And The Winner Is...

For those who don't know, the Delaware Republican Party has reorganized following the redistricting after the census.  The party structure has condensed in New Castle County from 5 regions down to 3 and so the old Newark Region has merged with the majority of the old Christiana/Millcreek region to form the new "Western New Castle Region".  Last night, January 30th was the first meeting of the newly structured region and officers were elected.  Dave Gilefski is the new Chairman, Ken James the new Vice Chairman and Robin Broomall is the new Treasurer.  Future meetings were set on the last Monday of every month to accommodate a wide range of schedules.  There were also many candidates at the event from U.S. Senate candidate Kevin Wade, Gubernatorial candidate Jeff Cragg, Lt. Gov. candidate Sher Valenzuela, Jim VanHoutten running for Insurance Commissioner, myself (running for State Senate in the 11th District) and a couple of candidates vying for County Executive.  There were also a number of current elected officials at the event.  Finally, there was a Presidential Straw Poll taken...and the winner is...Rick Santorum!  Santorum's win came signals a shift in the thinking within Newark area Republicans.  Previously the poll would have been dominated by Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich but as we go into 2012, this is a clear sign that Newark area voters value conservative principles now more than ever.  This was no eek out win either, here is the break down:

Rick Santorum - 21 - 43%
Mitt Romney - 15 - 31%
Newt Gingrich - 10 - 20%
Ron Paul - 2 - 4%

Congratulations to Rick Santorum for providing a message that Republican voters can appreciate.  Congratulations to the new officers of the Western New Castle Region.
Good luck to all of the Republican candidates, especially those who come from the Western New Castle Region.

Our next meeting is on Monday, February 27th and we urge all area Republicans to attend.

American Spectator Interviews a Troublemaker

Jeff Lord at the American Spectator recently sat down with a real troublemaker for an interview. 2010 U.S. Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell sat down with Jeff and the first copy of her new book “Troublemaker” for a chat. I’ll let you read most of Jeff’s piece over at the American Spectator but I thought that the following excerpt aptly described O’Donnell’s campaign.

THE REAL POINT HERE, as more and more Americans get with every passing day, is that this is precisely the game played with non-Establishment politicians right from the get-go. A viewing of the 1939 classic film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington​starring Jimmy Stewart -- this scene

 from the film gets to the guts of O'Donnell's 2010 race and then some with the exception that in the end Mr. Smith wins and O'Donnell loses -- says only in cinematic fashion what O'Donnell has lived in real life.

 O’Donnell faced down Mr. Potter and all his friends in former Congressman Mike Castle who she defeated in the 2010 Primary. They tried their best to take her down and they wounded her enough that she was unable to win the war but she made sure to take down Goliath along the way. It took dive bombs from Karl “Tokyo” Rove, smears by the Delaware Republican Party leadership, the withholding of support by the national party and constant insults from high powered magazine editors like Bill Kristol from the Weekly Standard to try and stop her but still, the respectable members of Delaware’s Republican Party were undeterred and selected her as their nominee.

Still the party know-it-alls like the ancient and detestable National Committeewoman Priscilla Rakestraw, whose reign will hopefully mercifully come to an end in 2012, refused to support O’Donnell. Likewise, the crotchety Castle refused to hold to his promise to support Christine if she did “somehow” win the nomination. Even when asked by O’Donnell’s father, to whom Castle had promised to support her, Castle refused. He claimed he was insulted by an attack on his sexuality launched by a former campaign vendor to the O’Donnell campaign but the truth is that King Castle had never lost an election and he simply didn’t know how to lose.

 O’Donnell spills the beans on this and many other Republican Party secrets in her tell-all. She explains the push to use certain vendors once she’s secured the nomination discusses the shenanigans behind the infamous “Witch Ad” and points fingers at the puppet masters who balked at a nominee whose strings they couldn’t pull. She’ll talk about a once grand old party, with names at the top like DuPont and Roth who in 2006 nominated Jan Ting to run against Tom Carper. Ting would go on to not only switch parties, but become state coordinator for the Obama campaign in 2008.

 Oh, she lays it down…and this is just the beginning. Get your copy of what is sure to be, a New York Time Bestseller (whether they like it or not) today!

Citizen Cain

Herman Cain burst onto the stage at the Fox News debate in South Carolina and suprised a lot of people.  I knew about Herman Cain, I was concerned about his ability to raise enough money to beat Obama but from what I knew of his message and his past, I was happy enough.  With that said, he WAS a Federal Reserve Chairman and that was a concern because I know that the Fed is a major problem in our country.  I say was, because Herman Cain was confronted about his work with the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City by Glenn Beck and his answer was more than sufficient:

You can watch the full 1 hour interview with Herman Cain here (Watch it, it's worth it). 

People ask, "Why do you support Herman Cain?" and the answer is, "Because Hermain Cain, flat out gets it."  Herman is a self made man.  He's worked for everything he's ever gotten and he's become a successful business owner who has created jobs and grown that business.  Cain understands America and what makes America the greatest country in the world.  He is descended from slaves and was raised by hardworking parents in the age of segregation in Atlanta, Georgia.  His father worked multiple jobs and his mother also worked to ensure that Herman and his brother had a home to grow up in and that they graduated from college.  They had faith the America WAS the nation of greatness that they thought it was.  They had faith that if they kept their faith in God and in eachother and worked hard, their dreams would be realized and they were right.  Herman and his brother graduated from college and now their son Herman is running for President of the United States. 

Herman understands that though America has the scar of slavery on it, the greatness is in the freedom to overcome that mark and to work your way up.  He combined that can do attitude with the values of a good work ethic & attention to detail and he earned everything he's ever recieved.  Some will say that "Herman Cain can't win."  I recall that they said the same thing about Christine O'Donnell in her race versus Mike Castle and look how that turned out.  She beat him despite the destruction by the mainstream media and despite the attacks from her own party.  In fact, had it not been for those attacks from her own party, we might be looking at Senator O'Donnell right now.

Some will say, "Can Herman Cain beat Barack Obama?" and the answer is YES.  Herman Cain is uniquely positioned to confront Barack Obama on all of his policies and to defeat him in the realm of ideas.  Additionally, Herman has a business background and he's been in the trenches of America's fiscal swamp.  What's more, Herman removes the one weapon that the media and the left have consistently thrown at every challenge to Barack Obama's policies, racism.  It almost feels wrong to even think it, but the fact is that no matter how valid the challenge to Barack Obama's Socialist policies, the media wraps it up in the bow of racism and hatred.  The media won't be able to do that with a man like Herman Cain who knows what he believes, understands the facts, speaks his mind and by the way, looks like Obama and more importantly, can really relate to communities that other candidates would spend millions of dollars just to begin to learn about.

Others will say, "Herman doesn't have enough name recognition.".  Sure, Herman has some work to do on his name recognition but most of that starts with us.  It's up to US to get the word out.  We've got to be telling our friends about Herman Cain and we've got be using Facebook, Twitter and email along with our face to face discussions to enlighten our friends and neighbors about Herman Cain and what he stands for. 

