominee whoever it may be.
I just hope the voters choose wisely.
As for me, in focusing on Campaign 2012 for President, I have neglected the fight against SOPA, the fight to election conservatives to the House and Senate, and the on going battles at the state level. It's time to refocus a bit on those and let this primary season where good friends are at each others throats over the nominees sort the season out.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. The Choice
This election—including the Republican primary contest— is about a fundamental question in American politics: We have an opportunity to decisively turn away from big government in Washington. Do we want to take it?
Conservatives across the country are fed up with President Obama's Washington approach to governance. Massive, budget-busting, deficit spending (except on defense, where he proposes cuts that are downright dangerous). Bailouts. An ever-mounting national debt. A federal government that has reached its tentacles further into Americans' lives, by virtue of Obamacare with its noxious individual mandate to purchase health insurance. Excessive, bureaucratically dictated, job-killing environmental regulation. Dodd-Frank. The actions of the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Communications Commission, and countless other agencies. A President who has engaged in offensive recess appointments to pay back his political allies ahead of a race he could well lose. And so on.
Almost universally, Republicans hold in contempt the real-life "ends" of the Obama administration's policies, though admittedly there are those self-described conservatives who have favored (and even authored) Obamacare-like approaches to health care and policies like cap-and-trade. To us, those ends look decidedly liberal and reminiscent of European social democracies, and out of step with our vision for America.
Yet some conservatives, while rejecting the "ends" have not yet fully rejected the means, despite the fact that many Americans—and not just conservatives or libertarians— have reached the conclusion that the federal government has just become too big and has its fingers in too many pies, with the predictable negative real-world consequences for the rest of us.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. The 2012 Election and the 'Inevitable' Mitt Romney
Let me go ahead and stipulate that Mitt Romney has presidential height and hair, and appears to have presidential composure in debates and interviews (at least, when not being mauled by the Great Grizzly of Interviewers, the always fearsome Bret Baier). He also has a history of business success and has the longest private sector career of any participant in the GOP primary – though it's obviously worth noting that his lengthy private sector career has largely been the result of his utter failure to enter and remain in the public sector, despite trying over and over and over and over again to do so.
However, leaving aside the fact that his positions on most issues have a history of being "multiple choice," as Ted Kennedy once said, Mitt Romney has two major vulnerabilities to attack – and it just so happens that they are the top two issues of this entire election.
It's no secret that the key to this election is "the economy, stupid." This will be a jobs election, an economy election, and – given the Obama administration's limited but well-worn playbook – a class warfare election. Business success demonstrates a much-needed understanding of what our economy needs to get moving again, but job creation and relatability are at a premium in such an environment, which is why Romney's Bain experience is such a handicap.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
4. Who are the Democratic gun-grabbers in the US Senate? Let's find out!
In the course of reading this subtly bitter (and thus subtly entertaining) story (via Instapundit) about the effective collapse of the anti-gun movement on the grassroots level, I came across this passage: "In November the Republican House approved a measure that would require states to respect concealed carry permits issued by other, less restrictive states; it now awaits action in the Democratic-controlled Senate, where its fate is uncertain." This refers to HR 822, which passed in the House with bipartisan support and is now awaiting action from Judiciary in the Senate. As people reading this probably know, reciprocal respect of other states' right-to-carry laws is a hot topic: it recently came to the forefront when a Tennessee woman got arrested for trying to check in her firearm at the 9/11 Ground Zero site. I should also note in passing that Mayor Michael Bloomberg's (INDEPENDENT) attempt to smear said woman by claiming she was also in possession of cocaine backfired: the woman didn't have any. But she's still facing several years of jail time – no, really – for a 'crime' that more enlightened portions of the United States of America decriminalized some time ago*.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
5. Why is Ron Paul allowed to Continue Participating in Debates?
Let us set aside for a moment the many crazy things that Ron Paul says and the ways in which they might damage the GOP brand. We've given people passes for saying crazy things before. I mean, I'm not thrilled to have the guy up there on national television representing the GOP in any form or fashion, but on the merits as far as his support, he deserves to be there no matter what sort of crankery he decides to subject the public to. The problem with Ron Paul's continued participation in the debates is that, having used the GOP as a free publicity vehicle, he will not commit to refusing a third party run.
January 9, 2012
What a Big Government Conservative Looks Like
I'm rather tired of all the people who don't like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist. I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.
Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.
