This CRNC election I think we all can agree has gotten ridiculous. This most recent move threatens the future existence of the College Republican National Committee, an institution that has been riddled with corruption on and off since its inception. Big surprise. There are scum bags on both sides of this election. Big surprise. There are scum bag who care so little for the movement that they would endanger it for their political careers. Big surprise.

The basic fact remains though that Paul Gourley represents status quo corruption and Michael Davidson represents a more risky, yet bright future. Paul Gourley represents the entrenched powers. Michael Davidson represents those that would depose them. Neither man is pure evil or pure good, but there can be little doubt that on the whole the choice is a moral one, and an easy one. Paul Gourley willingly defrauded old folks and has little resume for this position and absolutely no vision.

Yet, these facts have been rehashed over and over again, but for the most part the entrenched powers do what they always do: mold, amelierate, contort, etc until they find a position that will keep them in power, because without power their whole little worlds fall apart. So let us briefly set aside Davidson v. Gourley and lets talk vision.

1. Financial Transparency - The new administration should conduct a total internal audit and completely open its books to review. It should release all of its fundraising letters and hold only to the highest moral code on fundraising matters, as most other conservative organizations do.

2. Campus Activism - The new administration should devote itself to not just being the foottroops of the GOP but also campus activism. Pushing for Academic Bill’s of Rights, opposing campus leftists, PIRGs, etc should be a priority. Winning elections isn’t the only important function of the CRs

3. Top-Down Review of the Field Program - The field program is desperately in need of a top-down review and I think that looking into hiring full time permanent regional staffers is a good, positive idea that any new administration could take up. We don’t just need 30 people in the field temporarily who will disappear and offer chapters little hope for long term growth. An infrastructure needs to be developed to foster a long term growth and development.

4. Re-Focusing The Organization on Chapters - Repeat after me… “The CRNC is not my plaything.” Its time that the CRNC refocused its efforts on chapters and NOT just sending out one box and thinking that will somehow solve the REAL problems CR chapters face. A membership database, websites for clubs, resources, training seminars these are the things that have a real impact not “running around and getting your name in the papers.”

5. A Long Term Vision of Conservatism Not Careerism - The biggest problem facing the CRs nationally is the disconnect between average CRs who care about issues, policies, etc and CR leaders in chapters, state feds, and the CRNC who care about one thing: themself. The leader of the CRNC must be able to clearly espouse the strong argument of conservatism and not be beholden to the institutional powers that corrupt so absolutely. We as CRs must quit electing these scumbags, though this will not happen overnight. It starts at the bottom tossing chapter chairs who are political whores, and then with new principled chapter chairs tossing state chairs who sell their state to the highest bidder, and finally, and only then will the CRNC be retaken. I am not saying all Gourley folks are bad folks, there are good state fed chairs who support Gourley, but there are also those who are beholden to the establishment that they can not see the corruption that has infested and choked off life in the CRNC.

I would challenge all CRs to ask ALL their elected CR leaders, “what’s your vision?” Sadly for the vast majority of them their vision is power not principle. These are the scum that must be rolled.

An up coming battle that all conservatives should follow will be over who will take over Frist’s position as Senate Majority Leader when he steps down. I have heard that Sen. Lott wants the job again. That would be the worst possible outcome. I would love to see Coburn get it, but he is still a freshman and is hated by the establishment. Any other ideas?

A Gourley supporter on the credentials committe filed against sixteen states, asking them all to be denied delegates. Developing…

Tom Coburn, a doctor by profession (which the senate wants him to stop b/c people actually upholding the citizen legislator thing makes them nervous), held a conference last week on STDs and what America can do at home and abroad to stop the spread of them. Of course Coburn’s answer was commonsense: monogamy. But this is from the Corner:

“You keep mentioning the word ‘monogamy’,” a staffer named Roland Foster recalls one young woman asking after a lecture. “What is that?”

“That’s when you have sex with only one partner,” Coburn responded.

“You mean at a time?”

