DCRepublican.com

Rumors have been  surfacing about the possibility of Hillary and her minions staging a coup at the Democratic Convention. Could this happen? Yes it can! One can only hope.

Despite Senator Obama’s best efforts, many Hillary supporters are still quite angry at the DNC and Obama for “stealing” the Caucuses and buying off the super delegates. Do they have a point? Yes, I would say so considering that Hillary won more votes. Moreover, the controversy over Florida and Michigan made it quite clear that the Obama Campaign was only interested in ensuring the sanctity of every vote insofar as it benefited Obama. Moroever, let us not forget the misogynistic undertones of many of the attacks on Hillary that emanated from Obama’s supporters. Indeed, who can forget Obama’s dismissal of a female reporter as “sweetie?”

How angry are some of Hillary’s foot soldiers? Take a look at this YouTube video:

And for good measure, the pissed off Hillary voter:

So what do these Hillary fanatics expect to achieve in Denver if they cause a ruckus?  Do they really think that they can prevent Obama from receiving the nomination? I would wager that they are not so deluded as to think that by some miracle they can convince the supers to vote for Hillary. What they do mean to achieve is illustrating that Obama may be doomed to defeat and that Hillary in no way should be linked to that potential defeat. If Obama loses in November it would leave Hillary as the undisputed master of the Democratic Party.

It looks like there is an update to the post I made back in April, Where ‘States Rights’ Sometimes Get Complicated.

Even though the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the death penalty was too severe of a sentence for those found guilty of child rape, it appears that many state legislatures will remain steadfast in introducing and attempting to pass laws that provide these offenders with the toughest possible sentencing guidelines.

I was quite surprised Supreme Court was able to develop a majority opinion (5-4) that essentially removed the rights of individual states to determine what is ‘just punishment.’

Even though this was a huge victory for many on the far-left and certain religious types, I was pleased to see how John McCain and Barack Obama addressed this case:

Republican Sen. John McCain called the ruling “an assault on law enforcement’s efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said there should be no blanket prohibition of the death penalty for the rape of children if states want to apply it in those cases.

I have to admit, I was quite pleased to see Barack Obama make this statement. All too often to Democratic candidates succumb to the pull of the far-left fringe, and it usually comes back to haunt them, especially in middle America.

Obama’s statement makes me wonder what how he would prioritize the view of states rights when it comes to picking his Supreme Court Justice should he be elected. Would it be more important than a potential nominees stance on abortion? Gay rights?

I think it would be an interesting question to be presented to the candidates in a debate, “if you were given the task of picking a Supreme Court nominee during your presidency, list the top three ideological viewpoints that you would be looking for, in order, based on priority.”

Hopefully if they do another YouTube debate, someone can sneak in a question like this. Maybe the snowman.

Original Source

With the start of the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary just hours away, I’ve found myself in a reflective state, looking back at what has really been accomplished by the two candidates over the past six weeks.

Of all of the tours had by both candidates around the state, I can’t think that of one new policy idea that was completely rolled out. Furthermore, even after all of the debate and media coverage, I still can’t find myself in a position where I can tell you why one candidate is better than the other.

From what I’ve seen, there are a lot of people who have found themselves in the same position and these are people who live in Pennsylvania.

It’s quite clear that this hasn’t gone unnoticed by the candidate’s campaigns either. Instead of going after statements that were made by either candidate in Pennsylvania, most of the attack ads are focusing on something that has been drawn out too long already – special interest dollars.

Here is a quick video summary:

When the race is between three Senators, as much people might hate it, special interest money is going to come up. All of the candidates have received money from a PAC or PAC affiliated donor at some point. All of the candidates have met with lobbyists, and yes, I guarantee you all of the candidates are friends with at least a handful of DC “power lobbyists.”

Aside from the special interest attack ads, the other attack seems to be on universal health care. What’s funny about these attacks is that they are going after each others plans, when in reality none of them will ever be implemented.

All candidates, Democrats and Republicans, make big plans for when they get elected, in terms of implementing different policies. However, the reality is that the majority of those plans never make it through the legislature.

Just as an example, take President Bush’s 2004 Social Security plans. Even when Republicans had control, they weren’t able to pass one of his biggest campaign pushes.

People shouldn’t be surprised to find that the same will probably hold true if a Democrat is elected, even with a Democratic majority in the House.

These plans, while they might sound good in their initial proposals will never make it through the bodies as they appear now. Each member of Congress wants their stamp on it and will do what they can to make sure it’s there.

This is where almost all legislation seems to fail.

I guess that’s why I’ve found it so odd that this is how the Democrats chose to wind down their races leading into the election.

Instead of driving hard key issue, like the economy, or going after Senator McCain more aggressively, they’ve chosen the path that only highlights both of their weaknesses against each other, instead of showing their viability against Senator McCain.

But, from a Republican perspective – this is great. They’re going to have their donor based maxed and polarized before they even have a presumed nominee. That’s something that even one of Howard Deans spin-cycle emails cant downplay.

Just look at what CNN.com is reporting on their front page today:

Obama has outspent his rival in Pennsylvania, thanks in part to his hefty fundraising.

