Bill Pierce has laid out ten core principles in memorable fashion. They’re all great, but here are my five favorites:

Protect and Defend the Constitution. As your Senator, you have my solemn word I will protect and defend the Constitution with special assurances to protect America’s “first freedom” – the 2nd Amendment.

Less taxes and less regulation. Let’s renew the Reagan Revolution and free the spirit of American enterprise. We must make permanent the tax cuts enacted earlier and revise the Tax Code, and stay the hands of unelected federal bureaucrats who hamper small business creation.

Reign in federal spending. Pork, earmarks, uncontrolled growth in entitlement programs, and unnecessary spending will enslave our children into an intolerable level of debt. I will join Senators Coburn, Ensign, and DeMint to form a foursome of former small business owners who understand the need to balance the budget to reverse the fiscal “bad habits” of the past.

Secure border and control illegal immigration. A country that does not protect its borders will soon disappear. Our nation, built upon a foundation of the rule of law, must ensure that all laws are enforced or anarchy will reign – and, that applies to illegal immigrants and the businesses who employ them. Add the real threat of terrorism and there are plenty of reasons to secure our borders.

Address the crisis in the Judiciary. I will work to expose and correct the imbalanced case load versus staffing issues in the judiciary, and ensure that the President’s judicial nominations receive their “day in court” without delay by filibusters, which result in more vacant seats on the bench – justice not served is justice denied.

The differences between Pierce and DeWine could not be more stark, as Bill’s wrap-up demonstrates:

Finally - I do not, nor will I ever, subscribe to today’s prevailing attitude that Massachusetts and New York have sole patent rights for out-spoken Senators. I will speak out about the issues listed above and I will not hesitate to challenge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who work against our “common sense” approach to these critical issues.

The positions listed above are but a few of my central concerns. You may have noticed that Senator Mike DeWine supports the first one (prolife — Ed.), recently began to support the second (defense of traditional marriage — Ed.), and has either voted against one or more of the remaining OR not concerned himself with any of these “big” issues. I can and will do much better, but I need your help on Tuesday, May 2nd.

___________________________

Ohio conservatives having to stop hoping for conservatism from Mike DeWine. He’s had 11 years to disappoint us. There is no good reason to endure more disappointment from Mike DeWine when there is a genuine conservative alternative in Bill Pierce, a man who will represent and defend our values in Washington.

Don’t forget to visit Bill’s site, his blog, and his Contribute page.

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

UPDATE: Related FreeRepublic Post on the Dispatch editorial is HERE.
____________________________

The Enquirer thinks the GOP US Senate Primary isn’t worth covering, or worth the effort of rendering an endorsement (scroll to bottom for list of endorsement links).

Enquirer searches for any kind of news on the race yield mere listings of candidates and isolated stories that are all over a month old.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer didn’t endorse anyone either (link skips from state offices to Congressional races). No evidence at The Toledo Blade either. Or The Dayton Daily News.

They’re assuming it’s not a race.

This may turn out to be an oversight on the level of “Dewey Beats Truman.”

The Columbus Dispatch endorsed DeWine for the primary (about halfway down):

Mike DeWine, of Cedarville, comes to his third Senate campaign with a solid reputation for integrity and a track record of independence in a Republican-dominated Congress. Though consistent in declaring his support for most Bush administration policies, he has held his ground when his position differs from that of the most-conservative wing of his party. His brand of civility and professionalism, not partisanship, yields results.

THIS is “civil and professional”? And what exactly are those “results” ?

Bill Pierce (site, blog, contribute) shows us in his “Campaign of Principles” post that Mike Dewine’s positions don’t differ from the “most-conservative wing” (that’s Dispatch code for “extremists”); Mike DeWine’s positions differ from time-honored conservative principles most of the time. Read the whole thing.

Don’t let anyone fool you. This is a race, and Mike DeWine has only two things left going for him: Apathy and intertia. If you doubt it, click over to this FreeRepublic comment from yesterday at a post about DeWine’s outrageous criticism of Donald Rumsfeld:

I live in Ohio, I am working on the Ken Blackwell campaign. Every single GOP voter I have spoken with says they are voting for Pierce. Of course my local media is 100% behind De”whine.” As active as I am in politics, I had no idea DeWhine criticized Rummy. (Which was the intent of the media who Did NOT report on it, no doubt). Anyway…..To all Ohio conservative voters, lets send a message to RINOs and dump Dewhine.

UPDATE: Yes, I’ve seen today’s the Dispatch poll on the US Senate race. No, I don’t believe it, with good reason — simply remember how dreadfully wrong (56-point swings!) they were about the Reform Ohio Now initiatives last year. Now they’re hoping they can find representative GOP members, a smaller group, when they couldn’t even get a representative sample of the state. B,S.

