Category Archives: 2012 Presidential

Greetings from way, way, WAY on down South

I’ll be missing the craziness in SC the next day or so, as I’m in Key West talking about it.

You know how the Tea Party and the Occupiers get really worked up about the coziness between politicians and corporations? Well, I’m at the nexus of that. Or one of the nexuses. Or nexi. Or whatever.

Or at least, that’s what the protesters would probably say.

I’m at the Senate President’s Forum, where top officers from state senates across the country get together with corporate types and talk politics. So far, I haven’t met any of the participants, as the first event is tonight. I’ve never attended anything like this before; it promises to be interesting. I’ll tell you what it’s like. (Our own Senate president pro tem, Glenn McConnell, isn’t coming. SC is to be represented by Tom Alexander.)

I’m here to participate on a panel discussion about the presidential election. I’ll be joined by David Yepsen, former chief political editor at The Des Moines Register (somewhere, there are senior political editors who still have newspaper jobs, but I seldom run into them) and now director of the Paul Simon Institute at Southern Illinois University; John Marttila, President of Marttila Communications; and Mike DuHaime, Managing Director, Mercury Public Affairs and former Chief Strategist for Chris Christie’s successful gubernatorial campaign.

My job, of course, is to explain politics in the state that everyone is watching this week.

I need to write some opening remarks, which I worked on a bit on the plane this morning, but have only roughed it out. When I get it written, I’ll share it with y’all.

I’ll also be doing some walking around. This is my first time to Key West.

: People here seem to be enjoying themselves.

: Things are VERY laid back here.

: A local landmark I found by myself on an initial reconnaissance.

: After flying down here, I find this Southeastern Freight truck. SE is located about a mile from my house.

: This is parked outside my hotel.

: This wider view shows the ENTIRE inside of the airport.

: Those are mannequins. I kept wondering, from the plane, why they didn’t move.

Look out, y’all — here they all come, right at us

27 Replies

I hadn’t finished eating dinner when an AP alert on my phone told me Mitt Romney had won the New Hampshire primary.

So since then, it’s just been a matter of seeing how they line up behind him.

With 66 percent reporting, Romney has 38 percent, Ron Paul 23 percent, and John Huntsman 17 percent. Which means Huntsman is effectively in second place, since Ron Paul isn’t going to be the nominee. Which was probably about where he needed to be to continue.

Gingrich and Santorum at tied at less than 10 percent. And Rick Perry? Less than 1 percent. He has an explanation for that: “I skipped New Hampshire and aimed my campaign right at conservative South Carolina, where we’ve been campaigning hard and receiving an enthusiastic welcome.”

He and others will be much in evidence henceforth in these parts. Busy day tomorrow. I’m going to try to drop by as many of the following as possible:

1:10 p.m. — Rick Perry at Doc’s Barbecue
3 p.m. — Jon Huntsman at the Moore School at USC
6:10 p.m. — Mitt Romney at The Hall at Senate’s End
7 p.m. — Rick Santorum at the Springdale House in Lexington County

Looks like Gingrich doesn’t make it to town until Thursday — when I will be out of town (more about that later).

Here we go again, y’all…

Rusty DePass, who’s supporting Santorum, says it’s all over for Obama

48 Replies

On Monday, I started getting serious about interviewing SC Republicans, both those who have committed to candidates and one or two who are staying on the sidelines.

I arranged to meet fellow Rotarian Rusty Depass before our weekly meeting. Rusty is supporting Rick Santorum, and made sure to tell me that he’s backed him from the start — no post-Iowa bandwagon-joiner is our Rusty.

It’s very much like Rusty not to support Mitt Romney, whom he calls “the successor to Ford, Dole and McCain” — all relative centrists who led the party to defeat in the fall.

And Rusty isn’t looking for a defeat this year. In fact, he surprised me when he explained why he is unmoved by Republicans who say they back Romney because he can beat President Obama in the fall.

“We’re not trying to beat Obama,” he said, which grabbed my attention. “He’s beat. We’re picking a president.”

Really, I said? Other Republicans have sounded far less certain. Some — not for attribution, of course — just come out and say that they’re resigned to a second Obama term, as much as it displeases them. I got the strong impression that some of the people who did not run this year — Mike Huckabee in particular — stayed out for that very reason. In fact, Huckabee was saying it as early as the start of 2010. And I think he was right, to the extent that anything like that can be predicted so far out.