He raised $41 million in March, compared with Clinton’s $20 million, according to the latest campaign finance report.

In March, Obama spent about $31 million on his presidential campaign, compared with Clinton’s $22 million.

I don’t see any way that Obama or Clinton can raise that much money without their donors reaching the FEC limits.

The Republicans should really start taking advantage of this… soon.

I haven’t seen all that many mail pieces of phone calls going from the McCain camp, or the RNC talking about how we’re at an advantage here.

When a party has been beaten down over the last 8 years, this is positive news that will make people want to make an investment in the GOP.

But you can’t get money if you don’t ask… so hopefully they’ll start soon.

I’m guessing all the talk of the Clinton/Obama “dream ticket” will probably start to slow down after Wednesday’s Democratic Debate in Pennsylvania.

Amongst a series of questions that attempted to demand answers from the candidates was whether or not their Democratic opponent was electable.

Of course, in addition was the question of the season, would the winning opponent consider taking the loser as the candidate for VP.

From CNN.com:

“Yes. Yes. Yes,” Clinton said when pressed to answer whether Obama, the senator from Illinois, could win. Media reports have said Clinton and her campaign have been quietly courting support, chiefly from Democratic superdelegates who could decide a close race at the party’s convention, by arguing that Obama is not electable.

“Now, I think I can do a better job — obviously that’s why I’m here,” said Clinton, who promised she will “do everything I possibly can to make sure that one of us takes the oath of office next January.”

Obama said Clinton could win, too. He also said he would support the New York senator and former first lady if she is the Democratic nominee, although both candidates declined to say whether they would consider naming the other as a running mate.

Does anyone think that Obama would really want Hillary Clinton running with him? I honestly think that these “dream ticket” people are just old-establishment Democrats who get some sick sense of euphoria from seeing a Clinton on the ballot.

While there is no chance in hell that I’ll be voting for a Democrat, I think that it is going to be refreshing to finally see a ballot that doesn’t contain a Bush or a Clinton on it. I’m sure many other voters, from both sides, feel the same way.

Being Hillary Rodham Clinton is no easy job.

Her husband is the biggest player in the world… when she’s tired, she makes up stories that didn’t happen… she goes from being the “shoe-in nominee” to trailing in many of the polls and losing key states.

Life for Hillary isn’t as easy as many think. Sometimes, Hillary just needs a stiff drink to make the days go by:

From CNN.com:

CROWN POINT, Indiana – After a day of taking shots at rival Sen. Barack Obama over his bitter remarks, Sen. Hillary Clinton relaxed in Crown Point, Indiana and took a shot of a different kind – Crown Royal whiskey.

Clinton was at Bronko’s Restaurant having a beer when the bartender asked, “You want a shot with that Hillary?” After some deliberation, Clinton settled on a shot of Crown Royal, a Canadian whiskey.

Later in the evening, the Democratic presidential hopeful also sat down and had some pizza.

Some Clinton’s drink on the job, while others…

As the Democrats start to see that this election probably wont be as predictable as they once thought, the DNC has found itself in a position where they now MUST focus on trying to convince the Federal Elections Commission that Senator McCain did in fact lock himself into campaign spending limits before he became the presumptive nominee.

From CNN.com:

The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court in Washington, is the latest move by the Democratic National Committee that seeks to prove the Arizona senator locked himself into campaign spending limits earlier this year.

The DNC claims McCain did so when he used the prospect of $6 million in federal matching funds as collateral for a December bank loan to his campaign.

But after it became apparent he would be the Republican presidential nominee, McCain notified the FEC in early February that he was not claiming federal matching funds. Claiming those funds would limit his spending on the primary campaign to $54 million.

To be exact, the maximum figure that he could spent, according to the FEC is $56,757,500.

However, Senator McCain has spent well over that amount.

The reality is that at this point, the FEC really doesn’t have the ability or manpower to carryout the request of the DNC, which is why the Democrats must now rely on the courts. But does the DNC think that it’s likely that for the court to take action? It’s the end of an administration, so you can never predict these things.

The Republican National Committee called the lawsuit “total nonsense.”

“It is now clear that the trial-lawyer Democrats’ idea of campaigning for president is to hire lawyers and file frivolous lawsuits,” RNC spokesman Alex Conant said. “It’s unfortunate the DNC is now trying to drag the federal courts into their circus as well.”

This is a good point. Instead of focusing on their candidates and ensuring that all their delegates have a voice at the convention, they are trying to create a distraction to rile up their base and hope they focus on Senator McCain, instead of the back-and-fourth mudslinging going on between Senator Obama and Senator McCain.

For those of us who have, are or will be working on campaigns, this is going to be an interesting case to watch. What I think the most significant thing to watch is how the FEC decided to address this. They are understaffed and essentially have no power. If both sides see that the oversight and enforcement is going to be weak, this could be an even more interesting campaign.

I don’t care how liberal or conservative you are, but this is not how you want to start your career in Congress. There is absolutely no chance of this woman ever working with conservatives. None. Zero. Notta.

