Wednesday, April 30, 2008
What happens in Pennsylvania in the 2008 election (and, frankly, in the 2010 mid-term election) will help determine the success of the McCain presidency. Yes, it's important that John McCain prevails in November, but it's vital that Republicans regain some of the House (and Senate) seats lost in 2006. No Republican or conservative wants to send John McCain to the White House and have him face a Congress opposed to all his key initiatives. The point is this: If you want to support McCain, please take the additional step of voting to send Republicans to Congress. There are 19 congressional seats in Pennsylvania, and it should be possible for Republicans -- over time -- to win at least 14 of them. When that occurs, Republicans nationally should be able to regain control of the House of Representatives.
If you'd like to support any (or all) of these exceptional candidates, please go to their web sites. Alternatively, you can contact me at TalkTop65@aol.com, and I'll put you in touch with them.
Philadelphia Bulletin article on Marina Kats below:
Kats Will Take On Schwartz In Montco Congressional Race
By: Bradley Vasoli, The Bulletin
Marina Kats, an Abington attorney, became the sole Republican challenger to Democratic U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz in Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional District Monday evening.
Ms. Kats bested Upper Moreland Republican leader Lee Falgoust 178 to 81 at the Montgomery County Republican Committee's endorsement meeting. Mr. Falgoust responded by asking all county Republicans to support the endorsed candidate and withdrawing from the nomination contest, formally decided in the April 22 primary.
The presumptive nominee faces a formidable opponent in the incumbent Democrat. Mrs. Schwartz, a Jenkintown resident and former state senator, is running for a third term in the House of Representatives, having defeated real estate developer Raj Peter Bhakta in 2006 by 66 percent to 34 percent in a district that includes much of Montgomery County and most of Northeast Philadelphia. Her campaign now has roughly $1.6 million cash on hand.
Still, her opponent from Abington does not foresee a predictable Democratic victory. "I am very confident," Ms. Kats said. "We already know that money alone does not win the election." She cited Arizona Sen. John McCain's all-but-certain presidential primary victory over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as an example; Mr. McCain was out-raised manifold but still prevailed.
Ms. Kats also said that anti-incumbent impulses in America are currently strong and cut across party lines. In Maryland this year, she noted, Rep. Albert Wynn (D) and Rep. Wayne Gilchrist (R) both lost their respective primary battles. No congressperson from the state has lost a nomination contest since 1992.
"There's tremendous anti-incumbent sentiment right now," Ms. Kats said. "I think the fact that she's incumbent sort of goes against her not for her."The Republican has sought to distinguish herself from her opponent by speaking in favor of broad tax cuts and spending reductions. She also opposes amnesty for illegal aliens and describes herself as pro-Second Amendment on guns.
Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."
Schwartz spokesperson Rachel Magnuson said the congresswoman welcomes the opportunity to compare her own professional record with Ms. Kats's."Congresswoman Schwartz is a fighter on behalf of middle class families," Ms. Magnuson said. "The issues that they care about are health care, the economy and making sure the streets are safe from crime."
Mrs. Schwartz, she continued, should do well against someone "who has made her money being an immigration and criminal defense lawyer."
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
TO: Interested Parties
FROM: NRCC Communications Director Karen Hanretty
SUBJECT: Bloom Off the Obama Rose: Endorsement from Elitist No Longer Smells Sweet
DATE: April 29, 2008
The longer the chaos of the Democrat presidential primary plays out, the more a liability Barack Obama becomes to congressional candidates running on the Democrat ticket this year. Evidence that the bloom is off the Obama rose is Travis Childers’ adamant denial he accepted an endorsement from Obama.
Childers, a candidate in the open seat of Mississippi’s 1st Congressional District, told reporters, “Senator Obama hasn't endorsed my candidacy. I have not been in contact with his campaign nor has he been in contact with mine...” (WREG, April 28, 2008)
However, an email from Obama’s presidential campaign sent April 22nd encouraged supporters to make phone calls and turn out voters for Childers in the special election runoff. “Today we can give Travis the boost he needs to finish strong,” read the Obama email, “and show that our movement is dedicated to change up and down the ballot.” (Obama email, WREG, April 28, 2008)
See the story by WREG here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE1oN4bYjyg
Childers isn’t the only Democrat distancing himself from Obama. North Carolina Governor Mike Easely, a superdelegate, endorsed Hillary Clinton today over the odds-on favorite to win the state’s primary, Barack Obama. With less than a month until the Mississippi election to fill the open congressional seat, the question to Travis Childers is, “If not Obama, who? Hillary?”
Former President Bill Clinton lost the state of Mississippi in 1996, and President George W. Bush won the state in 2000 with 59% of the vote and again in 2004 by an even wider margin of 62%. No matter how you slice it, Democrat Travis Childers isn’t going to pick a candidate favorable to his district unless he endorses John McCain.
Steve adds: Well said, Karen. I hope the hapless Mr. Childers' Republican opponent runs Karen's exact comments as radio and TV ads. In at least half the congressional districts in America, an endorsement from Obama is an albatross around the neck. Most Americans recognize that Obama is an offensive elitist, and those congressional candidate who support him -- or even tolerate him -- fall into the same category.
"Seventeen percent of Pennsylvania voters said they will either not vote if Mrs. Clinton gets the nomination or will vote for Mr. McCain; 25% said they will do likewise if Mr. Obama wins the nomination." (The Economist, April 26 - May 2, 2008)
If Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee, he absolutely must prevail in Pennsylvania -- the nation's sixth largest state -- if he hopes to win the election. But the exit polls in the recent primary show that the Illinois Senator is unlikely to win the Keystone State.
Consider the views of Catholic voters -- about one-third of registered Democrats -- in Pennsylvania. Of the ones who voted in the primary, six-out-of-10 say they'd vote for Obama in the general election. However, more than two-out-of-10 (21%) say they'll vote for John McCain.
Among white voters, almost one-in-six (16%) said that race had an influence on their vote. And of those, nearly one-in-twelve (8%-plus) said they would not vote for Obama in November. When Gov. Ed Rendell make a similar observation months ago, he was condemned as uttering racially insensitive comments. Insensitive? Perhaps. Correct? Absolutely.