But Rusty definitely doesn’t think so. And he wants “a real conservative,” rather than “some milquetoast moderate leading us to defeat again.”

But why Santorum? It’s not like Rusty is always drawn to cultural conservatives. I can understand why my friend Hal Stevenson — who dropped by our table while Rusty and I were speaking (to tell me what he thought of “Tinker, Tailor”) — is supporting Santorum. But Rusty supported Rudy Giuliani last time. (And we all remember what Alec Sanders said about him: “He supports gay rights. He supports banning all handguns. He supports abortion. His wife kicked him out, and he moved in with two gay men and a Shih Tzu. Is that South Carolina values? I don’t think so.”)

Well, we know why he’s not for Romney — aside from the wishy-washiness, Rusty wants “a real person… I don’t begrudge Romney his money, but he’s hard to relate to.” And he maintains that the others have become such “luminaries” that they’re “hard to talk to.”

There are things he likes about the others. “Newt Gingrich has more bright ideas before breakfast than most people do in a lifetime.”

“I would like to see a debate between Gingrich and Obama, and see him just demolish him.” But “when the debate’s over, people don’t like him.”

And Santorum is likable. Rusty DePass thinks so, anyway.

For more on the subject, go read Rusty’s letter to the editor from last week. Here’s how it begins:

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is not only well-informed and articulate, but he is a likeable, dedicated, committed, unapologetic conservative. The one election he lost, which seems to be the only gig against him, was because he refused to budge from his conservative principles, and in a heavily Roman Catholic state, he got beat by the last pro-life Democrat in America. All of which brings us to the practical political considerations of nominating a candidate for president. What do they bring to the table? Except for Santorum, the answer would appear to be nothing.

Rusty’s not a guy to mince words. As he sums up, “We have a country to save, and Rick Santorum is the right man to do it.”

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2012/01/05/2101217/santorum-has-best-chance-against.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy

I like some of the things Santorum has to say

14 Replies

Before last week, I confess, I had pretty much ignored Rick Santorum. To me, he was just that former Senate culture warrior who had gotten his clock cleaned by Bob Casey in 2006.

But like a lot of people, I started paying attention to him after Iowa. And you know what? He said some stuff I really liked in the debate Saturday night.

(Meanwhile, I was less than enchanted by some of Jon Huntsman’s statements. For instance, I do wish he’d stop going on and on about term limits…)

My very favorite thing I heard Rick Santorum say was this, in response to Ron Paul:

I’m a conservative. I’m not a libertarian.

Wow. True, not all Republicans are libertarians, but when was the last time you heard one of them stand up and renounce that ideology? And then go on to say… you need to sit down before you hear this:

I believe in some government.

He actually said that! He dares to be a pre-2010 Republican! I just wanted to reach into the TV and shake his hand. Imagine, speaking truth to Ron Paul that way!

Earlier in the debate, he had done something even better. He pointed out that governing and running a business are two different things, and that being a CEO didn’t actually qualify you to be president!

I had gotten so used to Republicans either trying to sound like Mark Sanford or at least being afraid not to sound like Mark Sanford, that these statements were like a balm upon my soul.

And it reminded me — I always have liked the “values” conservatives more than the radical libertarians. (To my ears, “God and Country” sounds a whole lot better than “I, Me, Mine.”) And in general, more than the old school country-clubbers.

Maybe there’s a political future for guys like Bob Inglis yet. I hope so…

Ayn Rand is alive and well in the Club for Growth

8 Replies

It’s been really interesting to see his rivals tear into Mitt Romney for being some sort of heartless capitalist. And it’s been equally interesting to see the Mark Sanford wing of the GOP defend him.

I didn’t have time this morning to finish reading the front-page piece in The Wall Street Journal (which unfortunately is hiding behind the pay wall) about this phenomenon, but I can share with you this release from the Club for Growth:

Statement On Newt Gingrich’s Attacks On Mitt Romney And Bain Capital
Club for Growth President Chris Chocola: “Newt Gingrich should stop his attacks on free markets and apologize to Governor Romney for them”

