Friday, May 28, 2010

Breaking: Hell Freezes Over - Mass. Senate Passes Tough Immigration Law

Welcome to Arizona? Massachusetts Sends Strong Message During Election Year

Breaking News: The Boston Globe reportsthat the Massachusetts State Senate has passed a strict illegal immigration law. The vote: 28-10, with only 6 Republicans holding state senate seats.

Details include penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens, residency verification to gain access to Massachusetts public health insurance and housing by a check through homeland security.

Full article here: Boston Globe Breaking News

Chance of Deval Patrick signing this? Zero

That said, politically motivated Democrats can turn on a dime during an election year.

The Budget Amendments can be found here

Text in part reads:

Public Benefits Restrictions

Mr. Panagiotakos moves to amend the pending amendment (No. 52 by Mssrs. Tisei, Tarr, Knapik, Hedlund and Ross by striking out the text and inserting in place the following text:-

SECTION 154A. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary and to prevent fraud and misuse of unemployment benefits, the division of unemployment assistance shall:

maintain interagency agreements with the United States Social Security Administration to verify all claimant’s demographics and the United States Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Service to verify a noncitizen claimant’s work authorization;
determine citizenship during new claim filings;
require noncitizen claimants to provide their alien registration number; provided, however, that the department of unemployment assistance shall verify that claimant information and alien registration number with the United States Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Service;
require noncitizen claimants who cannot provide an alien registration number during the new claim process to send copies of any official documents they have that authorize them to work in the United States to the unemployment insurance program integrity department;
issue no payment after the first payment until the claim has been verified by the secondary verification process and the issue is approved for a claim from a monetarily eligible noncitizen that could not be verified by the above processes;
institute a secondary verification process, using unemployment insurance program integrity department staff to review the documents and transmit pertinent information from the documents for verification with the Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Service;
flag expiration dates of work authorizations or in the unemployment insurance system if such dates exist; and
report annually to the senate and house committees on ways and means and the executive office for administration and finance the amount of money recovered by the division from those who received benefits fraudulently as well as the numbers of recipients who were issued partial or lifetime disqualifications.
SECTION 154B. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary and to prevent fraud and misuse of public assistance benefits, the department of transitional assistance shall:
(1) consistent with federal and state law, require all applicants for benefits to provide verification of citizenship or their legal alien status; provided, however, that noncitizens shall be required to provide documentation from the United States Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Services for verification purposes; provided further, that if such documentation is not available or is questionable, the department shall use the federal SAVE system to verify their legal alien status and determine whether they are qualified aliens for benefit eligibility purposes;
(2) implement data matching with the department of revenue, the department of children and families, the division of unemployment assistance and any other relevant agencies to verify financial and categorical eligibility criteria;
(3) cooperate fully with the food and nutrition service of the United States Department of Agriculture in pursuing and prosecuting vendor fraud;
(4) refer all credible reports of fraud received from its fraud hotline or any other source to the bureau of special investigations for investigation;
(5) pursue, to the fullest extent possible, administrative disqualification penalties for instances of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and cash assistance fraud; and
(6) report annually to the senate and house committees on ways and means and the executive office for administration and finance the amount of money recovered by the division from those who received benefits fraudulently and the number of recipients who were issued partial or lifetime disqualifications.”

Sestak Bribe – Obama’s Watergate Unlikely If Press Has Lost Courage

The brouhaha all began with allegations by Democrat Joe Sestak of a job offer by Obama administration officials if he would drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate Primary back in February 2010. This occurred during an interview with a local reporter, Larry Kane, who first asked Sestak if he was ever offered a federal job by the administration in exchange for dropping out of the race and Sestak replied in the affirmative.

According to Federal statutes, this would be a felony – yet the story appeared to stand still for several months and now, with only a handful of Republican’s asking for an investigation into the matter, the White House is set to release its version of events. In a press conference yesterday, President Obama basically told the press that it was a non-issue.

