May 3, 2010

Ohio Primary Election Eve Post

Filed under: Activism,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:07 am

To be updated throughout the day as items warrant … to be presented out of order when necessary for emphasis purposes:


12:20 p.m. — It seems that there’s some pressure being applied on Seth Morgan and Sandy O’Brien to declare that they’ll support their primary opponent in the general election this November if they lose (I think each is likely to win, and as far as I know, each has promised to support their opponent).

Why isn’t anyone asking Kevin DeWine and ORPINO’s apparatchiks that question?

I just did, in an e-mail and a phone call to Jonathan Gormley. I’ll let readers know if I get a response.

Update, 2:30 p.m. — Jason Mauk responded “Yes of course,” with elaboration. Fine. We’re going to hold you guys to that, and I believe that we’ll have the opportunity to test that response in the six months after tomorrow night’s results come in.

I am under no such obligation to support Yost or Husted should they win (which I don’t think they will). I would support Yost, but for crystal-clear, drop-dead obvious reasons articulated below, I cannot support Jon Husted the Impostor.


2:30 p.m. – From the “Can You Top This?” Dept. -- I am being told that:

  • ORPINO (the Ohio Republican Party In Name Only) is doing robocalls for State Central Committee races.
  • Jon Husted has the NRA doing robocalls on his behalf. There is no substantive difference between where Husted stands and where Sandy O’Brien stands on 2nd Amendment issues — although it should be noted that Husted wasn’t out there pushing Bob Taft to do what he had promised to do with concealed carry during Taft’s eight years in office.

John Kasich, Mary Taylor, and Josh Mandel should be absolutely furious at the unprecedented waste of party resources dedicated to thwarting the will of the Buckeye State’s Tea Party and social conservative base (AG candidate and RINO retread Mike DeWine is probably pleased as punch). By the time this is over, they may be on their own — which in a sense may be just as well, until the current leadership changes.


9:45 a.m – An ABJ columnist (HT Right Ohio) originally reported that “(Mary) Taylor is also backing (Seth) Morgan (for auditor).”

There is now a correction at the top of Dennis Willard’s column saying that “Incumbent Mary Taylor has remained neutral and has not endorsed in the Republican state auditor’s race. This column originally reported differently. It was a reporting error.”

No matter. Taylor understands what auditor independence is about. So does Seth Morgan. Dave Yost doesn’t.

Taylor understands what the State Auditor’s job is all about, and as a CPA was ready to hit the ground running on Day 1. So does Seth Morgan, CPA, who is similarly prepared. Dave Yost isn’t a CPA, and isn’t ready.

The above is all a GOP primary voter really needs to know about the Auditor’s race. Go Seth.


10:15 a.m. — John Kasich supports Issue 1. I don’t. The Third Frontier has been a boondoggle that has thrown out a lot of money for relatively little return.

On this one, the Tea Partiers who are opposing Issue 1 are absolutely right, and John “I was (supposedly) a Tea Partier before there was a Tea Party” is completely wrong.

Think outside the I-270 Beltway, John.


10:45 a.m. — Jon Husted, Tea Party imposter:

“The only relation Jon Husted would have with the Tea Party is if he would have been driving the British ship into Boston Harbor,” said Ralph King, who runs the Cleveland Tea Party Patriots. “Jon Husted has shown an open hatred and contempt for the Tea Parties.”

“Chris Littleton, president of the Ohio Liberty Council, said Husted’s overtures to the Tea Party are all propaganda that would make him laugh if he weren’t so angry. He said Husted declined to attend many candidate forums put on by Tea Party groups and similar organizations. “I understand the political calculus”, said Littleton, whose group has started the Ohio Tea Party PAC. “It’s an out-and-out deceitful campaign”.

Oh, and a coward too: “It appears Mr. Husted ONLY wanted to attend these events if his opponent was not present and he could speak to the group alone.”