In the Pennsylvania exit polls, many Democrats made reference to Obama's "bitter" comments (about people clinging to religion, guns, racism, and xenophobia). Some of those voters joked that they were much too "bitter" ever to vote for Obama. Others, according to The Economist, accused Obama of "clinging" to a religious figure (Rev. Jeremiah Wright) notable for hating America and white people.
Especially in Rust Belt States (including Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, and Michigan), Obama has a real problem attracting white voters. According to the Senator's campaign managers, that's because the the voters don't "know" him. But whose fault is that?
Many Caucasians are evaluating Obama on the principle that you know a man by the company he keeps. As long as that company includes Rev. Wright, terrorist William Ayers, and influence-buyer Tony Rezko, the electorate doesn't like what it sees.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Scroll down to see the columns for Saturday and Sunday.
“This week in the New Republic we have an article comparing him [Obama) to George McGovern.” (Mike Allen, Politico.com)
John McCain speaking about the anti-Obama ad he asked the NC GOP to withdraw: McCain said the ad was described to him: "I didn't see it, and I hope that I don't see it."
I’m looking forward to writing this week about “The Battle for McCain’s Soul.” I’ve become increasingly convinced that John McCain is not being well-served by some of his advisers. Frankly, they are covered by a veil of illusion about the character of their main opponent, Barack Obama, and the nature of the campaign that will be waged against them.
Some weeks ago, Senator McCain went across the aisle to see his presumptive opponent, Barack Obama. McCain reportedly shook Obama’s hand, smiled broadly, and joshed animatedly with the Illinois Senator.
At the time on the campaign trail Senator Obama was saying that McCain wanted to continue the Iraq War for perhaps another hundred years. In terms of the economy, Obama, the Democratic Party, and “independent” left-wing groups were portraying McCain as the Second Coming of Herbert Hoover. Somehow, back-slapping and breeze-shooting didn’t seem quite the proper reactions on McCain’s part.
Unfortunately, John seems to regard the U.S. Senate as a gentleman’s club, something it hasn’t been for at least a generation. In the old gentleman’s club, of course, it would have been proper to give “the distinguished gentleman from Illinois” the benefit of the doubt. McCain does that when he claims, on the Chris Matthew’s “Hardball” show that, although Obama’s San Francisco remarks on small-town Americans (of which I’m one) were “elitist,” although he refuses to characterize the Senator himself as an “elitist.” Good grief.
Frankly, an elitist is someone who makes elitist comments. Barack Obama and his wife, who wants to become First Lady, regularly make such statements – as with Mrs. Obama’s “America in 2008 is a mean place.” As for Obama, he says he “respects Sen. McCain for his [military] service to his country.” Apparently, he has found no other reason to respect the Senator.
In the case of the North Carolina GOP ad, McCain’s actions were not only wrong but irresponsible. He asked the Party to withdraw an ad that was thoroughly appropriate – and he did so without even bothering to see the commercial he was excoriating.
Who “described” the ad to McCain – and who asked him to condemn it and call for its withdrawal? I assume Campaign Manager Rick Davis was involved in the decision. If that’s the case, then McCain should be asking himself if he wouldn’t be better off without Rick Davis.
One of the “narratives” Democrats are going to spin about McCain is that he engages in temper tantrums. Some of the Arizona Senators former colleagues – one being Pennsylvania’s hapless Rick Santorum – are saying that he’s a bully. Heavy-handed actions such as the one directed against the NC GOP reinforce that image.
One other figure in the McCain Campaign is Patrick Hynes, who sends out daily updates about what McCain is doing – and what’s being done to him. Patrick’s updates regularly complains that the national media is “not doing its job” of looking in depth into the Obama campaign. He also notes that Obama is misrepresenting McCain’s stands on the issues.
With all due respect to Patrick, he’s being naïve. In fact, the national media – particularly the New York Times, Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Time, Newsweek, and NBC – see their “job” as advancing the cause of Barack Obama. Seeking fairness from such sources is like Diogenes looking for an honest man.
Is anyone from the above media outlets going to ask the Senator from Illinois if he shares his wife's distaste for and lack of pride in America? Not in this lifetime. Are they going to ask them if his monolithic support from Black people is skewing the primary results? Surely you jest.
The Senator’s hope for basic fairness in coverage lies with the “new media,” such as this blog. If he looks to today’s yellow journalists for support, then he’s looking in all the wrong places. People like Patrick Hynes have to acknowledge that fact and move on.
Also, asking Obama to be more honest in his descriptions of McCain’s issue positions is a request that’s never going to be fulfilled. Obama and his buddies in MoveOn.org look at Senator McCain, an authentic American hero, as a right-wing troglodyte and warmonger. Obama his left-wing supporters are the political heirs of the 1960s radicals who used to chant “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today.”
I don’t believe Senator McCain’s advisors are serving him well. They’re apparently not making clear to him the avalanche of slime Obama and friends are beginning to spew.
Do I know why the Senator and his key aides are taking the positions they are? Of course. The Senator wants to wage an honest and decent effort, one free of “negative” campaigning. They want to return to a kinder, gentler era – perhaps to the 1950s when Dwight Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson waged campaigns where there was nary a “discouraging word.”
When a candidate like Obama has major flaws -- in his policies, character, and associations -- it's not inappropriate to point them out. The McCain Campaign shouldn't have to rely almost exclusively on "Saturday Night Live" and "FOX News" to carry the fight against the Democrats. When Obama is behaving in a haughty manner, it's okay to use the "e-word," elitist.
My own advice to Senator McCain is this: understand the nature of the “enemy.” Recognize that when they make false or defamatory statements about you some members of the voting public are going to believe them. Yes, the public generally expresses its disapproval of “negative” campaigning, but in fact negative comments – when they are true – are not gratuitous. If you doubt that, check out how Mrs. Clinton did in Pennsylvania. She "went negative" and won by a huge margin.
In the battle for Senator McCain’s “soul,” it’s essential that the realists win. It’s time to put the padlock on yesteryear’s “Gentleman’s Club.” Otherwise, Obama will end up controlling the campaign agenda – and McCain will end up losing the election.
As usual, comments are always welcome. If any bloggers would like to use all or part of the above material, please be my guests. If you do use it, please give my blog links: http://stevemaloneygop.blogspot.com or http://camp2008victorya.blogspot.com.
Friday, April 25, 2008
The following is this weekend's column. Your comments are welcome.
