I wanted to write this diary a couple hours ago, but I had to wait until I finished cleaning the vomit off my keyboard. I had just finished breakfast when I saw this disgusting picture on a Facebook post:

Ronald Reagan spent his entire political life fighting Communism. He dedicated much of his Presidency to winning the Cold War. He had the guts to call the USSR the “Evil Empire“. Within a few years of the end of his second term, the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed. The culmination of his resolve and his steel spine was the ultimate victory over tyranny, and he lived to see it.

Thank God he did not live long enough to see his America threatened by statism from within, from someone duly elected to hold the same office he held. If Reagan were alive today, I’ve no doubt that he would be fighting against Obama’s socialist agenda with all his heart and soul. To have Time magazine desecrate his memory, on the verge of his 100th birthday celebration, is unforgivable.

So what can we do about it? Should we just ignore it and write it off as just one more example of the death of journalism, the bias of the lamestream media? No! I won’t do it. They’ve gone too far this time. But, alas, I am not a violent person. So here is what I will do, and I suggest you do the same if you agree with me. I will print out a full-page version of the Time cover (they won’t get a dime from me for the real cover!!). I will cut out Reagan’s picture, then shred the remainder. I will put the Reagan photo, along with the shreddings of the rest, in a regular mailing envelope, along with a note that I will never ever ever buy a copy of Time magazine again. And that goes for any that have Sarah Palin on the cover (and those of you that know me should know how significant that statement is :).

I will then mail this package to:
John Q. Griffin
President, Time Inc. News Group
1271 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020

I suspect it won’t make any difference, but it will make me feel better and that is the most important thing! If you feel the same as I do, I recommend you do the same. Or if you have a better (non-violent of course!) suggestion, post it in the comments.

Based on the results of Round 1 and Round 2 of the alternative 2012 poll I started before Christmas, I submit to you the Final 4 Round. The top 4 vote-getters in the ‘Elite 8′ Round are shown below. For the Finals, the rules will be slightly different. Here they are:

1. Post your votes publicly as comments to this diary (this will limit it to RedState members).
2. List ALL 4 candidates in ranked order (#1=favorite, #2=2nd favorite, #3=3rd favorite, #4=4th favorite).
3. You MUST list all 4 candidates or I will not count your votes. In this round, I will NOT accept “None of the Above” as one of your votes.
4. All votes must be for one of the 4 listed candidates.
5. Please do not add any narrative to your votes to keep the page size down.
6. I will leave this “open” until noon EST on Thursday, January 6, then tally the votes.
7. Votes will be assigned by points (1st choice = 5 points, 2nd choice = 3 points, 3rd choice = 2 points, 4th choice = 1 point)
8. This is just for fun as an alternative way to conduct a poll.

The candidates are (in alphabetical order):
1. Haley Barbour
2. Mitch Daniels
3. Sarah Palin
4. Mike Pence

Enjoy!

Based on the results of the alternative 2012 poll I posted on Monday and tallied this evening, I submit to you Round 2. The top 8 vote-getters in the original poll were pretty clear, so let’s do a runoff using the same rules as before. For your reference, here they are:

1. Post your votes publicly as comments to this diary (this will limit it to RedState members).
2. List your TOP 3 candidates in ranked order (#1=favorite, #2=2nd favorite, #3=3rd favorite).
3. You MUST list 3 candidates or I will not count your votes. In this round and any subsequent rounds, I will NOT accept “None of the Above” as one of your votes.
4. All votes must be for one of the 8 listed candidates.
5. Please do not add any narrative to your votes to keep the page size down.
6. I will leave this “open” until noon EST on Thursday, then tally the votes.
7. Votes will be assigned by points (1st choice = 4 points, 2nd choice = 2 points, 3rd choice = 1 point)
8. This is just for fun as an alternative way to conduct a poll.

The candidates are (in alphabetical order):
1. Haley Barbour
2. John Bolton
3. Herman Cain
4. Chris Christie
5. Mitch Daniels
6. Sarah Palin
7. Mike Pence
8. Rick Perry

Enjoy!

The engineer in me can’t stand it anymore! I love Erick’s front-page 2012 polls, and I encourage you to continue to participate. But there seem to be a number of comments about folks coming from other sites to sway the poll, as well as comments about “missing” candidates. So I’m posting this as an open thread for a different kind of poll.

Here are my “rules”:
1. Post your votes publicly as comments to this diary (this will limit it to RedState members).
2. List your TOP 3 candidates in ranked order (#1=favorite, #2=2nd favorite, #3=3rd favorite).
3. You MUST list 3 candidates or I will not count your votes. I will accept “None of the Above” as one of your votes.
4. Please do not add any narrative to your votes to keep the page size down.
5. I will leave this “open” until noon EST on Tuesday, then tally the votes.
6. Votes will be assigned by points (1st choice = 4 points, 2nd choice = 2 points, 3rd choice = 1 point)
7. This is just for fun as an alternative way to conduct a poll.

My apologies to Erick if you don’t like me doing this in a diary! I suppose you could always shut down comments if you want to, but I hope you won’t.

Before I get to the main point of this diary, let me say what it is not.

This is not intended to be a discussion of Sarah Palin’s qualifications for the presidency, experiential or otherwise.  I will leave this to future diarists to discuss.  JSobieski has promised to post to this effect in a comment to JadedByPolitics’ recent Palin missive (now at 350+ comments and 45+ recs).  Frankly, I don’t personally care about that topic at this point.  It is best left to later discussion when we know who the candidates are and can explore their qualifications in a comparative sense.

This diary is also not intended to be an advertisement for a Palin candidacy.  Those who know me here at RS know that I have been a consistent Palin supporter (though last I checked, I didn’t have any drool running down my chin!).  Much of what I discuss below could be applied to any number of potential candidates.

So what is the point?  Here it is, plain and simple.  It is nearly 2 years out from the presidential election of 2012.  At the end of 1974, Nixon had just resigned and virtually no one had heard of a certain Georgia governor by the name of Jimmy Carter.  Two years later, he was President-Elect.  In 1978, most pundits thought Ronald Reagan was a right-wing warmongering extremist dunce that could never win a general election.  Heck, even within a week of his 10-point victory, he was virtually tied in most polls with an incredibly ineffective and unpopular Carter.  In 1990, hardly anyone thought an unknown governor of Arkansas had a shot at being elected.  Two years later, we had the beginning of a 2-term Clinton presidency.  And finally, in late 2006, hardly anyone thought that the Hillary Express could be stopped, especially by a newly-elected senator from Illinois with zero executive experience.  The rest, as they say, is history.