With the looming battle over Bush’s Supreme Court nominees, I think it would be appropriate for us to debate and discuss who these nominees should be. Most talk and speculation has centered on our current Attorney General, which to be honest does not excite me that much from what I have heard about him. In my opinion, the best candidate Bush could pick, and who would have good chances of getting approved, would be former Sen. Fed Thompson from Tennessee. Thompson was a great Senator and is a strong constitutionalist. He is overwhelmingly popular, even with some on the left. He would have to give up his day job as an actor on “Law and Order,” but so did Reagan. Thompson also stared in one of my favorite movies, “The Hunt for the Red October.” Thompson has a great line in the movie about “things getting out of control.” Ask Mark about it if you want to hear it authentically. You always know something bad is going to happen when Marks starts throwing that quote around. One such instance was during a race that was just days away from Election Day. Mark had just gotten off the phone and immediately started mumbling the famous line. Sure enough, he had learned that the very expensive direct mail piece that had just gone out was sent to the wrong district, to voters who could not even vote for us. I new heads would roll for this and they did.
But back to my point, I can think of no other better candidate than Thompson.
It would be very difficult for the liberals to block a former member of their chamber. Any other suggestions?

I seem to be ‘blogging a storm. Just a few quick notes:

Democracy may be finished in Europe. This is in addition to what Mark commented on below vis-a-vis Canada. It was fun while it lasted.

People don’t kill people, knives kill people.

Lastly, shouldn’t we just get it over with and get microchip implants now rather than later?

China’s Muslims were brought to mind by this article. About the article I have little to say, except that it could have used some proof reading. It also doesn’t mention the Cultural Revolution, which indicates a.) Communist Toadyism and b.) Historical Ignorance. I also assume that Muslims were not persecuted as fiercely as believing Protestants and Roman Catholics following the Communist revolution. This itself had two causes: first, I conjecture that Mao’s conscience was not as bothered by Muslim teachings as he was by Christian anti-materialism; second, it’s an established fact that Mao and later rulers have worked very hard to keep native Muslims happy as a way to appease foreign Muslim governments. Sound like anyone?

Anyway, it feels like nobody is talking about this, though I think it’s really important. China is on one of Samuel Huntington’s civilizational fault-lines, between the Confucian and Muslim worlds. Not only in the obvious places like Xinjiang (territory occupied by the Turkic Uigers (Weiwuerzu)), but also well into the historical boundaries of the Han Chinese people. The picture above is from Xi’an, the original capital of China (sort of) and the terminus of the silk road. In the very heart of the city is the Grand Mosque of China, originally erected during the T’ang dynasty, and a thriving Han Chinese Muslim community. I’d share pictures, but I’m in the stone age and didn’t take digital photos.

The biggest difference, besides the obvious, between the mosque and Buddhist temples that I’ve visited? People were actually there to use it. By contrast, I had to travel to Jakarta’s Chinatown to find a “truly working” Buddhist/Confucian temple. I don’t think this is because of the Chinese Communist Party’s official atheism and ostensible ban on religion, in general people just don’t seem to care. The Muslims did though, and it was obvious, and they are winning newer Han converts, even against the backdrop of growing numbers of confessing Christians.

Where does that leave us? Expect to see more ethnic rioting, hitting closer and closer to the more developed east of China. The Chinese government will co-opt our own language from the war on terror as an excuse to violently clamp down, and indeed they already have. I am also open to the possibility of an endorsement of Islam by the powers that be as a “least worst” foreign religion, because it is in limine an anti-Western movement.

Any wholesale movement of China towards Islam, like the countries of SE Asia centuries ago, or towards Christianity, as we see in the Phillipines and beginning in South Korea, is far in the future. It also may well be the case that Chinese society exercises the “Japan Option” and opts for material comfort with the minimum of spiritual growth.*

Religion is a sensitive subject, but since this also relates to foreign affairs and policy, I would appreciate reading the opinions/observations of others. In the interest of full disclosure, I make no bones about the fact that I am myself a Christian, and that obviously colors my prayers and hopes for China’s future.

* Anyone interested in a glimpse at the spiritual state of modern Japan is encouraged to read the humanist writer Natsume Soseki along with the great Catholic writer Endo Shusaku.

CNN:

“Rove’s Right Hand”

Sara Taylor, 30, is the youngest White House political director ever. The pollster played a major role in both Bush presidential victories and is now poised to have a hand in a variety of major Senate and gubernatorial races in 2006. She began her political career as a toddler, helping her dad, Ray Taylor, a former Iowa state representative.
“The Internationalist”

Jeremy Rosner may become famous for advising not only domestic politicans, but international ones. In fact, the foreign policy guru and former Clinton National Security Council staffer just helped British Prime Minister Tony Blair win a third term. “The Internationalist” has advised eight heads of state around the world and illustrates the growing globalization of political consulting.
“The Start Up”

Like Rove, who helped George W. Bush defeat incumbent Texas Gov. Ann Richards in 1994, Jude Barry hopes to make his mark by knocking off a well-known governor. That’s right, Barry is trying to help California Controller Steve Westly take on the Terminator a.k.a. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. (But first they will have to beat savvy California Treasurer Phil Angelides in a Democratic primary). A Silicon Valley native, “The Start Up” joined Joe Trippi in helping Howard Dean to ride the Internet wave.
“The Hot Hand”

