MA-Sen: Scott Brown is Not a RINO

Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown

Some in the Tea Party movement are angry at Republican Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and are thinking about abandoning their support for Brown in the likely event that he seeks reelection in 2012. Tea Partiers are upset that Brown, along with Republican Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, is supporting Democratic financial reform legislation that will come up for a vote in the U.S. Senate this week. This is not the first time that Brown’s reach across the aisle has been perceived as a betrayal by some Tea Partiers.

While the financial overhaul bill is, in fact, a bad piece of legislation, Tea Partiers need to take a step back, take a deep breath, and take a look at the facts. While Brown has occasionally voted with Democrats, he is by no means a RINO and he was unquestionably a better choice than his special election opponent, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Continue reading

Judicial Activism Will Renew Push for Marriage Protection Amendment

In 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled in Baehr v. Miike that the state would have to demonstrate a compelling interest in order to continue its ban on same-sex marriages and sent the issue back to trial court. In 1996, the trial court ruled that the state could not show such a compelling interest and effectively expanded legal marriage to same-sex couples. That same year and largely in response to the Hawaii judicial decision, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) with overwhelming bipartisan support and it was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton. DOMA guaranteed that states would not have to recognize other states’ same-sex unions under the Constitution’s full faith and credit clause and defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman at the federal level. In 1998, voters in Hawaii amended their state constitution to once again prohibit same-sex marriage.

On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health that the state’s prohibition of same-sex marriage violated the state constitution. The legislature subsequently declined to place a state constitutional amendment on the ballot that would have given voters the opportunity to decide whether or not to allow same-sex marriage in their state. Although the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) was originally introduced by former Colorado Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave on May 21 of that year, prior to the Goodridge ruling, there can be no doubt that the legal battle in Massachusetts was a catalyst for the amendment. The FMA defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman and would have prohibited same-sex marriage throughout the United States.

Ultimately, Goodridge led to an election year battle over same-sex marriage in 2004. President George W. Bush supported the FMA while Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, his Democratic opponent, opposed it. Although the amendment did not pass the House by the necessary 2/3 margin and never even overcame a filibuster in the Senate, the debate led to numerous state referenda prohibiting same-sex marriage and undoubtedly contributed to Kerry’s defeat. Renamed the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA), the amendment has occasionally been reintroduced in Congress to no avail.

The battle over same-sex marriage essentially died after the 2004 election. In 2008, neither Obama nor McCain favored amending the Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage and both stated that decisions on marriage should be left to the states. Although a few state courts and legislatures have granted some version of legal recognition to same-sex unions, anytime same-sex unions have been put directly to voters they have been rejected. The constant rejection of same-sex unions by voters indicates that opponents of same-sex marriage represent a political sleeping giant. That giant may have been awakened last week.

On July 8, Judge Joseph L. Tauro of the U.S. District Court in Boston ruled in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management that Section 3 of DOMA violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause, and in Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services that the same section of DOMA violates the Tenth Amendment. Although Gill and Massachusetts stop short of ruling the full faith and credit clause exemption, which is found in Section 2, unconstitutional, the damage has been done. A federal court has now ruled that Congress cannot define marriage at the federal level as a union between one man and one woman without amending the Constitution. Anyone who thinks there won’t be a renewed push for the Marriage Protection Amendment is either delusional or in serious denial.

Continue reading

How the West (and the Rest) Can Be Won: Palin-Johnson ’12

Beginning in 1956 and until his death in 1972, the late National Review editor Frank Meyer argued for conservative fusionism, the idea that libertarians and traditionalists should unite under a small government agenda. This idea was reintroduced to the conservative movement by journalist Ryan Sager in his 2006 book, The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control the Republican Party. Sager argues that the only way to avoid ideological chaos and electoral defeat (especially in Western states) is for both wings of the conservative movement to once again adopt the principle of fusionism.

Tea Party victories indicate there will be a return to fusionism for Republicans this year. Yet looking ahead to 2012, we see that at least three big government Republicans may be in the running for the GOP presidential nomination: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

If recent history has taught us anything, it is that Republican presidential candidates fail when they embrace big government. If we’re going to succeed in 2012, the two wings of the conservative movement must unite behind a Republican presidential ticket that will present an actual contrast to President Obama.

Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson

Libertarians would very much like the head of the ticket to be one of their own. Texas Congressman Ron Paul is undoubtedly the libertarian favorite. Unfortunately, Paul is viewed as an unserious candidate by many conservatives because of his noninterventionist views and hostility toward Israel. Paul himself seems to realize this and has indicated that he may not even run in 2012. Instead, he has floated the name of former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson as the next libertarian presidential standard-bearer.

I have blogged about Johnson before, and he is impressive. As the two-term governor of New Mexico, he vetoed 750 bills in the name of fiscal restraint. His biography is inspiring, as well. Should he choose to run in 2012, he would likely be a more serious candidate than Congressman Paul insofar as Johnson does not seem, well, kooky. Yet, while less extreme than Paul, Johnson’s positions on some of the same issues that have plagued Paul may raise too many questions for conservatives. It may be that Johnson is just a bit too small government, particularly for social conservatives who became accustomed to Bush administration pandering.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin

A candidate more appealing to social conservatives is former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She seems to be the natural heir to Ronald Reagan, who seamlessly blended libertarianism and social conservatism. While Palin has a strong record of restraining government and promoting individual liberty, she is a foreign policy hawk and takes a more traditional approach to social issues.

Palin’s problem is that libertarians have been somewhat leery of her. They have been warming up to her following revelations of a relaxed approach to marijuana policy, but there is still work to be done. She will need to take additional steps to bring libertarians onboard.

The strongest step in that direction would be an early electoral alliance between Gov. Palin and Gov. Johnson, beginning with his endorsement of Palin in the 2012 primaries and culminating in a victorious Palin choosing Johnson as her running mate. Johnson’s endorsement of Palin would build trust among libertarians, giving her an edge over other potential candidates who might appeal to libertarians. If Palin were to select Johnson as her running mate it would keep libertarians onboard for the general election, especially if she promises to give him a prominent policy role in a Palin administration.

There is another good reason for a Palin-Johnson ’12 fusion ticket: it will make Republicans more competitive in Western states, the new battleground in presidential elections.

Palin and Johnson are both well-suited to compete in the West. Johnson served as a popular two-term governor of New Mexico, and Palin is perceived as Western coming as she does from Alaska, the “Last Frontier.” Moreover, both Palin and Johnson are, like so many Westerners, outdoorsmen — the former an avid hunter and fisherman, the latter a mountain climber. A ticket featuring both Palin and Johnson would be certain to appeal to Westerners and present a clear contrast to Obama, an amalgamation of Northeastern elitism and Pacific radicalism.

But there is more to a potential Palin-Johnson ticket’s appeal in the West than mere personalities. There is also the libertarian factor. Sager argues that the interior West differs markedly from the reliably Republican South. Whereas the South is more socially conservative, the West is more libertarian. The Western philosophy is very much one of “live and let live,” according to Sager, and Democrats have in recent years been able to make gains by manipulating that philosophy.

After four years of Obama, the West will see that the Democratic Party is not the “don’t tread on me” party. Yet to be successful in the West, Republicans will have to offer a clear contrast that doesn’t take government out of the boardroom only to put it back in the bedroom. Gov. Palin is on course to become, should she choose to run, the first truly fusionist candidate since Reagan. She will appeal to Western libertarians all the more if she has the support of Gov. Johnson and if she chooses him as her running mate should she win the primaries.

If Gov. Johnson wants to give libertarians a real seat at the Republican policymaking table, he will anoint Gov. Palin the libertarian, erm, pitbull in 2012. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin should build on her fusionist image in the primaries and choose Gov. Johnson as her running mate for the general election. If she does, she will lock down a united conservative base, she will appeal to center-right independents, and she will strengthen her chances of winning battleground Western states.

Mark my words: If we are lucky enough to see Palin-Johnson ’12, this team of Western governors will defeat President Obama, and they will defeat him big.

The LeBron Effect: Kasich WINNER. Strickland & ODP, Not So Much

The sun will come up tomorrow but for now, more bad news for Ohio…

LeBron James, known as King James (perhaps in his own mind as Ohioans by and large do not think so now), announced last night he is leaving the Cleveland Cavaliers to play basketball for the Miami Heat.

There is no doubt that the news media’s non-stop coverage pulled me in (as I do not follow NBA), but my ears really perked up when Ohio Democrat Governor Ted Strickland and his campaign team added fuel to the LeBron-fire.   Governor Strickland (and Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown)  even sang a “We are LeBron” verse in a “We are the World” spoof begging LeBron to stay in Cleveland!  The Ohio Democrat Party also jumped into the LeBron frenzy by creating a website complete with a silly Kasich-bashing YouTube video.

