MD-House: Wade Kach Must Go

We have long argued that Republicans in Maryland cannot win by being Democrat-lite.  Aside for the fact that liberal Republicans fail to inspire a following and fail to galvanize voters to their cause, they are automatic losers.  Once we adopt the views of the opposition, we have lost, period.  As such, even if we somehow enjoy electoral success, it is irrelevant because, in essence, we are not winning anything.

Nevertheless, that is the type of party which state Delegate Wade Kach (RINO-Baltimore Co.) wants us to be.  He is advocating that we accept the most extreme positions of the Democrat Party, including the redefining of marriage to include...well, just about anything.

Earlier today, Kach announced that "as a proud member of the party of Lincoln, I believe that we as legislators should be more concerned with relieving the tax burden of families than telling them how to behave in their own homes."

Kach is using the typical illusory parlance that is associated with the pro-gay marriage forces.  He is falsely charging that opponents of gay marriage are telling people how to behave.  That is absolutely false.  The reality is that nobody is regulating the behavior of individuals, no matter how morally licentious it is.  We are merely upholding the basic definition of one of the most fundamental concepts since the dawn of times.

Again, for the millionth time, a homosexual relationship is not a marriage.  Kach and his ilk refuse to address the issue at hand.  Nobody is seeking to govern people's private behavior, although the nation was founded on bedrock values in which homosexuality stands as an anathema to our beliefs.  But let's forget about that for a moment.  This is not an issue of liberty.  It is a matter of honoring a sacrosanct relationship and legal definition that has been so basic to humankind since creation.  You could talk about liberty until you turn blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that unicorns don't fly, and a gay relationship is not a marriage.

All Americans, including gays, have the full liberty to get married; nobody is stopping them.  Additionally, nobody is preventing them from acting out their immoral impulses in private.  It is they who want society to change the basic definition of marriage - something that is totally intractable.

It is also preposterous and shameful to intimate that Lincoln would support something like gay marriage. It's very sad that we've descended to such moral decadency that we have Republicans who are advocating for such immorality - the degree to which has never been suggested until this generation.  While homosexuality has existed for a long time, nobody ever had the audacity to suggest that such a relationship constitutes a marriage.  One need not be overtly religious to appreciate that the basic legal definition of marriage is a special bond between one man and one woman.

If we are going to attenuate the meaning of marriage to the extent that it can include two men, why not change the other components of marriage, such as the number of parties involved?  Why not recognize polygamist marriages, or man-dog relationships?  I love my one-year-old son to death; can I marry him?  The concept of marriage is really not an enigma, except to those who are biased by their libertine beliefs.

Moreover, as we have seen all too often, there is no such thing as a social liberal who is a strong fiscal conservative.  If you follow the voting records of the 535 members of Congress, you will find that, with few exceptions, it is an extinct political breed.  When you have a small God, you have a big government; when you have a big God, you have small government.  The vacuum must be filled with something.  Consequently, secular humanists will fill that vacuum of religious values with the "religious values" of big government.

Accordingly, it is no surprise that Kach is a big government statist, along with being a social liberal.  Among many fiscally liberal votes that Kach has cast in the legislature, he voted for Maryland's cap and trade law in 2006.  What happened to intruding on people's personal lives, Mr. Kach?  Or, does your doctrine of freedom only cover a libertine world view -  and not a libertarian one? 

If Kach has such a desire to join those who seek our moral destruction, why not join the Democrat Party?  We already have one party that is engaged in an inexorable battle to reshape the character of this great nation.  We need a choice, not an echo.

Only 30% of the Maryland House is comprised of elected Republicans.  They have absolutely no power.  Is it too much to ask that they all share our core values and basic understanding of fundamental concepts?  There is plenty of room in the Democrat Party for those like Wade Kach.   

The Residual Effects of MD Petition Drive

The unprecedented success of Maryland's petition drive against in-state tuition for illegals will reverberate far beyond the issue of immigration.  The successful execution of the petition drive, in conjunction with the innovative use of the internet, will serve to buttress Maryland conservatives in their inexorable battle against the one-party oligarchy.