In many states (PA, NM, NC) Republicans are running ads to support state ("down-ticket") Republican candidates that feature criticisms of Barack Obama. In perhaps 30 states, he is becoming radioactive.
My friend, Melissa Hart, who's running for Congress in the 4th congressional district is launching almost daily attacks on her opponent, Jason Altmire, for his "fawning," uncritical behavior toward Obama. Consider the following information disseminated by Sharon Caliendo, a political superstar and consultant in Oklahoma and Texas:
Drag Entire Ticket Down
Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee for president would be a disaster for Oklahoma Democrats and possibly drag down other Democrat candidates, the new edition of the Sooner Survey reports.
Survey Director Pat McFerron reports that with either Obama or Hillary Clinton as the party nominee, Republican John McCain should win the state easily. But while McCain now leads Clinton 2-to-1, he leads Obama 3-to-1 and Obama displays startling weakness in Democrat areas of the state.
While Oklahoma Republicans once salivated at the opportunity to again run against a Clinton, McFerron writes, "Barack Obama’s numbers in the state make him an even more appealing Democrat nominee to run against."
For Oklahoma Democrats on the fall ballot, McFerron sounds an ominous warning: "When looking at their individual favorability numbers, there is not much difference between Obama (32% favorable vs. 54% unfavorable) and Clinton (34% favorable vs. 57% unfavorable).However, when looking at ballot match-ups against McCain, there is a sizeable difference that could have dire consequences for down-ballot Democrats.
Against Hillary Clinton, John McCain has a two-to-one advantage (60% McCain vs. 30% Clinton). Against Barack Obama, however, it approaches three-to-one (62% McCain vs. 21% Obama)."Obama drew a favorable rating from 32 percent of those in the survey, with 54 percent expressing an unfavorable opinion. And 40 percent have a "strongly unfavorable" impression of him.
McFerron writes that in the Ada/Ardmore area, an area of significant Democrat strength, 81 percent of those surveyed picked McCain and only 5 percent picked Obama in a head-to-head matchup.
In Little Dixie, McCain has an astounding 5-to-1 lead over Obama.
Sharon Caliendo added the following:
"I think this is pretty much what you are going to see across the South including Texas and Florida. I work with a good friend out of Florida that said he believes the OK numbers will be similar for Florida which is outstanding news. I expect Sen McCain to have coattails in a lot of our states that were all or predominately red the last time.
OK and UT had every county go for Pres Bush and as it stands now I expect those numbers to rise for Sen McCain as we draw in the American Indian vote for the Senator. He has spent years working for the Indians on the Senate Committee and all the ones I have talked with in OK support McCain.
"Getting a good feeling about this election in our part of the Country. Now to reach out to those states that were blue in the last election to bring some of them red so on election night we can celebrate instead of waiting until the next day and longer."
That said, I strongly disagree with McCain’s position that the North Carolina GOP should withdraw an Obama ad, one using Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American and anti-white comments to criticize two NC Democrats running for governor. Both candidates (Richard Moore and Bev Perdue) have endorsed Barack Obama.
John McCain has said “there’s no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don’t want it.” He also added that his knowledge of the ad was second-hand. In his words, “I didn’t see it, and I hope that I don’t see it.” Frankly, if he wants to condemn the ad, he should at least look at it.
John McCain is an honorable, decent man. In the case of the NC ad, he’s overstepping his authority. Yes, he will be the Republican standard bearer, but the North Carolina GOP is a separate entity, responsible for the performance of Republicans in their state.
Frankly, there’s nothing false or meretricious about the ad. Rev. Wright presented the sermon featured (the one where he says “God damn America”) as it appears in the ad. Obama has distanced himself in vague ways from what he calls Wright’s “controversial” remarks, but has not spoken in any detail about the issue.
In fact, Republican candidates around the country are holding Democrats to account on their support of Obama. In my own congressional district, GOP candidate Melissa Hart has repeatedly criticized her opponent, Jason Altmire, for not distancing himself from Obama’s so-called “bitter” comments. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is supporting such efforts.
As for McCain, he’s taking too much of a kid gloves approach to Obama, who misrepresents McCain’s position on a daily basis. Most disturbingly, McCain told MSNBC’s Chris Mathews that Obama’s “bitter” remarks were “elitist,” but that he wouldn’t characterize the Senator himself as an “elitist.”
I give up. Even Hillary Clinton, Obama’s fellow Democrat, has called him an “elitist.’ Frankly, an elitist is someone who makes elitist remarks and is guilty of elitist associations, and Obama regularly does both.
I sometimes fear that Senator McCain yearns for the good old days when the U.S. Senate was a “gentleman’s club.” In his chronic misrepresentations of McCain – for example, saying he’d like to fight the Iraq War for another 100 years – Obama is not exactly being a gentleman. In fact, he’s being a left-wing elitist, one detached from the realities of life in most of America.
In the campaign, Obama and his friends at MoveOn.org are going to throw the kitchen sink at McCain. Heck, they’re going to throw the stove, refrigerator, and dishwasher at McCain – not to mention the local landfills.
Senator McCain can not be under the illusion that he’s a latter-day Dwight Eisenhower running a contemporary version of Adlai Stevenson. Like the North Carolina Republicans, McCain must not overestimate the character of his opponent(s).
In the Gulf War, General Schwarzkopf said his approach would be to “hit the enemy in the face with a baseball bat.” Frankly, that’s a good description of what American leftists -- including Barack Obama – will try to do with McCain.
When you see a baseball bat coming your way, the best approach is NOT to turn the other cheek. Trust me, Senator Obama and his supporters are not to miss any opportunity to defame John McCain, and he’s better be ready for that.
Note: The material below describes in detail the controversy over the NC political ad.
"We asked them not to run it," McCain told reporters traveling with him in Kentucky. "I'm sending them an e-mail as we speak asking them to take it down.
"I don't know why they do it. Obviously, I don't control them, but I'm making it very clear, as I have a couple of times in the past, that there's no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don't want it," McCain said.
McCain said the ad was described to him: "I didn't see it, and I hope that I don't see it."
Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan, who accompanied McCain, said he had left a voice mail message for state party chairwoman Linda Daves asking her to pull the ad.
McCain, in an e-mail to Daves, said he will draw sharp contrasts with Democrats. "But we need not engage in political tactics that only seek to divide the American people."
