Weekly RINO Roundup

 Here is the latest roundup from RINOLand.

- Lindsey Grahamnesty is teaming up with Chuck Schumer for a new round of Amnesty.

- Scott Brown joins Democrats in proposing S. 248- to grant states the right to apply for waivers from portions of Obama Care.   Sound good?  Well, the reason why Democrats support this is because it will obviate the lawsuits against Obama Care by denying the states standing in court to contest this law.

- Dick Lugar tells Tea Party to "get real" over the START Treaty.  Hey Dick, maybe you ought to sit in the next session of the Russian Duma and actually listen to their interpretation of the preamble of the treaty.  Indeed it does affect our missile defense capabilities.  And it was all orchestrated at the expense of our British allies.  Your the one who needs to get real, Lugar.  Maybe when you are tossed from the Senate next year and spend some time with your Indiana constituents, you will be exposed to the reality that you have rejected during your entire career.

-Mark Kirk says he is opened to raising the debt limit.  But fear not; he supports big spending cuts.

- John Boehner supports Obama on Egypt in an interview with Meet The Press.  I'm a bit perturbed that I have to add the Speaker to the list this week.  However, I find it very disconcerting that the Republicans have totally caved to Obama on his support for the overthrow of Mubarak.  Whether it was inevitable or not, it was not in our best interests.  The fact that Obama has not been called out on his hypocrisy over Iran and the impending danger in Jordon as a result of his rejection of our Arab "allies" is really disappointing.

- Congressman Steven Loutorette (R-OH) and the Tuesday Rino Group lunch bunch are planning their own budget that will be a “more equitable approach”.  I guess $61 billion in cuts out of $3.7 trillion in spending is to harsh for them.

- Jon Kyl announced that they would not allow for a government shutdown.  Unfortunately, Paul Ryan echoed those sentiments as well.  Aside for the fact that conservatives argue on the merits of their aversion to a government shutdown, why show your cards before the fight begins?  Even if you are ultimately willing to compromise with Democrats in order to preclude a shutdown, why inform them now and lose your leverage?  Classic Senate Republican strategy!

List of 583 Amendments for Continuing Resolution

For those who are following the cumbersome and tedious debate of the amendment process for the CR (HR 1), here is a great resource from the House Republican Conference.  They offer a brief summary of the 583 amendments.

MD Legislature: Support Immigration Enforcement Now

While illegal aliens continue to commit violent crimes in Maryland, the Democrats in the legislature are more concerned with gay marriage, abolishing the death penalty, raising taxes, imposing draconian driving regulations, and expelling corporations from the state.  Earlier this week, an illegal abducted a women in PG County, the most infested jurisdiction in Maryland.  Upon his arrest, the local police discovered that he was deported two years ago and somehow found his way back in the country. [With only 15% of the border fully secure, it is no wonder] Here is the scoop from the Washington Post:

Haley Barbour, 2012, and the Need for a Focus on Illegal Immigration

Haley Barbour has been under fire for his stance on immigration after Time Magazine published a Justice Department filing showing that Barbour lobbied for amnesty.  The filings show that Barbour was part of a lobbying team that was commissioned by the Mexican embassy to lobby for a pathway to citizenship for illegals in 2001. 

Here are some of the details about the amnesty provisions that he was seeking.

At the time, Mexico was seeking an extension of a provision that allowed undocumented immigrants living in the United States to receive legal visas or green cards without returning to their country of origin, provided they pay an additional fine. In practice, the provision generally helped out undocumented family members of legal immigrants or undocumented immigrants who were eligible for visas based upon certain job skills. Without the provision in place, undocumented immigrants who received legal papers had to return to their country of origin, for three or 10 years, before returning to the U.S. The Congressional Research Service estimated that an extension would put benefit about 300,000 undocumented immigrants.

At first, I was hesitant to excogitate any further on this issue because it appeared to be yet another hatchet job on Haley Barbour from the liberal media.  Any conservative must always be circumspect of any liberal exposé about a conservative deviating from conservatism.  After all, they certainly have no penchant for our views.

20 Blue Dog Frauds Vote Against Budget Cuts

The remaining 26 members of the Blue Dog Coalition proudly describe themselves as fiscal conservatives in order to retain their seats.  Well, any member of this two faced caucus that cannot support the GOP Leadership's diminutive $61 billion in cuts is a complete fraud.

Incidentally, only 8 Democrats, and just 5 of the 25 Blue Dogs (Giffords is absent, of course) voted for the resolution to debate H.R. 1- the FY 2011 CR.  Even big mouth Heath Schuler, who fashions himself as a conservative democrat leader, opposed the bill.  Here is a list of the 20 Pelosi Puppies who need to be called on the carpet in 2012, when they attempt to promulgate fiscal conservatism:

1. Joe Baca (CA-43)
2. John Barrow (GA-12), Co-Chair for Policy
3. Sanford Bishop (GA-2)
4. Leonard Boswell (IA-3)
5. Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)
6. Ben Chandler (KY-6)
7. Jim Cooper (TN-5)
8. Jim Costa (CA-20)
9. Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
10. Joe Donnelly (IN-2)
11. Jane Harman (CA-36)
12. Tim Holden (PA-17)
13. Mike McIntyre (NC-7)
14. Collin Peterson (MN-7)
15. Loretta Sanchez (CA-47)
16. Adam Schiff (CA-29)
17. Kurt Schrader (OR-5)
18. David Scott (GA-13)
19. Heath Shuler (NC-11), Co-Chair for Administration
20. Mike Thompson (CA-1)

John Cornyn Over Lamar Alexander for Senate Whip

Jon Kyl's sudden retirement announcement has set off a domino effect on the ambitions of several Senate Republicans.  When Senator Kyl retires in 2012, he will be vacating the position of Senate (Majority, most likely) Whip, in addition to his Arizona Senate seat.  Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (RINO, TN), the 3rd ranking member in the GOP leadership, has announced that he will seek the Whip position.  Senator John Cornyn, the Chairman of the NRSC, will challenge Alexander for that key leadership role.  Also, if Alexander vacates his current position as Conference chair, there will be a race to succeed him.

For most of the past few months, we have focused on the House and its committee and leadership structure.  As jarring as the flaws of the Republican leadership in the House are, the Senate is much worse.  It is therefore imperative that we begin pressuring Republicans to make the right leadership choices in 2012.  This will be especially cogent as the GOP is likely to gain control over the Senate. 


Being that the Whip is charged with rounding up the necessary votes for our side, it is vital that the new Whip vote the right way in the first place.  Ideally, we would want somebody in the mold of Jim DeMint or Jeff Sessions.  However, if it becomes a choice between Lamar Alexander and John Cornyn, as it appears to be, the decision is simple.  Although John Cornyn is far from perfect, Lamar Alexander is a RINO who has no business representing such a conservative state to begin with, much less serve in leadership.  Let's compare their voting records.

Red Meat Conservative is Now On Twitter

You can now follow our latest opinion pieces and legislative updates on Twitter @ RMConservative.  Yay!  We are finally in the 21st century!

Mike Pence and Jim DeMint Propose Real Tax Reform

Once again, it is Mike Pence and Jim DeMint leading the way.  Today, they introduced The Tax Relief Certainty Act, legislation that would make the Bush tax cuts permanent.  Here are the main provisions of the bill:

• Make permanent the 2001 and 2003 individual income tax relief for all hard-working Americans- preserving the 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% income tax brackets, rather than allowing President Obama and Democrats to increase the top tax bracket to 39.6% and increase taxes on the lowest earning Americans in the bottom 10% bracket.
• Permanently repeal the immoral and unfair death tax, which increases from 35% to 55% on Jan. 1, 2013. Permanent repeal of the death tax would increase GDP by $118.8 billion and lead to $23.3 billion per year in new federal revenue;
• Prevent the tax increase on capital gains and dividends income for all Americans, rather than allowing the Democrats to increase the rates to 20% from the current 15%; and
• Permanently patch the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).

While there are many priorities for the Republican run House, this bill should receive an up or down vote in the near future.

