The Incumbent Party I

Craine's Greg Hinz

The Democratic activist, a veteran of the Bill Clinton years, was furious at U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. But not for making life miserable for Mayor Richard M. Daley, Gov. Rod Blagojevich or other Democrats under investigation.

Instead, this good Democrat was irate at how Mr. Fitzgerald is slapping around the Republican Bush White House.

"Fitzgerald is trying to criminalize politics," griped the activist, his drink nearly sloshing out of his glass at the political fund-raiser we both were attending a couple of weeks ago. "It's just not right."

...Like a character in an Ayn Rand novel, he wanted to do what he wanted to do, and did. And if that meant he would tick off nearly everyone and make it impossible to win a new term, well, he'd just go play with his young son.

...The offenses that result have real consequences, be they increased taxes needed to pay hacks or the death of six children because of driver's license bribery. Mayor Daley has almost totally remade his government as a result of Mr. Fitzgerald's probes. History will show that was good for him and us.

...In Washington, "politics as usual" — in other words, by leak — have helped entrench an administration that committed arguably the worst offense any administration can commit:

It misled the nation into a war that, so far, has led to the deaths of 2,000 Americans and countless Iraqis. Mr. Fitzgerald's probes have led to a renewed national debate on how and why we got where we are.

That, too, is good.

Through it all, from greedy people like Nick Hurtgen, to uber-smart people like Scooter Libby, Greg Hinz captures the truth about what us political operatives euphemistically call the Game.

The game is, challengers vs. incumbents. The game is, appearing to be the same person when one serves in public office as when one won public office. The game is, staying in public office.

If I heard it once, I heard it a thousand times; once we helped them achieve their ambition, and they won, they no longer fight for the people once mentioned in campaign stump speeches.

If Republicans are unable to turn the klieg lights upon ourselveses, then we should prepare for the day when voters turn their backs on us.

Ahead of My Time Part I

Republican State Senator Neal Kedzie’s recent guest column for a constitutional amendment to alter Democrat Governor Doyle’s veto authority got me thinking….

Back in 1990, the state legislative races that year were positioned with one goal in mind; getting Tommy Thompson reelected. Republican candidates from the Illinois border to Lake Superior were force-fed advice and direction to produce radio ads and mail pieces that pumped the accomplishments of Tommy.

The message everywhere was the same; Vote for me because I will go to Madison to work with Tommy Thompson, not against him.

Tommy, as Tommy mastered so well, was setting the state on fire with a heightened dedication to government activism. Much of what he accomplished during his first term was through vetoes. Both the senate and assembly were controlled by Democrats hell bent to spend as much as WEAC and Morrie Andrews wanted. To punch back, Tommy got creative. The traditional veto of bad bills, line-item veto, the Vanna White veto, Tommy used them all in record numbers.

The Democrats screamed it’s unconstitutional; this governor is abusing his power.

Meanwhile, from districts along the Mississippi to those surrounding Lake Winnebago, candidates did as they were told. Tommy’s voice and name was everywhere. Radio ads celebrated the Tommy record. Voter contact mail featured the required grip-and-grin photo.

And the strategy worked. Tommy beat Assembly Speaker Tom Loftus by record margins.

However, Republicans lost seats in the state legislature. The Party-centric, parliamentary-style campaign strategy was a big loser for the GOP.

The 1992 elections were different. At the state Republican Party, we changed the message. I would privately tell our recruits to find three items you disagree with Governor Thompson. No matter how big, or small, the disagreement, voters do not want a puppet in Madison, regardless of the overwhelming popularity of Tommy. Usually, the first item mentioned was the governor’s veto authority.

Editorials had hammered Tommy on the more creative implementation and interpretation of the constitution, so it was a logical break for legislative candidates to take. The Thompson brain trust were upset with my advice, but at a late fall Wausau Club event, the governor pulled me aside and said he heard what I was doing. With an open hand thump on my shoulder, Governor Thompson said he was big enough to defend himself, and do what needs to be done to bring some winners back to Madison.

Wow, what a great feeling

1992 was the first election since Tommy’s election in 1986 that Republicans achieved a net gain. One year later, in a series of special elections, we won control of the state senate for the first time in a generation. And one year after that, we won control of the state assembly for the first time in 20-some years.

One could argue the momentum started with a talk about independence of the legislature. State Senator Kedzie is on the right track.

Harriet, We Hardly Knew Ya

From last Friday, Oct 21st

Miers: The Only Exit Strategy

...Hence the perfectly honorable way to solve the conundrum: Miers withdraws out of respect for both the Senate and the executive's prerogatives, the Senate expresses appreciation for this gracious acknowledgment of its needs and responsibilities, and the White House accepts her decision with the deepest regret and with gratitude for Miers's putting preservation of executive prerogative above personal ambition.

Faces saved. And we start again.

OK, so much for the political mobilization of the the Christian Right and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (past post)

The only way one can look at this is --
U.S. Senate Republican Majority - 1; Bush White House - 0.

The first crack of a second term presidency. But an opportunity to rejuvenate conservative verve.

Happy Birthday Wife

Some call you a witch,
I know it's not true
I see you at night
And not with a broom.

Beautiful,
sexy,
smart, and
loving...

The best part of life
is growing old (er) with you.

Perp Walk II

Oh ya, I'll be on streets lobbying in no time, ya, no time, ya dirty coppers.