The only thing funnier than watching economists attempt to forecast market trends, is watching political pundits try to forecast political elections.  It is simply absurd to state with any certainty what will happen in 2012, either in the primaries or in the general election.  So if you read or hear someone saying “Palin is unelectable” or “Palin will wipe the floor with Obama”, or even “Daniels is too boring to win” or “Pence is not well-known enough to win a national election” or “Mickey Mouse could beat Obama in 2012″ or any variation thereof, feel free to chuckle out loud at the absurdity of the statement.  Anyone (including me!) who would make such a statement is either separated from reality or, more likely, exposing their personal bias towards or against a particular candidate.

All that said, the ultimate point of this diary (as belied by the title), is to particularly address the first of the absurd statements mentioned above (i.e. “Palin is unelectable”).  We don’t know if she’ll even run, and she very well may fall flat on her face in the primaries.  But the political landscape of Alaska, and to some extent America, is littered with the carcasses of those who have underestimated her.  So here I will make an argument for at least the plausability of a Palin general election victory.

It was the worst of times…

Sarah Palin of November 2010

1. is a failed GOP vice-presidential candidate
2. is viewed, rightly or wrongly, as divisive and polarizing by many voters, particularly independents
3. has an upside-down favorability rating
4. is viewed by many voters as “stupid” or intellectually “uncurious”
5. has a personal and family life viewed as a national soap opera by many
6. is best known for only one interview in which she did not perform well
7. trails Obama in all head-to-head early polling
8. has many Republicans (even conservative ones) doubting that she is qualified to be president
9. is viewed as “unelectable” by many in the GOP
10. has never participated in a presidential debate
11. is not actually running for president

It was the best of times…

OK, you have to use your imagination for this one!  As mentioned above, she may not even run.  But if she does, even many of those who view her as “unelectable” in the general election, acknowledge that she would be a formidable candidate for the GOP nomination.  So imagine we have just come out of the 2012 nominating conventions, and Sarah Palin is the GOP nominee. Now consider the

Sarah Palin of September 2012

1. has been a candidate for president for months
2. has run a successful campaign for the GOP nomination, defeating several other qualified candidates
3. has participated in a good number of presidential debates, apparently successfully
4. has demonstrated the ability to garner support across a broad geographical area necessary to win the nomination
5. has a unified GOP behind her, motivated to prevent a second Obama term
6. has given literally dozens of national interviews to a public now forced to consider her as a viable candidate
7. has a running mate with his/her own political and geographic strengths (as long as we’re imagining, maybe it’s Marco Rubio?)
8. is now a truly historic figure as the first woman nominee of a major party and one step removed from being the first woman president

Conclusion

As I argued above, it would be foolish of me to say that this would certainly all end well.  If this scenario were to occur, Palin could well go down in flames in the general election.  She may utterly fail at being able to pull independent voters to the GOP.  But keep in mind that the “worst of times” Palin trails Obama in head-to-head polls by anywhere from 4-12 points right now.  It is not at all implausible to view the “best of times” Palin as being able to more than make up this margin.  And this argument is based solely on the characteristics described above.  It does not depend on any magical transformation of her personality or her image.  It simply follows from a successful campaign.

So please, if you want to discuss the pros/cons of a Palin candidacy (or Romney, Huckabee, Pence, Pawlenty, Gingrich or whoever), let’s do it.  But beware of stating unequivocally that any candidate is “unelectable” or “a shoe-in”.  At 700+ days prior to the election, that is equivalent to a meterologist telling you it is going to snow on Super Bowl Sunday 2012.

(I tried this before the primaries with no success. So now that the 2010 election is over, let’s try an updated version!)

Any of you sports fans have certainly seen the Power Rankings for MLB, NCAA football, and other sports at the FoxSports site (among others). The NBA even has their own. So I thought it might be fun to start posting a 2012 GOP Presidential Nomination Power Rankings.

The purposes of these Power Rankings are simple:

• Have fun!
• Spark discussion
• Track ups and downs of the 2012 GOP race

The sports power rankings are basically one man (or woman)’s opinion and are completely meaningless. Just like these rankings! These are not meant to be predictive. They are just meant to be a snapshot of current sentiments. Candidates who are ranked highly now may not run, or they may fade. New candidates will show up. My plan (assuming anybody cares enough to read and/or comment on these!) is to update them roughly monthly until the 2012 campaign starts to heat up. Then maybe bi-weekly or even weekly.

I should also point out that these rankings are strictly my impressions of who is in the best position vis-a-vis the GOP nomination race. I make no statement about who should get the nomination or who would have the best chance to beat Obama.

Finally, please take these as they are intended, just to have a little fun. If you think I’m wrong or nuts, please (respectfully) comment as such. If I’m leaving out your favorite potential candidate, add a comment to that effect.

Maybe I’ll even add some odds once we get closer! (No wagering, please.)