Prior to the petition drive, there was simply no deterrent against the assault on our freedoms, values, and prosperity from Democrats in Annapolis.  They enjoy almost 3:1 majorities in both houses of the legislature and have an unbreakable grip over the courts.  Due to the way the districts are drawn in the state, Democrats never had to fear electoral reprisal or constituent backlash from their pernicious policies.  The petition has changed everything.

While we are not accorded the right to referendum for all budget related issues, thus precluding any usage of the petition against tax hikes, we can petition against any other law.  And the Democrats in Annapolis know this.

During the next (regular) legislative session, O'Malley plans to push for gay marriage.  However, we will no longer sit by and beg Baltimore City Democrats to oppose the bill.  We will now have an opportunity to place the marriage issue before the voters, once and for all.  If they were shocked by the auspicious results of the in-state tuition petition drive, Democrats will be stupefied by the success of a pro-marriage petition drive.  Conservative won't be the only ones to sign such a petition.  Many voters from the large black communities in Maryland will enthusiastically support the effort, in addition to the plethora of Catholic Democrats across the state.

Now that we have the power of the referendum petition behind us, Democrats will think twice before introducing unpopular legislation.  In Maryland, that is huge progress.

Proclaim Liberty Throughout the Land on this Independence Day

As Benjamin Franklin left Independence Hall after the Constitutional Convention, he was reportedly asked by a lady, "well doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"  He famously replied, "a republic, if you can keep it.”

Today, more than ever before, is a time to celebrate the roots of our founding - and resolve to preserve this republic as a paragon of liberty that we may bequeath to future generations.  As our nation comes under attack from the forces of tyranny within, we must reaffirm our commitment to the ideals of our founders and founding documents.

How unique that we celebrate our national holiday not on the day of our government's founding, nor the day on which the constitution was ratified, but on the day we became independent from tyranny and an over-imposing government.  On this day 235 years ago, the Continental Congress adopted the 1338-word Declaration of Independence in which we declared, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

235 years later, we find all of our founding principles under assault.  Many prominent political leaders in both parties seek to destroy our free markets, infringe upon our personal liberties, and abrogate our social values. Unfortunately, they have accrued a high level of success.

MD-Sen: Allan Kittleman Must Go

We have long argued that Republicans in Maryland cannot win by being Democrat-light.  Aside for the fact that Rinos don't inspire a following and fail to galvanize voters to their cause, they are automatic losers.  Once we adopt the views of the opposition, we have lost, period.  As such, even if we somehow enjoy electoral success, it is irrelevant because, in essence, we are not winning anything.

Nevertheless, that is the type of party which state Senator Allan Kittleman wants us to be.  He is advocating that we accept the most extreme positions of the Democrat Party, including the redefining of marriage to include...well, just about anything.  Kittleman is asserting that we must take cues from the Republican traitors in New York who voted for gay marriage.

It is very sad that we've descended to such moral decadency that we have Republicans who are advocating for such immorality - the degree to which has never been suggested until this generation.  While homosexuality has existed for a long time, nobody ever had the audacity to suggest that such a relationship constitutes a marriage.  One need not be overtly religious to appreciate that the basic legal definition of marriage is a special bond between one man and one woman.

If we are going to attenuate the meaning of marriage to the extent that it can include two men, why not change the other components of marriage, such as the number of parties involved?  Why not recognize polygamist marriages, or man-dog relationships?  I love my one-year-old son to death; can I marry him?  The concept of marriage is really not an enigma, except to those who are biased by their libertine beliefs.

Rep. Akin: 'At the Heart of Liberalism is a Hatred of God'

We need more people like Congressman Todd Akin in office.  The Missouri Congressman and Senate candidate recently said the following in an interview with Family Research Council director Tony Perkins regarding NBC's omission of "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance:

Well, I think NBC has a long record of being very liberal and at the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God and a belief that government should replace God. And so they’ve had a long history of not being at all favorable toward many of things that have been such a blessing to our country.These powerful works have liberals enraged. (HT: The Blaze) 

The Missouri Senate race is still under the radar of most politicos, as it is being overshadowed by some of the bigger contests.  However, we must begin choosing sides in some of the Senate primaries.  It was already becoming clear to me that Akin is the tested conservative in the race.  His perspicuous understanding of liberalism seals the deal with me.

