Kansas GOP Insider (wannabe): October 2014

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Stop the presses!

Better late than never.

Milton Wolf has decided he'd like to have a future in the Kansas Republican Party, and finally via Facebook, publicly endorsed Sen. Pat Roberts today.

I admit. I voted for that dud in August. And I voted for that other dud, Roberts, last week. I'm sick of the lot of them.

All reasonable conservatives had already made the (wise) decision to support Roberts in the general, but Wolf's endorsement may swing the dumb remaining few.

If that doesn't help, there's always the endorsement from Kansas State University head football Coach Bill Snyder. (I always suspected Snyder was a Democrat, but we'll take it.)




Well that's not right

So, this can't be right.

The Kansas GOP is sending mailers in support of Greg Orman? So says some guy at the DailyKOS



I haven't seen the mailer. It would be helpful to see the back. 

And if that actually is a pro-Orman mailer with KS GOP on it, that was probably an intentional "accident" from whoever produced the mailer.

No bueno.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Typical Dems

So, some Democrats in Salina were stealing Republican political literature off of doors, and they were caught red-handed. That's actually illegal, by the way, but that's what Dems do.

It's pretty clear in the video that these Dems, wearing Paul Davis t-shirts,  know what they were doing was wrong. They were taking J.R. Claey's literature from door knobs. 

The thieving couple look like your typical liberals -- white, middle aged and angry. But the best part is when they get in and drive off in their Prius.

Bwahahahahaha. I'm sorry. That's just funny. They couldn't look more like caricatures if they tried.

That race in Salina may be a tight one. I've written of it once before here. (Gary Swartzendruber is trying to take ground in the War against Women.)

If you live out that way, you should vote for the guy who isn't out stealing campaign literature, and that guy is Claeys.


Tuesday, October 28, 2014

I don't even... Pat Boone?

Surely there's some mistake.

Pat Boone is doing a robo-call for Sen. Pat Roberts, and my face is red with embarrassment.

Honestly, I had to ask my mother who Pat Boone was. A Baby Boomer, my mother explained: "Someone my mother used to listen to." 

My MOTHER'S MOTHER WAS A FAN. Probably during World War II. 

Attention Roberts campaign: Your battle right now is proving that you aren't out of touch. Voters have a legitimate concern that you only come to Kansas when you have an opponent and that you don't have your finger on the pulse of what's happening now.

You know what's not happening now? Pat Boone.

I have nothing bad to say about the guy, really I don't. And it's not about age. Well, maybe a little bit. I note that my reaction would be exactly the same if the Roberts campaign rolled out a Justin Bieber robo call. 

Seriously, Clint Eastwood has to be nearly as old as Pat Boone and if Clint was doing a Roberts robo call, I wouldn't think much of it. (Well, I'd think why should I care who Clint Eastwood thinks I should vote for, but other than that...) Or maybe that Golden Girl, whatsherface? Rose? She's kind of an 'it' girl now. If she was doing a Roberts robo call, I'd think weird choice, but I hope it helps.

Pat Boone isn't going to help. He was popular in the 1950s. (According to Wikipedia. I don't know this stuff intrinsically, because my parents weren't even born when he was popular!!!!)

Truly, I am embarrassed for the Roberts campaign. Personally, I don't care for celebrity endorsements, but I recognize that this is the world we live in. If you are a candidate and can get Marky Mark to take time from his busy pants dropping schedule to endorse you, then by all means. You probably should. (See what I did there? That's a popular culture reference. But if I said it to anyone under the age of about 30, it wouldn't work.)

I'm rambling because I'm so disturbed by how very, very out of touch the Roberts camp obviously is. Despite the hefty diatribe above, I'm kind of without words.
 
So help me if they roll Pat Boone out on a campaign stop somewhere dressed in his white patent leather shoes... Yes, that's what Wiki says Boone is famous for -- white, patent leather shoes.




Dear Roberts campaign staffers: At any time in the next week you are thinking about making any decisions at all related to the job of getting Roberts re-elected (as opposed to laughed at) please, please use one of your lifelines. Email me. Phone a friend. 

My sincerest hope is that this robo call went to only voters 50 and older. And even those voters are probably thinking, what in the world? But at least they're not getting all their information about Pat Boone from Wikipedia. 

Ugh. Just ugh.

One More Reason to Cheer the Royals

Mother Jones theorizes, and some studies agree: The Kansas City Royals' winning streak may help the GOP win the U.S. Senate.


 

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

The thing about GOP has-beens

So another "moderate" has been has decided to weigh in on the U.S. Senate race in Kansas.

Former Republican Gov. Bill Graves announced his endorsement of Sen. Pat Roberts. I am glad that Graves has decided to show an ounce of loyalty to the party that helped elect him to office.

That said, everyone sees through this, right?

Graves has waded into the fray in hopes of maintaining relevance. Had he done so much sooner, I wouldn't think anything of it. But waiting until the political tide has turned is awfully convenient for Graves.

He's wasted no political capital in the endorsement and has collected a future political favor in return.

When Rachelle Chronister and whoever those other Has Beens decided to endorse Paul Davis and Greg Orman, they were sticking their necks out. (They were also probably attempting to remove the tastes of sour grapes from their mouths.) 

Graves, on the other hand, appears to have made a calculated decision to stick with the winner. I guess conservatives should be pleased. The Graves endorsement may help, but please, don't think the movement owes Graves any favors. He was paid in full when he was twice elected Governor of Kansas.


Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Women support Yoder

So, yesterday -- two days ago-- whatever, Rep. Kevin Yoder announced his Women for Yoder coalition.  So, he's rounded up more than 100 women "leaders" of the third district who have pledged their support to the Congressman. I use air quotes, because some on the list and "leader" kind of a stretch. That's not to belittle them. That's just the truth.