Former Democrat State Senator Chuck Chvala

DISCLAIMER:Before any more big-shot lawyers call me or threaten WisPolitics.com, and you know who you are, the above quote may, or may not, be an actual quote. I may, or may not, be paraphrasing what a custodial staffer told his cousin's friend's neighbor, who happened to tell the bartender at the Showboat Tavern in Indianford.

Write Your Own Caption

Former Democrat State Senator Brian Burke pleaded guilty to a felony a few weeks back.

Free Will decided to let it ferment to give our readers an opportunity to relieve their angst at the current state of grand juries, indictments, plea bargains and convictions.

Kick-off...


Excuse me, you honor? My cell mate's name is...gulp...Twinkie?

Hope to Be Like You...

Happy Anniversary Mom and Dad.

41 years ago; What a wonderful example you live with each passing day.

When you look at your life, the greatest happinesses are
family happinesses.

He didn't tell me how to live; he lived,
and let me watch him do it.

God could not be everywhere,
so he created mothers.

That Didn't Take Long

But at least the campaigns have something to fill the page for their next drop of
fundraising mail.

Dress Codes and ESPN Ebonics

Good for NBA Commissioner David Stern's dress code. Whether they accept it or not, the fact remains that white athletes cannot look to the apparel of black athetes as their role models.

The brothers look good in a purple shirt with aqua stripes in a knee-length zoot suit, but the white dudes just can't pull-off the same look.

Put the same amount of bling on Andrew Bogut as Allen Iverson, and Bogut, along with most white guys, will look like Charlie Browns' Christmas tree -- overloaded by the weight of a single bulb.

The NBA dress code will serve to remind players of their impact on America's youth --that 10-year-old white kids should not be seen wearing a Malcolm X hat tilted to its side.

That we reverse the trend of 20-something white adults wearing retro player jerseys -- of Jim Brown or O.J. Simpson.

It has even become difficult for us white guys to understand ESPN these days.

60-something white corporate execs are guilty of parroting black cultural fads too. They have MTV'ed my sports fix.

If SportsCenter insists on jiving-up every base-hit, hyping-up every catch and run, and generally describing the day's highlight reel with Ebonics, then please, provide subtitles.

Stuart Scott has gotten so street that I half expect Suzy Kolber to look off-camera and shrug in bewildementnt; Translation...I need a translation!

The NBA dress code simply takes pity on us pathetically un-hip white guys.

So, next time you see a white kid sloughing their addidas shoes without laces, their drawers dropped to reveal their boxers, wearing a retro Negro League baseball cap, oversize Sony headphones wrapped around their ears, blasting Snoop Dogg, thanks to David Stern, we can now say, Hey Saltine, if you want to keep it real, wear a Brooks Brother suit like Kevin Garnett.

McBride on Glamour Shot Matters

Jessica McBride issued a challenge to expose myself, saying my photo;

...the first picture that popped up under his name was a picture of a guy with his name who looked.... like a soap opera actor. Or like a guy in a television commercial for Dial soap. Or like a guy in a magazine ad for Eddie Bauer. But the readers say it's actually him!

Soaps, soap and outdoor wear???

All in good fun, and good sleuthing; Guess I better update my website now...


Brian Christianson, International Man of Mystery...Yea Baby.

But I Want to Blast Cats

Feral Pig Shoot

Sounds like my neighbor's cat...

They're intelligent, agile, nocturnal and elusive. That's why the DNR is encouraging humans to shoot them.

Why differentiate between a feral this or feral that?

The few that staked a cloven foothold on Wisconsin have multiplied almost like rabbits.

Ahhh, c'mon, say it...they have multiplied almost like...CATS!

My Marketing Plan

Warning: Should you stumble upon a feral pig, quick run up a tree - those pigs are no pussies.

And You Can Take Those Numbers to the Bank

The problem with public, media polls --

The WisPolitics.com poll didn't screen for likely voters.

DOH!

So, I guess we can assume that Republican JB Van Hollen is winning the crucial 14-17 year old vote, Attorney General Peg Lauthenschlager is leading among girls 8-12 years old, and GOP Paul Bucher carries the disenfranchised Democrat vote of Waukesha County.

Roughly 8 out of 10 registered voters won't vote next September. Nearly 6 out of 10 won't vote next November.

But at least the campaigns have something to fill the page for their next drop of fundraising mail.

Will Vrakas Endorse Walker?

Voters vote concepts. They vote image. They vote emotion.

Voters do not vote white papers. They do not vote bills. They do not vote budgets.

Which is why the Taxpayer Bill of Rights has serious election legs.

The point is ladies and gentlemen that TABOR, for lack of a better word, is good. TABOR is right. TABOR works. TABOR clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

St. Rep. Dan Vrakas didn’t need to say anything more in winning the special election for Waukesha County Executive.

St. Rep. Glenn Grothman didn’t need to say anything more in waxing fellow Republican St. Senator Mary Panzer in a primary.

Go ahead, pointy-headed academics, debate the fiscal impact of TABOR. Go ahead, minority Democrats, discount the revolt percolating and manifesting itself with each election opportunity.

But the unbearable burden of property taxes has pushed the Doyle Administration into grabbing transportation funds to supplement school funding.

So, who was the biggest winner in Tuesday’s special election? Vrakas? Homeowners? Wrong. Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker. Scott now has a kindred spirit next door in Waukesha County.

TABOR has proven to be a unifying economic message and Scott has the advantage of being a chief executive who can own that message. If Walker can build a fence from Kenosha County, around Waukesha and Washington counties and back to the lake north of Ozaukee County, he’s 65% towards winning his Republican Primary for Governor.

