Archive for November, 2007

A little late night YouTube debate analysis…

Posted by: Jason | November 29th, 2007 · 4:37 AM

(image: msnbc)

Well… at least the snowman didn’t come out.

So I’m going to make this short and sweet because it’s 2:08 AM, I just finished watching the CNN YouTube debate via recorded programming, and I desperately need sleep. Let’s take this candidate by candidate, best performance to worst.

John McCain: He ties Huckabee for best performance of the night. I only place John McCain highest because he attempted to interject himself into a few more conversations. Huck is a bit too humble to do such a thing. Plus, he lashed out at Ron Paul, and that scores him points with me. Sure, it’s still McCain, so let’s not get excited about a good debate performance, but he commanded the foreign policy discussion and made a few choice statements.

Mike Huckabee: Conservatives can argue all they want about his economic record, and with some merit, but Mike Huckabee is by far the most well-liked and able candidate on that stage. If the choice is about likability and competence, Mike wins as usual. Best one liners (which make headlines and show savvy political skill), defended charges well, overall good job on a week he needed it. Mike passes Romney in Iowa within 2 weeks because of this night.

Duncan Hunter: No, he didn’t do a good job at the debate. I’m simply placing him 3rd because he didn’t hurt anything (as if he has any support). How many times can we hear the word “battalion”, the phrase “China is cheating on trade”, and the same old answers to every question? Why is this man still running?

Tom Tancredo: Same deal. Why is Tancredo even running? Play your part and attack Rudy and Romney or get the hell out Tom (and I mean that in a kind way, I like you a lot).

Fred Thompson: I think Erick at RedState said it best in his analysis tonight.

I think Fred held his own. He did well. But he did not shine and he needed to. I did think his YouTube clip made the point he needed to make. If Fred doesn’t do something soon, though, and soon as in in the next two weeks, I think he’ll flat line.

Thompson is campaigning like the best 3rd place guy you’ll ever see. Sure, he’ll mix it up when the host asks him to, but he droped a GOLDEN opportunity to peg Mitt and Mike after the only bright spot of the night, the playing of his scathing campaign ad against Romney and Huckabee on their past liberal positions. When asked about it? He gives a stupid 3 second reply saying “What do ya mean what’s up with that? It’s their words”. Umm… yeah… How about using a minute of time on television with millions of people watching right there Fred to back those attacks up and gain some ground on the one friggen week you need it, against the two friggen guys you need to compete with in Iowa! Missed opportunities are beginning to be the weekly staple of a Thompson campaign I had such high hopes for.

Mitt Romney: As if it gets any worse, get a load of this statement outed by Anderson Cooper tonight: “Governor Romney, do you still long for the days when gays and lesbians can serve openly in the military?”. Yes, Romney said that in 1994. And gave a slippery rebuttal which got mega-boos. Bad night for Mitt. The skirmish with Rudy made both candidates look bad. Still, he interjected in some discussions and made a few points. Dr. Cheese, but at least he’s lying about the right issues.

Rudy Giuliani: Likewise, bad night for Rudy. He looked Nixonian, and I mean the kind of Nixon that debated Kennedy in 1960. He was sweaty, said he favored restrictions on guns to a booing crowd (yes, he actually said this), looked like an ass for confronting Romney on illegals hired by contractors putting a roof in at his house, and appeared a feisty little Italian guy who’d make a great mayor of New York City post-Bloomberg.

Ron Paul: How bad can this guy suck? Kudos for McCain for calling his isolationism out as the formula which brought Hitler to power. I can’t wait for this guy to either bow out or get assassinated by his own supporters in a battle over who’s the most insane.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Continued Deception from the Giuliani Campaign

Posted by: Jason | November 27th, 2007 · 1:10 AM

(image: abcnews)

I tend to ignore the daily exchanges between campaign staff whenever possible. But there’s just something a little unsettling about the defense by Rudy’s people with regard to his bad record towards the second amendment.

Challenging him today on the issue of gun rights, Fred Thompson attacked Rudy Giuliani’s “record” during his time as mayor:

Giuliani “never met a gun-control bill he didn’t like until he started to run for president and now I understand he very much approves of the Supreme Court taking jurisdiction of this Washington, D.C., case which most Second Amendment advocates think will establish that the Second Amendment means what it says and grants individual rights to people to possess firearms,” Thompson said. “So, ah, maybe he’s changed his mind about that, but his record is clear otherwise.”