One of only two common denominators from the list of names: They're Republicans. The other, they have ovaries. (Or I guess had them at one time. Do they remove them sometimes? I guess I just outed myself as Not A Medical Doctor.)

I hate this sort of thing. It's divisive. It makes the subtle suggestion that women in general need to hear from other women to know what to think. That's a little misogynistic. 

Yoder's press release explains that he has a wife! and a daughter! And for the love of all things holy, there's the nine billionth mention of his grandmother. Come to think of it, it's a little weird that he doesn't mention his mother.  I'm positive he's got one.

While I recognize and celebrate the women are different than men, it seems like mindless pandering to a special interest group to send out a list of people with extra estrogen as a campaign centerpiece.

I realize everyone does it, especially Democrats. But they are disgusting, and I would hope we have no desire to be anything like them.

It would be ever-so-slightly less offensive to see Black People for K-Yo. (I can't begin to imagine how you write that press release without the media attempting to make Yoder the modern-day equivalent of Simon Legree, but I'd sure be interested in hearing how that shook out behind the scenes. But I digress.)

Ever, ever, so slightly less offensive, and only because Democrats have actually cornered the market on the black populace. When your best candidate only manages to garner less than 10 percent of the demographic, well... there may, possibly maybe, be a need for such a coalition. 

I'm not sold on it. I'm simply suggesting it could be a possibility for the right campaign somewhere. Yoder's campaign isn't that campaign.

And there's no campaign that needs to play along to the media idea that Republicans oppose women. It's not true, and even the half-wits among us - I'll call them liberals -- know this. It's just something they say to score political points. Every liberal, especially every liberal in Kansas, knows several women who are Republicans. 

How dumb do they think the general population is if it seems necessary to remind voters that the candidate has a mother. Sorry, Yoder. And Brownback. (Did I mention the Governor has one of these coalitions too?) I think this "coalition" is dumb. 

Here's how those coalitions look when liberals do them:

Pretty ridiculous, right?
Wake me up when someone forms the Testicles for Huelskamp, or whatever. 

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Dems can a guy

Dakota Loomis needs a job. (Probably.)

The Kansas Democratic Party kicked the communications director to the curb. Loomis called several southeast Kansas towns "crapholes" on a college sports message board. He used his real name. Has he never used the Internet before? You can be totally anonymous here!!

Anyway, the Dems will now commence a grand apology tour. They're sending KDP Chair Joan Wagnon.

Meanwhile, executive director Jason Perkey is handling calls from the press. Perkey lists a phone number from Louisville, Kentucky, BTW. I just think that's weird, if you're taking phone calls as the executive director of the Kansas Democratic Party, shouldn't you have a Kansas phone number?

Anyway, the Dems could obviously use a communications person. The press release has misspellings.

It reads: "Kansas Democratic Party Executive Director Jason Perkey issued the following statement regrading the termination of Communications Director Dakota Loomis." 

And then Loomis apologizes profusely:

"I must first and foremost apologize for me callous, insensitive, and frankly asinine comment.
I also realize as an employee and representative of the Kansas Democratic Party that my actions reflect not just on myself, but on all Kansas Democrats.
I would ask that you not hold my own immaturity and stupidity against the great Kansas Democrats who are working every day to restore Kansas, especially those in Southeast Kansas.
It is a privilege to work for such incredible candidates and party members and it pains me deeply to know I have insulted them and undermined their tireless effort.
Again, I am sorry for my inappropriate remark and apologize to all Kansans I let down."

AFP does the work party insiders should be doing

God bless Americans for Prosperity.

They are doing the work that Establishment Republicans -- and their dope-y staff members -- won't: Actually talking to voters.

In this election cycle, the organization is taking a page from the Obama for America operation. They're fielding paid volunteers rather than blowing their political capital on television commercials and mail pieces.

Republicans have long criticized (and somewhat rightfully so) Democrats for their astro-turf, paid grass roots organizers. Instead of criticizing, we should have been paying attention.

It's pretty sad liberals figured out that paying campaign precinct walkers and organizers yielded better results. Aren't we the party of capitalists?

I am not suggesting that conservatives hire ACORN to walk precincts. But I have no problem suggesting that it's not a terrible idea to hire organizers who in turn also do some of the walking -- rather hiring a college student to sit in the office and try to direct the retirees who want to volunteer to the streets to walk.

AFP is doing important work. They're not doing it perfectly -- they have plenty of establishment-types on staff. But they're attempting to do things in a new way. The organization deserves our support.

 

 

 

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

That's not what I would do

Dakota Loomis shouldn't lose his job for this, but everyone should question his decision-making ability. 

That is all.

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Orman. A weird Democrat


Lawrence Dems -- just the crapholiest people

Dakota Loomis doesn't like your crap-hole town.

The Kansas Democratic Party Communications Director used his own name on a KU message board commenting on  a thread about the most "craphole small towns.

Loomis has a lengthy list of ahem, not-so-nice Kansas towns. He wrote in a post that has since been deleted:

 “Gotta be more reminiscent of Missouri than the plains: BYE everyone but SE Kansas and Jetmore. Gotta be big enough to count as a city: BYE ELGIN, CHAUTAUQUA, TREECE. Can’t be too close to any cultural center/points of interest: BYE Crawford County. Gotta be poor, depressed, and getting worse: well, that doesn’t really help exclude folks in SE Kansas. Here are the top three contenders: Cherryvale, Columbus, and Galena.”

Honestly, he among us who has not poked fun at small towns on a college message board, raise your hands. OK. He among us who has poked fun at small towns using your own name when you're the communications director of a statewide party, quick show of hands.