Hill Poll: 53% Support Private Retirement Accounts

According to a new poll commissioned by The Hill, likely voters are in favor of private accounts by 53%-36%.  But, you wouldn't realize it from the title and narrative of the accompanying article in the Hill.  The title of the article is, "Voters troubled over future of Social Security".  They proceed to discuss how most people are concerned about Social Security solvency, but are split 40-48% on whether to raise the retirement age.  It's not until the end of the article that they mention the fact that the Public Opionion Research poll actually inquired about private retirement accounts.  Here is how they ensconced the majority support for privatization in their results:

Voters were also split over whether to allow people to invest the Social Security taxes they pay into personal retirement accounts, an idea that was a linchpin of then-President George W. Bush’s plan to reform the program.

Thirty-six percent of likely voters believe diverting payroll taxes to personal accounts should not be permitted at all, while 37 percent backed being able to invest either 25 percent or 50 percent. Sixteen percent supported the ability to invest three-fourths or all of one’s Social Security taxes.

Notice how they say that voters are split on the issue instead of decisively stating that a majority support private accounts.  They begin by saying that 36% oppose privatization, while 37% back investment of up to 50%.  However, when you add the additional 16% who support a majority privatization, there is a clear majority who support some sort of privatization.  The Hill declines to tally the numbers and lead off with the headline, "Majority Support Privatization".

Keep in mind that most political consultants believed that this issue is a profound liability to the party.  Most Republicans only call for a small percentage of privatization, and yet, a clear majority support up to 50% privatization.  I hope the Republican strategists are able to read between the lines, even if the media tries to obscure the truth about public sentiment for private property and ownership of one's own retirement.

The reality is that young voters cannot be forced into a confiscatory system which continues to raise the age at which they can receive their money- without offering a way to opt out.  I don't mind raising the retirement age for those who want to continue in the system, but there must be a private option. 

Gabrielle Giffords as the Democrat Political Human Shield in Arizona

In light of Jon Kyl's surprise retirement announcement last week, conservatives are presented with a unique opportunity to elect an unabashed conservative from the deep red state of Arizona.  The Republicans have super majorities in both houses of the legislature and control every statewide elected office.  As Arizona becomes more conservative, there is a plethora of solid candidates, which if elected, would serve as an improvement over Jon Kyl.  Once the Democrats destroyed Arizona's borders and opposed SB 1070, they were banished from electoral politics across the state.  Presumably, there would be no viable chance for the Democrats to turn over this seat.  But, the Democrats have a trick up their sleeve; run Gabrielle Giffords.

Ever since the tragic shooting in Tucson, the Democrats have employed every insidious tool at their disposal to score much needed political points from the tragedy.  Based upon Obama's poll numbers, it appears that they have succeeded to some degree.  Now, they are plotting to run Giffords for the Senate seat even before she recovers.  They figure that Republicans will not have the effrontery to oppose her.

Let's be clear.  Our hearts go out to Congresswomen Giffords and her family as we wish her the most complete and speedy recovery possible.  However, that does not mean that we should place emotions ahead of national interests by surrendering a Senate seat to her.

Lt. Col. Allen West Delivers a Rousing Closer at CPAC

Watch the whole speech here.  He gave a much needed defense of the imperitive to keep the three legged conservative stool in tact.  He touches on social and foreign policy conservatism, issues that have been largely neglected by other conservatives.

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.

Jon Huntsman's Presidential Bid is Dead on Arrival

As former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman ponders a presidential run following his resignation as ambassador to China, it is important to understand who he is. Here are some of his greatest hits:

Stimulus: "It’s easy to criticize the bill and if you don’t like it, you don’t have to take the money. It’s pretty simple.
I guess in hindsight we can all say that there were some fundamental flaws with it. It probably wasn’t large enough and, number two, there probably wasn’t enough stimulus effect. For example, a payroll tax exemption or maybe even a cut in the corporate tax…for small and medium-sized businesses for three years, for example.
We will take the money ... The size of about a trillion dollars was floated by Mark Zandi, who’s a very respected economist. I tend to believe what he is saying about the size of the package, which didn’t necessarily hit the mark in terms of size." (Interview with Politico, 2/24/09)

Gays: "I’ve always been in favor of greater equality. My first year in office I ran a…reciprocal beneficiary rights piece of legislation. It failed, but my first year in office I wanted to see if we could do more in the name of individual rights. And I’ve always thought that we were a little bit behind in terms of equality for people born under the same constitution." (Interview with Politico, 2/24/09)

Environment: "We’ve drifted a little bit from intellectual honesty in the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt, for example, where they would use rigorous science to back up many of their policies, and in this case many of their environmental policies. Richard Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency. We declared the war on cancer.
A lot of intellectual rigor went into the policies of those days, and we’ve drifted a little bit from taking seriously the importance of science to buttress much of what we’re doing today." (Interview with Politico, 2/24/09)

A pro stimulus, gay marriage, open borders, no growth environmentalist, Obama's point man on capitulation to China for President?  You decide.

Maryland Democrats Continue their War on Jobs

Last month, we reported on the Baltimore City bottle tax that has prompted Pepsi to cease their soda production and eliminate 70 jobs.  Now, Democrats in the state legislature are proposing a bill that would increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour by 2013.  This is another teachable moment for liberal economics.  Amidst record unemployment, particularly among teens and part time minimum wage workers, Maryland Democrats are trying to encumber the creators of those jobs.  This bill will induce long term unemployment in many low wage industries.  Then again, most of those jobs are being filled by illegal aliens in Maryland anyway.

We need to continue to be vigilant during the closing weeks of the legislative session.  Democrats will employ every tool in their arsenal to attenuate our state and local economy.  They plan to introduce a 10-cent hike in gas taxes, an increase an vehicle registration fees, and a higher liquor tax.  Maryland conservatives really need to mobilize, or be prepared to leave this socialist land of fruits and nuts. 

NC-7: Conservative War Hero Ilario Pantano to Run Again

Lt. Ilario Pantano

Among the several war heroes that were elected to the 112th congress, Ilario Pantano was one of the few who came up short.  Lieutenant Pantano was one of the Marines who were egregiously slandered and accused of killing civilians in Haditha, Iraq.  In 2010, he challenged blue dog fraud, Mike McIntyre for his NC-7 congressional seat, but came up surprisingly short.  This Wilmington based congressional district is conservative leaning and is ripe for picking in 2012.  It is heartening to here that Pantano is planning to give it another try.  Here is a quote from an email that Pantano circulated to his supporters:

"Does it seem that the Democratic leadership is ill-prepared for the security or foreign policy challenges of the day? Would you have retreated from Iraq in 2007 like Barack Obama and Mike McIntyre wanted to? Allow me the opportunity to protect you and your families from the wolves at the door. Our borders must be secured, and our enemies must be made sure of our seriousness of purpose. You know that after fighting two wars as a U.S. Marine, I have the scars to prove I mean business." 

We need more war heroes in congress who will focus on American-centered foreign policy and our crisis along the southern border.  Over the next year, we will follow this congressional race closely.

Hey Barack, Resign Now, and Now Means Yesterday

While our nation languishes amidst record food and energy prices, unprecedented underemployment (including those excluded from the workforce) and economic stagnation, crippling regulations, and an administration in contempt of two court decisions, the media would rather distract us with the Islamist uprising in Egypt.  It is imperative that we keep up the pressure on Obama and the Democrats by denying them the opportunity to preclude our attention from more relevant and ominous domestic problems.  On the other hand, there is one salient question that we should excogitate from Obama's handling of the Egyptian insurgency.  If Obama is willing to listen to the protesters of a foreign country due to their grievances from high food and energy prices and an unresponsive government, shouldn't he accede to the similar demands of his own citizens and resign immediately?

As a direct result of Obama's assiduous depredation of the private sector, there are a record number of people who are unemployed or underemployed.  For those who are lacking sufficient income, their most vital needs include food, energy, and health care are among  Yet, this President has used every tool at his disposal (including illegal ones) to ensure that the cost of production or delivery of each vital sector of our economy has burgeoned exponentially.

Through this President's continued support of ethanol mandates, subsidies, and tariffs, the price of essential food commodities has risen sharply, as corn is the antecedent of the food chain.  Almost 40% of corn grown in this country is now used for an ineffective and potentially environmentally degrading fuel.  In addition, the President has done everything in his power to mandate and subsidize the production and usage of under-performing and deleterious sources of energy.  This, along with his slavish devotion to the Fed's policy of quantitative easing (QE2), has artificially and gratuitously spiked the cost of food and energy commodities.

Happy 100th Birthday Mr. President

President Ronald Reagan, that is!

