Here’s a graphical depiction of Paul Ryan’s budget, introduced today (found at James Pethokoukis’s blog):

It is fully thought through, well-presented, understandable, and of course necessary.

It’s perfectly obvious that any sensible conservative (redundant term) would be positively thrilled to have fiscal hero Paul Ryan as their Congressperson, right? Why, if COAST, Anderson Township Republicans, and local Tea Party groups found out that Ryan was moving into Ohio’s Second District, they’d have an all-day parade on Beechmont Avenue, insist on clearing the GOP primary field for him, and work tirelessly on his campaign.

So why does this make me think of Jean Schmidt? I mean, after all, she’s just been a RINO all these years, posing as a conservative while betraying us in Washington, right?

Then someone needs to explain this:

• Club for Growth 2011 Scorecard: Schmidt 80%, Ryan … (wait for it) 73%.
• Club for Growth 2010 Scorecard: Schmidt 100%, Ryan 97%.
• Club for Growth 2009 Scorecard: Schmidt 91%, Ryan 93%.

Since the year of the TARP vote over which lots of people gave Jean Schmidt endless grief (full disclosure: including for a time yours truly, who voted for her challenger in the 2010 primary — a vote that in hindsight was mistaken), Jean Schmidt has scored higher than conservative icon Paul Ryan twice, and barely trailed him in 2009.

Look, I get that Schmidt didn’t do a good job of defending herself against the smears (and they WERE smears, some of them disgracefully and inexcusably misogynist and all of them fundamentally dishonest), that her public-speaking skills seemed to deteriorate (she was so much better at the candidates’ forum in June 2005 than she was at Rick Santorum’s February 2012 Brown County visit that I began wondering if I was watching the same person), and that she may have paid disproportionate attention to the district’s rural counties, especially after redistricting gave her a lot of new ground in Hamilton. So yes, she gets about half the blame for her defeat.

But the other half goes to people who would feel like they died and went to heaven if Paul Ryan were their congressperson, and who simply refused to recognize Schmidt’s genuine conservatism.

That includes COAST and ARTC, who never got over years-old grudges. Unfortunately, I expected that. But I didn’t expect the Ohio Liberty Council to endorse her opponent and completely ignore the facts. But they did. Most of those who supported her opponent don’t live in the district and from what I can tell were relying on her 2005 Saturday Night Live caricature far more than on anything substantive. So, alhough it took over six years, it looks like the liberal media and entertainment industry won again. You guys should be embarrassed. Wenstrup v. Schmidt was NOT a victory for Tea Party conservatism.

Oh, and I almost forgot (no, not really, this is my argument-ending closer) — Guess who voted for both TARP AND the initial GM-Chrysler bailout loans in 2008?

Answer: Paul Ryan, and not Jean Schmidt (full 2008 CFG scorecard) –

Schmidt voted for TARP, but so did Ryan. Schmidt voted against the auto bailout, but Ryan voted for it. And Jean Schmidt’s supposed to be the villainess.

When people say that Tea Party activists are losing their way, their endorsement of Brad Wenstrup over Jean Schmidt is Exhibit A. Y’all should be ashamed of yourselves, folks, for not even doing the most basic homework, and for ignoring drop-dead obvious red flags and serious flaws in Brad Wenstrup’s record.

Based on her record during the past three years, the Second District has lost a proven conservative congressperson. Whether one will arrive in her place is yet to be seen — but if he does, we can virtually guarantee that he won’t be more conservative in his votes — which at the end of the day is the most important thing a congressperson does — than Jean Schmidt has been.

I heard this Brad Wentstrup radio ad attacking Second District Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, whom Wenstrup is challenging in the Ohio primary, earlier this afternoon:

Lowlights:

Narrator 1 (“Bob”): Members of Congress are now greeting the President. There’s someone kissing the President. Who’s that?

Narrator 2: Looks like Congresswoman Jean Schmidt.

Bob: Ah, Congresswoman Schmidt. Is she a Democrat? She seems very close with the President.

Narrator 2: No Bob, she’s a longtime Republican politician, but she did vote for the Wall Street bailout. And she voted for the President’s debt-limit increase.

Bob: Seems that when you vote with the President so many times, he smiles when you kiss him.

… Brad Wenstrup: I’m Brad Wenstrup, and I approve this message.

Really, Brad? You approve of this borderline (actually, on the wrong side of the border) misogynistic crap?

And you want to serve in Congress?

Sadly, I see the influence of COAST in this outrageous ad. Every time it seems that the group might deserve the benefit of the doubt, it goes off the rails and does stupid things like endorsing Wenstrup over mostly solid and growing more solid conservative Jean Schmidt.