Yeah. That's Dakota Loomis sitting all alone with his hand raised. It's a-OK to make a joke, but Loomis' posting on a public page shows a stunning lack of judgment.

Here's the link in the Pittsburg Morning Sun. 

 

KS GOP Insider at Gmail

That's not me.

This afternoon, I received an email from someone called "KS GOP Insider." (Yes, I'm irritated. I feel like my name has been hijacked. But whatevs.)

Just so we're all clear, that isn't me. You can email me at gidget.southway@gmail.com. 

I don't know anything about Stacy Schlimmer. Craig McPherson was my guy in the district 8 race. 

So, feel free to buy whatever that email is selling. Just know, I'm not the one selling it.

 

No one likes League of Women Voters, but...

I'd been hearing rumors that conservative lawmakers and candidates were turning down Meet the Candidate events to be sponsored by the League of Women Voters. 

Looking at a quick list of LWV events at a few branches of the Johnson County Library, I am pretty certain the rumors were true.

So, the crazy liberals known as the League of Women Voters will host candidates at five different library branches over the next few weeks.

Some conservatives obviously accepted the invitation, but there are several library branches not represented on the list. There are 14 branches of the county library. Of those, five will host candidate events. House candidates for districts 17 and 18 will be at the Shawnee Neighborhood branch; House candidates for district 21 and county commission candidates for the first district will appear together at the Corinth Neighborhood branch; House candidates of district 29 will be at the Leawood Pioneer Neighborhood branch; Commission chair candidates and district four county commission candidates will appear at the Central Resource Library and House candidates for the 25th district will appear at Cedar Roe Neighborhood in Roeland Park.

With 14 library branches and countless candidates and races in Johnson County, it's incredibly disappointing that more aren't taking the opportunity to appear. I generally conclude that people who are unwilling to appear at such engagements are too stupid to speak reasonably in public.

I recognize that the League of Women Voters is vile, but this sort of event could serve as outreach to constituents that may hear the term, LWV, and assume this group is a non-partisan group with only the best interests of women in mind. If a candidate has the ability to speak publicly without sounding like a ding bat, there's absolutely no risk in attending. 

There are very few organizations sponsoring meet and greet events for lower ticket races these days. If conservative candidates are uncomfortable attending those set up by (gross) groups like LWV, maybe it's time for conservatives to start their own organizations to sponsor debates and greet events.

At some point in the near future, I will write here about outreach to voters who aren't old, white men and their wives. It is imperative that conservatives (and Republicans) learn to reach new audiences. Changing demographics require it.

Attending LWV and incrementally reaching even one disaffected member of that group is a huge start. And too many conservatives -- out of fear? pride? -- refused to take the opportunity.

 

 

Friday, October 10, 2014

A Less Malignant Tumor

Jim Geraghty fears that "the disappointment of 2012 persuaded a lot of conservatives that their efforts don't make a difference," which he says may become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I'm sure thousands of conservatives will explain to the National Review writer exactly why conservatives feel that way. And I'm going to add my voice to the chorus.

First, the 2012 election was a huge disappointment, but that in itself isn't what has discouraged the conservatives I know. We aren't disenchanted because the Democrats win some. We're frustrated that even when we win, Republicans don't move the needle.

Putting a Republican in office rather than a Democrat is basically replacing a virulent, malignant tumor with a slightly less malignant tumor. It slows the disease, but it's still fatal. Even when we win, we lose.

Spending slows slightly and expenditures are re-adjusted, but enormous deficits remain. I have little faith that if Republicans somehow manage to win the Senate and maintain the House that they will do what is necessary to rein in Obama's relentless overstep of Presidential authority.

As a Kansan, it is extraordinarily frustrating to me that our federal legislators, arguably some of the most conservative in the nation, will vote once again to retain John Boehner as speaker.

Boehner, the orange for brains, intends to support President Obama's plans for amnesty. The House Speaker says he'll only support some form of amnesty if the President agrees to shut down the border, but anyone who hasn't damaged one too many brain cells in a tanning bed knows that the President is highly unlikely to do any such thing. Obama enforces the parts of laws that he likes and completely ignores the parts he doesn't -- or he just changes them on the fly.

Members of the House theoretically hold the purse strings. Already, the Republican majority could have stopped the flow of federal dollars to Obamacare, but nope. They don't even have the political will to fight a wildly unpopular program that passed with the bare minimum of votes from only one side of the aisle. The American people -- not just conservatives -- hate it, but our jelly-fish House Republicans tremble in fear that Obama will say something not-nice about them. Um. He does that everyday. At a minimum they could  least score a point in return for the bashing.

It's probably not appropriate to bash our federal legislators right before an election, but I would sincerely like to know which members of the Kansas delegation are going to support Boehner for speaker. (Hint: 75 percent of them will without question.)

If Republicans take the Senate, the same question goes for the Kansas Senate delegation. Will they support Mitch McConnell for majority leader, assuming McConnell pulls his head out of the dark pit of his behind in time to win re-election? 

I think it's a safe assumption that McConnell will receive the votes of both Sen. Pat Roberts and Sen. Jerry Moran. 

McConnell is an awful, horrid human. (This is the very worst insult I can lob at anyone. There are lots of good people with whom I disagree. That's not McConnell. He's disgusts me.)

Anyway, McConnell, brags about being "with" Joe Biden. He's campaigning as the penultimate insider. McConnell is a porker who, along with his wife, a former Secretary of Labor, earned $110 million in earmarks. In short, he's human garbage that smells only slightly less offensive than Sen. Harry Reid. (And there rests the sole political statement of Orman's with which I agree.)

Even in Kansas itself, we're dealing with a somewhat tepid Republican Establishment that does an embarrassing amount of pandering to liberals.

We have a conservative legislature and a conservative governor and the best we can do is a sliver of income tax cuts balanced with a sales tax increase. 