Dick Wadhams is one of the hottest hands in GOP politics. He managed South Dakota Republican John Thune’s upset of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle and is now captaining the ship for potential presidential candidate Sen. George Allen of Virginia. “The Hot Hand” has won major campaigns in three different states — Colorado, Montana and South Dakota — and is 6-1 in major races. The lifelong political junkie was a Republican Party county chairman at the tender age of 19.
“The Field General”

Michael Whouley is perhaps the most sought after operative in Democratic politics. He famously turned around Iowa for John Kerry in 2004, and in 2000, he called Al Gore to tell him he could win Florida and to retract his concession call. That prompted the recount. “The Field General” is notoriously publicity shy — we’re not even showing his picture in our gallery. Whouley got his start in local Boston politics and has since worked on five presidential campaigns.

Certain ‘bloggers in the PRC might want to lay off the K’ung-pao ji for the time being.

Pres. Chirac has basically resigned himself to defeat. In true Clintonian fashion, he makes Sunday’s referendum about “The Children”, though he also talks a fair game about national strength and pride, which was never Clinton’s strongest suit.

Chirac knows that the animating force of both the Non and Oui camps is pure nationalism, and I think the direction he goes towards the end of the interview shows he’s going to take advantage of that. Expect a slew of double-speak from him if the European Constitution fails, people in France are going to have a difficult time remembering that he had originally supported it. Also look forward to increased anti-Americanism, and since his anti-American credentials are largely unmatched, he will be able to mold this hysteria towards as yet unknown ends.

Thank God for John Wesley.

These folks may have a point, just consider “Pro-Life” Bob Casey Jr…

Jerome on the pro-life Democrat.

It reminds me of the quandry that Republicans were in over environmental issues in the early 90’s. As the pro-business party, Republicans are against regulation of business as a rule. Standing against the enviromental laws being put forward by the Democrats, Republicans were losing the debate because caring about the environment, being a steward of the earth, is a winner. So, Frank Luntz told the Republicans to say that they too were for the environment, that they too were environmentalists. The Democrats snickered, but it worked, and has served to nuetralized that issue ever since. The Democrats said, no you are not. And the Republicans replied, yes I am, I just don’t want the government to stifle economic growth through regulation.

Boom. The debate was immediately re-framed over the issue of government intrusion, and Democrats were left holding the bag– arguing that governmental regulation of the environment doesn’t deter capitalism [...]

So if a politician says I am pro-life and Democrat, lets hear them out. The Republicans will snicker and respond, no you aren’t. And if the politician responds by saying yes I am, I do not like to see abortions, but will not legislate or have the government intruding into this private decision between a woman, her family, and her doctor. That’s a politician that belongs in the Democratic Party. And boom, this is a politician that’s going to put the Republicans on the defensive.
I agree 100 percent.

The first major battle of this war over the Supreme Court is going to be over who the next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is going to be after Rehnquist retires. The two options are Thomas or Scalia. I have read some of the writings of both and I think either would be a great choice. The Democrats will have a much harder time making a case against Scalia than Thomas. Scalia, a Regan appointment was approved almost unanimously by the Senate. So, which one would be best?

I agree with Gary that the “deal” could work out advantageously for us in the big picture, but let’s look at the bad first.

Looking into my crystal ball, I can see the Dems filibustering a Supreme Court nominee. DeWine and Graham will argue that the filibustering of a Supreme Court nominee would abrogate the deal and be willing to go nuclear, but this would leave the Democrats seeming “moderate” by having 5 RINOs of the band of weasels sticking together.

I do not forsee the Dems filibustering Bush’s first Supreme Court nominee. Remember, replacing Rehnquist with a conservative will merely keep the status quo balance on the Supreme Court. The Dems will probably raise hell like they’re doing for the Bolton confirmation battle, but they will save the filibuster for his second nominee if Bush is nearing lame duckhood and without a doubt on a possible third that would result in a conservative majority.

But here is the possible silver lining. Given that the Democrats will allow a vote on Bill Pryor, Priscilla Owen, and Janice Rogers Brown for federal court, wouldn’t they be obligated to do the same when nominated for the Supreme Court? Or as Gary noted, at least have to concede Bush’s less “extreme” nominees. Granted, the stakes would be raised, I think they would have to allow it as part of good faith in the deal. Pryor may have been too outspoken on abortion, and Owen and Rogers Brown have only made rulings on parental consent laws (please correct me if I’m wrong).