Step 1 - Go to www.hermancain.com  and learn what you can about Herman Cain.
Step 2 - Join Team Cain here
Step 3 - Invite your friends and family to check out www.hermancain.com
Step 4 - Invite your Caniac friends to Join Team Cain
Step 5 - Spread the word about Herman Cain to the rest of your community.

My latest blog pal, Mantei has got a GREAT post with tons of other Herman Cain websites where you can get involved.  Check him out here.  And subscribe to his site: http://mantei.wordpress.com

Sussex County ED Chair Responds to Delaware Republican Official

Jeanette Talylor responds to Mar Spicer.  Spicer's letter is below.  I've also attached some video.

Mary,

WOW!  You must have been at a different meeting.  I was at the one at Del Tech in the Carter Partnership Center auditorium.  As a new ED and a long time member of the GOP, I was terribly impressed that there was actually business conducted at this meeting.  That is something I haven’t seen done anytime lately.  The meeting was quiet and well ordered,  (thanks to the incredible job done by Vance) .  Oh yes, there was a lady yelling just prior to adjournment – but I’ll get to that.

There was no “double standard” or “dichotomy” that I saw.  Vance Phillips was elected Chairman Pro Tempore by a majority vote.  I did notice, however, that you failed to mention the first vote with 104 ballots cast by a voting membership of 78 (apparently two voters abstained) that required a second vote done by roll call ballot because somebody was a-cheatin’, which is kind of sad don’t you think for those who have tried everything in their power to keep any business from actually being attended to for months now at Sussex GOP meetings?  I wasn’t even going to mention how juvenile that was, as that kind of goes without saying , but, oh what the heck, it’s time to put on our big boy and girl panties.  Since we (the conservative group) knew going in that we already had the votes needed to get some actual business done and as I know most of them personally and can attest to the honesty and integrity of THAT particular group, it pretty well stands to reason that we know who was behind the cheating shenanigans. 

Now, to get back to the dichotomy and double standard.  Vance, according to the existing rules, was entitled to appoint a Parliamentarian Pro Tempore and he asked for any objections – THERE WERE NONE from the voting body present.   (Unless of course, those 26 ghost voters were simply not heard by us mere mortals)    Brent Wangen is a registered Republican and is very well versed in  Robert’s Rules of Order and standard Parliamentary procedure.   The existing rules state that the Chairman may appoint a Parliamentarian “unless the committee has provided otherwise”.    We were not provided the opportunity to provide otherwise as the  current chairman unilaterally chose Bruce Fitzgerald as his appointed Parliamentarian.   Oh yes, I know he said he got the majority vote of the Advisory Board for his appointment.  There are only a few small issues to be taken up with that.  Hmmmmmm, where should I start?   Well, the Advisory Board has no capacity or in legalese – jurisdiction – in this matter.  If you read the existing rules, the Advisory Board’s sole function is to maintain relationship with Republican voter elected officials at all levels.  Also, based on the behaviors exhibited by Mr. Fitzgerald at the previous meeting, he is NOT well versed in Robert’s Rules of Order nor standard Parliamentary Procedure.  Also, Mr. Fitzgerald resigned of his own accord publicly – I believe the next day on WGMD and also called for Mr. Sams to step down.  I could be wrong, I didn’t hear it – only heard about it.  Oh, but enough of that, let’s move on.

The “substitute” agenda contained ALL (that means every single item) from the original agenda but was in a different order to prevent yet another filibuster to prevent any business from being attended to by the voting members present.  This has been an ongoing tactic at past meetings and our purpose was simply to be able to conduct new/old business of the Sussex County GOP.   There was nothing hidden – the agenda was passed out to all voting members for review and comparison to the old agenda. 

“Character Assassinations” are not exactly what I would call a resolution to ask for a resignation of a Chairperson who is lacking in true leadership skills and has received a majority vote of no-confidence.  I have heard very few people say they dislike Ron Sams, on a personal level; most everyone likes him.  But the facts are there for all who are interested to see.  There has been NO REAL BUSINESS accomplished in the Sussex GOP for months! 

I can’t address the media being asked to leave and the doors being closed at past meetings – I have always seen members of the media present at our meetings so I’m not sure where that is coming from.  I do know that the media didn’t lead the exodus when Tom Ross rose to speak as those recording the event captured every word that he uttered.  A rather large contingent from the gallery (that means spectators) rose and exited when Tom Ross rose to speak.  A few of the voting members joined them.  Others (myself included) tried to stick it out just as a matter of respect.  I did notice, however, that although he made some rather nasty comments about our request for Ron Sams’ resignation (an ongoing issue for months now) that he said absolutely nothing about the 104 ballots cast by 78 present voting members.  You would think that cheating would be an issue, wouldn’t you?

More spectators and members left when Ross started mudslinging at Christine O’Donnell – who by the way,( if you were listening to the Treasurer’s report) has made significant contributions to our operations.  That’s when I had enough and left.  This party has shown little or no regard for the VOTERS’ choice in this state and has gone about choosing the candidate they wish to support prior to the primary.  In case you have forgotten, the conservatives in this state won our first and main initiative last year in eliminating Castle.  O’Donnell was the PEOPLE’S choice in the primary (by a 65-35% margin!) and the GOP is charged with carrying forth the VOICE AND VOTE of the people of the Republican party – NOT THEIR OWN AGENDA.   I guess not everyone has quite gotten the message that we are tired of the good ole boys (and girls) politics at every level. 

Most of you aren’t aware of the many previous attempts to get Ron Sams to resign over the last several months but it has been well documented.  He was contacted by a great many people in an effort to get him to resign so that we can pull this party together and move it forward as a voice of the Republican voter in the State of Delaware .   Ron was presented with a significantly large number of signatures from voting members of the SCEC and offered the opportunity to resign with grace and dignity.  Hell, we even offered to throw him a party, tell everyone what a great job he had done in the past and how hard he had worked.   He was also told that failure to resign would result in the resolution and public attempts to strip him of his title due to the lack of confidence by a majority of the voting membership.  Please note the word  M A J O R I T Y, it’s important.

As to embarrassing Ross – well, I can say we really didn’t have to – he just opens his mouth and embarrasses us.

So far as publicity goes, WBOC and WGMD are actually kind of small potatoes; I understand much of what Ross had to say is posted on YouTube for anyone with a computer to view, anywhere . 

As for “thug tactics”, well, I haven’t seen or heard any of that either so I’m not sure from what quarter that is coming but it isn’t coming from the conservative voting members of the SCEC.  To my knowledge, none of us have threatened anyone with bodily harm.  We strive to set a higher standard for our activities and the conduct of business.  So far, we have succeeded in doing just that as the meeting was quiet, orderly and well conducted – we actually got through Old and New business without a filibuster from one or more elected representative who only wishes to hear himself talk.   That was the ONLY purpose in moving Ross to the end of the meeting on the revised agenda.   Both Vance and Brent did an outstanding job of maintaining the rules of order and abiding by the existing rules of the SCEC. 