Stubborn Woman Responds

A most reasoned letter that warrants a reprint here, if for no other reason than I am flattered that Free Will's rants evoke such passionate (albeit, wrong) justifications that parse moral code - more on that at the end of SW's post;

Actually, we are spending too much time talking about abortion. We need to talk about abortion prevention. To me this means giving young women and young men a reason to wait. It means honest sex education, including the emotional and legal aspects of engaging in young sex or sex outside of marriage. Birth control information does need to be available--because otherwise pregnancy becomes a "punishment" for breaking the rules instead of the blessing God intends it to be.

However, to answer your question, I believe every abortion is a tragedy. I wish I could be anti-choice, but every time I get near there, I have to pull back because I believe it violates a woman's right to determine the use of her body and I believe this is a violation of the 14th amendment. No one else, not a man, not a child, can be forced to donate use of their body to another, even if the other would die. I cannot be forced to even give blood to my born child, even if I am the only match and the child will die without it. I cannot be cut into without my consent even to donate a kidney to my born child, yet courts have forced women to undergo c-sections against their consent for the "good" of the child. Therefore, while I believe abortion is nearly always the immoral choice (excepting only for life and physical health of the mother--when it comes to moral I would not excempt rape or incest), but I believe it must be a legal choice, no matter how repugnant. Having said that, I believe partial-birth abortion is barbaric and I still haven't seen a convincing reason why a child could be seconds away from being a born child and killed just to avoid it being a born child. I don't like 24-hour-waiting periods, but I don't see them as unsurmountable barriers for those determined to get an abortion. I don't have a problem with parental consent laws, but do believe we need judicial override.

As far as war. I was born while my father was serving during the Korean conflict; my son was born while his father was serving in Vietnam (he enlisted with my support while we were engaged). When my 17-year-old son wanted to join the Marine Corps reserves, I signed. When he was ordered to active duty and sent to the Gulf during the first Gulf war, I supported him--though you haven't lived until you have discussed with your 20-year-old whether he needs a will before going to war. I hope and pray my grandsons will not have to go to war. However, since they are growing up in privelege, I don't see them enlisting.

I believe that every politician has one job and one job only. To get re-elected. Principles are nice, but they don't seem to last long in the face of that reality. Both Democrats and Republicans spend too much--the difference is what are they spending and how are they raising the money?

Why let them off the hook with TABOR? In fact, in Colorado, the Republicans lost seats after TABOR because with the tax issue "taken care of" there was no need to vote them into office anymore. And of course the argument that you raise taxes if you can get citizens support in a referendum is based on a hope that any referendum will be voted down--no matter what the circumstances.

Oh, in answer to your question, I have voted both for and against school referenda, looking at each question on its merits. In the last Madison election, I voted against all four questions, because I believe the school board was arrogant and lazy and did not even come close to making its case. I think the Middleton referendum was obscene, though I didn't vote because I don't live there. I voted in favor of the last Madison referendum.

I am favor of civil unions for gays with all the legal benefits, responsibilities and drawbacks this entails. In fact, I'm in favor of civil unions for everybody. I don't know why churches are so willing to tie their definition of marriage to the state's definition. Churches should bless the marriages that meet their core beliefs and should feel free to reject any that don't--for whatever reason. The state, on the other hand, should get religion out of its definition of marriage and see it for what it is legally--a contract between adults that specifies certain responsibilities of each--to each other and to any children that may come into the home.

So you tell me. Am I a yellow line or a dead skunk? Whether you agree with me or not, these are my values.

First off, I always enjoy reading a well-written piece from those who are not afraid to throw their thoughts into the public arena. That's why I respect everyone who chooses to run for public office, whether their local school board or the U.S. Senate. It is only after they earn a record of service that I denigrate them for the flip-flopping, gone native , fakes they eventually become.

But alas, Stubborn Woman has mistaken her opinions for values. Values are indeed based in a moral, aka religious, truth of right and wrong. And their place in a political discussion is well established; since the beginning of time politics and religion have been inseparable.

Ancient Roman philosophers said opinions are arrived by self-interest. Galileo Galilee said Man cannot be taught anything, but can only be lead to discover the Truth.

Machiavelli said men live so far removed from the way they ought to live, that we pursue our downfall rather than our preservation. Nietzsche acknowledged how difficult human struggle with values are for Man; how much truth can a spirit bare, how much truth can a spirit dare?

In God We Trust is printed on our money; The Founding Fathers signed-on to the notion that we are endowed by our Creator. Thomas Paine, in the Age of Reason, said there is but one God. One Truth; a code shared by John Wesley to Martin Luther King, from the Torah to the Koran. George Washington said morality cannot be maintained without religious principle.

In more contemporary times, Ayn Rand said we are only truly happy when we achieve our values.

Thus, values is not about appealing to the mainstream line of thinking, that's what opinions do. Values should take us to a higher plane of being, beyond applying the 14th Amendment to a woman's desire to abort an unwanted pregnancy.

At the end of the day, the value that I strive to live is to not judge people.

Bourbon Street North

Wine Doggy Bag Bill Passes Committee Unanimously

Jeesh, back where I come from , we call pouring unfinished drinks into to-go containers, road-pops.

As Secretary Klauser once told me, they don’t get paid any more for passing good legislation.

Cable Blondes

Rita Cosby and Greta Van Sustern; One question, what is with those voices?

