Erick Erickson's Blog, page 85

On The Senate

According to the vote count that leaked out, Senator Roy Blunt became Senate Republican Conference Vice Chairman with 25 votes and Senator Ron Johnson lost with 22 votes.

Let me be up front that I genuinely like Roy Blunt. But I also think Senator Blunt is part of the status quo problem in Washington. My support of Ron Johnson was about Ron Johnson being a guy from a state hard for the GOP to win who has fresh, conservative ideas and isn't in Washington raiding the budget to send back home.

But such a guy is anathema to the Senate GOP leadership. Our work is not done. But there are races across the country where we can help turn the tide and get a set of Senate Republicans who will turn the tide, who will fight for fiscal sanity and a smaller Washington. The odds are in the GOP's favor to take back the Senate.

We need to increase the odds that conservatives take back the Senate GOP. It is a long fight. But here are some candidates who will help. There are links you can follow to give them money and, if you choose not to give to them, please at least consider the Senate Conservatives Fund.

Arizona

In Arizona, Representative Jeff Flake is running. He is a no nonsense budget cutter who will side with the conservative wing of the Republican Senate Caucus and has never been afraid to stand up to the leadership.

Florida

There has been a sudden infatuation in the primary with Rep. Connie Mack, but while his voting record in the House was conservative, he never proved himself to be a guy willing to stand up to leadership and actually fight. I'm sticking with Adam Hasner who, during this campaign season, has proven himself to be in lock step with the conservative movement. He was one of the first candidates for the Senate to say he too would support Ron Johnson and he is not wedded to Mitch McConnell as leader.

Indiana

Here is one where we can pick up a good seat overall. Richard Mourdock, the State Treasurer of Indiana, is running in the primary against Senator Dick Lugar. Not only do we have the chance to add a conservative to the Senate, but we have the chance to pick off a squishy Republican in the process.

Nebraska

The Senate GOP does not like Don Stenberg. They say that Stenberg ran once statewide for the Senate and lost. This is true. What they do not tell you is that Stenberg was winning that race until the genius head of the NRSC, a guy named Mitch McConnell at the time, ran a bunch of uncoordinated, nasty, and fatuous ads against Stenberg's opponent, causing a media firestorm that hurt Don Stenberg in the final two weeks of the campaign. Stenberg did everything right, McConnell did everything wrong, and now McConnell wants to do everything he can to stop Stenberg from getting to the Senate. That should be reason enough to support Stenberg.

Ohio

There is no finer choice in Ohio than Josh Mandel. He's already proven he can get votes statewide. He has a military background and he is fundamentally a small government conservative. And it would be a real win for the nation if we picked off the socialist Sherrod Brown with the conservative Josh Mandel.

Texas

Do I need to say anything more than Ted Cruz? Seriously? The guy is a rock star and will join Mike Lee in Senate constitutional awesomeness once he gets to the Senate. The former Solicitor General of Texas, Cruz knows a thing or two about the constitution and he's not afraid to stand up to the Senate GOP leadership.

Thus far in Campaign 2012, these are my candidates for the Senate. If you poured your heart into getting Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Pat Toomey, and Rand Paul into the Senate, you should join me in supporting these guys. They are the next wave of conservatives to take on the Senate GOP and move the country right.

Morning Briefing for December 14, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

December 14, 2011

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

1. Donald Trump Talks About the GOP, His Political Future, and Our Standing in the World

2. Annual Deficit Will Absolutely Top $1 Trillion in 2012

3. No, Ron Paul is not a threat to win the Iowa Caucuses

4. The New York Times and Its Anti-Fracking Cargo Cult

———————————————————————-

1. Donald Trump Talks About the GOP, His Political Future, and Our Standing in the World

Earlier tonight on my radio program I interviewed Donald Trump. It was his first interview since announcing he would cancel the GOP debate in which he intended to moderate the candidates. Only two candidates had agreed to participate and Mr. Trump recognized that there was a real concern about him running as a third party.

So I asked him if he might and he said he just may run. He's really concerned about the GOP picking a weak candidate. He would not name any names, but he particularly did not like Jon Huntsman. He took issue with Huntsman's views on China, which Trump thinks are weak and dangerous.

We actually spent a good bit of time on China. Trump thinks we hold a strong hand against China, but political leaders on all sides are too scared to take on China. He criticized the existing debate structure for not going deep into discussions on China, OPEC, and American manufacturing.