That said, the Washington Post is reporting that Sestak’s brother and Campaign Manager, had taken a call from the White House on Wednesday:

"They got ahold of my brother on his cellphone, and he spoke to the White House . . . about what's going to occur," said Sestak, who said he expects the White House will release its information Friday. He declined to elaborate on his discussions with his brother”
Ending the article with:
Sestak declined to say whether the alleged job offer was inappropriate and defended Obama's integrity. "I think the president's a pretty legitimate, you know, person," he said.

From the Los Angeles Times: “Obama insists no impropriety in Sestak controversy.”

From the New York Times: ”Obama Promises Response on Question of Job Offer”

In fact a total of 282 news articles (from traditional Newspaper and Network news sites) offer an article on the subject (Google News Search)

The Atlanta Journal Constitution’s Jamie Dupree, offers “The Sestak Story” worth the read as it notes at the end “This story isn't going away anytime soon."

What is mind-boggling is that the report about Sestak taking a White House Call on Wednesday and then deferring to Obama is not met with more than a passing note from the press, including Sestak's subsequent defense of the President. The fact that the explanation that the administration is doing its own investigation, without calls from the Press for an independent investigation, leaves one with the impression that this story will be gone by the end of the month. Unless, of course, the bloom comes off the rose, and that is unlikely.

For example: A New York Times “Live Blogging Obama’s News Conference”, with a note at 1:47 pm “Sidestepping Sestak Issues” posted 16 hours ago, (from the point of this writing) did not make it to the Times front page, rather is still relegated to the “Politics” section of the website; an article (not the live blogging) on Sestak is well below the fold, entitled Obama Promises Response on Question of Job Offer.”

It appears that the press would prefer to wait until the “official explanation from Obama” is in, prior to pronouncing that there is no wrongdoing. In which case, the press has lost the courage to investigate, rather preferring to parrot the administration, leaving those millions of American’s who may still be reading both paper and web, that now, more than before, the press is in the proverbial “tank” for the President. It is no wonder that, with each quarter, circulation reports show declines in subscribers for all papers, and viewership down for major news networks to the point where they are eclipsed by cable news.

If however, they follow due diligence and “throw Obama under the bus” in order to report the story, even going so far as printing an article or two on the front page, above the fold, they may, in the long run, save the industry. It is going to be a matter of time, before those that sit on editorial boards make the hard decision between ideology and survival. To date, with layoffs and cutbacks from all major news sources being the norm, it appears that ideology has the edge. It is, therefore, doubtful that this particular Nixon moment, will be anything more than a blip on the media radar.

Which is why, granting Freedom of the Press, was such a sticking point for the founders – read Federalist Papers #84 Hamilton:
"I go further and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than we granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do Why for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shallot be retrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power, but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power."

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Obama Job’s Bill Includes Huge Cuts to Medicare and Increase to Oil Fees in Attempt to Extend Unemployment Benefits through November.

Greek Riots in Greece - With continued spending this could be Washington. photo zimbio

Apparently, in a measure to reduce the jobs bill by $50 Billionwhich includes cuts to Medicare reimbursement to physicians, and increase in oil fees, and a reduction of one month in unemployment benefit extensions. The bill, with an original price tag of $190 billion, cut one vital program and increased a tax that will impact the price of oil, in order to attract enough votes from so called “moderates” in order to push another huge spending bill through Congress before the June recess.

The cut in Medicare payments to physicians is most worrisome to seniors, and the physicians who are at the receiving end of yet another stimulus. Although Congresshad promised there would be no cuts to Medicare, and the President, according to the AP, sent out “a glossy brochure to reassure seniors the health care program is on solid ground”, the jobs bill, with heavy pressure from unions, contains a reduction of $21.8 billion in Medicare reimbursements, from the $65 billion commitment made to physicians and seniors. In addition the funds are only guaranteed for a portion of the original time dictated by the administration (Politico).

Democrats are now referring to this cut as a “freeze”.

Most worrisome is the input from Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, who apparently feels that the growing deficit is of less import than extending unemployment benefits. (Politico) McEntee, a regular contributor to the Huffington Post, opined in a recent piece that there is an assault on Public Employees. The clueless Union Talking head has apparently missed the New York Times article, which discussed the gap in pensions for public employees versus those in the private sector (and lack of transparency): “about 3,700 retired public workers in New York are now getting pensions of more than $100,000 per year, exempt from state and local taxes”.