New York Recognizes Gay "Marriage" with Help from Republicans

The universally excepted legal and moral definition of the term "marriage" has been the same for thousands of years.  Marriage is a special relationship that can only be consummated between one man and one woman.  The notion that a marriage can occur between two men is as fatuous as the idea that it can take place between multiple people or between humans and dogs.  It is the most radical perversion of liberalism, yet gay marriage passed the New York state legislature late Friday night with the help of Republicans!

How ironic that here in Maryland, where the Democrats enjoy a 3-1 majority in both houses, gay marriage failed.  But in New York, where Republicans control the Senate, it passed.  Four Republicans supported the measure, enabling it to pass the upper chamber 33-29, despite the GOP majority.  It is truly a tragic day when such radical imprecations to our country's moral founding are propagated by the supposed moral party.

Here are the four Republicans who will bear the shame for eternity.  They need to be defeated at all costs, even at the expense of handing the seats to Democrats.

Mark J. Grisanti
James S. Alesi
Stephen M. Saland
Roy J. McDonald

The most repugnant player of all is Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos.  Even though he voted against the bill, Skelos was instrumental in bringing the bill to the floor and enabling it to pass.  As Majority Leader he could have easily blocked the bill from ever reaching the floor.  Worse, Republicans in the Senate agreed to waive the requirement that the bill be available to the public for 72 hours prior to the vote.  I guess they felt gay marriage was such a national emergency that is couldn't wait another two days.

In the same vane, we should also applaud Senator Ruben Diaz, the sole Democrat to vocally and vigorously oppose the bill.

Here's a parting question for you run-of-the-mill, banal Republicans who scoff upon the importance of social issues.  How far does this nation have to degenerate before you stand on principle? 

Key votes on Abortion, DADT, START, and Gitmo This Week

Today's House Action Alerts.

Today, the House will consider two bills with some amendments that are important to conservatives.

 Abortion

After a period of morning speeches, the House will finish work on H.R. 1216- the fourth bill brought to the floor that defunds mandatory appropriations for an Obamacare program.  This bill rescinds all unobligated funds for graduate medical training programs created under Obamacare.  It also subjects the remaining appropriations to the annual discretionary spending process.  This will prevent the program from becoming a mandatory slush fund for Democrat special interests.

The critical vote on this bill is the Foxx Amendment (H. AMDT. 298, which prohibits funding for graduate medical institutions to be used for the purpose of training medical residents in abortion procedures.  Please call you member of Congress and request a yes vote on the Foxx anti-abortion Amendment. 

Defense

After work on H.R. 1216 is complete, the House will begin debating the FY 2012 Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 1540); along with a marathon amendment process which calls for votes on 152 amendments.  That means that we must watch the floor vigilantly.

MD-House: Call Your State Delegate and Preserve Marriage in MD

Yesterday, the Democrats on the state House Judicial Proceedings Committee had trouble rounding up their members to vote the gay marriage bill to the floor.  This gives us more time to flood their offices with emails.  All of the Republicans are definitive votes against this travesty.  Please email all of the Democrats on the Committee and demand that they preserve marriage in Maryland.