Asked about the ad during an appearance in New Albany, Ind., Obama said: "My understanding is that the Republican National Committee and John McCain have both said that the ad's inappropriate. I take them at their word, and I assume that if John McCain thinks that it's an inappropriate ad, that he can get them to pull it down since he's their nominee and standard-bearer."
"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean piled on, saying McCain should call the party chairwoman personally."
"If John McCain means what he says, he should call the North Carolina Republican Party chairwoman and tell her not to run this ad," Dean said. "Sending an e-mail and turning a blind eye as the state party ignores him is not leadership."
North Carolina GOP spokesman Brent Woodcox said the ad will begin running statewide on Monday, a week before the state's crucial May 6 primary. The ad actually targets gubernatorial candidates Richard Moore and Bev Perdue, Democrats who have endorsed Obama.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
"America in 2008 is a mean country." (Michelle Obama, a Princeton and Harvard Law graduate who makes $300,000-plus annually working in "community outreach" at a Chicago hospital)
"A typical white person." (Obama in Dreams From My Father talking about his white grandmother)
Note: Tomorrow (Friday) I'll have a column (mildly) critical of John McCain for asking North Carolina Republicans to withdraw a commercial critical of the Obama/Wright connection and the pro-Obama Democratic gubernatorial candidates in NC. I know John McCain is a thoroughly decent and honorable man, but sometimes I wonder if he fully grasps the kind of opposition he's up against. Also, I don't believe he's in position to tell a state party how to conduct its campaigns -- any more than they are to give him instructions. I hope you'll visit.
Here's what a friend said about my forthcoming criticism of John McCain: "I'll be very interested to read it. I personally think that mild (or at times heavy) criticism of McCain is a good thing. Leaders should be open to advice from supporters, and supporters who view their candidate as perfect (see: Obamamania) are kidding themselves, proving a lack of intellectual compotence, and doing a disservice to their candidate by not offering advice. in short, supporters who are able to criticize their leader are far more useful and productive than those who are not."
And we Republicans? We can sit back and enjoy the spectacle.On my site appealing to Hillary Supporters who will back John McCain (against Obama) in the general election, I have a piece outlining why Mrs. Clinton deserves the Democratic nomination. See: http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com/.
Thanks very much for honoring me with your visit.
Obama: Conservative/Moderate Democrats' Decline and Fall?
Stuart Rothenberg, a non-partisan political analyst who evaluates congressional races around the country has this to say about the Obama effect in congressional races this year:
". . . Obama may not be the asset that he was once regarded by House Democrats. True, he will likely bring out younger voters and attract more independents than his New York opponent, but he's well on his way to being tagged a liberal, and that will undermine him as an asset for his party.
"Obama's great mistake was not in calling some small-town voters 'bitter.' Instead, it was in treating support for gun control and religion as negatives, as well as in equating 'anti-immigrant sentiment' and support for trade with religion.
"Obama's comments ought to worry Southern and rural Democrats about what their party's attitude might be toward them if and when the party elects a president in November. So long as Democrats have been focused on winning majorities, party leaders have been tolerant of their conservative Democratic colleagues. That could well change if Obama finds himself in the Oval Office." (Roll Call, April 17, 2008)
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Eric Dondero, a popular host on BlogTalkRadio and blogger at: http://mainstreamlibertarianr.blogspot.com/ sent the following message today:
You all, please take a moment to visit the Blog this morning. I've got an article up praising our own Stephen Maloney of PA for getting the PA predication 100% correct.
Can you all believe this? Stephen bucked the conventional wisdom. Told us last week that Hillary would win by 55% to 45% contrary to all the Pro-Obama propoganda the MSM was pushing at the time, about a "late Obama Surge."
Stephen gave us the view from the ground.
Stephen: You are now officially nicknamed "Nostradamus." Good job my man! Good job!!
Steve adds: I hope you'll visit Eric's site today. Later today (Wednesday), I'll discuss some of the reasons for Mrs. Clinton's big victory. On my site with the most unusual title (http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com/), I'll give some powerful reasons why Senator Clinton should get the Democratic nomination. In November of this year, I'll be voting for John McCain for the presidency, but I believe his opponent should be Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Why the Polls Were Wrong in PA . . .
A week ago, I told Terry Madonna, who heads the Franklin & Marshall College poll (a good one) that I was right and his poll and (most) others were wrong. I said so because people (especially African-Americans) who are voting for Hillary sometimes say they're voting for Obama. It has happened before (Ohio) but the pollsters keep getting it wrong. Michael Barone on FOX said the same thing early last night, even before there were any real numbers out. The exit polls of voters said that Hillary would win by 52-48.
The point is that it's not fashionable in some areas for people to say they're support Hillary. However, when they go in the voting booth, they do just that.
Thanks to everyone who honors me by visiting this site.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
As many of you know, I believe it's critical to reach out to Hillary Clinton supporters, many of whom say they will vote for John McCain if Barack Obama gets the nomination. Recently, I started an innovative site called: http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com/. I sincerely believe Mrs. Clinton is a better candidate than Obama, but he's likely to end up with nomination. On my Hillary site tomorrow (Wednesday), I'll have a column about why Mrs. Clinton should get the nomination. It will contain information you haven't seen before. I urge you to visit the "Hillary" site.
Senator Clinton won a major victory tonight in Pennsylvania. As some of you know, I predicted her winning margin would be either 55-45 or 54-46. It appears that I was right on target. Obama may very well win the nomination, but his campaign is floundering badly.
Today in Pennsylvania, there's a lot of excitement about the primary. This afternoon, I'll be writing about a devastating article in The (London) Economist. It discusses Barack Obama and his now-famous comments about average Americans who "cling" to religion, guns, racism, and anti-immigrant feelings.
Right now, on TV an Obama commercial is running that says, "Barack Obama doesn't take money from 'Big Oil' or lobbyists. That's of course not true, as a recent USA Today expose pointed out. Obama has many lobbyists raising funds for him, and he has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from oil industry executives. Go figure!
You’ve already heard a lot about Barack Obama’s so-called “bitter” comments. As columnist Jack Kelly said Sunday in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the national media – strongly pro-Obama -- emphasize the word “bitter” because it’s the least objectionable part of the candidate’s statement. The most objectionable part is where the candidate says that typical Americans cling to religion, guns, racism, and xenophobia (hatred of foreigners).