And don't even get me started on education policy. We've seen limited moves toward more local control -- which really means just shifting some school funding authority from the state to the locals -- no actual policy or actual educational programming shifts. We've essentially given local school boards more opportunity to increase property taxes. Fine, I guess.

In the realm of policy, Brownback is advocating for MORE public education -- not less. His all-day kindergarten proposal is maddening. 

Gov. Brownback, you should take note, that despite your somewhat liberal approach to education --  MORE money, MORE children under the auspice of the education establishment -- the media and liberals STILL call you anti-education. If you're going to pander, maybe you should pander to your base. 

Here's what that looks like: Use your crazy, half-cocked David Kensinger and friends to advocate for things like school choice instead of all-day kindergarten and sales tax increases. How 'bout that?

Our legislature is woefully terrified of the dramatic changes that must be made if we're to save the culture. We need to change the way our judges are appointed. We need to make serious changes to the school finance formula. We probably need to restructure or at least re-examine the power our State School Board has over curriculum. (That's what probably needs to happen to defeat Common Core). And we desperately need to slow our roll where spending is concerned. The tax cuts are awesome, but they need to be paired with spending cuts.

None of those things is going to be easy, but if not in 2010 or 2012 with a conservative legislature, a conservative governor and a political wind blowing decidedly right -- then when?

If you're a conservative who has invested blood, sweat, tears and cold hard cash to get these people elected only to see them move hard left the second their office is secured, it seems like a waste of time and resources to even bother. 

Grassroots conservatives have been bailing water over the sides of the Titanic that is the U.S. for many years. Our arms are tired, and the water continues to rise. Like many conservatives, I'm beginning to feel as if I should put down my bucket and enjoy the soothing music in the waning moments of liberty.

 

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Poll tipping is unsurprising

Solid coverage of the Kansas race for U.S. Senate from the Washington Examiner.

Editor Byron York attended yesterday's debate between Greg Orman and Pat Roberts. Roberts was a little-bit of a one-hit wonder, repeatedly noting that Orman is a Democrat. 

His one-note appearance was necessary -- Roberts will only win if Kansas recognize Orman for the jackass in sheep's clothing that he actually is. 

It's beginning to work. FINALLY. (Side bar: The Kansas Republican Party is claiming the poll turnaround can be attributed in part to a full-court press including a ground game. Um. Where is this Roberts' ground game? I guess maybe the grassroots people in Harper, Kan., are knocking it out of the park, but here in most-populated Johnson County? Yeah. OK.)

Here's the important takeaway from the York article:

"The bottom line is this is still Kansas, which has not sent a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since the 1930s. If the polls are indeed tipping back to Republicans, no one should really be surprised."

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Orman bubble?

And now a second poll shows U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts leading challenger Greg Orman.

A Fox News poll that collected data between Oct. 3 and Oct. 7 shows Roberts leading Orman 44 percent to 39 percent.

The same poll shows Gov. Brownback opening a lead on Rep. Paul Davis.
 

A semi-sigh of relief

Finally, some halfway decent news.

Sen. Pat Roberts is up in the latest poll from CNN. The poll of likely Kansas voters gives the Senator a 1 percent edge over independent Democrat Greg Orman.

It's still too close to break out the champagne, but it's a screaming cry better than 10-points behind, which is where other polls suggested Roberts was.

I believe the same poll shows Brownback down by only 1 percent to Davis as well.

If the two Republicans atop the Kansas ticket manage to pull this one off... 

Who gets the blame?

The Nov. 4 election may be a garbage storm for Kansas Republicans. 

National Review's Jim Geraghty suggests the outlook for U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts is "darkening." The latest polls suggest Gov. Brownback is inching closer to Paul Davis, though Davis still holds a polling lead within the margin of error.

If Kansas Republicans lose the Governorship, or worse but more likely, a U.S. Senate seat, who gets the blame?

Commence Circular Firing Squad Sequence:


There will certainly be plenty of blame to go around and the autopsy of Kansas general election 2014 will be gory.

I'll share who I believe deserves some heavy helpings of blame, but I am curious friends. Who do you think deserves the lions' share? 

I'm not looking for an ugly argument. That's already happening and is only going to get uglier if things go badly on Nov. 4.

Here's my short list:

1. U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts

He should never have run again. I've said that from the very beginning. One of the reasons is that he's definitely been in Washington too long. But more importantly, he wasn't in a very good position to win.

I know his long-time supporters and his trusted confidantes believe differently. They needed to take off the rose-colored glasses circa 2012. Former Sen. Dick Lugar's 2012 campaign should have sent a shiver down the spine of the Roberts apparatus. Lugar, you'll recall, was the longest-sitting U.S. Senator in history (I think). From Indiana, Lugar's tenure in the Senate began in 1976. (1976!!) He lost re-election in the 2012 Republican primary. The biggest campaign issue? Lugar didn't actually live in Indiana, and his opponent said Lugar had lost touch with his Hoosier State roots.

Sound familiar? His Republican replacement, Richard Mourdock, went on to lose the general election to a Democrat. 

Roberts also deserves some blame for never establishing any sort of ground game. He's had it way too easy in previous elections. Showing up was all it took to win the seat. That simply isn't today's political landscape. Had Roberts really worked at maintaining a real connection to Kansas -- and I don't care about his stupid recliner -- I mean actively, regularly attempting to engage the people he represents, he wouldn't be fighting for his political life today. He'd have supporters on the ground in Kansas, as opposed to flying in some Republican consultants from the East Coast. 

