He’s done it again…..

Mr. Biden is equally skeptical—albeit in a slightly more backhanded way—about Mr. Obama. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

New York Observer

This is the same guy just a few months back that said southerners would support him because Delaware was a slave state and also stated that “you cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”

Now, I frankly could care less that he said any of this because I believe freedom of speech is exactly that, however, the PC Nazi’s would go absolutely nuts had these same comments come from a Republican. I predict that since these remarks came from Biden, they will once again get glossed over like the other stuff. Additionally, the fact that this man makes these kind of remarks when running for President displays a complete lack of intellect and common sense.  Thus, he has no business sitting in the White House, where he has little chance of ending up anyhow.

Georgia Lt. Governor Casey Cagle, whom this blog endorsed last year, has not wasted anytime setting a new agenda for Georgia’s public schools.

A GRADE of “A” should be awarded to Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle for his proposal to allow entire school systems to operate under the “charter” concept, which comes close to the ideal for “home rule” and is very much opposite to the way the state has most recently been talking and heading.

To her considerable credit, State Schools Superintendent Kathy Cox appeared with Cagle when he revealed his plan and threw her support to it.

It only makes sense, Mrs. Cox said, to allow schools that have achieved the various state testing standards to be given more authority on how and where they will spend money from the state. Not to mention, she might have added, how to spend the money from local taxpayers.

“The missing piece for me,” she said, “and one of the things that I think really separates our charter schools from other public schools, is the fact that the people that are responsible for the results — the principals, the teachers, the students and the parents — in charter schools … have control over the resources.”

This is, as Cagle said, “really all about local control, the ability for teachers, principals and superintendents to come together, along with board members, and … have the flexibility to design an educational curriculum around the needs of individual students as well as communities.”

GIVEN THAT charter schools are few and far between in Georgia and comparatively new (there are now 58, with 17 being high schools), tossing out a proposal to allow entire systems — city or county — to basically “opt out” of most state mandates and blaze their own trails … so long as standards are met or exceeded … is pretty revolutionary stuff.

Lt. Governor Casey Cagle is the front-runner for the Governor’s office in 2010 to succeed Governor Perdue. In part because of proposals like this one. With Governor Perdue soon to be a lame duck and Speaker Richardson hamstrung by recent ethics charges, Lt. Governor Casey Cagle has free reign to set the agenda in Georgia for the next 4 years.

And may I make a prediction. After 8 years of Hillary, God forbid, look for Governor Cagle to redeem Georgia’s tarnished reputation for producing Presidents.

Today we remember a man and economist who contributed much to the ideas of the free market and individual liberty. Ben Stein had this to say about Friedman;

“Friedman was always discussed in tones of awe. Among a class of brilliant men and women, he stood out. He was gifted in analysis, fearless and in control in mathematics and statistics, able to assimilate massive amounts of data and make theories from them. Beyond that, far beyond that, he had a vision of what was important in the world, and that was freedom. Freedom of thought, freedom of action, free markets, free societies, free man and woman. Friedman had seen that freedom brought happiness and statism breought misery, mass killing, and humiliation. He preached from that good gospel all of his life.” 

Ok so now who is the candidate for 2008. I have limited it to what I consider tier A (Giulani, Romney, McCain) and tier B candidates (Newt, Brownback, Huckabee) because I seriously doubt the tier C candidates (Tancredo, Ron Paul, Tommy Thompson, etc) have a prayer.

Fortune Magazine just did a piece on Newt Gingrich which I thought was very informative and a fair evaluation of him, pointing out his strengths and weaknesses.  I spent most of today at a buddy’s house just hanging out and being that he is a political geek like myself we of course had a lengthy discussion of the ‘08 Presidential candidates.  He is solidly behind Gingrich, should he decide to enter the race, and I am thinking that will probably be my leaning as well based on the other candidates we already know are in.

Yeah, Newt has his baggage, no doubt, but point out one of them who doesn’t.  And what’s Hillary going to say about his divorces when she stood by and allowed her husband to have extra-marital affairs for her own political expediency?  His ethics charges were dropped and I think from hearing him speak in different forums, Gingrich has realized over the years some of the mistakes he made as Speaker.