The Giuliani campaign fired back:

Mayor Giuliani is a strong supporter of the second amendment and believes our focus should be on making sure criminals are the ones who can’t get guns. It’s the same tough-on-crime approach Rudy took in bringing historic crime reductions to New York City, and we’ll match that experience against Fred Thompson’s record of chasing moonshiners any day of the week.

Oh please! Stop skirting the issue Rudy. We’re not talking about your record, or should we say, your police department’s record on fighting crime (nor do we care about the subject in a national race for the presidency). What’s at issue here is your bad record, yes record, on second amendment rights.

Not only did you oppose such rights as NYC mayor, and not only did you support law suits against the gun manufacturers (a typical liberal argument), but you claim to be pro-second amendment now in your race for the presidency when it’s politically expedient.

You’re acting, as you so charmingly attack others on, like Hillary Clinton Mr. Mayor, in your insistence of changing the subject whenever someone brings up your bad record on guns, immigration, gay rights, abortion, as well as your countless moral failings as a person.

Dismissing the obvious, that such charges against Senator Thompson are ridiculous, you may want to answer truthful statements about your record with “why” you chose those courses of action, instead of squabbling your credibility by pretending you have a strong history of promoting gun rights. Quite frankly, your record proves exactly the opposite.

Story Source

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Fred on ABC

Posted by: Jason | November 25th, 2007 · 8:10 PM

I’m a day or so late on this one, but if you’re interested in ABC’s recent 30 minute interview with Fred Thompson, it’s worth a look. Yet again, Fred is proving himself to be the most policy-articulate, real, and well-rounded conservative in the Republican race.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Endorse Fred: An Open Letter to the National Rifle Assocation

Posted by: Jason | · 4:50 PM

(image: yourperfectknife)

Attn: Wayne LaPierre, CEO, National Rifle Association.

Dear Mr. LaPierre,

I have been a proud member of the National Rifle Association since 1999. Since that year, which was the inception of my interest in politics, I have followed closely the issue of protecting the second amendment for our children and for this nation’s future.

I know your organization to be the gold standard with regard to political action. No other in my opinion, has protected the interests of all Americans so successfully, advanced its cause in the face of more opposition further, or influenced political figures harder with respect to their votes on upholding constitutional rights.

I believe that this election year alone, more than any other in recent history, the National Rifle Association can make a strong difference in the outcome of the Republican Party’s primary process.

In my opinion, there is one candidate alone who embodies the values of the NRA, who has tireously championed those values, and who stands the biggest chance at being THE conservative alternative to anti-gun candidate Rudy Giuliani in the long stretches of this upcoming race. That man is Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson.

Senator Thompson needs you, and I implore you to help his campaign by making your early endorsement of his candidacy for President of the United States.

By doing so, you will not only be endorsing the most electable pro-second amendment candidate in the race, but you will also help bring a stop to the ambitions of gun-controlling Rudy Giuliani who seeks the same nomination.

Mr. Giuliani has proven, through his record, in being a traditional enemy to your organization, certainly seen through his outright rejection of second amendment rights during his time as New York City mayor, as well as his personally suing gun manufacturers and endorsing the gun-control policies of President Bill Clinton during the 1990’s.

During a year where Republicans may be at a disadvantage, and multiple candidates are now splintering conservative votes within the primary process, I believe without your early endorsement of Fred Thompson, the former New York Mayor may succeed in his quest to not only winning the nomination, but bringing a permanent change to that time-honored coalition between Republicans and pro-second amendment advocacy groups such as the NRA.

I realize that such an early endorsement may not be typical of your organization, and by making it so soon, the prospects of a Giuliani candidacy may serve as a gamble to lobby against too early, but I ask that you consider the greater harm that could come out of this election, and that is the Republican Party abandoning its pro-second amendment platform because we didn’t rally behind a single conservative early enough.

I believe that Fred Thompson is such a conservative. I believe his consistent, long-held views, on issues of second amendment rights, as well as social, economic, and foreign policy, are the types of views our party could rally behind in November 2008. I believe also in the man, as someone who is truthful in his willingness to serve his country alone, not reveling in aspirations of personal power.