Roberts has been in the U.S. Senate for longer than I have been of voting age. True story: As a very eager college student, I once sat next to him on an airplane. He very obviously didn't want to talk. An engaged Senator would have welcomed the opportunity to spend a few minutes with an informed constituent and voter. Until this summer, that was the ONLY time I have ever seen Pat Roberts outside of when I once visited his office in Washington, D.C. (And note, that plane ride wasn't going to or from Kansas.)

These days a Kansan can't swing an elbow without hitting Kevin Yoder or Jerry Moran. They are simply always, always, around -- either hosting town hall meetings, attending library openings, hosting office hours or whatever. They are available -- in person -- regularly.

I hate to kick a man when he's down, but I just think it's disappointing that Roberts dialed it in for so many years. Just because you can take the easy road doesn't mean you should. Roberts has had ample opportunity to connect with Kansas voters during his 18 years in the U.S. Senate. He's chosen limited contact. For many years, it was good enough, but had he done the hard work years ago, he wouldn't have to work so hard today.

2. Party Insiders/Roberts political advisors -- (i.e., the grassroots people who encouraged Roberts to seek re-election in 2014. I am assuming Roberts does in fact have some trusted advisors in Kansas. Those are the folks of which I speak here.) 

I'm told Republican Party insiders (Establishment) and leaders encouraged Roberts to run a bazillionth time in order to avoid a nasty primary, as it was rumored an open seat would have drawn several candidates, including Tim Huelskamp, Kris Kobach, Kevin Yoder and Todd Tiahrt. Everyone wanted to avoid the possibility of losing those office holders' seats to a Democrat and no one wanted a filthy primary that may have tarnished everyone involved.

Well, guess what? We got a filthy primary anyway, and now we're looking perilously close to losing the U.S. Senate. I would much rather have a fair, honest fight with the very best and brightest candidates battling it out for coveted offices. I would hate the lose any of those office holders' seats, but you know what will be worse? Losing the U.S. Senate with two years left of the Obama Presidency.

Any one of those candidates listed above would be running a better, more engaged, intense race against independent liberal Greg Orman. And a fresher face eliminates one-half of Orman's arguments. 

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not bashing Roberts exactly, and if I haven't said it already, Roberts deserves our vote in the Nov. 4 election. I'm very disturbed by the political movers and shakers who think they can control the Republican electorate. Their hubris is damaging to the Republican Party and may be damaging to the entire country come January 2015.

3. Milton Wolf

I was a mild Wolf supporter in August, but my tank of patience is on empty. It's well past time that he get over his damaged feelings and endorse Pat Roberts. 

It was an ugly primary campaign, but surely, that was expected, right? Wolf didn't throw his hat into the ring to become Secretary of the local Rotary Club. He was running for membership in a very elite organization -- one of the most powerful groups on the face of the planet. 

Even if Roberts had played 100 percent positive -- only running ads about why he's great, not doing any opposition research -- Wolf should have known and expected that someone, a PAC or a Roberts-supporting individual or what-have-you, would run negative ads on the Senator's behalf.  To think otherwise, is well, stupid.

Wolf should have expected it. Sure, be mad about it. But don't take your ball and go home. This is the big leagues. If Wolf wants the slightest hint of a political future, he needs to host a press conference, donate a few thousand and endorse Roberts. 

And while we're on the topic, has Wolf endorsed Brownback yet? A week ago, the Washington Examiner reported that the endorsement was forthcoming. I haven't seen it yet. Memo to Wolf: If you wait until Nov. 5, it's too late.

4. Ardent Wolf and Roberts Supporters 

You know who you are, and you know how you've behaved. Please, please grow up and act like adults. Stop throwing flames in the social media sandbox. 

Rabid Roberts supporters were really gross during the primary election. (I won't tell you what one of them said to me in person. Seriously, some old man I didn't even know personally attacked me at a party event, all for the simple crime of admitting to him that I would be voting for Wolf. Earth to you people: Attacking the other people who are generally on your side doesn't exactly harbor warm, fuzzy feelings. Have a debate, sure. But if your debate skills range from calling someone an "idiot" to calling someone a "moron," you're doing it wrong.) 

Meanwhile, Wolf supporters need to get on the Roberts train, ASAP. It's no secret that I personally want to slap the taste out of the mouths of those so-called "Tea Party" negotiators. I still feel slightly, OK, crazy enraged, when I think about last week's story in The Hill. Just stop it already, and either cast your vote for and vocally offer support to Roberts, or please, please do the world a favor and stop talking until Nov. 5. You're not helping. You're hurting the country's chances of having a Republican majority in the Senate.

 5. Sam Brownback

Dear, dear Governor: Please, please start listening to members of your own party. I'm not saying you should stop listening to your advisers, but you can overrule them, correct?

The bizarre thing about Brownback is he has governed far more from the center than necessary. It's quite baffling, honestly. He's pandered to special interests -- just not conservative special interests. (see, his grand American Indian apology tour. What was that? I'm still scratching my head.) 

In his quest for I guess, mediocrity, he's done a fine job of alienating conservatives. The moderates liberals are never, ever going to join Brownback's cause. Ever. So Brownback should be spending his time in office rallying conservatives and moving the state to the right. That's not what he's done, despite the media storyline.

If I think too long about it, I can still get fired up about that sales tax increase. 

You would be hard-pressed to find many conservatives just chomping at the bit to cast a ballot for Brownback this year. I'm not worried that they'll vote for Davis, but everyone should worry about the conservatives who just won't vote in the Governor's race. I've talked to them on doorsteps, and so have state House and Senate candidates. And I know for a fact, some of those very candidates have tried repeatedly to tell the Governor and his people that. It doesn't appear that Brownback is listening. Will conservative voting be depressed enough to drag down races lower on the ticket? 

The most rabid (in an awesome way) conservative officeholder (maybe second to Huelskamp) is Kris Kobach. He's going to get more votes than Brownback. 

Just let that sink in.

