Why I'm Voting for Rick Santorum in the SC Primary

Tomorrow, in the South Carolina GOP Presidential Preference primary, I will be voting for Rick Santorum.  Here’s why.

I need to start out by saying that I haven’t been totally thrilled with any of the four remaining candidates.  All of them have obvious weaknesses of character and/or policy which will make their race against Obama less of a lock than it ought to be.  The Republican Party needs a leader of the Reagan type, who, like him in 1980, would win 40+ states and carry a mandate with him to Washington.  But since we have four remaining candidates from whom to choose, and since any of them will be an improvement over the current president, I must choose from among them.

Rick Santorum, on the whole, represents my views the most consistently.  He has been consistently and passionately pro-life, and wrote the bill that ended partial birth abortion.  On social issues, he and I are of one voice.  He is also a firm believer in the Second Amendment (The NRA rates him A+).  He opposed TARP, voted against McCain-Feingold and Frank-Dodd, and receives low ratings from both the ACLU and the AFL-CIO.  While I am concerned about the trouncing he took in the 2006 Pennsylvania Senate race (and, for that matter, the trouncing he may get here in SC tomorrow, if the polls are valid), he is more demonstrably opposed to Obama than either Romney or Gingrich.  His biggest liability in my eyes is that he does not come across as a leader.

Newt Gingrich, at the moment, would be my second choice.  I agree with him on most issues—but he occasionally throws one out there that makes me scratch my head.  His personal character history is a serious problem and, even if he has sincerely repented and stays on the right track, will be a detriment in the race.  (Obama, for all his flaws, has no hint of marital infidelity.)  I am also concerned that his ego may become a liability.

Mitt Romney seems to be a conservative now, but my gut just doesn’t like the fact that he wasn’t while he was the governor of Massachusetts.  I think he can be a great executive, and if he is the GOP nominee, I will vote for him in November.  But for now, I’m going with the most consistent conservative.

Ron Paul is problematic.  His voting record is often meritorious and often puzzling.  The ACLU rates him pretty favorably—that's a problem.  His vicious and untrue attack ads concerning Santorum (being shown ad nauseam this week on SC TV stations) trouble me.  His foreign policy ideas are dangerous to the future of our country. 

Please educate yourself on the candidates and then take the opportunity to vote.

The Republican Presidential Field: A First Look

It's good to be back blogging again, after a busy few weeks.

The GOP presidential field is forming and evolving, as various individuals dive in or bow out. I want to discuss my thoughts on who these folks are and whether they are the "kind of people we want" in the White House. Starting from the top:

My Favorite so far: Tim Pawlenty. Two-term governor of a liberal-leaning state who managed to keep a wayward budget under control and generally be conservative without compromising core principles. As long as he doesn't get to DC and get grandiose ideas about how government can "help the people," I think he'll do a pretty good job.

Other Big Names:

Mitt Romney: He worries me. I can't get "RomneyCare" out of my head. He's Mormon...not sure how that will affect his decision making...if at all...or should it? He looks and talks presidential, but almost without passion.

Newt Gingrich: I like him, but his negatives are enormous. For every two good ideas he has—and he has many—there seems to be a lemon. I always have my doubts about those whose marital infidelity has become so, um, public. His tenure as House Speaker, however, was superb.

Rick Santorum: I like him, too. He's quite conservative and votes with a conscience. I don't think he has much of a chance, but mainly because so many of my GOP friends/family in PA don't like him. And if you can't do well in your home state....

Jon Huntsman: The man began running for president against Obama while still serving in the Obama administration. I call this bad ethics. He's an incredibly rich man—he didn't need the day job. So why did he take it?

The Rest of the Pack:

Michele Bachmann: Four words: Sarah Palin on steroids. Thoroughly enjoyable to listen to, and her positions on the issues are consistently on the mark. She comes across as less-than-presidential, though, and will be portrayed as (you heard it here first) Sarah Palin on steroids. This demonization will deep-six her campaign. And like Santorum, if you can't win your home state—Pawlenty will win MN, I'm sure—you are toast.