What I really like about Gingrich is his ability to communicate with the American people in such a way that he allows them to understand not just what issues are important to our country, but why they are important, something W has failed to do since day one.  He’s already demonstrated that he knows what matters most to the American people, as indicated by his leadership in the Republican Revolution of 1994, and he’s dead on about all the mistakes Bush has made over the last six years and why the Republicans lost both majorities.  If he were preside over the White House with the same message and values that swept the GOP into the majority in 94 then he could revitalize a broken party.

I will not support McCain under any circumstances, even if he is our nominee.  I don’t think Giuliani can win the nomination because of his social liberalism.  Romney has caught the Kerry Flip Flop bug and I can’t see Brownback winning the general election.  Ideally, Ron Paul is my preferred candidate and I will most likely vote for him in the primary next year if he is still in the race, but he is an ultra long shot to win the nomination.

I think Newt might be the one we need.

Fortune

For all those curious about the presidential try-outs that were the National Review Institute, I’ll leave a few of my thoughts:

• Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich were the stars of the show
• There is zero excitement behind Huckabee. Saturday night he spent twenty minutes walking around the foyer by himself, no serious presidential candidate would be left unmobbed for twenty minutes.
• People wanted more out of Romney. He was smart, pro-business, and has the presidential look but there was no fire in the belly. Nothing that would motivate folks to get out there and fight
• At the Saturday night session when Jonah Goldberg asked which GOP Presidential candidate was “unacceptable” there was a roar from the crowd about 75% McCain and 25% Giulani. I thought this was a surprising show of weakness for McCain, who made no appearance nor any surrogate appearance at the event.
• Brownback, Giulani, McCain all skipped out on the event and failed to even have a presence there. This was a very interesting development. NR is fairly hospitable to Giulani due to NR’s HQ in New York City and McCain has spent a lot of time trying to reach out to conservatives. The one who missed the biggest opportunity was Brownback, his absence made little sense.

I wrote a story in this Friday’s issue of The Bulletin that covered a new zoning survey released by the University of Pennsylvania.

The Situation:

The survey compiled a database of zoning and land use lands in 227 communities in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area and discovered the following:

• The densest areas experienced the least amount of housing cost increase over the last decade.
• The suburbs were more regulated than the City of Philadelphia (Chester County was the most, Delaware County the least).
• 57% of the surveyed communities experienced housing cost increase above the rate of inflation over the last decade.
• 60% of the surveyed communities had two or more forms of approval required for a development project.

What we can infer from the study:

• Excessive land use and zoning regulation deters some developers, places additional cost on consumers.
• Environmental and open space preservation drives up values of surrounding properties, reduces supply of available land while demand increases.
• Communities must choose between the competing interests of environmental and open space preservation and affordable housing.

I investigated Chester and Delaware counties and found the following:

• Chester County allocates 1/3rd of the cost for an open space project, municipalities and land trusts fork the rest. Delaware County only provides 5% of a given project.
• Chester County allocates $13 million a year for open space preservation (using property taxes to drive up the value of properties); Delco only allocated $820,000 in ‘06.
• Half of Chester’s 73 municipalities levy taxes earmarked for open space preservation.
• Delaware County hired urban planners for its 27 southeastern municipalities in 2002 to update their zoning codes, which were decades out of date, thereby reducing the amount of variances developers needed.

The Dilemma:

As conservatives, we’re against excessive regulation and rely on market competition to drive costs. Land trusts, conservationists, non-profits, foundations, and private entities can raise their own money to preserve open space without taxpayer subsidies.

However, when housing becomes more affordable, Democrats from Philadelphia move in and continue to vote Democrat– as was the case of the massive exodus of Philadelphians into the surrounding counties during the 90’s.

Are we fostering our own decline in the electorate?

Related:

The Count Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania released their 2007 agenda, calling for the General Assembly to give counties the authority to levy a realty transfer tax (a property sale) for the purpose of open space preservation. I wrote about that here.

Cantor:scandal, iraq, and spending hurt the Republican brand and it was the loss of the brand that really hurt the GOP in 06

Rich Lowry asks Cantor a question about Pres Bush possibly caving on key issues and, of course, Cantor dodges it as much as possible. Though he does focus mostly on the War in Iraq.