The best analysis I’ve seen of Senator Obama’s statement is in The Economist (April 19-25 , 2008, p. 44 ). Here are some excerpts:
“Barack Obama has a magic way with word, but when the magic deserts him, it deserts him big time. April 6th saw Mr. Obama making the worst verbal gaffe of this seemingly endless campaign. He told a group of fat cats in San Francisco that the reason why he is finding it hard to appeal to blue collar voters in Pennsylvania is because they are ‘bitter.’ They have suffered from so many broken promises that they prefer to ‘cling’ to God, guns, and xenophobia rather than reaching out for a helping hand from the government.
“ . . . Conservative radio talk show hosts have been bellowing 24/7 that Mr. Snooty knows nothing about the real America.
“And no wonder! Mr. Obama has always been in danger of coming across as an elitist. He was educated at Columbia University and Harvard Law School. He not only reads books but writes them [Dreams From My Father and The Audacity of Hope]. He once urged a group of Iowa farmers to check out the price of arugula in Whole Foods – an upmarket store that has no branch in the entire state. His Ivy League educated wife [Michelle] – who is paid nearly $300,000 a year for promoting ‘community outreach’ – is in the habit of telling audiences how difficult it is to afford ballet classes for their daughters.”
Those of us in America might ask: Why do we have to rely on a British journalist to provide such insights? Why is our own national media seemingly mesmerized by such a flawed candidate as Barack Obama? Perhaps because they’re easily mesmerized?
In Pittsburgh, about 15 miles from where I live, the Post-Gazette recently endorsed Obama on the grounds that he would take America “beyond partisanship.” Oh really? The (non-partisan) National Journal recently assessed Obama as the most liberal – and thus highly partisan – member of the U.S. Senate. The Post-Gazette editorial board (alas, Jack Kelly is not a member) knows Obama’s record, but they chose to misrepresent him to their readers.
In Dreams From My Father, Obama describes his remarkable grandmother, whom he’s now using in ads, as “a typical white person.” What if John McCain, or any other Caucasian, had described ANYONE as a “typical Black person?” That white American would no longer be seen as a serious candidate for the presidency.
Media outlets like the Post-Gazette are engaging in a journalistic form of Affirmative Action. They’re holding Obama to much lower standards than they are Hillary Clinton or John McCain.
In fact, the media’s failure to live up to its obligations is a major reason people are turning to the new media for information. In fact, it’s one reason you’re here rather than relying on a manipulative news organ like the Post-Gazette.
Thanks for visiting this site – and keep coming back. Thanks especially to regular visitors from Pittsburgh, PA; Philadelphia, PA; Cranberry Township, PA; Jefferson, Maryland; Rome, Georgia, Ewa Beach, HI; Anchorage, AK; Eagle River, AK; Wasilla, AK; Colorado Springs, CO; Queensland, Australia; Houston, TX; Austin, TX; St. Augustine, FL; Oklahoma City, Ok; Baton Rouge, LA; Rochester, NY (my birthplace); Dover, DE; Boston, MA; and Manchester, NH. There are many more regular visitors, and I'll mention them in my next column. Your comments are welcome!
The following message from Black conservative, radio show host, and pro-life activist Craig Bardo is an important one, and I hope you'll offer whatever help you can.
So often, we who oppose the practice of contraceptive abortion are accused of not caring for those that survive the abortion decision. For many black folk, the right to life movement is seen as a largely white effort and one that we may intellectually support but haven't found a way to contribute our time or limited financial resources.I've had occasion to visit Grace Pregnancy Resource Center here in Nashville, which supports 200 young women who have made the decision to bring their children to term rather than abort them.
This center is 3 buildings down from the second largest abortion clinic in the city. 47 of the women in the program were deterred from having an abortion by the staff at the Center. One young woman visited this morning, thinking that she was entering the abortion clinic, the counselor had an opportunity to visit with her,but she went up the street anyway, I don't know what she decided to do. 39% of these young women are black 22% are Hispanic.
I host a radio program here in the city and tomorrow, I'm kicking off a fund raiser for the Center that will go through next Wednesday. We're on the air from 6-8 am CST, M-F, Brian Harris the president of Tennessee Right to Life along with their spokeswoman Carolyn Smith, who happens to be Emmett Till's cousin. They'll be in the studio at 7:00 am to talk about the good work they're doing. These girls need your help.
You can listen in on the program via live streaming audio @ WVOL1470.com or WVOL1470.net. You can call in with your pledge of support to (615) 737-9865 or (615)227-1470. Make your checks payable to Tennessee Right to Life (Grace Pregnancy Resource Center). If you want to donate on line, go to their website, www.TNRTL.org and make sure to put The Craig Bardo Show in the memo box so they can track your contribution.
Thanks for your support and please pray for this effort, these young women are counting on it!
Monday, April 21, 2008
John McCain's victory -- in your precinct, state, and country -- depends largely on people exactly like you. During the time between now and the General Election (November 4, 2008), I'll discuss ways that average Americans (and above-average Americans) can help ensure that John McCain becomes the next President of the U.S. Here are some basic steps you can take:
- Tell you friends and family members that you're strongly backing John McCain -- something that will make them more likely to do so. You can do this face-to-face or through e-mails;
- Keep yourself up on what's happening each day in the McCain Campaign -- by e-mailing Patrick Hynes at firstname.lastname@example.org and asking to be on his mailing list;
- Go to the John McCain store at: http://store.johnmccain.com/ to order McCain-related apparel, buttons, stickers, signs, and accessories. If you wear a McCain hat or tee-shirt, you're functioning something like a walking billboard;
- Visit http://johnmccain.com/ to find out the various ways you can back McCain, including making a small donation (or a large one!) to the candidate;
- Join interest or demographic groups for McCain, including O. P. Ditch's http://www.vets4mccain.com/. Col. Ditch is signing up tens of thousands of veterans who back their fellow veteran, John McCain.
- Learn ways you can use your blog to enhance McCain's chance of winning. A great resource is Kathy Morrison's at: http://mccainbloggerresources.blogspot.com/.
- Join Bard Marston's exciting new McCain site: McCainNow.com. It's designed to bring our combined power together in a fun and exciting form. Built on the same software platform as Facebook, McCainNow.com allows you to start your own blog, join or start discussions on our forums, and join or start your own group. As Brad explains, "We are already getting ready to roll out Wall posts, Friends Connections and much, much more."