Trump's new book, Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again, is published by RedState's sister company Regnery Publishing. You can get the book here and you can listen to the interview right here.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Annual Deficit Will Absolutely Top $1 Trillion in 2012

Yesterday, the media was agog with glee over reports that CBO is projecting an annual deficit "below $1 trillion for the first time in four years."

How did they arrive at that conclusion?

This projection was extrapolated from the Treasury Department's report of the first two months of the fiscal year budget, which, as explained by the CBO's monthly budget review, pegs the current deficit at $236 billion — $55 billion less than at this time last year. The media is conflating this monthly report with an outdated long-term CBO budget outlook, which projects only a $973 billion deficit for FY 2012.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. No, Ron Paul is not a threat to win the Iowa Caucuses

It doesn't matter what you think the new Public Policy Polling result says. It doesn't matter how many gleeful Democrats are writing up news stories claiming it's true. It's not.

Ron Paul, King of Earmarks, Full Metal Truther, and Archbishop of the anti-American Gnostic Constitutionalists, is not going to win the Iowa caucuses or even get close for one simple reason.

He wins people who don't vote, but the Iowa caucuses only admit Republicans.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. The New York Times and Its Anti-Fracking Cargo Cult

Another day, another distorted and fear-mongering attack from the Old Grey Lady on America's natural gas industry.

Headline: Add Quakes to Rumblings Over Gas Rush

(originally published under the headline "Some Blame Hydraulic Fracturing For Earthquake Epidemic"; link may require subscription/signup)

Here, the Times conflates two dissimilar processes in an attempt to create fear and worry about natural gas.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Donald Trump Talks About the GOP, His Political Future, and Our Standing in the World

Earlier tonight on my radio program I interviewed Donald Trump. It was his first interview since announcing he would cancel the GOP debate in which he intended to moderate the candidates. Only two candidates had agreed to participate and Mr. Trump recognized that there was a real concern about him running as a third party.

So I asked him if he might and he said he just may run. He's really concerned about the GOP picking a weak candidate. He would not name any names, but he particularly did not like Jon Huntsman. He took issue with Huntsman's views on China, which Trump thinks are weak and dangerous.

We actually spent a good bit of time on China. Trump thinks we hold a strong hand against China, but political leaders on all sides are too scared to take on China. He criticized the existing debate structure for not going deep into discussions on China, OPEC, and American manufacturing.

Trump's new book, Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again, is published by RedState's sister company Regnery Publishing. You can get the book here and you can listen to the interview right here.

Download audio here

Donald Trump Joins Me For an Exclusive Interview #EERS

News broke today that Donald Trump has cancelled his debate with Republican candidates because of the concerns raised about his possible third party bid for the Presidency.

Does he have a preferred candidate in the GOP field? Is he running? Tonight at 7:35 p.m. I have an exclusive interview with Donald Trump and will ask him those questions, about his new book Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again, and where he sees the nation headed.

You can tune in live tonight to my radio show on the Marconi Award Winning Best News/Talk Radio Station in America for 2011, WSB Radio of Atlanta, which is also the nation's largest talk radio station, at AM 750 and now 95.5 FM or go online to the WSB live stream available by clicking right here.

You can call the show at 1-800-WSB-TALK.

The interview will start at 7:35 p.m. on WSB. Later, I'll have a podcast up at RedState with details of the interview. Stay tuned to tomorrow's Morning Briefing for more.

You can order Mr. Trump's book, Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again by clicking right here. His book is published by Regnery Publishing, a sister company to RedState.

Consider this an open thread.

Will New Jersey Oust Scott Garrett?

Scott Garrett, the solidly conservative Congressman from New Jersey may be on the verge of getting a raw deal thanks to a bipartisan redistricting commission in New Jersey. Garrett could be the one Republican thrown into a district with a Democrat. Some background is here.

This is unfortunate because his district is starkly different from the rest of the state. He's got small and mid-sized cities, towns and rural areas – pretty much everything else in New Jersey is either suburban or urban. It's basically an "L" in the western & northern part of the state. So to merge with another district, the new district would have to entail the suburban New York areas – resulting in a rather bizarre gerrymander. The latest rumor is that Garrett will be put into a district with Steve Rothman – a domestic liberal and foreign policy hawk who can raise a ton of cash if he's in a competitive race since he's on the Appropriations Committee and is very well liked by pro-Israel donors. Garrett can obviously raise money, too, but why should someone who can help candidates around the country be forced into an expensive fight against a strong Dem when Cong. Lance would make much more sense to be merged in with a Democrat given the various existing constituencies?

