WSJ/NBC Poll – Obama Confidence Low - Approval Sinks – Nation Rejects Both Major Political Entities

Most American's having difficulty telling DC Democrats or Republicans apart - image toonrefugee.com

The latest WSJ poll is out and according to NBC News the nation is no longer divided on President Obama’s capabilities; they are disapproving by the widest margin to date. In the same poll analysis by NBC, they note that the Republicans in Congress are doing worse than the President – and nearing the end of the article, note that most voters would rather not see their incumbent in office any longer (NBC News).

That was made evident last week in the stunning (to D.C.) defeat of Eric Cantor to College Professor, David Brat. One might suggest that that scenario will play out in coming primaries, regardless of which Party flavor, in the ensuing months. When it comes to the general, one might predict 40-50% of the seats will changes hands, which is not, by any means a conservative figure, however, when one looks closely at the 2013 local elections (yes, this anti-incumbent fervor had a trickle-down effect) – the incumbent lost in large numbers, in cities small and large.

As the leadership of each major political party has been called into question as of late, the 2016 prospects of those Libertarian Leaning politicians is looking up.

In the past weekends IA GOP convention Rand Paul (K), spoke to a room that decidedly changed their minds regarding the Senator, having previously been committed to other potential candidates, they came away deciding that Paul was the better choice, or at the very least, someone they would vote for .(U.S. News)

At the Massachusetts Democrat Convention Martha Coakely and Steve Grossman will face off in primaries against two others who made the ballot, according to the Boston Globe , the winner of which will face Charlie Baker for the Bay State corner office. Normal Massachusetts politics generally has a solid candidate going into the general, with either little or no primary challengers.

One might see both major political party fractioning in the ensuing years, as well as shifts, the Democrats becoming decidedly Progressive Socialist while Republicans more Libertarian in nature. Voter angst against the status quo will undoubtedly ensure that this scenario plays out either in whole or in part.

Who is Elizabeth Warren – Former Republican turned Democrat?

Not knowing much about Elizabeth Warren, other than the fact that she was caught with her hand in the cookie jar, claiming a bit of Indian Heritage to qualify for a Harvard slot, and bested, on Obama’s coattails, one Scott Brown, not a great deal. For starters, one might associate the Jr. Senator from Massachusetts as being a rubber stamp for the Democrat Party, a lifelong Democrat, who frankly, would be another guaranteed vote for the Progressive left. However, a few recent articles, and not much research on a Tuesday morning revealed a bit more that just made Elizabeth Warren a lot more interesting. She is, based on the Democrat Party and its proclivity to come up with the next shiny new toy, projected to upend Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democrat primary, similar to the upending that Clinton sustained under Barack Obama. Warren is less known, and that unknown quantity can be remodeled, so to speak, to fit the “everybody” mold and then walk under the banner of the “First” right into the White House. The funny thing is, the Progressive left adores her, perhaps for her angst against big banks, and the legislation that allows them to run rampant, the brouhaha over high interest rates and student loans, and of course, the middle class, a group that is fast becoming extinct.

That said, she may just be one of those evolving politico’s who cannot quite find what’s right, or wrong, with a particular party, and has a bit of an independent streak. Here’s where that line of thought comes from:

Think Progresshas a piece in “Why Elizabeth Warren Left the GOP”, which was somewhat of an eye opener, and first thought was: Hillary Clinton, former Goldwater Girl (Goldwater – a Libertarian-Republican). The first note was about her GOP history, she was a registered Republican from 1991 through 1996, with no mention of previous party affiliation. Therefore, she was a registered Republican when the Clinton’s held the White House and the GOP both Chambers of the House – interesting schematic. She left due to what she perceived as a GOP affiliation with the big banks, but has since argued with the Obama administration as well. Think Progress.

In the same Think Progress article she refers to herself as an Independent, so one just had to look at the Congressional Record to see how well she played across the aisle.

Apparently, quite well, given the fact that on a quick review Warren sponsors and cosponsors, what appears to be equal amounts of legislation written by both Democrats and Republicans.

One has to be honest, if she was a free-market, Libertarian leaning Independent, she’d be perfect.

Of course, no-one is, and the obvious quick review does not answer questions on reliable voting with a certain party, or what ambitions Senator Warren holds regarding the 2016, that said, she is worth watching. It may be she sees the writing on the wall, and will wait until the following general election, but that’s and all this is speculation for the most part. As there is no mention of her party affiliation prior to 1991 (and she was of an age to vote, one would hazard a guess in the 1980’s), one might hold out hope that a pattern may develop – shopping parties like a thinking woman. If she were more “Liberty-minded”, and for the middle class, while hanging out with say, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul, alternately with Bernie Sanders and throw in a few Democrats, and be able to campaign on that – she would sail into the White House – no problems. Perhaps she should take another look at the upheaval in the GOP – should it change (historically) to a re-branded Liberty Party – it might be time for her to re-up. Just a thought.

Rand Paul Goes West – to Berkeley – Greeted with Standing O – Dares to Cross Lines!

Rand Paul Speaks at Berkeley - image LA Times

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) went to Berkeley and, as the San Jose Mercury News headlined: “found support”…”of all places”! It is not without some humor and irony that the headline reads – “of all places”, simply due to the fact that Republican’s don’t generally stump and fundraise in the California Bay Area. San Francisco, the home of Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), is not the area one would anticipate any Republican to dare to tread – why bother, really the entire state is lost, along with Massachusetts. However, Paul is not your run of the mill, standard Republican, as he leans more Libertarians, which is an appealing prospect to a wide-range of voters – from the left to the right, men and women, young and old. Not only did he receive a warm welcome at UC Berkeley, he also received a standing ovation – which, knock one over with a feather!” (Daily Caller).

Outside of a very few articles on the success of the visit, most of the “Mainstream” media are treading carefully on coverage – The New York Times article on the Berkeley visit “Rand Paul, Warning About Spying, Faults Obama” doesn’t really speak to the oddity nor the implications of what Paul has accomplished., rather about a small portion of the speech he made to the students (who then applauded and stood).

The real implications are that a Libertarian, albeit, Republican is gaining more traction than any other candidate at the moment, given the articles rather than the polls, and the schematics of who will and will not vote in a mid-term or general election. The implications are, to this mind, that there is real change in the wind, not a slogan, nor a hypothetical, but a change in the hearts and minds of a populace who are tired of the same “party” lines, and are seeking a breath of fresh air. This air comes with a penchant for piece, individual liberty and common sense as far as social and fiscal issues are concerned, and are tied, hook, line and sinker to the Constitution.

This makes Rand Paul the frontrunner across the political spectrum and one should bet the house there is a proverbial “target” on the man, as he is upsetting the general party (and that is literally and figuratively) that is Washington D.C. entrenched politico’s and their sycophants.

One might see more venom develop from both the RNC and the DNC as they fight to maintain the status quo –a losing battle with the Libertarian minded Paul. For one, he is not shy about speaking out and correcting the press, which is a plus, and second, he does not come across as the politician, more like the family doctor/college professor/guy who eats snickers on the run who has a message which is on point.