Ron Paul: Good on fiscal issues. Libertarian streak is too strong. Occasionally comes across as a crackpot.

Herman Cain: I lack research. Is he a bona fide, conscience-driven, Bible-believing Christian? Is he another loud-mouthed, egotistical, radio talking head? I honestly have no idea yet.

Gary Johnson: Leading nominee at present for the 2012 "Who??" award.

Thankful they dropped out: Huckabee, Trump. (Although Trump may do a Ross Perot and jump back in. I can see this scenario. I don't like it.)

Still haven't committed, and looking doubtful they will: Palin, Christie

And there are others out there as well. Start your research, everyone; I'll keep you informed about mine.

Who Voted for the Ryan Bill?

Today the U.S. House passed a bill on a 235-193 vote for a budget plan which was spearheaded by Paul Ryan (R-WI). It likely won't even see a vote in the Senate, but even if it got through there, it is likely the president would veto it.

Every single D in the House voted against it. Every Republican except four of them voted for it. (Not sure what those four—Jones, McKinley, Paul, and Rehberg—were thinking.) Feel free to contact your Congressman and let him know what you think about his vote.

Full details on the vote can be found here.

Sarah Palin: Come to Michigan!

Sarah Palin resigned from being governor of Alaska Sunday. You can view the video of her speech here. It has some similarities to the typical political sending-off speech, but still contains the uplifting strains that Sarah Palin is now well-known for.

If you feel like reminiscing, here are some clips from last year's election campaign:

Speech to the RNC (9/7/08): Text Video

Speech upon becoming McCain's running mate (8/29/08): Text Video


Now we have a mystery confronting us: What is Sarah Palin going to do next?

I have a suggestion. I'd beg, if necessary.

I think she needs to immediately move to Michigan. I'd imagine that she and her husband would likely find a nice spot up in the Upper Peninsula...probably feel "at home" up there. Once she establishes residency, she should run for governor. Or lieutenant governor. Or state legislature. Or county commissioner. Something.

Because we need people with the political philosophy of Sarah Palin to make Michigan a better place to live, work, prosper, and enjoy our freedoms. Remember that political philosophy in the next round of elections!

Q&A With Rep. Larry DeShazor (R-61st District, Kalamazoo County)

Rep. Larry DeShazor is a first-term Republican representative from the western side of Kalamazoo County. He won the seat formerly held by Jack Hoogendyk. He graciously agreed to take some time to answer some questions for this blog.

1) You are new to the legislature this year, and in the minority party. What have you been able to accomplish so far?

First off, the pace of the legislature to this point has been slow. Unfortunately, this is not under my control as a member of the Republican minority. So far, the issues that have come up before the legislature are not focusing on the key issues that I feel Michigan needs to work on most. These issues are jobs, jobs and more jobs.

As for my accomplishments so far, I have continued to reach out to my constituents and keep a pulse on what their concerns are. Property Taxes and declining values will continue to be an important issue for the next few years. In response, I hosted 2 town hall meetings to inform my constituents about their options to appeal their property tax assessments. On the policy front, I have introduced legislation to address another major issue in Michigan, unemployment. The bill I introduced would eliminate the state income tax requirement for individuals receiving unemployment benefits. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to tax families during one of the most difficult times in their lives.

2) The budget of the state of Michigan requires change, and soon. What areas of the budget do you think most deserve to be cut? Should the per-pupil school funding monies be cut?

The budget is, and will continue to be, the biggest issue in Michigan for years to come if true reforms are not implemented to deal with our structural deficit. Simple reforms, such as privatizing food services in our prisons, could save the state up to $40 million per year.

As for per-pupil school funding, the allotment amount cannot be cut if the state wants to accept millions of dollars in stimulus money. Maintaining our state's investment in education is important, but I think the main focus for funding in schools needs be how that money is spent. Ensuring that more money reaches the classroom is vital to our children's futures.