Washington, DC – The Club for Growth PAC issued the following statement today in reaction to Speaker Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Governor Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital. Yesterday, Gingrich said “Those of us who believe in free markets and those of us who believe that in fact the whole goal of investment is entrepreneurship and job creation…we find it pretty hard to justify rich people figuring out clever legal ways to loot a company, leaving behind 1,700 families without a job.” (Source: New York Times, 1/8/11) Gingrich’s attack was echoed that same day that by the Democratic National Committee, which also attacked Romney for his job creation record at Bain Capital. (Source: Democratic National Committee YouTube Page, 1/8/12)

“Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital are disgusting,” said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “There are a number of issues for Mitt Romney’s Republican opponents to attack him for, but attacking him for making investments in companies to create a profit for his investors is just wrong. Because of the efforts of Bain Capital, major companies like Staples, Domino’s Pizza, and the Sports Authority now employ thousands of people and have created billions in wealth in the private economy. Attacking Governor Romney for participating in free-market capitalism is just beyond the pale for any purported ‘Reagan Conservative.’ Newt Gingrich should stop his attacks on free markets and apologize to Governor Romney for them.”

Ayn Rand, high priestess of the cult of Self, may be technically dead, but who needs her when we have the Club?

No word, by the way, on whether Chris Chocola is related to the Count. Probably not, given the spelling difference.

What Romney said about NLRB was technically wrong, but his message was accurate

3 Replies

Late last week the Obama re-election campaign brought to my attention a PolitiFact piece that said something Mitt Romney said about Obama’s NLRB was untrue.

And it was, technically. But what he was trying to say was essentially true.

Politifact described the Romney ad this way:

In the ad, Romney stands in front of workers on a factory floor and says that “the National Labor Relations Board, now stacked with union stooges selected by the president, says to a free enterprise like Boeing, ‘you can’t build a factory in South Carolina because South Carolina is a right-to-work state.’”

Here is Politifact’s ruling (and go ahead and read the entire explication that precedes it):

The Romney ad claimed that the NLRB told Boeing that it “can’t build a factory in South Carolina because South Carolina is a right-to-work state.”

The NLRB’s complaint started a legal process that could ultimately have resulted in a factory closure, but the NLRB as a whole didn’t tell Boeing anything. What’s more, the legal basis for the action centered on whether Boeing was punishing the union for staging strikes, not that Boeing had opened a factory in a right-to-work state. We rate the statement False.

Bottom line, Boeing had said it wanted to get away from all those strikes, and that’s that got it into trouble. Well, one good way to get away from strikes is to go to a “right-to-work” state, where you are less likely to be dealing with a union.

So… as an editor, if someone had written for publication the words spoken in the Romney ad, I wouldn’t have allowed it. I’d have reworded it. But I would have understood what he was saying.

Here’s a shocker for you: People whom Romney has supported are supporting him in return

5 Replies

I have always, according to everyone else, underestimated the role of money in politics. It bores me, so I don’t attach the importance to it that everyone says I should.

But for all you folks who are so much more world-wise than I, here’s a tidbit to gnaw on:

Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC and its affiliates states have lavished close to $1.3 million in campaign donations to federal, state and local GOP politicians, almost all since 2010. His recipients include officials in the major upcoming primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina, and in three southern Super Tuesday states where he was trounced four years ago.

In New Hampshire, a U.S. senator, a congressman, 10 state senators and three executive councilors shared $26,000 in donations from Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC in 2010 and 2011 combined. All 15 have showered Romney with endorsements leading up to Tuesday’s primary

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley came out for Romney last month – a year after his Free and Strong America PACs funneled $36,000 to the Tea Party darling’s 2010 election bid. And 19 state and Washington, D.C., lawmakers in three Super Tuesday states – Georgia, Tennessee and Virginia — are backing Romney after his PAC poured a total of $125,500 into their coffers for elections held in 2009 and 2010.

Make of that what you will. Me, I’m like, Yeah, I knew that they were supporting each other. So what do I care about the money? But that’s me. I’m cynical about cynicism; I think it’s all overblown.

It’s as over as it can get without being over

2 Replies

How’s that for hedging, Yogi Berra style? Hey, I’m not going to get caught out on a limb again like I did with my prediction, the day he announced, that Rick Perry was going to win it all (all, that is, except the presidency). Hey, how was I to know he suffered from chronic brain freeze? (OK, actually, I hedged that prediction, too — but nobody remembers that.)

This time, I’ve been more cautious. All during the holidays, I kept getting these vibes that made me feel like this year was not as freaky as I thought it was, and that things were starting to take their customary shape.