Not since casting a vote for Anderson (Libertarian leaning Republican) in the 1980 election, has the prospect of an opportunity to cast one for another in 2016 been more appealing. Anderson did not even make a dent in the bucket – running against Reagan and Carter, however, it was the first time one can recall seeing a national third party candidate, period…or a decent choice between two behemoths, when one does not particularly embrace either “grand party”. Therefore, to have one Libertarian leaning Republican run under the banner of the “grand party”, with a cadre of like minded Constitutionalist (be they Tea Party or Libertarian) growing in the same party, would be historical and personally exciting. It has been centuries since either party truly rebranded as a national party that would allow for a crossover of opposition party members, as well as those who are more independent minded, and Paul, in this time and in this place is the one to carry that water - reminiscent of Washington, George. What more can one nation ask for?

Club for Growth Scorecard – Where the Senate and the Congress Fall when it comes to Pro-Growth legislation – A 2014 Voters Guide

The Club for Growth has released it’s scorecard for the 2013 legislative body – the ranks from 1(high) to N/A – (insufficient votes to register) can be found here at www.clubforgrowth.org/progjects/scorecard.

Not surprisingly, the top members who are not likely to legislate the nation further into debt and promote economic growth are Cruz (R-TX), Lee (R-UT), Paul (R-KY), Enzi (R-WY), Risch (R-ID), Scott, (R-SC), Inhofe (R. OK), Corurn (R-OK) (The Waste Book Author), Cornyn (R-TX and Toomey (R-PA) round out the top 10 in the Senate. The House has Frank Trent (AZ-8-R) at the top, and Peters (MI-18-D) rounding out the bottom – scores 100% perfect to the single digits (Club for Growth).

Poltico was quick to point out that two Democrats did fairly well on the list, holding at 40% were “Retiring House Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Mike McIntyre of North Carolina. (This was followed by:) The GOP lawmakers that the Club ranked below Matheson and McIntyre are: Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida (38 percent), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida (37 percent), Michael Grimm of New York (37 percent) and Chris Gibson of New York (37 percent). Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) tied the two conservative Democrats at 40 percent. (Politico)

What this tells us is that normally split fairly evenly along party lines (with pro-growth meaning fewer taxes and incentives for businesses to hire, (simple version), there are variances in each party, and according to the state or district one represents.

One might however, be more inclined, in this economy that, although improving, is nowhere near where it needs to be in order restore significant j job growth, to check the other name on the ballot in 2014 when every single one of those Representatives are up for reelection and elect a new citizen representative.

What is a Libertarian and What Does the “Tea Party” Mean to the Current Political Parties? Why Not become Unaffiliated!

There’s been a dust-up and a battle brewing these past few years, put the date the real awakening began circa 2009, possibly before. This divide as some call it, wrongly, is the difference of political ideology between those “Tea Party” groups and the GOP. The reason it is not a divide is that the Tea Party and the GOP or standard Republican Party are not one in the same and never have been. The Tea Party is comprised of people of all political ideologies, most of which could be categorized as Libertarian in nature. The Libertarian is a stalwart defender of the Constitution, generally anti-war, and non-interventionist, a self-made philosophy when it comes to free-markets, and the true purpose of the Federal versus the State Governments as outlined by the Constitution of these United States. Some Republicans, lately, have referred to themselves as Jeffersonian Republican’s or, in essence, Libertarians who are working on the Republican side, mainly as the two-party political system has left, in the past, little room for the formation of a larger, robust and politically competitive Libertarian Party.

The Tea Party, which, again comprised of so many variances, is an anomaly as it is not yet, emphasis on yet, a true, separate political party, but more of a movement born of frustration and the lack of disconnect between Washington DC (the Elite) and the people they represent. It began over the growing tax burden and national debt in 2009, and with nationalized health care on the table in the House and Senate, the movement exploded. The reaction from the Political Class and the Media was one of instant hostility on one political side, and the other saw an opportunity to “cash-in” on similarities. That would be the GOP, but there was and still exists a deep schism between the two.

The question is why? The standard GOP politicians is not that much different than the standard Democrat – while going about the day to day business of Washington B.S., in the end, they tend to agree on most everything. Case in point – Obamacare.

Ted Cruz, the Senator from Texas is being much maligned in the media and by member of the GOP, especially John McCain of AZ, simply because he wanted to bring attention to the multiple issues. One might read about how the Senator is positioning himself with the “base” or the “extreme right wing” base of the Republican Party – or the “Tea Party”. Now recall, the Tea Party is not the Republican Party, and never has been. That “Tea Party” label attached to Cruz and other politicians and the Party is meant to be a warning bell for the potential voter to “stay away” – It is synonymous with “crazy”, but is that truly the case? It is the same as calling Ted Cruz an opportunist for standing 22 plus hours on the well of the Senate Floor, passionately asking his fellow Senators to do their job. He railed against Obamacare, which will, in the end, lead to socialized medicine and will destroy the economy. That is an opinion based upon some research on the Bill, and its continued growth, both lack of freedom to choose and economics.

Cruz, for his part, is appreciated by members of the Tea Party movement, he is also, one would easily guess, appreciated by Libertarians, and by voters who, may not care for the way Politician’s have risen to a “royalty” status, whiel the people mainly pay the various “Lords” their dues through taxes – with little return. A bit of a feudal system has developed. There are few Knights and no round table. What happens next with Obamacare? It goes into effect, with the help of John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham and those Republican’s where, without the GOP label, one might think they were Progressive Democrats. John McCain and others of his ilk, feel that there is simply no hope – the Best thing to do is to let the bill start, and when the people are so much more oppressed economically, they will turn around and love the Republican Party, the bill will self-destruct and all will be well – That is what is called, in most circles – gutless.

Men and Women, like Ted Cruz, believe that one might have fought to stop the process known as “cloture” – which allows a vote to go forward on a piece of law as is. The reasoning: he wanted to have a debate, and possibly add amendments to the Affordable Health Care Act. That Act might be salvageable, but not in its present form, and not without debate.

Yes, John McCain, spoke of the many Republican Amendments to the bill and how they worked to smooth it out, a bill a large percent of the American People did not want – in other words, John McCain and those GOP Senators in the 2009 Senate, were responsible for Obamacare, just as much or if not more than the Democrats.

What Cruz was pointing out was that with a bit of debate, and some quick fixes (of which many have been suggested in the house that make sense, but were summarily kicked to the curb), that would have benefitted the public and the government as a whole, but due to his brassy attack on members of his “own party”, he was maligned, by both those members and the media, and especially the democrats.

Therefore the lesson this sends is that no one individual who has been sent to Washington to represent their state, or district, should step outside the boundaries of their Political Party, and do what their conscious dictates – abide by what the individuals who sent them to Washington ask of that Senator or Congressional Representative.

That, in essence is why our founders were so dead set against the formation of political parties. They felt that the political parties would cause a divide in the people, and allow a very few to rule over the “masses”, in grand style.

That is what has happened, unfortunately. If one thinks about the political party they are affiliated with for a moment – it that party truly a membership. To be a Democrat or Republican is nothing more than a label, and guarantees on no special privileges than any other citizen. If one is a Democrat, does one even know his or her representative, and how they are working in Washington on their behalf, or a Republican? The same would apply.