joseph.vallario@house.state.md.us,

kathleen.dumais@house.state.md.us,

tiffany.alston@house.state.md.us,

curt.anderson@house.state.md.us,

sam.arora@house.state.md.us,

 jill.carter@house.state.md.us,

luke.clippinger@house.state.md.us,

john.cluster@house.state.md.us,

frank.conaway@house.state.md.us,

don.dwyer@house.state.md.us,

michael.hough@house.state.md.us,

kevin.kelly@house.state.md.us,

susan.lee@house.state.md.us,

susan.mccomas@house.state.md.us,

mike.mcdermott@house.state.md.us,

keiffer.mitchell@house.state.md.us,

neil.parrott@house.state.md.us,

luiz.simmons@house.state.md.us,

michael.smigiel@house.state.md.us,

kris.valderrama@house.state.md.us,

geraldine.valentino@house.state.md.us,

jeff.waldstreicher@house.state.md.us

MD-Sen: So Much for Moderate Democrats like Jim Brochin

As Maryland continues to deteriorate into an abyss of social and moral deprivation, it is important to remember those who have enabled this deterioration.  Many pundits were initially skeptical that the Senate would have the audacity to pass gay marriage because they counted on a number of so called moderate Democrats to defect and oppose the capricious measure.  However, these pseudo moderates proved that they have always been radical leftists, and always will be.

Senator Jim Brochin (D-Towson) represents a swing district and has won his seat repeatedly by working assiduously to convince his constituents that he is a conservative Democrat.  Like many Democrats, including President Obama, Brochin always asserted that while he enthusiastically supported civil unions, he had qualms about redefining marriage.  However, as is the case with Obama, we all knew that Brochin really supported gay marriage, but lacked the temerity to openly advocate for its passage.  Instead, he ensconced his support for gay marriage under the guise of equality and the need for civil unions.

Conservatives have known for quite some time that the push for civil unions would be the antecedent to gay marriage.  Senator Brochin knew that as well.  This is why he waited for his ultra left-wing compatriots in the legislator to propose the bill in the Judiciary Committee (where Brochin sits) in order to make his final move.  While his final support for the bill was not surprising to those of us who have followed his career, his explanation was preposterous. 

The Stalwart Fiscal Conservative Who is Socially Liberal? Non-Existent

As our annual CPAC gathering kicks off today with the sponsorship of the gay Republican GoProud organization, it is important to understand something about socially liberal "conservatives".  They don't exist. Period. (O.K. there is Jeff Flake on DADT, but he is still 100% pro life).

American conservatism is comprised of three indissoluble principles; social values, national defense, and classic economic liberalism.  A movement that includes those who categorically reject one of those ethos is not a big tent.  It is a circus.  That is because those who reject social values or national defense will indubitably reject fiscal conservatism as well.  How many self proclaimed social liberal/fiscal conservative Republicans are indeed stalwart, intrepid, and truculent in their defense of the free market and liberty?  Very few, indeed, and certainly not anyone who is associated with GoProud.

As Erick Erickson observes at Red State,GoProud has worked to undermine conservatives throughout their existence, even if that meant teaming up with the SEIU.  If these clowns were in the trenches fighting our battles for limited government and a robust America-first foreign policy, we would be more inclined to accept this group.  However, GoProud, along with every other self proclaimed conservative socially liberal group, has been missing in action as it relates to the issues that are important to authentic conservatives.  That is because conservatism without the social values is like a body without a soul.  It is lifeless.  Thus, they expend their efforts assiduously pushing their hard left social agenda, with no regard for any fiscal or national security issue.

Conversely, it is the inimitable social conservatives like Jim DeMint and Michelle Bachmann who are inexorable in their defense of national security and free market economics.

This is not the time to begin reaching out to fair-weather gay conservatives whose motives are dubious at best.  Social conservatism is under assault on every front; from the repeal of DADT and the integration of women in combat, to the proliferation of gay marriage throughout the states.  In my home state of Maryland, even the former Republican Senate leader is joining with Democrats to make the Old Line State the 6th state that recognizes gay marriage.

We must work indefatigably now, more than ever, to reassert ourselves over social issues and not cede the battleground to the left.  Are we prepared to eschew the core values that we seek to promote because of contrived "generational changes"?

Let there be no ambiguity concerning the motives of socially liberal "conservatives".  If they are willing to abjure some conservative values due to generational shifts, they will easily surrender the rest of the policy battlefield to the whims of the left.

As Social Conservatism Demises, So Does all Conservatism

Despite the triumphant ascendancy of conservatism in our times, many Republicans are impetuously 'punting on first down' in the battle for social conservatism.  Some prominent GOPers feel that not only is social conservatism not a priority, it is something that should be unconditionally and unilaterally surrendered to the left.  There are elected Republicans supporting the repeal of DADT, radical homosexual organizations sponsoring CPAC, and party leaders supporting a pro-abortion woman for chairman of the party.  Today, I came across a story of a local Republican leader advocating for gay civil unions in my home state of Maryland.