All during the fall, even very late fall, I was puzzled. I didn’t know what to tell people who asked me how the GOP presidential nomination process was going in South Carolina. Likely Republican voters were just jumping from candidate to candidate like restless frogs moving from one lily pad to the next.

I knew that the party nationally, and in SC particularly, had been having an identity crisis ever since 2008. The usual patterns didn’t apply, as we saw with the victory of Nikki Haley over more normal Republicans. It didn’t look like the Tea Party was going to be that much of a factor this time, but it was hard to say.

I even started to believe that this time, for once, South Carolina might not go for the eventual nominee. Which would greatly reduce the SC Mystique in the national party.

But then, things shook out to the point that the familiar pattern asserted itself. After all that running around and flirting, SC Republicans started flocking to Mitt Romney. The pattern here has been to go for the establishment guy, and this year that guy was Romney. Last time, he was the Last Conservative Hope for the right, the last chance to stop the establishment candidate of 2008, John McCain — who, for his part, had been the outsider candidate in the previous contested GOP primary, in 2000.

I heard the pattern described well on NPR Friday:

You know, one thing about this race – for all its weirdness and twists and turns – it still is following the traditional form for a Republican primary. There is an establishment candidate. There are some conservative alternatives. Usually the establishment guy wins; that seems what’s like what’s happening this time.

And the guy who came in second last time – because the Republicans are still a hierarchical party, despite the Tea Party – is first this time. It happened with McCain. It looks like it’s happening with Romney. And the other thing, it looks like Republicans, as Bill Clinton used to say, fall in line instead of falling in love. Yes, Romney has weaknesses but they haven’t – conservatives have not been able to find an alternative.

Yup. And that’s what’s about to happen in the Palmetto State — whatever happens in Iowa and New Hampshire, SC is the place that says, “Y’all settle down, now — here’s your nominee.”

I’m late in writing this. I should have said it on the last day of 2011, when I read that Warren Tompkins had jumped aboard the Romney bandwagon.

All the other GOP establishment types had declared themselves early — Alan Wilson, Henry McMaster, Mike Campbell and John Courson for Huntsman, Bobby Harrell for Perry, etc. — but Warren had hung back. Warren is the Tessio of GOP endorsers in SC — he’s the smart one, who backs the most likely horse.

When I saw he’d made that move, I said to myself, Self, Warren is seeing the same stuff you’re seeing — and then some.

But I didn’t utter the words “It’s over” until Friday, when I said in a Tweet responding to the latest poll numbers:

It’s over. Unless, of course, it isn’t.“@postandcourier: SC GOP voters like Romney best,… CNN/Time poll says. #scpolhttp://ow.ly/8kBBS”

Notice the hedge. I’m being smart. I want people to call the “Tessio of SC bloggers.” No, wait — he got whacked. How about, “The Clemenza of SC bloggers.” That would be more like it.

Today, I’ve been talking to a number of SC Republicans to get their thoughts on the race. I started my day over breakfast with an activist who has not declared for a candidate, even though he sees the writing on the wall. His first words to me were, “It is so over.”

I’m inclined to agree.

The Boston Globe’s endorsement of Huntsman

27 Replies

Huntsman in South Carolina in August.

The Boston Globe‘s endorsement of Jon Huntsman was strong, particularly in the way the paper set the scene and explained what was at stake (something most of the candidates have failed to do):

DISSATISFACTION WITH the economy, expressed in spasms of anger toward Wall Street and Washington; the dashed hopes of many who believed that Barack Obama’s election would create a new spirit of unity; and genuine uncertainty about Democratic health care reform – all of these have created an historic opportunity for the Republican Party. Just three years removed from a Republican administration that was roundly judged a failure, the party has a chance to renew itself – to blaze a path to bipartisan action on the budget, to introduce market-based solutions to health costs, and to construct a post-Iraq War network of alliances to promote global economic strength, knowing that true security comes from both peace and prosperity.

So far, Republican presidential contenders have shown little awareness of this opportunity. Far from promoting bipartisan unity, the GOP candidates have even abandoned Ronald Reagan’s “11th commandment” (“Though shalt not speak ill of another Republican”), shattering the party’s customary internal unity in an electric storm of name-calling and accusations. Rather than compare creative policy solutions, the candidates have vied for meaningless titles like “true conservative.’’ Rather than outline a vision for a safer world, they’ve signaled a return to Bush-era posturing and disdain for allies who don’t blindly serve American interests…

Then, there is the reasoning presented for Huntsman himself:

With a strong record as governor of Utah and US ambassador to China, arguably the most important overseas diplomatic post, Huntsman’s credentials match those of anyone in the field. He would be the best candidate to seize this moment in GOP history, and the best-prepared to be president.