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

Go here for Part 1.
Go here for Part 2.
___________________________

Warning: Some readers might find the material covered in this post offensive, though every attempt has been made to keep it at a PG-13 level. Click on links provided to the R-Rated Whisteblower at your own risk.
_________________________

Not only has Bob McEwen willing associated himself with a publisher and a group whose concerns about opponent Jean Schmidt’s safety are at a minimum cavalier, he has associated himself with someone who has made frequent crude and borderline pornographic references to his opponent.

When Jean Schmidt made her trip to Iraq, the R-Rated Whistleblower posted the following (for those not as “well-educated” as the R-Rated Whistleblower, as I wasn’t, “Camel Toe” is a crude reference to the female genital area):

From the January 12 issue –
If you think receiving a pre-recorded over-taxed payer funded telephone call at supper time from Congresswoman “Mean Jean” Schmidt, off on an over-taxpayer funded campaign trip (designated by the Department of Defense as Operation Camel Toe) in Iraq, would be outrageous, just check your mailbox to see “Mean Jean’s” glossy, full-color political self-promoting puff piece, prepared, published, and paid for by the over-taxed payers too. Postage rates just went up for ordinary Americans. But the franking privilege still allows multi-millionaires in Congress to send out their political puffery for free.

From the January 13 issue –
“Mean Jean” Schmidt’s bad luck continues. First, on her over-taxed payer funded campaign trip to Iraq, folks hearing about “Operation Camel Toe” couldn’t stop laughing about how she showed up wearing her “I Love Cameltoes” T-Shirt. No wonder the press wasn’t allowed on this trip. At least she didn’t ask how they liked their Hummers. What’s next, will she be trashed on the Tigris? Booed in Baghdad?

From the January 14 issue –
Friday in Iraq, on “Mean Jean” Schmidt’s over-taxed payer funded campaign trip to the Middle East, the news blackout continued about what the sergeant said when “Mean Jean” asked the troops, “Why do they call it Operation Camel Toe?”

When the Blower published his celebratory April 27 issue on the results of the day’s festivities at the Ohio Election Commission, the title of the issue was “Clusterf*** in Columbus” (spelled with a letter missing, I suppose to avoid the spam filters).

Many more examples could be provided, but I think that’s quite enough.

The evangelicals listed at Bob McEwen’s Endorsements page ought to ask him how associating with the lewd, crude, and borderline pornographic material described here is consistent with the tenets of the Christian faith he allegedly holds so dear.

At a more worldly level, voters in The Second District have to wonder what in the heck the relationship is between what has been described in this post and the previous one, and the idea of “Restoring Honor and Dignity,” and why someone who doesn’t seem to understand the obvious contradictions is deserving of their vote.
____________________________

UPDATE: In the interest of space, these posts haven’t even attempted to chronicle The Blower’s other areas of attack on Schmidt (her height, her female attributes, her husband, her daughter’s wedding, her twin sister, etc., etc.), all of which should have been repudiated by the McEwen camp if its claim all along that the campaign should be about “the issues” had even the slightest bit of credibility to it. It again shows the candidate’s own contention to Bill Cunningham on April 20 that he had not been engaging (or by inference sanctioning) negative campaigning is, and has been, a pile of Camel do-do.

UPDATE 2, May 5: As if confirmation of the association were necessary, the Enquirer’s Politics Extra blog took note of the McEwen Election Night Party Wake attendees (HT to a frequent e-mailer):

Bob Schuler, Ohio state senator
Mark Quarry, Silverton city councilman
Russ Jackson, Anderson Township trustee
Jeff Hardin, vice chairman of the Clermont County Republican Club
Rick Brian, former mayor of Blue Ash
Bob Semple, former Adams County commissioner
Linda Rieg of Warren County, who started the Women for McEwen group
Jim Schifrin, author of the e-mail newsletter The Whistleblower

Go here for Part 1.
Go here for Part 3.
___________________________

So what has the R-Rated Whistleblower published that make Bob McEwen’s association with it so hypocritical?

First, recall that McEwen was yukking it up in February with everyone else, including The Blower himself, when Tom Brinkman cut off Jean Schmidt’s head on a cake.

No big deal? I beg to differ.

On January 9, while she was either in or on her way to Iraq, the Whistleblower wrote:

Some folks are worried Mean Jean could even be abducted by terrorists. But even more people are worried that she might then be released.

People, there is humor, and there’s unspeakable meanness.

What happens to people who are kidnapped in Iraq? Think Nick Berg; they’re beheaded.

