DCRepublican.com

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.

Some good weekend viewing, from the folks at BarelyPolitical.com:

Obama ‘08 - taste the rainbow

lol.

Another great BarelyPolitical production:

And of course anyone who has ever worked on a campaign can probably understand this video. There is a reason one of my favorite songs is”Gone Til’ November” by Wylcef.

It’s going to be hard as hell for Barack Obama to paint himself as the “change” candidate presenting a “new kind of politics” when he’s continually surrounded by nut-jobs like Congressman Robert Wexler (from ABC News/Political Punch):

Congressman Robert Wexler, D-Fla. — the Florida co-chair for the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. — today announced that he has signed on to support the Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush, introduced this week by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

I guess there were no serious issues for the Congressman to be focusing his time and energy on. Gas prices, housing woes, etc, nah… let’s just have some fun and try and impeach the President.

Is McCain going to dominate the pro-Israel community? Here is the latest from the AIPAC Policy Conference, and I’ll have more on this later this evening:

McCain Emphasizes Importance of U.S.-Israel Alliance

Senator John McCain (R-AZ), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, opened AIPAC Policy Conference 2008 in Washington, D.C. in front of more than 6,500 pro-Israel activists from all 50 states.

Sen. McCain said that Iran must be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons and reaffirmed his support of a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.

“My friends, as the people of Israel know better than most, the safety of free people can never be taken for granted,” McCain said. “And in a world full of dangers, Israel and the United States must always stand together.”

The Democratic candidates for president, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) will address Policy Conference attendees on the morning of June 4.

If you haven’t seen this video of Obama supporter, Catholic Priest Michael Pfleger, you can watch it here:

Can anyone say nut job?

For those of you who don’t recall his name, this is the same priest that used to protest the Jerry Springer show in the late 1990’s, and this is also the same guy who urged his parishioners to “buy time” with prostitutes to preach the gospel.

So to recap, this is a priest who will fight TV producers, work to ‘heal’ hookers, and try to heal as many societal wounds as possible. However, when it comes to one of the biggest divides in the United States, the black/white divide, this joke of a theologian is only making matters worse.

Based on what I’ve read about him, his missions, his sermons, etc, he seems to be “cherry picking priest,” only taking verses of the Bible that help him further his causes.

For the most part, his causes are noble and have a solid purpose, however it’s quite clear that he feels that white people should give up the ‘benefits of being white’, based on actions that happened generations ago.

Maybe Rev. Pfleger should flip his Bible to the Book of Ephesians and read 4:31-32:

Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

And no, I’m not getting rid of my 401(k).

Update (5/30): Pfleger appologises for comments after condemned by Obama (via CNN.com)

Original Source

Over the past few weeks, Senator McCain has received a relatively small amount of attention from the media, while the majority of the headlines have been dominated by stories regarding the campaigns of Senators Clinton and Obama.

However, there has been one story that has received more attention than it should have over the past few days, this time regarding another member of Senator McCain’s campaign that has had to step down due to business ties related to previous lobbying activities.

While this latest departure is just one of a handful of staffers to step down for similar reasons, I can’t help but wonder why they are making such a big deal of this?

Furthermore, I have now found myself pondering the question of which associations are more important in campaign politics, personal or professional?

Based on the way that the media has covered Senator McCain’s problems with his top advisors, many would be under the impression that it is the professional ties that are more problematic in campaigns.

Then there are others who would use the example of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for Barack Obama, making the argument that it is personal ties that weigh heavier than those that are professional in nature.

In my opinion, both have their place in the campaign, but it seems that there is a bias that both sides are experiencing, making each association more or less important for the other, based on their political party.

For the Democrats, they have continued to paint the Republican Party as a group of politicians that are “fat cats,” who are chummy with some of DC’s top lobbyists.

Then you have certain Republicans who have tried to paint the Democratic Party as one that sees patriotism as a dirty word and doesn’t value religion, the constitution, etc.

Overall, both sides have done an excellent job of putting the opposition into these boxes.

However, who is this hurting more?

Some would argue that this is hurting the Republicans more, because they already poll lower when it comes to being trusted, and of course there are still the ties to the Bush Administration that can and will hurt some of the candidates.

While this might be true in some instances, I think that overall, these attacks are going to hurt the Democrats, simply because it’s Barack Obama making these statements directly, which creates a whole new dynamic.

One thing that John McCain has been doing very well, is keeping the heavy mudslinging at a minimum until the time is right , asking judgment questions instead of making “in-your-face” statements.

Obama on the other hand, has made reference to Senator McCain’s lobbyist ties on many occasions, using that as a springboard for painting himself as the candidate who hasn’t become a DC insider.

The problem this poses for Obama is that it creates many different media streams that WILL be used to attack him.