The Republicans are down to a pitiful 12 seat caucus in the Maryland Senate.  Twelve!  Yet, even the remaining holdouts won't stand up for conservatism.  What's worse is that the minority leader, RINO Allan Kittleman, is planning to introduce a bill next week that will recognize civil unions in the state of Maryland.  His proposal would give couples entering in a civil union the same rights given to married couples.  The amazing thing is that Kittleman represents part of Carroll County, one of the most conservative jurisdictions in Maryland.  The Columbia Flyer explains Kittleman's rationale:

“I believe that the government shouldn’t be involved in marriage,” Kittleman said. “I think the government should be involved in civil unions.”

That belief, and his views on civil rights, are what prompted him to draft this legislation, Kittleman said.

“This is something I have felt strongly about for a long time,” he said, noting that with several new state senators elected in the November mid-term elections, it is “a good time to put in new ideas and to see where people stand.”

What exactly does he mean by recognizing government’s role in civil unions, but not in marriage?  What planet is he living in?!?  Also, he says that this is an issue that he feels strongly about.  So let's get this straight.  The Democrats control every facet of government in Maryland and the leader of the rag-tag Republican caucus feels strongly about supporting a Democrat cause!  So why doesn’t he just become a Democrat?  We already have a robust party that spits on our American values, infringes on our rights, and destroys our free markets.  Now we are saddled with an Orwellian opposition leader who pushes left wing legislation even before the ruling party gets a chance.  This is a question that we need to confront not just in Maryland, but across our nation.  Do we really need two left hands in public policy?

8 Republicans, Including Ensign and Burr Support Immoral Military

Here is a list of the Republicans who supported the repeal of DADT and the undermining of our troops during a time of war. 

Richard Burr of North Carolina, Mark Kirk of Illinois, John Ensign of Nevada, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, George Voinovich of Ohio, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Ensign and Burr?  Unfortunately, Burr just took his reelection and ran with it.  He has voted for some other un-American pieces of legislation since November, such as the FDA farm takeover.  The real shock of the night is the fact that sleazy Ensign voted along with it.  Who saw that coming?  Then again, based upon his lack of regard for the sanctity of marriage, it is no surprise that he spits on conservative values.  The difference between the two Senators is that Ensign is up for reelection this year and is already vulnerable.  He needs to be defeated at all costs.  

And what about Scott Brown?  I am convinced that he is the biggest liar in the history of politics.  In the time span of less than a year, Brown has supported every far left, corrupt, "political chicanery" that he railed against during his election.  I hope the Democrats defeat him in 2012. 

A List of Red District Dems Who Voted for Social Engineering in the Military

There is a broad misconception among the election handicappers that the Republicans picked the electoral map clean.  The fact is that there is still room to grow, as there are blue dogs who were almost defeated and will be prime targets in 2012.  We need to start keeping a tally of these Pelosi lapdogs and publicize every instance in which they vote with the far left.  Let's start with their support for social engineering in the barracks during a time of war.  Here is a list of 14 Dems who reside in culturally conservative districts, and will stand for election in 2012, that voted for the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell (H.R. 2965).

Jason Altmire (PA-4)
John Barrow (GA-12)
Sanford Bishop (GA-2)
Leonard Boswell (IA-3)
Ben Chandler (KY-6)
Jim Cooper (TN-5)
Joe Donnelly (IN-2)
Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8)
Tim Holden (PA-17)
Larry Kissell (NC-8)
Bill Owens (NY-23)
Gary Peters (MI-9)
Heath Schuler (NC-11)
Chuck Yarmuth (KY-3)

Now, there are obviously many more blue dogs who supported this bill, but were defeated in November.  They figure that they can flip the birdie to their constituents one more time.  It is these 14 however, whom we must remind their constituents in 2012 that they are not the social conservatives that they profess to be.