3) Is there any type of tax increase that you would support this year to balance the state budget? Or do you oppose all attempts at increasing taxes?

This year is going to be tough when you consider the $1 billion hole we need to plug before October 1st. However, increasing taxes will not solve Michigan's problems. The general tax increases that were passed in 2007 have obviously not had the impact their proponents had hoped. At this point, I think all taxes, tax incentives, tax abatements and spending needs to be considered. The problems Michigan is facing aren't new and won't be solved overnight. Now is the time for lawmakers to come together and examine all these issues to come up with a fair and equitable tax system to all of Michigan's families and businesses.

4) As a state representative with its unique perspective, how do you see Gov. Granholm's policies and decisions affecting your own district?

Overall, I think the piecemeal approach to attracting businesses and job providers to this state simply isn't working. The government's job isn't to pick winners and losers with tax policy. Focusing on a strong infrastructure, a great quality of life and reasonable across the board tax policy will help create and retain jobs. I served as a Portage City Councilman for 6 years, and this was our formula for combating many of the negative trends throughout other parts of Michigan.

5) Is there any particular tidbit about yourself that you would like the people of your district to know?

I would like to express what an honor it is to serve the people of the 61st House District in Lansing. The citizens of our state need to remain hopeful during this difficult time. We need to learn from our past mistakes and work to ensure that we have a productive future. I know that Michigan will emerge from this challenging economic environment, and I look forward to being a part of the transformation.

New York Senate Flips to GOP!

In a stunning procedural move, two democratic NY senators flipped sides and gave the GOP a 32-30 majority in the state's upper chamber. [Graphic below from the New York Post website]

The move came as the most surprising of surprises to the Senate democrats (and governor, and pretty much everyone else). The democrats refuse to recognize what happened, even after their abrupt adjournment without counting the votes.

This will be extremely interesting to watch today.

Q&A with Sen. Ron Jelinek (R-Three Oaks, 21st District)

State Senator Ron Jelinek has represented the 21st District in the Michigan Senate for the past six years. He is the current chairman of the Appropriations Committee and therefore is in the middle of the budget cut discussions of recent days. He graciously consented to answer some questions I posed to him about his work in the Senate.

1) As chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, you currently have the uneviable task of helping to determine what areas of the state budget will see cuts. What areas of the budget do you think should be first in line for cuts? Why? What areas of the budget, if any, should not be cut, and why?

Sen. Jelinek: As I write this, we are in the process of coming to agreement in our caucus of what our budget priorities are. That does not mean they won’t be cut, but the reduction may be less at the expense of other programs that feel larger reductions or total elimination. We have agreed that health, safety and education need to be preserved as much as possible. We do need to look at specific program spending however, and not just general categories. For example: We should try to preserve the basic foundation per-pupil grant, but individual programs such as bus inspections or some early childhood programs may need to be eliminated or reduced.

2) Why did you choose to give up six days of your Senate pay?

Sen. Jelinek: I gave up 6 days pay because we required it of all state employees as a budget balancing tool. I am no different, I should participate. My 6 days alone will not make very much of a difference, but added to the other state employees and legislators, it does make a difference. I would much rather give up some days than see layoffs.

3) After your term ends in 2010, how do you anticipate remaining involved in Michigan politics?

Sen. Jelinek: I am not sure of my future; I will try to make myself available to my party and its candidates in anyway I can serve them best.

4) Looking back over your time in the legislature, of what achievements are you the most pleased?

Sen. Jelinek: No one can say that they accomplished things alone – it takes an entire legislature. I have tried to personally speak for education and its funding to the best levels possible. I have also tried to maintain a balanced budget with common sense and recognize the wishes and needs of the people of this state. Also, everyday I am contacted by a constituent who has a personal dilemma that is of great importance to them. If I can help solve their problem satisfactorily, I consider that to be my greatest achievement.

Did Campaign Contributions Determine Which Chrysler Dealers Were Closed?

This is a question now being scrutinized (see one site here) by some who have begun to notice that among those dealers closed, a seemingly disproportionate number of them were significant donors to the Republican party and Republican candidates.