So, here’s the sequence:

• The Blower’s says that if kidnapped in Iraq it would be nice if she stays kidnapped.
• People who are kidnapped in Iraq tend to have their heads cut off.
• Tom Brinkman figuratively cuts off Schmidt’s head on a cake in the presence of The Blower, the COASTers, and ….. Bob McEwen.

Now that the whole scenario has been laid out, readers not afflicted with Schmidt Derangement Syndrome might now understand why Jean Schmidt blew a gasket in reacting to COAST’s cake-cutting event. These folks can fairly be seen as wishing she were dead, and thinking that it’s all quite funny.

In fact, what was the counterreaction to Schmidt’s objection?

“No honoree before has complained of the honor, and we doubt anyone will again,” said COAST President Jim Urling. “In addition to being unable to control her urges to tax and spend, Ms. Schmidt obviously has no sense of humor.”

Point, proven.

This sad series of events brought mean-spiritedness to a new level, and Bob McEwen willingly associated himself with it. How that is consistent with his professed Christianity I will never know.

Matt at Weapons of Mass Discussion had this reaction in late February:

I’m beginning to think that this crowd has more and more in common with the fever swamp liberals. Like them, this group has a terrible habit of projecting their problems onto others and hoping that the electorate doesn’t notice.

But wait, there’s more — in the next post.

Go here for Part 2.
Go here for Part 3.
___________________________

The R-Rated Whistleblower is in his own way a Greater Cincinnati institution.

He’ll have to forgive me is my history isn’t quite straight. He began publishing on a permanent basis when Bill Clinton was first elected in 1992. His first missives were sent out as faxes. Then he converted to e-mail and added web pages that matched his e-mails. Several years ago, a mysterious person who has never identified himself named Artis Conception came along to provide the Whistleblower with the “artistic” enhancements that the publication is now so well-known for.

At his best, The Blower, as many refer to him, is the area’s version of Walter Winchell. Once, when I asked him why the people he skewered mercilessly in his publication were nevertheless out-of-their-way friendly towards him in person, he simply said “They know they’d better be.” The Blower can properly claim credit for exposing a number of things the local press here either won’t touch, hasn’t dug up, or is covering up.

But at his worst, he can be a borderline pornographic caricature of what many liberals think of every conservative — even after granting him license for comedy and satire, you realize that he’s right on the edge of racism, bigotry, homophobia, and sexism at an off-putting level.

What does this have to do with Bob McEwen? Not a darn thing until about, oh, August 2 at about 10:55 p.m. That’s roughly one minute after my live blogpost shows that Jean Schmidt was declared the winner in the 2nd Congressional District Special Election, defeating Paul Hackett.

You, see the Whistleblower really, really, REALLY doesn’t like Jean Schmidt. I would say he hates her, but hate is too mild a word. Whatever it is that drives the cadre of Schmidt-bashers bananas, the Blower has multiplied by 10.

Beginning almost immediately after the special election, The Blower began a daily countdown to this one, presumptively hoping that someone, ANYONE would come along and challenge Jean Schmidt in the primary. After her infamous House floor speech in November, it became the established wisdom in Blower e-mails and in the Schmidt-bashing community that anyone who challenged her could handily defeat her — never mind that her speech became associated with a 403-3 repudiation of the Democrats’ cut-and-run attempt; never mind that she became temporary Public Enemy Number One of the moonbatty Left, meaning that her stature became enhanced in a district that has almost no patience for the moonbatty Left; and never mind that her speech led to an invitation from the administration to visit Iraq.

Bob McEwen clearly became a Blower devotee, swallowed the idea of Jean Schmidt’s vulnerability whole, and ultimately threw his carpetbag into the ring.

Make no mistake: Bob McEwen has been and continues to be associated with the R-Rated Whistleblower, and is on that basis fairly associated with the The Blower’s material since that association began. In fact, the bobmcewen.org web site, which appears to have been an attempt to set up a campaign blog that never got off the ground, has had a link to The Blower’s web page (scroll down the left-hand sidd) since mid-January, if not earlier.

Some of what The Blower has published since it became clear that Bob McEwen intended to challenge Jean Schmidt, and McEwen’s failure to distance himself from it, not only makes a total mockery of McEwen’s claim that he wants to “Restore Dignity and Respect” to The Second District, but also makes one question his right to continue to proclaim his fundamentalist Christian beliefs.

What am I referring to? That’s coming right up.

Back in December, some S.O.B. Alliance members, and members to be, used Mike DeWine’s vote against ANWR drilling as an opportunity to endorse. Porkopolis used it as an opportunity to unload, and did he ever.