azaeroprof’s 2012 GOP Presidential Power Rankings

Rank	Candidate	Prev Rank	Comment
1	Mitt Romney	1	Still most organized and well-funded. 2008 experience. Runs a slight Number 1 in most of the early polls. Still has that RomneyCare albatross around his neck. Closest to a concensus front-runner at this point, which probably works against him.
2	Sarah Palin	2	Clearly has the most devoted and largest following of any potential candidates. Conservative rock star. Still has work to do to appeal to moderates and beef up her policy resume. Has done nothing but raise her stock during the 2010 midterms. Book coming out next week will get her more attention. Even Joe Biden cautions against underestimating her. Well, on second thought,…
3	Rick Perry	3	Solid re-election, the strength of the Texas economy and Perry’s ability to remain a popular governor through two full terms work to his favor. Despite his protestations to the contrary, his recent public statements indicate he is definitely thinking national politics.
4	Mitch Daniels	4	May be the nation’s most successful and competent governor. Turned Indiana’s fiscal ship around during a horrible recession. Not the most charismatic guy, but America may well be ready for boring after 4 years of Obama’s left-wing drama queen act. Criticisms of social conservatives may make it tougher for him to come out of GOP nomination fight.
5	Chris Christie	15	Not exactly Mr. Attractive TV candidate, but you sure cannot discount his ability to get elected in a tough environment for Republicans. And then to turn around and govern like a Conservative! His early success in New Jersey has made him a darling among many in the GOP already.
6	Haley Barbour	7	Anyone else like Barbour could be discounted as too good-ole Southern boy. But Barbour cannot be ignored based on his success as Mississippi governor, especially in the face of natural disasters, and his longstanding party leadership. He probably has more chits and favors owed to him than any other potential candidate, and his leadership of the RGA showed he has no interest in resting on his laurels.
7	Newt Gingrich	6	Despite his baggage and bizarre tendency to stray off the Conservative reservation from time to time, Newt remains a powerful force and eloquent spokesman for the movement. As he has grayed, he has mellowed and made his personality a little more sugar and less vinegar to the center and left voters. Still an idea machine and someone to watch for a veep nod if he doesn’t secure the nomination.
8	Jon Hunstman, Jr.	5	Popular former governor of Utah. Thought by many to have quelled presidential aspirations when he accepted Obama’s appointment as U.S. Ambassador to China. I don’t think so. This may actually position him well to be seen as bipartisan. Being from Utah may make him a little more palatable to conservatives as well. Someone to watch.
9	Mike Huckabee	8	One of the big 3 in early polls, but I don’t see him as a serious contender. His best bet was against McCain in ‘08, but he “didn’t wear well in the wash.” Definitely appeals to SoCons, but his fiscal conservative bonafides are questionable.
10	Tim Pawlenty	9	Yes, he has been an effective governor elected twice in one of the most Democratic states (from a POTUS perspective anyway). But he just doesn’t generate the kind of excitement and buzz among grassroots Repubs and Conservatives (though this does seem to be increasing), and this is a requirement to get the kind of support required. Would likely rank higher on a list of Who would do well in a general election? ranking, but this is not the purpose here.
11	Mike Pence	11	Well-liked by the conservative movement types, but still very unknown outside of Indiana. Jumping from the House of Representatives to President is a huge jump, so he is not likely a threat to win. But if he resonates with the national voters and makes a splash, he could be a contender for the #2 spot.
12	Bobby Jindal	14	Is starting to show signs that he may run. Tanked in his big-time premier. But his record and fairly high national name recognition may give him a mulligan. If he can shore up his rhetoric and display more of a fire in his belly, he could be a player (if he chooses).
13	John Thune	10	Attractive, though largely unknown, candidate. Giant-killer from knocking off Tom Daschle, Thune has built up support within the GOP. As Romney, Palin and some others flirt with overexposure, Thune may be a refreshing new face for the public to get to know. What we don’t know at this point is whether the voters outside of South Dakota will love him or be indifferent to him.
14	Scott Brown	13	Still new, too liberal, and unknown interest. But he’s as close as we have to being a #2 rock star after Sarah Palin. If he could endear himself to Conservatives enough to be in contention for the nomination, he could be a heavyweight in the general. But Conservatives will likely rule the nomination process, which doesn’t bode well for his chances. VP maybe?
15	Liz Cheney	12	OK, I know many of you here at RedState would like to see her rated more highly. And she is one of our most effective critics of the Obama admin. Still, her last name is Cheney and that will continue to be a net minus among the larger population of voters. And like many of the folks on this list, we don’t even know if she is interested in running. Hasn’t shown any particular interest in running.

OK, before I get any nasty replies…2010, 2010, 2010, 2010! I know, I know. But hey, I’m a PC (yes, CW!), an appointed official of my county GOP, and Faculty Advisor for my campus chapter of College Republicans. And a campaign volunteer. So I’m working on 2010. But there’s nothing wrong with multitasking, right?

Any of you sports fans have certainly seen the Power Rankings for MLB and various sports at the FoxSports site (among others). The NBA even has their own. So I thought it might be fun to start posting a 2012 GOP Presidential Nomination Power Rankings.

The purposes of these Power Rankings are simple:

• Have fun!
• Spark discussion
• Track ups and downs of the 2012 GOP race

The sports power rankings are basically one man (or woman)’s opinion and are completely meaningless. Just like these rankings! These are not meant to be predictive. They are just meant to be a snapshot of current sentiments. Candidates who are ranked highly now may not run, or they may fade. New candidates will show up. My plan (assuming anybody cares enough to read and/or comment on these!) is to update them roughly monthly until the 2012 campaign starts to heat up. Then maybe bi-weekly or even weekly.

I should also point out that these rankings are strictly my impressions of who is in the best position vis-a-vis the GOP nomination race. I make no statement about who should get the nomination or who would have the best chance to beat Obama.

Finally, please take these as they are intended, just to have a little fun. If you think I’m wrong or nuts, please (respectfully) comment as such. If I’m leaving out your favorite potential candidate, add a comment to that effect.

Maybe I’ll even add some odds once we get closer! (No wagering, please.)