For the record, and to avoid writing a book:

• Schmidt opposed ObamaCare, and advocates its repeal (later in the ad, Wenstrup says he also favors repeal, making it look as if Schmidt doesn’t).
• Schmidt’s economic and fiscal rating at the Club for Growth in 2010 was 100%. In 2009, it was 91%. Her 2008 TARP vote was a mistake, but let’s not forget that it was made under conditions of outright blackmail (to be clear, she should still have voted “no,” but the pressure from business executives and bankers in her district was enormous). She also received a 100% rating from Americans for Prosperity.
• Schmidt’s rating from the National Right to Life is 100%, as it is at Gary Bauer’s Campaign for Working Families and Family Research Council (HTs to Mark at Weapons of Mass Discussion). Speaking of Mark, he has chronicled Mr. Wenstrup’s prolife values-betraying agreement to give money to Planned Parenthood and grant administration weaknesses which have cost the City of Cincinnati a state grant which it had been receiving for decades.

If Brad Wenstrup had an ounce of decency, he’d pull and denounce this despicable ad. Betcha that he won’t, which will force me to conclude that he doesn’t.

Let’s compare the increase in private sector employment in states with Republican vs. Democratic governors, right to work and non-right to work states, and the various combinations of the two:

Everything is as expected except perhaps the Democrat-RTW category, which only has two states, and was dragged down by the disaster in North Carolina known as Beverly Perdue.

Differences of 0.3% to 0.4% between GOP- and Dem-governed states and right to work vs. non-right to work states many not seem like much, but it’s what has been happening consistently for a couple of decades, and explains why a lot of the Midwest, whose income and standard of living used to exceed the South by miles, no longer really does.

The difference between the sum of the states and the national report may (emphasis may) indicate a downside surprise in prior-month revisions when tomorrow’s Employment Situation report is released, or possibly an increase in the state numbers when the next related state report is released later this month.

Now let’s look at the top 15 private sector performers, which is deep enough to pick up the great State of Ohio:

Several points:

• Louisiana, as indicated in my column earlier this week, has done very well considering the barriers the Obama administration has put in the way of full Gulf drilling resumption.
• Texas’s performance in the private sector compared to overall (where it placed sixth) directly contradicts the silly claim made late last year by a Democratic hack who said that Rick Perry as governor had overseen big growth in public sector employment.
• Of the top 15, ten are GOP-governed. Eight of those ten are right to work states. Of the five Democrat-governed states, two (KY and WV) are arguably governed relatively conservatively, and DC keeps growing because of Uncle Sam. Washington State is the only real star performer of the bunch.

This (issues page at Brad Wenstrup’s site) doesn’t explain it.

If Jean Schmidt isn’t sufficiently conservative for Mr. Wenstrup, he needs to say how and why he would be different and better. He hasn’t. At least Mike Kilburn articulated a couple of genuine beefs in 2010 and had a decent political track record.

Meanwhile, Mr. Wenstrup has a “funny” way of demonstrating that he is “prolife” — except that those who believe in the sanctity of life aren’t laughing.

Mark at Weapons of Mass Discussion has been all over this:

• Nov. 29 — Supposed Pro Life Conservative Brad Wenstrup Approves of Giving Kids Birth Control Without Parental Consent
• Nov. 28 — Wenstrup Doesn’t Get His Pro Abort Excuse Timeline Right….
• Nov. 23 — Greater Cincinnati Right to Life Doesn’t Agree with Dr. Wenstrup
• Nov. 23 — While Wenstrup Gives Grants to Child Rape Cover Up Artists at Planned Parenthood, Jean Schmidt is recognized as actually being pro life
• Nov. 23 — Supposed “Strong Conservative” Wenstrup Uses Soros Attack Dogs to Smear Jean Schmidt. That would be CREW, which pretends to be bipartisan but “somehow” goes after conservatives far more often than libs for ethical lapses.
• Nov. 21 — COAST Chooses Vendetta over Its Own Principles…
• Nov. 14 — Dr. Wenstrup Has a Funny Way of Being “Pro”-Life
• Nov. 17 (my sum-up, quoting Mark) “This ‘doctor’ who claims to be pro life and is running against incumbent Jean Schmidt, who actually is pro life, by the way, voted to give money to an organization that openly violated the law.”

That organization would be Planned Parenthood, which routinely flouts the law when it comes to killing preborn babies carried by minors as a result of adult-child sex (aka “statutory rape”) by failing to report it to authorities as required, and which therefore — even proaborts should agree with this (but they don’t in practice, because killing preborn babies trumps all other considerations with them) — should be getting no public money of any kind for any reason, “targeted” or not.