There is an option for those who are fed up with the two-party systems that is choking the life out of this nation – become an unaffiliated voter. By doing so, one is liberated from the label, and one is not bound (mentally) to vote for someone based solely on a party membership that has zero value in the real world.

Listen to what the individual is attempting to say – not the slogans, but where they stand on the issues, and if one agrees, regardless of whether the candidate is a Democrat, Republican or – shock, Tea Party, Libertarian, or otherwise, then vote for that individual.

Don’t’ send a dime, red cent, or nickel to any political party. If one has a candidate one likes, give to that candidate directly.

What Cruz was doing was begging his colleagues of all political affiliates to-do their job. He was disgusted with the disconnect between those who rule over us in Washington, and what we, as a nation, truly need.

What this nation needs is 400 more Ted Cruz’s, Democrat, Republican, Unaffiliated, Libertarian (especially Libertarian), Green Party, etc. Take the social issues out of the equation. One has to understand that the social issues are thrown into the political mix purely for emotional effect – and have little to do with what happens either pro or con on any social issue once those two political parties meet in D.C. After the dust has settled, there is still abortion, there are still injustices and there will always be until – the parties are not two, but three or four or five, with the capital of this Republic filled with the voices of the people it represents. That is what the founders envisioned, and the plan was a fine one, it is the law of the land in its truest sense. It would allow true representation, rather than a ruling class.

Those members of the Tea Party get this concept. This is why there is a divide in the GOP – which again, truly does not exist – as these are two separate political entities, one is a party (GOP) one is a movement (TEA) and they are not simpatico.

It is true that members of the Tea Party have run on the Republican Ticket – mainly became it is a simpler way to gain access to party funds and to find a way to break the barrier against alternative ideologies. This is also true of the Progressive Socialists, who run as Democrats and are now in the Political Class. There is little written or discussed on that scope, but it exists. The lines between the two parties are so blurred, that one has to step back a moment and think now about the individual. Unaffilate. There is no membership in any party that is worth the cheap paper card one’s name is printed on.

Imagine in the message it would send, if the nations voters shed the political party image and actually voted for the individual who made sense, to them personally, it would be chaos – for the political class.

Note: if you read it on the internet, or in the paper or hear it on the evening news, unless it’s a train wreck, with 8 X 10 color glosses and live video providing proof, have a bit of skepticism, its healthily. Who to believe? Attend a meeting, a political meeting – either a Democrat Party Meeting, or a Republican Party Meeting, or better yet, find a Tea Party Meeting or Libertarian meeting and see which one of those groups most closely align with your own personal beliefs. The experience might surprise you.

As the GOP Turns – The Old Guard and New Guard – Nothing More than Evolution

There’s that old adage: “history repeats itself”, that should be taken into account prior to ringing death knells on political brands, or “rebranding” if one prefers to parse words. The fact that, as we age, younger individuals move up the ladder, so to speak, bringing with them a “new” (or old, as the case may be), political point of view – one that fits neither of today’s establishment parties. Therefore, of one individual in that generation tends to lead in the political arena, it is what it is, a changing of the guard and with that a whole can of worms opens. Suffice it to say, that there has always been a right and a left, liberal and conservative thought, which those in power generally use to divide and conquer – some to their own demise (consider the French revolution). The Old Democrat party has been long gone for decades, only no one apparently noticed. The brand is there – the dutiful “D” printed on each ballot – but the formerly fiscally sound, social justice fighters, working class party – is now the party ruled by academic elitist, who have little experience outside of a classroom, and a philosophy that is decidedly socialist. The Democrat brand was co-opted by the rise of one Ronald Reagan, who, at the same time, rebranded the Republican Party – leaning on the tax cuts of John F. Kennedy, and challenging the establishment GOP, he embodied the working man - he drove the party elites and the media crazy. Over the following decades the two parties appeared to meld into the ebb and flow of partisan politics, with rare exceptions, one was either a “Democrat or a Republican” – there was no challenge to the status quo, and the political dynasties emerged – the Bushes, the Clintons, their respective allies in the Senate and the Congress and on K Street (where the lobbyist and political action committees reside.) Reagan was the last reformer, otherwise the Republican Party, like the Democrat Party, has been the dutiful “R” on the ballot.

Suddenly the media and Washington are on high alert, as a group of individuals who are not necessarily Republican, as in “rich old white men” (as opposed to the “rich old white men” that run the Democrat Party.) are suddenly calling themselves “conservatives” running as “Republicans” and winning elections, hearts and minds. There is about to be a shift – one would hope that the scenario of three or four (optimal) parties emerging from the two old behemoths would emerge, yet, the common approach would be to co-opt one or both of the established parties. Enter the “libertarians”.

Libertarians follow a political thought process based on personal liberty, with a strong emphasis on the U.S. Constitution. Those millions of Tea Party Strict Constructionists are also likely to lean “Libertarian” – so are most 18 to 25 year olds, a demographic that rarely votes, but if, as a group, they find someone relatable, they will vote in droves. (An unintended consequence seen under Reagan.)

Although the dutiful academics, installed in the schools across the nation, from kindergarten through one’s Doctorate, have been preaching the message of “progressive” philosophy for the past 40 years, it has become stale in its practice. The economic impact of the progressive Congress under Nancy Pelosi, followed by the election and reelection of President Obama, and the consequences of “bigger, more encroaching, government”, has begun to wear thin. For some it is the lack of opportunities, for others, it is the obvious installation of a “class system” – those who have, those how have not. Those who would promise to make everyone equal, everyone wealthy, and everyone on the same playing field, by virtue of the all important government - apparently cannot deliver on that promise.

Therefore, the sudden emergence and popularity of Rand Paul and Dr. Ben Carson are seen by the media as upheaval in the Republican Party – as dutiful “Democrats”, they report on the demise of the GOP, or the “upheaval” within the GOP – it is nothing more than growing pains, or an evolution – of a more centric, inclusionary political party, one that is based upon a fiscal policy that is morally sound, while holding the 10th amendment sacrosanct.

Therefore, one might suggests, that those that would be king, the McCain’s, the Clinton’s, will have to make way for those Doctors who will stand up for both fiscal sanity and humanity, but most importantly individual liberty and responsibility – the opportunity to become a success (rather than one of the “masses” – yes, Libertarian, and/or Conservative – but appealing to those who are sick and tired of the “old brands” that have run the nation with little differences between the two political parties since Reagan left office.

Tom Wesley, Republican Candidate - MA Hampden 2nd District, Running Against Incumbent, Richard Neal (D) – Candidate Profile and Q & A – 2010 Mid-Term

On Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010 voters will go to the polls across the United States and choose individuals to represent them in both State and Federal positions. In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, there are 10 U.S. Congressional Races; the outcome of each District race will define the make-up of the 112th Congress and the course of the nation. The Congress is especially important due to the fact that members draft legislation, and work in tandem with the U.S. Senate in order to make the laws which impact U.S. Citizens daily lives. The Congress also has the power over the governments’ purse strings, giving members of Congress the ability to fund programs and appropriate tax payers dollars in order to run the government. In other words, the individual members of Congress, collectively in one body, have more power than the U.S. President when it comes to the laws of our nation. Therefore, Decisions on which candidate to choose should be made on an individual basis, with time taken to learn about the candidates prior to casting a vote. To that end, this blog is presenting “Candidate Profiles”, which are in a Q&A format. Questions were only changed to reflect the candidate’s political party and current status (incumbent or challenger). The balance was not edited to reflect the views of this blog and remains unabridged. Hopefully, this will allow readers to get to know the candidate a bit more, both on a personal level as well as how they perceive the important issues facing the nation as well as the Congressional District.