Another question was about the GOP capitulation on the ‘100 Hours’ agenda. Boehner defended this by saying only 3 republicans voted for all 6 proposals.

Jeb is defending George heavily and is pushing the blame to congress. His speech is on the wonders of conservative principles. The “bedrock belief in limited government”

I bet many people are currently wishing he had a name other than Bush because he would be a great candidate.

“Learning how to say no in Washington is the first step to recovery” - Jeb

He also said that his nickname is Veto Carliogne. B/c he voted 5000+ pork items which amassed nearly 2bn in savings for the state.

90,000 veto for a program called “Where you at”

He cut taxes all eight years of his governorship.

“We’ve become too timid. People don’t want photo ops. They want meaningful change”

Jeb pushed entitlement reform.

The past 10 minutes of Jeb and the questions about immigration have been coming hard and fast. He is very open borders though articulating it in a unique way that’s fairly pervasive.

He is clearly attacking Tom Tancredo and the pro-enforcement camp. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Rumors are swirling here at National Review Institute Conservative Summit that Mike Huckabee will announce his Presidential run here tommorow at 10AM

John o’sullivan has been giving a talk on foreign policy and it has some good points I’ll quickly highlight.

3 Threats
* Islamic radicalism
* Transnational progressives
* China

Islamic radicalism is winning in Europe but losing worldwide, and if we keep the fight we will win

In 50 years, 75% of world GDP will be divided between China, India, and the US which actually works to fight transnational progressivism. These new powers will not want to give up their influence to transnational progressives. In some ways the EU will be the only pro-transnational entity.

But even the EU will no longer be able to fight for abortion on demand, gay rights, etc because of the growing muslim influence.

O’Sullivan also had a great comment that we suffer from “cultural masochism”

Rivkin is now talking about the need to portray Islamic fundamentalism as antithetical to human nature. He argues part of that being democracy promotion

Ralph Reed claims 24% of the electorate are “religous conservatives.” Reed is talking about how we didn’t lose becayse we were pro-life but because we are pro-big government.Reed is making some great points, so sad he is compromised by Abramoff.

Ryan Sager is speaking now about the concept of fusionism and how Republicans won’t win until they find the appeal to libertarians again. It seems to me these guys really don’t disagree per se.

Now the big differences come out, as Ryan Sager argues we are on the wrong side of the gay marriage issue. “The biggest civil rights issue of our day.” Reed is responding by talking about a larger agenda that will appeal to libertarians but is talking about gay marriage as the defining part of this argument.

It is interesting point that gay marriage is such a divider. I would like to see polling on how many libertarians vote actually on gay marriage and not economic issues.

I think a point could be made that the pandering of the FMA as a pure political tool is definitely a mistake (politically and morally) but is this an issue that really hurts our party?

Reed talks about the fact that it was a judicial fiat that brought marriage to the forefront. Sager responds that it still was a wedge issue, and demeanizing homosexuals to gin up more evangelical, african americans, and latinos.

One questioner brought up the latino vote and if the family issues weren’t the best way to win them over. Sager responds that libertarianism will win them over. I think this is perhaps Sagers weakest point so far. Reed is talking about the success of the GOP with hispanics in Georgia.

Sager says success was due to school choice not gay marriage or abortion.

Uh oh Terri Schiavo comes up…

Reed lays the smack pointing out that the younger cohort may be pro-gay marriage but they aren’t married yet. But his best point was that the reason we lost all the swing cohorts in 2006 was the war in Iraq and not gay marriage, which is supported strongly by the exit polls.

Reed talks about Casey, Heath Shuler, etc

The next panel is on “is small government a big joke” and prof olasky is currently discussing why we need to not reject compassionate conservatism just because the Bush administration has screwed it up so bad.

One of his strongest points has been how much more effective small non-profits were at katrina relief compared to the Feds. He advocates a charitable 500 tax credit whereby you direct 500 to a non-profit of your choice. Interesting idea.