No one started yelling until after Ross began his rather insipid and petulant tirade against the Sussex County Republican voter.   This occurred just prior to adjournment of the meeting at 9 pm

So, gee, I don’t know what meeting you were at but it wasn’t the Sussex County GOP meeting on February 16, 2011 at the Carter Partnership Center auditorium on the Del Tech Community College Campus in Georgetown, DE. 

And, by the way, I thought that I might pay a visit to the Sussex County Republican Women’s Club monthly meeting so I started looking for a calendar and meeting times.  Unfortunately, I, like most of Sussex County Republican Voters – WORK FOR A LIVING and, therefore, can’t attend a Wednesday luncheon. 

Perhaps if you were more accessible to the voting public, you may be more in tune with their voting habits and political attitudes.  We are pretty much fed up with the elitist and self-serving attitudes of the old guard and we’re going to take our party back to the people, where it belongs.   I’m glad you are happy to see a good turn out and a passion for change.  Baby, you ain’t seen nothing’ yet!

For the readers, if you live in my district and wish to be heard, call me.  As a representative of the district, I intend to be accessible.

Jeannette Taylor

2nd ED 41st District

Millsboro, DE  19966

302-245-4192

LETTER TO EDITOR: GOP

     Screaming women and character assassinating men dominated the GOP meeting at Del Tech’s Carter Hall Wednesday evening, February 16, 2011.

     The double standard and dichotomy began when the Acting Chairman, Vance Phillips, stated that he needed a Parliamentarian and immediately appointed Brent Wagaman, an individual many people thought was a Registered Libertarian, not a Republican.  There was no review of Brent's credentials, no motion to permit him to serve.  Yet when Chairman Ron Sams did the very same thing prior to the January, 2011 meeting, Mr. Sams was verbally castigated and the Parliamentarian, Bruce Fitzgerald was pressured to resign for “the good of the Party”.

     Motions were made, a substitute agenda approved and the character assassination of Chairman Sams began.  It was all I could do not to laugh out loud!  The very same actions, or “lack thereof”  had been practiced by the 3 previous Sussex County Regional Chairs!!!

     So, what was different now?  A hidden agenda had to be fulfilled!  The media were invited whereas in previous situations, the media were asked to leave and the doors were closed.  The hidden agenda became very obvious.  Media were present to record the character assassination and the walk out when Tom Ross began to speak in an effort to publicly disgrace them and to force elected officials to resign from their non-paying jobs.  Does anyone remember when the Primary election results became available in September 2010?

     Vance Phillips telephoned WGMD to say that Ron Sams, Tom Ross, State Party Chair, Priscilla Rakestraw, National Committee Woman and Laird Stabler, National Committeeman, “had to go” and that the “Delaware Republican Party will never be the same”.  Aren’t those the same words that came out of the mouth of Christine O'Donnell when she lost the Senate seat in the election?

     Having witnessed the effort to embarrass Sams and Ross, I wanted to hear the additional chapter in the effort to dismantle the Party.  WBOC carried the planned character attack on the 11:PM news Wednesday evening.

  

     The following afternoon, I even turned on WGMD after the 3pm news to hear what Bill Colley would say.  Colley stated that he led a “walk-out” when Tom Ross began to speak, and indeed he did, a half dozen or so folks followed him out the door, and as Colley stated, they left the door open to hear what was being said.  Colley’s rude behavior and continued character assassination seems to be the new norm for those few who choose to follow him.  Several dozen of us turn the dial or literally turn off WGMD after the 3PM news.

     On the positive side, it is very exciting to see the passion and increased numbers of people interested in Republican politics.  I do, however, wish the thug tactics (with actual threats of bodily harm or in the case of Sams and Ross, character assassinations) would stop.  Does “praying” behavior apply to politics or are they only words to be spoken?    I wish that civility and respect for others would return to Sussex.

Mary Spicer, President,

Delaware Federation of Republican Women

PO Box 611

Lewes, DE.  19958

302-645-7767

Where is our response?

In the last 3-4 years Delaware has lost two auto plants, an oil refinery, 750 jobs at HSBC and now hundreds more will be leaving Wilmington Trust thanks to the merger with M&T Bank.  These are just the bulk losses.  Gone with them are THOUSANDS of support jobs and small businesses whose customer bases lost their jobs in these major layoffs.  Since 2007 it has been one hit after another but what do we hear from our leaders in Dover?  *Crickets* *Crickets*

To be fair to the Markell administration the auto plant closings occurred on the watch of Governor Minner.  Of course, Jack Markell was Gov. Minner's Treasurer and he was fully aware of the economic problems we faced and if he wasn't than he was derelict in his duties.  The reality is that in just a few years during two Democrat administrations, Delaware lost more than 3,700 jobs.  For all the economic star power in the Markell Administration, including Alan Levine (of Happy Harry's fame) whose cross the party lines appointment was seen as genius and an illustration of a Governor who understood the challenges in front of him.  Democrats and Republicans alike praised Markell and to this day he is given a pass.  No one from either party questions the fact that Delaware has not created jobs.

You would think that the administration would have worked to bring new businesses in to replace jobs being lost but you would be wrong.  The Chrysler plant, when abandoned by Chrysler was not turned over to flourishing companies like Ford, Hyundai, Nissan or Toyota.  Instead it was sold to the University of Delaware who will now embark on a decades long cleanup project to make the facility into a new medical complex.  They've promised grandiose plans that will lead to thousands of jobs but of course, they're long term projections.  The old GM Boxwood plant?  It's now owned by another company with lofty long term goals and no immediate results.  Fisker will employ 2000 autoworkers when it finally reopens the plant and begins making taxpayer funded electric cars.  Never mind the fact that every car it sells is subsidized 50% by state and federal taxpayers and that in all likelihood each car built will represent a net loss of taxpayer dollars.  Valero closed back in 2009 and nearly 1000 people lost their jobs.  In what represents the best hope for the creation of new jobs, it is expected that the plant will reopen under new management (PBF Energy, a foreign owned company has agreed to take ownership) this April and that 700 jobs will be picked up.  Still, that is assuming that everything goes to plan.  As for the more than 1400 jobs lost in the banking sector?  *Crickets* *Crickets*

Yet, still, we hear NOTHING from Dover and even LESS from the opposition party.  Where are the Republicans?  Why aren't they calling on Markell to produce jobs the way we hear John Boehner and Paul Ryan calling on the Obama Administration?  It's called "The Delaware Way".  The misnomer is that this is a unique brand of civility in Delaware but in reality it is nothing short of cowardice and wanton disregard for the business of the people.  It's very much the reason why there is single party rule in Delaware.  The Delaware Republican Party is scared to DEATH to call a spade a spade.  Sure, you may see a few people (like me, Charlie Copeland, Dave Anderson...etc.) with blogs who are critical of the administration but where are the press releases from the Delaware GOP leadership railing against this hemorrhaging of jobs and the lack of economic growth?  Far from being an act of civility, this silence is an act of servitude where the Delaware GOP ignores the transgressions of Delaware's ruling Democrat Party and in exchange is allowed a few token election wins.  Who would want to vote for a party that just does what the other party wants them to do? 