Rita sounds as if she needs to belch after downing a swig of Pabst and the last bite of her T-Bone...

Greta sounds like her...well, her name; Grrrrrrrr-eta, Grrrrrrr-eta.

And Nancy Grace's twang is so rich she makes Dr. Phil sound like a Havard blueblood.

I'm Objectifying Again

Jessica McBride's Blog

Never met her, but I like her blog. Just one question, does she really look like this, or is this one of those hair-flip Glamour Shots from some mall in Waukesha?

Talk About Milking a Poll...

From the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute;

There is an enormous gap in Wisconsin between residents and their elected officials. Today only 6% of the residents in Wisconsin believe their elected officials represent the interests of their constituents on important issues. These are among the key findings from the most recent survey of 600 Wisconsin residents...

In related key findings;

58% of all Americans believe Spongebob really does live in a pineapple under the sea, and..



74% of all subscribers to People Magazine believe Jessica and Brittany have talent.

Oh No, Not Roe

John Fund

According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.

…The call was moderated by the Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association. Participating were 13 members of the executive committee of the Arlington Group, an umbrella alliance of 60 religious conservative groups, including Gary Bauer of American Values, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and the Rev. Bill Owens, a black minister. Also on the call were Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court and Judge Ed Kinkeade, a Dallas-based federal trial judge.

…Mr. Specter has said he plans to press Ms. Miers "very hard" on whether Roe v. Wade is settled law.

Adds Rush Limbaugh

Given the extraordinary power the Supreme Court has seized from the representative parts of our government, this is no small matter. Roe v. Wade is a primary example of judicial activism. Regardless of one's position on abortion, seven unelected and unaccountable justices simply did not have the constitutional authority to impose their pro-abortion views on the nation. The Constitution empowers the people, through their elected representatives in Congress or the state legislatures, to make this decision

The very last issue Republican governors and Republican legislative leaders want handed-back to their respective states is Roe v. Wade. Most elected state GOP leaders have banked on the Court's general attitude that Roe is indeed settled law.

Should the question of keeping abortions legal find its way back to state legislatures, Republicans will be forced to put a vote behind those glossy pro-life mailers sent out at election time.

I suspect, those states restricting abortions would be few, except for maybe, Utah

Right on, Rush!

No Yellow Lines or Dead Skunks here...

Rush Limbaugh

I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy. Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals. We are confident in our principles and energetic about openly advancing them. We believe in individual liberty, limited government, capitalism, the rule of law, faith, a color-blind society and national security. We support school choice, enterprise zones, tax cuts, welfare reform, faith-based initiatives, political speech, homeowner rights and the war on terrorism. And at our core we embrace and celebrate the most magnificent governing document ever ratified by any nation--the U.S. Constitution. Along with the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes our God-given natural right to be free, it is the foundation on which our government is built and has enabled us to flourish as a people.

From Scandal, Reforms are Born

From Ashland;

A Start on Campaign Finance Reform
...That's why Assembly Bill 226, the campaign finance reform bill being considered today by the Assembly Committee on Campaigns and Elections, should be passed.

The bill does not contain a provision many would like to see: disclosure of the names of donors who fund issue advertising put out be advocacy organizations. But it would never pass.

I gotta ask, why is disclosure such a bogeyman for Republicans? No one is restricting free speech. The simple rule should be, whenever an entity makes a donation, it must be disclosed. Period. Disclosure for all, from George Soros to Steve Forbes.

The only reason AB 226 does not require the names of the donors is because we could not get legislation that contained that requirement scheduled for consideration, let alone passed in the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Jay Heck
Common Cause Wisconsin

So what good is AB 226 without disclosure rules?

It would require disclosure of how much outside groups spend during election cycles.

OK, that is a step towards more meaningful disclosure.

It creates a system of public financing, creating an endowment for funding campaigns and increasing the campaign check-off to $5.

Increase it to $100...that phony reform move the Democrats insist on will never increase deposits to fund the new WECF public grant levels paid to candidates who qualify.

It would prohibit fundraising for campaigns while the state budget is being put together.

Assembly Speaker John Gard raised $240,000 in his run for U.S. House over the past three months...The new figures mean Gard, R-Peshtigo, has raised $465,000 since he announced earlier this year that he intended to seek the 8th Congressional District seat.

Well, at least Speaker Gard had to disclose raising nearly a half million dollars as he directed the Republican version of the state budget this past summer.

It would ban legislative campaign committees and prohibit trading money between political action committees.

Ban legislative campaign committees? Then what would the caucuses do with their staffs? This one is longgggg overdue.

Wisconsin is still recovering from a political scandal that has seen state senators, assemblymen and women and their aides have careers ruined because the quest for campaign cash consumed them. It's in the public interest to create a political system that prevents that from happening again.

The Wisconsin State Journal's Dee Hall, among the best investigative reporters in the state, will keep the heat on state legislators with her reporting of this and future scandals currently percolating; increasing the likelihood that legislators facing reelection will distance themselves by promoting campaign reforms.

Both sides are preparing for an Oct. 31 trial before Circuit Judge David Flanagan that could stretch on for five weeks and include as many as 200 witnesses.

Among those expected to be called: dozens of lobbyists, about a dozen current and former lawmakers and Chvala himself, who plans to appear as an expert witness for the defense on the workings of the Wisconsin State Senate.