azaeroprof’s 2012 GOP Presidential Power Rankings

Rank	Candidate	Prev Rank	Comment
1	Mitt Romney	–	Most organized and well-funded. 2008 experience. Number 1 on the strength of his straw poll win at SRLC. Still has that RomneyCare albatross around his neck. Closest to a concensus front-runner at this point, which probably works against him.
2	Sarah Palin	–	Clearly has the most devoted and largest following of any potential candidates. Conservative rock star. Still has work to do to appeal to moderates and beef up her policy resume. Will be most closely-watched candidates during 2010 midterms to see how effective she is at drawing support for other candidates.
3	Rick Perry	–	The strength of the Texas economy and Perry’s ability to remain a popular governor through two full terms work to his favor. Favorite of the Tea Partiers with secession talk. Needs to win reelection handily to maintain his spot near the top of these rankings.
4	Mitch Daniels	–	May be the nation’s most successful and competent governor. Turned Indiana’s fiscal ship around during a horrible recession. Not the most charismatic guy, but America may well be ready for boring after 4 years of Obama’s left-wing drama queen act.
5	Jon Hunstman, Jr.	–	Popular former governor of Utah. Thought by many to have quelled presidential aspirations when he accepted Obama’s appointment as U.S. Ambassador to China. I don’t think so. This may actually position him well to be seen as bipartisan. Being from Utah may make him a little more palatable to conservatives as well. Someone to watch.
6	Newt Gingrich	–	Despite his baggage and bizarre tendency to stray off the Conservative reservation from time to time, Newt remains a powerful force and eloquent spokesman for the movement. As he has grayed, he has mellowed and made his personality a little more sugar and less vinegar to the center and left voters. Still an idea machine and someone to watch for a veep nod if he doesn’t secure the nomination.
7	Haley Barbour	–	Anyone else like Barbour could be discounted as too good-ole Southern boy. But Barbour cannot be ignored based on his success as Mississippi governor, especially in the face of natural disasters, and his longstanding party leadership. He probably has more chits and favors owed to him than any other potential candidate, and his leadership of the RGA shows he has no interest in resting on his laurels.
8	Mike Huckabee	–	I don’t see him as a serious contender. But since it’s early, no serious newcomers have arisen to erase the memory of 2008. May be enough of a power player to impact the race even if he is not in the running for the top spot.
9	Tim Pawlenty	–	Many in the media would have TPaw listed in their Top 3 at this point. I really don’t see it. Yes, he has been an effective governor elected twice in the most Democratic state (from a POTUS perspective anyway). But he just doesn’t generate the kind of excitement and buzz among grassroots Repubs and Conservatives, and this is a requirement to get the kind of support required. Would likely rank higher on a list of Who would do well in a general election? ranking, but this is not the purpose here.
10	John Thune	–	Attractive, though largely unknown, candidate. Giant-killer from knocking off Tom Daschle, Thune has built up support within the GOP. As Romney, Palin and some others flirt with overexposure, Thune may be a refreshing new face for the public to get to know. What we don’t know at this point is whether the voters outside of South Dakota will love him or be indifferent to him. Time will tell, but he is a definite candidate to move up the rankings.
11	Mike Pence	–	Well-liked by the conservative movement types, but still very unknown outside of Indiana. Jumping from the House of Representatives to President is a huge jump, so he is not likely a threat to win. But if he resonates with the national voters and makes a splash, he could be a contender for the #2 spot.
12	Liz Cheney	–	OK, I know many of you here at RedState would like to see her rated more highly. And she is one of our most effective critics of the Obama admin. Still, her last name is Cheney and that will continue to be a net minus among the larger population of voters. And like many of the folks on this list, we don’t even know if she is interested in running. Probably a cycle too early for her.
13	Scott Brown	–	Still new, too liberal, and unknown interest. But he’s as close as we have to being a #2 rock star after Sarah Palin. If he could endear himself to Conservatives enough to be in contention for the nomination, he could be a heavyweight in the general. But Conservatives will likely rule the nomination process, which doesn’t bode well for his chances. VP maybe?
14	Bobby Jindal	–	Says he won’t run. Tanked in his big-time premier. But his record and fairly high national name recognition may give him a mulligan. If he can shore up his rhetoric and display more of a fire in his belly, he could be a player (if he chooses). I see him as more VP material and likely to drop off this list when others start to make their moves after November.
15	Chris Christie	–	Not exactly Mr. Attractive TV candidate, but you sure cannot discount his ability to get elected in a tough environment for Republicans. And then to turn around and govern like a Conservative! I really don’t see him as a strong contender, and he’ll be really too fresh as a governor, but you never know. And if his policies are successful in Jersey, watch out for VP.

It was wonderful to read Brian Faughnan’s front page diary about Rick Boucher (D-VA09) being in danger of losing his re-election bid this year! Boucher is a first-rate example of the dangers of the power of incumbency; how a Congressman totally out of step with his constituents can make a lifetime career in the Capitol.

Back in 1994, while a graduate student at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, I was one of those misrepresented constituents. I wrote a commentary for the Tech newspaper urging Boucher’s defeat. Someone at the Roanoke Times & World News saw my article and reprinted a version (that I slightly modified) of the commentary. Except for a few dated references, this commentary could apply equally today. It’s just sad that 16 years later, the great people of the Virginia 9th are still stuck with this loser.

So to help add fuel to the anti-Boucher fire, and to relive some old memories from my Virginia days, here is my commentary in its entirety. (By the way, enjoy the reference to the good old days of the Clinton economic stimulus package, with a whopping $16 billion price tag!)

Pork in the 9th: Cleaning up Washington starts at home
by Mark Sensmeier
Monday, Oct. 24, 1994

The November elections are just a few weeks away, and public frustration with the federal government, primarily Congress, seems to be reaching a fevered pitch. We, the people, are fed up with an unaccountable Congress more interested in placating lobbyists and getting re-elected than following the will of the people. There is a plethora of stories of the Rostenkowskis, Packwoods and others who continually abuse the public trust.

Despite our complaints about the unresponsiveness and wastefulness in Washington, the true blame does not rest there. It rests with us. We continue to send the same people back to Congress without thinking about what we are doing. If a member of Congress brings money (translated “pork”) back to his or her home district, we run to the polls to re-elect that person like so many lemmings diving off a cliff.

We think that if our congressman brings lots of federal grants back home, he is helping us out. This could not be farther from the truth. To obtain this pork for our district, our congressman must make a multitude of deals with other members of Congress so they can bring home pork to their district as well.

So we end up having to send more money to Washington to pay for the pork in the other 434 districts than we receive in pork for our own district. The result is that the entire country is hurt and spending spirals out of control, leading to the devastating federal debt we have today.

We have the opportunity here in Virginia’s 9th District to do something about this. In Rick Boucher, we have a perfect illustration of what is wrong with Congress today. The 9th is a large, primarily small-town and rural district. Southwestern Virginians for the most part hold dear the conservative principles on which this nation was founded. But because Boucher is adept at bringing pork home, we keep sending him back to Washington. This, despite the fact that his liberal views and particularly his liberal voting record couldn’t be more out of touch with the views of the majority of voters in the 9th District.

According to Congressional Quarterly, in 1993 he voted to support President Clinton 85 percent of the time, and voted in a Democratic partisan manner 93 percent of the time. On the other hand, Boucher received low ratings from the American Conservative Union (13 percent), the American Security Council (30 percent) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (30 percent).

Boucher also voted in favor of the infamous Clinton economic-stimulus package, a $16 billion waste of taxpayer money. He voted against the Penny-Kasich deficity-reduction bill, against the balanced-budget amendment, and he cast the deciding vote in the 1993 Clinton tax increase.

Despite this liberal voting record, he continues to be easily re-elected in a fairly conservative district. Why? Primarily because he brings the pork home. But to do this, he has to support similar pork spending for other congressmen. The result is that the National Taxpayer Union, the nation’s leading taxpayer watchdog group, rates him as one of the biggest spenders in Congress. In 1993, Boucher voted to increase spending in five out of every six opportunities.

It shouldn’t surprise us that Boucher does not represent the views of the voters in this district. In 1991-92 (the last full cycle reported), Boucher took in campaign receipts of more that $600,000. Out of this total, almost two-thirds (63 percent) was from political action committees (PAC’s). So much for getting special interests out of Washington.

So, if we in the 9th District of Virginia want to help clean up Congress, we have a golden opportunity this November. Let’s stop complaining about Congress, and start doing something about it. Let’s send someone to Washington who will uphold the values of Southwestern Virginians and who won’t make a living wasting taxpayer money. “Kick Rick” on Nov. 8!

Mark Sensmeier of Blacksburgh is a graduate student in engineering science and mechanics at Virginia Tech.

