Hillary Clinton and a Hint of 2012 - The Rumors Begin

Clinton with Palin - the glass ceiling calls - image: newsbusters

It has been known, for some time, that Hillary Clinton has maintained her 2008 campaign staff,, and adding fuel to the recent fire - was her absence at the State of the Union Address. These "facts" can be added to a CBS Interview where Clinton “suggested she would be a one-term Secretary of State”.

For those tea-leave readers out there, these bits of news may indicate Hillary Clinton is intending to run for the Presidency in 2012. It may also mean that Clinton did not disband her campaign staff until all the bills were paid, she had made the plans to be absent from the State of the Union long before the date was set, and finally, with Obama’s recent announcement that he would prefer to be a “really good one-term president”, she is preparing for a well-deserved retirement.
Retirement – not likely. Hillary Clinton, regardless of the popular theory that Obama won in a landslide, did, in reality, have the popular vote in the Democrat primaries. Clinton lost to Obama when the “Super Delegate” shenanigans, ousted her from a well-executed, hard fought campaign against a rising tide of Progressive think. It was classic highway robbery – with Pelosi and her daughter casting the final votes in favor of Obama. Clinton, in her party, is a moderate, not so far to the left (a la Pelosi) to be blinded to reality. She is also a patriot, had been strong on defense during her tenure in the Senate, and, some might note, as not pro-abortion enough as the groups N.A.R.A.L. and Emily’s list, got firmly behind Obama. Don’t even ask about N.O.W.’s defection. So much for so-called women’s groups and women in higher office, giving a well deserved sister a hand-up.

What Clinton would face in a primary would be overwhelming support (assuming that the nation continues on the current track of self-destruction), from the Democrats left within her own Party. It would be a war between those Progressives no one really understands (but there are definitions available), and the traditional Democrat (or the majority of the rank and file). The problem she would then face would be branding. It would not be the Clinton brand gone bad – it would be the Democrat Brand in its totality. Should she succeed in besting Obama (and that is not out of the question), the only hope she would have would be a very weak and very partisan Republican opponent.

In the minds-eye of a Conservative Feminist (with degrees of moderation and sanity), the obvious course would be a combined ticket featuring Clinton and either Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin. All three have had instances in their political careers where they have bucked the traditional party line, and therefore, are well equipped to set aside partisanship to do the will of the people. Against all odds of this ever occurring in the next century, in an ideal situation, the American people would benefit from an end of the never-ending partisanship that is present in Washington. Additionally, the preference would be to have two women, both competent, both with backbones, running the country. It would shatter the glass ceiling and give hope to women around the world. Chances of this happening are, of course, zero, but one can always hope that love of country will someday trump ideology. (the Utopian side of the Conservative Feminist.) The fact that an electorate can conceive of such a concept has recently been proven, in Massachusetts – where the “independent minded” (and there is evidence to support that fact) Scott Brown, became the new Senator Elect from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Class Act – Mass. Senator Elect Scott Brown to Visit his Constituants in a State Wide Tour

Senator Elect Scott Brown, image CBS news

Newly elected Republican Senator, Scott Brown, will be making several stops over the coming days to thank his supporters as well as reach out to all Massachusetts citizens. True to Brown form (based on his Massachusetts Senate three-term history – archives available here), he makes sure that his constituents come first.

Brown: “We won this election thanks to the grassroots support of the people, and I want to personally show how much I appreciate that support and tell them that I will always strive to be an independent voice in Washington,” said Brown. “I’m looking forward to seeing some familiar faces from the campaign trail, but I hope to see lots of new faces as well because I don’t just want to be the Senator of those who supported me. I want to be the Senator for all of the people of Massachusetts.”

One cannot recall any other duly elected Senator (or Member of Congress) from the Commonwealth personally stopping to say a word of thanks after an election. Some may argue that Brown has yet to be seated, so he has the time – but now that the State of the Union has aired, one can bet he’ll be heading to Washington. He could have found something else to do, surely, readying himself to make the trip to Washington, but instead he chose to visit his constituents, he will be, after all, caring for the “peoples’ seat”.