I'm calling on the Delaware Republican Party to STAND for something.  STAND UP for these people who have lost their jobs.  STAND UP for these people are desperately in need of help.  BE the GRAND old party again.  Stop maintaining the status quo and start rocking the boat.  Delaware needs leaders and there are people in the Delaware GOP who I KNOW can provide the leadership we need in order to turn our situation around.  What we need is for those leaders to STAND and to stop waffling.  Make your CASE...and the people will follow you.  I'm reminded of one of my favorite movies....Braveheart:

Craig: Sir William, where are you going?

William: We have beaten the English, but they'll come back because you won't stand together.

Craig: Well what will you do?

William: I will invade England and defeat the English on their own ground.

Craig: Invade? That's impossible.

William: Why? Why is that impossible? You're so concerned with squabbling for the scraps from Longshank's table that you've missed your God given right to something better. There is a difference between us. You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom. And I go to make sure that they have it.

---

Robert the Bruce: Wait! I respect what you said, but remember that these men have lands and castles. It's much to risk.

William: And the common man who bleeds on the battlefield, does he risk less?

Robert the Bruce: No, but from top to bottom this country has no sense of itself. Its nobles share allegiance with England. Its clans war with each other. If you make enemies on both sides of the border, you'll end up dead.

William: We all end up dead; it's just a question of how and why.

Robert the Bruce: I'm not a coward. I want what you want, but we need the nobles.

William: We need them?

Robert the Bruce: Aye.

William: Now tell me, what does that mean to be noble? Your title gives you claim to the throne of our country, but men don't follow titles, they follow courage. Now our people know you. Noble, and common, they respect you. And if you would just lead them to freedom, they'd follow you. And so would I.

---

Donald Trump to run for President in 2012

That's right folks.  "The Don" is more than considering it.  He's told close friends and relatives to get ready because after "The Apprentice" wraps up he's announcing it publicly on NBC.  That's the report from Newsmax who cites sources close to Trump.  Only time will tell, Trump has flirted with the idea of running before but nothing materialized.  With that said, Donald Trump has been a leading opponent of Obama and his policies and is rabidly pro-defense.  Trump was willing to cut Obama slack early on but his tone has hardended over the last couple of years as he has seen the direction in which Obama is driving the country. 

Trumps largest concerns are jobs and the economy, America's standing in the world, our weakening defense and China holding our debt.  Trump has some interesting ways to tackle these concerns as well, including an interesting plan to tax China and using those revenues to pay down our debt with China which would lock the nation into a cycle of debt reduction.  Basically the idea is that China will HAVE to pay the tax if it wants to recoup it's investment in American debt.  Could China call the debt and eat the losses?  Perhaps, but Trump obviously thinks it's unlikely and given that Donald Trump has grown and grown and grown as a businessman, I'm inclined to believe him.  He's also recently inserted himself into the NYC Mosque controversy and offered to put up a portion of the money needed to move the mosque to a location more conducive to building bridges and providing access to Muslims. 

Weighing Trump down is a 14 yr old case involving a New Jersey widow whose home Trump tried to have the government condemn so he could expand his casino.  This suit was CLEARLY in violation of the right to property and was not a proper use of eminent domain.   Has "The Don" changed his tune?  Is this worse than 30 years of attendence at Reverend Wright's church?  Is it more harmful than being a radical socialist for ones entire life?  Only time will tell but Newsmax has a poll that shows Obama up 53-47 over Trump right now.  If the economy worsens, as Trump lays out his plan, he is likely to close that gap.  If nothing else, this will be an interesting primary and general election cycle.

RNC Chairman debate

So, I confess, I KIND OF watched the RNC chairman's debate yesterday (I'm replaying it as we speak which is what inspired me to write this).  I will say that when I was poking around the net today, I found an AWESOME critique by Bryan Preston over at Pajamas Media which I'm urging all of you to read.  The inclusion of SBA as a sponsor seems to have focused the debate more on social issues and as Preston points out, that has little bearing on the RNC Chairman's ability to do his job.  With that said, the idea is to find the MOST conservative candidate who can win and among Republicans, (as we saw here in Delaware) you're able to find strong conservatives and elect them. 

Candidates
Ann Wagner
Wagner has conservative credentials.  She's done great things in Missouri and she has plenty of political experience.  Most of the candidates talk about raising money, Saul and Ann really come forward with some specifics which is good.  Ann's plans don't quite sound as well thought out but she makes a good case.  Ann Wagner points out that the PEOPLE are the ones who decide who wins the primaries and that the RNC needs to focus on recruiting candidates, fund party, victory and GOTV efforts across the country.  Supports legislative efforts to define marriage as between one man and one woman.  Cited a lack of focus on the real issue of debt as a failure and also said that the people would decide if we are on the right track or wrong track.  Danced around the question a bit.  Cites many of the TEA Party values as absolutely critical for people to be considered a Republican.  Three Pillars: Fiscal Conservatism, National Defense, Social Values - a Chairman should espouse all of these values.  Brings grassroots groups to the table to build coalitions in Missourah (sorry Ann! it's there) especially pro-life groups.

Saul Anuzis
Saul REALLY gets it.  He understands that funding is priority, followed closely by management skills and he certainly has the message.  He's backed by TEA Party groups across the country and is a breath of fresh air among a sea of also rans.  Understands that the state parties need to drive the message and the GOTV efforts but that the RNC should support it with funds.  Anuzis feels that the primary should be the determination and not the state party electors.  Believes that marriage between a man and a woman is a cultural and religious belief that is worth fighting for.  Saul breaks down the failures of the party.  He explains that the Republican Party lost its way and shifted ever to the left becoming more like Democrats and he points out that when the Republicans act like Republicans they win, when they act like Democrats they lose.  Understands that this is a "2nd chance" not a mandate and that if the Republican Party doesn't move back to its conservative base and principles, the voters will throw them out again.  If they are with us 80% of the time, they are a Republican.  The chairman should support the platform at least 80% of the time.  Worked WITH the grassroots groups in every way that they could and is ready to run toward issues and not away with them.  Understands the balance of ALL issues (including social issues) in the party platform.  Ready to build coalitions across the party platform.

Maria Cino (no website)
She's a lobbyist, which turns me off already.  She sounds like she feel entitled and her talk about retiring debt is interesting but I'd ask, if she's so good, how come the RNC is $20 million in debt?  She talks about beating Obama but she supports Obamacare.  Given a question about races like Delaware, where Christine beat Castle, she dodged the question.  She talked about how the RNC should support the candidates that the state parties and the voters choose...thanks captain obvious.  My question and the one asked is, did you see the victory by Christine as a triumph of principle or a disaster?  Believes in the party platform.  Cites McCain-Feingold as a mistake and then losing our way on spending.  Cutting spending and cutting deficits wins elections.  Agrees with Ann Wagner on the party platform.  Wants to continue building coalitions and calls for a state victory plan due in April (while Delaware is bracing for a new state chairman!)