Porkopolis did the dirty work and asked our incumbent senator six as-yet unanswered questions. I’m doing what I can to call attention to them before balloting takes place next Tuesday.

So here’s the Porkopolis Pre-Election Question of the Day:

Why did you vote against Senator Coburn’s amendment to limit pork barrel spending earmarks?

This will not be a concern with Bill Pierce, who is fully behind Senator Coburn’s efforts. In fact, you can expect more good news from a Senator Bill Pierce like this news from Senator Coburn, who is achieving some success at cutting the pork and shedding light on the piggiest fo the porkers.

Don’t wait for answers from Mike DeWine that aren’t going to come. Instead, vote for fiscal conservative Bill Pierce on May 2, and you won’t be asking your senator questions like this six years from now.

Don’t forget to visit Bill’s site, his blog, and his Contribute page.

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

Possibly (NY Times link requires free registration):

Case Turns Toward Law Firm

A six-year investigation into whether lawyers at the influential securities class-action law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman used illegal tactics took a significant turn yesterday after a retired real estate mortgage broker agreed to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigation.

The broker, Howard J. Vogel of Englewood, N.J., and Florida, received nearly $2.5 million in kickbacks from lawyers inside Milberg Weiss for agreeing to be, or having a family member agree to be, the lead plaintiff in 40 cases, including lawsuits against Oxford Health Plans and Barnesandnoble.com, prosecutors contend.

….. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles have spent more than six years investigating practices inside the high-profile firm, which was Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach before a 2004 split. No charges have yet been brought against any lawyers or the firm.

Part of the challenge in building the case has been that witnesses have either been uncooperative or are viewed as having potential credibility problems, lawyers involved in the case said.

In February, two of the high-profile targets of the investigation — Melvyn I. Weiss and his former partner, William S. Lerach, who now heads Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins of San Diego — were told that no charges would be filed against them at this time.

Lawyers involved in the case, however, have said in recent weeks that two other partners, David J. Bershad and Steven G. Schulman, remain targets and could be indicted. Additionally, the firm itself could be indicted.

….. Mr. Vogel first approached Milberg Weiss to explore filing a class-action lawsuit against the Valero Energy Corporation in 1991, according to the court filings. In exchange for bringing the case to the law firm and serving as the lead plaintiff, Mr. Vogel said he expected to share in the legal fees that would be paid.

According to the filings, Milberg Weiss agreed to pay Mr. Vogel 14 percent of any fees it received in the class-action lawsuit against Valero. But two lawyers who were not named in the documents told Mr. Vogel that since he was a plaintiff in the case, a possible conflict of interest would arise from any payment made directly to him by Milberg Weiss.

Illegal payments to shareholder-suit plaintiffs are what have enabled law firms specializing in securities class actions to keep the case flow going. It is quite obvious from the machinations attempted to avoid detection that the parties involved can’t try to claim any kind of ignorance.

Successful prosecutions would be very helpful in putting a stop to this heinous illegal practice.
________________________

Previous Posts:

• Dec. 14, 2005 — Quebec’s Lawyers Are Mimicking Milberg Weiss’s US Class-Action Tactics
• Nov. 18 — Update: Investigation into Illegal Payments to Shareholder-Suit Plaintiffs
• Aug. 19 — Update: The Multi-Billion Dollar Shareholder-Suit Payoffs Investigation Is Gaining Steam; Only the WSJ Cares
• June 27 — Payoffs to Shareholder Suit Plaintiffs Alleged

One brother went from Scotland to Australia to see the other (HT Good News Blog):

(more…)

Actually it was Friday — At the Bethel candidates’ forum, she got off what may be remembered as line of the campaign:

Schmidt said McEwen’s “true home is in Virginia.”

“I know, because I have been sending him Christmas cards there for the past 15 years,” Schmidt said.

And they haven’t been addressed c/o the Fairfax Station, Virginia Homeless Shelter?

(Let me guess: COAST will file an election complaint claiming
she’s only been sent cards the past 14 years; or that
the cards have been from both her and her husband,
not just her; or that the cards said “Happy Holidays”
and didn’t mention Christmas; or…..)

___________________________

UPDATE, April 30: An e-mailer tells me that John Boehner got in on the act yesterday:

(Boehner said that) McEwen wanted him to endorse him again but
Boehner told him he was in Jean’s corner.

His rationale?

She’s the incumbent, she won it fair and square, and
“she lives in the district.” Then he made a comment
about the whole residency flap and said, “All of us in
DC know where Bob lives because we see him.”

It was great.

The Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes (COAST) is an anti-tax organization with ostensibly noble goals:

COAST exists to limit the rate of taxes and spending at the Federal, State, and local level to within the rate of inflation and to stop the abuse of power by government officials.