Huntsman governed Utah as a clear conservative who nonetheless put the interests of his state ahead of ideology. He delighted right-wing supporters by replacing a graduated state income tax with a flat tax. Strong economic growth put Utah in the top five in job creation during Huntsman’s tenure, while he gave tax credits to companies developing solar energy. He offered a sweeping school choice plan, and joined the Western Climate Initiative, which set goals for reducing greenhouse gases.

When the national economy fell into recession, some Republican governors made a show of rejecting federal stimulus money on ideological grounds; sensibly, Huntsman took the money. While he endorsed the notion of a federal stimulus, he also offered a credible critique of the way the Democratic Congress had structured the plan. Then, when Obama offered him the post of ambassador to China, Huntsman accepted. Other Republicans, such as New Hampshire’s Judd Gregg, couldn’t bring themselves to accept entreaties from a Democratic president. Huntsman did. It attests to his sincerity when he vows to lead in a bipartisan spirit.

Serving as ambassador to China, the largest economic and military competitor to the United States, is a deeply meaningful credential. Notably, Huntsman’s nuanced foreign-policy vision of economic and strategic alliances stems from his time in Beijing. While other candidates point toward Cold War-style rejection and isolation of China, Huntsman promises deeper engagement. But he had the courage as ambassador to walk among protesters, drawing the ire of repressive Chinese authorities…

Now watch as Republican partisans dismiss the endorsement as worthless because it came from a “liberal newspaper.” Which to an intelligent person should be irrelevant, of course — either the endorsement shows wisdom or it does not. This one does, and that fact that partisans will dismiss it is further testimony, as if we needed any, to the distortions partisanship causes to the human mind.

A person free of such handicaps, an person with a penetrating, unfettered mind, can see that Huntsman has presented himself as the most serious, least desperate candidate. Even in small things: The Huntsman ad that I embedded here on the blog a few days ago shows a perspicacity, a discernment, a seriousness that no other candidate has either been able, or has dared, to show. A 30-second ad is a pathetic thing upon which to judge a candidate. But the tragedy of this nation is that so many voters base their judgments on so little. And it says a lot about Huntsman that he can pack more meaning into such a medium.

As The Globe says, Romney comes next in this regard, but his desperation to pander, to stoop to conquer, means he falls far short of Huntsman. And of course, The Globe knows Romney far better than I do.

Gingrich insists: Employment glass is half empty

5 Replies

I was wondering this morning how the GOP field was going to react to the awful news — from their perspective — that the unemployment rate has dropped to the lowest level in three years.

Newt Gingrich didn’t make me wait:

Gingrich Response to December Jobs Report:
We Need a Reagan Conservative
Hanover, NH – Newt Gingrich made the following statement today in response to this morning’s report of 8.5% unemployment for the month of December 2011:

“Three full years into the Obama presidency, and there are still 1.7 million fewer Americans going to work today than there were on Obama’s Inauguration day.

“Today’s new December unemployment figure doesn’t capture the full scale of the tragedy: almost 24 million Americans still unemployed, working part-time for economic reasons, or discouraged from looking for work.

“The Obama experiment has failed, and it is time to look to proven solutions that have successfully empowered job-creators in the past.

“Ronald Reagan enacted historic income tax rate cuts, a stronger and more stable dollar, regulatory reforms, and spending controls. Three years into his recovery, Americans had created about 9.5 million jobs. When we took control of the House in 1995, we moved quickly to balance the budget, reform entitlements, and make the largest capital gains tax cut in history – three years later, 8 million more Americans were going into work every day.

“Now more than ever, America needs a Reagan conservative in the White House.”

###

Now, before you laugh too hard at his desperation to find a dark lining in a silver cloud… Newt definitely has a point. More than one, even. I can attest to the fact that there’s plenty of pain out there. Someone very close to me lost his longtime job just this week — along with most of the people in his office. And there are no statistics telling the story of the tons of people who remain profoundly underemployed, compared to the jobs they had before September 2008.