Look, I get it if you think Jean Schmidt, despite her strong conservative ratings from the likes of Club for Growth (100% in 2010) and others, has made some mistakes, and that perhaps someone else could do better.

But if you do — yeah, I’m talking to you, COAST, and you, Anderson Township Republicans — you need to come up with that “someone” who has demonstrated that he or she could and would do better. Brad Wenstrup isn’t that guy.

In the meantime, could you please stop acting as if Jean Schmidt is evil incarnate, and that anybody with a pulse would be preferable? That six-year routine in the face of Schmidt’s consistent voting record as a solid conservative has moved from embarrassing to disgraceful. Please — Let the anciently-based, long since proven baseless bitterness go.

Those of us who remember the epic OH-02 special election battle featuring Democrat Paul Hackett vs. Republican Jean Schmidt in the summer of 2005 saw a lot of parallels in the NY-09 special election between Republican Bob Turner and Democrat David Weprin conducted yesterday — but not in the final result.

In each case, it was supposed to be a safe district for the incumbent party. OH-02 has been Republican since 1964. NY-09 had been held by Democratic demagogues like Chuck Schumer, Anthony Weiner, and others since 1923.

OH-02 was supposed to be a referendum on the popularity of George W. Bush and the Iraq War, even though Democrat Hackett pretended to be an Iraq War supporter in his ads on the home front while cursing the commander in chief in front of out-of-town supporters and reporters. NY-09 was a referendum primarily on the performance of Barack Obama, especially on the economy.

Note how I’m using the past tense in NY-09. That’s because, unlike in OH-02, where Republican Schmidt held on to win by a 3-point margin, Bob Turner last night broke the Democrat stranglehold on NY-09 and won, by a convincing margin (54-46 with 86% of the district counted). (Update: The New York Daily News’s headline: “Turner Trounces Weprin In NY-9 Showdown”)

Democrats declared that Hackett’s close OH-02 loss obtained under obviously false pretenses supposedly meant that the Iraq War was unpopular and that “no Republican seat is safe.” Today they claim that Turner’s historic win achieved without equivocation on where he stands and what he believes doesn’t mean much.

The heck it doesn’t. It’s a direct rebuke to the President and his party, and a huge win refuting the claim that a candidate’s Tea Party sympathies represent a liability.

If Democrats can’t win in NY-09, they may not be guaranteed of congressional wins anywhere. One would expect that they will have to dedicate significant resources to holding districts they would normally be able to leave alone.

For those who are unaware, because of redistricting in Ohio, which is losing two congressional seats as a result of the 2010 census, longtime Buckeye State Congressman and 2004/2008 unserious Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is considering a run for Congress in Washington State, some 2,000 miles from his current Cleveland digs.

In his coverage of Kucinich’s recent northwestern travels, Carl Hulse at the New York Times characterized the possible long-distance congressional pursuit by the former Boy Mayor, who mismanaged Cleveland to the brink of bankruptcy in the late-1970s, thusly: “It is a somewhat novel idea that could be summed up as: Have seniority, will travel.”

Hulse didn’t follow up on his seniority assertion, but it would appear that if Kucinich were somehow to triumph in an Evergreen State congressional contest, he would retain his status as ranking Democratic member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and his relatively lofty status at the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Unfortunately, that’s not surprising. Although not directly analogous, in 2005, former six-term Ohio Congressman Bob McEwen, who had resided in Virginia during almost all of the previous 12 years after being ousted in 1992, came close to winning a 2005 special GOP primary for the Buckeye State’s Second Congressional District necessitated by Rob Portman’s departure for the Bush administration. One of McEwen’s major arguments was that, unlike his opponents, he would rejoin the Rules Committee with his years of seniority intact. McEwen lost, and his claim was never tested. But there is nothing I have found in discussions with others or in limited research that would lead me to believe that Dennis Kucinich would lose his seniority if he were to grab the carpetbag and somehow win election as a Washington State congressman.

This strikes me as unfair, especially to longtime Washingtonians who might have to run against Kucinich, and to other House members who have remained loyal to their states but would still have to wait their turn to move up the seniority ladder.

But there it is.

Cross-posted at the Washington Examiner Opinion Zone.

__________________________________________

BizzyBlog Update: Gosh, I just realized that today is the sixth anniversary of this post, which changed the nature of this blog forever, and was the beginning of an ultimately successful effort (with lots of help from other quarters) which kept a certain former congressman from again becoming “my” congressman.

________________________________________________

Note: This is the first in a series of posts by Rose chronicling why endorsed GOP candidate Archie Wilson should be the choice of Clermont County’s voters in the contest for County Commissioner.