Let’s (FINALLY) Kick Rick in 2010!!

Like most everybody, I was pleasantly surprised to see the GDP numbers this morning (+5.7% annual growth rate for the 4th quarter of 2009). Working at a private university whose income is largely tuition-driven, my career is heavily tied to the economy. Even though I know Obama will take undeserved credit for it, I still want what’s best for my country.

I think most people knew right away to be skeptical of the +5.7% number. The administration originally reported a +3.5% growth rate in the 3rd quarter of ‘09, but later revised it down…then down again…and finally to +2.2%. Even still, a +5.7% would likely still be close to +4% even if revised down.

Then, I saw this story which shed a little more light on the report. Apparently, the government decided to try a new little accounting trick on inventories that dramatically overreported the true growth in the economy. For an administration that has been caught with its pants down on bogus stimulus job reporting (including further lies by Obama in the SOTU!), this is par for the course. (And you’ll notice, this report was on MSNBC.com, yes that MSNBC!)

I imagine Axelrod, Plouffe, et al are hard at work trying to figure out a way to cook the Department of Labor’s books to show that unemployment is dramatically decreasing. Geez, while they’re at it, wouldn’t it be easier to claim that millions of Americans have gone off the no-health-insurance list due to Obama’s tough negotiations with the insurance companies! Then they could abandon the health care bill and declare victory!! Hoo-rah!

While this poll has potential 2012 ramification, it also has significance for the current battles with Obama/Pelosi/Reid and the 2010 elections.

The conventional wisdom is that Sarah Palin is a *polarizing* figure who has no appeal outside of the very limited radical right-wing base. But check out this paragraph from the above-referenced poll article:

President Obama recently stated that he “probably won’t” read Sarah Palin’s new book. But his possible opponent in the 2012 elections trails him in personal favorability by only seven points (54 percent to 47 percent). Among the critical segment of independent voters, they are virtually even (Obama at 50 percent; Palin at 49 percent).

I report this result not to toot Palin’s horn or say how great she is (as much as I might like to!), but just to highlight a possibly fatal flaw in the conventional wisdom. And her interview performances to date have been pretty decent, so these numbers might be even better a few weeks from now.

And on an anecdotal note: I don’t personally know a lot of people who voted for Obama. I tend to hang out with good conservatives (Boy Scouts, work, church). But I have talked to no fewer than four acquaintances this week who all voted for Obama, now regret it, and voluntarily told me that they watched Palin’s Oprah and/or Baba Wawa interview and now have a completely different opinion of Sarah. It’s a small sample and not quantitative, but I have a gut feeling that this kind of thing is creeping into the national psyche.

Whether you like her or not, she may be in a position soon to play a big role in accelerating the conservative resurgence. Time will tell…

The Obama administration continues to treat dissenters with disdain and put-downs. We’ve been called mobsters, right-wing extremists, domestic terrorists, and even silly. So now today, Baghdad Bob Gibbs likens us to Bluto and his buddies from Animal House for being concerned about Obama’s school speech tomorrow.

You would think by now that Obama, being as brilliantly gifted as he is, might have figured out that putting down half or more of the voters in the country would be politically, well, stupid! But now, he’s really screwed up. Everyone loves the Delta House buddies: Bluto, Pinto, Boon, Otter, Flounder, D-Day, Stork, etc. They are fun-loving and stand up against the evil administration.

Now, Obama and Gibbs have put themselves directly on the side of the Omega’s, the snobby, rich, elitist bunch that everyone hates. So I hope they now enjoy being thought of as Barack ‘Niedermeyer’ Obama, Joe ‘Marmalard’ Biden, and Bobby ‘Diller’ Gibbs. So, to Obama and his administration full of Socialists, Commies, and other assorted political misfits, I say “EAT ME“!

Consider this a holiday open thread and a request to $peciallist and 6eorge Jetson to come up with some really cool photoshops along this theme!

One year ago today, August 29, 2008, political life in America (and my life) underwent a sea change.  On that day, in a basketball arena in Dayton, Ohio, John McCain announced that Sarah Palin would be his running mate for the 2008 Presidential election.

Now, this is not a diary to pronounce how Sarah Palin gave birth to her fifth child at the top of Mount Everest while closing up the hole in the ozone layer.  Rather, it is just a personal reflection on that day and what Sarah’s nomination meant to me, and my interpretation of what that has meant, and will continue to mean, to the American body politic.

I first became aware of Sarah Palin in early 2008.  Matt Drudge had a link near the bottom of his page that said something like “Hottie for VP”.  Being a normal American male, I of course followed the link, which led me to Adam Brickley’s now famous (and enshrined in the Library of Congress historical archives) “Draft Sarah Palin for Vice-President” blog.  I immediately began researching Gov. Palin and liked what I saw and read.  I watched every interview with her that I could find.  I even watched clips from the 2006 Alaska gubernatorial debates.  I became convinced that she was the only potential running mate for McCain that would help close the enthusiasm gap between him and Obama, and his best bet for winning the White House.

I spent the next 7 or 8 months pushing this idea to everyone I knew, including commenting on every news article I could find on McCain’s VP choices.  Adam’s blog became a daily fixture for me.  But even as late as August 28, the prospect of a Palin candidacy was just a fringe possibility that very few people gave much credence to.  Two days before the announcement, for the first time in my life (despite being a longtime political activist), I actually prayed to God for a specific political outcome.  I had become disheartened by the media’s love affair with Barack Obama and the minimal prospect of beating him in November.  I so wanted John McCain to do something, anything, to inspire me.  As I went to bed on Thursday night, Drudge had several articles highlighting Tim Pawlenty on his site.  I went to bed hopeful, but somewhat resigned to the likelihood of a disappointing announcement and an unenthusiastic, doomed, Presidential campaign.

When I awoke on Friday morning, I slowly trod to the computer and pulled up the Drudge Report.  To my utter astonishment, there was the McCain/Palin button graphic that I also had on my computer desktop!  The headline said, “And the mate is?”.  I could hardly contain my excitement as I read the articles about the mysterious plane from Alaska to Ohio and watched Fox News speculate on whether or not it was Palin.  When they finally announced that it was official, my family and I were ecstatic.