This shouldn’t surprise anyone:

  • Jon Husted is an impostor as a State Senator and prior to that as a State Rep, living full-time in a Columbus suburb while “representing” Metro Dayton.
  • Jon Husted is an impostor as a tax-cutter. He crows about a promoting a Commercial Activities Tax that is keeping businesses from starting up, relocating into, or expanding in Ohio.
  • Jon Husted doesn’t mind being a prolife impostor when ORPINO requires it.
  • Jon Husted is the fave of ORPINO (the Ohio Republican Party In Name Only), which itself is a group of impostors pretending to advance sensible conservatism in Ohio while working against the group that has done more to bring it to the fore in 15 months than OPRINO has done in about 15 years.

RightOhio has plenty of other useful names for Husted.

If Husted somehow survives the primary because of his last-minute TV blitz and carpet-bombing direct mail campaign (I fervently hope he does not, and believe it very likely that he will not), the Ohio media that is currently either leaving Husted alone or endorsing him in the primary will turn on him and expose him for the impostor that he is during the fall campaign. So will his Democratic opponent and the Democratic Party. They would all, of course, be correct. Husted would lose in November, and deserves to lose in November if it comes to that, as he has no credible defense.


12:25 p.m. — Jon Husted does have the coveted Bob Taft endorsement (paragraph breaks added by me; obviously, what follows is satirical):

How lucky are we to be able to finally vote to support Jon Husted for Statewide office? I have waited for this day, and like a proud papa when his son gets his first hit in a baseball game, I’m just beaming.

Jon voted for my sales tax hike, and my gas tax hike in addition to pushing for my brand new Commercial Activites Tax. Jon was a supporter of my Third Frontier program that worked wonders to make Ohio’s economy so great, and has been a vocal advocate for Issue 1 this year, which is a renewal of my wildly successful Third Frontier program. But perhaps best of all, Jon stood shoulder to shoulder with my main man Virgil Lovitt in his State Representative race.

On Tuesday, vote for the tax hiking son I never had, Jonny Boy Husted.


12:45 p.m. — The Taft satire site reminds me to note that I cannot bring myself to support Jean Schmidt in the Second District’s GOP congressional primary.

As far as I can tell, she has employed a “run and hide” strategy against opponent Mike Kilburn and the Tea Party movement, and has never satisfactorily renounced her vote for TARP in September 2008. Her more-dangerous-than-she-thinks gamble is that she’ll win by inertia on the part of less engaged voters.

My vote will be for Kilburn, who I believe is the slightly better overall candidate and would be the slightly better congressperson. My vote will serve the dual purpose of sending a “buck-up, babe” message to the incumbent that will hopefully have an effect if Schmidt wins a close race.

But I don’t think a Schmidt win is automatic. Though on paper his chances appear very remote, this is a throw-out-the-playbook election, and I would not totally rule out the possibility of a Kilburn upset. If it’s ever to happen, this is the time. If it does, it will be a shot heard ’round the state, if not the nation.

Schmidt will get my support in the general because her opposition then will be either completely cracked or stupid far-left. But she needs improvement, and needs to recognize that.


2:45 p.m. — In my e-mail box, from a Chris Brock, apparently from the Ohio Chamber of Commerce:

Election Day is tomorrow, May 4 and voters should support job creation and Ohio’s economy by voting YES on State Issue 1. State Issue 1 would renew Ohio’s Third Frontier program – a program that has created 55,000 jobs since 2002 while bringing 637 businesses and companies to Ohio.

In the words of a certain congressman … “You Lie!”

Only 8,000 or so provable, direct jobs have been created (assuming clean bookkeeping, which hopefully wasn’t learned at The other roughly 47,000 represent the kind of “created and saved” fuzzy math that even President Obama’s peeps are starting to shy away from.


3:30 p.m. — Geraghty the Ordinarily Great is napping:

In Ohio, most of the action is on the Democratic side, mostly the Senate race.

Hey, I know Auditor and SOS are down-ticket races, but given the ORPINO mud-slinging, the test of Tea Party strength, etc. and the existence of only one competitive race on the Dem side (and it’s looking less competitive with each passing day), that assessment is wayyyy off.