Chvala is charged with 19 felonies in a case alleging the Madison Democrat extorted campaign cash from lobbyists, illegally raised political donations in his Capitol office, used Senate Democratic Caucus staff to run political campaigns and illegally coordinated so-called "independent" expenditures with those campaigns.

Tom Roeser Pitches Rudi in '08

Tom Roeser is one of my favorite conservatives. Having lunched and dined with him on several occasions, he doesn’t shrink from throwing his philosophy and opinions into the public arena.

But on this one, while I see the connection, Rudi can’t possibly win the nomination;

There's only one guy in modern times who started with such an advantage: Dwight D. Eisenhower. When Eisenhower announced for president, few knew anything about him other than he was a man of decisiveness. On June 4, 1944, he looked at his watch and the weather reports and said, ''We'll go.'' Did we ever.

And as for those who say that Giuliani is too liberal, I say: Wait for the change as the campaign unfolds and he won't have to romance just New York City. His critics forget the magical fluidity that is politics. Ike started out as an FDR man, JFK an America Firster, LBJ a segregationist, Nixon a Red China-basher. Reagan was originally a pro-choicer who co-founded Americans for Democratic Action. George H.W. Bush, who was called "rubber George" in the House, wanted the feds to control population and was an enthusiastic pro-choicer. And remember, George W. was a supporter of humble, stay-at-home foreign policy.

One more thing: Let 'em pair Giuliani, whose words spout like bullets from a machine gun, with a veep who talks slow, with the vowels dripping syrup on hominy grits swimming with butter: Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, who brilliantly handled Hurricane Katrina. Manhattan and Mississippi. Yeah: I like that.

First off, the examples are riddled with yea buts --

Yea, but…Ike was never vetted by social conservatives,
Yea but…JFK was a popular VP possibility at the 1956 Convention,
Yea but…LBJ had MLK to link with;
Yea but…Nixon had debated Khrushchev in 1959,
Yea but…Reagan was a two-term governor and labor leader,
Yea but…Bush 41 had, Dukakis,
Yea but…Bush 43 had 9/11.

Rudy is indeed a national political celebrity, but he has no infrastructure, short of CNN, FOX, MSNBC and CNBC, to advance his campaign. Like U.S. Senator John McCain before him, Rudy is vulnerable to being cast as a media hound. Remember, McCain is a real live war hero/POW and still, the Bush campaign out-muscled him for the nomination in 2000.

Rudy is indeed America’s Mayor, but he has a long row to hoe before conservatives put him in a position to nominate future Supreme Court Justices or executive order new definitions of marriage. And how would his Judiciary react to local lawsuits on gun manufacturers?

Tom is right. If the Christian Coalition, the NRA, and the hundreds of other activist groups with millions of members give Rudy a pass, then winning the Republican nomination may be in sight. However, those same groups, such as Robert Jones University, did not give McCain such a reprieve.

I can see a McCain-Guiliani, 3rd Party ticket winning in 2008 long before I see Rudi capturing the GOP nomination in 2008.

McCain, Feingold Taint Themselves

Here's a thought; Had McCain-Feingold tackled the real issues of incumbent protection --

Every Member's campaign account would zero-out on January 1st after the November election;

(WI-7 Rep. Dave Obey would have been sent back to Oklahoma a long time ago had it not been for his stockpile of DC PAC money; PACs who gave to Obey even in years when he had no/token opponents)

Campaign contributions could only be spent on the office that is being sought. Seek a different or higher office, then the bank account resets to zero;

(OK, this provision dings some friends of mine across the country, seeking other office, but the test of reform is, does it treat both Parties equally?)

Outlaw Leadership PACs. If a Member wants leadership, such as Whip or a committee chairmanship, or has dreams of winning the New Hampshire primary, then cover those expenses from a single committee account;

(Leadership PACs are all about DC special interest money. Big checks come in, and smaller checks then are sent out to sprinkle the infield. Rising stars are created, which begets more special interest money. Then, almost without notice, lines are crossed, and investigations into the money trail begin)

**************

Money and fundraising serves as a test of political viability. If a citizen wishes to run for Congress, and is unable to raise contributions, then ipso facto, that citizen must lack personal appeal or their issue positions are lacking.

But our current system bastardizes this gauge of support. When more than a $1 million dollars can be accrued over the course of 3 or 4 election cycles, is that an accurate indication of enduring popularity, or is it an indication of being ingrained in the culture of incumbency?

And when that same $1 million dollars can be legally transferred from a congressional account to a statewide campaign -- whether a governor or even a U.S. Senate campaign -- is it fair to permit such a jump-start with funds that were not contributed from a statewide organization?

***************

John McCain and Russ Feingold have duped the country into believing they are on the side of fairness and reform. After all, they are both long-term incumbents. Early on, they both harbored dreams of a White House address. Why mess with the system that they would one day, exploit themselves?

McCain's Reform Institute leadership PAC.

Feingold's Progressive Patriots Fund leadership PAC.

DeLay Reason Enough for Term Limits

Ryan says he won't return money received from DeLay committee

OK, enough with the emails attacking me for ducking the DeLay issue. It is because I am a principled conservative that Free Will is far ahead of my Party on most current events. Back in April, Free Will recognized the political heat Rep. Tom DeLay was inflicting on good, honest GOP Congressmen.

Here and here.

Unfortunately, a political truism holds that the more entrenched a politician becomes, the less likely the politician is to see the storm clouds before the rain falls.