Conservatives in the Senate Demand More Spending Cuts

Ever since the November electoral triumph, we were eagerly anticipating the budget cuts the would be implemented by House Republicans.  They promised $100 billion in cuts for FY 2011, and although that is a paltry sum in relation to our deficit, it seemed like a prudent start.  Unfortunately, they announced last week that there would only be $32 billion in cuts for the remainder of the fiscal year.  This is simply unacceptable.  The federal deficit stands at $14.1 trillion, while our annual budget is slated to top $1.6 trillion.  In fact, our monthly deficits have appreciated to over $100 billion.  Yet, the Republicans cannot even commit to a comparable deduction for a full year!

It is heartening to see that Conservative members of the Senate sent House Republicans a letter imploring them to implement the full $100 billion in cuts this year.  Here is a list of the 12 members who signed the letter:

Ron Johnson of Wisconsin
Mike Lee of Utah
Rand Paul of Kentucky
Marco Rubio of Florida 
Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania
Sen. Demint of South Carolina
Tom Coburn of Oklahoma
John Ensign of Nevada
Mike Enzi of Wyoming
Mike Johanns of Nebraska 
David Vitter of Louisiana

It's good to see that we are reaping the benefits from the freshmen who we worked so hard to elect.  Although, it is a bit disappointing that Robert Portman, Kelly Ayotte, and Jim Moran are not on the list.  Either way, we must keep up the pressure throughout the next month as we come to a crossroads with the Continuing Resolution and the debt limit deadline.

Weekly RINO Roundup

 Recently, I began a weekly roundup of RINO news so we can be vigilant of what we are up against within our own party.  Here is just a sample of some of this week's headlines.


Lisa Murkowski Blasts GOP on Obama Care Repeal- (And this is what we get from Alaska?  I seriously would rather have had the Democrat win than put up with her for another six years.)

Dick Lugar Pushes for "Clean Energy Standard"- (which will destroy jobs, raise prices for vital goods and services on the poor, and slow economic growth)

Lisa Murkowski proposes inter-party bi-partisan lunches to sing kumbaya and extend the SOTU night dating to other venues.

Bill Shuster (R-PA) and John Mica (R-FL) support Obama's runaway rail project. ( When Republican were in the minority they took pride in the fact that every member of the conference opposed the stimulus.  Now, it appears that in the majority, two of the top members of the House Transportation Committee will be supporting Stimulus II.)

Lindsey Graham opposes Balanced Budget Amendment as a bottom line concession for raising the debt limit. (In other words, he only supports bi-partisan compromises, a.k.a. ones that completely sell out to the Dems.)

John McCain calls for Mubarak to step down. ( Well, who exactly should step up?  This is just another example of Republicans circling the wagons around Obama in his effort to duplicate the 79' Iranian Islamist revolution.  Does he have the temerity to call for Obama's resignation in light of his subversion of democracy by being in contempt of court over the health care and oil drilling regulations?)

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Democrat Support for Repeal of 1099 Provision is Self Indictment

Mitch McConnell plans to offer his health care repeal amendment (S.A. 13) to the FAA authorization bill later this evening.  Every Democrat, including the bald faced liars like Joe Manchin, plan to support a budget point of order to scuttle this amendment.  However, in order to buttress red state Democrats from electoral reprisal,  Debbie Stabenow plans to offer an alternative amendment (S.A. 9) that would only repeal the onerous 1099 filing provision.  Even Chuck Schumer says that most Democrats support this amendment.

Here is a question that needs to be asked by Republicans on the floor of the Senate.  How can you so categorically reject something that you wholeheartedly supported just a year ago?  What has changed now?  It's not like they could claim that circumstances have shown this mandate to be a burden because it hasn't even taken effect yet.  Isn't this a self indictment that they knowingly vote for bills that even according to their ideology would be detrimental to their constituents?  Yet, we are supposed to believe that the rest of the bill was voted on in good faith.  What other nefarious pieces of legislation do they knowingly support for political reasons?

Maybe we ought to take to the streets to demand that they repeal health care.  Hey, if protesters in Egypt can get Obama to support their cause, why can't we?  Or, is he more amenable to the Muslim Brotherhood than the Tea Party?

The Left's War on Food for Poor Continues

Last week, we reported on the record number of Americans enrolled in the food stamp program.  As we observe the efforts of the left to drive up the cost of food, there is no wonder why so many people are having trouble feeding their families.  Their policies mandating the use of corn as fuel, as well as the inflationary aspects of the Fed's recent QE2 policies, have kept the cost of food high for a long time.  Now, Obama's EPA is working on a proposal to increase the percentage of ethanol in gasoline from 10% to 15%.  What about its effect on food prices?  Let them use food stamps, says Obama's government.

It's ironic that the government plans to augment ethanol mandates even as poor and developing countries are facing skyrocketing food prices.  There is no doubt that ethanol is one of the culprits behind the economic upheaval that led to the political turmoil in Egypt.  Egypt has to import most of their wheat, and with grain-based commodities rising as a result of increased ethanol production, Egyptians simply cannot afford a loaf of bread.  Almost 40% of corn produced in the U.S. is used for this substandard fuel, yet it is still not enough of a poverty enhancer for the left.  Yes, the very same left that purports to care about the impoverished and the third world.

In addition to its disastrous effects on the food supply, this decision could turn out to be dangerous for motorists.  Higher bio-fuel blends have already been tested and have shown a propensity to melt the gas pumps and storage tanks!  Furthermore, even the EPA has come out with a long report detailing the negative environmental effects that ethanol production has on the water and soil.  So, we have a situation in which mandates, tariffs, and tax credits enrich the government/corporate complex, while driving up the cost of fuel and food on the poor and actually harming the environment.  Who are the ones to care for the poor and the environment again?

Meanwhile, potential presidential candidate Newt Gingrich gave a speech defending ethanol in...Iowa! (The WSJ has a great write-up on Newt's corn boondoggle here.) He can join Senator John Thune as a presidential candidate who is willing to peddle corporate cronyism in order to win Iowa.

Mubarak is not a Great Ally, But What's the Alternative?

There are some apologists for Mubarak who contend that he is a great ally of the U.S. and a strategic partner for Israel. Other wizards of smart like John Kerry and the Bush foreign policy crowd feel that we should actively side with the Muslim Brotherhood to overthrow Mubarak. There are some good columns out today explaining why they are both wrong. The bottom line is that Mubarak is not such a strong ally and doesn't deserve $1.5 billion in aid; however, the alternative is much, much worse. To that end, it would be Carteresque to support the "democratic" protesters. 

- Here is Max Boot's Op-ed in the WSJ detailing Mubarak's efforts to undermine Israel and turn a blind eye to the Muslim Brotherhood. Nonetheless, it is clear that the vacuum of his departure would be filled with real nefarious characters.

- Caroline Glick has a great piece in today's Jerusalem Post explaining the coalition between the anti-colonialist left and the Bush democracy peddlers in their pursuit to overthrow Mubarak. They are both misguided in their lack of insight into the Muslim world.

- Bret Stephens of the WSJ explains why he thinks that Mubarak his playing his cards prudently and that the revolution will eventually fizzle.

It is disturbing to see the GOP circle the wagons around the administration and John Kerry by supporting regime change.  It is also disconcerting to see fellow Massachusetts politician Mitt Romney call for Mubarak to resign.  Would these politicians support the protesters in Jordon to overthrow King Abdullah?  Unlike Mubarak, he is a true ally.  Worse yet, the Jordanian people are even more radical than the Egyptians (70% of them are Palestinian).  Don't they understand the consequenses of their actions?

We cannot afford another Iranian revolution paradigm in which we oust a dictator in favor of an Islamist state.  Then again, when we have someone like Dick Lugar leading the Republican foreign policy in the Senate, would you expect anything different?

Mitch McConnell Appoints Mediocre Chairmen to Most Committees

Here is a list of the new Republican Ranking Members of the 16 standing Committees in the Senate.