Somebody buy Jim a clue so he’s awake for tomorrow night. Have him go to the second half of this column (the “dingbats on the right” part) if he wants to get up to speed really quick.

Lucid Links (050310, Morning)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 9:16 am

The sickening news that “A baby boy abandoned by doctors to die after a botched abortion was found alive nearly a day later,” and that the “disability justification” for the procedure was that the child had “a cleft lip and palate,” brings to mind the fact that our nation has a president who is okey-dokey with leaving babies to die (HT RedState and a RedState commenter):


Pointing out the obvious, from Business Insider, and adding two qualifiers:

We’re guessing that unlike Bush, Obama will largely get a pass. Katrina played into a narrative of Bush ignoring the plight of the poor and African-Americans. Nobody is suggesting that Obama is bad on the environment. Also, just generally, an ecological disaster won’t elicit the same kind of emotional response as a human tragedy (for good reason).

Let’s at least acknowledge the obvious opposite, that if we were currently in a Republican administration that had just okayed offshore drilling in America, and they had gone eight days without serious action, they’d be getting absolutely pilloried in the press.

The qualifiers are:

  • New and alternative media are stronger and their impact is more immediate than 4 years ago, so the free pass from the establishment press, which is itself weaker, won’t mean quite as much.
  • The enviro community isn’t necessarily as controllable as other leftists factions, and is already a bit miffed that Obama even broached the idea of additional offshore drilling (though very weakly and cynically) several weeks ago.


Leftist control freaks have wanted this for decades (HT Villainous Company), courtesy of Nancy “We’ll Tell You What’s In It After We Pass It” Pelosi:

A few wording changes to the tax code’s section 6041 regarding 1099 reporting were slipped into the 2000-page health legislation. The changes will force millions of businesses to issue hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of additional IRS Form 1099s every year. It appears to be a costly, anti-business nightmare.

businesses will have to issue 1099s whenever they do more than $600 of business with another entity in a year. For the $14 trillion U.S. economy, that’s a hell of a lot of 1099s. When a business buys a $1,000 used car, it will have to gather information on the seller and mail 1099s to the seller and the IRS. When a small shop owner pays her rent, she will have to send a 1099 to the landlord and IRS. Recipients of the vast flood of these forms will have to match them with existing accounting records. There will be huge numbers of errors and mismatches, which will probably generate many costly battles with the IRS.

It was either during Bush 41′s administration or during the early Clinton years, but I clearly recall that Democrats proposed a $10 threshold for such reporting, and that it made some progress towards making it into law. That’s right, $10. For them, it is and always has been about command and control.

Janet ‘All Hands on Deck’ Napolitano’s CYA Attempt Fools No One

Note: This was originally posted at midnight, and has been carried forward.


As quoted by the Associated Press:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said any comparison between the ruptured BP oil well and Katrina was “a total mischaracterization” and that the government had taken an “all hands on deck” approach from the beginning.

Reality differs (HT Doug Ross) — and the admitted speculation also included in what follows is potentially very damming (bolds are mine):

Federal officials should have started burning oil off the surface of the Gulf last week, almost as soon as the spill happened, said the former oil spill response coordinator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Ron Gouget, who also managed Louisiana’s oil response team for a time, said federal officials missed a narrow window of opportunity to gain control of the spill by burning last week, before the spill spread hundreds of miles across the Gulf, and before winds began blowing toward shore.

He also said the heavy use of dispersants, which cause oil to sink, has likely knocked so much oil into the water column that portions of the Gulf may be on the threshold of becoming toxic to marine life. Add in the oil spreading into the water as it rises from the seafloor, and Gouget said he expected officials would have to think about limiting the use of the dispersants.

… Gouget, now an environmental consultant with Windward Associates in Seattle, was part of the group that created the 1994 plan designed to allow federal responders to begin burning oil as soon as a major spill occurred, without an approval process.

“They had pre-approval. The whole reason the plan was created was so we could pull the trigger right away instead of waiting ten days to get permission,” Gouget said.