- Make certain all the McCain supporters in your community are registered -- and that they vote on November 4. Explain that every vote truly counts.
- Visit blogs that continue good information and insights about the presidential race, including this blog or its mirror blog. I also blog about Pennsylvania at: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/. And, when my arms don't fall off, I blog at an innovative site called: http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com/. Although I don't support Hillary Clinton, I hope to work closely with people who have supported her but now lean toward John McCain.
If you leverage your individual strength by helping recruit other McCain supporters, you might influence 100 votes -- or, if you have lots of time on your hands, even 1,000 votes. I'm certainly hoping to do so.
Here are some quick links you should explore: McCain Now
Sunday, April 20, 2008
The column below is reposted from my Pennsylvania site (http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.com. In this year's election, Pennsylvania is going to be what the pundits call "highly competitive." Generally, the columns on the Pennsylvania site will be "states-specific," recognizing that PA is going to be a critical battleground state. Later today, I'll be putting up a new -- and extremely important -- blog called: http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com. When Obama wins the nomination, as he presumably will, many Hillary supporters -- perhaps one-in-four -- will be inclined to vote for John McCain, and the Hillary site will involve discussions about that development. I urge you to visit both these sites.
Hillary Winning in PA, Nationwide
On Sunday, April 20, the results of the latest Gallup "Tracking Poll" were released. They showed Hillary Clinton leading nationally among Democrats by one percentage point. A week ago, Obama's lead in the Gallup Poll was about 11 points, so there's been a dramatic drop in his national support.
In Pennsylvania, the average of polls shows Mrs. Clinton's lead at about five points.Some analysts, including this one, believe it's entirely possible that Clinton will win in the Keystone State by approximately 10 percentage points. I've guessed it will be approximately 55% to 45%, although it could conceivably be by as much as 57% to 43%.
Clinton is stronger in Pennsylvania than you might have been hearing on TV. Right now, she's tied or leading in every demographic except Blacks and the wealthiest of Democrats.
If Mrs. Clinton has a double-digit win in Pennsylvania, look for to call on Super Delegates to support her. Presumably, she will point directly to the Gallup Poll as illustrating that she's the most electable candidate. She would have a powerful argument in her favor.
Clearly, Obama has been hurt by two factors: (1) his "bitter" comments about small town America; (2) his poor performance in the recent debate. The national media, many of whom obviously support Obama, have been slow to report on the dramatic changes taking place in the Democratic race.
Keep a close eye on those Gallup Tracking Polls. If Senator Clinton extends her lead, the Democratic race may become more chaotic than it already is. My own guess? That the battle will go right to the convention floor in Denver, an eventuality that will help John McCain.
In fact, McCain is looking like a probable winner in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and even New Jersey, usually thought of as a solid "Blue State." Mrs. Clinton had solid wins in Ohio and New Jersey, and she should have a similar result in PA.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Born 6:30 AM, April 18th, 2008
6 pounds, 2 ounces
Trig was not slated to arrive until May 18th, which makes him exactly one month early. Gov. Palin actually went into labor while in Texas for yesterdays Governors Forum, where she delivered the Keynote Address, but flew back to Alaska to give birth at the Mat-Su Valley Regional Medical Center. The Palin family issued the following statement:
"Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed"
NOTE: A friend and fellow Palin supporter from Alaska informs me that among the “special challenges” is the fact that Trig Palin has Downs Syndrome.
Like so many other people who believe Sarah Palin has the potential to be a great vice-president – and ultimately a great President – I continue to urge John McCain to select her as his running mate.
Trig Palin is very lucky to have two such superb people as Todd and Sarah Palin as his parents. All the best to the entire Palin family.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Cranberry Township, PA – Today, former Congresswoman Melissa Hart was joined by Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) for a press conference to call on Jason Altmire to end his silence and condemn the remarks made by Barack Obama one week ago.
“I find it disturbing that Jason Altmire has continued to stay silent regarding these insulting remarks. As a life long resident of Western Pennsylvania, I know the people here are proud of their values, families and faith. We certainly don’t cling to religion and sportsmen traditions out of bitterness,” said Melissa Hart.
“With each passing day, it has becomes more clear that Jason Altmire pays more attention to his national political profile than his constituents’ concerns. Governor Rendell and other top Democrats have rightly criticized Obama’s remarks,” said Hart.
Congressman Boehner added, “It’s time for Barack Obama to apologize to voters here in Pennsylvania and across the Midwest. And it’s time for his supporters in Congress to defend their constituents and denounce Obama’s patronizing rhetoric.”
Boehner continued, “Midwest voters aren’t ‘bitter;’ they’re for freedom. Freedom from higher taxes. Freedom to practice their faith. Freedom to exercise their Constitutional rights,” Boehner concluded. “That Obama and Altmire don’t understand that shows how out of touch they are.”
Altmire has been seen at many Barack Obama campaign events across Western Pennsylvania, including the event where Senator Bob Casey endorsed Barack Obama.
The only statement Altmire has made since the “bitter” remarks about Obama was in last Sunday’s Washington Post, saying "the more people get to know him, the more they like him."
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Here are the first comments:
Ken Dilanian, “Obama has ties to lobbyists despite boasts of not taking their money,” April 16, 2008 http://usatoday.com.
“Barack Obama often boasts he is “the only candidate who isn’t taking a dime from Washington lobbyists,” yet his fundraising team includes 18 members of law firms that were paid $138 million last year to lobby the federal government, records show.
“The lawyers, including 10 former federal lobbyists, have pledged to raise at least $3.5 million for the Illinois senator’s presidential race. Employees of their firms have given Obama’s campaign $2.26 million, a USA TODAY analysis of campaign finance data shows.
“Thirty-one of the 38 are law partners, who typically receive a share of their firm’s lobbying fees. At least six of them have some managerial authority over lobbyists.
“’It makes no difference whether the person is a registered lobbyist or the partner of a registered lobbyist, f the person is raising money to get access or curry favor,’ said Michael Malbin, director of the Campaign Finance Institute, a non-partisan think tank.”
Steve Adds: Obama is running wall-to-commercials, perhaps $10 million worth, in Pennsylvania that claim he doesn’t accept money from lobbyists. That is the reverse of the truth, and it reinforces the view of Obama as a man who is dishonest in the claims he makes about himself and his campaign.