Meanwhile, Europe scrambles to avoid financial collapse (see Greece) in France, the government is raising the retirement age to 60 in order to stave off huge deficits. It may be recalled that Greece, with outrageous entitlement programs that it could no longer sustain, was recently bailed out by the U.S. government.

One should ask those Union leaders and the clueless horde that currently runs our government, who might bail out the U.S. should our entitlement programs (already unsustainable in most states) are summarily cut? New Jersey Governor, Chris Christy is battling to cut the state deficit, and warns that New Jersey is one step away from being “Greece”. He is currently ignoring the state union employees who had rallied on the Statehouse steps against the budget cuts. Chris Christie “gets it”.

While the Administration and the Democrat Controlled Congress are about to cut essential services to the nations senior, place a tax on oil that will impact both seniors and those on fixed incomes nationwide, in order to pacify the unions, one has to ask when the proverbial “light bulb” will finally appear over the heads of the committed Progressives who are so pro-union, they cannot see the forest through the trees. There will be no bailout of the U.S. period. We can, as a nation, only sustain so much debt before serious cuts must be made, and taxes reduced on those very same businesses so vilified by the union talking heads, that create jobs. John F. Kennedy got it, Ronald Reagan got it, even George W. Bush got it – for some reason, Progressives never get it, instead, they cry foul of the corporations whose very existence created jobs for the likes of union bosses.

The big what if? Certain economists believe that the Chinese Economy is not on solid ground, and the real estate market there is experiencing some difficulty, in addition they face rising unemployment. Given the fact that the China holds the biggest percentage of U.S. Debt (allowing the Democrats to continue to spend like no tomorrow), should that country’s economic system experience a hiccup – they would no longer be in a position to bail us out. Europe is in a shambles – there is literally no place to turn.

What needs to be done now is not minor surgery to yet another tax and spend bill, rather serious cuts to every segment of the Federal government and a reduction in entitlement programs, coupled with across the board tax cuts. This is not an overnight fix, it takes time to bring back those businesses Mr. McEntee accuses of leaving the U.S. jobless in pursuit of non-union employees in other nations that offer real tax breaks. One other remedy that should be on the table – disband the unions that protect individuals in jobs where there is absolutely no risk to life and limb. Any left standing should be federally mandated to ensure that dues are used only for retirement programs and plans for its members. (Not hefty salaries and donations to political parties, as is now the case, on the back s of those same union members McEntee is allegedly tyring to protect) Salaries to so-called union officials and union management should be capped, period. Someone has to have the courage to make major change to the current program, which is highly unlikely given the current administration and like-minded Congress. The only remedy at this point is the ballot box. November cannot come soon enough.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Earl Sholley, Candidate for MA 4th District Running Against Barney Frank, When You’re Right, You’re Right

Ear Sholley Candidate Against Barney Frank - photo by former George Magazine Photographer - Steve Azzara

A recent piece in South Coast Today, by Jack Spillane, reports on Earl Sholley, Congressional Candidate for the 4th district. Sholley is running against incumbent Barney Frank, and the article, appears to be at first glance to contain backhanded complements, however in the end, praises Mr. Sholley for standing up for his beliefs. Earl Sholley is no stranger to running for office – and has, on multiple occasions – and likens himself to President Lincoln who made multiple unsuccessful bids for state and federal offices before his first election. In respect to Sholley’s last campaign against Barney Frank, he began late, worked with little to no staff, and managed to grab 70,000 votes in the 4th, obviously not a win, but a chunk of the electorate that had to include both independents and democrats (as there are hardly enough Republicans in that particular district to push anyone over the top, independents are outnumbered by Democrats, so logic dictates, a few must have found something in Mr. Sholley that was more appealing than sending Frank to Congress –again.

This campaign season is different in that Sholley began early, hired Lisa Camp, from the Huckabee Presidential campaign, as manager, and began an early Internet and radio campaign – establishing name recognition. Camp has since left the campaign, issuing a brief statement of a difference in management styles between herself and Mr. Sholley. Sholley, who when one meets he man, can hear strains of Frank Sinatra’s “I Did it My Way” playing somewhere in the distance. This would explain the exit of Ms. Camp as well as other staff member of past Sholley campaigns. That said, he is, if nothing else, persistent in his belief that he can and will succeed in ridding the 4th district and the nation of Barney Frank’s brand of legislating, thereby helping to put the nation and the district with 22% unemployment back on sound fiscal ground. He is, if nothing else, a staunch fiscal conservative.