The series also will raise important and troubling questions about how property tax dollars are being allocated in Clermont County — and perhaps many other Ohio counties.

________________________________________________

In late September, I chronicled the rather extensive list of endorsements won by Archie Wilson in the Clermont County Commissioner’s race here.

Given the desparate measures Wilson’s progressive incumbent opponent, his band of bullies and the lamestream media are taking to maintain power after being rejected by Republican and Tea Party conservatives, it is clear that those organizations made the right decisions.

The following is posted in full with permission.

Vote Archie Wilson for Clermont County Commissioner
By Tim Rudd
Clermont County Republican Party Chairperson
September 27th, 2010

Republican, Conservative, Conservative Republican, confusing – it can be especially when someone is deliberatively trying to confuse you. Let me cut through the confusion.

The Clermont County Republican Central Committee met in January and endorsed Archie Wilson for Commissioner on a vote of 100 for Archie, 54 for incumbent Scott Croswell, and 10 not to endorse. Archie’s vote total met the 60% of the quorum present necessary for endorsement. The vote total showed that Archie had widespread support from across the county. Immediately after the endorsement the incumbent announced that the endorsement was “essentially irrelevant” and that he would prevail in the primary. The incumbent subsequently changed his mind and filed to run as an Independent in November.

I still believe that the conservative base of the party has a real concern regarding the use of taxpayer’s money by the incumbent Commissioner to compete against private enterprise for economic development in this county. The incumbent brags about fiscal responsibility while spending millions of taxpayer dollars on economic development where the commissioners, or the private corporations they established, pick the winning developers.

In 2006, for the first time ever, over 15% of county normal operating funds and over 37% of the county beginning fund balance was spent on “economic development” without any voter input. Picking winners and losers sounds more like President Obama’s failed economic stimulus than being a free market fiscal conservative.

The Croswell for Commissioner Campaign filed its semiannual campaign finance report in July.

Of the almost $21,000 raised only about 7.4% was raised in Clermont County leaving over 92% raised elsewhere.
Political Action Committees donated $2,000.00 with addresses of Omaha, Nebraska, Nashville, Tennessee, Pickerington, Ohio and Columbus. Private donors from Indianapolis and Lexington donated $3000.00.

The rest of the private donations comprising the balance of the 92% percent came mostly from across Ohio from such places as Upper Arlington, Hilliard, Blacklick, anywhere except for Clermont County.

I don’t know about you but I’m getting a little uneasy here between the economic development and an unprecedented out of county funding for a commissioner’s race. Can a “For Sale” sign be too far behind for our county?

Archie Wilson is the only Republican in the race for Commissioner this fall. Archie’s endorsements include the following:

Ohio Tea Party PAC
Cincinnati Right to Life PAC
Citizens for Community Values Action PAC
Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Valley Lodge #112.

He is serving his third term as Batavia Township Trustee. Archie is a Master Plumber who along with his partner founded and manages Midwestern Plumbing. Midwestern Plumbing is a thirty year success story that was recognized last year by the Clermont County Chamber of Commerce receiving the Pacesetter Award. Archie gives generously to charity but does not believe in government funded corporate charity. Archie has faced the tough decisions of a private businessman and knows what is necessary for a business to succeed. Archie, a true self made man, will bring real conservative values to the office of Commissioner. Vote Archie Wilson.

Additional Posts:
- Oct. 29 — Archie Wilson Stands Up to Cronyism
- Oct. 30 — Archie Wilson Takes on Elitist Incumbent
- Oct. 31 — The Tea Party Weighs In
- Oct. 31 — Kasich Denounces Croswell Trick
- Nov. 1 — The Croswell-Kasich Mailer (Pics and County GOP Chairman’s Reax)

From the Pike County News Watchman (HT to an e-mailer), on a Bob McEwen speech at that county’s Lincoln Day Dinner:

“Now, I don’t need some Indonesian immigrant to tell me he wants to change America,” McEwen said of President Obama who spent some of his growing up years in Indonesia.

Geez Bob, you didn’t need to go there to make your points about freedom, free markets, and limited government.

Why won’t you just go away?

Ohio’s Second Congressional District has been represented by Jean Schmidt since September 2005. Almost Over four years later, it appears that she finally has a worthy, serious, sensible conservative challenger (i.e., after the last time it happened, which was June 2005).

It’s worth recounting how Jean Schmidt got to this point to recognize just how many bullets she has dodged.

In June 2005′s special 11-candidate GOP primary to replace Rob Portman, she shrewdly/luckily stayed out of the intensely negative boxing match between perceived front-runners Pat DeWine, Bob McEwen, and Tom Brinkman.