If it could be shown that the Obama administration forced Chrysler dealerships to close and that the manner of selecting those dealerships had political motives, this would be a scandal far greater than any seen in the last 35 years at the presidential level. Closing these dealerships summarily already has legal implications (like, say, breach of contract) which the owners have the right to fight in court—regardless of anything else.

If it is true, then what we will see is the worst of Chicago-style thug-politics-from-the-gutter being practiced at the very highest level. The mob bosses may actually become envious.

I hope to see this thoroughly researched. Soon.

Thanks to theblogprof for alerting me to this story.

Republican Wisdom From My Wife and 10-year-old Daughter

The other day my wife—also a conservative, I am happy to report—came up with this acronym that I thought was worth sharing:

We believe that
Responsible free
Enterprise
Provides
Unlimited
Benefits, that
Limited government
Is best, and that God
Condones
Abortion
Never!

She is beautiful, talented, smart, and politically right thinking—I am such a blessed man.

My daughter actually tried her hand at this first. Like the parents, our children are happy Republicans. These are her two efforts:
Responsible, sign is an
Elephant,
Patient, stand
Up for the candidates,
Believes in
Limited government
Included with
Caring for unborns more than
Animals with
No
Souls.

This fine effort was followed by this one, for the president:
Outstanding is he not, very
Boastful and
Awful to me and
Money I think is all he cares
About.

Democrats will no doubt label that as the politics of personal destruction. I'd like to point out that my daughter has never gone to public school (and probably never will) and that she did this on her own. What a girl!

NEW Blog: Van Buren County Republican

I would like to recommend the blog "Van Buren County Republican" to all of my friends, especially those who live here in Van Buren County, Michigan. The stated purpose of this blog is to communicate with Michiganders about the political, social, and economic state of our county and our state.

Today, you will find an excellent piece from Rep. Tonya Schuitmaker, who represents Van Buren County in the state legislature, explaining her "No" vote on the "Hire Michigan First" legislation. She does an eloquent job explaining the shortcomings of this legislation.

We look forward to hearing from other Republican county and state officials regarding how they contribute to the betterment of Van Buren County and the state of Michigan.

Van Buren County Republican Party: What We Did Tonight

I am the secretary of the Van Buren County Republican Party, and this evening (about 3 hours ago) we had our regular monthly meeting—"regular" meaning the second Tuesday of each month—in Lawrence. What is this meeting? What did we accomplish?

Without typing out the minutes of the meeting here (which I can do, because I take the minutes), let me summarize some of the activities we engaged in tonight:

• Every other month, we have a 6:30 potluck to precede the 7:00 meeting. This was a potluck night. Food and fellowship! (Or you could say, nourishment and networking!) I would also tangentially say that our county organization does some of the best potlucks in Michigan. Period.
  
• Our state senator and a state representative (who is running for higher office next year) both addressed the group. Both graciously stayed for several minutes after the meeting to talk politics with those assembled.
• A representative from our U.S. Congressman's office came and spoke on his behalf.
• We had discussions and made plans for upcoming county GOP events.
• We discussed various ways that we can increase involvement locally with the Republican Party.

If "All politics is local," then we represent a front line in the political battles being waged in America today. I think a lot of people—especially those who complain that politicians are insular or that they, the voters, can't have any impact on what's going on—would be pleasantly surprised at their ability to interact with the people voted into office...if they would take the time and opportunity to attend GOP county meetings. Not every politician attends every meeting, but if you come to three or four of ours, you will meet most of our county elected officials in Van Buren County.

As a result of my attendance the last few years, I can say that I am friends with my state representative, most of the county commissioners, most of the county elected officials (county clerk, county treasurer, etc.), and a variety of folks who hold township-level positions. I have had the opportunity to meet a number of state-level candidates and officials, as well as senators and representatives from other Michigan districts. As an officer of the organization, I was even invited to a private meeting (along with about 50 other people in this part of the state) with John McCain in 2007. And I asked him about that nutty immigration bill he supported two years ago.