In reviewing the issues (or baggage if one will) that have followed Sholley in previous campaigns, one wonders what the problem might be. For example: a domestic issue involving Sholley’s ex-wife and 14 year old daughter, has gotten a lot of play in the media. Specifically as Sholley was arrested and spent time in jail for refusing to enter a batters program. Sholley is old school – straight out of the 1950’s and when his daughter was in trouble, and in danger of harming herself, Sholley in desperation, did what parents in that era would do – he spanked her. Since most readers today do not recall being taken out to the woodshed by ones parents (normally carrying a belt), the horror, or feigned horror if one is working for an opposition team), is somewhat understandable. After all, when Sholley was in school, teachers had the right to discipline students with a belt or ruler for that matter. Some voters, especially those over the age of 50, can sympathies with Sholley on that point. In refusing to go through the batterers program, Sholley obviously felt he was not a batterer, but a parent, who was trying to get a message across to a child who had endangered herself. The result of the case, it caused a rift in his marriage. He was acquitted of the case involving his wife and a restraining order.

He also was involved in an incident in a court house where he was in an altercation with an up and coming Democrat DA, by the name of Cahill. In reading the case on findlaw, one gets the sense that Sholley, a known Republican, was railroaded.

Do the aforementioned make Sholley a flawed candidate, of course; however, he is also running against a flawed incumbent, lest one forgets the multiple ethics charges that Frank has faced in his past. Which is, in essence, the point – both men have issues that had been resolved (or in Frank’s case, faded away) which are over 20 years old - Therefore maybe not an issue as far as the average voters are concerned.

One can imagine that, given the amount of press Sholley has received to date in the district, his name is fast becoming a household word, which will make it difficult for his Republican primary challenger, Sean Bielat, to overcome without a huge war chest and a ton of advertising. As of the last FEC filing, Sholley and Beilat were even in individual contributions, while Beilat had taken out loans three times the amount of Mr. Sholley's (Sholley only after an apparent discourse with then campaign manager, Camp.) which gives Mr. Beilat an edge, on paper.

The ending of the article (which aligns Sholley with the Tea Party Movement from the get-go, and with Paul’s recent victory in Kentucky, that may bode very well for Sholley, as that particular movement has a strong presence in Massachusetts):

He knows how he'd solve the problem and it's about getting back to basics, he says.
"I think everybody is happiest when they're working on a job, rather than receiving money," he said.
It may be a tea party-sounding solution but with Earl Sholley, it seems to be what he believes. And what he's offering the Fourth District.

Therefore, should one wish to divest the nation of Barney Frank, one has to look critically at the candidates, and understand that Sholley, although somewhat “flawed”, is the one best positioned to beat Frank in November. In the interest of fairness, Sean Beilat, also running as a Republican, is more of a moderate conservative, but he is new to politics and as a first run, will be well positioned, with experience to take a Massachusetts state or congressional seat in the 2012 elections. It is not crime to run multiple times. Neither man, as far as extensive research, has received any support from the State GOP.

Can Earl Sholley succeed in besting Barney Frank, despite the negative press, despite his alleged affiliation with the Tea Party (which is, often to the media’s surprise, a plus) – absolutely. Sholley, obviously, must win the primary, and it’s a long way between now and September (again, name recognition in the 4th will be key), and with mounting pressure on Democrats nationwide, Frank may find himself faced with a loss to an educated, quirky, somewhat eccentric, former military man, turned small businessman, who in retirement, is trying to do his best to help his country. Better than Barney Frank? You Betcha. To learn more about the Sholley Campaign visit

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Mass. Govenor, Deval Patrick Cries “Sedition!” as Opposition to Obama Reaches Critical Mass

Deval Patrick, unable to tolerate criticism of close friend, Barak Obama - photo

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrickwas using “rhetorical flourish” when he described Republican lawmakers as “bordering on sedition”. The story, which broke in the Boston Globe yesterday, reported the remark made at a Suffolk University forum. Suffolk University is a pollster than often leans left – 8% of respondents in all polls taken are from the university participate in Massachusetts polls, which may skew polls. (See marginals of Mass. Governor’s race here .) Patrick, who was White House advisor, David Axelrod’s, “Test” for the Obama 2008 national campaign, down to the slogan “Yes, We Can”, was elected in 2006. He is noted in the article as a close friend to the President.

