July 12, 2010

Treasurer Boyce’s Campaign Manager Quits

Filed under: Activism,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 2:40 pm

Note: This post originally went up shortly after noon today and has been moved to the top.

From the inbox:


Effective today, Treasurer Kevin Boyce’s Campaign Manager has quit the Boyce campaign. Marquez Brown’s departure comes in the wake of numerous news stories and editorials outlining growing cronyism, pay-to-play and ethics problems in Boyce’s office.

Brown follows in a long line of Boyce staffers who have left Boyce over the past year, including his Chief of Staff, Executive Assistant, Communications Director, Regional Outreach Director and Fundraising Director. Democratic operatives remain consistent in explaining that this mass exodus from Boyce’s operation is due to his poor management skills, inability to understand the office, arrogance and growing ethics problems.

As Boyce’s team continues to fall apart and he continues to be outraised and outworked by Team Mandel, I wanted to take a moment to update you on our campaign and share with you why Josh Mandel will be elected our next State Treasurer.

Further, it appears as if there is yet…


Our opponent has already received continuous negative media coverage for his misuse of tax dollars on self-promotion, questionable and unqualified hires, abuse of his role in the Census effort and manipulation of bank contract deadlines for fundraising purposes.

Now, Ohio taxpayers, citizen action groups, and newspaper editorial boards are all questioning the latest ethically questionable practices in the Treasurer’s Office. The Dayton Daily News, The Plain Dealer, The Columbus Dispatch and the Warren Tribune Chronicle have all covered the Treasurer Kevin Boyce / Deputy Treasurer Amer Ahmad scandal of steering contracts to an out-of-state bank under investigation for fraud and hiring friends and politicos rather than qualified financial professionals to handle billions of taxpayer dollars.

Click below for the original articles and for other coverage of Boyce’s growing pattern of corruption…

Pension fund should trouble state officials
June 18, 2010, Warren Tribune Chronicle

Treasurer candidates allege cronyism, corruption
June 17, 2010, The Columbus Dispatch

Ohio Treasurer Boyce plays the old patronage game: editorial
June 12, 2010, The Plain Dealer

Ohio Treasurer picks bank facing fraud allegations to hold billions in Ohio pension funds’ assets
June 6, 2010, The Plain Dealer

Lobbyist’s wife works in office that gave $1M state contract to client
May 25, 2010, Dayton Daily News

Bank hired lobbyist with Boyce aide ties just days before landing state contract
May 23, 2010, Dayton Daily News

Challenger in state treasurer’s race questions whether delay in awarding state contract will boost incumbent’s fundraising efforts
March 16, 2010, The Plain Dealer

Ohio Treasurer gives bank contract, gets political fund-raiser
July 28, 2009, Dayton Daily News

Critics: Ohio Treasurer shouldn’t be spending on self-promotion
June 13, 2009, Dayton Daily News

As Matt Naugle reported last week, Dem Chair Chris Redfern and the other cronies, namely those who benefited from these unethical moves, are crying “racism.”

Oh, go on…please! More and more people are onto the fact that the true nature and strategy of any given liberal is revealed in the accusations they spew at conservatives.

Christmas in July, baby, or should I say November in July, lol…


UDDATE: Right Ohio’s related post on Marquez Brown’s departure is here.

UPDATE 2 (from Tom): The Columbus Dispatch’s Daily Briefing blog notes some interesting timing in an item that might as well be entitled, “Nobody Outworks Team Mandel, Part LXXXII” —

Mandel beats Boyce to his own announcement

It’s probably not a good omen when the opposition tells the world your old campaign manager has resigned before you can announce a new one has started.

That’s what happened to Ohio Treasurer Kevin L. Boyce this morning when he announced that Bryan Clark has been appointed as his campaign manager.

The thing is, his Republican opponent, state Rep. Josh Mandel of Lyndhurst, dashed out a statement about 45 minutes earlier pointing out that the old campaign manager, Marquez Brown, had resigned.

It’s refreshing to see a genuine conservative and Republican (in that order) working hard on his campaign marathon and attacking his opponent when he deserves it, while most of the rest of the ticket seems to be biding its time … to what end?

I know it’s getting tiresome, but I should note that the home page at ORPINO (the Ohio Republican Party In Name Only), with one minor exception that is annoying in its own right (what are Kasich/Taylor running for, guys?), is essentially the same as it was on the day after the May 4 primary, almost nine long weeks ago. Oh yeah, there’s also an anti-Lee Fisher post and video, but it begs the question: Who’s running against him?