Michael Steele
I think he's got balls even running in the first place.  He's got his talking points going, he has a few one liner zingers but he's got a record and like he says, it speaks for itself.  He takes credit for the RNC sweep this year but it's disingenuous.  Make no mistake Steele, you won because the TEA Party allowed you to win.  Many forget that Steele was no TEA Party friend early on and here in Delaware he only barely made it a priority to meet with the candidate who had the most attention this year (O'Donnell).  He clearly DOESN'T understand what's going on.  To take credit for the grassroots movement is...well it's simply disrespectful and ignorant of reality.  Steele makes a good point about the RNC not getting involved in state party business but I think he misses the fact that some state (like Delaware) have structures that are not conducive to building unity.  The RNC would do well to counsel states like Delaware on how to improve their process to promote unity.  Steele understands that marriage is between a man and a woman as a matter of tradition.  In his view, the definition of "family" may change but the party will support the ideal of marriage as traditionally defined.  Believes that the GOP walked away from the Contract with America and that Democrat lite does not sell well in the public.  Also says that the party stopped reaching out to people.  Cites outreach as necessary to growing the party, reaching out to minority categories.  Supports moderation as a leader and does not want to create a litmus test to determine eligibility to be a Republican.  In favor of building more coalitions but worked AGAINST the TEA Party groups early on.

Reince Priebus
He makes a case for himself and his working with conservatives in Wisconsin.  Reince could be effective in teaching state party leaderships how to work with the TEA Party.  Stresses unity and cooperation which he does in a way that keeps himself above the fray and he shows the RNC as a broker of power between state parties, TEA Party groups and conservative single issue groups.  Reince thinks everything has to mean something and he thinks the chairman should be a conservative Republican.  Reince supports the way Delaware currently operates but what he misses is that in his home state of Wisconsin, he worked WITH the TEA Party  and grassroots groups to come up with palpable candidates before the primary.  In Delaware the state party ignored the movement and subsequently came up lame in their nomination.  Also believes marriage is between a man and woman and that no one should lose their dignity.  Does not believe the courts can rewrite the Constitution and define marriage.  He believes the biggest failure of the party in the last decade has been not sticking to principles and he cited having to hold "our noses and voting for Republicans that didn't uphold the basic principles of our platform."  Believes that the RNC chair out to take a chance and go out and support the conservative platform every chance they get.  Thinks we need a chairman that will go out there and be PROUD to be a Republican.  Cites pro-abortion, pro-stimulus, pro-bailout people as people who "might not be a Republican".  Has a track record of working WITH grassroots groups and building solid coalitions.

My take:
Look, the chairman has a job to do.  That job is tough!  Bryan over at Pajamas Media points out the nuts and bolts of the gig but it's more than that.  RNC chairman has to tie the whole party together and expand the message.  Every single one of these candidates makes a case and a point on some issues.  I've laid out responses by the candidates throughout the first 40%-50% of the debate and you can watch the rest on your own.  I'm going to tell you, while Bryan sees things differently than I, I think we end up with the same two front runners.

Reince Priebus comes across VERY smart and VERY congennial.  The only problem is he sometimes doesn't sound very honest.  That doesn't mean he isn't and I'm not questioning his integrity but he comes across a bit slick.  He almost sounds like a used car salesman but maybe that's just his Wisconsin accent.  Neither here nor there, I LIKE what he had to say.  The problem for him is that he doesn't seem to live what he says.  The law firm he works for is a huge supporter of Obamacare.  For those of us who believe in TEA Party principles it is almost expected that someone who wants to be a leader of this movement stand for the principles in his or her personal life as well as publicly.  Many would expect Reince to leave that firm and move to another.  Fair or unfair I think it is a valid question for Reince to answer.  Why not leave the firm?  Are there no other firms?  Is the partnership at that firm more important than standing on principles?  and for those of us looking at this, if his answer is that his family well being and money was more important, does that disqualify him?  For me, I think it's a difficult road.  I worked for JP Morgan Chase during the time when they received bailouts and I made the decision that a job outside of the bailout process, with no input into that tactic was important and the alternative (unemployment) was not acceptable.  Until I see where Reince was involved directly in this effort, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. Priebus was also a little flustered, did not look confident behind the mic at all times and simply doesn't inspire confidence in his look and speech.  His words make sense but the way he presents them sometimes betrays him.

Saul Anuzis simply gets it.  He, like Reince, has built a red wall in his otherwise blue state.  Anuzis understands that we have to get back to being Republicans at heart and that there is room for disagreement but that the chairman should be a strong conservative.  He understands the correct order of things.  He knows that fundraising will drive the message and GOTV and that the states should be responsible for moving those things forward with RNC monetary support.  He also knows that it is important that the PEOPLE, through the primary system make the decisions and not party leaders.  He sees a real need for the party to present a united front and to reform their own state primaries to ensure that the people and the party don't butt heads (like we did here in Delaware).  He's a strong conservative and he understands that the RNC should be a strong support mechanism for the state parties.  He does not have any of the Obamacare baggage that Reince does and he knows how to use social networking and technology to make fundraising easier and more effective and to drive the message.  Saul looked comfortable and sounded confident which made his ideas all the more palpable.  Hes also honestly believes in his principles and with an absence of anything in the past to the contrary, I think he's the real deal.  Apparently Tom Ross agrees with me about him.

About The Rest - we can't afford to let these people walk away if they don't win.  Every single one of them needs a seat at the party table.  None of them can really be "counted out", as backroom deals often make their way into politics (shocking right?) but I find them to be the long shots.

Ann Wagner - She's a great conservative thinker with political experience.  She'd be a great boon to the party as someone who can support, groom and engage candidates for national offices.  I hope she takes a role with the RNC that allows her to put forth this talent, perhaps as a "scout" or trainer for candidates for U.S. Senate, U.S. House, President, etc.  She's not likely to be our next RNC chairwoman but of the rest, she is the best.

Michael Steele - Steele is fighting an uphill battle that is only partially his own fault.  The GOP had already been in decline when he took over and he is right, when he took office it was hard to find anyone who wanted to be a Republican (and some "Republicans" like Castle yearned to be Dems) much less give money to a GOP with no identity.  Steele fought the TEA Party/conservative movement early on and you can sense some of that in his answers.  Steele would just as soon make the GOP Democrat Lite (despite his suggestion to the contrary) if it meant a bunch of R's elected.  Well that's what got us where we were in 2008.  Finally, Steele takes credit for the GOP wave election in 2010.  Well, he deserves credit for getting the hell out of the way and keeping his mouth shut but make no mistake, Steele did NOTHING to help the wave.  This was the TEA Party election Mr. Steele.  It was the grassroots movement flexing its muscle and carrying you across the finish line.  I wonder how you even went into $20 million of debt by doing nothing.  Perhaps if you spent less time filing FEC complaints against good conservative candidates, you wouldn't be in debt.  Steele isn't likely to win.  I'd put his chances at 30% but don't count him out completely.  With all of this said, I think Steele is KEY to GOP outreach efforts especially to minority groups and his help MUST be retained to work on the message that is presented to minority groups.