Tom Wesley Candidate Profile


Tom Wesley, Candidate for U.S. Congress, MA 2nd District - image Wales GOP

Brief biography

I am a graduate of the US Merchant Marine Academy, received my BS degree and US Coast Guard license as a Third Mate of Vessels of Any Gross Tons, Upon Oceans. I was able to sail any ship, anywhere in the world. Instead, I went on active duty in the US Navy and earned my wings as a Naval Aviator. I flew helicopters in the Cold War during the Reagan years and served with distinction in operations in the Pacific, including operations involving search and salvage of the Korean Airline Flight 007 shoot down. I later served in the Pentagon with the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as part of a prestigious internship program. I was one of only two junior naval officers on the staff.

My business career began in aerospace and defense industries with large corporations in sales and marketing positions of progressive responsibility. These positions allowed me to expand my global travel credentials. I did venture into entrepreneurial pursuits involving aerospace exports and eventually into consumer imports. The venture ultimately failed due to market forces and noncollectable debt.

I returned to corporate life and ultimately got involved in the Life Science industry where I actually ran factories, built products in this country and developed an understanding of the global factors that create an environment ripe for outsourcing. I am currently Director of Strategic Planning and Corporate Sustainability for a large multi-national corporation in Milford, MA.

Always active in my community, I have been involved in my church, serving as moderator and chairman of various boards and committees, and in Boy Scouts, where I am the current Scoutmaster of my troop in Hopedale.

Q. As a conservative – can you define what you feel conservatism means to you?

A. American Conservatism is a byproduct of American individualism and American exceptionalism. Its roots derive from the Western entrepreneurial spirit of adventure, high risk and high reward. It is the essence of the American Dream where anything is possible for those who are committed to success.


Q. When did you first discover you were a conservative (Republican)?

A. Actually, I first voted for Jimmy Carter and then had the experience of serving under him as Commander-in-Chief. I became a conservative-minded person when Ronald Reagan became my Commander-in-Chief.

Q. Are you originally from Massachusetts? If so, where in Mass? If you lived elsewhere, why did you choose the 2nd district to make your home?

A.
I was born in Brooklyn, NY, as a second-generation Polish immigrant. Uncle Sam made sure that I had lots of addresses during my career. I have lived in Florida, Maine, California, Hawaii and DC during my Navy years. Business took me to New Hampshire, Connecticut and Massachusetts. My wife and I enjoyed the atmosphere of the small town of Hopedale, its proximity to my workplace and the quality of the education available to my children.

Q. You’re married and have children, (grown?) – do you feel that the 2nd district is the best place to raise a family and why?

A.
I have two grown daughters, 26 and 24, who have been unable to sustain employment in Massachusetts and are staking their claims out of state, and a 17 year old that is a senior in Hopedale HS. I do hope that we can restore the second district as a place where our children can settle down and raise their families.

Q. Why did you decide to run, what made you feel you wanted to give up your time to run for public office?

A.
I took an oath of office, not once but twice, to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. I have never been an elected official but have been a public servant all my life. I view this task as my patriotic duty to our generation and the next and for the unborn generations of Americans yet to come.

Q. As you are aware, Scott Brown did win the district, but lost Springfield and Northampton at the time. How do you feel you relate to both independents and democrats while still maintaining your conservative principles?

A. It is not possible to win every heart and mind or to win every vote. What I tell people who will not vote for me is that I will be their Congressman, too. We may not always agree on the issues but I will always tell you where I stand. And when it comes to services, all of my constituents will be treated with equality and respect.


Issues:

Q. What do you feel are the three most important issues facing American’s today? List
A.
1. Economy
2. Immigration
3. Healthcare Reform

Q. What do you feel are the three most important issues facing the 2nd district? List

A.

The issues are the same as at the national level. They touch us in the pocketbook and in the heart. They have the potential to derail the American Dream and undermine the future of our children.

We must also ensure that our schools are producing quality graduates who are ready to work in a modern economy with the necessary skill sets that our innovative economy requires.

Q. Are there any other issues you feel are of import?
What are your personal solutions to solving the problems (choose two) that you feel are a priority for the 2nd district?

A. The economy must be our first priority. We must get people working once again. Jobs go offshore because of government greed in taxation. The US has the highest tax rate in the world. It forces companies to offshore havens. We must work towards halving that rate and look to level the playing field against unfair foreign competition. We must also seek to ensure that government regulation does not unnecessarily burden our businesses as they compete internationally.

The issue of immigration, both legal and illegal, must be addressed very quickly in the 112th Congress. Until we can stop the flow of people across our border who have no authority or right to be here, we cannot distinguish between those who mean us no harm from those who do. Those who do bring drugs, violence, human trafficking, and the threat of terrorism against our way of life. It is an imperative that we seal the border in order to control entry to this country. On the legal front, we must pursue a comprehensive overhaul of regulations and policies in order that those who come here on short term visas cannot overstay their welcome; those who wish to stay can be fairly evaluated; and, those who wish to enter are fairly treated.

Q. If you are elected to represent the Massachusetts 2nd Hampden Congressional District, what would you author as your first piece of legislation and why.

A.Unless the 111th Congress acts to rescind the upcoming tax hikes, this may be the first legislation required. Our economy is too fragile to absorb such an increase.

Q. Do you feel pork is important to the district? (If yes, or no, explain.)

A. Pork contains fat. We have enough worthy projects in this nation that we should not be measured by how many dollars one can bring back to the district to fund abstract ideas or white elephants. I think this district is capable of competing for resources on the merit of the project alone. And I would admonish my colleagues to do the same.

Q. I’m a 2nd district voter - you just knocked on my door – introduce yourself and tell me why you should get my vote.

A.Hello, my name is Tom Wesley, a Navy veteran, a first time candidate and career citizen, just like you. I am not running against the 22-year incumbent career politician, Richard Neal, as much as I am running for my vision of America in the 21st century. It is a vision that foresees an era of American leadership in political, economic and moral arenas. It is a vision that protects the American dream for you, your children and the unborn generations of Americans yet to come. I run because I am your neighbor: not because I live next door to you but because I value the things that you do. This is our Congress and we must fight to regain our voice in Washington. And this is our time. Too much is at stake for us not to take this election very seriously. I ask you for your vote so that we can begin the process of moving this country forward once again.

To learn more about Tom Wesley visit: www.tomwesley.com

To learn more about Richard Neal (MA-D) visit www.nealforcongress.com

In summery, remember, every vote counts, therefore, get out and vote on Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010. Many a race, even for Federal office, has been determined by a handful of votes. Often there are questions on the ballots which allow citizens to choose to fund a certain local project, or to actively participate in a state law, such as a reduction of the Massachusetts State income tax. Therefore, if one feels strongly about a particular issue or candidate the only way to positively effect change is to get out and vote, regardless of party. There is an old adage, and regardless of the outcome of any given race or ballot question, if one does not vote, one cannot complain.