Paul Ryan and Pat Toomey also spoke on the panel and have spent a lot of time talking about why small government wins. Pat shared that a recent gallup poll showed 61% of americans said big government is the biggest threat to america. (The other options being big labor, and big business).

He also noted that the C4G poll on the eve of the election showed that the american populous thought the democrats were the small government party. Ugh.

Another interesting point Pat is currently making is that middle class entitlements are “the biggest driver for big government”

This has been a great conference so far up next is a debate between Ralph Reed v Ryan Sager on where do religous conservatives belong in the party

Let’s all ignore his baggage for a second, he is here at the NR Institute event and he is burning the place down.

He really has the intellectual chutzpah that conservatives have lacked since Bush’s presidency

Update: “Consulting class” has destroyed the GOP. As a part time consultant, I couldn’t agree more

From The Hotline

Ringing In The New Cycle
CTBS partner Mindy Finn is credited as a key player in elevating the presence of the GOP online. As ex-Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) Dir. Of New Media and Technology in 2006. Finn oversaw the campaign’s text messaging initiative targeting women. Although the initiative received “a not surprising, but pleasant response” Finn says the greatest opportunity for campaigns to utilize the technology in ‘08 will be in practical grassroots. Aristotle’s Peter Kelly adds that new inventions, such as the iPhone, will "not change things radically, but will accelerate the adoption" of mobile usage in campaigns.

Though many on this blog and across the right-wing blogosphere are already opposed to supporting the NRSC due to its sliming of Steve Laffey in favor of uber-RINO Lincoln Chafee, N.Z. Bear at the TruthLaidBear has drawn up a pledge that is getting support from many blogs.

The gist of the pledge is that the grassroots community will oppose any Republican Senator running for re-election in 2008, and the NRSC if it chooses to support the candidates, should the Senator support a resolution, whether it’s binding or not, expressing opposition to the plan to send more troops to engage the enemy in Iraq.  The main Senators in question are Susan Collins from Maine, Gordon Smith from Oregon, and Norm Coleman from Minnesota.  To see what General Petraeus had to say about any such resolution, and its effect on both our troops and the enemy, you can read my earlier post.
I’ve already signed the pledge.  You can too by going here.

You can read all about it here.

I’m actually surprised. Though nobody gave Kerry a snowball’s chance in hell of garnering the Democratic nomination a second time for the Presidential race in 2008, I was sure that his pompous arrogance, his insistence that he deserved the Presidency, gosh-darn it!, would propel him to run regardless of what his advisors and friends said.

Oh, and as is the current popular thing to do amongst Democrats in DC, he renounced his vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq in 2002. How great to know that some of our elected officials will wholeheartedly support a war effort, only to retract their support at any time given the political atmosphere. Sure makes me feel really comfortable about our leaders in Washington.

From General Petraeus’s confirmation hearing to be the new top dog in the Iraq Theater:

SEN. LIEBERMAN: You also said in response to a question from Senator McCain that adoption of a resolution of disapproval, which is contemplated by our colleagues and probably will be on the Senate floor — disapproval of the new way ahead in Iraq — would not, if I remember your words, have a beneficial effect on our troops in Iraq. But I want to ask you, what effect would Senate passage of a resolution of disapproval of this new way ahead that you embrace — what effect would it have on our enemies in Iraq?

GEN. PETRAEUS: Sir, as I stated in the opening statement, this is a test of wills, at the end of the day. And in that regard, speaking purely as a military commander, if confirmed — albeit one who, frankly, does understand enormously and treasures the value of free and open debate, free speech, who has put himself in harm’s way to protect those great features of our democracy — nonetheless, having said that, a commander in such an endeavor would obviously like the enemy to feel that there’s no hope.

SEN. LIEBERMAN: And a resolution — a Senate-passed resolution of disapproval for this new strategy in Iraq would give the enemy some encouragement, some feeling that — well, some clear expression that the American people were divided.

GEN. PETRAEUS: That’s correct, sir.

Shamelessly excerpted from a longer excerpt at RedState, go check it out.

Do you see President George W. Bush as a conservative Republican in the mode of Ronald Reagan? (Republicans Only)
Yes 11%
No 77%
Undecided 12%

 Link

This race looks more and more like Romney vs. McCain… Discuss…