Locations:
Friday, January 29, 2010

12:00 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at the Hu Ke Lau restaurant.
Hu Ke Lau
705 Memorial Drive
Chicopee.
7:00 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at the Falmouth Inn.
The Falmouth Inn
824 Main Street
Falmouth.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

1:00 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at the Kowloon Restaurant.
Kowloon Restaurant
948 Broadway Street – Rt. 1 North
Saugus.
3:30 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at Lenzi’s Catering.
Lenzi’s Catering
810 Merrimack Avenue – Rt. 110
Dracut.
6:00 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at the Maxwell–Silverman Restaurant.
Maxwell–Silverman Restaurant
25 Union Street
Worcester.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

5:00 PM

Senator-elect Brown greets citizens at Christina’s Function Facility.
Christina’s Function Facility
2 Washington Street – Rt. 1
Foxboro.

State of the Union – Obama Touts Partisanship, Tax Cuts and Eliminating Pork Believes Stimulus I Worked – Moves Sharply to the Middle - Analysis

Obama Delivers His First State of the Union - image Telegraph UK

In a total about face, Barack Obama has suddenly become interested in partisanship and tax cuts and according to his State of the Union, the recession is over. Suddenly he is a deficit hawk, promising to cut pork and make sure that there is transparency in government. Over the past months, the administrations focus on Health Care Reform belies the claim of renewed partisanship, as one party locked the other out of negotiations, preferring to ignore the millions of constituents who were against the bills in their current form, and throwing all criticism into the “partisanship” pot. Each stimulus, each version of the Health Care Reform Bill, each budget, was laden with pork from the Party in power. Talk is cheap, sometimes - Obama spoke about selective tax cuts and the need to cut spending and then announced a job creation bill that will cost a measly $80 billion dollars, similar in design to the stimulus, and one which former President Jimmy Carter implemented in the late 1970’s.

In several rousing moments of the speech, he spoke about the will of the American people and our ability to rise from adversity. America, according to Obama, needs high speed railways in order to best our global competitors. He’d also like to see tax cuts go to businesses that stay in the U.S., and to those who prefer to build overseas, no tax cuts at all. Protectionism is a fine idea; however, many states in these United States have such high corporate tax rates, that even a federal tax cut will not make a federal tax cut attractive. Massachusetts, for example, has the 4th highest corporate tax, globally. He blamed the banks who were part and parcel of the TARP program, setting fees on the largest banks in order to pay for it all. However, there are still more programs pending than three large banks can afford, and with the Bush Tax Cuts set to expire, a tax increase will set in across the board, (another source of revenue, one in which he failed to mention. – see marriage penalty and child tax credits and the federal income tax cut that will overshadow the $13 and $8.00 gain in Obama’s tax cuts. (Note: those who are working two jobs may actually end up paying back their tax cut, if they did not wisely claim 0 on one of their two W-2 forms.) What he did not mention was terrorism, a problem the U.S. faces from within its borders.

Overall, his reception was tepid, at first, however, the room warmed to him for the most part. His language was casual, less formal than most Presidents of the past, including George W. Bush, an effort to reach out those millions of Americans who are now looking at him with a less than favorable opinion. The task before the President now is to carry through on the promises he made the American people, and produce some results. Perhaps Obama truly believes that he has moved to the middle, perhaps these have been his intentions all along, perhaps he needed a crisis within his own party to be able to step up and get out from the shadows. Only time will tell if this new Obama will “make good” - he has precious little time to do a total about face before the mid-term elections in 2010.

That said should this be the real Obama, a total reversal of fortunes for his party, with a new party majority in Congress in 2010, will be exactly what he needs in order to be able to govern and get off the campaign trail. If it is merely rhetoric, then time and history will liken Obama to Jimmy Carter. Should he be sincere, then he will emerge as a Bill Clinton. All American’s should be mindful that it is easy to Monday morning quarterback, (or Thursday morning in this case), and time should be allowed for Obama to “make good”. As the President is used to getting bills delivered to his desk immediately, this should not present a problem.