Acorn Voter Fraud - 2004 Revisited with a Vengeance

Voter fraud is nothing new – one must understand that ballot stuffing has been happening at least since Tammany Hall; it is the way of the Republic in which we live. When a group or an individual finds themselves in a situation where they feel that their position and/or candidate are critical to the nations survival, they will do whatever it takes in order reach their objective.
Actions can range from registering individuals who are deceased, trolling for votes in nursing homes and generally breaking laws and the bounds of decency as they go on their merry way. Normally, this type of political maneuvering is confined to districts and wards; however, this election cycle it is rampant, from the ward to Jennifer Brunner, the Secretary of State of Ohio.

Ohio, a must-win state for both major political parties, has had more than a few problems with voter fraud this election cycle. Acorn, a non-profit organization that has its fingers in the mortgage industry (Fannie and Freddie), voter registration and a lobbyist group, has been making local news in several states, but Ohio is the biggest threat to all voters. There are problems in every district of Ohio, multiple registrations and other anomalies have been taking place (most media outlets use alleged, regardless of the fact that there are multiple videos available outlining including one man who testified to registering multiple times Video Here Brunner, a Democrat, had been issued an order by US District Court Judge, George C Smith, to verify newly registered voters and to assist county commissions in this process, she declined and brought it to a Federal Appeals Court, which overturned the judges ruling. One has to wonder why, with all of the attention focused on Voter Fraud (with the exception of the major media outlets), that Brunner would seek to avoid certifying voters in every single district if the allegations against ACORN were false? One would have to believe that Brunner, in blind partisanship, has abused her position in order to push an agenda, or Brunner honestly believes that ACORN is doing a great job in turning out the vote, even if it means that some of those registered are dead and buried, or live in Chicago (Illinois). What might boggle the mind is that the Federal Appeals Court aided and abetted Brunner – that said, Courts are made up of judges who often side with a party or agenda rather than with the people (California 9th District Court, Massachusetts Supreme Court, the Connecticut Supreme Court). This has been said of the Supreme Court’s decision in the 2000 election – where Al Gore, of all people, asked the Court to decide and was not pleased with the decision. Go figure. Should American’s been scandalized and feel that their votes are being “stolen” by Brunner and ACORN –absolutely – but will it matter?

This is the most likely scenario – in every state, especially Ohio, where voter fraud has been confirmed (or as the press implies alleged), there is an opportunity to request a re-count, send in the lawyers and basically prolong the result of the election for several months; especially if the results appeared skewed (this can go to either political party). How likely is this to happen? A lot will depend upon the make-up of the electorate, if it has changed in the course of four years, or if it has pretty much stayed the same. One has to understand that the polls, the division, the bias on both sides, is a mirror of 2004, additionally, the voter demographics have not changed – therefore, the outcome should be similar – in that the race will certainly be tight – right up to the last week, barring any October Surprise (and Troopergate is not an October Surprise – an October Surprise defeats the base, and the Republican Base is energized). As of the moment, the only poll that would be of interest would ask the following question: Are you voting for President at all – not, which party are you, and how likely are you to vote, but specifically will you vote for the office of President. Those in both parties, who feel strongly about the presidency, and feel they cannot support the person running for president, will be drawing a line, voting for neither McCain or Obama, but addressing any state offices and resolutions on the ballot. Should the number of individuals not voting be substantial, depending upon the party, ACORNs efforts will have been, once again, for naught.

Bill Clinton - Understanding Sarah Palin’s Appeal

Bill Clinton thinks he understands why Sarah Palin is so popular in the Heartland. On Monday, he shared his thoughts with reporters prior to a meeting (Clinton Global Initiative): "I come from Arkansas, I get why she's hot out there," Clinton said. "Why she's doing well." He went on to explain that her appeal centered on her motherhood, a larger family that those in the “Heartland” could relate to, as well the fact that her husband is the kind of guy Clinton can “relate to”. He went on to decry the never-ending Obama campaign attacks by stressing that Palin should be celebrated for her elevation on the ticket, ending with the question: “And just say that she was a good choice for him and we disagree with them?"

Where President Clinton may have erred is that location doesn’t matter when it comes to Palin – women, whether they live in the Heartland or the West, or the Northeast or the South or Florida, if they are working mothers, relate to Palin. There are a few who, bedeviled by partisan blindness, one too many Huffington Post updates, and a firm belief that Obama is the next Messiah, believe Sarah Palin should be subject to Photoshop, hacked emails, and the comments of their favorite undereducated starlets and comediennes – but they are not the norm.

What is a working Mom? - Women who have one or two or more children, work 40 hours, act as a taxi-service and feel that they have been ignored, let down and left out by politician’s because there is no way Nancy Pelosi could ever relate to the rest of “us”. Nancy Pelosi and Company (Obama, Kerry and the rest of her Henchmen), are only interested in “Reproductive Rights” (yet another term for abortion), and that message is loud and clear ringing not in the heartland only, but in the suburbs and yes, even in urban centers. The gig is up – and Bill Clinton gave a great assessment as to why Palin has personal appeal. Women are paying attention, working mothers that are not only interested in the fact taht Palin manages just like they do, but that she also had to manage her family and govern and she did so effectively. She’s a reformer and there is nothing a mom likes more than reform – especially when it comes to education and a call for transparency in government. (- A government that is sucking the life out of every family in the country through a never ending array of taxes.)

Just how many working women are there who relate to positively relate to Palin? Both campaigns need to figure this out because those are the women who may play a larger roll in deciding this election. One of them most likely new when he chose her as his running mate (giving him points with that same group), the other most likely has because of the level and baseness of the attacks.
Bill Clinton knows first had what it is to work with and stand by a strong and capable woman, and he also knows what the best strategy would be, if the match up were between Sarah and Hillary. He also sees the writing on the wall, and "race" doesn't enter into the picture. Educated guess based on Rasmussen polling and Vegas lines: he’s laying the groundwork for a 2012 match-up between Hillary and Palin.

When All Else Fails – Democrats on the Offence

Barack Obama’s campaign strategy, so far, has been to compare John McCain to George Bush. This has been the go-to tactic since the primary process began to wind down. It does nothing to contrast and compare policy – the charge that one man is so like another, when evidence strongly suggests otherwise, is fairly transparent. Playing off the fears of the base, many of whom have been in therapy for the past 8 years, is the biggest card that the DNC has to play – one has to ask, if it did not work in 2004, then how can they expect it to work in 2008? There are a finite number of elitists who are airing concerns to their steadfast followers on the standard issues that the DNC holds: abortion, Republicans who go to church and war – adding lack of experience into the mix when it appears that the general public isn’t engaged, is fine on both a state and national level. Obama, and Democrats in general, were supposed to have run away with the 2008 election, yet polls appear to indicate otherwise. The problem stems from a disconnect between the general public and those who feel entitled to hold office – the tantrums of children who have lost a turn – so to speak – to rule the playground. What’s a politician to do? Dispatch lawyers and journalists to Wasilla Alaska and go after every single shred of what might be a scandal or a negative against an increasing popular Republican Vice Presidential nominee.