I’m all for politicians attempting to seem relatable to the masses by keeping in touch with pop culture, but a simple tweet or facebook post will do that.  Ted and the ODP actually put their political weight behind and placed their bets on LeBron choosing to stay in Cleveland in order to help Strickland score political points in his re-election bid. Apparently Strickland and the ODP feel that the role of government and its elected officials is to interfere in a sports-world business contract.  Government is expanding rapidly into numerous areas where it shouldn’t be so I guess they feel that the sports world should be added to the mix.  They are political losers for doing so.

So who wins, politically speaking?

In a strange turn of events, that must have ODP Chairman Chris Redfern scratching his head, John Kasich actually comes out ahead and wins politically for staying out of LeBron-mania!  John Kasich rightly decided not to jump into the LeBron-frenzy because Ohio has lost 400,000 jobs under Governor Ted Strickland and did not want ONE extremely high paying job to take attention away from the economic hurt our state is in.  But now is the time to react!

Ohioans have an incredible tax burden between the high state income tax and the Ohio estate (death) tax! LeBron James, by choosing to play basketball in Florida, has saved himself millions due to Florida not having a state income tax.  Business & Media Institute reports that LeBron saves himself $5.69 million in Ohio income taxes based on a $96 million contract by leaving Ohio and the Cavs.  The numbers only go up from there if LeBron had decided to play basketball in New York or New Jersey!  LeBron could pay at least $5 million in taxes in Ohio OR he could go play in a state that won’t charge LeBron state income tax on his quest to become a billionaire athlete?  Easy call for LeBron to make even though he says it isn’t about the money.

My advice is for John Kasich to start driving north on I-71 immediately.  I hope Kasich’s team is scheduling a press conference outside of Quicken Loans Arena ASAP. Kasich can start talking about the negative economic impact LeBron’s decision to Cleveland and Ohio.  Doing this would give him the opportunity and press coverage needed to connect with Cleveland residents who may not know who John Kasich is, by using a very real and relatable example to explain the positive effect lower taxes/no state income tax would have on Ohio.  This will allow Kasich to turn around Strickland and the ODP’s attacks by relating to Ohioans’ pain over LeBron’s choice, increasing Kasich’s name ID, promoting fiscally conservative principles, and gaining needed votes for November!

400,000 jobs lost under Ted Strickland’s failed leadership is awful but right now in Cleveland, finding out it is 400,001 jobs now that LeBron is leaving, is a sucker-punch to the gut and Ohio’s economy…

Guest Bloggers

As previously noted, I have limited internet access and so I’ve been unable to update the blog regularly. Rather than leave Pitbull Patriots to my own irregular posting schedule, I have decided to ask several friends and fellow bloggers whom I trust to take over regular posting until I have full internet access again. You will be seeing several new names here in the next couple of weeks.

For now, I would like to introduce the first Pitbull Patriots guest blogger. Lisa Griffin is a Republican campaign consultant from Ohio, and I can tell you from the discussions we’ve had that she has her finger on the pulse of Ohio’s Tea Party politics and the politics of grassroots conservatives (and libertarian Republicans) nationwide. I hope you’ll give her a warm welcome, and I’m sure you’ll enjoy reading her work.

I will be sure to introduce you to other Pitbull Patriots guest bloggers at the appropriate time. Thanks for continuing to read Pitbull Patriots, the blog for Republicans who don’t just bark the bark!

WV-Sen: Robert Byrd Dies; Manchin to Run in 2012?

Late West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd (1917-2010)

Readers will know by now that Democratic West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd died yesterday at the age of 92. He holds the record for longest service in the U.S. Senate, having first been elected to the Senate in 1959. Much is being said and written about Byrd’s legacy in West Virginia, as well as some controversial decisions he made in his life — including his brief membership in the Ku Klux Klan, his famous (infamous?) mastery of the earmark system, and his vote for ObamaCare (which meant a vote for federally funded abortion). Those decisions and the current condition of West Virginia, to which the late senator contributed, are now between him and his Maker.