For future reference: full text of the State of the Union Huffington Post

The Rise of the Populist Candidate in Massachusetts – Most align with GOP – Candidate Profile Earl Sholley Running against Barney Frank in 2010

The media and the DNC are still reeling from the election of, not yet officially seated, Senator Elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts. Brown, who ran as a Republican, was more than qualified for the Senate, given his background having served in State Senate for 3 terms, but more to the point, Scott Brown was not “one of those elitists”. In the early stages of the campaign, it was doubtful that he had support from the Mass GOP let alone the RNC – and more to the point, although the help did come, once it was determined that Brown was going to clock Coakley, he continued to be Scott Brown.

Suddenly, there appears to be a slew of GOP politicians’ comparing themselves to Scott Brown, specifically from satirical media reports, aimed at diminishing the Brown win and its impact on the GOP. The problem for those who would tag every GOP candidate as “wanting to be anther Scott Brown”, especially in Massachusetts, is that many who were raising funds, and had filed with the FEC to run against incumbent Democrats that have been entrenched for years (specifically the 4th district: Barney Frank and the 2nd Hampden, Richard Neal), were on the campaign trail long before Brown made his decision to run (or as he was making it).

Buyers beware: Take a good look all incumbents and all challengers for any given house seat in Massachusetts, especially. The reason, Brown did inspire the conservatives to come out of the proverbial closet, yet, those that already had established campaigns, did so on their own, several of them are easily identified as populist in nature. Many have no legislative experience, rather educated, degreed, and carrying a deep and abiding love of country. Some have run before, as Republican’s, only to lose due to lack of branding.

Case in point is Earl Sholley, the Republican candidate running against Barney Frank in the Massachusetts 4th.
Newspaper articles from the last election cycle when Sholley ran, such as the Boston Globe’s "Sholley Presses Lonely Battle against Frank without GOP Support" note that the Frank seat is safe, because the candidate (Sholley) is flawed and does not have party support. That said, the Globe does not highlight the fact that the incumbent is also flawed (half dozen of one, six of another), which lends to the impression that somehow Sholley is not to be taken seriously.

One has to question why then, would Sholley run? Is he some dedicated GOP insider? No. Did he enter the race to ride the wave of dissatisfaction brought to the forefront by Scott Brown? No. Sholley has been running, without backup (until recently), simply because he felt he had to do something, and it appeared no one else was going to put their lives on hold to run against a deeply entrenched U.S. Congressman in one of the most egregiously gerrymandered districts in the country. Earl Sholley is a populist.

Sholley has learned from his past campaigns, and although one can bet the house that Frank’s seat is considered “Safe”, at the present time, one can also bet the house that this designation regarding the 4th district will change. Sholley made his move to social networking sites a year ago or more, volunteers are showing up daily from both inside, but most importantly outside the Commonwealth, (financial and phone banking support). Should any comparisons be made between Sholley and Brown, it is that they both understand the power of the Internet, and how imperative it is to grassroots support, but that’s where the comparison ends.

While many of the Mass. GOP faithful were busy campaigning for Brown in MA to get as much attention as possible in the press, Sholley took the high road (so to speak) suspending his campaign and quietly working for Brown, until the results were in. Immediately following, Sholley Ads began appearing on the Drudge Report, and the tactic used in the last election which allowed a virtual unknown who had entered the race in the last quarter, going door to door, throughout the district, will certainly have a greater impact for Sholley this election, as time is on his side.
Sholley’s pluses: A strong fiscal conservative, well versed in the Constitution, Strict Constructionist, has a keen sense of history, (important knowledge used by some not to repeat failed policies). He’s not in it for the money, for the ego, or for any other reason that love of country.

Sholley minus: He’s no rock star, he is who he is (move that to the plus column), he has baggage, but that has already been recycled more often than not and expect to see articles regarding Sholley’s foibles (all personal in nature), again and again, without one mention of Frank’s foibles, which some can say, may be more egregious. He can be boring, at times, a lecturing on government can put many to sleep, that said.

The question to those Independent, Republican and Democrats who are living in the 4th - Who would you rather support in a 4th district election? Someone who has single handedly destroyed out financial system, or some sometimes dull, frumpy Republican who has a handle on finances, and actually thinks outside the box?

The question to those pundits who believe all is safe: With Brown taking the majority of the votes in Frank’s district, a good percentage of votes were cast because of Brown’s personality, but also because of voter frustration with the current system of entrenched politicians.