With gerrymandering serving as the hammer of invincibility, the result has been less than 10% of U.S. House districts can be considered competitive. Thus, we have entrenched politicians who become nearly weather-proof to political storms.

Which is why term limits is needed, as the least evil of all current campaign reform measures...

...The Janesville Republican reiterated Tuesday that he won't give back contributions made to his earlier campaigns by a political action committee run by indicted Rep. Tom DeLay because, Ryan said, the contributions were legal, the money was spent and to return it would seem to be a tacit admission that something was wrong.

...Green has said he will return $2,000 of the some $30,000 he received from DeLay if the Texan is convicted of a serious crime. That is all he legally could return because when he converted $1.3 million of federal campaign money to the state campaign, he listed only a $2,000 donation from DeLay's leadership PAC in 2003.

...Ryan was asked why he did not return the money to diffuse the political attacks against him. He replied that he wouldn't do anything that seemed to be an "admission of something that was wrong."

I know Paul Ryan. There is not an unethical bone in his being.

However, if the First District was still as competitive for both Rs and Ds as in the days of Peter Barca and Mark Neumann, or even Paul's first race before redistricting reshaped the First into a lock for Rs, might those DeLay funds be returned with some haste? To avoid attack ads at reelection time?

The defense offered above only proves that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) successfully researched and distributed talking points to each Member who has ever received PAC checks from DeLay's Leadership Committee (Google it yourself. Every Member is saying the exact same verse).

The bigger issues are -- stockpiling campaign donations from cycle to cycle -- and, the legitimacy of transferring donations received while seeking one office to a campaign effort that seeks a different office -- and, the end-run around contribution limits by establishing so-called leadership PACs, designed soley to buy colleague support or fund travel outside one's state/district.

Take away leadership PACs, carry-over warchests, and endless money transferring, Congress could save itself, from itself.

Ryan Wins Liberal's Endorsement

From the Desk of Justin Sowa (D-Franklin)
Candidate, WI-1

Note to self, call all liberal professors, and tell them to stymie themselves.

Paul's going to win again. There's no question Paul's going to win again, so he can take a stronger stand than Green can.

Georgia Duerst-Lahti
Professor, Political Science, Beloit College

Told you so, here and here

Reader Responds

I often wonder if anyone is reading my rants, so here's proof that someone out there found us, although I may be sending a fuzzy signal...

You call for a national debate on taxation, which I think would result in the people saying, “Tax me, but you need to show me more value for my money.” You call for using our power wisely. You call for bringing our troops home. I presume the next step would be to come up with a plan to use them next time in a way that’s more acceptable to world opinion AND advances our interests. It all sounds good to me. Maybe I’m more conservative and less moderate than I claim to be.

And then there’s your reaction to the government’s botched response to Hurricane Katrina. I think a lot of people had an identical response. Further, I think it caused them to reexamine their acceptance of the conservative mantra “you can’t expect the government to solve your problems.” I think a lot of people are coming back to the idea that you should expect just that. It doesn’t make them liberals.

Expecting the government to solve problems you can’t solve on your own, but in a fiscally prudent manner, seems moderate to me.

I enjoy your writing. It’s so much more intelligent, so much more reasonable, than the crap I hear from a typical conservative (or liberal) hack.

And why the heck does everyone seem to bristle these days when someone calls them moderate? Not too long ago, it was a badge of honor.

Finally, I agree with your political analysis. The Dems are going to do to the Repubs what Gingrich did to the Dems – make big hay out of ruling party corruption and take over. It’s amazing that people were so dumb as to believe that Bush is a populist conservative.

How was the weather in Eastern Europe?

Thanks Jim....I appreciate your comments! The election victories that we Republcians have orchestrated for the better part of my generation has invited a bastardization of the conservative movement. And that is what blisters my butt these days.

I get slammed from my Republican friends for not being "more supportive," but I am a child of the conservative crusade. I worked for Rep. Jack Kemp and on his presidential campaign in 1988, not George H.W . Bush's, which at the time, was considered treason, for not supporting Reagan's running mate. But hey, time has proven that it was Kemp, and not Bush, who was the legitimate heir of the conservative movement.

What I find ironic, that as conservative philosophies have found their way into governing principles, albeit in limited fashion, and under this Bush Presidency, nearly none, those conservative victories have been deemed "moderate." So much so that even John McCain is now called a moderate. Remarkable, given McCain's lifetime ACU rating.

I am one who endorses Jesse Helms' take on moderates; only two things found in the middle of the road, yellow lines and dead skunks.

Real conservatives are being called moderates by members of my own Party, because we have become like the Democrats once were; more concerned about winning the next election with loyalty oaths, than offering conservative ideas to remake government.

By the way, the weather in Kiev was gorgeous, as are those Slavic women.

Supreme Court Nomination a Done Deal

US Chamber Recruited

Mission complete. While barely breaking a sweat, Karl Rove mobilized the social conservatives with one call to Dr. James Dobson, then, mobilized the tort reformers with one call to the U.S. Chamber.

Circling the wagons with such a public show of political muscle will make it difficult on those Republican Senators who might have bolted to the maverick side of our Party.

As long as Harriet Miers doesn't volunteer something crazy like, favoring the Dred Scott or Plessey decisions, she's got her lifetime appointment.

That's big for the business community," says Bruce Josten, the top lobbyist for the US Chamber of Commerce. He predicts that other business groups, many for the first time in their histories, will take a higher profile role in court fights.