The latest test appears to be Palin’s religion – her affiliation six years ago with an Assembly of God church – complete with You-Tube videos and in-depth analysis by CNN – all warning of extreme faith in God – or “Christian”, a cry that appears fine when referring to Obama (lest someone refer to him as a Muslim), but worrisome when it applies to someone with conservative values. The danger – abortion may be at risk, or worse, someone with faith may pray when faced with a serious decision.

On abortion, the issue has not given Democrats the traction they need to win over Independents; apparently all that is left is a candidates Religion as well as comparisons and ties to the current Bush administration. What is truly important to those caught in middle America – security, the economy, the dismal state of public education – are barely discussed – there is no contrast to be had simply because nothing has been done in Washington over the past two years – and Republicans and Democrats alike spent like there was no end is sight – making it difficult to tell the difference. The exception has been those committed either right or left – the right calling for reform, the left calling for investigations of the Bush administration. It is Us vs. Them -and although they should realize that the general public is tired of this tune, they just can’t seem to help themselves.

Now, in a heated campaign, the left is left holding the bag – so to speak. They must attack – but lacking any real substance, they turn to the old standbys – even when the players are on the same team. A group called Dems For Kerry, in defense of Senator John Kerry and his campaign for Senate (Kerry is facing his first challenger from inside the party.) is going YouTube. As Ed O’Reilly, Democrat challenger appears to be more serious than first thought and with a primary less than one week away, a video charging that O’Reilly is best friends with Jeff Beatty, Republican challenger is up on YouTube. The fact that O’Reilly and Beatty are both pleasant and reasonable men is used in this ridiculous video as an “attack”.



Actual campaign ads for Kerry (all two of them), are downright boring – one rehashes his ties to Veterans and the other his ties to Al Gore. They may do well in certain areas within Massachusetts, but one has to factor that the majority of voters are Independents or Unenrolled – (not unlike the entire country) or the wild card in the state and national races. People in general want to hear about the issues, not about what church someone belongs to, or if they actually are pleasant when speaking to someone with opposing political views. Should the trend continue Obama and Kerry may find themselves in similar situations as Matthews and Oberman - allowed to play to a point, but left out of the main event.

Palin – Reaction from a Concerned Left

It is interesting that the Press who felt that any mention of Barack Obama’s wife or children was totally reprehensible would turn on Sarah Palin and her seventeen year old daughter with such vigor. Those blogs that claim to represent the left, including nominee Barack Obama began the rumor mill as soon as Palin was announced as V.P. pick. Without a shred of evidence these outlets (including Daily Kos, CNN, MSNBC, CBS news and others) went to “bat for Obama”. His reaction was telling – hands off the family, especially in regards to Palin's 17 year old daughter’s pregnancy. Obama mentioned that his mother was only 18 when she gave birth – should the fact that Obama’s mother faced a similar situation to Palin’s be analyzed from every angle? Hardly. It is a private, family matter, one which affects households in American everyday, regardless of race, ethnicity or socio-economic backgrounds. Unless one has their pre-teen and teenage daughters (or sons for that matter) locked up in a bubble, that child is subjected to non-stop approval of teen pregnancy from family friendly outlets such as Nickelodeon and Disney, the teen idols are engaged in drinking, pornography, etc., which is glamorized by these same news outlets that now have their “panties in a bunch” so to speak. Should this even be a story? Hardly, the problem is that there is very little that is negative to be found in Palin – thus, grasping at straws is what is left.

Palin is a reformer, one who has taken on her own party, and contrary to what is being widely reported from the main press to the local, she is a known entity to the Republican base, a woman in the mold of John McCain. The press, so concerned with family issues and one non-story from a disgruntled employee in The Alaska State Government Juneau Empire, are questioning whether or not Palin was fully vetted. They should start reading newspapers:
An article from the Washington Post dated August 31, 2008, titled “Palin Made an Impression From the Start” outlined the extensive vetting process.

So, why the hoopla over a family matter and a non-story? That is one easy answer – the polls. Barrack Obama was supposed to have received at the minimum a 15 point bump from his “historic” speech – the actual numbers feel far below the anticipated leaving both candidates basically tied. The problem – the announcement of Palin as the V.P. pick virtually erased any bump Obama may have enjoyed. The press is reacting: protecting one who they perceive as their own.

Where does the press go when family and non-issues may not be enough? Why the old “right-wing Christian” theme, of course. There are a few problems with that tract: In reality her values do align with those who would be considered value-voters (i.e. Religious), however, she appeals to those white, working class men – and women who are interested in a candidate that will reform, not conform. Sarah Palin speaks to the nation from the RNC convention on Wednesday night, after which, the polls will tell how well she resonated with the base, as well as the nation. (If one looks to Rasmussen Polling for guidance, how well she did with the base and “likely voters”.) Feminists (true feminist, not the pro-abortion-one-issue groups), will make up their minds (if they haven’t already), and the polls will give an indication of how well she does with certain demographics. Will she change the minds of those committed to a particular party? Most likely not – she will appeal to the base, and the 20 million evangelical voters who will go to the polls – the wild card will remain the Independent voter. The independent voter – McCain’s strong suit – shared with Obama – for now.

McCain - Out of the Box Perfection - Palin Running Mate

At first, hearing the name of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate gave pause - there was definitely some concern as to reasoning of this particular choice by the Maverick. Did McCain choose Palin because she was a woman - and any woman would do? Was it to attract disgruntled Clinton supporters or to appease a base that cried out for a conservative choice. After reviewing who Sarah Palin is, the reason McCain made this choice is glaringly clear: he chose a strong person for the spot - Palin, a mother of 5, fiscal conservative, pro-life, Governor of Alaska (Well liked in a Blue State). She is the epitome of a Conservative Feminist. McCain chose for McCain - who he felt was best for the Country. Should any thing happen to prevent John McCain from performing the duties of the office of the President (should he become the President), then it would be comforting to know a strong woman would be there to step in and take the reigns of this country.

John Kerry - Desperation Over Debates!

Brigid O’Rourke, spoke model for John F. Kerry, (D-MA) has her hands full lately. Last week she was assailing Jeff Beatty,(R-MA)candidate for U.S. Senate. due to his calling John Kerry an opportunist - today it was Ed O’Reilly, (D) Kerry’s first Senate challenger in 24 years that has Brigid somewhat upset. Apparently, Ed O’Reilly is guilty of telling the truth – something that Brigid might not be used to hearing. O’Reilly noted in a television appearance that Kerry was “ducking debates” with him, to which O’Rourke replied: “O'Reilly's charges are a "cheap ploy" intended for "character assassination." Further, "You know this fella's blatant lies are getting as old as his campaign is desperate."
Brigid contends that it is O’Reilly not John Kerry who is in no hurry to debate. Understandably, the Kerry Campaign must make charges against both Beatty and O’Reilly – regardless of any basis in fact. Simply stated, the Junior Senator is under siege from both the right and the left!

The truth of the matter - Mr. O’Reilly has left a “newspaper trail” that is impressive and, from Worcester to Washington, no one is buying the fact that Kerry is willing to debate. Additionally, O'Reilly is running a campaign that is statewide - having offices out in Western Massachusetts no less. The Junior Senator doesn't even have a post office box west of Boston.