With a mandate to pare 13 districts down to 12, the bipartisan commission has been expected to create a 50/50 district between a Democrat and a Republican incumbent, with many speculating that the race will be between Rep. Rush Holt (D), and (moderate) GOP Rep. Leonard Lance. For more on this theory, see here.

Given that the Lance/Holt district is much easier to draw and is much more intuitive, a Garrett/Rothman district is clearly motivated by something other than what is best for the Republican Party and the people of New Jersey. The new Garrett/Rothman rumor seems like a move by Governor Chris Christie, who's not been thrilled with the prospect of a powerful Tea Party in his state.

So now the Republicans on the bipartisan commission could be getting ready to throw a national leader of the conservative movement and a Tea Party favorite – one who actually does stuff in Congress – under the bus, while sparing a bona fide moderate like Congressman Leonard Lance.

The time is running out in this fight and I sure hope Gov. Christie might use his influence to save Scott Garrett.

Roy Blunt Wins: Senate GOP Shuns Tea Party, Embraces K Street

Today, Senate Republicans held an internal election to choose a Vice Chairman for the Senate Republican Conference. Conservative organizations and tea party groups rallied to Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI). Senator Roy Blunt (MO) won the leadership contest 25 votes to 22 votes. It is worth noting the number of Senators who came out publicly for Senator Ron Johnson and the number who refused to publicly support Senator Blunt.

Senator Blunt is a fine guy, but he is decidedly on the side of the old guard that has shown a lack of initiative and ideas.

The election is a trust testament to the need to support Senator Jim DeMint's Senate Conservatives Fund and I hope is a strong signal to Senator DeMint and each of you that our work is not done and we must continue challenging incumbent Republican Senators in primaries.

The downside to this election is the GOP's refusal to move past the narrative about party greed and corruption from K Street, which is as relevant now as it was in the Bridge to Nowhere controversy.

One former Blunt aide said: "While both are freshman senators, Sen. Blunt's experience in these types of races gives him an edge." If he's successful this afternoon it is expected to be a strong sign of the Missouri Republican moving upward in GOP leadership as soon as next year. If he wins, "it gets him in the queue to be considered for other posts," another former Blunt aide told PI.

K Street certainly has big ties to Blunt, the former House majority whip. Former aides include: Gregg Hartley of Cassidy & Associates; Joe Wall of Goldman Sachs; Sam Geduldig of Clark, Lytle Geduldig & Cranston; Brian Gaston of Glover Park Group; Amos Snead of Story Partners; Jay Perron of IFA; and Samantha Cook of SMC Consulting.

On the bright side, I suspect Mitch McConnell and the old guard just created a new super hero conservative in Senator Ron Johnson who will be a thorn in their side.

From the Mailbag

Given his grammar, I assume we can blame this on government school indoctrination.

From: mrkdray@yahoo.com

Subject: The end of the modern day conservative party

Date: December 13, 2011 9:13:22 AM EST

To: contact@redstate.com

You sound like a bunch of fools rapped in the confederate Flagg deluding yourselves that a new day is dawning.Look in the f**king mirror and confess the abuses by you and yours that crippled this great country,with no concern for her future and not respect for her passed.You fools that blindly support these candidates who cannot say they can ever remember a time in their life that they wanted for anything,you give credit to them when they have no clue what hardships good Americans endure and by that stupid smirk on Perry's face could careless.Ask yourself why none of the real candidates are in other than not wanting to be seen with this clown show.How embarrassed you must be when a has been like Newt is leading and real players are at home stuffing burgers in his face and that nice Cuban boy who ,oops forgot the truth about his past and then scrambled to change his congressional website info.What does it say about a man when he can't even tell the truth about something so dear to him and his family.Ah, time to go ,but I will be back my slow witted ,stuck in the past of a dead President,ciao for now!

3 Weeks And Counting. Are We In a Suicide Pact?

"It is hard to dislike a guy who can filet his opponent with a smile and a side of fava beans and a nice chianti."

As you wake up this morning, however hard it may be to believe, we are actually three weeks away from the first votes being cast in Campaign 2012. Three weeks from today, in the Iowa cold, people will gather and support their man.