What I will say is that the canonization of Byrd’s contribution to West Virginia is exaggerated to a point that is dishonest. Yes, he did secure innumerable earmarks for the state. But have those earmarks done much long term good? All evidence points to no. As a friend pointed out, West Virginia is ranked 49th in family income. It is 6th highest in families living below the poverty level, 39th in personal income, 2nd in obesity, and 48th in percentage of people with a high school diploma or higher. Clearly, Byrd’s strategy of saving West Virginia through big government spending didn’t work. Any discussion of his legacy without laying out these facts is incomplete.

Be that as it may, there can be no doubt that the media will continue to distort and exaggerate Byrd’s legacy. To spend anymore words arguing with them would be a waste of time and energy. The facts are available to anyone who wants to look.

West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin

Byrd’s passing leads to the inevitable question: Who will replace him? Given West Virginia law, we likely won’t have a permanent replacement for Byrd until 2012. If Democratic Gov. Joe Manchin decides to run, he will likely be his party’s front runner. We’ll have a better idea of if he intends to run by who he appoints to serve the remainder of this unexpired term. If it’s someone in his inner circle, someone that he trusts not to seek reelection in 2012, expect him to run. He does have some trouble with the Democratic Party’s liberal base (he opposed ObamaCare), so expect a potential primary challenge. Any of the statewide office holders could end up primary challengers in 2012 because all are Democrats, but my money is on Secretary of State Natalie Tennant as a dark horse candidate.

Former West Virginia Secretary of State Betty Ireland

On the Republican side, it’s difficult to say who could emerge given the lack of statewide elected Republicans. Former Secretary of State Betty Ireland was the last statewide Republican, elected in 2004. She chose not to seek reelection in 2008 but is frequently mentioned as a possible contender for statewide office (usually governor, but possibly senator). John Raese, Byrd’s 2006 opponent, may also run for the office again. He is a businessman and former West Virginia Republican Party chairman, with a history of taking on entrenched politicians from both his own party (Gov. Arch Moore in 1988) and the Democratic Party (then-Gov., now-Sen. Jay Rockefeller in 1984 and Byrd in 2006). Businessman and former State Sen. Jay Wolfe, who has run against both Byrd and most recently Rockefeller for U.S. Senate, may also seek the office.

Betty Ireland, John Raese, Jay Wolfe — don’t be surprised if you see one or more of these announcing their candidacy for U.S. Senate early next year.

Contrary to what some might think, West Virginia’s U.S. Senate seat might be very much in play by the time 2012 rolls around. The Democratic grip on statewide politics, especially when it comes to the national stage, seems to be slipping. George W. Bush won election and reelection in 2000 and 2004; John McCain won West Virginia in 2008, following Hillary Clinton’s primary victory there. With this seat now open and not occupied by a senator with the highest seniority in the U.S. Senate, it’s way too soon to be ruling out a Republican pick-up in 2012.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, campaigning for the McCain-Palin '08 ticket in West Virginia in 2012

Speaking of 2012, an open U.S. Senate seat probably isn’t great news for President Obama. He now stands an even better chance of continuing Democratic presidential losses in the state. Republicans and conservative-minded independents will likely be even more energized for 2012 now that a Senate seat will be seriously in play. If the national mood continues on its present course, Democratic enthusiasm in West Virginia may be at a low point in 2012 while Republican enthusiasm could be at an all time high.

Voters turning out for the Republican U.S. Senate candidate in 2012 will likely also be turning out for the Republican presidential candidate. Given Manchin’s relative conservatism, it may not be the case that his voters will be turning out for Obama. I think it’s officially safe to say that West Virginia will remain red, possibly by an even wider margin, in the next presidential election. Both the U.S. Senate election and the presidential election will likely have the Democratic Party and their entrenched labor interests in West Virginia in a tizzy.

Slow Blogging

Blogging will be light over the next few weeks, as starting this evening I will have limited access to the internet for at least two or three weeks (possibly longer). I will try to update from an undisclosed location (also known as a public library) as often as possible, but at least once or twice per week. Stay tuned!

NOTE: This is a sticky post, meaning that it remains at the top of the page. Please be sure to check for periodic updates while I have limited internet access.

CT-Sen: McMahon Being Sued By WWE Wrestler’s Widow

Linda McMahon and husband Vince, Chairman and CEO of the WWE

From the Christian Science Monitor (h/t The TrogloPundit):

The widow of a World Wrestling Entertainment performer who died in a televised 1999 stunt filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday against the Connecticut-based company and its leaders, including Republican U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon.