My main point is this: If you want to make a difference, get involved. Contact your county Republican Party and ask when and where the next meeting is. (Not sure how? Check out migop.org, or the corresponding website in your state.) Take a friend or two with you if you are uncomfortable showing up in a group of relative strangers...because if you want to know more, your friends probably do, also. Attend a Lincoln Day Dinner or other county event where people and politicians mingle. Join a facebook group (we have one—Van Buren County Republican Party) or other internet social network for interested people; read blogs and news stories written by the people who are doing the actual work. There is much work to be done between now and November 2010; be a part of it!

Some Cause For Optimism, If Done Properly...

This article, by Bill Whittle of National Review Online, contains these words of encouragement to those in despair over the recent election returns. Here is an excerpt:

Nowhere have I heard a shred of defeatism or despair. On the contrary. In point of fact, the magnanimity and graciousness I have seen in defeat in so many places on the right tells me that this is an eager and seasoned army, one able to look defeat in the face and own up to the errors in tactics and strategy that got us there. And nowhere do I see a call to abandon our core principles and sue for terms, but rather that our loss was caused precisely by our abandonment of the issues which we hold dear and which have served us so well on battlefields past.

So consider this, my fellows in arms: On Tuesday, the Left — armed with the most attractive, eloquent, young, hip, and charismatic candidate I have seen with my adult eyes, a candidate shielded by a media so overtly that it can never be such a shield again, who appeared after eight years of a historically unpopular President, in the midst of two undefended wars and at the time of the worst financial crisis since the Depression and whose praises were sung by every movie, television, and musical icon without pause or challenge for 20 months . . . who ran against the oldest nominee in the country’s history, against a campaign rent with internal disarray and determined not to attack in the one area where attack could have succeeded, and who was out-spent no less than seven-to-one in a cycle where not a single debate question was unfavorable to his opponent — that historic victory, that perfect storm of opportunity . . .

Yielded a result of 53 percent.

Folks, we are going to lick these people out of their boots.

There is much to do. That a man with such overt Marxist ideas and such a history of association with virulent anti-Americans can be elected president should make it crystal clear to each of us just how far we have let fall the moral tone of this Republic. The great lesson from Ronald Reagan was simply that we can and must gently educate as well as campaign, and explain our ideas with smiles on our faces and real joy in our hearts. For unlike the far-left radical who gained the presidency on Tuesday, we start with 150 million of the most free and intelligent and hard-working people in the history of the Earth at our backs, with a philosophy that — unlike theirs, which has resulted in 100 million dead in unmarked graves — has liberated and enriched more people and created more joy than any nation or combination of nations in our history.

And then we will begin, with a confident and happy heart, to examine how we have failed the American people in regard to making clear the moral and philosophical underpinnings of our philosophy. For anyone that fully understands these philosophies, presented calmly and with wit and humility, will come to our side and never leave.

We have tried, and failed. Tomorrow we will try again.

How can we lose, my friends? How can we lose, unless we give up?

Not a Good Week in Politics...But You Have To Love This!

It was not a good week on the political front: Congress passed, and the president unwisely signed, a fat bailout bill that will cost me a lot of money over the next however-many years; McCain signed off on the same; and the McCain campaign (after spending a lot of money over the past few months on ho-hum commercials) announced that they are pulling resources out of Michigan. But...

Incidentally, here's an article I read where economists generally agree, left and right alike: The bailout plan is not good policy.

In this foxnews.com article, based on an interview earlier in the day, we got the good news that somebody in the McCain campaign—Sarah and Todd Palin—wants to campaign here! Here is a portion of the article:

Sarah Palin criticized John McCain's decision to pull campaign resources out of Michigan in an interview with FOX News on Friday, saying she and her husband Todd would "be happy" to campaign in the economically distraught battleground state.