A sampling of articles supporting Mr. O’Reilly follows:

On July 29 >The Berkshire Eagle Tribune reported: “In a letter sent to Kerry, O'Reilly asked for 23 debates — a combination of public forums and television appearances — between now and the Sept. 16 primary. No schedule has been established, and with the primary closing in, O'Reilly wants to get moving."He has to come back to Massachusetts and debate the issues," O'Reilly said. Kerry, first elected in 1984, doesn't share O'Reilly's urgency. Roger Lau, his campaign manager, said the senator can't agree to a schedule until he knows when the Senate will recess. While an August recess is planned, it's possible the Senate will work into the month to finish its business.”

August 18th, News IN Brief “Kerry may not debate challenger"
WORCESTER. Sen. John Kerry says he has instructed his campaign manager to discuss the “modalities” of a debate with his re-election challenger but he’s not necessarily going to debate fellow Democrat Edward O’Reilly.
Kerry says Senate business and his own statewide campaign schedule have kept him from taking up O’Reilly’s initial challenge for 23 debates.
Now, with less than a month until the Sept. 16 primary, Kerry says his campaign manager will have to see if he can negotiate any agreement with the Gloucester attorney."

Google O’Reilly Debate Kerry and the evidence is overwhelming.The headlines say as much as the articles:

August 7 Newbury Port News: ”Kerry shouldn't shy away from debates”

And on August 19, Real Clear Politics “Why Kerry Won’t Debate” (Not particularly complementary towards the Junior Senator.)

This begs the questions: Just who is desperate?” and “Who’s guilty of character assassination?” Hopefully, O’Rourke has a mirror handy. The simple truth is that for the past month, the media has been reporting on Ed O'Reilly's calls for a debate, including the Boston Globe. Also, the NRNC has a nifty anti-Kerry ad. Suddenly, the Junior Senator is paying attention and crying foul! Could it be that once Biden got the call for V.P. (Democrats can lay that at Kerry's doorstep as well, his former campaign team now advising Obama), Kerry understood he might actually be out of job come November.

McCain Takes the Lead Trumps Obama by 5 Points

In a Reuters/Zogby poll taken this past week, John McCain took an overall 5 point lead over Barack Obama for the first time and is leading Obama on the economy by 9 points. The impact from the Saddleback Civil Forum will certainly play a significant roll in upcoming polls. The forum, played on both CNN and Fox news over the weekend, shed new light on the way both candidates handle questions posed unscripted. McCain clearly led Obama in that forum and led to speculation that the upcoming debates would favor McCain.

With Russia threatening (Fox News and Matt Drudge both have breaking news today noting: “Russia Says Response to U.S. Missile Shield Deal with Poland Will Go Beyond Diplomacy”) use of force, McCain can only widen the gap in upcoming polls.

McCain and Obama’s Saddleback Performance – Experience Trumps “Change”

Anyone who took the opportunity to watch the Saddleback Forum, hosted by Rick Warren on Saturday night had an opportunity to watch John McCain score and Obama fumble. The forum, hosted and moderated by Reverend Rick Warren, focused on character, integrity and faith. The presidential hopefuls were interviewed separately, at the request of the campaigns and agreed to answer similar questions. .

Barack Obama appeared generally at ease, but stumbled over questions on abortion (drawing a distinction between morality and science as regards to when life begins and then refusing to answer because “it was above his pay grade”), among others. The most striking were his comments on Supreme Court Justices – he would not have nominated Scalia, which, one would gather Obama would prefer a justice not strictly interpret the Constitution, therefore that was not a surprise. However, he named Clarence Thomas first, reasoning that Thomas lacked experience. Overall, a lackluster performance, rambling as it was unscripted.

John McCain on the other hand surprised those who have felt (author) that he had the charisma of a tranquilizer. Previously and admittedly, the support for John McCain had come from a “lesser of two evils” approach to picking a candidate. McCain came out gunning. He was amusing, connected with the viewer and left one feeling secure.
How was that possible? McCain has an usual style – he answers quickly and decisively – not searching for words in order not to offend anyone, he appears confident in his answers, and promotes hope in the American Dream. If age were an issue, he came across as more lively than the younger Illinois Senator. The Saddleback forum changed minds – and although the media is looking at the forum as one strictly for religious (specifically evangelicals), the reality – the entire spectrum of American society took time to watch this forum; it was broadcast by both Fox and CNN, with additional broadcasts by both networks over the weekend. In discussion with both independent and conservative Massachusetts viewers (where McCain has closed to within 9 points on Barrack Obama), comments focused not on question content, rather on the demeanor of both candidates: simply McCain came across as presidential and confident.

The press reacted, as it was glaringly obvious that McCain outshone Barack Obama, and therefore, he must have somehow cheated. The New York Times is crying foul noting that McCain may have had an opportunity to hear or have knowledge of some of the questions. (This after the Obama campaign accused, scrambling as usual - damage control.) Even if McCain somehow managed to hear or have knowledge of the first 3 similar questions put to Obama (which is an unsubstantiated claim from the Obama campaign), it would not explain the continued excellence of the McCain performance. From NBC to the New York Times, the obvious fact that the candidate who was thought to have Charisma that would outshine experience and put a Progressive into the White House, may now be another Dukakis or McGovern (politically speaking).

As the Democrats head into their convention, with McCain choosing to run 60 second spots on network television during the same time frame, the bounce from the convention may mirror the Obama Tour O8 (plus 9 points which faded within a week), which cannot bode well. It is now patently clear that Obama must stick to scripted debates; his cue card is essential.

Additional thought: Perhaps more important is his choice of running mate (more so than McCain), one can bet the house that should Obama choose John Kerry, (speculation), McCain could add the 12 electoral votes from Massachusetts to his win column.

Kerry as Obama V.P. – Seriously

The speculation over V.P. pics has reached a feverish pitch; as pundits and beltway experts weigh in on a multitude of possibilities for both McCain and Obama – one must keep in mind that, although a great way to pass the time, guessing who the V.P. will be is akin to buying a lottery ticket and hoping one wins. That said, those weighing in will have another week or so to continue to choose for the nominees – with one or two possibly getting it right.

The latest V.P. pic bandied about is Massachusetts Junior Senator, John Kerry. The case for Kerry’s V.P. is made by Jon Keller, of WBZ Boston. Keller’s Blog outlines the pro’s of a Kerry V.P. choice, so well, apparently, that Matt Drudge has made it a two day headline (August 15 & August 16). That said, other sources in Massachusetts have indicated there may be something to this, adding: “According to state law, Kerry can run for Senator and for Vice President simultaneously.”

Would Kerry fit the bill? Yes, he may even be the most logical choice. He is close to Obama. It was Kerry who chose Obama as the keynote speaker for the 2004 convention; he also campaigned for Obama in Illinois (while campaigning for president). Kerry has spent more time campaigning and fundraising for Obama than paying attention to his own Senatorial race. Additionally, as previously noted in other posts, Kerry’s 2004 campaign staff is working for Obama. Obama lacks experience; Kerry has experience and is national party leader. He is also an astounding political opportunist.

