Yes We Can, but...

Viewers of yesterdays airing of The Daily Show were treated to a rare sight, President Obama being defensive on his own turf. Entertainer Jon Stewart maintained a modicum of "professional" impartiality by putting the President through the requisite (given how poorly the country has performed under his leadership) ringer of loaded questions. Interestingly, Obama didn't rise to the challenge but instead exhibited the same behaviors and emotions of every other politician who faced the stinging satire of Stewart: awkwardness, defensiveness, and a general uncoolness. Uncoolness was a condition that was never attributed to Obama before, but henceforth it will always have a sofa in his living room of a psyche and persona. Even more damaging to Obama the political brand was the damage he inflicted on his own iconic, although stolen at Cesar Chavez's expense, political motto. Stewart asked the President whether he would be able to use Yes We Can again in the 2012 election. Obama answered stiltedly: "Yes we can but...but..." At this moment the audience and Stewart had began laughing, while Obama continued to attempt to answer the question, but no one really cared at that moment. The damage had been done, and everyone knew it. There is a gift wrapped ad blurb just ready for use in two years time.

Maybe, just maybe, the curtain has finally been drawn on the Wizard. Image and perception were Obama's twin pillars to the idea of Obama the President. Republicans have been trying to change that perception, but nothing has been quite as effective as what the President did to himself on Comedy Central.

The (Lisa) Murkowski name is mud

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, recent loser of the Alaskan GOP senate primary has decided to break her promise to respect the will of Republican primary voters, win or lose. The daughter of a prominent Alaskan political family, Murkowski is now running as a write-in candidate, albeit one with alot of money on hand.



The logic behind Murkowski's decision may be based on the results of Alaska's GOP and Democratic senatorial primaries. Murkowski lost to "tea party" candidate Joe Miller by just 2,006 votes. The final tally was a razor thin 55,878 - 53,872. On the Democratic side, Scott McAdams beat out two other candidates for the honor of losing to either Murkowski or Miller. Cumulatively, the Democratic primary drew 30,000 voters. Murkowski's ticket to victory in the general election will obviously be to woo a fraction of Alaskan Democrats who, in the face of certain defeat, may opt to vote for the more moderate and known Murkowski.

As a moderate myself, I have no problems with Murkowski. Yet this extremely selfish act shows where Murkowski's allegiance really lies, not in the party she was a lifelong member of, nor the wishes of the very people she once claimed to represent. In this aspect she is no different than Charlie Crist of Florida, another former Republican turned independent. It is indeed sobering to note that Charlie Crist has announced he will caucus with the Democrats if elected. It is any one's guess at this point what Murkowski will do if she manages to beat Miller in November. Perhaps she will become a Republican Joe Lieberman. Who knows. Both Murkowski and Crist may satisfy their base political ambitions but in the process they will also live up to the dangerous, cynical perception some tea party activists hold of mainstream Republicans, that in the end they are politicians devoid of principle.

Castle(s) and coasters

I must admit feeling a bit of dissapointment at the news of Congressman Mike Castle's defeat at the hands of insurgent "tea party" candidate Christine O'Donnell. Since first hearing about him around the time Beau Biden decided not to run for his father's former Senate seat, I developed a respect for a man who had won election after election in a state whose Democratic bonafides include twice voting against Abraham Lincoln. Twice!. I admire Republicans like Castle, who prosper, and even thrive, in political environments they have no business succeeding in. Candidates like Castle, in my opinion, can teach valuable lessons on how to effectively reach voters of all stripes. Better yet, Castle was about as close to a political sure thing as you can get, with a 10 point lead over Democratic senatorial candidate Chris Coons. Candidate Castle would have been alot like a free spot in an electoral bingo card. With O'Donnell, the GOP now fields a candidate that can be at best described as a wild card.

Yet the wishes of Delaware GOP primary voters cannot be denied, and the actions of the Republican Senatorial Committee immediately following O'Donnell's upset win were in extremely bad taste. Threats of withholding even cursory support for O'Donnel is at best unhelpful to the GOP's own cause. Mainstream Republicans must make efforts to create an inclusive environment for the Tea Party phenomenon, as this will help avoid the GOP's worst fears, a fracturing of the right of center voting bloc. O'Donnell won her contest fair and square, and as such, she deserves all the support the GOP establishment can muster. By the morning after Castle's defeat, the GOP establishment had changed it's tune: O'Donnell's campaign was pledged the maximum monetary amount the RSC is allowed to give.