The Republican vice presidential nominee, on the heels of her debate with Joe Biden, also took a second stab at questions that seemed to trip her up during recent interviews, declaring that she looks "forward to speaking to the media more and more every day."

Palin said the decision to pull out of Michigan, which was announced Thursday, was "not a surprise" to her since polls show McCain slipping in the state.

But Palin said that when she read the news, she "fired off a quick e-mail and said, 'Oh come on, do we have to?'"

"Todd and I, we'd be happy to get to Michigan ...We'd be so happy to speak to the people there in Michigan who are hurting," she said. "Whatever Todd and I can do in realizing what their challenges in that state are .... I wanna get back to Michigan and I want to try."

It's unclear whether the McCain campaign will heed Palin's request. McCain aides said on a conference call Thursday that Michigan had always been the weakest of the toss-up states for them, and that they are still competing in several other battlegrounds like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and moving resources into high-stakes states like Florida.

Text of Sarah Palin's RNC Address 9/3/08

Reading the speech is a treat....you'll find it here! Here is the youtube video of it. A few great excerpts:

I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education better.

When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.

And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.


We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers. I've noticed a pattern with our opponent.

Maybe you have, too.

We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers.

And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.

This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed ... when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy ... our opponent is against producing it.

Victory in Iraq is finally in sight ... he wants to forfeit.

Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay ... he wants to meet them without preconditions.

Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights? Government is too big ... he wants to grow it.

Congress spends too much ... he promises more.

Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.

The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ... raise payroll taxes ... raise investment income taxes ... raise the death tax ... raise business taxes ... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.

Another Great Speech!

Sarah Palin, in addition to all the qualities she has demonstrated as both person and politician, gave a great speech tonight! She showed marvelous humor and indicting wit. She promoted good ideas—ideas American needs to implement.

The immediate post-speech commentary by Brian Williams and the NBC crowd was contemptible! Clearly showing disdain (could it be perhaps that they, of all people, don't like criticism?) for her person, they immediately blathered about whatever negative things—real or perceived—came to mind. Then I come back here to the computer, turn the radio on (public radio this time), and some even more contemptible liberal is giving snide criticism of her and her speech.

How is it that these same media, when covering Hillary Clinton, fawn; and when they cover Barack Obama, worship? Objectivity is dead!

Kudos for Hoogendyk!

The Republicans assembled in St. Paul this week (and boy, would I love to be there) have taken a forced break from their festivities...so how are they spending their time? Jack Hoogendyk, the awesome Senate candidate from our area, responded in this manner. His press release is copied below.

Hoogendyk Calls for Blood Drive at Republican Convention Michigan Delegates Pledge to Give Blood for Hurricane Victims

Minneapolis, MN - Michigan State Representative Jack Hoogendyk announced that the Michigan delegation to the Republican National Convention would be participating in a blood drive on Tuesday, which he initiated to provide relief for potential victims of Hurricane Gustav. Hoogendyk, the Republican Party's candidate to unseat US Senator Carl Levin, made the announcement at the Michigan delegation's breakfast and then circulated the room with a clipboard collecting pledges for blood donations. The local Red Cross has named the effort the "Michigan Republican Party Gulf Relief Blood Drive." The Red Cross plans to send a blood drive bus to the Northland Inn, where the Michigan delegation is staying. Hoogendyk is calling for blood donations from residents across the state of Michigan, as well as from other delegates to the Convention. "Everyone here in Minnesota at the Convention is watching the events in the Gulf closely. We see it as an opportunity to mobilize Republicans from all around the country to help their fellow citizens who are suffering from the effects of Hurricane Gustav," says Hoogendyk. "We're all going to roll up our sleeves and give blood to send to those in need in the Gulf Coast area." The blood drive will be taking place at the Northland Inn Hotel on Tuesday, September 2 from 10 am to 4 pm. A large turnout is expected.

It is great to see that the Republicans are not merely partying and having a good time—they are making a positive impact! (And if I were there, Jack, I'd give a pint!)

OK, Michigan—Which Would You Rather Have?