“Yes he can” run for Senator and V.P. simultaneously, however, polls indicate that the V.P. slot may be more likely than a re-election. Polls: Suffolk University polls have indicated that 51% of the respondents preferred Kerry not retain his seat (no other candidates were mentioned in this particular poll). Ed O’Reilly, Democrat for Senate managed to get on the ballot despite the best efforts of the Kerry camp to squelch O’Reilly’s ambitions. Additionally, Jeff Beatty, republican has begun to close the gap in the Massachusetts Senate polls – gaining approximately 20 points in the most recent polls, which coincides with the percentage of those polled as “having no opinion” (not knowing about) of the candidate, dropping from 60% to 40%.
O’Reilly and Beatty have grassroots campaigns, which Kerry cannot generate, preferring to meet with City and State politicians on the campaign trail rather than actual voters. The most interesting indicator is the Bay State press. Recent articles are showing caution: the word “if” has been inserted before “John Kerry wins the primary”. One needs only to "Google" Kerry and Massachusetts Campaign to find Obama's name in the majority of the results - this may be leading pundits to believe Kerry is considering the V.P. slot, or alternately, aggressively seeking the same.

With McCain and Obama now tied in the daily Rasmussen Polls (44 – 44), the Obama campaign must be seriously looking for a way to generate buzz. The logical step would be to go where they believe they have a shot. With Kerry’s popularity in Massachusetts questionable at best, and the Republican Candidate, Beatty mounting an increasingly effective campaign – Kerry might feel more comfortable in the national spotlight.

A Kerry VP pick in Denver? Yes, anything is possible, however, perhaps the campaign should poll in Massachusetts (specifically independents or unenrolleds who make up 50% plus of the electorate) prior to making any definitive decisions.

The Democrat Convention – This Should Be Reality Television at Its Best

The fact that Hillary Clinton’s roll in the upcoming conventions has been greatly expanded to include a nomination has many a pundit nonplused! Some are calling the nomination of Clinton “symbolic”, an appeasement process to bring Clinton supporters to Obama’s side. Other’s are a bit unnerved over the Clinton’s involvement in the process. Dick Morris, in a recent Fox News appearance, sees it a bit differently. Morris, who is not a fan of the Clintons and has a less than stellar track record of predicating the outcome of any given race, made an interesting point nonetheless: Obama caved into Hillary Clinton. How? By allowing her far too much time at the convention, and an opportunity to upstage Obama. The question: "How’s that for leadership on the part of Obama?" Morris went on to ponder; if Obama cannot control Hillary Clinton, how can he be trusted to control critical situations? (Issues of import to the security of the nation.)

That’s a valid question. However, can one place the blame entirely on Obama? Yes and no - it depends on who is chosing his advisors. That is not entirely clear. The one term senator from Illinois whose mentor, John Kerry, Democrat Massachusetts, brought to national attention in 2004 at the DNC convention, has hired members from Kerry's old campaign team. Those advisors, although well-intentioned, may not have the best track records.

John Kerry campaign staff from his failed 2004 presidential bid that are working for Obama include:
Heather Higginbottom, Obama’s policy advisor, Stephanie Cutter, senior advisor to Obama and chief of staff for wife, Michelle and Jim Margolis leads the commercial production and daily message team. Additionally, Tom Daschle is a national co-chair of the Obama campaign.

The Obama camp is hoping that the “symbolic” nomination and multiple appearances by the Clinton’s during the convention will mollify the 18,000,000 Democrats who voted in the primary’s – bringing them over to the side of the “magnanimous Obama.” This remains to be seen. One can bet the house that the ratings for the Denver Convention will be through the roof – not necessarily because Obama will be on the stage, along with a yet to be announced running mate – it is the drama. This year’s DNC party will be the best of Realty TV. It remains to be seen how much control Obama and his staff will have over those delegates on the floor who are there for one reason and one reason only – to nominate Hillary Clinton as their party’s standard bearer. Comments on the original news release from the ABC Blog are an interesting read with a common theme – disarray. What types of message will this sending to the average voter?

To recap: Obama’s surrounded himself with campaign advisors who have major political failures under their belt and Hillary Clinton will have a huge percentage of air time at the Convention. Republicans, who were destined to lose every election this year, are looking more likely to retain the White House and those Daschle-like, DNC “Obamafiles” (Pelosi and Kerry come to mind), may end up on the outside looking in.

Hillary Clinton – Vindicated – Nominated - Party in Denver

According to ABC News a deal has been worked out between the rival Democrat camps that places Hillary Clintons name in nomination at the Denver convention. The question now arises: “What if?”. Should the DNC be paying attention to the winds of change – the polls show Obama and McCain in a dead heat for weeks. Today’s Rasmussen Poll has a 1 point difference between the two, with Clinton voters likely included in that mix. The more Progressive Arm of the party (Pelosi, Reid, Kerry and Moveon.org) may be in for a rocky mountain ride, while moderates scramble to salvage what should have been a run-away for the “chosen one”. However, at this stage of the game, introducing Clinton as the front-runner (should that occur), may not leave enough time for the DNC to recover. That said it is the true Democrats in the party that have forced the Progressives to kneel, giving Clinton the opportunity to salvage the party in 2012.

"Read My Lips, No New Taxes", The Bush-McCain Connection.

Given the fact that every imaginable high-ranking conservative has given their endorsement to John McCain, should not the party rank and file just fall in and throw all their grassroots might behind the "Chosen Candidate?" No. Last time anyone bothered to check, the rule book includes something inane about the people of the party actually voting for the candidate. Enter Mike Huckabee, who is as non-party elite as one can be, yet still holds the party near and dear to his heart. The problem with Mike Huckabee is that he is for the people first, not the party. This is the way he successfully governed in Arkansas (he has an impeccable record which is ignored in favor of the elite and the media crying "Christian" every chance they get, in an attempt to frighten off the general public, who are? - Christian's in some form or other. Those Evangelicals are hardly different from Catholics, Protestants (which, as a Catholic I thought they fell under that umbrella), or any one practicing any faith in this country. Once the fog lifted from the elite hue and cry, it was duly noted that the man actually had more experience than any other candidate, and a successful record of dealing with both sides of the aisle in order to accomplish a thing or two.

The problem is that the administration and elite have anointed McCain as one most likely to fall into line with party dogma; the media loves McCain as he suits their more liberal leanings and frankly, is the easiest target for the Democrats this November. What's not to love about this guy? No disrespect to his service, but his voting record is dismal at best, if you happen to be moderately conservative.

Is there a choice or a chance at this point? Decidedly yes. There is still hope, hope that Mike Huckabee will take the 51% or so, delegates in the remaining states, force it to the convention and garner enough votes in a brokered convention to give the party back to the people and make an honest and successful run at the white house in November.

Is it no wonder that the RNC has given state delegates from Michigan to McCain. They fear that Mike can win, and that if they don't stop him, the party is over.

(Not the Republican Party, but the inside the beltway, elite party).

Is it no wonder that the final debate has not taken place? Why would McCain enter to debate with Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul? Because should he do so, he would be shown to be the fraud he is.

Mike will survive (see You Tube video below).