Martha Hart said she learned two months ago that McMahon, who stepped down as WWE chief executive in the fall to run for Senate, and her husband, Vince, the current chairman, for years have used the image of her late husband, Owen Hart, in at least 37 videos and other materials without her knowledge and permission, and despite her objections to his likeness being associated with the pr0-wrestling company.

To those who say this isn’t that bad because it’s a copyright suit and not a suit over Owen Hart’s death, I ask you: Do you think that won’t come up? Do you think the details of his death are just going to stay hidden under a rock, never to be dredged up by the Connecticut and national mainstream media?

Linda McMahon is a bad candidate for many, many reasons. Her reckless exploitation of other human beings to make the millions with which she is now funding her U.S. Senate campaign is certainly one of those reasons.

There is one man who stands between Linda McMahon and the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Connecticut, one man trying to stop the train wreck McMahon will cause in November. His name is Peter Schiff. Donate today.

Dr. Clifford F. Thies on the Ohio GOP’s Woes

Ohio Republican gubernatorial John Kasich and Auditor of State Mary Taylor, Republican candidate for lieutenant governor

In a recent post at Libertarian Republican, Dr. Clifford F. Thies noted:

Over in the Senate, based on a variety of state polls, it looks like Republicans will make major gains: SD, DE, IN, AR, NV and CO look like probable pick-ups. IL and PA also look do-able. CA and WA are competitive. Our most vulnerable seat is OH, which is a toss-up, and several other of our seats are in play. So, I’m thinking there is a possibility of gaining eight to ten seats.

(Boldface mine). The fact that both the race for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by George Voinovich, who is retiring, and the governor’s race are so close is very vexing for many Ohio Republicans. I e-mailed Dr. Thies to ask him if he had any opinion as to why the GOP is having such difficulty in a typically red state like Ohio when even blue states like California and Washington might fire their Democratic incumbents. Here’s what Dr. Thies had to say:

The Republican Party of Ohio appears to still be dogged by the drift into higher taxes and corruption of the Taft administration.

This is not unlike the Republican Party of Alaska, that got so involved in running government, profiting from contracts and jobs, etc., that Sarah Palin ran against the establishment Republicans and booted them out.

In 2008, we even lost a Senate seat from that state, Ted Stevens.

The fellows who look to be the GOP statewide candidates in Ohio appear to be very competent and honest. Neither is a tea-partier. Hence, no ground swell of enthusiasm right now. But, it could be that – by the time all is said and done – both do fine.

(Boldface mine). Dr. Thies is a professor of economics and finance at Shenandoah University. He is a former Libertarian National Committee member and a former National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He knows a thing or two about politics.

John Kasich and Rob Portman have got to harness the Tea Party energy that is giving Republicans in the bluest of blue states victory over Democratic incumbents. So far they haven’t managed to do that.

I’m not saying it’s entirely their fault. Tea Party enthusiasm has been deflated since the demoralizing defeat of Seth Morgan and Sandy O’Brien in the primaries. The Ohio Republican Party’s heavy-handed tactics and unprecedented self-endorsement of its own central committee members only aggravated the situation. The presence on the statewide ticket of candidates Tea Partiers are uncomfortable with — Jon Husted, Mike DeWine, and to a lesser extent Dave Yost — is likely dragging the rest of the statewide ticket down to some extent.

It’s imperative that Portman and Kasich grab hold of the Tea Party narrative of fighting government expansion and corruption in Washington and Columbus, including in their own party’s past (and, in some cases, present). Things like having Tea Party favorite Seth Morgan going door to door (h/t Right Ohio) to campaign for Kasich (and hopefully Portman as well) will help, but in the end it’s up to Kasich and Portman to excite Tea Partiers and build the kind of enthusiasm they’ll need to win in November. Oh, and it would be nice if Kevin DeWine could help out a little with that, as well.

WI-Sen: Believe It or Not, a Statistical Tie

Ron Johnson, Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Wisconsin

I didn’t expect to be writing about the race for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, primarily because I didn’t think it would actually be in play without former Gov. Tommy Thompson as Feingold’s GOP challenger. Turns out I was wrong. Rasmussen (h/t RedState) shows Feingold in a statistical tie with his challenger, accountant and entrepreneur Ron Johnson.

It strikes me that with usually safe incumbents like Barbara Boxer, Patty Murray, and now Russ Feingold all in serious jeopardy, the Democrats could be in even worse shape than anyone realizes.

If you’d like to help the Ron Johnson insurgency in Wisconsin, you can donate here.