And three weeks out is perhaps the perfect time for me to ask this. Have conservatives entered a suicide pact? Has the Republican Party, as a whole, done the same?

We got a preview of Mr. Obama's campaign strategy in Kansas. He intends to make the moral case for government and wealth redistribution. The campaign will be about the morality of government picking winners and losers and will be presupposed by a belief that the free market has failed.

Scoff all you will that this will be successful, but know that lots of people in the great mass of the undecided are not so sure Obama isn't right. They may not like him, but they aren't sure the Republicans are the people who can fix the problems.

The reason to me is rather simple. We do not have anyone on our side making the moral case for the free market. And this is where it gets tricky.

If you were to look at the candidates on the Republican side, I suspect you might agree with me that the best person to put up against a man arguing that the government should pick winners and losers is the guy who grew up dirt poor on a farm without indoor plumbing who joined the military, served his country, became a farmer, and then got into government culminating in the most impressive job creation record of any Governor in America at this time.

The problem is that candidate, Rick Perry, has failed to convince people he is capable of the task at hand, though he still has the time, money, and poll trends in an upward direction in Iowa to do it.

Another candidate you might want to put up against a man hell bent on making, in effect, the moral case for socialism in America is the guy who worked for Ronald Reagan and, in the private sector, made his money making things and building things and whose family company invented things, i.e. a man who not only prospered in the free market, but who helped other people prosper and work and earn a living in the free market.

The problem is that candidate, Jon Huntsman, decided to launch his campaign by giving conservatives a middle finger as he raced to get on The View.

You might decide that the guy to put up against Obama is the History Professor who has a real sense of history and can articulate bold ideas and is one hell of a debater.

The problem is that candidate, Newt Gingrich, talks a great talk, but actually is not the conservative you might think he is.

Now, if you are foolish, given that the President intends to campaign on a moral case against success and a lot of people are receptive to it, you might want to put up a candidate who made his money doing leveraged buy outs, laying off people, and restructuring companies. That's precisely why Mitt Romney is such a terrible fit for the zeitgeist of this election season.

Right now conservatives have decided to go with the good talker and good debater in Newt Gingrich. I get it and I don't blame anyone for doing so. I just might. I'm warming up to the idea.

But before we go down that road, I really think we probably do need to take another look at the other candidates first. To be honest, a President spends the least amount of time debating and giving speeches and it seems conservatives are about to pick their guy based on the job criteria at the bottom of the classified ad and not the top.

I say this having re-read Tom Coburn's Breach of Trust. I am surprised the Romney campaign is not buying copies wholesale and sending to voters. It paints a discomforting picture of Newt Gingrich.

I think, given the direction the Obama team intends to head with their campaign theme, we would be crazy not to reconsider Perry, given how effective his biography and life story would be combatting that theme. If not Perry, perhaps Huntsman does deserve a look given his private sector and Reagan administration experience. Both men, however, have things they must show conservatives in order to get conservatives back on board for Perry or on board the first time for Huntsman.

I do know that a lot of people are ready to sign off on Newt Gingrich because of his debating prowess, not his conservative bona fides. If people know what they are getting going into this, so be it. But I think a lot of people don't.

I do know. And if I must choose between Mitt and Newt, I would choose Newt in a heart beat. It is hard to dislike a guy who can filet his opponent with a smile and a side of fava beans and a nice chianti.

But are we sure he's the guy? We've only got three weeks to be sure. The future of conservatism as a political force is at stake.

Morning Briefing for December 13, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

December 13, 2011

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

1. 3 Weeks And Counting. Are We In a Suicide Pact?

2. The Omnibus: 3 x 24 = 72

3. Colt Firearm's Florida Move Has UAW Job-Killers In Connecticut Worried

4. Mitt Romney Knows Deprivation

———————————————————————-

1. 3 Weeks And Counting. Are We In a Suicide Pact?

As you wake up this morning, however hard it may be to believe, we are actually three weeks away from the first votes being cast in Campaign 2012. Three weeks from today, in the Iowa cold, people will gather and support their man.

And three weeks out is perhaps the perfect time for me to ask this. Have conservatives entered a suicide pact? Has the Republican Party, as a whole, done the same?