In that primary, Pat DeWine spent about a million dollars to get less than 5,500 votes. DeWine was not seen as legitimately conservative, largely because his father Mike was so busy selling out sensible conservative principles and values in Washington during that time (think Gang of 14, ANWR). That result should have been, but wasn’t, a red-letter hint to U.S. Senator DeWine that he would be in serious trouble in his reelection campaign the next year.

Bob McEwen, despite deep-pocketed national support and testimonials from the likes of James Dobson and other supposed family-values leaders, was fortunately taken down in the final weeks by the Southwestern Ohio blogosphere. In retrospect, the fact that McEwen’s outside supporters were so willing to overlook his so many serious flaws was a troubling preview of the unforgivable passes those same people ended up giving Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney in the GOP 2008 presidential race.

Tom Brinkman, the candidate for whom I voted, was taken down by a last-minute ad blitz attacking his opposition to the death penalty.

Out of that dogfight, Jean Schmidt emerged the shrewd/lucky winner.

Then came the August 2, 2005 special election against Democrat Paul Hackett. Even Schmidt’s biggest fans have to admit that she ran an awful campaign marred by several serious gaffes. Meanwhile, Iraq War vet Hackett posed as a George W. Bush fan in his TV ads while running around the country telling his victory-starved leftospheric fans that our president was a “son of a b____” and “chicken hawk.”

Fortunately for Jean Schmidt, the establishment media, sensing an opportunity to delegitimize Bush and the war, uncharacteristically allowed Hackett’s incendiary quotes into their coverage. Because of that tactical error, Schmidt was saved once again, with yet another heavy assist from the Southwestern Ohio blogosphere. At literally the eleventh hour, our work was noticed by then-prominent video blogger Trey Jackson. His post was seen by Rush Limbaugh’s peeps, causing Rush to deliver Paul Hackett the relentless hammering he should have received all along from Schmidt during most of his broadcast on Election Day. Schmidt won by less than 4,000 votes.

The CQ Politics Eye on 2010 Blog does a pretty good job taking the Schmidt saga from there:

She had a rocky beginning to her tenure, in part for comments on the House floor that appeared to question the patriotism of Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. John P. Murtha.

In 2006, Schmidt beat former Rep. Bob McEwen in the primary by 5 percentage points, then edged Democratic physician Victoria Wulsin by 1 percentage point in the general election.

In 2008, Schmidt beat back a primary challenge from state Rep. Tom Brinkman, then won a rematch against Wulsin, albeit with just 45 percent of the vote in a three-way contest in which Wulsin took 37 percent and independent candidate David Krikorian won 18 percent.

Krikorian is running again in 2010, this time as a Democrat, though party officials have been promoting the candidacy of state Rep. Todd Book.

This brings us to Mike Kilburn. Where he hits Schmidt is a perfect fit (again from CQ’s blog):

“I don’t have anything against Jean Schmidt, but I think there’s a movement to elect more conservative politicians to Washington,” Kilburn, who serves in Warren County east of Cincinnati, told the Hamilton Journal-News late last week. “I have a burning desire to make sure this country won’t go broke.”

Kilburn, who is serving his seventh four-year term on the county commission, drew headlines this year when he opposed accepting some federal stimulus dollars for transportation projects on the grounds that it was “filthy money.”

…. Kilburn spoke with CQ Politics on Monday afternoon and emphasized restraint in federal spending. He said that Schmidt “doesn’t really have the most conservative spending record,” pointing to her vote for a $700 billion program to stabilize the financial markets.

“You’ve got to be able to say no. Government can’t be all things to all people,” he said. “The Republicans kind of lost their way — they thought that they would curry favor with their voters and their constituents if they could bring something back home for them.”

To be fair, Jean Schmidt has mostly not “lost her way.” But her financial bailout vote (what CQ Politics euphemistically calls the vote to “stabilize the financial markets”) cost her my presumptive support and I daresay that of thousands of others in this district. My vote is up for grabs, because at crunch time, she and many others who say they are conservative (sadly including House Republican leader John Boehner) sided with the Washington elites who don’t care what the people think or want.

I have never heard or seen a good justification from Team Schmidt about why she voted for the financial bailout. If she was blackmailed/fooled by threats that Second District employers would go under if their credit lines or loans went away, we deserve to know that, with specifics. (Given what Treasury Secretary Paulson actually did with bailout funds in the program’s early days, it’s very hard to believe that things were nearly as serious as advertised.) Absent any kind of valid justification, what we need to hear is a heartfelt “I was wrong. I am sorry.”