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry  
Pat Roberts

Appropriations 
 Thad Cochran
Armed Services 
John McCain
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
Richard Shelby
Budget
Chuck Grassley
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Energy and Natural Resources
Lisa Murkowski
Environment and Public Works
James Inhofe
Finance
Chuck Grassley
Foreign Relations
Richard Lugar
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Michael Enzi
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Susan Collins
Judiciary
Jeff Sessions
Rules and Administration
Mitch McConnell
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
Olympia Snowe
Veterans' Affairs 
 Richard Burr

If you thought that some of the choices for House committee chairmen were dismal, most of the Senate picks are scandalous.  The biggest rinos like Snowe, Collins, McCain, Hutchison, and Lugar are ranking members of standing committees.  And yes, Lisa Murkowski is the ranking member of  the Energy Committee!  Way to go Mitch McConnell.  On top of that, we have the biggest porker, Thad Cochran as head of Approps.  And Mr. gays in the military, Richard Burr, as head of Veterans Affairs.  The only good picks were Inhofe and Sessions.  At this rate, it will take a decade for the conservative members to overpower the rinos with seniority.

Update on House Conservative Legislation

The major legislation that was debated and voted on this past week was HR 38, the FY 2011 Budget Resolution..  This bill will limit non-defense discretionary spending to no higher than 2008 levels.  The Democrats are complaining about the ambivalence of the exact budget numbers, but Republicans are merely repairing a budget that was never dealt with a year ago.  This is a nice start but more needs to be done.  Here is an update on some other budget and non budget related bills that should be a priority for conservatives.

• Dr. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) introduced a tort reform bill that is being designated as H.R. 5.  This is one of the most direct causes of high health care costs and must be taken up immediately.  Here is a brief summary of the provisions in this bill from The Hill:

"Among other things, the bill would limit the number of years a plaintiff has to file a legal claim against medical practitioners and ensure that doctors are only liable for the portion of a procedure for which they are at fault. The latter provision would limit the ability of a plaintiff's lawyers to seek "deep pockets" in a legal challenge.
The bill also ensures that more monetary awards would go to patients, not patients' lawyers, puts "reasonable limits" on punitive damages and allows states to maintain their own damage award caps."

Rand Paul is Right on Foreign Aid

Unfortunately, we often work assiduously to elect an alleged conservative who upon assumption of office, vacillates between the right and the center. Thankfully, that has not been the case with Rand Paul.  He has not wasted time being a timid, freshman, do-nothing Senator.  In his first few weeks, he has had the temerity to push for private retirement accounts, reform of birthright citizenship, and has formed the Senate tea party caucus.  His greatest accomplishment to date is his blockbuster budget plan which calls for $500 billion in cuts per year, not just per decade!

One of components of our budget that would be targeted for elimination is foreign aid.  Liberals in the media and "pro-Israel" groups are trying to drive a wedge between fiscal conservatives and foreign policy conservatives by suggesting that Rand Paul is being anti-Israel by cutting their foreign aid.

On the surface, this is obviously a flagrantly disingenuous argument because the plan eliminates all foreign aid, not just Israel's.  The reality is that we must prioritize our budgetary needs in order to achieve fiscal solvency before we borrow more money from China to aid other nations.

However, a deeper perspicacity of the issue of foreign policy in general, and the Middle East in particular, illuminates a more salient question that is ignored by the media.  What does it mean to be pro-Israel?  Let's present two world philosophies vis-à-vis Israel; the conservative and the liberal view, and determine which is more advantageous for our ally.

Liberal View

1. Grant Israel several billion dollars of economic and military aid.
2. Use that aid to coerce, castigate, and threaten them into handing over their territory to Islamo-fascists, for the purpose of creating a 22nd Arab state and 2nd Palestinian state.  Every check point, military operation, or act of self defense must be cleared with Washington.
3.  While giving foreign aid to Israel, Washington simultaneously grants billions of dollars of economic and military aid to all of their enemies like Fatah Palestinians, Lebanon (ostensibly Hezbollah), Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.  In addition, they train the Palestinian military and supply them with all the weapons they need to assail Israel.

Conservative View

1. Limited or no aid to Israel as we must balance our own budget.  Israel is thankfully in a stronger position than it was when we began the foreign aid program.
2. As a result, there are no strings attached and no promulgating of the "piss process".
3. Absolutely no weapons, aid, or military training for terrorist entities or Muslim states that threaten Israel or anyone else.

To any true pro-Israel policy thinker, the choice is quite obvious.  But, for those liberals at AIPAC, the most important thing is to perpetuate the status quo of funding Israel, while funding their enemies, and mandating a Palestinian state.  It often appears that they would be satisfied with a robust; U.S. armed and equipped "Palestinian state", as long as Israel would continue to receive its sacrosanct aid.  We must remind them that aid to Israel is not an ends to itself.  It is a means to achieve greater security for Israel, and by extension, America.  If we continue to implement broader policies that negate and countervail that aid, it should be discontinued.  Maybe these hypocritical leftists ought to examine their own views regarding Israel before they slander American conservatives who are Israel's best friends in the world.

Personally, I favor a plan that would cut 90% of foreign aid instead of scuttling it completely.  While allies like Israel, South Korea, and Taiwan no longer need economic assistance, it is in our strategic interest to send them military aid.  A strong reaffirmation of our military assistance to Taiwan would send a powerful message to China, especially at a time when we are projecting weakness on that front.  A further bolstering of South Korea's military would also send a message to....China again!  And, the continuation of some military aid to Israel would project a much needed posture towards her enemies that are currently aided by... U.S. taxpayers.

However, when confronted with a choice between the status quo which funds friends and foes of America, or Rand Paul's across the board cut in foreign aid, there should be no ambivalence from conservatives.  Let's call out these pseudo pro-Israel organizations on their own hypocritical priorities and deny them the opportunity to drive a wedge between conservatives.

Biden Supports Despotism in Egypt

After doing nothing to support the democratic revolutions in Tunisia and Sudan, the President had the gall to take credit for them during his State of the Union Address.  Now, as protesters are on the bring of overthrowing Islamo-fascist Hosni Mubarak, Joe Biden is supporting Mubarak.  The Egyptian government has suspended the remaining liberties that are granted to their citizens, yet the administration has not suspended a red cent of the $1.3 billion in foreign aid to the regime.  This, from the Christian Science Monitor:

Liberal Economics: Drive up Cost of Food on Poor, While Benefiting Corporate Donors

The Democrats have thrived in public office since FDR by cementing their power through the perpetuation of government and subsidization of poverty.  Pick an industry and the name of the game is the same.  They blow up the private sector through any mix of taxation, regulation, and litigation.  Then, as jobs are cut and the cost of the good or service of that industry skyrockets, the liberals swoop in with more government solutions to solve problems incurred by the original governmental intervention.  Worse, these programs usually benefit their corporate friends who remit some of their new-found cash to Democrat reelection committees.

There is no better illustration of the fatuous cycle of government than the Democrat's food policy.  They have artificially inflated the cost of food through ethanol mandates, environmental regulations, and new FDA regulations.  In addition, their constriction of oil drilling, refinery constructing, nuclear power, and coal extraction, has had a residual effect on the cost of food transportation.  Now that these regressive policies from the progressives have come home to roost, and people cannot afford the gratuitously high cost of food, they are waiting at the door with handouts.

According to the latest data released by the USDA,  an additional 289,737 people were added to the food stamp program during October 2010, the first month of FY 2011.  That is roughly a 14% increase in enrollment and costs of the program on a year-over-year basis.  There are now a record 43,200,878 people and 20,183,148 households enrolled in the program which costs us almost $5.8 billion annually.  At this rate, the food stamp program will cost taxpayers at least $70 billion for FY 2011, and will likely increase as enrollment in the program continues to skyrocket.

Random Notes and Musings from the SOTU Show

-Energy- Obama calls for the elimination of subsidies for energy that works, while asking for more subsidies for energy sources that don't work.  I'm all for eliminating subsidies for everyone, including oil producers.  But this is just pure perversion. He says he can't predict which energies will lead the future (except that he will ensure that it won't be oil), yet he wants to subsidize wind, solar, and corn.  Then again, Obama and the libs have always intended on grinding our energy production to a halt.

- Trade-Obama takes credit for trade agreements that Bush had proposed long ago, but Democrats and Obama (until recently) stiffed.

- Health Care-Obama admitted that the 1099 filing provision of his Health Care bill was a disaster.  So why did he sign it?  What other burdens to businesses did he willingly sign into law?

- Spending-How can we freeze discretionary spending, yet add all his new porkulous, subsidies, and handouts disguised as tax cuts without adding to the deficit?  He also said that he wants to redouble his efforts from the first stimulus.  Well, 1 trillion*2=?  Then again, he probably doesn't regard that as discretionary spending.