COAST advances this cause by consistent and principled adherence to limited government and lower taxes in fighting legislation and ballot initiatives that increase taxes and spending beyond the rate of inflation, and by supporting candidates for public office who advance these principles.

Despite the stated mission, COAST spends the bulk of its energy not by “supporting candidates for public office” but by opposing people they don’t believe have hewn sufficiently to their low-tax outlook, and does so by using some of the most outrageous tactics imaginable.

I have been told by three different antitax people in three different school districts that the surest way to make sure that school levy repeal or reduction efforts fail is to bring the COAST folks in to “help you out.” The next thing you know, everyone is so mad at you that they won’t listen. That’s because the COAST folks are so bent on insulting people who don’t agree with every line item of their agenda and in scoring their debating points, no matter how bizarre, that they make those who might otherwise have been persuadable tune them out. The people who are trying to keep taxes under control don’t need that.

Now to the current Second District campaign: In February, COAST gave incumbent Congresswoman Jean Schmidt their “Marie Antoinette Award” for 2005 for voting for tax increases. There’s only one problem: Jean Schmidt had a pretty good 2005. In fact, though it was only for a partial year, it was just as good as John Boehner’s, five points shy of Steve Chabot’s and better than every other member of the Ohio congressional delegation.

So the award was bogus. If COAST was really interested in giving out a “Marie” award to Jean Schmidt and they really thought her record in the Ohio General Assembly was that horrid, it should have been one for Lifetime Achievement.

Bob McEwen was there not only when the “Marie” award was given out, but he yukked it up with everyone there when Jean Schmidt’s head was figuratively cut off on a cake (”let them eat cake — get it?), an act of meanness that will be discussed in a later post.

People should know that Bob McEwen is joined at the hip with COAST; he attended the infamous “Marie” meeting, and they have given him $1,000.

This is the same organization that took money from and worked with a liberal proabortion PAC last summer in an attempt to convince GOP voters to stay home and let Democrat Paul Hackett win by default.

How working with an antitax organization that has no problem working with a group that supports the antilife agenda is consistent with Bob McEwen’s stated fundamentalist Christian beliefs is an unsolved mystery that perhaps he’d like to explain — right after he explains how someone who once stood with Ronald Reagan as Eastern European communism fell can take $15,000 a month from what Evans and Novak in their latest e-mail call the “quasi-Marxist government” of Eritrea.
______________________

UPDATE: Mr. Jenkins’ comment #1 below inspires me to make sure this quote from this week’s Evans-Novak Report is in the record (link will only work for a few more days):

Still, (Jean Schmidt’s) primary election opponent, former Rep. Bob McEwen (R), is weighed down by his own ethics problems, which go beyond his involvement in the House Banking Scandal in the early 1990s. Now he is facing problems related to his voter registration: He has voted in Ohio for years since leaving Congress, despite living in Virginia. This issue has legs, and it blindsided McEwen, who has handled it very badly. Perhaps less damaging, but still problematic, is the new revelation that he lobbied for the quasi-Marxist government of Eritrea.

Pierce-ing Posts, daily until the election, is sampling current blog posts both in and out of the S.O.B. Alliance, going to Old Media coverage, and bringing important prior posts to the attention of late-comers to Ohio’s US Senate contest.

Don’t forget to visit Bill’s site, his blog, and his Contribute page.

____________________________

FROM THE CURRENT BLOG CROP

Right Angle Blog Picks up a 16-vote Swing (Bill Pierce +8 Mike DeWine -8)

From Cleveland Townhall (no link provided; indicated link does not go to forum post) — “At our last monthly meeting, one of our special guests was Bill Pierce, who’s running in the Republican primary against Mike DeWine. Most everyone there was very impressed with Pierce, and based on the conversation I heard afterwards, the DeWine camp should be concerned because I think they lost at least 8 votes that they were able to count on last election.”

OLD MEDIA MORSELS

Thanks to DeWine, the Left Is Close to Winning Many Judicial Nomination Battles by Default

A subscription-only editorial in The Wall Street Journal makes that very clear:

There are 17 vacancies on the appeals bench, including nine pending nominations. They deserve to be filled as soon as possible before the summer recess.

An excellent place to start would be to finally vote on Terrence Boyle, whom Mr. Bush has named to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Boyle was in Mr. Bush’s original group of appeals-court nominees on May 9, 2001, after having failed to get a vote when he was nominated a decade earlier by the President’s father. Judge Boyle, who has served on the federal bench for 22 years, had a hearing more than a year ago and was voted out of the Judiciary Committee in June. His plight is similar to that of William Myers, whose confirmation hearing for the Ninth Circuit also took place more than a year ago.