Maria Cino - Ok, so I didn't like her from the word go because the first thing I saw was "lobbyist" and the second was "Pfizer" and the third was "supported Obamacare".  She is not my choice for RNC chair but she made some compelling points and a look over her she cited McCain-Feingold as a mistake, along with losing our way with spending.  Not exactly rocket science but good points.  Look, Maria has done a great job in the past with the GOTV efforts and I think she would make a great GOTV/Coalitions Director.  That said, she really hasn't got a shot at being Chairwoman despite the support of Delaware's Priscilla Rakestraw (the longest serving National Committeewoman and one of the more disliked Delaware Republicans).

Let me know what you think.

Turns out Christine O'Donnell actually HELPED down ticket Republicans

At least, that is how it would appear when one looks at the exit polling from the Delaware U.S. Senate race.  O'Donnell struggled with women(36% for 61% against) and with black voters(93% against) in the state.  It's been long understood that those groups are the most important blocs to win in Delaware.  Details of the exit poll breakdown show that O'Donnell tied Coons among white women (48% each) but lost black women 95% - 4% which accounts for nearly the entire 25 point swing in female voters.  What appears to have done O'Donnell in is the 18% of Republicans who abandoned the more conservative O'Donnell as opposed to the 9% of Democrats who crossed over to vote against Coons. 

So what does all this mean?  Republicans down ticket SHOULD have benefited from the increases in Republicans and Independent voters over the registration totals.  Remember, the registration gap at election time was:

Democrats:  47 %.  

Republicans:  29.4%.  

"Other" & Independents:  23.5%

Yet the exit polling shows that Democrats made up only 44% of actual voters in November:
Democrats:  44 %.

Republicans:  30%.   

"Other" & Independents:  27%

So in theory, this should have HELPED candidates down ticket, not hurt them as has been suggested by the GOP elite.  There is one explanation for why those candidates may have lost their races....the 18% of Republicans who voted against O'Donnell.  It's interesting that 18% of Delaware Republicans cost Christine the election and likewise, 18% of Delaware Republicans consider themselves more liberal than moderate.

Democrats:  44%. 

Peeling back the labels on No Labels

Fans of this blog will recall that yesterdays post examined a new progressive group launched by Mike Castle and a host of other establishment political types.  For those of you who might be reading this blog for the first time and who may not be familiar with the term “Progressive” in politics, please begin your study here.  The term sounds benign, even wonderful, moving the country forward and progressing sounds appealing.  The problem is that along the way, as you evolve the government, individuals lose their personality and individuality.  You will need to understand Progressivism to understand the rest of this post.

Today we will focus on some of the founders of No Labels and their affiliations.  No Labels lists 11 founding members on their website and while each of these founding leaders is indeed linked to Progressive or liberal causes, we’ll examine 6 of them in total and 2 in this post. 

David Frum

American progressives (as you know from the history lesson above) have learned that in America’s political structure, it is imperative that you work within BOTH major parties if you are going to accomplish any REAL lasting changes.  In a Republic built to allow laws to be written, removed and reinstated depending on how the  people feel, it is increasingly difficult (and rightfully so) to fundamentally transform America.  That is why progressives cannot be pigeon-holed into only the Democrat Party.  Look at Teddy Roosevelt, perhaps the biggest Progressive to every become President, who was a Republican!  In fact, today, the Republican Party is nearly as progressive as the Democrat Party.  John McCain, Mike Castle, Olympia Snowe and Lisa Murkowski are just a few examples of Republican progressives serving in Washington, D.C. right now. 

Progressives also understand the need to make their views appear mainstream and accepted across the political spectrum in order to build support on both sides of the issues.  That is why modern progressive Republicans have attempted to call themselves conservatives in order to provide a “conservative voice” who can champion their causes.  Frum is a so called “conservative voice” who is frequently called upon by liberal sources like the New York Times, MSNBC and the Washington Post to provide opinions from “the other side”.   

Frum grew up in Ontario, Canada and his first real political move at age 14 was to volunteer for a member of the Canadian “New Democrat Party”.   After attending Yale and working for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes he did work at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (a conservative think tank in NYC).  Once President Bush was elected in 2000, the Canadian citizen (he received his U.S. citizenship on 9-11-07) was appointed as a speechwriter for economics in the White House where he worked from 2001 to 2002. Beginning in 2003 he worked at the American Enterprise Institute but was let go in March of this year amid his criticism of Fox News and the conservative opposition to Obamacare. 

This is not the first time Frum had been discharged amid controversy.  In 2008, Frum broke with National Review Online when he started The New Majority which has become a centrist funding arm.  Frum has also categorized younger readers as “a generation often repelled by today's mainstream conservatism” and he has consistently attacked conservative positions that conflict with President Obama’s agenda.  Frum has supported Obama and progressives in feuds with other more conservative columnists like Stanley Kurtz.  In fact, Frum has increasingly bucked the ideas of conservatism in favor of more populist and progressive positions even to the point of being widely considered to be a progressive plant in the media who practices “pragmatic conservatism” which is little more than slower progressivism.  He has also consistently attacked the TEA Party as being “too conservative” or “lacking pragmatism”.  He has joined a slew of progressive Republicans who have rejected the ideas of reducing the deficit by using the principles of Reagan who lowered taxes to drive up revenue and cut spending to balance the budget. 

Frums conservative credentials are weak when viewed in the overall context of his writing and political viewpoints.  It certainly doesn’t help his cause that his wife, author Danielle Crittenden, is a long time Huffington Post contributor.  In the end it’s pretty clear that Frum is little more than a shill for the progressive movement in general and specifically for the Republican Establishment progressives who value remaining in power far more than retaining freedom and liberty for the people.

Holly Page

Holly Page’s credentials from the No Labels website describe her as having spent 13 years at the Democratic Leadership Council (with the last 5 spent as Executive VP).  The site glosses over her real job which is as a lobbyist with Fontheim International.  Let’s go back just a moment and introduce you to the DLC.  It was started in 1985 by Will Marshall and Al From in response to the dramatic losses by Democrats in the 1984 General election when Reagan conservatism paved the way for Republicans.  Reagan’s natural conservatism reached out to the American middle class, a group that had long been courted by and been loyal to the Democrat Party.  Democrats had lost the popular vote badly and From and Marshall founded the DLC and it’s think tank the “Progressive Policy Institute” in order to discover ways to win back the American middle class.  DLC, PPI and their latest initiative “The Third Way” are aimed at using the moderates and the concept of bi-partisanship to push through the progressive agenda and encourage an ever growing, ever more powerful government.

Mrs. Page has played a key role with the DLC and is responsible for “The National Conversation” which is the largest gathering of Democratic elected officials outside of the DNC.  She brokered a deal with Harvard and the Aspen Institute to provide leadership development training to progressive elected officials.  Holly is also responsible for setting up the first ever online town hall with President Clinton in 1998 and a World Leaders Summit for the Third Way.  She is a dedicated progressive who has worked for progressive political candidates for almost two decades. 