AP Video ‘Expert’: Being Here ‘Without Documentation’ Isn’t a Crime

MexicanAboveAZflag0610One reason to hope that the Big 3 networks continue to muddle through their awful evening news ratings and somehow hang around is that there’s an alternative out there that would be much worse.

If any of the networks ever considered outsourcing their nightly newscasts to the Associated Press, the likely result could be bad enough to make some long for the (relatively) good old days of Brian, Diane, and Katie.

An object example of the AP’s pathetically one-sided, biased and completely not-transparent video reporting came last Tuesday when it covered the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Arizona’s illegal immigration enforcement measure. The 1070 law tells police to verify citizenship status in “contact” situations (e.g., traffic stops and other routine matters) if they have a “reasonable suspicion” that the person or persons involved aren’t here legally.

AP’s go-to “expert” acts as if it’s a given that the United States government has decided that being here illegally (“without documentation”) isn’t a crime. Seriously. During the 104-second report (first go here, then type “Arizona immigration” in the search bar near the bottom, and select “Fed. Suing to Block Ariz. Immigration Law”), AP reporter Brian Thomas interviewed no one who defended the law’s constitutionality.

Here’s the transcript:

Brian Thomas, AP Reporter: The Obama administration is suing the state of Arizona over what the President has called “a misguided law.” Federal officials say the state’s new immigration policy tries to override the government’s authority under the Constitution. The measure requires police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws, like traffic stops.

Steven Vladeck, American Univ. Law Professor: The federal government has long since decided that it’s not a crime to be in the United States without documentation. You can be removed from the United States, you can be deported, but you cannot be put in jail. And so the question is, “Do individual states, Arizona today, Maryland tomorrow, have the authority to decide for themselves to have a harsher regime?”

Thomas: The Justice Department argues the state plan will lead to the harassment of American citizens and others who are authorized to be here.

Tony Bustamante, Attorney in Arizona: Federal priority enforcement of immigration laws is to go after the criminals, the bad people who are causing havoc on society, not the gardeners and the landscapers and the cooks who make the economy go ’round and ’round.

Thomas: Those who support the pending law have said the stringent rules are necessary to fight drug trafficking, murders and other crimes plaguing the border state.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Maybe the federal government ought to ask for the help of local and state law enforcement to stop this illegal immigration situation.

Thomas: The federal government is hoping its lawsuit will stop other states looking to follow Arizona’s lead.

Vladeck: If the federal government can show the Arizona laws are inconsistent with federal policies, the federal government can, should, and will win. And I think it’s likely that they will do so.

Thomas: The next step is for the case to be assigned to a judge who will decided temporarily whether to block the law from taking effect at the end of this month.

A two-word, law-based response to Vladeck’s claim that “The federal government has long since decided that it’s not a crime to be in the United States without documentation” — Horse manure:

Search 8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code – Section 1325: Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of -
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.

The “without documentation” portion of Vladeck’s statement is at best useless misdirection. If you aren’t here legally, you’re subject to the sanctions just noted. If you’re here legally and happen to be “without documentation” at any given moment, that’s a totally different situation, and I believe he knows it. The federal government (i.e., the executive branch) doesn’t get to “decide” what is and what is not a crime. To make illegal entry not a crime, the law has to be changed by the legislative branch. That hasn’t happened.

Vladeck’s claim that “you cannot be put in jail” for being here illegally is objectively false, as bolded above in the excerpt from the law. Also note the use of the word “shall” (i.e., there is normally not supposed to be any discretion) as opposed to “may.” Arizona’s law is on target with the intent of federal law.

Vladeck’s next bolded claim in the transcript above is tantamount to saying, “Policy becomes the law, no matter what the law says.” No sir. Of course there will always be prosecutorial discretion that will dictate the best and most appropriate use of an attorney general’s or county prosecutor’s resources, but that’s not what’s at play here. What Vladeck is saying it that because immigration enforcement officials have a policy of trying to avoid going after “non-criminals” (an illogical word, because you’re a criminal in this country the minute you cross the border illegally), that policy has in effect become the law, no matter what the law really is.

Brian Thomas could have found dozens of people to make mince meat of Vladeck’s arguments, and chose not to. I wonder why?