"Business is getting involved for the first time because, in the last decade, we've had a litigation explosion in this country that is unmatched in the industrial world - $250 billion in annual tort costs, much of it paid by the business
community," he adds.

The president's nomination of Harriet Miers is a good pick for the US Supreme Court," said Chamber President and CEO Thomas Donohue

"In looking at his tenure on the court, he repeatedly demonstrated a real sensitivity and understanding of the problems that business faces when it is involved in litigation," says Stephen Bokat, executive vice president of the National Chamber Litigation Center.

The Political Influence of Focus on the Family

Spin Cycle Begins

So, Doctor Dobson, evangelical conservatives want to know, what did the White House share with you on the Roe v. Wade thing?

Dobson said that he and Rove did not discuss Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that established a woman's right to end a pregnancy, or how Miers might judge abortion-related cases.

Please, Doctor Dobson, you're as much a politician as an ordained minister. How could that one huge elephant standing in the room not be referenced?

"I did not ask that question," Dobson said. "You know, to be honest, I would have loved to have known how Harriet Miers views Roe v. Wade. But even if Karl had known the answer to that — and I'm certain that he didn't, because the president himself said he didn't know — Karl would not have told me that. That's the most incendiary information that's out there, and it was never part of our discussion."

OK. Being a man of the cloth, I accept your word. So if the biggest issue facing most church-going folk, and the foundation of President Bush's reelection strategy, was not mentioned, then what did Karl Rove share with you?

According to Dobson, that information included "that Harriet Miers is an evangelical Christian; that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life; that she had taken on the American Bar Assn. on the issue of abortion and fought for a policy that would not be supportive of abortion; [and] that she had been a member of the Texas Right to Life."

Ahhh, now I understand. Code. Like asking my 5 year-old a question; he answers truthfully, but only the question that was asked.

Miers' personal views on abortion have been the focus of much concern on the right and the left. As president of the Texas Bar Assn., she contended that local chapters should be allowed a voice in American Bar Assn. positions on national controversies such as abortion, but she did not say whether she was personally against abortion rights.

This is sounding too lawyerly, like Bill Clinton questioning what the definitiion of is, is.

And in 1989, Miers gave $150 to Texans United for Life and was a sponsor of the group's annual dinner that honored Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), a leading congressional opponent of abortion — but she does not appear to have formally joined the organization.

As one of our leading voices on social conservative issues, Dr. Dobson's psuedo-endorsement will prove to be enough to confirm Harriet Miers. But, disappointment remains among movement conservatives.

Crying? There's No Crying in Baseball, err, Politics

Last time you was here, you was crying like a pussy...

Scott Fawell abruptly stopped answering questions, wiped his face with his hand, stood up and turned his back on the courtroom. A minute later he was led outside by federal marshals.

The change in the formerly cocky, wisecracking witness came after Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick M. Collins asked him about his visits in prison with his fiancee, Andrea Coutretsis.

Fawell is currently serving a 6 1/2-year sentence for racketeering.

And in related news, is it the money, or the politicians, that's evil?

The race for money and power is at the core of the various scandals besetting Mayor Richard M. Daley, Gov. Rod Blagojevich, ex-Gov. George Ryan and U.S. Rep.Tom DeLay, the at-least-temporarily deposed House majority leader. They're symptomatic of a larger truth. Unless we as a society — Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives — can figure out a way to allow free speech without asking politicians to sell their souls, self governance will become merely a phrase in a history book.

"In the long run, I don't know what will work," says Ed Murnane, a Republican who knows the value of political cash as a veteran of the tort-reform wars, but who still is troubled by where the system overall is headed. "We almost have to have some reasonable limits or it will continue to snowball."

From Legislators to Lobbyists

Editorial: Burke should lose law, lobby licenses

Burke has already manipulated the campaign and election system in Wisconsin by shifting some of his campaign money to his legal defense fund. He also may try to use campaign funds to pay restitution to the state, although state law seems to preclude this tactic.

A lawyer, Burke also faces the possibility of the state Supreme Court suspending or revoking his license to practice law.

We don’t think justice would be served in this case if Burke were allowed to keep his license.
Some would argue that losing the lobby and law licenses would prevent Burke from earning money so he could pay back the state for the illegal campaign.

But Brian Burke is a smart young man and surely he could find a job outside of the legal profession and halls of government to earn a living.

They had me right up until that final comment; surely he can find a job outside the halls ofgovernmentt.

Who has?

The pattern of behavior is, ex-lawmakers have no other marketable skills; they nearly all hang around and become lobbyists. It is simply, what they know -- or, more accurately, who they know.

Tony Earl, Bob Kasten, Steve Gunderson, Toby Roth, Steve Foti, Bob Welch, Brian Rude, Scott Klug, Marty Schreiber, and on, and on.

Throw a dart at the recent photo from a WI State Senate reunion, posed in chambers, and chances are better than 66% you'll stick an image of a lobbyist.

Former Congressman Mark Neumann. Now there's a guy who walks the walk and talks the talk. No way he feeds off the system.

Like We Didn't Already Know, The Economy Sucks

Poll Results

From a political operative’s perspective, WPRI’s poll of the Wisconsin governor’s race contained nothing new.

Both Republican campaign managers, Bruce Pfaff for Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and Mark Graul for Congressman Mark Green, summed-up the poll stating the obvious;

Two 3rd party polls have confirmed Governor Doyle’s overall vulnerability; and,
Governor Doyle’s approval rating has not moved up from 46% since becoming governor.