5. Jerry Moran

Moran is the head of the NRSC, and if Republicans lose the U.S. Senate in this election, he should be immediately removed from that duty. Sorry. 

I like Moran, but the NRSC has one job. If they fail to win the Senate because Moran's home state sends a liberal to Washington, Moran should be canned from that role.

Who am I missing? Are there others who deserve some blame? Shoot me an email or comment anonymously. Let's keep the discussion halfway civil and clean.









 

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Brownback vs. Davis -- It's going to be a photo finish

I'm not counting Sen. Pat Roberts out just yet, but it ain't looking good. The last polls I saw showed the independent liberal with a 10 point lead.

Meanwhile, the Governor's race is looking downright winnable, which is better than it was nary a week or so ago. While polling showed a 4-point Paul Davis lead just a few days ago, the most recent polling puts the Governor behind Davis by 1 point. It's winnable



I anticipate polls will continue to move in the right direction between now and election day, and all of the terrible things that happen between now and then -- ObamaCare fully roosting, Ebola, ISIS -- all of that will be blamed, rightfully so, on the Democrats.

Unfortunately, the Pat Roberts campaign has not been able to clearly show Orman as the friend of Obama, liberal loon, he actually is. And it may just cost the Republicans the U.S. Senate.

Two polls, in which surveying concluded on Oct. 1, show wildly different results in the Roberts/Orman race. One, conducted over a 10-day period, shows a tie. The other, conducted over a five-day period, shows Orman opening up a 10-point lead.

I don't know what to think. In my heart, I know conservatives and even non-conservatives like Steve Rose, are reluctantly rallying around Roberts. Finally. I only hope it isn't too little, too late. 

I am quite curious what others think as I am at a loss. The sense a panic rolling off my conservative friends like sweat off a pig in August.

If Roberts somehow manages to pull this race out, it will be because a lot of good people did something they didn't really want to do -- pull the lever for someone who overstayed his welcome. Should he win, I sincerely hope Roberts will go out of his way to show his gratitude.

If he loses, well, that's a post for another time.

Vote early, vote often

Dons tin foil cap.

Go early to the polls this year. I know it's not the conservative thing to do. 

Philosophically, we're traditionalists and we like to see our friends and neighbors and feel the rush of performing our civic duty. 

Don't wait this year, my friends. Don't. Advance, in-person begins in Johnson County on Oct. 20. I suggest all conservatives make it a point to cast their ballots as early as possible.

And here's the part where I need my tin foil hat: I am all but certain every time a federal official opens his or her mouth they are lying to us. Every single time. They are out of control. 

I couldn't be bothered to rock myself in the fetal position over the small lies. I think my favorite baby lie is the monthly release of unemployment numbers. Officials report that the unemployment rate is dropping like a rock. It's lower today than it was six years ago. The officials conveniently forget to mention that the way unemployment data is figured has changed dramatically since then. It's comparing apples to soccer balls. They also don't mention that while the unemployment numbers are lower, the percentage of Americans no longer in the workforce is dramatically higher. Those numbers can't be explained by Baby Boomers retiring. (Which, by the way, for the record numbers of Baby Boomers reaching retirement age, very few of them seem to be leaving the labor force if they can help it -- probably because they can't afford to -- but that's a story for another day.)

So, our federal officials are all Pinochios, only in suits instead of lederhosen. The biggest Pinochio of them all, I am convinced, is Thomas Freiden and everyone involved in public health.



His story isn't to be believed and not just because he's a federal official and we've clearly established that they are liars. But also because his stories about Ebola and about enterovirus 68 don't add up.

The enterovirus entered the country via a mass of illegals from central America. Good luck finding anyone who will be honest about it.

And then there's Ebola. Are we really to believe that the deadly epidemic is spread the same way as AIDS -- via contact of bodily fluids? 

The official response to the two diseases is certainly different. I'm going to date myself a bit, but I clearly recall Bill Clinton's Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders advocating teaching children about masturbation in order to combat AIDS. Meanwhile, back when AIDS was said to be a deadly epidemic, junior high kids were encouraged to put condoms on produce in order to fight it.

Fast forward 20 years, and we're being told gently just to wash our hands -- nothing to worry about. This disease kills 60 percent of the people it infects within weeks. AIDS killed (kills?) over years. 

Our officials just seem awfully glib about Ebola considering it's deadly nature and how little they know about it. Trained medical practitioners are falling ill. A woman in Spain recently contracted the virus though she wore personal protective gear each of the two times she was in contact with an infected person. They don't know how she caught it.

But seriously, Americans, just wash your hands. That should fix it up just fine. 

I am sensitive to health officials not wanting to cause a panic. I get it, but there's no excuse for lying about what you know or don't know about a deadly virus capable of wiping out two-thirds of the planet.

I don't know. They just don't seem worried enough, and that makes me worried. I like my public officials heavy on exercising caution. 

So, I'm doing some math, and avoiding large gatherings of people when and where I can. 

A very important election is 29 days away. Ebola's incubation period is 21 days. There is a man in Dallas, who was diagnosed with the illness on Sept. 26, and authorities just flew an NBC cameraman with the virus to Omaha for treatment.

If the virus mutates, if large masses of people are exposed or ill, I firmly believe Homeland Security will temporarily set aside spying on Americans and instead quarantine the masses. 

They may hope to strategically quarantine voters who are sympathetic to Republicans. Look, I know it sounds completely crazy, and I say these things half-laughing. But only half. A part of me is frightened, and the other half simply doesn't trust this administration. I truly believe they are diabolical and that they will do whatever they believe they can get away with.

Take that however you want. I'm not taking any chances. This is the most important election of my lifetime, and I don't plan to miss it.

I'll be voting early -- just in case.