I find it puzzling that here in Michigan, the campaign higher-ups who control the dispersing of monies keep spending much of it on the same thing: Phone calls to voters (and possible voters).

Every voter I know in Michigan is, at the very best, ambivalent about such phone calls; and the ambivalent ones are probably the least likely to either change their vote...or to vote at all, based on one or more phone calls.

On the other hand, many Michigan voters I know want one thing more than anything else before an election: Yard signs. They may take bumper stickers, but don't want to put them on their vehicle; they may buy buttons, but rarely wear them. But give those voters yard signs, and they'll be on proud display ASAP!

Had I not gone to the state GOP convention last week, I—a county party official—still wouldn't have a McCain sign in my yard. While I was there, I observed people descending on the piles of McCain signs like vultures on road kill (analogy not intended to describe the people or the signs). People want yard signs—Campaigns, take note!!

McCain-Palin: Wow!

I didn't think McCain would choose Romney, Huckabee, Ridge, or Lieberman—mainly because each of them would bring (real or perceived) negatives to the ticket—but politically speaking, he made a daring yet shrewd choice by choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Her resume looks good; she seems to favor all the conservative causes. And although I despise mindless voting, many will vote for her simply because she has two X chromosomes. But here's my observation: This lady gives a great speech! I have never been a fan of Obama's speechmaking ability, which although above average, isn't on a caliber with great orators; but she could out-speechify Obama with ease!

This already makes the campaign much more interesting! (And now I can relax, knowing it's not going to be Romney, Ridge, or Lieberman!)

The Michigan GOP State Convention: Part 2

A couple of great photos from a great day...

Here we have Jack Hoogendyk, who has already won the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat now held by the liberal Carl Levin. As always, he did a great job today.


And here we have four very happy children with some of their plunder, including the free hats (promoting a candidate for Wayne State University Board of Governors):

The Michigan GOP State Convention: Part 1

Today was the day of the Michigan state GOP Convention, held in Novi, near Detroit. My wife and I were both delegates, so we took along the four kids—and had a great time!

The primary business of the day (besides choosing electors to the electoral college, should McCain win our state; this was pretty much pro forma) was nominating people to the following positions to appear on the November ballot:

• Justice of the Supreme Court. Clifford Taylor, the current chief justice, is up for election this year and will be viciously attacked by the other party; conservative justices hold a 4-3 majority on this bench and he is the majority's leader. Michigan Republicans adore him. Every state should have supreme court justices like this man.
• Two positions on the state board of education. Three folks were running.
• Two positions on the MSU Board of Trustees. Scott Romney, elder brother of Mitt, is an incumbent; he and one other woman were the only ones in the running.
• Two positions on the Wayne State University Board of Governors. Only two folks were actively seeking this position.
• Two positions on the University of Michigan Board of Regents. There were three people actively running hard for these two spots.

The observant will notice that only two of these five listed positions were truly contested. But in every case (not to mention candidates for other offices that have already been chosen in primaries two weeks ago, such as soon-to-be-senator Jack Hoogendyk), stickers, signs, leaflets, and other goodies—including free doughnuts courtesy of Lisa Bouchard, who was the other candidate for MSU Trustee—were being handed out in a manner that even "generously" cannot properly describe. If you like the game-day-face-to-face-meet-and-greet nobody-knows-the-outcome-until-it's-over version of politics, you'd have loved to observe this! My children haven't gotten so much free stuff since Christmas.

As delegates, my wife and I were among those voting for the contested nominations. It is also a great time to meet folks, especially from your own district, who share your political views. I was especially proud of our county's largest delegation to a state convention in some time.

It was also a great opportunity to pick up materials to promote John McCain and others who are running for various offices; to purchase buttons, neckties, and other "stuff" that promotes the GOP; and to get a lot of talking points to share with your friends about "why you should vote for so-and-so for a board of governors on the other side of the state."

But I still left with one question on my mind: Why do we have three colleges with boards of trustees, governors, and regents? Why are they all differently named, yet chosen in the same manner?