But still… Newt mentions Reagan here. Does anyone doubt that, if Reagan were in the White House now, Mr. Gingrich would be insisting, vehemently, that we embrace the good news in the report? I don’t.

I don’t know whether the policies President Obama has pursued have helped improve the economy or not, and I’m suspicious of anyone who claims to know.

But good news is good news. And Obama looks more like a two-term president than ever. And some of the candidates who did not get into this race — Huckabee, Barbour, Christie — are probably quietly congratulating themselves right now.

Haley & Loftis agree on ONE thing: Romney

1 Reply

Maybe Mitt Romney is a uniter after all, if he can get Nikki Haley and Curtis Loftis on the same team:

Friends,

This week I was honored to speak before several grassroots organizations, including groups like the Greenville Tea Party and the Lexington County GOP. These folks took time out of their evenings to gather because they care deeply about our state and nation.

Their gracious reception reminded me well of the hard work, tenacity, and assistance these good folk have given to me during my campaign and tenure in office as your State Treasurer. Being with these heartfelt conservatives fills me with renewed energy to represent them and makes me determined to work harder and longer on their behalf.

I am impressed at the respect and deference that my brothers and sisters in the conservative movement have shown me. As State Chairman of Mitt Romney’s campaign, I can tell you that there are six qualified candidates in this race and my friend Mitt will certainly not get every vote, but the ability of the most conservative members of the movement to listen and discuss Mitt Romney is impressive, and gives me hope that our nominee, when chosen, will unite us in our efforts.

The latest poll, released today, shows Governor Romney in the lead here in South Carolina. This reaffirms my heartfelt conviction that most voters believe that Mitt is the man to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.

Be Well,

Curtis M. Loftis, Jr.

Last seen at each other’s throats over… oh, I forget what it was about, but it was bitter — the gov and treas have come together over Mitt. Now if they can just get their aforementioned Tea Party friends to go along…

Is it possible that Perry has dumbed his message down even MORE, just for li’l ol’ SC?

13 Replies

OK, so Rick Perry, who was not just on the ropes, but collapsed in his corner — his corner man’s arm cocked back ready to chuck the towel into the ring — before deciding to make one last comeback in South Carolina, has come up with a TV ad just for us.

Everything’s riding on this, mind you…

And here it is, in its entirety:

“Values” Script:

Gov. Perry: “As the son of tenant farmers from the West Texas town of Paint Creek, I learned the values of hard work, faith and family.

“I took those values with me when I served our country as a pilot in the Air Force. I returned home to farm and ranch with my father and married my high school sweetheart. The values I learned served me well as Governor of Texas, and will continue to guide me as President.

“I’m Rick Perry and I approve this message.”

Or, to be even briefer, Ah’m a regler feller, vote fer me.

Yep. The guy who has lowered trite saynothingism to the crudest of art forms, who has spent a fortune boring us in Iowa, has dumbed it down even more. Just for us.

Do you feel insulted? I feel insulted. I feel more insulted than I’ve felt since “Tinker, Tailor” didn’t come to Columbia as a mainstream commercial release (although I do hope to get to Nickelodeon this weekend).

Come, on Rick — show me there’s something there! Give me something to agree with, or disagree with. I mean, really — do you think South Carolinians are so dumb that they haven’t even absorbed the fact that you’re running as a good ol’ Southern boy?

Time’s a wastin’, boy. If you’ve got something to tell us, tell us. Otherwise, run along on home.

“Chuckles!” Where you been at, man?

6 Replies

That's "Chuckles" Gidley in the background, during a 2006 editorial board meeting. See how he got his name?

I was delighted to see this passage in the paper this morning:

Santorum will boast of his focus on the Iranian threat to peace while other lawmakers were fixated on Iraq. He will brag that during his 12 years in the U.S. Senate, he never voted for a tax increase and pushed for a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

And he will note he did those things while representing Pennsylvania, a sometimes liberal state, without “giving up his conservative principles,” according to Hogan Gidley, Santorum’s national spokesman.“He did not have to morph and change himself to win elections,” Gidley said, a not-so-subtle jab at GOP front-runner Mitt Romney’s record while governor of Massachusetts.

Hogan Gidley! Chuckles! Where you been at, man?

My calling him “Chuckles” dates from when he was handling Karen Floyd’s campaign for state superintendent of education. I’ve seldom had a campaign aide glower at me in quite that way before. Karen hated the camera, but at least she smiled for it now and then.