This concludes today’s look at the leaders of “No Labels” and gives you an idea of what you will find in the weeks to come as we begin to peel back the label on the people behind the organization.  You will see the progressive roots in each leader and the connections to other progressive organizations.  The media has called this group “MSNBC’s TEA Party” and to prove its effectiveness the leaders spent the last 12 months preparing a launch event that drew 1,100 people to Columbia University in NYC.  By contrast, the 1^st ever April 15^th TEA Party in Wilmington, Delaware drew nearly 1,500 in the cold and driving rain.  Outdoor events across the state drew nearly 2,500 participants.  New York City is 9 times the size of Delaware in terms of population.  I’m just sayin’.

Next up: Jonathan Cowan and Mark McKinnon

Raising taxes on the car in the ditch and the gas that's in it

Democrats just can't help themselves.  Delaware Senator Tom Carper proposed a 25% tax on gasoline just one week before the House Democrats passed a bill to stop the Obama tax increases for Americans making less than $250,000.  At the same time, the Senate passed a bill that allows the federal government control over the entire agricultural sector (including your own home gardens).  There is another push to extend unemployment benefits as well.  Let's look at each of these proposals on their merits.

1. 25 cents per gallon tax on gasoline - This would certainly put more money into the federal coffers which is desperately needed until the government begins to cut spending but Carper wants to put this money into a fund specifically for road construction (to join the National Highway Trust Fund which is bankrupt because Congress has borrowed from it).  The tax would hit consumers at the pump, making gasoline that averages around $2.95 per gallon today, rise to $3.20 per gallon for regular gas.  It would also hit consumers across the board because businesses who transport goods will need to pay the same .25 cent fuel tax on each gallon their trucks consume.  Do you think that they will eat that cost or increase the cost of their products to cover the fuel cost?  That's right, they will pass it on to us.  Every product on every shelf and in every store will see an increase to help cover the costs associated with this tax and that will amount to BILLIONS of dollars in price increases for American citizens at a time when the dollar is already buying less and less.
2. Obama tax increases on those making more than $250,000 - The Democrats have sold this as class warfare rhetoric by claiming that these increases only affect the top 2% of Americans.  They get away with that because the tax increases would directly hit only the top 2% of wage earners however, it would trickle down to everyone else.  You see, the top 2% of wage earners are also the people who create the jobs in America.  They are small business owners, medium sized business CEO's and hiring managers at Fortune 500 companies.  Ask yourself this, ever gotten a job from a poor man?  The answer is most likely no and this is the reason why it's not smart to raise taxes on ANYONE right now.  When we need jobs as badly as we do now and when many with jobs are looking to salary increases to stave off the effects of inflation, it's even less understandable that the Democrats would fight so hard to stick it to the people who create the jobs.
3. Food Safety Act of 2010 - Progressives always come up with innocent sounding names for their bills in order to conceal the goal of the legislation.  This is one of the times where the name of the bill obscures the true intent.  Allegedly brought on by the recent egg scare, this bill builds on something that started in the 1930's with the Agricultural Adjustment Act.  The AAA allowed the government to control planting habits in many of America's staple crops by subsidizing farmers who let their fields lie dormant in order to artificially adjust pricing for certain crops (think corn, grain and cotton) and influence which types of crops are grown in each region.  Later the progressives would introduce genetically engineered seeds that produced higher yields and larger products than the original "heirloom" seeds but the problem with the genetically engineered seeds is that they are only good for a single season because they are sterile.  Heirloom seeds, the original seeds work in the traditional fashion where pollination can occur and seeds can be planted once and grown for many seasons thereafter.  Sterilizing the seeds serves a single purpose, it keeps farmers coming back every year for more seeds.  Now Congress has introduced a bill that allows them to control livestock, tomatoes, cucumbers, you name it, they can now determine where you can grow it, how you can grow it, when you can grow it and what you can do with it afterwards.  There is even a provision (put on hold by a last minute amendment) that controls home gardens.  It does almost nothing to increase safety unless you trust the government with every aspect of your life.
4. Unemployment benefit extension - Unemployment benefits are both a great safety net and a terrible tool of control.  They allow immediate relief for people who are laid off abruptly through no fault of their own and provide the necessary minimum (sometimes less than the minimum) required to sustain them until they are able to find work again.  The problem is that Congress has raised unemployment benefits so much and extended them for so long that there is a segment of the population that has become accustomed to living on these benefits and who no longer feel the need to seek gainful employment.  As one talk show host said, "If the government will pay you $300 per week to stay in a home paid for by someone else and do nothing, why go out and find work?"  Yet, unemployment benefits are crucial at this time with so many people out of work and so there must be a discussion about extending them at least until the job market improves so the conservatives have suggested that the Democrats use unspent TARP or stimulus funds to pay for their new spending on unemployment benefit extensions.  The Democrats have refused to do that and instead want to add more than $12 Billion to the federal deficit (which is now over $14 Trillion) in the most fiscally irresponsible move imaginable.  In fact, Democrats have said that increasing spending in one are and decreasing it in another doesn't make sense.  Conservatives say that the 2010 elections show that Americans want a more responsible management of funds and that using unspent TARP or Stimulus funds is the most responsible way to pay for these extensions.  They call it balancing the federal budget.

The current culture of spend, spend and spend some more has not changed with the wake up call sent to Washington on November 2nd.  We can only hope that the new Congress in January makes the changes we all want, needs and desire.

Why Tom...Why Now...Why Not

As a T.E.A. Party leader and Republican I am uniquely positioned to understand the concerns of both sides as they struggle to achieve a balance in a new political climate.  The establishment has been running things for a very long time and now some new upstarts are threatening to cut in on their action.  The "upstarts" happen to be the electorate as a whole which is actually the way our government was designed.  The problem is that it hasn't been run that way in more than 100 years so the establishment has become complacent in their dominance. 

Delaware, like New York, Chicago and most other small geographical  locations has been controlled by a powerful few for many years.  These powerful few come from all political affiliations and they control the most important decisions in the state.  While the people retain the power to vote of course and appear to be in control of the process, it is the elite few that control who runs, how they are covered in the media and what support they get from the political parties.  It's been said that the only place that plays Chicago politics as good as Chicago, is Delaware.

So it's not surprising that after a divisive Primary election where establishment favorite Mike Castle was beaten by TEA Party favorite Christine O'Donnell, that the two factions would be suspicious of one another.  The Democrats are riding a high after their General election victories and they are feeling confident about the Special Election for New Castle County President.  They've nominated Tim Sheldon, the current 9th District County Council Representative and former Vice President of Delaware's AFL-CIO.  He's still employed by the unions, now serving as the Chief Administrative Officer of the regional bricklayers union and like fellow Democrat Velda Jones-Potter, he's dipping into government resources through another level as well.  While not a paid position, Sheldon serves on the board of the Delaware Solid Waste Authority.  DSWA is a public/private partnership whose board is appointed by the Governor (and confirmed by the State Senate) and who controls landfill and trash removal in the state. 