Schmidt also betrayed a weakness in her knowledge of how our government is supposed to work at the Voice of America rally in September. While listening to a broadcast of the event, I heard her give the courts credit for possessing far more power than they constitutionally have (if anyone has the specific quote, let me know, preferably with a link).

Mike Kilburn seems to have a record of standing up when it counts. He is right; stimulus money IS “filthy money” stolen from future generations by a government that is spending trillions more than it is taking in.

He’s also right about the now loophole-ridden (thanks to Washington and Ohio’s compliant Strickland administration) Food Stamp program:

Warren County commissioners are upset after learning about a loophole in Ohio’s public assistance plan that allows wealthy people to collect food stamps.

The commissioners met Tuesday after learning that a person with a paid-for $311,000 home, a new Mercedes and $80,000 in the bank is being given $500 a month in food stamps and $300 in cash assistance.

“This is absolutely ridiculous and the buck stops here,” Commissioner Michael Kilburn said.

Kilburn doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who will descend into the kind of stupid, sexist character assassination that other challengers have stooped to in past primary attempts to defeat Schmidt. If I’m correct, that will be a huge relief.

I’m sure we’ll hear whining from the Ohio Republican Party, which will until further notice go by the acronym ORPINO (the Ohio Republican Party In Name Only) around here, that “we shouldn’t have divisive primaries,” and “incumbents deserve the benefit of the doubt,” blah-blah-blah. Spare me. This illogic, and the accompanying failure to define oneself to the grass roots who must be motivated to do the grunt work of general-election campaigning, explains why mediocre, squishy GOP candidates in the Buckeye State get their hats handed to them in general elections far more than they should, given the sensible center-right beliefs of the vast majority of Buckeye state residents.

Apparently that’s not going to happen this time, and that’s a very good thing. Make Jean Schmidt defend her record. Make Mike Kilburn tell us and show us why he believes he’ll be better.

Let the games begin.

Note: This post has been carried to the top and will stay until early tomorrow morning because of the importance of the topic.

_______________________________________________________

Hey John,

I understand you’ve got an announcement coming up on Monday. Assuming that you’re going to formalize your run for governor, congratulations on your decision. Ohio needs someone with a proven record of controlling government spending and balancing budgets.

Of course, assuming you win the GOP primary next May, you’ll be running against Governor Ted Strickland.

But to be successful, you also have to run against the way the Republican Party governed this state for at least a dozen years prior to Strickland’s arrival at the Statehouse. As you well know, the sad fact is that your beloved Buckeye State has been run economically like a blue state since the mid-1990s. This is why Ohio has gone from economic leader to economic laggard during that time.

Having seen you speak last year and having followed your efforts since, it is clear that you realize the need to make a clean break from a deeply flawed past. You also surely know that the 2010 Republican statewide ticket must unequivocally make that break, and that if it doesn’t, it will be unnecessarily courting failure.

Fortunately, the ticket as it is currently shaping up is mostly heading decisively in that the right direction. Incumbent Auditor Mary Taylor has been a shining star as a consummate but outspoken professional. Treasurer candidate Josh Mandel redefines “breath of fresh air.” Dave Yost looks to be the kind of no-nonsense, no-cronyism leader that the tarnished Attorney General’s office desperately needs.

That brings us to the one glaring exception. His name is Jon Husted.

Let’s not kid ourselves. Jon Husted does not belong on the GOP’s statewide ticket. Almost everyone except Jon Husted and the Ohio Republican Party instinctively knows this.

It is not arguable that Husted violates at least the first and last items in Chairman Kevin DeWine’s “10-point plan for building a new Ohio Republican Party.”

Jon Husted does not have “conservative credibility” (Point 1). He voted for Bob Taft’s 2003 tax increases, the largest in Ohio’s history, and has to my knowledge has never expressed remorse for having done so. Six years later, I’d say it’s too late for believable mea culpas. By contrast, a courageous state representative was kicked off of a House committee for voting against that tax increase. That representative was Mary Taylor.

The ORP’s silence and inaction on Husted’s residency problem – even though he “admits spending most of his time in his Upper Arlington residence, outside of his district, as opposed to his home in Kettering” –- is a clear breach of the Party’s alleged “zero-tolerance policy” (Point 10). The idea that the person running to be the enforcer of the state’s election laws has himself more than likely violated election laws (and definitely has violated their spirit) is simply intolerable. Again, almost everyone except Jon Husted and the Ohio Republican Party instinctively knows this.

