Massachusetts State GOP Chair attracts Two Candidates

Peter Torkildsen’s, resignation as Massachusetts State GOP Chairman, has brought two candidates (that can be verified), forward that want to tackle the job of moving the Massachusetts Republican Party in a positive direction. Massachusetts Republicans actually lost seats in the last election – in a state where over 50% of the voters are registered as “unenrolled” – is mind-boggling - from a statistics standpoint.

Will new leadership address the issues of conservatives in the Bay State, garner enough press (outside of New England Cable News) to brand both the party and any candidates, and, most importantly, act like (tired but appropriate analogy) Reagan Republicans?

(Ronald Regan won the Bay State twice - by sticking to his conservative principals, while having the sense to include all peoples, into the party (including Union Democrats, all ethnicity and genders). In other words, he did not win the Bay State by declaring himself pro-choice.)

The Candidates in brief: Mike Franco , of East Longmeadow, has not held public office, and ran two failed campaigns for Governors council (neither should be held against a candidate), Franco who is a fathers-rights activist is also unapologetically pro-life and pro-family.

Jennifer Nassour, a mother, wife and long-time Republican activist, is referred to as “a breath of fresh air” by State Senator Scott Brown (one of the few Bay State Republicans to hold an office)
(Being a "party insider" should not be held against anyone.)

A comment responding to an article in the Boston Herald regarding Scotts endorsement of Nassour was blatantly sexist, suggesting that Nassour stick to her present employment as a “mom”. (Making her even more qualified in the mind of a Conservative Feminist.) Nassour has a hefty resume, especially as a fund-raiser, a quality badly needed should the Republican Party hope to regain ground in Massachusetts - they will need to consider branding and a paid media blitz, as they face a less than friendly press. Therefore, someone with the ability to multi-task ("mom"), is an aggressive fundraiser and who understands how to use the media (including social media)may be the ticket.

That said, be it Franco or Nassour who is chosen on the 27th by members of the State Committee, ignoring the grassroots, failing to push conservative Republican candidates by aggressive branding, and most importantly, acting like Democrats, will assure that the status qua remains the same.

Note: Jeff Beatty, Republican candidate for Senate 2008, had little press outside of the New England Cable News Network and the Cape – that said Suffolk University Polls conducted at various points in the campaign showed a specific increase in approval for Jeff Beatty, consistent with the percentage of those polled on “name recognition”.

Obama Budget Proposal - the “Middle Class” Tax Cut Under Fire from Democrats

The Associated Press is reporting that there is some dissension amongst the rank and file Democrats (and some fiscally horrified Republicans) over the President-Elects proposed stimulus plan. Of interest are the proposed tax cuts –

About $300 billion of Obama's package would be for tax cuts or refunds for individuals and businesses.
One tax provision would provide a $500 tax cut for most workers and $1,000 for couples, at a cost of about $140 billion to $150 billion over two years. The individual tax cuts may be awarded through withholding less from worker paychecks, effectively making checks about $10 to $20 larger each week.
Democrats emerging from a closed-door meeting of the Senate Finance Committee had little positive to say about the tax cut proposals. Conrad was critical of the proposed break for workers and their families.
"Twenty bucks a week. How much of a lift is that going to give?" he said.
Nor did he sound positive about a proposed tax break for businesses to create jobs — a $3,000 tax credit for companies that hire or retrain workers.
"If I'm a business person, it's unlikely if you give me a several thousand dollar credit that I'm going to hire people if I can't sell the products they're producing," Conrad said.

Although an extra $20 per week appears to be a drop in the bucket, Conrad (D-ND) is following Liberal form in decrying tax cuts; while the President Elect’s path to the Oval Office was paved with promises of “Middle Class Relief”, bought hook, line and sinker by most “independent minded” voters, that $20 bucks could speak volumes in 2010. What will continue to be on the minds of those who cast their vote for $20, will be the big-business bailouts that were shoved down the throats of the Taxpayer, initially proposed to salvage the government run mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the list of those lining up for a piece of the taxpayer funded pie include, not only any industry associated with a mortgage or credit designation – but those industries who made bad business decisions, as well as those who are suffering as a result of loss of consumer confidence.