Now, we all know the story, the ups and downs, that have followed since that fateful day.  We have many disagreements about Sarah Palin: Should she have resigned or not?  Does she have any prospects for future national office, or not?  Is her limited term as Governor an impossible obstacle to future office? And so on, and so on…

But what we are missing in these disagreements, is this.  McCain’s nomination of Sarah Palin, and her subsequent introduction speech electrified a moribund conservative movement like nothing else did, or even could have, at that point in our history.  We were largely a demoralized movement by 2008, worn down by the disappointing presidency of George W. Bush.  While he did keep us safe after 9/11, he betrayed conservatives on very many domestic fronts.  Had he sold himself originally as a moderate Republican, we could have used his failures to energize our movement.  But since he had suckered us in by proclaiming himself a “compassionate conservative”, conservatives now were stuck with the blame for his big government, big spending ways.  The voters had taken note, and wanted nothing to do with conservative politicians.  They were unhappy with the last 8 years, even to the point of backing an unknown, radically leftist, Chicago thug politician with absolutely zero experience running anything.

Sarah Palin’s ascension changed the conservative nation overnight.  Millions of people who had zero (or even negative) enthusiasm about politics and the 2008 campaign suddenly showed up at Republican Headquarters around the country.  The volunteer ranks exploded overnight, and suddenly there were McCain-Palin signs everywhere where previously there were only Obama and “Change We Can Believe In” signs.  The conservative movement had received a transfusion of energy, enthusiasm, and optimism that we had lacked for a long, long time.  From a personal perspective, though I had grown up in an activist Republican family, I had not been involved in party politics for a long time.  I immediately signed up to be a Precinct Committeeman, and now am very active in my county GOP.  I bought a button maker and made almost 2000 buttons for the 2008 campaign, most of which were either given or sold for cost to my county GOP HQ.  They flew off the shelves as fast as I could make them.  We had 10,000 people on our town square for John McCain’s midnight rally on election eve.

Now, of course, the election did not turn out like we had hoped.  My high hopes for a Sarah Palin vice-presidency (and subsequent presidency) now yield sharp pangs of disappointment when I think about them. I haven’t lost my enthusiasm for her, though, and I sincerely believe she will be a player on the national scene for years to come, perhaps even as a national candidate.

But the main point of this diary is not to argue Sarah Palin’s future one way or the other.  It is simply to make the point, on this anniversary date of her debut on the national stage, that McCain’s act of nominating her (and of course her magnificent performance at the GOP National Convention) provided the jolt of electricity that restarted the heart of the conservative movement.  Barack Obama has been a catalyst with his reckless, dangerous, socialist agenda.  But I truly believe that had it not been for Sarah Palin’s nomination, we would not have the effective opposition movement we have today.  Perhaps we would still have a Tea Party movement.  Perhaps we would still be arguing against nationalized health care at congressional town hall meetings.  But the crowds would be much smaller, less effective, and likely less mainstream.  Barack Obama may have gotten us off our butts and out on the streets fighting to restore the America the founders intended, but it was Sarah Palin who woke us up and made sure we were awake to see the threat.

Thanks Sarah!  Happy Anniversary today, both on your marriage and on your selection.  I wish you the best and hope to see many great things from you in the years ahead.

Conservatives, continue to fight the good fight!  We can, and will, save our nation.

I’m certain that Erick and others will have nice things to say about Ted Kennedy come the morning, but being a west coaster (time zone anyway), I’ll throw out a late night open thread in his honor.

First, I offer my condolences to the entire Kennedy family.  Cancer is a brutal killer, and having lost my father-in-law in the last year the same way, I feel for what they have all gone through.  Although I disagreed with Senator Kennedy (and unlike Barbara Boxer, he REALLY DID earn that title) on virtually every issue, I had great respect for his commitment to his principles.  While I considered him an adversary, he was one who fought hard and fair, and who truly believed in what he stood for.  And while he had numerous and legendary personal foibles, he seemed to have straightened that aspect of his life out in recent years.  I do believe that he had personal faith and is likely in Heaven now, hopefully unbearing his long burden by finally apologizing to Mary Jo Kopechne.

In Sen. Kennedy’s honor, here is my personal list of the 5 most effective political speeches I have ever seen.  This list is not based on ideology, but on sheer power of the text, the delivery, and its effect on America’s political discourse.  Feel free to agree or disagree or offer your own candidates.  They are presented in chronological order, as it is difficult to rank them against each other. (I am limiting this list to speeches given in my lifetime, though a couple of them I did not see live.)

1. Martin Luther King, Jr. - “I Have a Dream” speech - 1963 - While not a political speech, per se, its impact was clearly political.  In retrospect, while the Civil Rights battle continues to some extent today, this speech began the end of the bulk of racial prejudice in this country.  Without this one particular speech, I truly believe we would still be waiting for our first President of color.
2. Ronald Reagan - 1964 televised address in support of Barry Goldwater - “A Time For Choosing” - Incredibly effective speech that launched the career of a political superstar, the bookend to FDR as giants of 20th century American politics. 
3.  Ted Kennedy - 1980 Democratic National Convention - “The Dream Will Never Die” - The first speech on my list that I witnessed live.  While I disagreed with virtually every topical aspect of this speech, I was markedly moved by the delivery and the sincere commitment to its central theme exhibited by the Senator.  There is no doubt that, if they could have suspended the delegate rules at that moment, Kennedy would have ousted Carter by a landslide for the nomination.
4. Ronald Reagan - 1987 Brandenburg Gate, Berlin - “Tear Down This Wall” - If I expanded this list to my Top 10, Reagan would probably occupy at least 5 of the spots, if not more.  I saw his 1981 Inaugural Address live and in person and am inclined to include it in the Top 5.  But in all honesty, a speech which presaged the end of the Cold War is more worthy of that spot.  My mind may be a little slow this late at night, but I am hard pressed to think of any speech in human history which had this much impact on the security of the world.
5. Sarah Palin - 2008 Republican National Convention - Barack Obama had just had his coronation in Denver.  John McCain shocked the nation with his selection of a VP candidate, but over 5 days, her opponents and the media (not that there is a difference between the two) had savaged her.  And her daughter’s condition added fuel to that fire.  McCain’s candidacy teetered on the abyss to what could easily have become a McGovern-type loss.  Enter Sarah Palin onto that Minnesota stage.  She delivered an address that not only electrified the audience there, but exuded such poise and effectiveness that it single-handedly revived the McCain campaign.  Without the subsequent mishandling of her by the McCain campaign staff and the financial meltdown, this speech may well have launched one of the greatest political upsets in American history.  As of this date, Sarah Palin’s future political achievements are unknown, but whatever future she has is owed to this speech.