In fact, if anyone but Jon Husted with Jon Husted’s record and baggage attempted to run statewide, the Ohio Republican Party would be working night and day to marginalize him. Instead (and let’s not kid ourselves), there is plenty of evidence that the ORP is promoting him. If they weren’t, why am I hearing that so many speakers at Lincoln Day dinners throughout the state, many of whom have barely shaken hands with the guy, are going out of their way to tell their audiences what a great candidate Husted is, and that people should get behind him?

You, John Kasich, should not be expected to swallow hard and accept or even quietly ignore Jon Husted. His presence on the statewide ticket would tarnish the so-far correct perception that you will leave no stone unturned to reform this state. His residency problem is a ticking time bomb.

What should you do about Husted? Well, you’re the one running for governor. I can only suggest that how you deal with this cancerous situation will be an important early test of your leadership, and that Ohioans will be watching.

Be assured that there are many of us in Ohio’s center-right, sensible conservative blogosphere who will fight just as hard to keep Jon Husted off the November 2010 ballot as some of us in Southwestern Ohio worked in 2005 and 2006 to keep Bob McEwen — another deeply flawed candidate with a record of illegal voting -– from returning to Congress. Also be assured that we will not hesitate to express our disappointment at any indication that you are willing to accept a Secretary of State candidate who is clearly unacceptable.

Ohio’s center-right, sensible conservative bloggers would rather not spend our limited energies defeating Husted. We’d prefer to deal with other, more positive things, like how to bring Ohio back to its former greatness. That’s where you come in.

Jean Schmidt survived a challenge from Victoria Wells Wulsin Whatever (VW3) and David “Cracked” Krikorian, but not impressively. My two cents: Her vote for the bailout hurt her and helped the other two, both of whom ran poor campaigns. She either needs to return to her otherwise strong voting record next year, or deserves a stiff conservative challenge in 2010. The linked story is “cleverly” written: “In a one-on-one interview with 9News, Schmidt said that she is ready to go back to Washington, and ‘roll up her sleeves’ to work together with the new Obama administration.” I’ll bet she didn’t actually say the last eight words.

______________________________________________________

Emily’s Lister and chummy with jihadists (9:25 item at link) Mary Jo “of course” Kilroy has lost to Steve Stivers in OH-15, per CNN and the Columbus Dispatch, despite two other candidates who siphoned votes away from Stivers. Update, Nov. 7: Nope (HT to Chad Baus) — CNN and the Dispatch were wrong (how does that happen). Stivers is up by 321 pending a recount. With Brunner in charge, I’m a pessimist.

______________________________________________________

Even though OH-01 was picked up by someone who claims to be prolife but isn’t when it matters, and OH-16 was picked up by someone who claims to be in favor of 2nd Amendment rights but isn’t when it matters, the OH congressional delegation is still 10-8 GOP.

______________________________________________________

Nancy (oh) Boyda lost to Lynn Jenkins in KS-02. No more temper tantrums when generals tell the truth.

_____________________________________________________

State Rep Josh Mandel in Ohio District 17 handily defeated the his Democratic opponent who, along with his wife, clownishly criticized Mandel for “going AWOL” by returning to Iraq and threw in a bit of Jewish stereotyping as an added bonus. Mandel’s explanation for his decision to return: “I didn’t join the Marine Corps to say no when my country called.” Thank you, sir.

Jill at Writes Like She Talks, who lives in the District, did not support Mandel, and may have voted for the clownishly acting opponent. The results of a WLST site search on her opponent’s name show that she clearly followed the race closely. Yet, “somehow,” she had nothing to say about this:

Though the YouTube went upon October 26, Mandel’s opponent and his wife said what they said in July.

Jill criticizes Mandel for exaggerating a fear of an expensive campaign to build his fundraising. On the very safe assumption that Mandel heard about what happened shortly after the fact, who could blame Mandel for being worried? Marines don’t just sit back and wait for incoming, Jill. I sure hope you didn’t know about the implicit “all good Jews are Democrats” sentiment and the “serving George Bush is more important than serving his constituents” comment (soldiers serve their country, no matter who their commander in chief happens to be) contained in the vid. Because if you did, your failure to mention it in a race you chose to follow closely is indefensible. If you actually voted for the guy who said it, the meter moves to shameful.
______________________________________________________

Prop. 8 in California (SOS description, “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry”; my description, “restores conditions to where voters had them in 2001″), is going to pass, despite the LA Times’s laughable holdout. It’s up by 350,000 votes with 90.8% of the votes counted. “No” votes would have to be 68% of the remainder for 8 to fail. Many of the uncounted votes, perhaps the majority, are from counties where Prop. 8 is passing. San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin Counties are all counted. Update: 8 Passed.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but this means that no state’s voters, no matter how blue, have ever legalized gay marriage. The result makes Arnold Schwarzenegger’s betrayal in advance of the vote that much more disgraceful.