So, what I would like to see then is a conservative Hispanic nominated first, Owen second and Janice Rogers Brown to clinch it. Yeah, I don’t like playing race and gender cards, but we haven’t gotten a conservative without it in the post-Roe world.

Keep on doing it until you get it right. Think it couldn’t happen here?

He’s running. One might give Rep. Ford credit for at least trying to stop the Pelosi insanity in the Democrat Party, but as Michael rightly warns us, it’s wrong to praise “moderate” Democrats too much for simply being sensible.

Now don’t get me wrong. I’m sick and tired of the “free-thinking” moderate Republicans (a.k.a. uber-RINO’s) undermining the conservative majority in the Senate. Who do these people think they are? The usual suspects - McCain, Chafee, Snow, Collins, Hagel - don’t care about compromise or the traditions of the Senate; they care solely about getting good press from the liberal media, and the way to do that is to distance yourself from the evil “right-wing” of the Republican Party. Sure enough, the Spineless Six have been hailed as bold and daring political heroes by the mainstream media: “the brave Senators who dared to defy the Bush White House and the powerful religious right.” Blah, blah, blah…. But surely real courage entails fighting for conservative principles and taking the resulting media hits, as President Bush, Majority Leader Frist and the other 48 conservative Senators have done and will continue to do.

Still, in spite of what all the conservative pundits are saying – including Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett, Laura Ingraham, Thomas Sowell – we did not get rolled in Monday’s deal with the Democrats. As a matter of fact, it’s just the opposite. The Democrats have been taken to the cleaners…only they don’t know it yet!
The problem is that no one – including our side - is looking at the big picture. What actually happened as a result of this deal is that, for all practical purposes, the filibuster as a means to obstruct judicial nominees is dead! Isn’t that what we wanted in the first place? And like Reagan winning the Cold War without firing a shot, we achieved this goal without having to initiate the so-called “nuclear option,” and thus avoided taking the huge hit from the mainstream media. The MSM was waiting with bated breath, ready to pounce on the Republicans like a cat on a cornered mouse. Can’t you just hear them repeating the mantra “…and the Republicans actually changed the rules in the middle of the debate!”
In the first place, we now will get confirmed the three nominees deemed by the Democrats to be the most “extreme”: Pricilla Owens, Janice Rodgers Brown, and William Pryor. Follow me on this. If these three are the most “extreme” - by the Democrats own definition - what does that make the others? That’s right…moderates! Does anyone really believe that the Democrats will now resurrect the filibuster to obstruct “moderate judges”? Majority Leader Frist has vowed that all of the remaining judges will be put forward for votes promptly, possibly within a week or two. Should the Democrats be foolish enough to filibuster any of these “moderates,” he has also vowed again to ignite the “nuclear option.” All the centrist Republicans who supported the agreement – including Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham – have likewise vowed to support Frist should it become necessary. Let me see…they give up the filibuster while we retain the right to use the “nuclear option” against the filibuster and have become united in our opposition to it. Sounds like a victory to me!
How about the seven Democratic “centrist” senators? I doubt very seriously that any of them would support a filibuster at this stage of any kind, most especially against the remaining “moderate” judges. Guess what. These people have been looking for a way to dissociate themselves from the Teddy Kennedy wing of their party… and now they have found it. Without these seven senators, the Democrats couldn’t filibuster Attila the Hun!
And don’t you see how foolish the Democrats are looking already? What was all the fuss about Pricilla Owens in the first place that they had to block her for four years? This so-called “extremist” will be confirmed today with a sizeable number of their own party voting for her! That’s some “extremist!” In other words, they’ve proven again for all to see that you can’t trust their judgment on who is really “extremist” and who isn’t. Like the little boy who cried wolf, their use of the label “extremist” has a definite “hollow ring” to it.
Let’s recap: the Republicans have effectively eliminated the filibuster without taking the huge media hit, while letting it be known that they retain the threat of the “nuclear option,” with their seven senators on record as supporting Frist should the Democrats be foolish to try the filibuster again. In addition, the Republicans appear as the “moderates” in the debate, willing to try compromise to avoid a Senate showdown. As an added side benefit, John McClain – by taking the lead on this and being so willing to side with the Democrats – has shown once again that he can’t be trusted and for all practical purposes has committed political suicide. Can anyone imagine him winning a single Republican primary in 2008? As usual the media has got it wrong again, making McCain the winner and Frist the loser.

Not bad, not bad at all.