Suddenly we're all forgetting what a big government conservatism is. The term was coined by Fred Barnes in defense of George W. Bush's "compassionate conservative" agenda. Bush intended to use domestic social welfare policy for conservative ends. In the process, he expanded the welfare state to do so through No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit, etc. Rick Santorum was a willing participant in this.
Santorum is a conservative. He is. But his conservatism is largely defined by his social positions and the ends to which government would be deployed. But he has chosen as the means to those conservative ends bigger government. We see big government conservatives most clearly when they deviate from the tireless efforts of people like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint and the others who were willing to oppose George W. Bush's expansion of the welfare state. Rick Santorum was not among them.
I and some friends, none of us Romney fans, have set about exploring Santorum's record since Wednesday morning. Here now is a non-exhaustive list of what we have found. It does not even include his support for No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, debt ceiling increases, funding the bridge to nowhere, refusing to redirect earmark allocations to disaster relief along the Gulf Coast post Katrina, etc.
This is not the record of a man committed to scaling back the welfare state or the nanny state. Had he been up for re-election in 2010 instead of 2006, this is the record of a man who the tea party movement would have primaried. The only real justification for supporting him now is he is not Mitt Romney, but I still believe we can do better.
Consider, if you will, this contrast. Ronald Reagan said, "The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom." Rick Santorum, in 2008, said, "This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don't think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn't get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can't go it alone." I can handle Santorum's view of social conservatism and the need for cultural integrity. But he goes off the rails when he blends it with a version of fiscal conservatism that is anything but conservative and which fuels the government leviathan that, as it expands, takes away core freedoms and is run by entrenched progressive civil servants who are anything but conservative.
Rick Santorum's voting record reflects his rejection of small government. See for yourself.
NEA
Voted for taxpayer funding of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Voted against a 10% cut in the budget for National Endowment for the Arts.
Bankruptcy
Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
Defense and Foreign Policy
Voted for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.
Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.
Voted for the START II Treaty
Voted to allow the sale of supercomputers to China.
Voted to ban antipersonnel landmines
Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.
Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.
Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President's authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea
Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions. If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.
Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.
Voted against the Conventional Trident Missile Program
Nominations
Voted for Richard Paez to the 9th Curcuit (cloture)
Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge
Voted for Richard Holbrooke to be Ambassador to the UN
Voted for Margaret Morrow to be District Judge
Voted twice for Marsha Berzon to the 9thg Circuit
Voted for Mary McLaughlin to be District Judge
Voted for Tim Dyk to be District Judge
Voted for James Brady to be District Judge
Labor
Voted against National Right to Work Act
Voted against Real of Davis-Bacon Prevailing union wages
Voted for Alexis Herman to be Secretary of Labor
Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
Voted for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Voted for Job Corps funding
Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization
Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations.
Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws.
Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.
Guns
Voted to require pawn shops to do background checks on people who pawn a gun.
Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device
Voted for a Federal ban on possession of "assault weapons" by those under 18.
Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.
Reform
Voted for funding for the legal services corporation.
Voted twice for a Congressional payraise.
Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.
Voted for the Specter "backup plan" to allow campaign finance reform to survive if portions of the bill were found unconstitutional.
Voted to mandate discounted broadcast times for politicians.
Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.
Immigration
Voted against increasing the number of immigration investigators
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border partrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.
Taxes
Voted against a flat tax.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for Medicare prescription drugs
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to fund health insurance subsidies for small businesses.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an $8 billion increase in child healh insurance.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an increase in NIH funding.
Voted twice for internet taxes.
Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies.
Voted against repealing the Clinton 4.3 cent gas tax increase.
Voted to increase taxes by $2.3 billion to pay for an Amtrak trust fund.
Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.
Welfare
Voted against food stamp reform
Voted against Medicaid reform
Voted against TANF reform
Voted to increase the Social Services Block Grant from $1 billion to $2 billion
Voted to increase the FHA loan from $170,000 to $197,000. Also opposed increasing GNMA guaranty from 6 basis points to 12.
Voted for $2 billion for low income heating assistance.
Waste
Sponsored An amendment to increase Amtrak funds by $550 million
Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum's Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)
Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
Voted to increase NIHnding by $700 million
Voted to for a $2 million earmark to renovate the Vulcan Monument (AL)
Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry
Voted against requiring that highway earmarks would come out of a state's highway allocation
Voted to allow Market Access Program funds to go to foreign companies.
Voted to allow OPIC to increase its administrative costs by 50%
Voted against transferring $20 million from Americorps to veterans.
Voted for the $140 billion asbestos compensation bill.