Asked why officials waited for a week before conducting even a test burn, Gouget said, “Good question. Maybe complacency was the biggest issue. They probably didn’t have the materials on hand to conduct the burn, which is unconscionable.”

He said the NOAA officials involved at the Unified Command Center in Louisiana know how to respond to spills, and know burning should have started as soon as possible after the initial release was detected. Gouget said they may have been overruled.

“It may have been a political issue. The burn would make a big big plume and lots of soot. Like Valdez, the decisions to get the resources mobilized may not have occurred until it was too late,” Gouget said. “This whole thing has been a daily strip tease. At first they thought it was just the diesel, then they said the well wasn’t leaking. It’s unfortunate they didn’t get the burning going right away. They could have gotten 90 percent of the oil before it spread.”

Note that the first sentence begins with “federal officials,” NOT “BP.”

Reality also differs significantly from Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In that instance, federal officials were continually assured by Louisiana’s governor and the mayor of New Orleans that they had the situation under control. Then when things went wrong, an establishment press that was incurably hostile to George W. Bush fraudulently transformed it into a federal problem.

In this case, a noted above, the feds have been involved from the very beginning. The question is whether they have done their job properly.

Blaming BP for everything, again as noted above, just won’t cut it.

Given what Gouget has asserted, Napolitano’s pretense that the government has been “all hands on deck” from the beginning insults our intelligence.

Positivity: Okla. ultrasound law is constitutional and ‘commonsense’ abortion regulation, backer says

Filed under: Life-Based News,Positivity — Tom @ 7:47 am

From Oklahoma City:

Apr 29, 2010 / 05:57 am

Women aren’t done any favors when the truth about abortion is hidden from them, says a backer of a new “commonsense” Oklahoma law that requires a doctor to give an ultrasound to a woman seeking an abortion. His comments come in response to a legal challenge from the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR).

The law passed on Tuesday after a bipartisan vote in the Oklahoma legislature overrode Democratic Gov. Brad Henry’s veto.

The law requires the doctor to show a woman the ultrasound image of her unborn baby and to describe the image in detail before performing an abortion.

In a Tuesday statement, the CRR argued that the requirement for an ultrasound “profoundly intrudes” on a patient’s privacy, calling it “the most extreme ultrasound law in the country.”

“The law forces a woman to hear information that she may not want to hear and that may not be relevant to her medical care,” the CRR continued, saying this alleged compulsion discounts “her abilities to make healthy decisions about her own life.”

The organization also claimed that the law interferes with the doctor-patient relationship.

Stephanie Toti, staff attorney in the U.S. Legal Program of the CRR, claimed that the law was “clearly unconstitutional” and detrimental to women. She also said a court fight would waste Oklahoma taxpayers’ money.

CNA spoke about the new law in a Wednesday interview with Tony Lauinger, state chairman of Oklahomans for Life.

He said the law is in fact constitutional, noting the “very clear” rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The state has a right to ensure that a woman receives sufficient information to give fully informed consent,” Lauinger commented, adding that the law provides important information to a woman in advance of an “irrevocable, lethal act.”

“Many women suffer severe psychological and emotional trauma as a result of having had abortions,” he explained, contending that the law will “help empower women.”

Countering the claims of the CRR, Lauinger said the law does not intrude on a woman’s privacy or violate the doctor-patient relationship.

“We believe the description of the images on the ultrasound screen is a very logical and proper part of the informed consent process. A woman is entitled to the benefit of this information. A doctor is obliged to provide that information. The law doesn’t tell the doctor how to describe the images, but he is to describe what is depicted on the screen.”

To CRR’s claim that a court fight will waste taxpayer money, he replied:

“It is they who are filing the lawsuit. That charge makes no sense.”

Asked how the law will affect abortion doctors, Lauinger answered that abortion is “an assembly-line, mass-production type of process” that is “extremely impersonal” and has “virtually no interchange between the abortionist and the woman.” …

Go here for the rest of the story.