Councilman Sheldon is paid $27,500 per year by the New Castle County taxpayers part time to serve on County Council and also likely pulls down 6 figures from his full time union job (Not to mention the benefits!).  He doesn't really need the money so it's OK that the DSWA appointment comes without pay, what it gives him is an inside track to ensure that his union gets in on the government contract action.  It may not be illegal but morally, we have to wonder, is it right? 

On the other hand, the Republicans have nominated former State Representative Tom Kovach who was caught on the wrong side of the wave election this year.  Kovach is the hand picked candidate of Mike Castle which likely harmed him among conservative voters in his district and may have cost him the election there.  This past election was unfortunate as good Republicans lost in places they never should have for various reasons.  Some lost because people didn't like O'Donnell and others because of their allegiance to Castle.  Whatever the case, unfortunately the good was taken out with the bad.  Tom Kovach, for all his bedfellows, is one of the good ones.  As a State Representative he served ably in Dover and he stood up for conservative fiscal values.  He's a lawyer who specializes in corporate environmental law and intellectual property.  He has experience with the land use issues that County Council will be working on and he understands the importance of fiscal responsibility at all levels of government.  Tom is perceived as a moderate, "Mike Castle Republican" because he has not been overt about his views on social issues.  What we do know about Tom is that he understands that we need cut spending, decrease the tax burden and get government out of the way of the free market to create jobs.  These are the things that matter and these are the things that Tom will work to fix in County Council.  So what if Mike Castle endorsed Tom Kovach?  There has been a lot of talk about working together and uniting to ensure that our economy improves and I believe that Tom Kovach is a candidate that we can all agree will fight to make that happen.  With that in mind, consider this my official endorsement of Tom Kovach for New Castle County President.  I hope that the members of the Patriot Movement will join me in supporting Tom and standing up against the harmful policies of Paul Clark and Tim Sheldon.  Please consider voting for Tom Kovach on Jan. 13th, 2011 in the Special Election for New Castle County Council President.

Mike Castle or "Mike Castle Republicans"?

There has been much posted about how the "extreme right wing" T.E.A. Party people won't support "Mike Castle Republicans" and how that will be the downfall of the GOP in New Castle County.  Much of it stems from the fact that conservative activist Christine O'Donnell defeated long time Republican Congressman Mike Castle in the recent U.S. Senate Primary.  That has left a sour taste in the mouths of some moderate Republicans who have projected a race between two individuals onto an entire group of people.  The fact is that the 2010 U.S. Senate Republican Primary was about Mike Castle and Christine O'Donnell.  Mike had drifted too far away from his base and had lost even the mantra of a fiscal conservative by voting time and again for bailouts, spending without limits and massive government growth.  Long ago Congressman Castle had shed the skin of social conservatism and alienated many in not just the southern part of the state but the north as well. 

For the T.E.A. Party groups, this election was about limiting government to the boundaries of the Constitution, stopping spending and keeping markets free.  Mike Castle had become someone who did not represent these values.  By contrast, Christine O'Donnell offered fresh ideas, a chance to stop the Obama policies that Castle had largely supported and a set of policies that would return America to the roots of prosperity that we have consistently returned to in times of trouble.  Castle also seemed to feel as though he was owed the U.S. Senate seat.  He did not feel like he should be accountable to the people of Delaware and specifically, he felt no need to listen to the T.E.A. Party groups.  It was clear that Congressman Castle had escaped his base in 2009 during a town hall meeting about the Obamacare legislation when he was asked a question about where in the Constitution it states that the government can be involved in health care.  His answer was that the Constitution doesn't PROHIBIT the Federal Government from that activity which ignores the whole premise of the Constitution.  The Constitution lays out specifically what the federal government MAY do and specifically (10th Amendment) leaves the rest to the people and to the states.  Christine O'Donnell by comparison had studied Constitutional government and understood the founding document.  In fact, in the General Election she would display her knowledge at a debate with the eventual winner of the General Election, Chris Coons which was held at Widener Law School.  Coons asserted that the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in the 1st Amendment of the Constitution and O'Donnell smartly challenged him.  As Coons backtracked, the student body of the law school showed their ignorance with laughter at Ms. O'Donnell's position.  The media of course went into red alert mode and tried to paint Christine into a corner.  Sadly, they showed the ignorance of their positions as the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in any of our founding documents but instead, in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptist Ministers in Danbury Connecticut written in 1802 which is not formal policy but rather a reassurance to the delegation that the United States would never adopt a national religion like England did.

The fact that Mike Castle was pro-choice and Christine O'Donnell was pro-life was not an insignificant position by any means but to make the leap that the media did in claiming that it was a deciding factor for TEA Party members is flat out absurd.  In fact, for all the work that the media and left wing did to paint Christine as a far right social activist, the truth bears a different story.  Christine stood for a limited government approach to many social issues by calling for those decisions to be made at the local or state level and not by the federal government.  She was also in favor of maintaining a healthy planet, reducing emissions and being good stewards of the land God has given us.  Another myth was presented when GLBT groups began protesting against O'Donnell and asserting that she was anti-homosexual.  The fact is that her staff was made up of perhaps the most diverse group of people ever assembled.  Nearly every race, gender, religion and sexual orientation was represented and she even had members from every mainstream political party working for her.  Christine is far from a bigot when it comes to any of these labels and looked for the best people for the job and not what they looked like, what they did in their personal lives or what religion they practiced. 

So you see, this was not an election about an ideologically pure ultraconservative candidate being nominated in a state overrun with leftists the way the media and the establishment has claimed.  Nor was it a referendum on all moderate Republicans.  It was about Mike Castle and a set of principles that he had abandoned.  It was about the base of the Republican Party standing up and being heard by the establishment that had made all of the decisions over the years and it was about busting up the backroom deals and "The Delaware Way" which was designed to keep the powerful in power and the regular citizens in the dark.  Christine accomplished something that many others had failed at in the past and while she didn't accomplish the ultimate goal, she has NOTHING to be ashamed of.  She's made it possible for regular people to run for office in Delaware again and she's inspired people to stand up for what they believe in.  She combined the very conservative folks in southern Delaware with the TEA Party folks all across the state and created a coalition across party lines that stood on principle regardless of the outcome. 

For many years, those conservatives and TEA Party folks had voted for Mike Castle and others like him under that old mantra that you vote for the most conservative candidate who can get elected.  The TEA Party itself is a melting pot of individuals from hardcore conservatives to moderate Democrats who are united around 3 main principles:

1. A government limited by the Constitution and all of the rules it contains.
2. A government that is responsible with taxpayer dollars and keeps taxes low.
3. Markets that are free and open to the people.

This is what makes the TEA Party continue to grow and what unites people across political party lines and despite establishment claims, this is what will unite the TEA Party and conservatives with establishment Republicans in supporting people like Tom Kovach in New Castle County.