We got a preview of Mr. Obama's campaign strategy in Kansas. He intends to make the moral case for government and wealth redistribution. The campaign will be about the morality of government picking winners and losers and will be presupposed by a belief that the free market has failed.

Scoff all you will that this will be successful, but know that lots of people in the great mass of the undecided are not so sure Obama isn't right. They may not like him, but they aren't sure the Republicans are the people who can fix the problems.

The reason to me is rather simple. We do not have anyone on our side making the moral case for the free market. And this is where it gets tricky.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. The Omnibus: 3 x 24 = 72

The House is set to pass a trillion dollar spending bill. Sources say we can expect the bill to be posted online soon (if not around midnight last night). I have no doubt that the bill will include all kinds of hidden earmarks and spending gimmicks. But the clever bill writers will make these hard to find. This is why it is so important that the public and Members of Congress have a chance to read the bill before it comes to the House floor.

In the much ballyhooed Pledge to Nowhere, the House promised to post all bills online for three days prior to consideration.

Jo Maney of House Rules Committee clarified that three days does not mean 72 hours. According to my math, 3 x 24 = 72. But thanks for the clarification.

OK, so maybe the rule doesn't specifically say 72 hours, even though that is what everyone understood it to say — everyone including the Speaker of the House. Here is Speaker Boehner himself promising "a 72 hour review period for all major bills"

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Colt Firearm's Florida Move Has UAW Job-Killers In Connecticut Worried

As Connecticut continues to shoot itself in its foot (so to speak), job creators are rightfully beginning to look elsewhere for locales that do not view businesses as cannon fodder.

Colt Firearms appears to be one of the many Connecticut companies looking for a less hostile home.

To clarify, Florida is a Right-to-Work state and Connecticut is not. Which may be why the UAW is so concerned about keeping jobs in the anti-business state.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Mitt Romney Knows Deprivation

There are few things more ridiculous than wealthy men trying to convince everyone they know what economic deprivation feels like. Even when the stories are possibly true, such as when Paul O'Neill and aged Klansman Robert C. Byrd dueled over who had the most authentic PWT background, the spectacle is demeaning and degrading to everyone involved: participant or spectator.

When the man involved is fabulously wealthy and from a prominent family with privileged upbringing it is just insulting.

Still stinging from his rather bizarre offer to gift Governor Rick Perry $10,000 during the last of the interminable debates — I say gift rather than bet because Romney's book did get the Soviet May Day picture treatment before his latest attempt to become a professional politician — the Romney campaign has now set out to make Mitt v 467753.1: Romney the common man.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

The Omnibus: 3 x 24 = 72

The House is set to pass a trillion dollar spending bill. Sources say we can expect the bill to be posted online sometime close to midnight tonight. I have no doubt that the bill will include all kinds of hidden earmarks and spending gimmicks. But the clever bill writers will make these hard to find. This is why it is so important that the public and Members of Congress have a chance to read the bill before it comes to the House floor.

In the much ballyhooed Pledge to Nowhere, the House promised to post all bills online for three days prior to consideration.

'We will ensure that bills are debated and discussed in the public square by publishing the text online for at least three days before coming up for a vote in the House of Representatives. No more hiding legislative language from the minority party, opponents, and the public. Legislation should be understood by all interested parties before it is voted on."

Jo Maney of House Rules Committee clarified that three days does not mean 72 hours. According to my math, 3 x 24 = 72. But thanks for the clarification.

OK, so maybe the rule doesn't specifically say 72 hours, even though that is what everyone understood it to say — everyone including the Speaker of the House. Here is Speaker Boehner himself promising "a 72 hour review period for all major bills"

Can we all stipulate that a trillion dollar appropriations bill would be a "major bill?"

Can we also stipulate that the appropriations bill has not been posted yet, and that nobody outside the senior appropriators and maybe a few in Leadership has any idea what is in it?

So if the bill is posted online at 11:59 tonight, can we expect Speaker Boehner to keep his promise and give the public until 11:59 Thursday night to read it, prior to bringing it to the floor of the House?

The big spenders understand that, like dead fish, the longer these bills sit in the sun, the more they stink. This is why they have the bill locked in a file cabinet somewhere and will keep it there until the very last minute in hopes that the public will not discover the shenanigans until the bill is already signed into law.

Hopefully the Speaker will keep his word, and this bill will not come to the House floor until Friday morning. If they try to rush it through before that, conservatives should oppose the rule.