….. We guess we should be happy that no one is talking about filibusters these days. This time last year, the fight over the Democrats’ unprecedented use of the judicial filibuster was coming to a head and Republicans were threatening to change Senate rules to prohibit its use. The single biggest accomplishment of the Senate last year was breaking the filibusters to confirm a string of highly qualified candidates for the appeals courts and then going on to confirm two Supreme Court nominees.

The advice-and-consent clause of the Constitution gives the Senate the duty to vet all federal judicial nominees. Now it’s time for the remaining nominees to have the up-or-down floor votes they deserve.

The editorial was written a month ago. Note how nothing has happened. Note that Mike DeWine is on the Judiciary Committee. Note that Mike DeWine has uttered not a word of complaint about the lack of action.

BLOG BLASTS FROM THE PAST

Bill Pierce visited the lion’s den, so to speak, when he was interviewed by the left-leaning Meet the Bloggers group in March. Though there were obvious disagreements on issues, Bill nevertheless left favorable impressions with the interviewers — an outcome that bodes well for getting independent and crossover votes in the general election. Here is Writes Like She Talks’ summations of Part 1 and Part 2. Audio files are here.

Back in December, some S.O.B. Alliance members, and members to be, used Mike DeWine’s vote against ANWR drilling as an opportunity to endorse. Porkopolis used it as an opportunity to unload, and did he ever.

Porkopolis did the dirty work and asked our incumbent senator six as-yet unanswered questions. I’m doing what I can to call attention to them before balloting takes place next Tuesday.

So here’s the Porkopolis Pre-Election Question of the Day:

Why are you supporting the give-away of government land to lobbying groups?

Mike DeWine has not been a good steward of our tax dollars. As indicated earlier this week, the National Taxpayers union gave him a 2005 grade of C- with a raw score of 48 — the fourth-worst rating of any Republican senator.

Don’t wait for answers that aren’t going to come. Instead, vote for fiscal conservative Bill Pierce on May 2, and you won’t be asking your senator questions like this six years from now.

Don’t forget to visit Bill’s site, his blog, and his Contribute page.

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

The Free Market Project notes the typical characterization of shareholder-owned oil companies as sinister, while totally overlooking what near-dictator Hugo Chavez does with his country’s oil profits:

While ABC’s April 26 “World News Tonight” opened with an attack on the success of petroleum companies – anchor Elizabeth Vargas noted “overflowing profits for the oil industry as Americans struggle to pay rising prices at the pump” – it also featured a story that just briefly discussed how Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez is pumping some of his billions in oil money into undermining American interests.

The same night on the “CBS Evening News,” correspondent Byron Pitts slammed American petroleum companies as harming consumers and even their own gas station owners, though the Citgo station owner he featured worked for a company owned by Venezuela.

Over on ABC, correspondent Dan Harris was more realistic. “Before you get too steamed at the oil companies, take a hard look at oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Venezuela,” Harris said.

“It’s the producers,” of oil, countries like Chavez’s Venezuela, “that make the lion’s share of the profit,” Thompson Financial research director Michael Thompson told ABC News.

Harris informed viewers that Chavez’s regime stood to gain $34 billion from oil sales this year, money which helps the country’s dictator “to support anti-U.S. politicians across Latin America.”

….. Pitts didn’t explain that it’s the anti-American Chavez who is getting “big and fat” from Citgo sales. Citgo, unlike publicly-traded corporations like ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) or BP (NYSE: BP), is “a wholly-owned subsidiary of Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A.,” and therefore has “no publicly-traded equity securities,” according to the company Web page.

In other words, all of Citgo’s profits are Hugo Chavez’s to essentially do with as he pleases, while shareholder-owned oil companies pay out dividends and are expected by their owner to invest their profits wisely to produce more wealth.

Tell me which set-up is more greedy again?

A nice touch — A “graduation“:

(more…)

Note: This post will stay at the top all day because of its importance.
____________________________________

From his blog, no further comment necessary, second paragraph bolded by me:

DeWine’s Public Attack of Rumsfeld was Wrong!

Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) was wrong to lash out at Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld over his management of the War on Terrorism ….. earlier this week. We must learn from the past and that includes learning from our past mistakes, but obviously Senator DeWine missed those history lessons from Vietnam.

In his interview with Salon’s Walter Shapiro, DeWine stated that “Rumsfeld has made some very serious mistakes….Very serious mistakes. I think history will judge him very harshly.” He followed that with, “[c]learly not enough troops going in [to Iraq]. That was the biggest mistake. And a lot of mistakes would be covered under that.”