The fact that Sholley took 30 some odd percent of those votes prior to Frank (meaning that he did indeed have Democrats cast votes for him) as a virtual unknown) is a fairly good predictor of things to come.

The money: From from Open Secrets To Date, Sholley has raised a little over $32,000, compared to the $40,000 he pulled in the entire 2008 campaign, one can do the math. These numbers may be a drop in the bucket (1st quarter filings), but Sholley has time on his side, and as a populist, who’s message is one of fiscal conservatism, one might find the unimaginable happening in Massachusetts. The shocking revelation that a little known, landscaper, Army Veteran, who is just fed up with the status quo, giving Barney Frank the boot. He’s not Scott Brown, he’s Earl Sholley, and one can hazard to guess that there are more than a few just like Earl Sholley’s running against the entrenched politicians that do more harm than good for their districts and the nation.

Obama to Move to the Middle – Class – State of the Union to Include “Tax Credits” – Congress to Work on Job Creation! Who’s Buying This?

Barak and Jimmy - image conservative report.wordpress

Obama’s State of the Union Address which will be telecast Wednesday night, January, 27th, will include a slew of “tax credits” aimed at the Middle Class. The President now believes that the “Middle Class” is under assault, however, his tax credits, will be offset by the Bush tax cuts due to expire this year. What is lost on those who blindly follow, yet refuse to read, is that the Bush Tax Cuts included the child tax credit, eliminated the marriage penalty and gave across the board relief in the form of a tax reduction. This will now be offset by the following proposals by the Obama administration: begin with new mandates on employers to “encourage” retirement plans – this will encourage “savings”. (This will result in additional paperwork, an expense that the actual private sector employers left, can hardly afford.).

Obama also plans to almost double the tax credit that families receive for the costs of child care. One has to ask what happens to the millions of families that cannot afford “child care” per se – those that use the “latch-key” method, let alone those who have older teens who are not about to go into a “child care” setting.
Here’s one for the ever growing budget: adding more to the federal fund that helps working parents pay for child care – most often those that need assistance to pay for child care under federal guidelines are not the middle class.

Adding to the federal deficit through Job Creation - although the President and his like-minded Congress and Senate agree that American’s need job creation, they apparently have no clue as to how to achieve job creation in the private sector. This is evidenced by a new proposal being pushed through Congressto the tune of $80 billion dollars in the form of a “Job Creation” package. Job creation defined by the administration is to save jobs in the public sector and then designate the balance of the monies (being printed out of the Congressional basement) to “shovel-ready” projects. (See all the infrastructure work and thousands of private sector constructions jobs created by Stimulus 1?). Perhaps it would do well for the administration to take a step back and review a bit of history.

Although not found in history books, per se (as they are mainly written by Progressives, a group with an agenda, less a clue), there are archives of newspaper clippings and articles and books written on subjects (Google Books and Amazon.com) such as: Jimmy Carter's failed Job Stimulus program. A program which worked so poorly that between unemployment and inflation (which resulted when the U.S. dollar was worth less than the Canadian Dollar and the Cost of Oil rose through the roof – one should refer to recent articles where: the Canadian Dollar is strong compared to the U.S. Dollar and the price per barrel of oil continues to rise)the mix of unemployment and inflation caused a “misery index”. That index name leaves no room for speculation.

Recently, Obama gave an interview to Diane Sawyer of ABC in which he noted he’d rather be a really good one-term President as opposed to a mediocre two-term president. One, our President is considered a progressive (political ideology that is based mainly on socialism) and b); there are concerns that that he does not have a clue. Obama was being somewhat predictive in his interview with Ms. Sawyer, yes; he will be a one-term President – more than likely. The question of a “really good” one-term president, now that’s a different story. Then again, Jimmy Carter believes he was a “really good” one-term president too, and there are textbooks that are there to back him up.