Voted against requiring a uniform medical criteria to ensure asbestos claims were legitimate.
Voted to increase community development programs by $2 billion.
Spending and Entitlements
Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies an new entitlement.
Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.
Health Care
Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.
Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
Voted against a allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.
Education
Voted to increase Federal funding for teacher testing
Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion.
Voted against requiring courts to consider the impact of IDEA awards on a local school district.
Energy
Voted to allow the President to designate certain sites as interim nuclear waste storage sites in the event that he determines that Yucca Mountain is not a suitable site for a permanent waste repository. Those sites are as follows: the nuclear waste site in Hanford, Washington; the Savannah River Site in South Carolina; Barnwell County, South Carolina; and the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.
Voted to make fuel price gouging a Federal crime.
Morning Briefing for January 9, 2011
RedState Morning Briefing
January 6, 2012
Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
1. What a Big Government Conservative Looks Like
2. Politics As Entertainment, Endless GOP Debates Edition
3. The Late Term Abortion of a Conservative Resurgence
4. Mitt Romney Got Arrested
5. The Biggest Mistake of the Worst Debate
6. Vast Majority of ObamaCare Waivers Go To Union Workers In Latest Round
———————————————————————-
1. What a Big Government Conservative Looks Like
I'm rather tired of all the people who don't like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist. I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.
Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.
Suddenly we're all forgetting what a big government conservatism is. The term was coined by Fred Barnes in defense of George W. Bush's "compassionate conservative" agenda. Bush intended to use domestic social welfare policy for conservative ends. In the process, he expanded the welfare state to do so through No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit, etc. Rick Santorum was a willing participant in this.
Santorum is a conservative. He is. But his conservative is largely defined by his social positions and the ends to which government would be deployed. But he has chosen as the means to those conservative ends bigger government. We see big government conservatives most clearly when they deviate from the tireless efforts of people like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint and the others who were willing to oppose George W. Bush's expansion of the welfare state. Rick Santorum was not among them.
I and some friends, none of us Romney fans, have set about exploring Santorum's record since Wednesday morning. Here now is a non-exhaustive list of what we have found. It does not even include his support for No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, debt ceiling increases, funding the bridge to nowhere, refusing to redirect earmark allocations to disaster relief along the Gulf Coast post Katrina, etc.
This is not the record of a man committed to scaling back the welfare state or the nanny state. Had he been up for re-election in 2010 instead of 2006, this is the record of a man who the tea party movement would have primaried. The only real justification for supporting him now is he is not Mitt Romney, but I still believe we can do better.
Consider, if you will, this contrast. Ronald Reagan said, "The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom." Rick Santorum, in 2008, said, "This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don't think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn't get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can't go it alone."
Rick Santorum's voting record reflects his rejection of small government. See for yourself.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. Politics As Entertainment, Endless GOP Debates Edition
We live in an entertainment culture. The lives of many in this country revolve around the consumption of media and entertainment. Sports is almost an object of worship to some, and events such as the BCS Championship and the Super Bowl are virtually national holidays, surrounded by endless attention in the news/sports media and other popular culture outlets. Given that media consumption is now so ubiquitous, with flat-screen digital TVs, smartphones, satellite TV, streaming video, iPads and other multimedia sources, is it any wonder that politics has now taken on a similar flavor? 2012 is an election year and along with it, politics as entertainment has come to the fore. Even Entertainment Weekly has a "Politics As Entertainment" page! But the biggest proof point for this is the seemingly endless series of debates between GOP candidates. This may make for good entertainment, but does it make for good politics?
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. The Late Term Abortion of a Conservative Resurgence
In 2009 we began a conservative resurgence. We had just witnessed a stunning economic intervention from the Bush administration, and were now facing an expansion of government. President Obama, with a complicit Congress, had charted a course that included giveaways to every left wing pipe dream couched as stimulus. Conservatives and libertarians formed a loose coalition and took to the streets to seek redress.
As the movement gained strength and popularity, the Obama administration decided to flex its muscles and force even greater socialist schemes on the people of this nation. The passage of Obamacare, while an absolute defeat for smaller government, served as a rallying cry that strengthened our resolve.
In 2010 we put down the protest signs and picked up campaign signs. We made errors, but more importantly, we took back the House. Unfortunately, we didn't change our leadership. Betrayals and half measures served to squash the optimism that had been prevalent.
As we began pondering the 2012 GOP candidates, there was a palpable pessimism. The field was unworthy of the conservative resurgence that had returned the House to our control. We were all awaiting a champion.