Charles Ravenel lost a close primary to my preffered candidate Jim DeMint, but Ravenell was also a solid guy I wouldn’t mind having in the Senate. Well with Lindsay Graham wondering off the boat again Ravenell has started publicly criticizing Graham. Read more here at RedState. We’re not going to lose this seat and I would love to see Ravenel in the Senate and I think it would keep some more of these Red State RINOs in line. (Graham isn’t bad per se, but he ain’t fantastic so it might be worth making an example of him).

This extremely disturbing article from the Washington Post notes that an Italian writer living in New York has been indicted in Italy for “stirring up hate” against Muslims, under a charge of defamation, by writing a book that stated:

In “La Forza della Ragione,” Fallaci wrote that terrorists had killed 6,000 people over the past 20 years in the name of the Koran and said the Islamic faith “sows hatred in the place of love and slavery in the place of freedom.”

An Italian Justice had this to say

“In Europe we are seeing the birth of a movement that is looking to silence those who don’t follow a single mindset, within which it is forbidden to speak ill of Islam, of homosexuals or of the children of homosexuals,” Castelli was quoted as saying in an interview with Radio Padania.

SO the light of liberty grows dimmer in the Old West too, these are dark days for Western Society indeed.

Sources on the Hill expect Bolton to come to a vote on the floor by the end of the week, but the prognosis is not good as even Sen. Thune (R?-SD) has suggested he’s leary of Bolton.

Cripes! What is in the water up on Capitol Hill? I can’t imagine the UN is a very popular institution up in South Dakota, and Thune is running like Bolton like he’s cryptonite. I honestly will be more angry if Bolton goes down then about the “Deal.” Any thoughts?

China has sent a strong signal to Japan that the issue of Prime Minister Koizumi visiting a shrine which honors Japanese war dead (including such heros as the late General Tojo) is not over with, even if the media thought it was. It canceled at the last minute a meeting with Koizumi and China’s top problem-solving envoy who then promptly took a trip to that geo-political hotspot Mongolia.

The excellent blog, Dawn’s Early Light has a good bit up about China’s rising nationalism and has invited others to comment on what this means and more importantly why China is doing what it is doing. I’ll bite.

It would seem that the argument that I have used before, that China’s leadership is in thrall to its increasingly nationalistic youth, does not apply here. There was no domestic pressure or call for such a move. While it is true that Chinese youth are nationalistic to the extreme, they seem to have settled down in recent weeks and reverted to merely hating the Japanese instead of calling for their blood. Why just this last Sunday I was enjoying a walk in the park near Bei Da with a sweet, young Chinese girl when she casually mentioned to me how much she hates the Japanese. For years the CCP has feed school children with fascist rhetoric and now it does indeed have a monster to feed, but like I said this does not apply to the latest move by Hu Jintao.

Another option is that Hu Jintao and the Chinese leadership in the upper echelons of the CCP have themselves become increasingly nationalistic. To be honest this is a real possibility. The Chinese have been kicked around for a while now. First by the Europeans, then by the Japanese, then by a sick German philosophy that damn near ruined the country, and finally they have been held in check by American military might. Hu Jintao may be succumbing to the hype and glamour surrounding China’s rise that he has been blinded from reality and envisions himself and the current leadership structure as Chinese patriots standing up to Japan. Let’s all hope I am very wrong.

I think this third option is the most likely one. Hu Jintao is not a stupid man. The current Chinese leadership structure is not full of stupid men. I have a hard time believing that the idiots I converse with daily about Japan on the streets have emotional equivalents in the CCP Central Committee. This was a warning to Japan, issued directly by Hu Jintao to Koizumi. Hu sent a very well known and respected Chinese negotiator, Vice Premier Wu Yi, who is known as a “problem-solver”. A round of behind the scenes negations regarding the shrine visits failed to produce any results. Beijing was informed and Vice Premier Wu was promptly withdrawn as punishment for Tokyo’s failure to bend to Beijing’s will.

Basically China has informed Japan, “We will play the “Shrine card” whenever and however we choose.” China is playing with fire, but fire can be a powerful weapon. Koizumi is right not bend on the shrine issue. He has already apologized for Japan’s war crimes, making this the 18th time that Japan has officially apologized to the world for being right bastards. This was never about Japan’s war crimes, it was never about the textbooks, nor the shrine visits. These are all things that the “by jingo”, ignorant Chinese get fired up about. So whenever Beijing needs to rein in Japanese influence it will unleash the hoard of fired-up idiots to chant and shout about thing that don’t really matter that much.