I hope that the National Rifle Association shares my view of Fred Thompson. I hope that this letter reaches you and that you will consider endorsing him for President of the United States. As we have finally struck a blow in this country to those who would take away our right to bear arms, we cannot allow our political enemies to turn the tide in this battle we’re beginning to win, and without Fred Thompson as our nominee, I believe that is indeed at stake.

I thank you for your consideration of this letter. God bless the National Rifle Association, freedom, and the United States of America.

Cordially,

Jason M. McBride

Co-Founder, PostPolitical.com

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Will this man serve a purpose after all?

Posted by: Jason | November 24th, 2007 · 2:26 PM

(image: nhpr)

For weeks now, as the political scene has unfolded within the Republican Party, my major complaint has been over a view that conservatives were being split up within three camps–Thompson, Huckabee, and Mitt–each serving a different purpose, and that this reality could accidentally propel Rudy Giuliani to the nomination.

Fred Thompson’s supporters represented true, Reagan conservatives. Those of us who were conservative on social issues, but not wishing for a religious pope for a president, and those of us who were traditional on guns, taxes, and war. Mike Huckabee’s supporters represented a completely different voter. The guy who wasn’t as concerned with Iraq or tax-and-spend policies (especially in the case of Huckabee’s bad economic record), but someone who thought “all-social” all the time. And finally, Mitt Romney, who blended a mixture of mainstream moderates and moderate-to-conservative voters who saw Fred Thompson as a fluke.

I’m starting to think differently now, with regard to my fear over a three-way split and a Rudy nomination, and may see a purpose for Mike Huckabee after all. That purpose? Win Iowa and destroy Mitt Romney.

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Chuck on Huck

Posted by: Jason | November 18th, 2007 · 10:40 PM

Say what you want about the Republican field, the Mike Huckabee camp receives “Best Campaign Ad” award for this juicy little spot to air in Iowa starting this week. It’s an interesting twist on Chuck Norris jokes, staring the former Texas ranger and all out badass himself. Best line of the ad? “Chuck Norris doesn’t endorse candidates, he tells America how it’s going to be”.

In Gov. Huckabee’s defense, serious ads are apparently beginning after this clever marketing push to gain web traffic:

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Fred On Amnesty

Posted by: Jason | · 1:06 AM

A few days old, but in case you haven’t seen it, Fred’s recent no-nonsense illegal immigration ad. It simply doesn’t get any clearer than this.

If you want to view Fred’s full plan on immigration click here.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Post-Primary Analysis: Why these guys would lose the election

Posted by: Jason | · 12:50 AM

(image: timeinc)

At some point in our careers, we’ve all experienced the “grass is greener” scenario. This is where we think our lives aren’t going quite the way we want them to and begin to suggest to ourselves that a career change is in order. I recently experienced this myself in fact. Five years had gone by where I currently work and I suddenly felt like a change was in order. Sure… My pay was fine, I liked the people I worked for, and I never felt much stress… at least of the variety that makes some people want to kill themselves every night at 5pm. Yet, I still felt this sensation for change.

But then I suddenly came to my senses and realized something very, very important. There were potential risks to my actions with regard to even entertaining the idea of leaving for another company. Big risks. Not just income and job security risks, but risks like… having stability at a company and a knowledge of what works for me in my life. Really not knowing what I’d get from a new company if I ever made that decision, as opposed to what seemed to be a pretty good formula for success now with my current career. So alas, I stayed, and thankfully so.

In so many ways, I’m beginning to see that the Republican Party is experiencing this “grass is greener” sensation. We’re down and out right now, unsure of ourselves, and thinking… maybe… just maybe… if we switch what’s always worked, things will get better for us. Well I’m here today as the conscience to all Republicans by saying… “DON’T DO IT!”.

We know what works. With regard to elections since the 1980s, the Republican Party has operated on a winning formula, a coalition, between social, economic, and military conservatives. It worked for Reagan, it worked for Bush I, and it worked for Bush II… even on a year it probably shouldn’t have.

Yet here we are, in the classic “grass is greener” scenario, contemplating the nomination of a pro-abortion, anti-gun mayor from New York City, and likewise a flip-flopping Massachusetts businessman who used to be a Democrat. I simply don’t get it.

I believe that we are grossly miscalculating the strength of Mayor Giuliani and Governor Romney as the saviors who