Pence declined, Palin declined, Daniels, Christie, Jindal, Ryan, none would step forward.
Then, something happened. Governor Perry heard the call and threw his hat into the ring. For a moment, we were optimistic about our primary.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
4. Mitt Romney Got Arrested
It is such a silly thing, but it plays right into the left-wing attack on Mitt as an out of touch elitist.
All the way back to 1981, Mitt Romney got arrested.
It was no big deal.
Still, the Obama campaign is rapidly building a John Kerry narrative against Mitt Romney. You and I may think the whole 99% vs the 1% crap is in fact crap, but the average joe doesn't like elitists.
And this isn't the only time Romney has had encounters with law enforcement that got nasty when things didn't go his way.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
5. The Biggest Mistake of the Worst Debate
Let's face it: the ABC News New Hampshire debate was the worst debate of the entire election cycle. And that is saying something, considering the sheer volume of debates. How many years and election cycles will it take before Republicans learn to turn to conservatives as moderators for presidential debates, instead of washed up Democrat hacks disguised as journalists?
Now, to the extent that such a pathetic debate is worthy of any analysis, the clear winner was Mitt Romney. Watching the debate, you'd think Ron Paul was the frontrunner. All of the verbal altercations played out between Ron Paul and one of the other candidates. Romney was able to sit pretty throughout the entire debate, except for one monologue from Santorum at the end of the debate. Undoubtedly, the platform for the debate, along with the inane questions, wasn't exactly conducive to attacking Romney's liberal record as governor. However, they all had an opportunity during the opening salvo of the debate. They failed miserably.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
6. Vast Majority of ObamaCare Waivers Go To Union Workers In Latest Round
For a special interest group that pushed so hard to enact legislation that weighs on the rest of America, unions seem to be the largest group that want to avoid the very law they helped enact. In fact, according to Friday afternoon's document dump, the vast majority of individuals receiving special treatment in this latest waiver boondoggle are union workers. This brings the total of unionized ObamaCare waiver recipients to over 50% of the total recipients.
January 8, 2012
Where I Stand: Perry, Gingrich, and None of the Above
I will support the Republican nominee for President.
But until we have that nominee, I will not support Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.
Had Rick Santorum been up for election in 2010 instead of suffering the largest margin of defeat of any candidate in 2006, I have no doubt he would be one of the Republicans primaried by the tea party. He routinely voted for tax increases to fund healthcare, supported expansions of the welfare state, supported the creation of new entitlements, opposed free trade, filibustered the National Right to Work Act, opposed repeal or even waiver of the Davis-Bacon Act, supported the Bridge to Nowhere even at the expense of rebuilding the Gulf Coast post Katrina, and helped pass all those travesties of the Bush Administration conservatives routinely lament including No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D as well as being perfectly fine with Harriet Miers.
Rick Santorum is a big government conservative and the only way to conclude otherwise is to be intellectually and ideologically disingenuous.
Mitt Romney too should be opposed by conservatives. He is not one. He is a political opportunist. He has held every side of every issue known to man except on the individual mandate about which his faith is unshakable.
So I am left to support Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, either of whom I would willingly support. In the alternative, another candidate could still come forward now, though time is of the essence, and vie for a sweep of the late states to secure the nomination out right or at least force an open and brokered convention. Yes, there is still time for a Perry rebound, a Gingrich surge, and even for a new candidate to get in.
Rick Perry, who is the most successful governor in the United States, unfortunately, does not seem capable of running a Presidential campaign. Perhaps word will come tomorrow that he has restructured and reshuffled his campaign. But without a real reboot of his campaign, I cannot recommend investing in or supporting his campaign. You'll be wasting your money. There was a report than some staff had been let go, but that was bad reporting and not the staff that really needs letting go anyway.
The most I've seen so far is the Washington consultants pushing out the media buying firm, in order to get a local ad buying firm in South Carolina to handle all the South Carolina ad buying work, which is a smart move, but which cannot be the only move or considered even a major move.
I really hope Governor Perry understands just how much he needs to do a reboot and just how necessary it is to change the media narrative into the story of making a comeback.
That leaves Newt Gingrich, though I cannot endorse either Perry or Gingrich. Not just because I would prefer to not endorse and instead review the candidates as I see them without carrying their water, but also because like with Perry, I am not sure Gingrich's campaign operation is stable — though it is more stable than Perry's. It seems to be getting that way, if only on strength of personality, but not yet.