You may have noticed a conspicuous absence on my list of a particular U.S. President who is touted as a great orator.  I have seen a number of Obama’s speeches, including his coronation speech in Denver.  While he has a smooth voice and apparently reads very well, I have not found any speech of his to be particularly memorable or effective.  Other than the words “hope”, “change”, and “yes we can”, I have never heard even any of his fans able to recall any particular portion of his speeches by even the next day.  I am convinced that his reputation as a great orator is largely a modern mythology.  This reputation was very effectively astroturfed by David Axelrod and a willing media into a political movement based on a person, not principles or even words.  At least that’s my opinion.

Again, my prayers and thoughts to the Kennedy family on their loss.

ColdWarrior keeps pushing and pushing us RedState folks to become Precinct Committeepersons (PC’s), continuing Martin Knight’s drumbeat. Listen to him! That is how we will change and reinvigorate the Republican party.

Here’s my story:
After Sarah Palin’s selection last year, I got charged up and and finally submitted a PC application with my county GOP. Since all PC slots in my precinct were vacant (this is not at all unusual), it was just a matter of getting appointed by my County GOP Chair (and then approved by the County Board of Supervisors). I made about 1500 buttons for the campaign, went door-to-door on election day, attended some meetings, etc, enough that some party folks got to know my name and face. When we moved about 2 months ago, I got in touch to change my address and my precinct. Again, all 5 PC slots in my new precinct were vacant, so I just got moved over to the new precinct. The Chair asked me at that time if I wanted to get more involved in the party. Easy answer on that one.

Today, she called me and said the executive committee had elected me as the Youth Group coordinator for the county at their last meeting. It is essentially a new position, so they want to talk to me about what can be done to get ratcheted up before 2010. Basically, I’ll oversee any Young Republican, College Republican, High School Republican, etc groups in the county and try to get more started where they don’t exist already. Basically, I’ll be in charge of outreach to the “younger generation” (like Amy Miller and Jake W!).

All this because I filled out a one-page PC app (and I’ll point out, also too , that none of this would have happened if McCain hadn’t picked Palin, which I had been rooting for for almost a year before it happened thanks to Adam Brickley’s now famous blog!). So if there are any of you that aren’t already PC’s (or other position in your local party), get out there and sign up now! Talk to your conservative friends and get them to do the same. We can electrify this party in time for a huge victory in 2010!

P.S. I might add that my county GOP is already pretty conservative, so there’s no coup necessary here! Just want lots of fresh blood.

Last year, Barack Obama’s campaign brought literally millions into the political arena that were never activated before. Now, his disastrous policies are bringing millions of conservative-minded folks into the world of political activism that were never inclined to do so. This is a great thing!!! I would guess that there are literally thousands who have discovered RedState in the last 6-9 months (heck, I only joined officially a little over 9 months ago myself). There are probably many more readers than those who have actually registered and commented/posted. There are probably an increasing number who show up for the first time each day to just read the posts. This is a great opportunity to educate folks and to inspire them into action.

However, many of them are not as “educated” in conservative doctrine as are many regular RedState posters. Like many of the folks Obama brought into the process, many of our newbies know only how they “feel” about certain issues or people. Many of these folks have gotten active because they fell in love with Sarah Palin. Many of them just have a gut-level distaste for Barack Obama, making them more inclined to believe the birth certificate conspiracy arguments. (I mention these two issues primarily because they have been the biggest controversial topics of late. There are any number of other issues that will crop up that will be similar emotional catalysts.)

If we want our conservative arguments to prevail, we need a big army! In this army will be officers and enlisted folks, planners and fighters, charge-leaders and back-room dealers. There is a need and room for many. And there will be many disagreements, some of which we’ve already seen. We must be careful not to alienate or chase away these new folks!!!!! Let me make this clear, I am 100% in favor of factual arguments. You think Sarah Palin has made mistakes or is finished with electoral politics, fine. Make that argument. You think she’s great, make that argument. You think Obama’s not eligible to be POTUS, fine, make that argument. You think the whole birth certificate issue has nowhere to go, great. Make that argument. (Full disclosure: I remain a huge Sarah Palin fan; and I believe that Obama was born in Hawaii.)

But RedState should not be an elitist site!! We want a big army, we need a big army. If we call Palin fans, especially those who are new and whose opinions are still largely “feelings-based”, names (e.g. Palinbots) and ridicule them, they will leave our site (and likely political activism) for good. If we make fun of the folks who genuinely believe that Obama has not proven his eligibility (and believe me, I’ve met a good number of them, and they are a completely different, and more normal, group than the Paulites) and make cracks about “tinfoil hats”, we will lose them as well. And believe me, every person who leaves RedState feeling put down or unwelcome will let their like-minded friends know how they were treated or how welcoming our site is.

So please, Redstaters, let’s keep the conversation at this site thoughtful, incisive, witty, and fun. But please dispense with any third-grade name-calling. If I want that, I will go read HuffPo or some other such site.

Ta-ta for now, and see many of you in Atlanta!

So 8 Vichy Republicans have turned coat on their party and their nation by providing the key votes to pass the cap and tradetax debacle. So we need to thank them for their treasonous behavior.

So please go to Barnes and Noble or Amazon and order a copy of Jean Fritz’s Traitor: The Case of Benedict Arnold for as many of these turncoats as you can. The book only costs about six dollars, so it’s plenty affordable to send a copy to all 8!

Here are the Washington office addresses for the ‘gang of 8′:

Mary Bono Mack (CA-45)
104 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Mike Castle (DE)
1233 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Mark Kirk (IL-10)
1030 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Leonard Lance (NJ-7)
114 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Frank LoBiondo (NJ-2)
2427 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

John McHugh (NY-23)
2366 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Dave Reichert
1730 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Chris Smith (NJ-4)
2373 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Seems like a nice topic for a Friday afternoon.

Over the last 8 years, the lefties (in AND out of the press) succeeded immensely in painting caricatures of the key members of the Bush administration. They did this often by associating certain characteristics (true or not!) with each person and ALWAYS including these characteristics whenever they discussed these folks.

For example, President Bush was rarely mentioned without some synonym of the word ’stupid’ (dunce, village idiot, clueless, etc) and VP Cheney was rarely mentioned without a synonym of ‘dangerous’. This has been a liberal tactic for decades.

Conservatives have, I guess, been more reluctant to get involved in this type of name calling, preferring instead to focus on issues. But this is a very effective tactic. It helps to shape the opinions of those who don’t follow politics closely. Only the strength of conservative principles has been able to occasionally trump this word association trick. I am proposing that we, as conservatives and members of the RS Army, start using this tactic. For example, we could make sure that every time Barack Obama is discussed, that he is associated with the word ‘arrogant’. This is not truly name calling if you choose descriptive and accurate terms rather than inflammatory names.