- Tort Reform- There is no doubt that he would never sign any pure bill that has consequential effects on his trial lawyer friends.  A. The Democrats rely on it. B. This would cut health care costs and would therefore, undercut his plans for single payer.  This was just a shout out to the media so they can shower him with accolades about his move to the center.  The same holds true for his promise on corporate tax reform.  Although, he can always say that he only agreed to tax cuts if it doesn't add to the deficit.  And of course, he believes that all tax cuts add to the deficit, while no spending initiatives will increase it.  Also, he offered absolutely no specifics on tax reform.

-Regulatory reform- Well, that was already proven to be smoke and mirrors by everyone from the WSJ to the Heritage Foundation.

- Social Security- Obama ruled out private accounts and cutting benefits, so what does that leave us with except tax increases?



-The much hyped Sputnik reference- Daniel Foster of NRO has a great observation on this:

A sharp operator on the Hill points out to me that the total cost of the Apollo program — America’s long-form response to Sputnik — was $25 billion, or $113 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars. Also known as one seventh of the stimulus bill.
Don’t like that? Okay, how about this: the entire NASA budget from 1958 to 1970 was about $38.5 billion, or about $150 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Also, what nerve for the man who is ostensibly killing the space program to use that as a metaphor for innovative investments!

About that SOTU Prom Night

As Republicans continue to make last minute frantic efforts to adopt a Democrat to sit with during the grand speech, I was wondering how this would play out with certain members.  If the objective is to show bi-partisanship and reconciliation, will the RINOs sit with Republicans tonight?

Which Freshmen House Members Are Conservative? Time Will Tell

While the House class of 2010 is regarded as the "Tea Party Congress", it is quite obvious that not all 87 freshmen Republicans are conservative.  All of the bills and resolutions so far have been over fundamental issues and were all supported unanimously by the Republican Conference.  Over the next few months, we will see if cracks begin to form in the conservative armor of the freshmen class.

We have seen the first signs of RINO life this past week when Charlie Bass (NH-2) and Charlie Dent (PA-15) convened their first Tuesday Group lunch of RINOs.  Bass's efforts are not really that surprising or disappointing because he is really an old veteran RINO who was reelected in 2010 after losing his seat.  The group is co-chaired by Dent and Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8).  I couldn't find a list of those who will attend the Tuesday meetings this session and how many of them are freshmen.  Here is a link to those who are members of the Republican Main Street Partnership, a sister caucus to the Tuesday Group.

It is important to note that not everyone who is a member of the Main Street Partnership has a moderate voting record.  There are some members, such as Roscoe Bartlett, who are also on the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC).  For what it is worth, there are only 6 Freshmen members of the Partnership: Charlie Bass (NH-2), Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-8), Richard Hanna (NY-24), Nan Hayworth (NY-19), Tom Reed (NY-29), Steve Stivers (OH-15).

As you can see, most of them represent swing-Dem leaning districts and were known to be moderate.  The only surprise on this list is Nan Hayworth, who definitely campaigned as a conservative.  However, she does represent a Democrat district and might have become a member for show.  She is also a member of the RSC, although so are Hanna, Reed, and Stivers.  It is more important to find out if she and the others attend the Tuesday Group.

Incidentally, throughout the election campaign, I was eager to find out who would join the RSC.  We must keep in mind that not every member is a solid conservative and not every non-member is a RINO.  Nonetheless, it provides us with a cursory view of where the member is headed in terms of ideological and partisan alignment.

Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence: The Technocrat and the Intrepid Ideological Conservative

Any conservative who is flirting with the idea of supporting Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels for President should read this Politico puff piece on the potential presidential aspirant.  Jonathan Martin of Politico, in a piece titled, "Mitch Daniels: Heartthrob of the Elites", cites elitist columnists and publications that heap praise upon Mitch Daniels for his "gold-plated resume".  After discerning the type of pundits who admire Mitch Daniels, I am more certain than ever that he is not the man with the temerity, grit, or passion to battle the left.  Here is the opening of the article:

If pundits and columnists represented the GOP base, Mitch Daniels would be the odds-on favorite for the presidential nomination in 2012.
The Indiana governor has been showered with favorable coverage from political thinkers and analysts in recent months, most of which heaped praise on his thoughtful and principled approach to governing while celebrating his serious yet down-to-earth mien.
“Of all the Republicans talking about the deficit these days, Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana, has arguably the most credibility,” claimed The New York Times’ David Leonhardt in an Indianapolis-datelined economics column recently. (emphasis added)

If these supercilious politicos hold Daniels in such high regard, I can't imagine any supposition that he would serve as the conservative warrior to lead our nation back to constitutional government.  Perhaps it is his perfect resume, which titillates David Broder, that assures the political elite not be leery of Daniels.  As Jonathan Martin continues,

As David Broder wrote last fall: “[H]is record of accomplishment is dazzling.”
He went to all the right schools (Bachelors, with honors, at Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School and a law degree, with honors, from Georgetown), learned at the knee of a political Wise Man (veteran Sen. Richard Lugar) headed up a think tank (Hudson Institute), was a top executive at a Fortune 500 company (Eli Lilly), and for two terms has been a governor, where, as the mandarins’ formulation goes, all the real policy innovations take place.

I'll let that paragraph speak for itself.  Next, he cites a quote from George Will regarding an interview Daniels had with the Economist.

“He is a Republican who had never heard of 9/12, Glenn Beck’s tea-party group, before The Economist mentioned it to him.” 

Citing his gold-plated resume, The Economist observed that in each of his jobs Daniels “brought a decidedly dorky passion: a reverence for restraint and efficacy.”

The article closes by quoting acclamatory statements from such 'impeccable conservatives' as Charles Krauthammer and Weekly Standard writers.

MD-Senate: It's Minority Leader Nancy Jacobs!

The Maryland Republican Senate Caucus met yesterday to elect a new Minority Leader following the resignation of RINO Alan Kittleman.  Most people expected fellow RINO, Minority Whip David Brinkley to become the next leader.  Several days ago, we advocated that Nancy Jacobs (R-Harford, Cecil Counties) would be best suited for the job as she has been a staunch fighter for all conservative causes, including social conservatism.  I certainly didn't expect it to happen, but Senator Jacobs was elected Minority Leader.  In further good news, Brinckly will no longer be Whip either, as he was replaced with E.J. Pipkin.  Senator Pipkin is not as stellar as Jacobs, but he is better suited for the job than Brinkley.

Here is the report from the Sun:

Maryland Senate Republicans chose Sen. Nancy Jacobs as minority leader on Friday — just weeks after voting her out of the minority whip position.

The GOP caucus elected Sen. E.J. Pipkin as the new minority whip. The leadership elections followed the resignation of Minority Leader Allan H. Kittleman over his plans to introduce legislation to legalize same-sex civil unions in Maryland.

Jacobs, who represents Harford and Cecil counties, said the Senate Republicans' main goal this year will be to "protect constituents who are hurting financially in these tough economic times."

She said she would continue to fight against new taxes and to make the state more hospitable to private businesses. The Senate's only female Republican, Jacobs appears to be the first woman to lead the Senate minority caucus.

RSC Spending Plan a Good Start, More is Needed

The Republican Study Committee, the conservative House caucus, released a bill this week to cut $2.5 trillion in spending over the next 10 years.  This plan, which is summarized in a two page document, includes cuts in specific Obama programs, as well as the elimination of old programs and subsidies.

The main objective of the RSC plan is to pass a CR that caps non defense/security discretionary spending for the remainder of FY 2011 to 2008 spending levels.  Then, beginning in 2012, this bill would slash discretionary spending to 2006 levels and would eliminate automatic increases for inflation.  The Spending Reduction Act of 2011 also calls for cuts in federal employees and their salaries, the privatization of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and the sequestering of the remaining stimulus funds.  Finally, the plan calls for the elimination of 56 programs, mandates, or subsidies that will save an additional $330 billion over 10 years.

While the RSC plan is a bold and prudent beginning, there is much more work to be done.  It's important to note that recent budget deficits have skyrocketed to a gargantuan $1.3-$1.4 trillion.  This budget plan would only shave off an average of $100 billion per year.  Here are some other programs that should be eliminated as we aim for a balanced budget.  Many of these cuts will probably be included in the new Welfare Reform Act that the RSC plans to unveil in the coming days.