Then there is the wildcard option. There is still time and there is, even at minimum, a path to a brokered convention to get a new candidate. I hope that Rick Perry can rapidly rebuild and show clear momentum in South Carolina. I hope Newt Gingrich can trounce both Romney and Santorum. But in the absence of performance by them, I hope they will not drag down the small government conservatives. If they can't show gains, time is short, but available, for a Bobby Jindal or someone else to get in.
Below is a list of the states, their filing deadlines, and the delegates at stake. As you can see, there is still the ability to enter the race and, if the candidate sweeps the states, win outright or, if the candidate cannot sweep the states, force a brokered convention to get a new, more viable conservative candidate.
I will gladly support Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich. But there is time for an alternative. We do not have to settle even for the current crop. If Perry cannot reboot and Gingrich cannot convince us he won't implode, I endorse an open, brokered convention.
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
Iowa caucus
28
1.20%
Jan 3, 2012
-
1.20%
NH Primary
12
0.50%
Jan 10, 2012
past
1.80%
SC Primary
25
1.10%
Jan 21, 2012
past
2.90%
FL Primary
50
2.20%
Jan 31, 2012
past
5.10%
NV Caucus
28
1.20%
Feb 4, 2012
-
6.30%
ME Caucus
24
1.10%
2/4-11/12
-
7.40%
CO Caucus
36
1.60%
Feb 7, 2012
-
9.00%
MN Caucus
40
1.80%
Feb 7, 2012
-
10.70%
AZ Primary
29
1.30%
Feb 28, 2012
Jan 9, 2012
12.00%
MI Primary
30
1.30%
Feb 28, 2012
past
13.30%
WA Caucus
43
1.90%
Mar 3, 2012
-
15.20%
Pre-Super Tuesday
345
15.20%
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
AK Caucus
27
1.20%
Mar 6, 2012
-
16.40%
GA Primary
76
3.40%
Mar 6, 2012
past
19.80%
ID Caucus
32
1.40%
Mar 6, 2012
-
21.20%
MA Primary
41
1.80%
Mar 6, 2012
past
23.00%
ND Caucus
28
1.20%
Mar 6, 2012
-
24.20%
OK Primary
43
1.90%
Mar 6, 2012
past
26.10%
TN Primary
58
2.60%
Mar 6, 2012
past
28.70%
TX Primary
155
6.80%
Mar 6, 2012
past
35.60%
VE Primary
17
0.80%
Mar 6, 2012
Jan 9, 2012
36.30%
VA Primary
49
2.20%
Mar 6, 2012
past
38.50%
Vir Islands Caucus
9
0.40%
Mar 6, 2012
-
38.90%
WY Caucus
29
1.30%
Mar 6, 2012
-
40.20%
Super Tuesday
564
24.90%
State
Delegates
Portion
Date
Filing
Complete
KS Caucus
40
1.80%
Mar 10, 2012
-
41.90%
AL Primary
50
2.20%
Mar 13, 2012
Jan 13, 2012
44.10%
Haw Caucus
20
0.90%
Mar 13, 2012
-
45.00%
MS Primary
38
1.70%
Mar 13, 2012
Jan 14, 2012
46.70%
Am Samoa Caucus
9
0.40%
Mar 13, 2012
-
47.10%
Missouri Caucus
52
2.30%
Mar 17, 2012
-
49.40%
Puerto Rico Caucus
23
1.00%
Mar 18, 2012
-
50.40%
IL Primary
69
3.00%
Mar 20, 2012
past
53.40%
LA Primary
45
2.00%
Mar 24, 2012
past
55.40%
DC Primary
19
0.80%
Apr 3, 2012
past
56.30%
MD Primary
37
1.60%
Apr 3, 2012
Jan 11, 2012
57.90%
WI Primary
42
1.90%
Apr 3, 2012
Jan 11, 2012
59.80%
Conn Primary
28
1.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Mar 2, 2012
61.00%
DE Primary
17
0.80%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 24, 2012
61.70%
NY Primary
95
4.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 9, 2012
65.90%
PA Primary
72
3.20%
Apr 24, 2012
Feb 14, 2012
69.10%
RI Primary
19
0.80%
Apr 24, 2012
Jan 21, 2012
70.00%
IN Primary
46
2.00%
May 8, 2012
Feb 10, 2012
72.00%
NC Primary
55
2.40%
May 8, 2012
Feb 29, 2012
74.40%
WV Primary
31
1.40%
May 8, 2012
Jan 28, 2012
75.80%
NE Primary
34
1.50%
May 15, 2012
Mar 7, 2012
77.30%
OR Primary
28
1.20%
May 15, 2012
Mar 6, 2012
78.50%
Ark Primary
36
1.60%
May 22, 2012
Mar 1, 2012
80.10%
KY Primary
45
2.00%
May 22, 2012
Jan 31, 2012
82.10%
CA Primary
172
7.60%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 23, 2012
89.70%
MT Primary
26
1.10%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 12, 2012
90.90%
NJ Primary
50
2.20%
Jun 5, 2012
Apr 2, 2012
93.10%
NM Primary
23
1.00%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 16, 2012
94.10%
SD Primary
28
1.20%
Jun 5, 2012
Mar 27, 2012
95.30%
OH Primary
66
2.90%
Jun 12, 2012
Mar 14, 2012
98.20%
UT Primary
40
1.80%
Jun 26, 2012
Mar 15, 2012
100.00%
Post-Super Tuesday
1355
59.80%
Total Delegates
2264
100.00%
January 7, 2012
Mitt Romney Got Arrested
It is such a silly thing, but it plays right into the left-wing attack on Mitt as an out of touch elitist.