So consider this an open thread for you to suggest words to associate with different members of the Obamadministration. Here’s just a couple ideas to start with:

Barack Obama: arrogant
Joe Biden: flibbertigibbet, or our foot-in-mouth VP
Rahm Emanuel: partisan, or master manipulator, something like that
Robert Gibbs: bumbling
Nancy Pelosi: geez, can’t think of anything non-inflammatory here

anyway, you get the idea.

P.S. Rush and Hannity already have some terms that they repeat often, like ‘Dingey’ Harry Reid, Rahm ‘Dead Fish’ Emmanuel, etc. We can continue to use those terms or make up some more. The idea is to be consistent as possible in associating these terms with their ‘owners’.

[This is a re-print of a Commentary I had published in the Virginia Tech Collegiate Times on December 3, 1993. It is a spoof of Hillarycare, which was being thrust on us at the time. Now, over 15 years later, we're about to get something similar shoved down our throats, through Reconciliation, by the Obama administration. To update the column, I have changed the word Clinton to Obama. Enjoy.]

If Grocery Shopping Were Just Like Health Care

Before we all get caught up in the feel-good ‘big-government-savior’ rhetoric being sold to us by the Obama administration regarding health care reform, we must realize the absurdity of this plan. Solving the problems in the existing health care system by creating a sweeping new bureaucracy is inefficient overkill.

To illustrate the absurdity of this solution, let’s draw an analogy: consider the problem of hunger in this country.

Clearly, the best way to solve the hunger problem is to help those who are not able to obtain the means to do so.

But using the Obama health care reform as a blueprint, here is how one would envision their solution to hunger. Everything in this plan is taken directly from the current health care debate.

The problem: Americans are spending more and more of their hard-earned money on food. Millions of Americans are hungry due to a lack of food. Americans who lose their jobs may be unable to afford to buy food.

The current food distribution is unequal; some have plenty to eat, some have too little. Many grocery stores turn people away who cannot afford to buy food. This is a crisis. We cannot be competitive for the 21st century unless all Americans are secure in their food!

The premise: Food is a right. Everyone needs food to survive, therefore we must see that it is provided to all Americans. We should not be denied food because we cannot afford it. We should not lose our food because we change jobs or lose our jobs.

The Food Security Plan: Each state will form Regional Food Alliances. These alliances will select a limited number of grocery stores from which food may be obtained.
Every American must choose which grocery store plan they wish to join in their alliance. They may only shop at the store for that plan.

States may also elect a Single Payer Food system. This would mean that all residents of that state could only buy their food at the state food store.

The Regional Food Alliances will place limits on the amount a farmer or food company may charge a Grocery Plan for a particular type of food.

It will be illegal for Americans to go outside the Food Security Plan and use ‘bribes or gratuities to influence the delivery’ of food service.

All employers will be required to provide 80 percent of their employees’ Grocery Plan premiums. The individuals will be responsible for the remaining 20 percent.

Your premiums will be based on a regionally averaged food premium. Thus, people who need less food will pay the same as people who need more food.

Employers who decide to save money by administering their own Employee Food Plans will be taxed 50 percent on the amount of money they save by not joining the Regional Alliance.

Unemployed persons or persons below the poverty level will have their Food Plan premiums supplemented by the federal government.

This plan will not cost any additional government money. It will be financed entirely by savings in other government food programs, such as school lunches, and by a 75 cent per bar tax on candy bars.

The Cost: President Obama’s Task Force on Food has spent literally months researching the food industry and estimating costs. Only 25 percent of Americans will pay more for their food under the Obama Plan - wait, actually 40 percent. No, we mean 15 percent - wait, it’s really 40 percent. But let’s stop this nonsense about who pays more and who pays less! People who pay more will also be buying Food Security, and that’s something money can’t buy!

Sound absurd? Watch out, I wouldn’t put this past the Obamabots. If you don’t believe me, let me ask you this. Have you ever gone two months without going to the doctor? You have. Have you ever gone two months without food?

So which is more important…which should be a fundamental right?

I had an epiphany today…OK, maybe it’s just end-of-the-semester sleep deprivation. Who knows? But I thought I’d share it for what it’s worth on a Friday night when there are fewer folks posting diaries.

I teach engineering at a small campus of a rather unusual university. Our student body, and faculty for that matter, are significantly less liberal than most institutions of higher learning. About 20 percent of our student body are ROTC, and virtually all our students are interested in getting into the aerospace and aviation industry. In the last three POTUS elections, I have run a mock election in all my classes. In 2000, George W. Bush got the votes of about 90% of the students. Algore actually ran in third place behind Nader! In 2004, the result was very similar, though Kerry did manage to capture second place with around 10 percent of the vote. However, in the 2008 version, McCain got only one more vote than Obama out of the roughly 100 votes cast in my three classes. I seriously don’t think that our student body has changed that much since 2000 or 2004, it just reflects the general appeal that Obama had to the younger voters. But it was a significant shift.

We at Redstate have engaged in a number of post-election debates about the challenge to Conservatism. Should we moderate our message? Should we go back to first principles, a la Reagan? Should Sarah Palin be our spokesperson? Is she what her fans (full disclosure: myself included) think she is? Should it be Jindal, Sanford, Gingrich, etc? Should we support gay marriage? Should we kick out the “squishy” moderates or open the tent more?

I love these debates. I have my definite opinions, and I love hearing the opinions of all of you at RedState. But something happened today in a couple of classes that actually caused me to have a ‘aha’ moment in regards to the challenges we face as Conservatives.

Read More →

A recent diary about Kay Bailey Hutchison dissing Sarah Palin in an advertisement brought out a number of negative comments regarding Gov. Rick Perry (R-Tx). I stayed quiet through these as most were from Texas conservatives, who I figured knew Perry better than I. I’m predisposed to liking Gov. Perry as I am a Scoutmaster in the Boy Scouts whose son is nearing the Eagle rank, and Gov. Perry recently published On My Honor, a book about Eagle Scouts (of which Perry is one).

Now, it appears that Gov. Perry, for whatever he may have done in the past that upset TX conservatives, is on the right side of things. From the featured story on Drudge:

WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Perry continued: “Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas.”

A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.

It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.

Developing…

Now, I don’t know if this will pass or not and what effect it will have in practice, but as a symbolic act it is certainly a nice start. I look forward to hearing responses from you TX folks as to how significant this story may or may not be.
And a message to The One: “The Eyes of Texas are Upon You!!”

P.S. And a message to Texas and Gov. Perry from one in Arizona: “I Second That Emotion”!