This is lazy, statist liberalism at its best: We don’t like a law, so we won’t enforce it, until that tradition of non-enforcement becomes the law. It’s the same bubble-headed logic that underlies the entire liberal mind-set towards the constitution: We don’t like it, so we’re going to decide that it means something other than what it clearly says, instead of going through the constitutionally mandated and deliberately difficult-by-design process of passing a constitutional amendment to change it to its desired meaning. Say what you will about whether or not the prohibition movement was misguided, but you have to acknowledge that they respected the constitution and the country enough to get their work done the right way. Contrast that with what the Clinton administration (and to an extent, the several administrations that preceded it) did to tobacco companies.

From the “This was so predictable” Dept. — Vladeck’s views towards the executive branch powers are selective and arguably partisan, as you will see from the opening paragraph of his American University bio:

Stephen I. Vladeck is a Professor of Law at American University Washington College of Law, where his teaching and research focus on federal jurisdiction, national security law, constitutional law (especially the separation of powers), and international criminal law. A nationally recognized expert on the role of the federal courts in the war on terrorism, he was part of the legal team that successfully challenged the Bush Administration’s use of military tribunals at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

Here’s another “This was so predictable” item, this time about “Attorney in Arizona” Tony (Antonio) Bustamante, from the far-left Phoenix New Times:

For our (40th) anniversary, we gathered many — not all — of those who’ve been targets of Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Some, like politicos Phil Gordon, Mary Rose Wilcox, and Don Stapley, are converts to the struggle. Others, activists, stood up to protect the most vulnerable amongst us: Mexicans seeking to be part of the American Dream; prisoners looking to survive.

… 17) Antonio Bustamante: Phoenix attorney and activist who advises those who monitor Arpaio’s anti-immigrant sweeps and defends demonstrators arrested for protesting the sheriff.

Brian Thomas didn’t think viewers needed to know anything about Vladeck’s or Bustamante’s background. How typically pathetic.

Oh, I almost forgot: The picture at the top right of the Mexican flag appearing to fly above the Arizona flag is what viewers of the AP video get to see during the report’s final seconds. It looks like a childish “in your face” move to me. And I didn’t get to the matter of what other states, including Rhode Island, are doing that is at least as “harsh” as what Arizona is set to do.

As stated earlier, we could do worse than the evening news shows NBC, ABC, and CBS are currently feeding us. If AP’s video reports really are the go-to alternative, we should hope that Brian, Diane, and Katie remain mired in mediocrity instead of disappearing entirely.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

Obama Is Golf Personified…

Filed under: Activism,General,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 10:00 am

(HT: Drudge)

Playing golf so often may lower Obama’s handicap, but it’s also lowering his approval ratings. Pretty soon, we won’t be able to tell which is which…

What happened to “we will not rest until (insert crisis here)…?”

And Ohio’s Next Senate President Will Be…

Filed under: Activism,Economy,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 9:59 am

Now this is the kind of proactive thinking I like to see…

Evidently, State Senator Tom Niehaus (District 14), has been [prematurely] telling folks in his district and around capitol square, that his election to the role of Senate President is a done deal.

Other sources around the state say hmmmm …. well … not so much, and that Tom has some competition for Senate President after the November elections.

Now Tom is a relatively nice guy, but most agree, especially those who have been paying attention, that he is not a strong leader. Hand-picked long ago by outgoing Senate President Bill Harris, Tom is one of the 5 Republican Senators, who among other inconsistencies, most recently voted to retroactively increase our income taxes 4.5% (substantially decreasing the percentage previously claimed by R’s).

Oh yeah, like we need more of that…

The impetus for many is concern, namely that a conservative agenda actually gets implemented after November’s political pendulum shift, and can you blame anyone for that concern given our decades-long leadership void? Additionally, the “I’ve played the establishment’s game, so it’s my turn” card is over. Most understand that we need a strong Senate leader to complement a strong Speaker Batchelder and [hopefully] a strong Governor Kasich.

So who is it already?! Why it’s Majority Whip Steve Buehrer from District 1 of course, and I have two words to say about that: PRAISE GOD!

I know Steve looks like Gary Sinese,…but he is a solid common-sense conservative that would add tremendous value and provide true leadership.