Counting down the time until the California courts throw out or issue an illegal and should-be-ignored injunction against the vote …..

A phone call I received this morning motivated me to jump on this now instead of waiting a few days.

Let me first be clear about something: After her vote FOR the pork-expanded “bailout” with the made-up $850 billion price tag, on the heels of her vote AGAINST the original “bailout” with the made-up $700 billion price tag, I’m not inclined to give Jean Schmidt many more, if any, passes for questionable votes.

In fact, I believe she needs a credible challenge from the right.

The problem is, after emerging from a crowded field in the June 2005 Special Primary, she’s never had one.

Certainly not House Bank scandalized, scam-supporting Bob McEwen, whose habit of voting absentee in Ohio while living in Virginia for nearly a decade may have been the “inspiration” for the vote-fraud-on-steroids tactics being carried out from a house in Columbus that were detailed by Michelle Malkin yesterday.

There have been other challengers, but, among other things, they were too closely or too recently associated with the type of people who think the idea of Ms. Schmidt being abducted while in Iraq and not returned is somehow funny. Ha ha.

If Jean Schmidt is going to get a credible challenge from the right, it’s going to have to wait until 2010.

Though the allegedly conservative person who is trying to challenge this year, David Krikorian, has put on a good game face, he has shown himself to be every bit as unhinged, if not moreso, as many of the challengers who preceded him.

I’ve known about Krikorian’s unhinged nature for some time. Alas, I’ve been unable to disclose what I’ve learned, and vaguely referring to it would carry little weight.

Thus, I have been hoping (more like expecting) that Krikorian would reveal his true nature publicly in some other way between now and Election Day.

Now he has.

Jean Schmidt was hit by a car while jogging last week.

Did challenger David Krikorian express sympathy for Schmidt’s situation and unconditionally wish for her full recovery from injuries she suffered?

Uh, not exactly.

Instead, Krikorian questioned Schmidt’s claims about the specifics of the incident:

“Um, I’m going to say, we are – how do I put this – elements of the representative’s story do not add up,” Krikorian said. “There is no way that at 6 a.m. in the morning, or 5:45 in the morning, she claims that a car was approaching her and it didn’t slow down. I’m assuming that it had its headlights on before it hit her, she turns her back. Two things that don’t make sense to me – One, she said she thought it was a gray car and a man was driving it. And I don’t see how you could make that assertion when it’s pitch black, foggy, and the headlights are facing her. You can’t tell what color the car is, and you certainly can’t tell who’s driving the car, especially if you turn your back.

“Secondly, she claims the car must have damage to it, based on it hitting her, yet apparently she was undamaged. All I can say is, you don’t get hit by a vehicle and walk away from it, and the vehicle has damage to it. I don’t see how she can make that assertion. I’ve talked to a lot of people who think the story’s phony. I’m not saying the story’s phony, but a lot of people out there think it is. And we’re looking into it.”

Well, “phony” this:

Schmidt injuries more serious

Rep. Jean Schmidt is recuperating at her Miami Township home in Clermont County after suffering two broken ribs and two broken vertebra as a result of being hit by a car while running along a road last week.

Here’s Krikorian’s attempted walk-back:

“Well, that would certainly be new information that would then corroborate her story. But Jean Schmidt has a history of issues with the truth, and you know, I certainly don’t want to make an assertion where there’s none to be made, and the way it was initially reported in the paper doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

“Now it makes sense. I had not heard that before. Now it seems like maybe she was hit. You can’t get hit by a car and not suffer injuries. Now we’re hearing reports that she did in fact suffer injuries, and if that’s the case, I wish her a speedy recovery.”

Way too little, way too late, pal.

David Krikorian has accomplished the seemingly impossible, making Nate “She didn’t really run that marathon” Noy look reasonable by comparison. The only thing dented around here is Krikorian’s credibility — which is so damaged that his campaign should be declared a total loss.

What the public has seen of Krikorian unhinged has the ancillary benefit of making the claim I made earlier more believable. Yes, there is more, but I would need permission to reveal it. For now, I’m not inclined to ask for it.

If David Krikorian were smart, he’d drop out of the Second District Congressional race to save himself further embarrassment and Second District voters further nausea. Alas, he almost certainly won’t.

Some inept or unfit challengers have the redeeming value of being entertaining to watch, even if only inadvertently so. Krikorian is not one of them. I’ve officially tuned him out as unworthy of consideration. Voters in Ohio’s Second Congressional District should do likewise.