The dynamics of the Delaware senate race have changed. O'Donnell is presently running 11 points behind Coons. As a result, the GOP will be greatly disinclined to invest much more time or money on O'Donnell. There are simply too many other races with better prospects for GOP victories, and it is only prudent to spend precious campaign dollars accordingly. Should O'Donnell find a way to narrow the gap, establishment support should increase. Initially though, O'Donnell will have to lean heavily on additional Tea Party support, monetary and otherwise. Right leaning voters all along the spectrum must appreciate the gravity of the November elections. It must be remembered that Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin are both Republicans, and the party will require the efforts of the likes of both to achieve the results all right leaning voters are hoping for. At this time, Christine O'Donnell awaits Mike Castle's endorsement. Initial reports are that he intends to remain neutral in the upcoming campaign. That would be, given Castle's stature among Delaware Republicans, simply unacceptable. His neutrality could be the difference between 9 new Republican senators and 10. I hope he doesn't make O'Donnell, and the rest of us, wait too much longer.

Brewer The Icon ?

The latest Rasmussen poll on the Brewer/Goddard gubernatorial race has, at least on a preliminary basis, proven my previous post wrong. The governor's 'Jan Brewer' moment didn't cost her in the poll. Rather, she has actually gained 2 points during the week following the debate. Why is this the case?

Rasmussen's opinion is that Arizonans may have had a dim view of Brewer's debate performance, but that locals also resent the negative attention the governor received from out of state pundits and critics. The old circle the wagon effect ? Interesting, but I wonder if Brewer is also benefiting from a phenomena that, in my opinion, helped President Obama on the trail in '08: icon status. Icon status affords a candidate the ability to transcend their glaring deficiencies as candidates, because voters do not pay much attention to the actual candidates themselves, but rather the idea(l) that the candidate has come to embody. President Obama was Hope and Change, while Gov. Brewer has become a figurehead for the resistance against the Federal overreach. I must admit I was tickled by the image of Jan the Riveter. I didn't think GOP'ers were capable of such slick iconography. Perhaps it is just a natural response to how political marketing will be carried out in the Age of Obama.

I realize it may be considered controversial by some to dare compare Gov. Brewer and President Obama. Understand, my comparison is based solely on how icon status applied to thier respective campaigns, not political or oratorical skill. That being said, Brewer, given the local political environment, has generally run the kind of campaign that will lead to her reelection. Fate has also awarded her a notoriety that most state governors simply don't enjoy. Who can name the governors of Utah or Maine ?. Exactly.

Meet Councilman Phil Davison (R) of Minerva Village, Ohio

If Pictures speak a thousand words, this video speaks....EPIC WIN!

Debating Candidate Brewer

Does one debate define a political candidate? Probably not. Will Jan Brewer lose in November?. Again, the answer is: probably not. Then again, Governor Brewer is not the prototypical gubernatorial candidate. Brewer, a Republican, inherited the governorship while serving as Secretary of State because Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano went on to bigger and better things. This was a duly constitutional ascension to power, but while constitutional legitimacy is one thing, kitchen table legitimacy is another.

Signing AZ SB 1070 into law gave Gov. Brewer instantanious notoriety and acclaim among Republicans here and nationwide. Brewer has been basking in the glow of sometimes sympathetic and frequent national media attention. She as handled the spotlight well, acquitting her case for 1070 and her candidacy ably until ... the vague desert beheading statement she made and, especially, her recent horrid debate performance. All signs say that the Governor will not face AG Goddard in another debate. In my opinion this is a mistake.

Gov. Brewer should not allow the debate to become a millstone. Goddard, 20 points behind on the Rasmussen polling of the race, now has an effective angle to attack the Governor with. Brewer need not wipe the floor with Goddard in a second debate. Indeed, Goddard's debate performance was just passable, but was made to appear better than it was by Brewer's brain cramp. But she must face him again, and simply deliver a clean performance, one I am certain she is capable of delivering.

SB 1070 gave the Governor national standing that may prove valuable to her in the future. Perhaps, like Napolitano, she could become a cabinet secretary for a future President. However, her debate debacle, coupled with her retraction and clarification of her claim that headless bodies were found in the Arizona desert have cast new doubts on her candidacy, and, dare I say, her faculty, while simultaneously giving Terry Goddard what any politician down 20 points could hope for, a seam of opportunity. If Brewer follows conventional political wisdom and avoids the possible risks of another debate, her 20 point lead may very well become a 10 point lead, or worse. While Gov. Brewer may be able to ride this year's Republican wave to ultimate victory, should she fail to debate Goddard again, the lasting image of her candidacy will be the one she most earnestly wants us all to forget.

Enough is Enough

I am tired of the political demagoguery about a state law that addresses the serious human/economic/environmental/political/legal travesty my state of Arizona is being subjected to. I am tired of the widespread willful ignorance of the most vocal, mass media covered opponents of Senate bill 1070 who mouth out lie after lie after lie.