All the way back to 1981, Mitt Romney got arrested.
It was no big deal.
Romney's arrest came in June 1981 when he proceeded to launch his motorboat at Wayland's Lake Cochituate only moments after a park police officer had told him not to launch the craft or face a $50 fine.
The charges against Romney were dropped several days later and officially dismissed in February 1982 at Natick District Court. At Romney's request, the judge also agreed to seal the records, making them unavailable for public inspection.
Romney said yesterday that the park ranger had overstepped his authority in arresting him and said the reason the case was dropped was that he had threatened to charge the officer and his agency, then called the Department of Environmental Affairs, with false arrest.
"He did not have the right to arrest me because I was not a disorderly person. This was an obvious case of false arrest," Romney said. "The officer obviously agreed because he agreed to dropping the case."
Still, the Obama campaign is rapidly building a John Kerry narrative against Mitt Romney. You and I may think the whole 99% vs the 1% crap is in fact crap, but the average joe doesn't like elitists.
And this isn't the only time Romney has had encounters with law enforcement that got nasty when things didn't go his way. In 2002 during the Winter Olympics in Utah, Weber County Sheriff's Office Capt. Terry Shaw claimed that Mitt Romney twice used the . . . wait for it . . . seriously . . . wait for it . . . the F-word while berating Deputy Kodi Taggart of the Weber County Sheriff's Department. Likewise a traffic volunteer, Shaun Knopp, claimed "asked me who the f___ I was and what the f___ I was doing. We got the Olympics going on we don't need this s___ down here." Yeah, that was 2002.
The best thing Romney has going for him in this regard is Barack Obama also being an elitist. Because don't all elitists yell at the little people like law enforcement officers?
The Mental Derangement of Ron Paul's Campaign
Supporters of Ron Paul produced a hit job on Jon Huntsman attacking Huntsman over his adopted daughter. His daughter, ftom China, was left for dead in a market and the Huntsmans intervened, got her back to good health, and adopted her.
Someone put up a video attacking Huntsman adoption as proof that Huntsman is a foreign agent.
The video began circulating among Ron Paul supporters and when Huntsman called them out, the Ron Paul campaign swung into high gear and produced a report that I can only venture to suspect was written by someone hopped up on gardasil, having acquired the mental retardation Michele Bachmann warned us about.
The Ron Paul campaign — NOT SUPPORTERS, BUT CAMPAIGN — analysis concludes that Jon Huntsman attacked his own daughter in an attempt to smear Ron Paul.
Yes, friends, it has come to that level of dain bramage.
While the media is licking its chops over the he said – he said of the Ron Paul "analysis" I should note that ridicule of the families of the other candidates is par for the course for Ron Paul supporters.
Here's a Paul supporter on Ron Paul's wall on Facebook ridiculing Rick Santorum's family:
The Paul campaign could have had the common decency to just say it was a supporter and condemn the attack on Jon Huntsman and his daughter.
But the Paul campaign seems only willing to condemn black people, Jews, and gays. Everyone else is fair game, including the children of other Presidential candidates.
What's even more disturbing though is the Politico and other news outlets treating the Ron Paul defense as legitimate and questioning the Huntsman campaign. That's not something the media even did to John McCain in 2000 with the awful attacks on him in South Carolina.
Pitiful all around.
Erick Erickson's Blog
- Erick Erickson's profile
- 12 followers