(Steve Walter's article)

It’s the lobbyist community and the county party types that get all goosey every time a poll is released. And the data will also serve as text for the next mail drop to house files and prospecting lists, requesting another $25, $50, or $100 donation to support the favorite Republican and the only candidate that polls say can beat Jim Doyle.

But beyond measuring the horserace, public polls accomplish nothing of value.

Real value is gained from the campaigns’ private polls. And when combined with regional focus groups, internal public opinion research will drive every spending decision and every public statement the public hears from a campaign.

UPDATE:
It appears Walker is stronger in his geographic base (Milw ADI) than Green is in his geographic base (Green Bay ADI). Given the population density is Southeast, Walker is still a viable nominee, however, Green appears to be running a better statewide operation.

If the 2004 Republican Primary for the U.S. Senate serves as a lesson, then Tim Michels is the benchmark; Michels conducted a broad statewide campaign as Russ Darrow regionalized himself as a Milwaukee car dealer, and Bob Welch carried...Redgranite.

And Mistakes Were Made...

This from John Fund, together with the NY Times' David Brooks, are the two best political reporters/observers/commentators on the planet:

But that ignores the fact that every Republican president over the past half century has stumbled when it comes to naming nominees to the high court.

Consider the record:

After leaving office, Dwight Eisenhower was asked by a reporter if he had made any mistakes as president. "Two," Ike replied. "They are both on the Supreme Court." He referred to Earl Warren and William Brennan, both of whom became liberal icons.

Richard Nixon personally assured conservatives that Harry Blackmun would vote the same way as his childhood friend, Warren Burger. Within four years, Justice Blackmun had spun Roe v. Wade out of whole constitutional cloth. Chief Justice Burger concurred in Roe, and made clear he didn't even understand what the court was deciding:

"Plainly," he wrote, "the Court today rejects any claim that the Constitution
requires abortions on demand."

Gerald Ford personally told members of his staff that John Paul Stevens was "a good Republican, and would vote like one." Justice Stevens has since become the leader of the court's liberal wing.

An upcoming biography of Sandra Day O'Connor by Supreme Court reporter Joan Biskupic includes correspondence from Ronald Reagan to conservative senators concerned about her scant paper trail. The message was, in effect: Trust me. She's a traditional conservative.

From Roe v. Wade to racial preferences, she has proved not to be. Similarly, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation recalls the hard sell the Reagan White House made on behalf of Anthony Kennedy in 1987, after the Senate rejected Robert Bork.

"They even put his priest on the phone with us to assure us he was solid on everything," Mr. Weyrich recalls. From term limits to abortion to the juvenile death penalty to the overturning of a state referendum on gay rights, Justice Kennedy has
often disappointed conservatives.

Most famously, White House chief of staff John Sununu told Pat McGuigan, an aide to Mr. Weyrich, that the appointment of David Souter in 1990 would please conservatives.

"This is a home run, and the ball is still ascending. In fact, it's just about to leave earth orbit," he told Mr. McGuigan. At the press conference announcing the
appointment, the elder President Bush asserted five times that Justice Souter
was "committed to interpreting, not making the law."

The rest is history.

Except for the neocons force feeding us a war without objectives, most conservatives possess a decent understanding of history; which is why we receive this nomination with such great disappointment.

The Cause is Done

Conservatism -- to misquote Hamlet to his friend Horatio -- dear conservatism, I, I am dead.

George W. proved to us movement conservatives that the New England/Yale/Bush family bloodline of Rockefeller Republicanism was a stronger impulse than the West Texas/bootstrap/Ronald Reagan imagery we were coaxed into believing.

It was all a fraud.

Call it friendly fire; call it the mastery of Karl Rove, but conservatives have been mortally wounded. Forget 2006. We'll lose House and U.S. Senate seats. Gerrymandered House seats (such as the cockeyed WI-1 and WI-2 seats) will keep Republicans in control of both, but it will limp along as an empty majority.

Forget 2008. The White House is gone; Hillary will win; she's bigger than her Party, she'll say what she must to middle America and win, maybe, 20% of the 2004 Bush vote. Look at any big-name pollster's crosstabs, and it isn't too tough to see where erosion is likely to occur. Add-in a rabid base, on a scale that George W's Party enjoyed in 2004, and conservatives should prepare for an extended camp-out in the political wilderness.

What have we done with this 2-term Presidency? What have we passed, with this congressional majority? Did we offer voters a national debate on taxation, beyond the slogan, Keep the Tax Cuts Permanent? Did we use our power as the world's only military superpower wisely? Did we change the business of Washington, DC, or is Tom Delay, Ralph Reed, and Grover Norquist only in it for the money, as is every other K Street lobbyist?

What's next?

A good first step is for those 27 Republican U.S. Senators who wanted something more than a crony appointment to join with those 23 Democrats who voted against Justice John Roberts and sink the Harriet Miers confirmation.

Then, force the President to dust-off a Scalia, a Thomas, a Bork, and lets have a genuine debate on the role of the U.S. Supreme Court in the lives of every day Americans.

While we're at it, Mr. President, dust-off those plans to bring the troops home.

Back from the (former) U.S.S.R.

Ok, I'm back from Kiev and other former lands of the Soviet Republic. Did I miss anything?

Is President Bush still a Republican?
Is former IL Governor George Ryan in prison yet?
Is Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker still in the Republican Primary?
Any other Supreme Court Justices kick?

I'll need to get the brain synapses firing again as I fight though some serious jet lag.