The Globe’s follow-up is an apology piece for Patrick:

Geoffrey R. Stone, a former dean of the University of Chicago Law School, said sedition “doesn’t even really exist as a legal concept anymore’’ since the Supreme Court has found both the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and the Sedition Act of 1918 unconstitutional. Those laws, he said, once allowed the government to jail critics who “cast the government into contempt or disrepute with malice, which means without a good motive.’’
Stone said he suspects Patrick was using the term “in a very conventional sense,’’ to describe critics who constantly attack the president, rather than engage in “serious and honest criticism.’’
“If you take that definition of sedition, then Patrick probably is accurate,’’ Stone said.

Patrick, who is up for reelection this November, faces challenges from Republican, Charles Baker ( and Democrat turned Independent Tim Cahill Cahill, is a former member of the Patrick administration. Baker, who recently began his statewide campaign, has been criticized by the Patrick administration for allowing a third party to run attack ads against Cahill. The Globe and other Massachusetts daily newspapers ran the Patrick criticism of Baker as the headliner, while covering the gubernatorial candidate’s campaign kickoff. It is apparent that the Globe, regardless of reality, defends Patrick on all fronts.

The term “sedition” although arcane by some measures, is still widely used, as is “treason” - which one can imagine was also running through Patrick’s mind before using the less incendiary word in describing what he calls “partisanship” coming from the Republican side of the aisle. Apparently, if one does not agree with the Obama administration (or the Patrick administration locally), one is guilty of “sedition” or an "incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority." (Merriam Webster).

Patrick had better get ready to attack the three major news networks who are just now beginning to show signs of criticism of the President , ABC, CBS and NBC all ran somewhat critical pieces on the Presidents slow response to the BP oil spill in the gulf.

Meanwhile, Congress is planning to raise taxes on oil four time the current assessment “just in case” the party responsible for an oil spill in the future can’t afford to clean it up. Additionally, Rasmussen polling suggests that Obama’s approval nationwide is at 44%, with only 25% of those polled “strongly approving” of the Presidents job performance. With unemployment levels expected to remain the same through the next year, the economic crisis in Europe and the U.S. bailout of Greece, and the fact that the Democrat controlled Congress is running without a fixed budget one can imagine that those numbers will fall further, and Patrick will have to use much stronger language in the future in order to defend the President. When one feels compelled to use language that is “arcane” so to speak, it is a clear sign of desperation – giving those on the ground in Massachusetts a virtual “front row” seat to the depths to which Patrick can sink.

Monday, May 24, 2010

Obama – Mid-Term Election Strategy to Campaign Against Bush and Republican Congress – While Public Wearies Of Big Ticket Programs – Clinton 2012?

Clinton Run in 2012? Saving the Democrats from Self-Destruction -image lvitale wordpress blog

FromPolitco a treatment of the political strategy for Democrats going forward into the 2010 mid-terms: Obama apparently continues to campaign against George Bush and a Republican Congress, which, in this particular article, he does so without mentioning names.

“The message is layered. A shot at Bush (without mentioning his name.) A jab at congressional Republicans (although rarely saying “Republicans.”) A defense of the actions he’s taken so far.

The article concludes that this message may or may not work, depending upon the economy in November.

That said, as much as Obama continues to pound home the “It’s not my fault” message, and American’s, according to an AP release, aren’t buying it. The big spending from a Democrat controlled congress continues unabated while programs penned by the President, from the Stimulus to Health Care Reform, have the general public skittish.