MD-Senate: Alan Kittleman Was Right to Resign as Minority Leader

Last week, we reported on state Sen. Allan Kittleman's civil unions bill and called upon him to resign from leadership.  We are happy to hear that he has acknowledged that his social liberalism is unbecoming of a Republican leader and voluntarily resigned his leadership post.  It is one thing to have divergent views within the party; it is another thing to have the leader of the Republicans push for priority legislation of the other side even before they do.

As we look to find a new minority leader, we must consider who would cogently fight for conservatism and have media savvy to expose the egregious policies of the far left to the public.  Surprisingly, state GOP Chairman Alex Mooney is calling upon Kittleman to reconsider his decision to step down.  I guess he is concerned that there is nobody else who could fill the vacuum.  After all, his likely successor would be minority whip David Brinkly, who is not exactly a stalwart conservative.  However, this is not an excuse for bringing back a RINO to a leadership position.

I will reiterate what I have said before regarding Maryland politics.  If we lack the temerity to fight for conservatism with the few remaining elected officials that we have, then what is the point of serving in the General Assembly.  There is already a robust socialist, pro illegal, morally decrepit party in the state.  Who needs a second one?  I constantly hear people advocate ad nauseum that we must moderate our views so that we can cooperate with the ruling Democrats.  But if that is the objective, then why not just go home and let the Democrats carry out their business alone?

Remember Those Red District ObamaCare Socialists in 2012

Thankfully, the Republican controlled House just passed the repeal of Obamacare by a 245-189 margin.  Three Democrats; Mike Ross (AR), Dan Boren (OK), and Mike McIntyre (NC), joined every Republican in support of repeal.  This means that 10 of the remaining 13 Democrats who voted against Obama Care to win reelection last year, showed their true colors by opposing repeal.

Here are the ten Democrat turncoats:

Ben Chandler ( Ky.), John Barrow ( Ga.) Heath Schuler ( N.C.), Larry Kissell ( N.C.), Stephen Lynch ( Mass.), Jason Altmire ( Pa.), Tim Holden ( Pa.), Collin Peterson ( Minn), Dan Lipinski ( Ill.) and Jim Matheson ( Utah).

If we include the other Democrats who represent R rated districts (Cook PVI) but supported ObamaCare from the beginning, that number increases by another 6, for a total of 16:

Jerry McNerney (CA) Joe Donnelly (IN) Tim Walz (Minn) Bill Owens (NY) Mark Critz (PA) Nick Rahall (WV)

These 16 Democrats must be targeted for their disingenuous conservative talk at home, as they vote with the radical left in DC.  It looks like their symbolic vote against Nancy Pelosi was nothing more than window dressing.  Let's end the blue dog and pony show and defeat these clowns in 2012.

Weekly RINO Roundup

- McCain Calls Obama a Patriot

- Bill Frist: Don't Repeal Obamacare (And he was the leader of Senate Republicans when they controlled every branch of gov't?)
- Newt Gingrich Praises Obama, Criticizes Palin

- Scott Brown:  R is Just itty-bitty Letter at End of Name ( I guess it is the Ted Kennedy seat after all)

- Dick Lugar to Seek Reelection-  Promote Assault Weapons Ban

-Charlie Bass and the Return of the Tuesday Group ( And we thought we were done with RINOs in the House)

- Lindsey Graham: Romney is the Front Runner

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

ND Senate: Another Golden Conservative Opportunity

Last week, we stressed the importance of electing a Jim DeMint conservative to a vacant red state Senate seat in Texas.  The same applies in North Dakota after today's announcement by Kent Conrad that he will not seek reelection.  As with the Texas GOP primary, it is important that we identify the true conservative within the next month or so.  We must remember that the primaries occur much earlier during presidential elections.  This will preclude a chaotic primary in which the conservative vote could potentially be split, while handing the seat to a RINO.  It will also ensure that the GOP won't coronate an establishment candidate just because he has the most name recognition.  Keep in mind that there is no excuse for the "he can't win the general election" argument in a state like North Dakota, especially considering the thin Democrat farm team.

We will be providing comprehensive updates on both the Texas and North Dakota GOP primaries in order to identify and promote the authentic conservative.

The Cost of Obama's Ban, Baby ,Ban Energy Policy

Unfortunately, the left has vividly illustrated for us the regressive effects of progressive energy policies.  They ban, tax, regulate, or litigate efficient and effective energy sources, while promoting special interest "green energy", a.k.a. no energy.  As a result, we have incurred a severe shortage in food and energy supplies, thereby augmenting the costs of both of these basic consumer needs.  Any who is hit hardest from these nescient policies?  Fixed-income families.  So much for the progressive's obsession with helping out the poor!

Aside for the negative effects of green energy policies on the cost of fuel and job creation, there is another casualty of this liberal madness.  Ironically, the government is losing much needed revenue as a result of its onerous oil drilling regulatory regime.  According to a new calculation by the Heritage Foundation, the Federal treasury will lose $1.35 billion in revenue this year due to Obama's ban on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.  In other words, they are losing the taxes paid on the 220,000 barrels per day that will not be produced this year.  They also note that "The number grows even larger when coupled with a lack of Gulf lease sales and fewer rental payments. Those three components — royalties, leases and rent — make up a sizeable amount of government revenue."

You can read the full report here.

We already know that Obama has no regard for consumer spending or job creation, but one would think that he would covet his precious tax revenue.

Golden Opportunity in Texas As Hutchison Announces Retirement

It was announced today that Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison will not seek reelection!  This is the best piece of news for conservatives for a while.  We always have such a difficult time electing solid constitutional conservatives in blue states or knocking off incumbent RINOs even in red states.  Now, we have a golden opportunity to elect a DeMint conservative in a solid red state.  The best thing is that we won't have to fight a costly and vicious primary against the entrenched RINO.  We applaud Senator Hutchison for keeping her pledge to retire after this term in 2012.

Luckily, there is no lack of a Republican or conservative bench in Texas.  However, as we have witnessed quite vividly, there is a big distinction between the two.  We must ensure that conservatives don't split the vote and hand a solid red seat to a RINO.  This is what happened in Tennessee in 2006, in which former Congressmen Ed Bryant and van Hilleary split the conservative vote, giving us RINO Bob Corker.

The first major candidate that has officially registered to run is Railroad Commissioner and former state Delegate Elizabeth Ames Jones.  Another Railroad Commissioner, Michael Williams, originally planned to fill the seat had Hutchison vacated it in middle of the term.  It is therefore quite likely that he will officially run for the open seat and announce his intentions soon.  Former Texas Sec. of State Roger Williams has also formed an exploratory committee and was planning to run even before the retirement announcement.  All three candidates appear to be conservative so we must wait and see who rises to the top.  There is also some chatter about Lt. Governor David Dewhurst tossing his hat into the ring.  Dewhurst has built a solid reputation as a staunch border security hawk.

There is a bit of concern that Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert is considering a bid for Senate.  As you can imagine, the mayor of the ninth largest city in the country is not a conservative.  Granted that Dallas is not nearly as bad as most major urban centers, but it is still hard to elect an authentic conservative from such a large city.  There are many questions about his commitment to limited government and his stances on social issues.  We shall wait and see.  It is just imperative that we not squander this opportunity to elect a conservative by splitting the base vote and handing a RINO the seat.  Keep in mind that the primaries are much earlier during presidential election years, so we must work to sort out the field within the next few months.

Do Republicans Have the Temerity to Hold the Debt Ceiling?

The Democrats have a habit of sabotaging our economy and then demanding that we pass their legislation to avert impending doom that would result from their original policies.  Unfortunately, Republicans credulously accept their premises and acquiesce to the emergency legislative actions.  We watched this unfold during the debate over TARP, in which Republicans naively bought into the notion that the Great Depression would return unless they supported the Democrat bailouts.  We agonized over it when Republicans agreed to extend unemployment welfare and ethanol subsidies for another year, lest taxes go up for a week in January.

The same dynamic is now unfolding with the debate concerning the debt ceiling.  The national debt currently stands at $13.95 trillion, as we accrue over $100 billion in new debt every month.  By that calculation, we will surpass the $14.29 trillion debt ceiling in less than three months.  The Democrats are demanding that Republicans consummate and perpetuate their unconstitutional spending habits by raising the debt ceiling, or suffer the peril of defaulting on our credit. 