Here's number 2, my comments on the situation in Texas:
I believe when we hear the evidence the state has -- and the early signs are that they have a great deal of information about law-breaking, including sex with underage women -- we will all be able to make more intelligent decisions about the rightness (or lack thereof) of the state's actions. At the very least, the males who totally dominate the "Yearning for Zion" (yikes!), or YFZ, site are exploiting both the males and females there.
Frankly, the women, who come across as Stepford Wife zombies, are not being done any favors. I say zombies because of the women's lack of "affect," the inappropriate smiling, and the sing-song voices, coupled with an obvious lack of basic education. I was dismayed by the women's (and we heard only from women, not the "elders") refusal to answer questions that they surely knew the answers to. What appears to have happened is that the "elders" define anything controversial as "sacred" (including sex with underage girls) and therefore not a matter that can be discussed. Very convenient.
In normal society, the way that abusive treatment gets detected is often by the neighbors or the authorities. In YFZ, there are no neighbors -- just members of the one secetive religious cult -- and the authorities and abusers seem to be one and the same. Yes, I have some mixed feelings about the withdrawal of all 416 children, but as I hear more I think the state just may be doing the children a big favor.
YFZ looks a whole lot like one of the old plantations from "Gone With the Wind," where the "darkies" were portrayed as singing away, all happy as clams. I don't believe it. At YFZ, at the very least, people's lives are being drained away and anyone who can stop that is performing a public service.
One point that hasn't been emphasized is that six women chose to go the "safe house." I won't be surprised if those women are singing like the birds in the trees about things taking place at YFZ.
Apparently, a number of children are also talking freely. One network is reporting that several young girls have said they know "Sarah," who made the original complaint. One thing people may be wondering about YFZ -- and all the other FLDS communities: where are the Black people?
Apparently, the answer is that they don't want any, in keeping with the "old" Mormon doctrine (pre-1980) that Blacks are someohow lesser beings in the eyes of God. I don't think that teaching children that particular "doctrine" is anything but hateful -- and very damaging to those who hear the "lessons."
There is no grand solution to this situation, but foster homes are starting to look better and better.
By Jerry Bowyer
As a Pennsylvania voter, I'm disheartened by the identity politics now playing out as both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battle for votes among Democratic Party factions.
One in five supporters of Mrs. Clinton here say they won't vote for Mr. Obama should their candidate lose (and vice versa, according to pollster Terry Madonna of Franklin & Marshall College). Only 12% of nonwhite Pennsylvania voters support Mrs. Clinton. Only 29% of white ones support Mr. Obama. Gender and age cohorts break along similarly sharp lines, with women and older voters going for Mrs. Clinton, men and young voters trending toward Mr. Obama.
As a student of political history, I see these poll results as something deeper than a passing nomination squabble. For at least 40 years, Democrats have been playing identity politics and empowering factional blocs within their party.
Though others might pick a different starting point, I'd trace the start of that process to 1968 Chicago, where antiwar protestors rioted outside of the party's national convention and party leaders inside responded by creating the McGovern-Fraser commission. That commission went on to write presidential nomination rules establishing delegate quotas based on age, race and gender. State parties followed suit by structuring caucuses to favor organized activist groups such as unions.
And so now Pennsylvania Democrats, like their brethren around the country, are splitting along race, age, gender and geographical lines as they are forced to choose between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama. But then, why shouldn't they? Democratic voters are just doing what they've been trained to do – thinking of themselves in group terms.
I find all of this disheartening because allowing the narrow interests of political factions to force decisions and policies onto the whole is something that James Madison warned us against. In a pro-Constitution editorial (which history has come to know as Federalist 9), he described in prescient terms precisely why political factions are dangerous.
When there is liberty, he argued, some men will create more wealth than others. Property and class factions are the result. Members of these different economic classes are tempted to pass laws which help themselves at the expense of the overall public good. Over time this excessive self-regard distorts the gift of reason and causes people to think and speak in ways that seem strange to the country at large.
If that sounds a little like the Democratic Party today, it may be because the party of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison has come to be dominated by factions. In the Keystone State, those factions include African-Americans who dominate the inner-cities, upper-class white voters in the suburbs, working-class voters in the middle regions of the state, and Latinos, seniors and college students who are dispersed in geographic pockets. And of course, ubiquitous unions.
Voters head to the polls in Pennsylvania on April 22 in a process that is supposed to lead eventually to a Democratic presidential nominee. But in watching Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama traverse the state, it's hard to see how one candidate will emerge from the many Democratic factions slugging it out.
Mr. Obama is hoping to overcome Mrs. Clinton by energizing college students. And anecdotal evidence suggests that a surge of support among college-age voters may be helping him. Recent statewide polls show the race tightening. My mother, who is volunteering to help the Northampton County Department of Elections process new voter registrants, is watching the Obama surge first hand. Among the new registrants she sees, the vast majority are Democratic college students, most of whom, we can presume, will vote for Mr. Obama.
Mrs. Clinton is trying to turn out her own supporters, who include traditional working-class Democrats, middle-class suburbanites and, of course, women and seniors.
Last month, it appeared that Mr. Obama's campaign was to be split apart on the edge of growing fears among white Democrats over incendiary and, at times racially charged, comments his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, delivered from the pulpit over a 20-year period that Mr. Obama attended his church in Chicago. All the while, Mr. Obama hadn't raised an objection to Rev. Wright's sermons.
To save his campaign he showed up in Philadelphia – the city where Madison and the rest drew up the Constitution in 1787 – and gave what some called "The Speech" on race in America. In doing so, Mr. Obama likely saved his presidential campaign. And he did it, in part, drawing a line all the way back to "that group of men [who had] gathered" across the street in Constitutional Hall in 1787 to write one of the founding documents of the nation. In other words, by reaching beyond the factional politics of the Democratic Party.
Democrats might have once hoped that Pennsylvania would settle their nomination fight. Instead, it has shown how dangerous it is to put voters into factional blocs that can then be exploited along racial lines. To the extent that Democrats suffer this year for not learning that lesson earlier, well, to quote Mr. Obama's pastor (who himself was quoting Malcolm X): "the chickens have come home to roost."
Mr. Bowyer is chief economist of BenchMark Financial Network and a CNBC contributor.