If you'd like to spend the rest of your day terrified of a virus you can't stop, click on the links I provided. I don't blame you if you don't click on the links. 

And now I will return you to non-tin-foil-hat-wearing Gidget.

 

 
 

Monday, October 6, 2014

Stop Leaks before they happen, GOP





In case anyone missed my irritation with a Hill story last week about a baffling meeting between so-called Tea Party leaders and Roberts' and Brownback's campaign people: I leave you with the above. (H/T)

Stop leaks before they happen, Kansas GOP. (You can do this by never allowing into another meeting the tools who spoke to The Hill.)

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Oh The Curse Words I'd Like to Use

I couldn't sleep last night after reading this revolting story about members of the "Tea Party" staging a revolt and turning Kansas blue.

According to some lady writing a story about Kansas from her cozy home in Washington D.C., Kansas Tea Party members are "negotiating" with members of the Roberts and Brownback campaigns.

Here's one of many money quotes: "It all comes back to whether or not there's an agreement reached. I don't know if there's going to be," said Steve Shute, a city councilman in Gardner, Kan., and Tea Party activist. "The longer this delays, to find results, the greater risk there is that Kansas turns blue or purple," said Shute, who's been acting as a moderator between conservatives and the campaigns of Roberts and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback.

It's hard for me to find the right words to explain how blood-ragingly angry that quote makes me. Lucky you all, I'm going to try.

First,  in order to "negotiate" anything you have to have something the other party wants. I'm assuming Shute believes he can lead Tea Party conservatives to the Roberts and Brownback stream and make them drink. That idea is the single most egotistical load of hubris on planet Earth today, and it shows a stunning lack of understanding of what the Tea Party is all about.

Memo to all would-be Tea Party self-proclaimed spokespeople: You don't speak for me. You don't speak for the majority of us. The Tea Party was an organic, grassroots effort founded largely on liberty, personal responsibility and fiscal restraint. When it began, there were no leaders. And honestly today, the Tea Party is an idea -- not a political party, though plenty of people have worked long and hard at trying to hijack it for their own personal gains. Shame on them.

If you want to get dressed up in your Revolutionary War garb and give speeches about patriotism, go ahead. But please know your comments are yours alone. You do not speak for the Tea Party. You do not speak for conservatives. 

Word on the street here in actual Kansas is that a meeting did take place at the behest of Sen. Roberts, who hoped to learn how to reach some of the "tea partiers." I appreciate the good faith effort from Sen. Roberts, but please, do your homework! Those people don't speak for anyone but themselves. Further, never, EVER, allow people into such a meeting that can't stop themselves from running to the press. There were people I respect in that meeting. They are not quoted in the article.

The mere appearance of attempting to negotiate with those lunatics is damaging to the Roberts campaign, and probably to the Brownback campaign as well. As soon as the list of "demands" was brought to the table, the sane people should have refused to continue the discussion.

There's simply no reason to negotiate with a person who holds little, if any, political clout, and even less of a reason to have a discussion with someone making outrageous demands.

 (I am not certain how accurate my information is. As I've said before, I'm standing at the window looking in on party insiders. Sometimes, the blinds are closed. This is one of those times.)

Their demands are truly insane and damage the conservative cause.

According to the article in The Hill, the deranged self-proclaimed leaders are asking that Anne Hodgdon be removed from her slot on the Kansas Board of Healing Arts. Hodgdon, you'll recall, is a vocal Roberts supporter. Gov. Brownback appointed her to the board, and the board began investigating an ethics complaint about Milton Wolf and his x-rays. 

What a bunch of hypocrites the so-called "Tea Party" activists are if they attempt to use their self-perceived power to target a private citizen, which Hodgdon is. Ironically, they are demanding that Brownback do to Hodgdon what they said Hodgdon did to Wolf -- that is abuse power. It's hideous.

Their second demand is just as ludicrous. This drum circle of raging idiots told The Hill that they are also demanding that the state party "adopt a resolution declaring that if Roberts doesn't complete all six years of his next term, Wolf would be named his replacement."

I have two major problems with that demand.  Um. That's not how that works. That's not how any of that works, and secondly, it's politically daft to let the whole world know that Roberts likely isn't going to complete his term right BEFORE a hotly contested election.

If and when there is a Republican vacancy in office, precinct committee men and women select a replacement. Precinct people are the grassroots. They are duly elected by their friends and neighbors and they are tasked with doing the crappy groundwork in campaigns. When someone comes to your door with political literature and a yard sign, chances are they serve as precinct people. That's their real job. Every once in a blue moon, they get the small perk of choosing a replacement office holder. 

So, if Roberts is elected and for some reason he doesn't serve out the remainder of his term, grassroots people will select his replacement via a ballot. Wolf is welcome to try for the opening, but that's not how it works that the state party can just name a successor. Have these activists lost their minds? Allowing the state party to say in advance who a successor would be is a terrible idea that places even more power in the hands of the state party.

I don't think that's very "tea party" of them.

Look, insiders (and wannabes) all know that Roberts, if he manages to win, isn't staying in office the entire term. And I know I've said this somewhere before but am too lazy and enraged to seek it: I think that's gross and tacky and indecent. 

But that's the system we have, and like a good, actual Tea Partier, I like to follow the rules, until we change the rules. And by changing the rules, I mean we do it through the appropriate channels -- not by acting like political hacks with an axe to grind.

I don't want to leave any room for doubt here, so I'm going to reiterate a few things: Shute, Rob Wood and Chuck Henderson don't speak for me, and I'm certain they don't speak for most others.

Every Wolf voter that I personally know has come to terms with voting for Roberts. They will do what they should. There are approximately five leftover holdouts from the Wolf campaign. And as evidenced by that story in The Hill, they are lunatics.