The lessons not learned by DeWine come from the 1962 to 1974 era when politicians in Washington tried micro-managing and second guessing the military. Without a day spent in a military uniform and without membership on the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, Senator Mike DeWine has become a critic of the nuances of our War on Terrorism. To make matters worse, he felt compelled to make his views public.

Discussion and disagreement is fine, but the participants must choose their venues carefully. For Mike DeWine to disagree with Rumsfeld’s management of the War is all right, but to do so publicly does nothing more than “aid and abet” the enemy – a lesson he should have learned from Vietnam. Our enemies look for that public discord and when they find it within the same Party they become heartened even more.

Senator DeWine could not have expected to achieve any strategic military benefit from his public criticism of Rumsfeld, nor could he have expected any change in the direction of the efforts. However, he likely expected that his attack would distance himself from the Administration in a mistaken attempt to make himself appear more attractive to Ohio voters for the November general election should he pass the primary next week. His actions fall clearly within the classification of pandering. To pander for votes at the expense of our efforts to succeed in our War on Terrorism, to aid and abet our enemies, and to further put our troops in harm’s way is simply shameful of a sitting United States Senator.

William G. Pierce, P.E.

____________________________

Previous Post: DeWine Stabs Rumsfeld in the Back
____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

NOTE: Related FreeRepublic post is here.
________________________________

Leave it to Ohio’s incumbent senior senator to do something totally symbolic and worthless while refusing to do anything substantive on energy:

Big Oil in congressional cross hairs
Politics play large role in fuel-price protests

WASHINGTON — In a bitter election year, Congress has finally reached consensus about something this week: Everybody is mad at the oil companies.

The soaring price of gasoline has sent tremors through Capitol Hill, with Republicans and Democrats scurrying for the nearest TV camera to assail the petroleum giants.

Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, wants the Justice Department to use antitrust laws to go after foreign oil exporters, while Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., is urging the federal government to stop collecting its gasoline taxes for 60 days.

Senate Republicans countered with a $100 rebate to individuals to cushion the cost of gasoline prices. The GOP plan came with a catch: The Republicans want Congress to approve oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Democrats and a handful of Republicans, including DeWine, oppose oil drilling in the refuge.

And Rep. Deborah Pryce, R-Upper Arlington, after saying profit is “what America’s all about,” denounced ExxonMobil for record profits while refusing to pay billions of dollars in punitive damages for the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

It is part of a growing worry — particularly among Republicans — that voters are so angry about high prices at the pump that they will take it out on incumbent members of Congress.

“Nobody wants to be on the side of the oil companies and high gasoline prices,” said Sherry Bebitch, a professor of political science at the University of Southern California. “Will this do anything (to reduce prices)? Of course it won’t do anything.”

….. Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill co-authored by DeWine that would allow the Justice Department to examine the prices demanded by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which includes Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

It was a mostly symbolic gesture, with some lawmakers acknowledging the legislation would be litigated for years if it becomes law. But DeWine said that “if companies in the United States were doing what OPEC is doing today, they could be hauled into court.”

Here’s what The Wall Street Journal said about all this nonsense today in a subcription-only editorial:

Even the Members know that cars will run on nuclear power before suits against OPEC succeed in U.S. courts.

And the idea that oil companies are colluding to raise prices has been contradicted by countless Federal Trade Commission studies. Oil exploration is a capital-intensive business that requires huge economies of scale and long time horizons. From the time a potential drilling site is spotted to the day any oil gets to the pump can take a decade. Bigger companies can afford to take bigger risks. So busting up oil companies would almost certainly lead to less oil exploration and production, and thus higher oil and gas prices.

So please, Sen. DeWine, do you really think we’ve forgotten that you alone are the biggest reason why drilling in the Arctic National Wildlfe Refuge has never passed the Senate?

And now, after years of hamstringing the energy industry, you’re shocked, SHOCKED that prices are so high.

Give me a break.

Ohio conservatives have a chance to do something about our RINO Senator on Tuesday. For the sake of energy sanity, vote for Bill Pierce (site, blog, contribute).

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

Item:

DeWine criticizes Rumsfeld in Interview with Far-Left online magazine Salon

Main quote:

But the sky rockets went off as soon as the topic turned to embattled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

“Rumsfeld has made some very serious mistakes,” DeWine declared, repeating his verdict for emphasis. “Very serious mistakes. I think history will judge him very harshly.” Just to make sure that I was really hearing one of the harshest attacks yet on Rumsfeld by a Republican senator, I asked, “Which mistakes?” DeWine, who has never repented his 2002 vote for the Iraq war, gave me a what-planet-are-you-on look before responding, “Clearly not enough troops going in [to Iraq]. That was the biggest mistake. And a lot of mistakes would be covered under that.”