Which may be why major special elections held this year, have gone to Conservatives, including the Pennsylvania 12th, where Democrat Mark Critz ran as far away from Democrat policy as possible: including the Health Care Reform bill and Cap and Trade. The recent win of Charles Djou in Hawaii’s 1st district emphasizes the desperation within the ranks of the Democrat party – with Progressives and Moderate Democrats fighting to deliver a message the electorate will buy – in this case, both the Progressive and Moderate refusing to bow out of a race. The smart move would have been to run with the moderate, in order to maintain the seat, even in a heavily Democrat controlled Hawaii – the Progressive message is tainted with the bigger taxes, big spending and unions pushing for more.

The fact that George Bush will have been out of the White House for two years, come November and the public is well-aware that Congress had been controlled by Democrats (see Nancy Pelosi’s approval) since 2006, will not play well in swing states, as well as traditional Democrat bastions such as Massachusetts and Hawaii indefinitely. It may have worked in the 2008 elections but the media has made it very clear that Obama is responsible, along with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, for all major programs; thereby nullifying Obama’s argument.

To the point, Republican Whip, Eric Cantor , has a program entitled You Cut The premise: each week, five different spending programs before Congress are outlined on the website, the general public is invited to choose one of the five items by voting – basically offering the general public transparency (the bill is posted), and an opportunity to see exactly how ridiculous the current administration and Democrats controlling the Congress are when it comes to fiscal responsibility. Although touted by the press as a “Gimmick”, it sends a clear message that something has to be done to stop the bleeding. Cantor gets it, along with others, be it a “Tea Party Candidate”, or a Democrat who, in order to win in a strongly controlled Democrat district, must run against his own party (Critz-PA 12) in order to be elected. To cast your vote go to: You Cut. To find out how your Congressional Representative voted in the first round go to: Week One Vote

With Republicans becoming more vocal, and Tea Party politician’s doing the same, Obama is going to have a hard sell to the much needed independent voter and the moderate Democrat. Moreover, according to some on the left (see Huffington Post), Obama may be challenged come 2011 by Hillary Clinton, and depending upon the outcome of the November elections (which one can fairly conclude will be a boon to the Republican Party, a moderate Clinton could defeat Obama in a primary, given the fact that the majority of the “Super Delegates” who pulled the rug out from under Clinton in a Progressive Coup at the 2008 Democrat Convention, may not longer be in office. A Clinton run for the White House would set the stage for a resurgence or return of the moderate Democrat. Depending upon which of the four leading Republican’s (Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich and Palin according to a PPO poll) assumed to be running in 2012, specifically Palin, should Palin win the nod, (or end up on the ticket) it would be the most interesting race to the Corner Office in the nation’s history.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Charles Djou Takes Hawaii 1st District, First Republican to win 1st District in 20 Years

Republican, Charles Djou, New Congressman of the Hawaii 1st District - photo: hiphoprepublican blog

With all of the votes tallied, Charles Djou, the Republican candidate for the 1st Hawaii Congressional District, was the clear winner is last night’s election. Djou bested two Democrats, Hanabusa and Case, who were fighting for the same seat. The national DNC pulled out of Hawaii’s first district a month ago, putting a stop to the attack ads against Djou. Hanabusa, the moderate and Case, the Progressive, fought it out for months with Hanabusa refusing to step aside. Djou, won with 39.1% of the votes, there were 14 candidates for the seat.

The district, symbolically, is a blow to Progressive Democrats, as it was the childhood home of President Barak Obama, and another boost to the GOP heading into the November elections. To date, the GOP has won the majority of key special elections with victories in the Virginia Governor’s race, the New Jersey Governors Race, the Massachusetts Senate Race, and, although a Democrat Primary, the defeat of Arlan Spector in Pennsylvania’s Senate primary, which gives Republican Toomey the advantage. Special House elections, however, normally do not go the way of the GOP, making Hawaii the first this year. The other House races of note, however, were not particularly DNC sweeps: the New York 23rd saw a flawed GOP candidate bested by a Conservative, splitting the vote, when pressed, the GOP candidate endorsed the Democrat. In the Pennsylvania 12th, the Democrat ran on Republican issues, and must run for re-election in November.

Trends nationwide, show a clear advantage for Republican’s going into November with a real probability of taking control of both the House and the Senate.

Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address