No one is taking political cues from them. They have been denounced thoroughly from every corner of the state.

All of that said, if anyone from the Brownback or Roberts campaign actually meets with those fools, they should do no more than offer a pat on the head and a piece of candy. 

They are not to be taken seriously.  

For what it's worth, here are there supposed demands in outline form.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Doing stuff how it's always been done



Old school Republicans are one sorry bunch of clueless. Sorry, but it needs to be said.

First, there's this. Click on that link and just prepare to be sorely disappointed. 

The blog post is from an anonymous poster in Mississippi. In that state, the politically astute will recall,  a doddering Republican Establishment Senator Thad Cochran won a vicious primary against a younger, Tea Party-backed candidate.

Here's the gist of the blog post:

"WE ARE LOST and you...the GOP...just bet your last dollar on an old man that can barely walk, barely talk, and other geriatric candidates that you can control so the control you have had in the past will continue so I ask you...What profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his own soul?

I went to this event because I wanted to see the 11 million dollar man for myself. When it ended, 2 gentlemen that were behind me, young, well-dressed, affluent(or appeared that way) looked at each other and for a second I thought they were thinking what I was thinking...OMG we gave up McDaniels for this? But then one of them said Woohoo and clapped and then there was some mild clapping that followed. I know deep down in my heart they were thinking something different...OMG we are in trouble."

The parallels between the Cochran-McDaniel primary and the Roberts-Wolf race aren't perfect. The Mississippi race was far nastier, and Cochran, backed by the NRSC (shame, shame, shame on Jerry Moran and the group he chairs) resorted to blatant falsehoods that somehow McDaniel was a racist. 

That is by far the most disgusting charge a Republican can level at another Republican -- especially when there is no evidence to support it. It was race baiting, pure and simple. And I personally believe that should (not shall, but should) be beneath the Republicans. The Roberts-Wolf, though ugly, was no where near that level of pig pen.

 

The blog post goes into a lengthy reverie about how the author could not bear to be hard on Cochran, because he is a doddering old man. Pat Roberts is not a doddering old man. He's old, all right. But he isn't doddering. He's as energetic as any 25-year-old still living in his parents' basement playing videogames. (That's to say, he's still got some get-up-and-go, but maybe not the same amount as a 25-year-old athlete.)
Anyway, the blogger has some meaningful things to say about the current Republican Party. He (or she) questions how the Republican Party would rally around someone who so obviously should retire. About the rally he attended, he writes:

"I can tell you one thing...there was no excitement, there was no passion, and there was no hope...just people going through the motions of what? I don't know."

Preach it, Brother Whoever You Are. 

In the last few days, I have been especially troubled that Republican candidates seem to be hanging their hopes on old-style campaigning. While Democrats are using their considerable war chests hiring (astroturf) people to go door-to-door and rally specific demographics to vote, Republicans are spending the majority of their campaign funds for things like television commercials. (You can read more about it at DailyKos. Sorry.)

Quick show of hands: How many of you actually watch commercials when you sit in front of the television? 

Yeah. Me neither. In addition to elect-me promises that sound like Back to the Future -- hello, Todd Tiahrt -- Republicans are campaigning like it's 1985. Between Netflix, On Demand cable programming and my DVR, I almost never watch the commercials. (The commercials I've linked to here, I've seen only because they are available on YouTube and I look for them.) Blowing a campaign war chest on commercials is so last week. (Or really, last decade).




In 2012, President Obama specifically targeted black voters. His primary objective was to register record numbers of black voters and drive them to the polls. He did this partially through traditional advertising, but primarily, he used initiatives like targeting barber and beauty shops in specific neighborhoods.

Democrats are following that playbook in 2014. I don't know if it will work in this election, but it is definitely going to make election margins much tighter for Republicans than they traditionally would be.

And Roberts, Moran via the NRSC, and the Republican Governor's Association may as well be using stone tablets to get their message out.

Does Roberts have a ground game, like, at all? How many doorsteps has Roberts himself visited? I'm guessing pitifully few. Had the Senator ever actually had to mount a competitive campaign, he would at least have a core group of grassroots people in every corner of the state ready to rally voters to his cause. (Yoder seems to be doing yeoman's work, campaigning like he's got a tight race. This bodes well for his continued success in the future.)

It's true Republicans are coming around, somewhat. Last election cycle, the National GOP Committee finally figured out that having a bunch of offices in Washington D.C. was stupid. (Shame on Republicans for letting Democrats figure this out first.) Supposedly, the National GOP has fanned out setting up offices across the nation this year. 

It's a start, but it may be too little too late.

Shocker. Well not really.

Who saw this one coming?

Oh wait. Everyone.

A panel of liberal Democratic judges ruled today that the Democrats do not have to put a Democrat on the ballot for U.S. Senate. It's true, there already is a Democrat on the ballot, but Greg Orman is running without a 'D' behind his name. (And that shouldn't count, because the Democrats had a primary and everything. No really. Just a few months ago, they had a primary election with two whole candidates battling it out to be the guy who drops out of the race to make way for Orman.)

What is it with liberals and their basic misunderstanding of language?

"Shall" equals "used in laws,  regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory." No seriously. That's the actual definition from Webster's Dictionary. 

I feel pretty certain that when law makers use that word in legislation, the legislators interpret "shall" to mean "mandatory." 

I am also really, really confident what the word "is" means as I am a native English speaker with, apparently, an unusually exceptional understanding of the meaning of common words. I am not a judge, alas, so I am not adept at parsing language so words mean what I want them to mean instead of what they actually mean.



So, the Democrats will not replace Chad Taylor on the ballot. Everyone saw that coming, right? And by everyone, I mean the Roberts campaign staff. You guys knew this was coming, and are properly prepared, right?