She doesn’t even have a vote record, but already I want Jackie Speier out Congress. She seems like a total joke, another Steve Kagen.

This woman is not, cannot and will never be anything like her predecessor, Tom Lantos.

Not only is today April Fool’s day, but it is also Election Day in Wisconsin for a variety of state-seats, but there is one race in particular that has drawn national attention and become quite ugly.

The race drawing so much attention is for an open seat on the State Supreme Court, which in Wisconsin is a term that lasts 10 years, and if you do your job right, you’ll go down in history.

For the most part, state-based races in Wisconsin don’t usually get national attention, however due to how early these elections are, the Supreme Court races almost always generate national buzz, simply because there are so many interest groups trying to ensure that the “right” candidate gets elected.

Here is a bit more on this race from CNN.com:

Justice Louis Butler — already on the high court after being appointed to fill a vacancy — and Burnett County Circuit Judge Michael Gableman have traded partisan attacks, helped by hundreds of broadcast ads aired across the state, most funded by a host of independent advocacy groups.

“What’s remarkable about this race is how dominant the outside groups have been,” said J.R. Ross, editor at WisPolitics.com. “They’ve outspent the candidates themselves 10-to-1 on TV ads. They’re essentially drowning out the messages of Butler and Gableman.”

Ross said latest estimates show more than $3 million spent just on TV ads in the state’s top three media markets: Milwaukee, Madison and Green Bay.

It’s sad that I don’t see $3,000,000 as a lot of money anymore in terms of spending on campaigns. It’s also very unfortunate that it costs that much money to sling mud these days.

The stakes in Wisconsin and nationwide are high, and are fueling renewed calls for reform on how judges are selected. The 19 states that held state Supreme Court elections last year shattered previous campaign cycle spending records — $34.4 million in all — which have increased steadily in the past decade.

The idea of judges running for elected office may seem like a strange concept, but it is the law in 21 states that have some sort of contested system for top judges. Thirty states — along with the federal system — appoint their judges, often under a merit selection system in which the governor gets the final say.

It’s very interesting, having elected judges, especially to the State Supreme Court. I’m conflicted as to whether or not I think this is a good idea or not, but it seems to work in Wisconsin.

I would bet a large amount of money that if you polled those voting today and asked them what the role of the State Supreme Court was, I’m sure many of them would get it wrong. I’m guessing even with all the spending, turnout will be relatively low. I’ll be curious to see the breakdown of dollars spent per voter once the dust settles.

However, with all this spending, both Gableman and Butler are guaranteed to have temporary rock-start status in the weeks following the election.

Here are a list of Wisconsin bloggers who have done a great job covering this race and have many more details on what is at stake and why Wisconsin needs Gableman on the high Court:

Election Watch Wisconsin

Dan Suhr @ GOP3

I’m actually quite surprised by how little national attention the Senate race in Minnesota has been getting. Of all of the Senate races currently happening, it’s this race, without a doubt, that will be one of the most lively and expensive.

For those of you who haven’t been following this race, basically its between the incumbent, Norm Coleman and former Saturday Night Live comedian and ultra-lefty, Al Franken.

Judging by this article, it looks like its going to only get more heated.

From CNN.com:

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The first time Norm Coleman went up against a celebrity for statewide office, he was slammed by former pro wrestler Jesse Ventura.

Coleman did better against his second famous opponent, edging former Vice President Walter Mondale to win his seat in the U.S. Senate.

He’s hoping to repeat that success in his third run against a well-known name in as many tries — Democrat Al Franken, the former “Saturday Night Live” comedian and radio host.

Sen. Coleman has become one of the state’s most recognizable politicians.

But in preparing for his latest fight, Coleman has tried to turn the spotlight back on Franken, criticizing some of the more outrageous or profane things he’s said or written in years of comedy routines and liberal commentary.

“If the partisan disease is what’s tearing Washington apart, for years he was part of that,” said Coleman, who officially launches his campaign Wednesday. “The talk radio culture, the Rush Limbaughs, the Ann Coulters, the Al Frankens. If that’s the disease, I’ve tried to be the cure to that disease for a long time.”

Coleman said Franken wouldn’t be able to “work across the aisle with people he has so ridiculed and so debased.”

It’s important to note that when Norm Coleman was first elected as the Mayor of Minneapolis in 1993, he ran as a Democrat, so he already has many ties to the Democrat establishment in the state. However, I guess “once friends, always friends” doesn’t apply here:

Coleman is no stranger to wild campaigns. First elected mayor of St. Paul in 1993 as a conservative Democrat, he switched to the Republican Party three years later. Many Democrats have resented him ever since.

Obviously, this isn’t going to be an easy race for Coleman to win. However, I’m convinced that his campaign manager, the “behind the scenes rockstar,” Cullen Sheehan has a strategy that will be able to appeal to the conservative base, but also reach out to the moderates who might not be sure how they are going to vote yet.

This is a race that I think the blogosphere can have a great impact in, simply because many people are going to be interested in following what Al Franken is doing as the campaign heats up.

I think its almost impossible to predict the outcome of races in Minnesota, just look at their former Governor, former WWF start Jesse Ventura.