Senator Elect Scott Brown (the Pride of the Bay State), has a clue. In one of his initial campaign ads, a video of John F. Kennedy discussing tax cuts (not mentioned in text books), was morphed into Scott Brown talking about – tax cuts! It was not designed to compare Brown to Kennedy as so many who cannot read believed. Clearly stated in the ad was that there were difference between the men, but that one policy that worked, regardless of political party or ideology, was: Tax Cuts

Apparently Brown did his research, while, some holding higher offices have not. In order to give true relief to the American public, including those from the bottom to those on the top, we need less “stimulus” and much less “debt”, in order to function and bring jobs (private sector) back on track. Which, it is obvious from the preview of the President’s State of the Union, that’s not going to happen.

As the second year of the one-term Presidency of Obama begins, let us hope that someone, somewhere gives that man several teleprompters loaded with articles from the 1970’s that explain, in detail, where he may be going wrong. Perhaps he’ll get it in time to stop the bleeding of the Middle Class, those on fixed incomes, and those who are seeking employment in the private sector.

How bad is it?

Sam’s Club, (owned by Wal-Mart) is being forced to layoff 11,000 employees. This is not high end luxury retail we’re talking about, this is deep discount. Apparently, the fact that rising costs due to rising taxes on every business that has anything to do with production, from food to clothing, has been lost on the administration. Our nation is at the point where, should this pattern continue, no matter what spin the political powers that be put on the misery of the people, no matter how many times Bush and Cheney are mentioned by a Progressive Democrat who is hell-bent on not getting elected (See Martha Coakley), the fact remains – that the “Buck Stops Here”, and it has. Republican or Democrats in both houses need to jump on the Scott Brown train and take a look at what can help the People, party politics aside, or they will soon be joining the ranks of the ever increasing unemployed.

Barney Frank – Plans To Abolish Freddie and Fannie – Replace with New System

Barney Frank, the Massachusetts 4th District U.S. Congressional Representative, apparently feels that Freddie Mac and Fannie May are no longer viable, despite statements he made in defense of the Mortgage giants prior to and preceding the financial meltdown: (Boston Globe)

Frank doesn't. But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall.

Apparently, now Frank has decided that, once the bailout of Freddie and Fannie tanked, they should be dismantled in favor of a New System(To be announced). File this under: "Covering Ones Tracks". One can bet the house that Frank’s fingers will be all over this new system, and therein lays the danger. Frank, who is up for reelection in 2010, has been involved with Freddie and Fannie, well before he took the Chairman of the finance Committee seat in 2007, the year the Democrats took control of the Congress. What lies in store for the Mortgage industry now is anyone’s guess, but with the Obama administration ready to become the sole provider of Student Loans, (see HR 3221 and HR 2669 Here ), one can bet the house that a bigger chunk of the mortgage pie will be controlled by the ever burgeoning “government” should Frank have anything to do about it.

Should the next venture explode a la Freddie and Fannie, into inglorious flames, Frank will be the first to back pedal and cast the blame – elsewhere – anywhere.
How fast can Frank turn on a dime? In response to Scott Brown’s Senate Race, Frank’s first thought was to re-write the rules and abolish the filibuster, however, after learning that newly elected U.S. Senator Scott Brown carried Frank’s district, his tone immediately changed to one that was reasonable - suggesting Brown be Seated without delay. Suddenly, it appears as if Barney is ready to cover his proverbial tracks.

Frank, the consummate politician, will be facing opposition in his district, from both inside his own party as well as from a populist Republican by the name of Earl Sholley. Sholley who had run against Frank in the past, entering the race late, pulled over 30% of the votes in Frank’s district as the “unknown” candidate. Considering that the districts makeup leans more Democrat (due to gerrymandering) it goes without saying that Sholley picked up a Democrat or two in the 2008 race. Sholley a fiscal conservative with a keen grasp of the constitution, has an earlier start this year, and the last FEC filings shows a substantial increase in individual donations over the previous camping. (See Last Quarters Filing) Sholley’s campaign is also effectively utilizing social networking.

Not to be outdone and taking page from the Brown Campaign, Frank has established a Face Book Fan Page, and a new Twitter profile (one tweet) to date. One can be certain that Frank will be changing his tone over the next few months to a “gentler, kinder, Barney Frank”, as the real possibility exists that his hold on the Massachusetts 4th and as an extension the Nation’s finances are in serious jeopardy. Stay tuned for more government intervention ideas from Barney Frank, as well as a whole lot of backtracking should any of his ideas not go over well in Massachusetts.