Never mind that it was the Democrats who caused the credit, housing, and budget crises in the first place!  They seem to forget that programs like TARP, bailouts, porkulous, union payoffs, cash-for-clunkers, 99 weeks of unemployment benefits, Franken-Dodd, and Obama Care are the culprits for the doubling of the national debt.  Should the Republicans reward the pillagers by granting them one more opportunity to purloin the taxpayers?  Are we ever going to stop passing the buck down and indefatigably fight against big government in the present?  Even the much anticipated repeal of Obama Care was oddly postponed to placate the Democrats' shameless politicization of the Tucson shooting.  Why not start reversing the $1.4 trillion deficit now?

Instead of falling into their sinister trap once again, we must uproot their premise by demanding a lowering of the spending floor.  If we lack the intransigence to block Democrat proposals due to threats of peril, how many more Democrat initiatives will we support under the guise of "a one time emergency fix"?  Will Republicans support one last tax increase on Social Security to preclude its bankruptcy?

Maryland Economics: Tax Beverages and Their Producers into Oblivion

I have always felt that liberal urban politicians would make the best teachers of economics.  They know how to illustrate economic principles through practical applications like nobody else.  Last year, the hoodlums on the Baltimore City Council passed a 2-cent beverage tax on all bottled beverages sold in the city.  Only a few months later, Pepsi plans to shut down their production of soda in Baltimore.  The Baltimore Sun reports:

"The Pepsi plant in Baltimore will no longer make soda, and the company plans to lay off 77 people as officials have decided to stop manufacturing operations — a decision they blame in part on a controversial new beverage tax in the city.
The last cans and 2-liter bottles of Pepsi-Cola, Diet Pepsi, Mountain Dew and other sodas ran through the production line Monday morning. Executives at Pepsi Beverages Co. told workers in meetings later in the day that production would be halted for good. Pepsi officials said they would work out details regarding the layoffs, including potential severance, with the local Teamsters union."

Now, all of the drones who voted for these crooks will have to suffer with the higher costs of beverages and the loss of jobs that will continue to ensue as a result of the tax.  Pepsi will just take their business to states that appreciate capitalism.

Since the beverage tax worked so well in Baltimore, the Maryland legislature is planning to increase alcohol taxes on all wine, beer, and liquor sold in Maryland.  Eventually, all beverage producers and retailers will be chased out of the state.  The Maryland politicians provide the most effective stimulus of economic growth for Pennsylvania and Virginia!  Unfortunately, with full control of Maryland government and a drone-like electorate, the Democrats and their tax hikes are virtually insuperable.

More Regressiveness From Progressives As Oil Prices Skyrocket

As Americans continue to shiver from the cold, they will continue to pay more to heat their homes and power their cars.  Sadly, yet ironically, the culprit is the man-made hoax of global warming.  For years, the left has attempted to demonize oil and energy producers with their hateful rhetoric.  Now, they are turning their vituperative rhetoric into action.  Oil prices surged again yesterday following the release of the recommendations from the President's Oil Spill Commission.  Bloomberg News reports:

Crude advanced 2.1 percent after the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill recommended exploration in U.S. deep waters be overseen by an independent agency in the Interior Department. Producers suspended most output from Alaska’s North Slope after a Jan. 8 pipeline leak.

“The market took off after the release of the presidential panel’s report,” said Phil Flynn, vice president of research at PFGBest in Chicago. “There’s concern that it will become more difficult to develop resources and there will be less oil available.”

Oil for February delivery gained $1.86 to $91.11 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the highest settlement since Jan. 3. Futures have risen 10 percent in the past year.

Ask Your Congressman to Support H.R. 140- To End Birthright Citizenship

One issue that will hopefully make a comeback in the 112th congress is immigration.  With a record 1.2 million new immigrants arriving each year (primarily from the third world), and an equal number of illegals sneaking through the border or overstaying visas, we must reassert control over our borders, sovereignty, and destiny as a nation.  One of the more egregious immigration policies over the years has been the misinterpretation of the 14th amendment to perpetuate the disastrous policy of birthright citizenship.

There are a number of good bills that were introduced during the first week of congress which will address our immigration problems.  Steve King has introduced H.R. 140 to clarify the Immigration and Nationality Act to grant citizenship only to those who are here legally.  Congressman King has been the leader on border security and immigration for many years and we must urge our congressmen to lend their support to his bill.  There are currently 26 co-sponsors of HR 140.

Incidentally, it is important to point out that Steve King, who had been the ranking member on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, has been passed over for the chairmanship by Speaker Boehner.  Many of us in the pro enforcement camp have been anticipating the ascendancy of Mr. King to the chairmanship all year.  Instead, Rep. Elton Gallegly of California will serve as Chairman and King will be Vice Chairman.  While I have nothing against Congressman Gallegly, it is Steve King who has been the leader on this issue.  The fact that Boehner passed over the current ranking member is an unambiguous sign that he is scared of King's uncompromising stance on our nation's sovereignty.  Here is the scoop from National Journal:

The public reason for King's demotion was a reorganization of the committee. The post was given to Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Calif., a senior member to King who is considered conservative enough on immigration to satisfy tea party Republicans but not as outspoken as King. But it was also clear from GOP aides that House leaders worried about King and his tendency to press on immigration issues that angered more moderate members of his own party.
"John Boehner isn't very aggressive on immigration," King said, noting that the GOP "Pledge to America" barely mentions immigration or border security. "It's the tiniest section," he said.

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?

The Tuscon Shooter Was Deranged, Not Conservative

Thankfully, the latest reports indicate that Congresswomen Giffords is expected to recover from the shooting earlier today.  While there are still many things to sort out, one thing is clear.  This murderer was insane.  There was no coherent right or left political ideology that fueled his actions.  We must make sure that the media and the far left have no plans to turn this into some referendum of the tea party by blaming today's massacre on conservatives.  This is why I want to draw attention to one line from an ABC article on the murderer, Jared Loughner:

In the YouTube profile, the account holder, identified as Loughner, lists "The Communist Manifesto" and "Mein Kampf" among his favorite books.
A former classmate of Loughner's told ABC News he was extremely political in high school, but not radical. The classmate said Loughner once met Giffords in 2007 and said he thought the congresswoman was "unintelligent."(emphasis added)

It is quite evident that this guy was simply a madman.  This was not left wing or right wing terrorism.  A would be "tea party assassin" would not quote the Communist Manifesto.  In addition, Gabrielle Giffords is one of the most conservative Democrats and recently voted against Nancy Pelosi, much to the chagrin of some left wing websites.  There are also reports of people who knew him that are describing him as a leftist.  However, I am not saying that this attack was politically motivated from the left either.  He was simply deranged.

The bottom line is that as the week progresses, we need to make sure that the narrative is focused upon the important things such as security measures for public servants.  If the media attempts to conjure up images of the tea party while discussing the Tuscon massacre, we need to remind them of Loughner's choice reading.

The Same Blue Dog and Pony Show as Before

Well, it appears that nothing has changed for the decimated Blue Dog coalition of self professed moderates.  They have always launched their rebellion against the leadership in highly symbolic ways, while acquiescing to them like lap dogs when it really counted.  Nothing has changed in this congress.

19 Democrats voted for someone other than Nancy Pelosi for Speaker:

Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania, John Barrow of Georgia, Sanford Bishop of Georgia, Dan Boren of Oklahoma, Jim Cooper of Tennessee, Dennis Cardoza of California, Jim Costa of California, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, Tim Holden of Pennsylvania, Ron Kind of Wisconsin, Larry Kissell of North Carolina, Daniel Lipinski of Illinois, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, Jim Matheson of Utah, Mike Michaud of Maine, Mike Ross of Arkansas, Kurt Schrader of Oregon, and Heath Shuler of North Carolina

Yet, when it came time to vote for the Republican rules package, not a single Democrat crossed the aisle to buck their leadership.  Their strategy is quite transparent.  The Blue Dogs wanted to avoid being viewed in a TV ad as supporting Nancy Pelosi, so they took that off the table by voting for somebody else.  But when it comes time to vote on substance, they will usually vote with their leadership.  Luckily, their votes don't matter any more.  We own the House!