And since ORPINO (the Ohio Republican Party In Name Only) has, by hook or by crook, forced a couple of undesirables down our throats, I don’t think it’s wise or warranted that they continue to dictate, designate and control their token power base in the Senate (more on that later).

So, dare I say that this news is inspiring? A Senate President Buehrer would not only complete the trifecta, but would likely give Republicans some much-needed street cred (and we’ll know if they really want any).

Ya know, regardless of political party the state has suffered from “business as usual” with no boldness or vision. The go along, get along approach has not worked and our state continues to struggle and fall further behind the rest of the country.

2010 is about leadership, and getting stuff done for Ohio and our citizens, at perhaps the most critical time in our state’s history.

(Pssst, and btw State Senators: please don’t make the same mistake that certain, “conservative” House members made when they so negligently supported Matt Dolan over an imperfect but much stronger Bill Batchelder. They’re still hanging their heads in shame over that no-brainer, and rightfully so.)

More to come…

Another POR/Uncertainty Economy Casualty: Small Investors

Filed under: Business Moves,Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 8:46 am

WSJheadlineOnSmallInvestors071210From a longish WSJ article today by E.S. Browning (number tags are mine):

Small investors’ faith in stocks, which surged in the 1990s, has collapsed since the technology-stock debacle and the Enron and WorldCom scandals of 2000-2002. The 2007-2009 financial crisis only made things worse. Now, the pullback among ordinary investors means they are a declining force in a market that is increasingly dominated by professionals (1).

… Investors talk of a growing disillusionment with big institutions, including corporations, government, banks and political parties—as well as fears about the nation’s heavy debt (2).

… Ordinary investors are returning to the cautious mentality they developed during the 1970s (3). That was the last extended period of stock weakness, after which it took many people a decade or more to get comfortable with stocks again.

… History suggests that individuals eventually will return to stocks, as they did in the 1980s and, even more strongly, in the 1990s (4). But rebuilding their confidence could take time, says Brian Reid, chief economist of the Investment Company Institute (5). Historically, it has taken an extended period of stock success to lure individuals back after long periods of disaffection.

Okay, I’ve had enough. Let’s break this down:

(1) – Small investors are pulling out because they can’t handle the FUDGE Economy (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, and Government Excess) engineered by the progenitors of the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Economy they’ve seen during the past two years as it limps into its third. More savvy investors realized what was developing in 2007, when the Dow began its retreat from all-time highs.

(2) – Barack Obama’s administration, Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives, and Harry Reid’s Senate are the ones who have piled on the debt in numbers that dwarfed previous Congresses since they took over in early 2007.

(3) – Ah yes, the 1970s, the era of stagflation, Nixon’s resignation, and Carter’s malaise. Unfortunately, we hear echoes today.

(4) – These things don’t just happen. Ronald Reagan employed specific policies that buoyed investor confidence: tax cuts; tax simplification; deregulation; robust defense; a determination to win the Cold War, not merely to remain in perpetual stalemate; and a belief, once again borne out by his administration’s results, in freer markets and American exceptionalism.

(5) – Restoring confidence will require a sea change in philosophy and policy out of Washington. The current crew is congenitally incapable of bringing it about.

Positivity: New family-friendly TV movie to air on NBC

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 7:54 am

From Hollywood:

Jul 11, 2010 / 07:08 pm

A new family movie, “The Jensen Project,” is scheduled to air on NBC TV next Friday, July 16, at 7 p.m. CST as part of an effort to increase appropriate family entertainment.

The Vote With Your Remote movement is bringing the movie to television in response to persistent requests for more family-friendly programming.

The plot of the movie focuses on Claire and Matt Thompson and their teenage son, Brody. The family is involved with a secret community of geniuses known as The Jensen Project, who do research and share it anonymously to help the world. In a suspense-filled storyline, the Thompsons must race against the clock to prevent potentially dangerous technology from falling into the wrong hands. They follow clues and thwart evil schemes, and ultimately grow closer as a family in the process.

Working to publicize “The Jensen Project” is Motive Entertainment, the company that has promoted previous family movies including “Polar Express” and “The Chronicles of Narnia.”

According to Motive, “This is entertainment that the entire family can enjoy; since it’s on television, it’s essentially available for anyone to watch; and it’s something families can plan to do as an evening together.”

High ratings will illustrate to the entertainment industry that there is a significant audience for family movies and programs, Motive noted. …

Go here for the rest of the story.