Newspapers in Connecticut are asking for relief. (Although some insist it selective tax relief, rather than a true “bailout”, newspapers failed to understand that editorializing the news and alienating 50% of their audience, in an age where that 50% can go elsewhere to find news that is not “biased”, resulted in a drop in subscriptions. (Note: not all newspapers are experiencing steep declines, The Wall Street Journal, for instance.) Although the press has consistently blamed the decline on the “Internet”, a new source for decline in subscriptions appears to be literacy! (Possible cause of new scapegoat: Online advertising revenues not as expected.

The latest industry to line up at the “bailout trough” is the Porn industry. Given the make-up of the current legislature, it would not surprise most conservatives should Larry Flint receive more than a $20 check in the mail. Conrad, who was one of the earliest proponents of the subprime bailouts (some self-interest may have applied) , should look long and hard at those proposed tax cuts and consider those colleagues who might want to stay competitive in 2010.

Senate Democrats follow the Letter of the Law – Burris to be Seated

Roland Burris Photo Wall Street Journal

In a change of face, Senate Democrats, with prodding from President-Elect Obama, have relented and will seat Roland Burris. Burris, chosen by embattled Illinois Governor Blagojevich, to fill Obama’s vacant senate seat, has faced a battle from Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.

Reid, who had allegedly spoken to Blagojevich regarding his preferences for the vacant seat, has excluded specific individuals, all of whom we’re African American. Republican Senator Cornyn is asking that, if the tape exists, , it should be released.

One must understand that should a tape appear which clearly shows Harry Reid playing fast and loose with the Constitution (see 9th Circuit Court), with racist undertones, it would have no bearing on his current status. Somehow, scandals in the “people’s party” don’t call for action, unless of course it is at the hands of constituents (see Louisiana Congressman “Freezer” Jefferson, replaced by Joseph Cao (R) in a heavily Democrat district).
There should have been no drama surrounding the Burris selection, considering he was legally and constitutionally selected by the Governor of Illinois (who, although arrested, and facing charges, is still the acting governor). Reid, who has made some interesting statements regarding the President Elect is up for reelection in 2010.

Not so Fast, Harry – Reid Believes He’ll Lead the Senate until 2015 – Nevadan’s Say Otherwise.

Harry Reid, in a recent interview with Politico , quipped that he was looking forward to being “a vulnerable incumbent” - he welcomes this roll because he feels that RNC will waste money in Nevada that they may need for other states in 2010. The article begins with notion that Reids statement that he will lead the Senate until 2015 is a move designed to goad “ Republicans who’d like to unseat him “ and stymie “the hopes of Democrats who’d like to succeed him.”

Further in Politico's article, Reid laid out his vision for the Senate, one where he (and other Democrats) would be not “rubberstamp” everything Obama wanted (See criticism of Obama from Feinstein andFrank in recent weeks), and in “gung-ho” military speech, called himself the “point of the spear” against President Bush. Seriously, Harry thinks that he has protected the country from George Bush - and furthermore - the people of Nevada, who know him, will re-elect him in 2010 to another six year term.

Apparently the people of Nevada do know Harry, and according to Sherman Frederick, Publisher of the Las Vegas Review Journal, his seat is up for grabs. In an op-ed piece January 4th , Frederick lays out Harry’s demise in simple terms; Reid will be 71 in 2010, he has “difficulty connecting with people”, and he barely survived a bid for re-election in 1998 (429 votes with no recount requested). Additionally, Harry bears the same burden as Massachusetts Senator John Kerry; he simply is not “likable”.

Frederick goes on to note that a “good chuck of voting Nevadans treat Reid like a bad haircut -- with teeth-gritting toleration.” Should an opposition candidate similar to the one he faced in 1998 (John Ensign who went on become Reid’s counterpart in the Senate in 2000), it will be game over for Harry Reid.

To read the blog that started the entire Reid re-election discussions and interesting comments visit Review Journal Blogs With all the Shenanigans taking place before the New Administration has a chance to Even take the Oval office,(Blagovich and Burris,, Comedian Franken and Burris, Television Personality Sanjay Gupta, Appeasement Panetta's appointment to lead CIA added to a bleak economic outlook that President-Elect Obama believes will last for "years" - 2010 may prove to be a very interesting year.