Arizona simply can no longer afford illegal immigration. Our state is a billion dollars in the red, our delicate southern ecology is being relentlessly trampled upon by thousands upon thousands of illegals who litter the desert with human waste, plastic, clothing, and other detritus produced of a unregulated exodus. In flusher economic times, Arizona could better absorb the 2 billion dollar cost of illegal immigration, an amount that, by their own best estimates, open borders advocates say that the economic benefits of illegal immigrants matches. I would gladly take back every lost life, and every despoiled acre of Organ Pipe desert, in return for the supposed cost-neutral proposition of illegal immigration.

It is utterly intellectually insulting that those who oppose Arizona Senate law 1070 on "humanitarian" concerns are perfectly willing to allow people, out of economic desperation, to cross a merciless desert, too often in the supposed care of human traffickers. People are being left to the tender mercies of "Coyotes" and drug dealers, and the Sonoran Desert, all in the name of cheap labor here, and billions in remittances for the countries they come from. It is a great system for open borders advocates, both political and economic. The illegal immigrant assumes 100% of the personal risk involved in crossing and living here, while so called Raza proponents and some Democratic allies salivate at the prospect of these people's children being future voting foot soldiers for their racial/ideological revolution. The same must be said for the employers in this country who willfully hire illegal immigrants. These employers are just as much to blame as anyone else for this illegal process, and as a result, internal enforcement must go hand in hand with border security.

Illegal immigration is an affront to the process of legal naturalization and American citizenship in general. My wife Hershey obtained her Green Card by filling out the required forms, and paying the required fees. It wasn't always fun, but we went through the process. It never dawned on us the obfuscate the law, but then again, the Philippines doesn't have the benefit of a long land border with the United States. American citizenship and legal residency is too precious a privilege to be allowed to be cheapened by the exigencies of racial politics and illicit economic benefits.

I want to close on some ideas I support in response to this issue. There is an obvious need for an increased legal quota for unskilled labor in the US. Instead of allowing people to cross a desert, why not double or triple the amount of seasonal workers allowed into the country?. A viable pathway to legalisation must be created for the 12 - 20 million illegals that already live among us, mostly in peace. On the enforcement side, all future illegal aliens found here should be deported. All employers who willfully hire illegal aliens should be fined and imprisoned. The border fence, whether made of steel or a virtual one comprised of sensors, should be completed. This fight isn't against a particular race or people. It is against a shadowy process that has been allowed to go on for far too long. We are angry. We are tired. Arizona is under attack, but this state has gone too far already. President Obama and Congress can either lend us a hand or get out of the way.

Just Say Yes....Again

All of us Arizonans have a big job to do this Tuesday. In the first statewide election of the year, our state needs our help to get itself out of the budgetary morass it finds itself in.

As a Republican, I am always skeptical of government asking the people for more money. Nothing comes from nothing, and the fact is, should Prop. 100 pass, you and me will be paying the price. Therefore, in light of the recent and blatant cash grab by the city of Phoenix (2% tax on grocery items), it is with some reluctance that I support this Proposition, and ask for your support as well. What tilted my opinion in favor for 100 is the three year sunset clause built into thr propsition, and the fact that the state, under Gov. Brewer, has taken huge steps in the reduction of state spending. All my conservative government budget instincts aside, spending cuts alone won't close the budget gap alone.

There is a reason we all live in Arizona. We all call the Grand Canyon State home because, in our own individual cases, Arizona has been good to us. This Tuesday, Arizona desperately needs the 5 minutes it will take for us to go to the polls and vote in favor of Propsition 100.

Just Say 'Yes' this Tuesday.

It is often said that all politics is local. This Tuesday in Metro Phoenix, the truth of this political axiom will be played out by a select few. While American participation in elections is notoriously low, those of us who vote for budget overrides and city mayoral ships is downright minuscule. This constitutes rule by the few over the largely uninterested masses, even as these 'obscure' local elections have greater effect, by virtue of their close proximity to the voters.

Nothing is more local than the school districts we send children in our communities to. In my case, Phoenix Union High School District is asking for a redo of an earlier override defeat, a defeat I would partially attribute to voter confusion in my district. The Osborn Elementary override, which passed, took up the entire front page of the ballot due to it's being dispplayed in both English and Spanish. The PUHSD override, placed on the backside of the ballot, recieved fewer votes in total. Apparently, those who wished to oppose the measure had little trouble flipping the ballot around and voting no.

This time around, the PUHSD override will stand alone, and it will hopefully fair better as a result. These overrides will not cost taxpayers any additional money, but should they be defeated, taxpayer savings will be largely negligible, while the school districts will be left with millions in budget cuts. Please join me this Tuesday in supporting public education.

Joe vs. The Senator

Joe “the plumber” Wurzelbacher lashed out at John McCain on the stump and on Hannity, alleging that McCain “is no public servant”. Has McCain the candidate really changed much in the year since Wurzelbacher campaigned for the Senator? Is this episode emblematic of the fickleness of the support for GOP candidates by outsiders like Wurzelbacher, or more specifically, of the fickleness of Joe himself? All whose politics lean right should hope for the latter.