Bill Pierce Reax — DeWine’s Public Attack of Rumsfeld Was Wrong!

Blogger and Other Reax (will be updated throughout the evening):

• Porkopolis (”Et Tu, DeWine”) — “Political expediency is too kind a characterization for the ingratitude DeWine shows to a Secretary of Defense that is simultaneously prosecuting three wars (worldwide terrorism, Afghanistan and Iraq), with historically low casualties, and transforming the military bureaucracy at the same time. ….. To DeWine, all of Washington’s a stage and he but an miscasted actor attempting to play the role of a conservative. On May 2nd, Ohio Republicans can tell DeWine to exit stage left and let Bill Pierce represent us/U.S. in the Senate. I love that “exit stage left” part.
• Matt at WoMD rips Hugh Hewitt for not pulling the plug on DeWine after the umpteenth betrayal, and telling us we should still “rally behind him — “What conservative credentials??? I’ll rally behind DeWine when DeWine represents our values… Chances of that happening? Well, let’s put it this way, I’m not holding my breath.” How can you “Paint the Map Red” when your guy shows up with only blue paint?
• NixGuy — “Mike DeWine has never been in military service, and I’m really curious as to why he thinks his opinion is better than Donald Rumsfeld. I’m also curious as to why he’s swallowing Dem talking points. Especially as it appears obvious that we had exactly as many troops needed to throw Saddam out of power militarily. We are now fighting guerillas. Anyone with just a faintest inkling of how things went in Vietnam came away with this lesson: Number of troops is not the most important factor when fighting a Guerilla war. But apparently DeWine didn’t even get that much out of Vietnam history.”
• Large Bill (from a comment at a previous BizzyBlog post) — “Leading up to hostilities and after shock and awe, personally I was concerned that we had way too many troops in harms way. What DeWine conveniently forgets is we (including him) believed Saddam had WMD. Is he saying he wanted the administration to put more troops in jeopardy than necessary? Fools like DeWine fail to realize we have had an extremely low casualty rate by any historical comparison precisely because we did not put extra targets in country. So, basically, DeWine is criticizing Secretary Rumsfeld for a low body count. What a clown. He needs come on home - for good.”
• Chuckoblog — “To paraphrase, ‘I came here to make blanket statements about the unpopular (according to left wing media polls) Secretary of Defense. Please don’t ask me to be specific, or it may alienate my conservative base that is mostly unaware of my horrible tax and spend record as a US Senator.’” Too late Mike. Consider us alienated.
• This ought to disabuse DeWine that he’s scoring any points with libs — “When your ship is sinking, blame somebody, anybody.”
• Ethical Wasteland — “The Republicans need to get their (act) together… they’re starting to bicker and fracture like Democrats.”
• Crain’s Cleveland Business — “Cross Rummy off DeWine’s Christmas card list”
• Return of the Conservatives — “Why exactly is DeWhiner running as a Republican? If he was to be honest with his constituents he would change his party affiliation and run as a democRAT which he has become.”
• PunditReview.com — “As election day approaches, two-term Republican Senator Mike DeWine is reaching out to…the liberal media by joining the chorus of Rumsfeld critics. Nice approach Senator. This is sure to shore up your base.”
• Boring Made Dull says DeWine has “New York Times Syndrome”– “Let’s see— soft on Judges, Soft on the 2nd amendment, now soft on the war against terror, no drilling in ANWR, but some show trials on energy prices. The reasons to vote for DeWine are rapidly shrinking. When your only slogan left is “I’m not as liberal as my opponent!” That’s not a rousing call to arms. Given the choice, most voters leaning left will prefer the real Democrat to the faux one. And if those are the choices, many conservatives may stay home. Oh, and memo to Sen. DeWine: The puff pieces won’t be rolling out from the MSM in September and October. They’re pretty fickle. Well, not fickle, since they will rally to the left every time.”

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.

Back in December, some S.O.B. Alliance members, and members to be, used Mike DeWine’s vote against ANWR drilling as an opportunity to endorse. Porkopolis used it as an opportunity to unload, and did he ever.

Porkopolis did the dirty work and asked our incumbent senator six as-yet unanswered questions. I’m doing what I can to call attention to them before balloting takes place next Tuesday.

So here’s the Porkopolis Pre-Election Question of the Day:

Why are you blocking Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp reform?

Mike DeWine fiddles while the PBGC deterioriates.

Don’t wait for answers that aren’t going to come. Instead, vote for fiscal conservative Bill Pierce on May 2, and you won’t be asking your senator questions like this six years from now.

Don’t forget to visit Bill’s site, his blog, and his Contribute page.

____________________________

NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.