The fact of the matter is that regardless of how long you’ve been in DC, there have and will be many instances where you will do favors for friends, it’s the unfortunate nature of politics these days.

Sometimes that will mean securing funding for a hospital that your wife works at, or pushing through an earmark that your friend or top donor is behind.

No matter how you spin, those elements are the things that make someone a DC insider.

Furthermore, Obama is painting himself as someone who is anti-lobbyist. In fact, I’ve heard people try to make the argument that Obama has never even met with a lobbyist, which is completely false, but it’s a sign that his strategy is working well… for now.

Eventually someone is going to get their hands on his Senate calendar, illustrating the number of meetings he’s had with lobbyists, as well as the frequency. The results shouldn’t be surprising to anyone who has seen the inner-workings of Congressional politics.

Instead of all of this back-and-fourth based on ties, I think that both of the candidates should stay focused on the issues, presenting real solutions, with real implementation strategies. This is what the American people want to hear.

If the Republicans can stop attacking McCain and embrace his ideas (even if it’s hard to do), the party will be in a position where they are seen as unified, thus giving people something to be confident in.

If that doesn’t happen, these attacks by Obama will seem more legitimate, simply because the message of “change” is much easier to swallow then the message of “internal chaos” that seems be affecting the GOP. No matter what the attack is, if the GOP doesn’t seem like it has its act together the attacks will seem much more credible.

I’m sure that I wasn’t the only person surprised by seeing former Congressman Bob Barr’s latest resurgence – this time running for President under the Libertarian Party.

While the likelihood of Bob Barr winning is quite slim, I do believe that he could bring an interesting dynamic to the race that could have a significant impact on the outcome of the election this November.

On a few occasions, I have discussed the need for the Republican Party to find a way to harness some of the energy of the loyal Ron Paul base. However, with Bob Barr entering this race, it’s going to be much easier for those supporters to find common ground with Barr as opposed to Senator McCain, spelling out problems for the GOP.

Furthermore, when Ron Paul actually decides to exit this race, if he throws his support behind Bob Barr, it’s safe to assume that the majority of the Ron Paul army will also follow.

Now in terms of percentage of the overall electorate, I don’t think that Ron Paul’s loyalists would have much muscle if this was your typical election. However, with the likelihood of Barack Obama being the Democratic nominee becoming more likely every day, this Ron Paul army now finds itself in a position of power.

Under normal circumstances, it would be assumed that this army of conservative/libertarian voters would usually support the next best thing when their candidate leaves the race. For the last few weeks, that next best thing has been John McCain (by a long shot for some, I know), but now with Bob Barr throwing his hat in, the McCain campaign is going to have to find a way to get to some of these voters, or find a new group of ‘independents’ to go after.

If Hillary Clinton was the nominee for the Demcorats, this wouldn’t be a big deal, simply because the independents would naturally gravitate more towards McCain. But Barack Obama does very well independents, which pulls away more potential non-traditional voters from the McCain campaign.

When you throw in the potential of a ‘Bob Barr’ effect, the results could pose significant problems for the McCain campaign.

Even with Bob Barr entering this race, I still believe that McCain has a good chance of winning in November. However, it’s going to be more difficult than once assumed and the McCain camp is going to have to make some strategy decisions that put them in a position to reach out beyond the identified supporters and ‘likely independents’.

You can already see the McCain campaign doing this with their latest pitches on global warming, supporting proposals like cap-and-trade.

While these definitely have appeal to the non-traditional-Republican voters, they are fighting words in some free-market, libertarian-Republican circles, who cringe at the idea of more government intervention.

If at any point it appears that this race is going to be a lost cause for the Republican Party, I don’t see any reason why libertarian-Republicans wouldn’t throw their support behind Bob Barr just to make a point to the Republican National Committee.

I personally think that John McCain is making some smart moves by addressing the environment issues early on in his campaign. As you know, there are many Republicans who doubt the credibility of global warming claims and believe that the government shouldn’t impose new regulations based on those claims.

By putting these issues on table now, there is a good chance that once the debates start rolling around, people will begin to look at more contrasting issues, such as national defense, immigration, health care, social security and other tax policies where Obama and McCain see things much differently.

But, at the same time, this also gives Bob Barr an opportunity to reach out to those people (mainly libertarian leaning Republicans) who are opposed to McCain’s views and raise money to go on the attack.

If Bob Barr has the ability to harness even one-half of the energy that surrounds Ron Paul’s campaign, he’ll definitely have the ability to play spoiler in November.

Now all Bob Barr needs is an endorsement from Paul, and we’ll have one hell of a race.

Like I said, I think McCain can still win this and I’m not all that worried… yet. I mean, he does still have to compete with Mike Gravel first, right?

On a side note, I did see that the Ron Paul headquarters in Arlington, VA has been vacated…

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.