All in good fun. Chuckles likes his nickname. At least, I think he does. Of course, I once forgot that he was executive director of the state Republican Party, so I might have forgotten his opinion of the nickname, too…

Why stump for Romney in NH, rather than SC?

25 Replies

Speaking of releases from the SC Democrats, they just put out the above video, with this comment from Dick Harpootlian:

Instead of rolling up her sleeves and getting to work on South Carolina’s problems with jobs, education, and taxes, Nikki Haley is jetting to New Hampshire to play politics and mingle with the national press and pundits. It’s clear Nikki Haley is already done with all of us here in South Carolina and is planning her national political career. I hope she’ll bring us back a t-shirt that says “Nikki went to New Hampshire and all I got was this lousy tee shirt (and a lousy Governor).”

Aw, come on, Dick! The T-shirt gag has been done to death, and you just used it awkwardly to boot.

Anyway, the conclusion I draw from the video is that the Dems are driving to drive a wedge between our governor and her Tea Party fans, who are already less than enchanted with her over her support of Mitt Romney.

Beyond that, I find myself wondering — if she wants to campaign for Romney, why doesn’t she do it right here at home, with our primary coming up on the 21st?

Could it be because she’s worn out her welcome with many of the voters Romney needs to charm down here, while she still continues to get a free ride, and hagiographic coverage, from the national media — thereby making her more valuable far from home?

I don’t know. I doubt Mitt is that hip to the situation in SC. But it would be interesting if that’s what his campaign is thinking.

Ex-GOP candidate boasts of high ACLU rating. No, really.

4 Replies

Seeing as how I’m old enough to remember the epithet, “card-carrying member of the ACLU,” I was a bit taken aback by this release from erstwhile GOP presidential candidate wannabe Gary Johnson:

GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON TOPS OBAMA, PAUL ON ACLU CONSTITUTIONAL REPORT CARD
Liberty Watch Scorecard

January 3, 2012, Santa Fe, NM — Former New Mexico Governor and presidential candidate Gary Johnson ranks highest of all major presidential candidates in a “Liberty Watch” report card just released by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU report ranked candidates according to their positions on issues of civil liberties and adherence to the Constitution.
Johnson ranked higher than both President Obama and Texas Congressman Ron Paul in the ACLU Liberty Watch ratings. The report card included candidates’ positions on issues ranging from immigration to gay rights to a woman’s right to choose.
On the ACLU Liberty Watch website, ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero said, “Republican-turned-Libertarian Gary Johnson scored even better than Paul, Huntsman and Obama, earning four and three torches on most major issues. They stand in stark contrast to the other major GOP candidates, three of whom — Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum — didn’t earn a single torch in any of the seven major categories.”
The full Liberty Watch Report Card can be viewed at www.aclulibertywatch.org.

There’s an explanation. It seems that over the holidays when I wasn’t paying attention (OK, I admit I never was actually paying attention to Gov. Johnson, but last week I was like in negative Johnson-attention mode), the candidate gave up on running as a Republican, and is now seeking the Libertarian Party nod.

Which explains a lot.

Before, he was a Republican. Now, he’s more down on the two-party system than… well, than an UnPartisan. Dig the fund-raising pitch on his site:

Everybody says they want a viable alternative to America’s two-party chokehold.

Everybody — Meet Gary Johnson.

The two-party is over.

See what I mean?

The Huntsman Girls, tonight on Pub Politics

7 Replies

I emailed Wesley yesterday to let him know I would be available if he needed me this week or next on Pub Politics (which would me my unparalleled eighth appearance on the show). He said he’s let me know if he needed me.

Since then, he’s been distracted by the demise of the candidacy for which he was working.

But that didn’t prevent him from lining up a show with considerably more appeal that I could bring:

Did you know that the human body produces its own supply of alcohol naturally on a continuous basis, 24 hours a day, seven days a week? Did you know that the world’s oldest known recipe is for beer?

And did you know that the Huntsman Girls are going to be our special guests this week on Pub Politics? Meet Wes and Phil and the girls at Pearlz Oyster Bar in the Vista this Thursday, January 5 at our usual time, 6pm. We’ll chat politics and partying to celebrate Phil’s birthday.