However, it is still important that we target every remaining red district Democrat and expose their left wing voting record throughout the session.  As we have explained in a previous post, there are 17 Republicans who represent blue districts (following Charlie Cook's PVI) and will be relentlessly targeted by the Democrats.  While it is imperative that we rigorously defend those districts, we must also launch a counteroffensive against the 17 remaining Democrats in red districts. 

A quick check of the 19 votes against Pelosi reveals that only 10 are from R rated districts while 9 are from D leaning districts.  This means that there are seven Democrats who represent R leaning districts who still supported Pelosi for Speaker:  Here are the Pelosi poodles:

Jerry McNerney (CA-11)
Ben Chandler (KY-6) (R+9 District)
Tim Walz (MN-1)
Colin Peterson (MN-7)(R+5 District)
Bill Owens (NY-23)
Mark Critz (PA-12)
Nick Rahall (WV-3)(R+6 District)

These guys should be toast in 2012.  Any potential opponent should already be preparing a TV ad which depicts them standing on the House floor and declaring "Pelosi". 

Perpetuating the Social Security Ponzi Scheme is Not Conservative

When Bernie Madoff was caught running a Ponzi scheme, he was sentenced to lifetime imprisonment.  Needless to say, the Ponzi scheme was prorogated immediately.  Unfortunately, when the leftists in government were caught purloining the funds from the mandatory Social Security retirement program, they were rewarded with reelection.  Worse yet, they still have the power to force us to contribute more, receive less, and raise the retirement age in order to perpetuate and exacerbate the greatest Ponzi scheme of all time. 

It is quite evident that Democrats are content with their 'don't ask don't tell' policy concerning Social Security.  They are happy to continue bankrupting this nation, while remaining silent regarding the impending implosion of Social Security.  Republicans are justified in their vocal concern over the program's insolvency and their calls for reform.  However, it is extremely disconcerting to hear many conservatives support the idea of digging deeper into this unconstitutional confiscatory program.  Many conservatives have adulated the recommendations of the debt commission because they “address” the Social Security crisis.  The problem is that they address the insolvency by implementing one or more of the following changes; cutting benefits, raising payroll taxes, raising the exemption limit, means testing benefits, and (most egregiously) raising the retirement age.  The need and desire to address a policy problem is no excuse for proposing the wrong solution.

On Sunday, Lindsey Graham made headlines by asserting that he would not support raising the debt ceiling until the long term fiscal problems are solved.  Sounds conservative, right?  Think again.  Here is the full quote from Lindsey Graham on Meet the Press:

“I will not vote for the debt ceiling increase until I see a plan in place that will deal with our long-term debt obligations, starting with Social Security, a real bipartisan effort to make sure that Social Security stays solvent, adjusting the age, looking at means tests for benefits. On the spending side, I’m not going to vote for debt ceiling increase unless we go back to 2008 spending levels, cutting discretionary spending.” (emphasis added)

Greece Does Something Prudent for Once

Greece has released plans to build a border fence on their border with Turkey in an attempt to keep out illegal immigrants.  The U.K. Daily Mail reports:

The first stage in the planned structure was unveiled yesterday, with a 10-ft high, eight-mile-long trial fence to cover a section of the border near the town Orestidada.
According to the EU's border agency Frontex, the area concerned has become the main entry point for migrants traveling from Africa and Asia, with an average of 245 people per day crossing illegally in October alone last year.  Around 90 per cent of all illegal immigrants into the EU have come through Greece, it is estimated.

It's also interesting to note that Europe has its own anti-border security leftists as in the U.S.  According to the Daily Mail, The European Commission referred to the Greek border fence as "a 'short-term measure'  that does not deal with the root of the problem."  Sound familiar?  Remember all of those who opposed our border fence because, "it can't stop 100% of the illegal crossings"?  At least the Greek government is doing something prudent.  Hey, if we are going to replicate the Greek budget paradigm, we would be wise to copy their immigration policy.

Here's a parting question.  Who are those who are crossing over the Turk-Greek border?

Let's Not Fall for the Demagoguery Concerning Pre-Conditions

The day of reckoning for Obama Care is rapidly approaching as the Republicans have scheduled a vote next week to repeal this unconstitutional, job killing piece of socialism.  They plan to schedule two votes; one on the full repeal of Obama Care (Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act), and another on a resolution which instruct four committees to craft a new health care bill.  The resolution dictates that the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Ways and Means, report a new bill that includes the following twelve provisions:

1.  "foster economic growth and private sector job creation by eliminating job-killing policies and regulations
2.   lower health care premiums through increased competition and choice
3.   preserve a patient’s ability to keep his or her health plan if he or she likes it
4.   provide people with pre-existing conditions access to affordable health coverage
5.   reform the medical liability system to reduce unnecessary and wasteful health care spending
6.   increase the number of insured Americans
7.   protect the doctor-patient relationship
8.   provide the States greater flexibility to administer Medicaid programs
9.   expand incentives to encourage personal responsibility for health care coverage and costs
10. prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions and provide conscience protections for health care providers
11. eliminate duplicative government programs and wasteful spending; or,
12. do not accelerate the insolvency of entitlement programs or increase the tax burden on Americans."

The 111th RINO Senate Was the Wimpiest of All Time

Al right.  That is not precisely the title of the latest headline at Roll Call, but it is close.  The actual headline reads, "Reid Set a Filibuster Record".  In other words, thanks to RINOs, Harry Reid became the most successful Majority Leader in terms of killing filibusters through cloture.

Keep in mind that the Democrats had 60 seats only for a short time during the 111th congress.  Al Franken was sworn in as the 60th Democrat Senator on July 7, 2009, and Scott Brown was sworn in as the 41st Republican Senator on February 4, 2010.  If you factor in the summer break and the month following Kennedy's death, the Democrats only had four months with 60 Senators.  Unfortunately, they didn't need 60 Senators for cloture throughout the session.  The Republicans were more than happy enough to spare the extra change for cloture, especially during the lame duck session.

Roll Call reports that, "Reid won 69 percent of his total attempts to shut down threatened filibusters in the two years of the 111th Congress that began January 2009."  They further break down the numbers between the two sessions by noting, "Reid largely achieved his record in 2009, not 2010. In the first year of the session, Reid won 35 of 39 — a stunning 90 percent — of his attempts to close debate, or invoke cloture, on a variety of measures and nominations.  However, in 2010, his average dropped to 54 percent, when he won 28 cloture votes and lost 24."

A New Year, A New Muslim Rampage

Well, it appears that Islamofacists always want to usher in the new year with a blast.  After slaughtering at least 80 Christians in the Nigerian town of Jos, Muslim terrorists massacred more Christians who were attending mass in the nation's capitol Abuja, as well as in Alexandria, Egypt.  1,000 Christians were gathered for mass at an Alexandria church, when a Muslim suicide bomber blew himself up, killing at least 21 and injuring over 80.  But you wouldn't know anything about the perpetrator from the first paragraph of the article from Reuters.  They begin their report:

A bomb killed at least 21 people outside a church in the Egyptian city of Alexandria early on New Year's Day and the Interior Ministry said a foreign-backed suicide bomber may have been responsible.
Dozens of people were wounded by the blast, which scattered body parts, destroyed cars and smashed windows. The attack prompted Christians to protest on the streets, and some Christians and Muslims hurled stones at each other. (emphasis added)

So, a bomb just passively detonated on its own, and decided to scatter body parts.  Then, the Christians elected to commence a pogrom against the poor innocent Muslims.  Unbelievable! Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

Here was Obama's response:

"Killing innocent civilians who were simply gathering – like so many people around the world – to celebrate the beginning of a New Year further demonstrates the bankrupt vision of those who carry out these attacks, and we are similarly prepared to offer assistance to the Government of Nigeria as it works to bring the perpetrators to justice." (emphasis added)

Isn't it interesting how there is random violence around the world in Nigeria, Egypt, Sudan, Israel, Lebanon, and Somalia.  They are orchestrated by unknown perpetrators.  The fact that they all share the same religion has nothing to do with it!


There is another important point that this weekend's bombing bring to bear.  We provide Egypt with over $1.5 billion in foreign aid every year.  They have always straddled the fence between their ambivalence towards radical Islam and their desire to pander for American support.  If they don't use this tragedy as an opportunity to clamp down on terror, we should immediately cut off their foreign aid.  Why should we be funding another Muslim nation that harbors Al Qaeda?