RNC Chair Debate – Steele and Saltzman Best To Move Party Forward

The candidates for RNC Chair, met in a debate sponsored by Americans For Tax Reform yesterday. Televised at 1:00 in the afternoon via C-SPAN and available here on the web, the six candidates used this time to convince those who would elect the next Chair of their qualifications. Of the six, all, including current chair, Mike Duncan, insisted they understood the grass roots – however, there was a “failure to connect”, with the exception of two of the candidates, Michael Steele and Chip Saltzman. Although Saltzman, understands the campaign and how to best utilize, not disenfranchise, the grassroots of the party, his recent boondoggle of an ill-chosen, politically incorrect Christmas Gift, puts his candidacy at risk. Michael Steele remains the one candidate with the “get out the vote” ability as well as the ability to bring the Republican Party back to its original roots of “inclusion”.

The Beltway and those extreme conservative will do their utmost to keep Steele “in his place”, simply because he has a more “moderate approach” ( the Club for Growth comes to mind)and is, for all intents and purposes, not “socially conservative” enough for their tastes. In other words, they would prefer the status quo; the “us vs. them” nonsense that does nothing to bring new members to the party, rather perpetuates those RNC fund-raising mailers that have not changed in tone in the last 30 years. (Which liberal agenda scares you the most – Hurry Send $25 today!) (Mike Huckabee was incessantly attacked by the Club for Growth for the same ridiculous charges, (in league with Unions - i.e. connecting with people and getting re-elected in an state that is soundly Democrat - i.e. Arkansas twice!) which in the end, resulted in McCain’s nomination – and everyone knows how well that turned out.)

Steele, besides having a stellar conservative record, understands the need to focus on those “blue states” that the RNC traditionally avoids. The fact of the matter is that the tried and true method is not working – membership and elected officials are almost non-existent in the Northeast (whereas there are plenty of conservatives), the South is beginning to go the way of the Northeast, leaving only pockets in the Mid-West and some in the West. Steele is, shockingly, exciting. He brings a fresh perspective to an otherwise dull process, and has the ability to energize the base, but most importantly, does not plan to leave the base tucked away in a closet until the next general election, if given the opportunity to serve.

From a moderate conservative standpoint, Steele would have the ability to bring more like-minded individuals into the party, those that hold strong to social conservative values while understanding the need to be open-minded when it comes to getting out the vote.
Portions of the C-Span debate below.

Arabic News Site Questions Obama's Silence on Gaza

The Arabic News Site, Al Jezzera’s, article on president-elect Obama’s silence on the situation in the Gaza strip is nothing short of naive. There are several facts that the “Muslim world” has failed to consider, chief among them is that Obama was elected to be the President of the United States, not the “President of the World”.

In the article, Mark Perry of the Conflicts Forum, a pro-Muslim group, noted:

"Obama has said that Israel has the right to defend itself from rocket attacks but my question to him is 'does he believe that Palestinians also have the right of self-defense?'"

Although the group claims that they do not support Hamas, Mr. Perry‘s question regarding the Palestinians right of “self-defense” is plain hogwash. The situation in the Gaza was started by Hamas, an Islamic Terrorist group that was elected by the Palestinian people. In short, "the people" knew what they were getting into.

The article, in its attempt to condemn the President-Elect, goes on to point out that Obama spoke out in support of Israel during the Campaign. This should come as no surprise given the fact that Israel is a staunch ally of the United States, whereas the Palestinians are not. Indeed,the Palestinian Leadership, Hamas, has gone so far as to threaten the the US for the crime of “supporting Israel”. If Obama were to speak out against any particular "side" in this instance, when he officially takes office, one would think should be against "terrorists" (Hamas). That said, with no crystal ball in hand, no-one is in a position to know what the President Elect will or will not say.

The fact remains that Israel is a sovereign nation unto its own, taking no direction from the United States, and needing no “permission” from the United Nations or Europe in order to protect itself. With the Hamas leadership cowardly hiding in mosques, homes in highly populated urban areas, and hospitals, is it no wonder that there will be Civilian casualties? Palestinian civilians are taught from an early age to hate Israel and the U.S. and career focus in mainly on becoming suicide bombers. (You tube videos below)

One would think, think that instead of “condemning Obama’s silence”, these pro-Palestinian protesters would condemn Hamas tactics against their own people! That thought process can also be applied to the European Press (see Article Guardian UK here, CNN, CBS and the entire anti-Semitic American and International Press.

Hero of the week goes to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who has traveled to Ideal to show solidarity and support for Israel’s self-defense New York City suffered one attack on September 11, 2001; the Israeli’s suffer daily at the behest of “world opinion”. It is indeed, time for change, however, the change should come in the form of outrage against groups like Hamas and the “innocent civilians” who support them.