Dear Pennsylvanians and others interested in Keystone State politics, please visit my blog focused on the state at: pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. Occasionally, I'll cross post from this national blog to the PA one, but generally the columns there will be distinctive.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
When it comes down to actually voting, the vast majority of Libertarians will reject the more liberal candidate (Obama) – and vote for the more conservative one (McCain). That’s because Libertarians reject the liberal narrative and generally accept the conservative one.
George Will recently described the liberal narrative as portraying “most Americans [as] victims of this or that sinister elite or impersonal force – and are not content to cope with life’s complexities without government supervision.” http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2008/04/13/fooling_ourselves_into_entitlements
That nanny-state-narrative is completely at variance with the libertarian view of life.
What is the conservative narrative? Here’s how “Lexington,” a super writer for The Economist (and a libertarian) describes it: “American conservatives tend to believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can succeed. This makes them more optimistic than liberals, more likely to feel in control of their lives and, therefore, happier.”
Conservative is not exactly the same thing as libertarian, but the two are compatible, as William F. Buckley, Jr. found 50-plus years ago when he staffed the National Review with a combination of economic libertarians and social conservatives. In contrast, liberalism, the friend of Big Government, generally is the polar opposite of libertarianism.
If you listen to Barack Obama (and Hillary Clinton) on the campaign trail, you hear some scary things. They portray “too many Americans’ as one step away from economic and social disaster. They see as people badly in need of major assistance – their assistance.
John McCain, imperfect as he may be, sees a very different America. It’s the same country whose liberties he was willing to give his life for in Viet Nam. We may not agree with him on every issue, but we can’t disagree that a love for liberty is at the central core of this man’s being.
Even Bill Clinton has said of McCain: “He’s given everything he has to his country – except his life.” President Clinton has never spoken truer words.
In contrast to McCain, Obama essentially portrays America as something resembling Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach,” where “ignorant armies clash by night.” As “Lexington describes Obama’s world-view, America is “a coalition of groups that define themselves as victims of social and economic forces, and . . . [where] its leaders encourage people to feel helpless and aggrieved . . .”
If Obama becomes President, we would become a society of “victims,” all of us clamoring for the government to bail us out of our misery. That would be a disaster not only for libertarians, but for all Americans.
I hope all libertarians do the right thing: voting for John McCain. Also, ask your friends and family members to do the same thing. The future of liberty in this society depends on free people standing up and supporting a man who has devoted his entire life to defending American values and liberties. John McCain is the right man for our cause.
Steve Maloney is a writer and political activist living in a small town near Pittsburgh, PA. He’d like to inform Senator Obama that he is not now – and never has been – “bitter.” He blogs at: http://stevemaloneygop.blogspot.com/.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
As you'll notice, my views about a Melissa Hart victory over Jason Altmire are not all that different from what McCain has to do to win over Obama in Pennsylvania. It's important to understand that Jason Altmire, who's one of Nancy Pelosi's and John Murtha's "pets" in Washington, will try to portray himself -- falsely -- as a centrist.
Also, as the campaign goes on, he and his surrogates and financial backers will try the same approach they relied on in 2006: to use their slime buckets in an attempt to heap mud on Melissa. Since Altmire will say anything and do anything to win, it's important that voters know exactly why so many observers describe him as a political guttersnipe
I'm working to get bloggers and other onliners to "link" (technically, emotionally, and politically) to Melissa's site -- and to keep going there. I also ask them to make small contributions (I mention $20 to $50) on the theory that if they make one, they'll make more. The 4th congressional district (north and west of Pittsburgh) is not a household term in, say, Texas or Oregon, but if it gets portrayed accurately as the most important congressional race in the country (and one that's critical to McCain's future), then it should get people's attention.
It's important to keep reminding people that Altmire called Murtha his "campaign manager" because, outside the 12th congressional district Murtha is as unpopular as it gets. I also link Altmire's name with that of Pelosi, on the basis that Altmire voted for her as Speaker and regularly votes with her on critical issues. On insignificant issues, Pelosi occasionally allows him to vote in accord with the wishes of voters in the 4th.
Also, on the Obama comments: he portrayed Pennsylvanians as a bunch of Bible-thumping, gun-toting rubes who take out their economic frustrations on immigrants and people who are "different" from Obama's supporters. Altmire apparently agrees on that point.
Finally, there's the issue of Altmire's radical donors, as revealed on www.opensecrets.org (go there and type in Altmire's name). He apparently believes he can accept huge amounts of money from radical left-wingers -- and somehow continue to portray himself as a centrist. In fact, Altmire is getting his "donations" from the same people who cheered Obama's sneering comments about Pennsylvanians and other average Americans. The contributors are people who believe in economic protectionism and in waging the War on Terror with rhetoric and platitudes rather than effective actions.
The America-haters of Moveon.org play as big a role in financing Altmire's campaign as they do in Obama's. (I'm going to write extensively in coming days about Altmire's money-men.) It's eminently fair to use Altmire's radical donors against him, because they're the ones who call the tune he dances to.
What's more, he needs to explain why he's taking money from union dues paid under duress by union bosses from members who support Melissa Hart. Because of his actions, Altmire should always be on the defensive -- right through November 4.
Overall, it's critical for people in the 4th who vote for John McCain to support Melissa Hart. She will back McCain's practical, yet often visionary, policies. Altmire would not.
In the 4th, the numbers look good. McCain will win the district by tens of thousands of votes (perhaps as many as 40,000 -- Bush having won in 2004 by 30,000). Thus, McCain should be putting wind in Melssa's sails.
Despite the vast amounts of money the far-Left is pouring into Altmire's campaign, Melissa Hart is looking more and more like a winner. Please visit her informative web site.
Bloggers who would like to reprint any of my material, including this column, are cordially invited to do so.
NOTE: ON MY OHIO AND NEW JERSEY SITES, WHICH I HOPE YOU'LL VISIT, I HAVE A SHORT PIECE TODAY ON BARACK OBAMA AS "AMERICA'S PET ROCK." Those sites are at: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com and http://newjerseyforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. In general, those sites focus on the particular states, although on occasion I cross-post. I have yet another site (yikes): http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. Its emphasis is on the relationship between the McCain Campaign and efforts by Republicans to take or hold congressional seats. I'm looking to hand off the Ohio and New Jersey sites to willing bloggers from those states.Your comments are always welcome.