The Huntsman girls – Mary Anne, Liddy, and Abby – the eldest three children of presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman are most notable for their recent viral YouTube videos. Mary Anne, 26, is a concert pianist and works on the fundraising side of her father’s campaign, Abby, 25, works in broadcasting and handles media with the campaign, and Liddy, 23, is a recent college grad recruiting young voters.

You can follow them on twitter @Jon2012Girls or check out their YouTube videos where they mock a Herman Cain ad or offer up their own rendition of a popular Justin Timberlake song.

McCain endorses former rival Romney

Look out, SC! You’ve been chosen as site of the GOP Götterdämmerung

11 Replies

Perry. Rick Perry...

Yikes! I didn’t expect this. Perry just faked everybody out. After sounding (and looking) like a loser last night, and mumbling about going home to lick his wounds and reassess (with New Hampshire a week away), suddenly Rick Perry tweeted this out:

And the next leg of the marathon is the Palmetto State…Here we come South Carolina!!!

Oh, and the above picture was included with the Tweet. I think he’s trying to give a James Bond impression. Like he just climbed out of that pond, and he’s going to take off that wetsuit-looking thing and have a tux on underneath or something.

Here’s what National Journal is reporting:

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa –- Just hours after announcing via Twitter that he would be continuing his presidential bid in South Carolina, Texas Gov. Rick Perry blasted Iowa’s caucus process and blamed it for his fifth-place finish.

“This is a quirky place, a quirky process to say the least, and we’re going to go into places where they have actual primaries and there are going to be real Republicans voting,” he told reporters. “Not that there aren’t real Republicans here in Iowa, but the fact it is was a pretty loosey-goosey process and you had a ton of people who were there that admitted they were Democrats voting in the caucuses last night.”

Sshhh! Don’t anybody tell the governor that we have open primaries here, and don’t register by party! Let it be a surprise!

So long, Michele Bachmann…

33 Replies

OK, now that she’s made her exit speech, we are reminded of two things:

Just how useless the Iowa Straw Poll is — she mentioned having won it — as if we didn’t already know.
That the country is probably better off without her leadership.

I base the latter on her hyperbolic explanation of why she ran. She explained that Obamacare “endangered the very survival of the United States of America.”

So, in our lifetime, that makes two existential threats to our country: The Soviet Union, and a health care plan that is a timid, pale shadow of that provided in practically every other advanced nation in the world.

You know, I’m thinking it would be great if the GOP would now concentrate on finding a nominee who knows what a real threat is. Because the most critical part of the job description is, after all, commander in chief. Maybe that process began in Iowa last night.

The painting to which the ex-candidate referred: "Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States," by Howard Chandler Christy.

With a Mormon and a Catholic leading the pack, let’s pause for a few words from John F. Kennedy

28 Replies

On the morning after the photo-finish in Iowa, The New Yorker is waxing deeply philosophical:

What will be more telling, perhaps, is how the Republican candidates, in the primaries and caucuses to come, address the ideals and most personal beliefs of others. A party whose base has increasingly been oriented around the interests of politicized evangelism finds itself with a tie between a Mormon and a Catholic. (The “entrance polls” in Iowa, like many others so far, showed one set of numbers for those identifying themselves as “evangelical or born again,” and one set for those who do not.) One has been left to wonder how much of a factor Romney’s religion has been in his troubles with Republican voters. (They have so many non-sectarian reasons to suspect him that it’s hard to tease out.) In the 2008 election, as Hendrik Hertzberg noted at the time, Romney attempted to ingratiate himself by drawing a circle around the followers of organized religions generally, while casting aspersions on those who led a secular life. Santorum, meanwhile, has made religious beliefs about matters such as family planning and romantic relationships cornerstones of his political program.

We are more than a half century removed from John F. Kennedy’s campaign to be the first Catholic President. In a speech that he felt he needed to give, at the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, he said,

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew—or a Quaker or a Unitarian or a Baptist.

Watching his speech on the subject now, one is struck not only by his words but by the expressions on the faces of the people who are listening—really listening, it appears, to words thoughtfully spoken…

This has not been the spirit of the speakers or the audience in the dozen or so debates so far. What will we see in the six scheduled for January alone, not to mention the ads that will air in the weeks and months ahead? What will the candidates, and their surrogates, have to say about each others’ religions? Or about people who have no religion at all, and—one hopes this won’t need to be said—are no less faithful citizens for it? (Kennedy, in a crucial phrase, spoke of the right to attend “or not attend” the church of one’s choice.)…

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits