[Right Eat Their Own] Rice's 'Mother-in-Law' Comment Raises Conservative Hackles

Note to self. If trailing badly in a political contest, play the NAMBLA card.


In final debate, Blackwell accuses Strickland of pedophile support
By Dennis J. Willard
Beacon Journal Columbus Bureau

COLUMBUS - It was the first gubernatorial debate in Ohio history, possibly the United States, in which one candidate accused the other of being applauded by the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican candidate for governor who is trailing by double digits in most polls with three weeks until the election, went on the offensive in the fourth and final debate Monday night against Democrat Ted Strickland.

And like the rain that fell on the Channel 10 television studios and the spin tents pitched outside, Blackwell never let up during the one-hour debate nor in the aftermath during a rousing question-and-answer session.

To recap, Blackwell said Strickland did not vote for a resolution condemning sex between adults and children as a U.S. congressman.

That vote led NAMBLA, an organization that promotes sex between adults and consenting minors, to applaud Strickland, Blackwell said. Blackwell also said Strickland knew, employed and traveled with a man convicted of exposing himself to young children in Washington and Athens counties.

``It goes right at his judgment,'' Blackwell said.

The accusations were raised at the same time Republican candidates around the country are attempting to distance themselves from the scandal enveloping U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned after acknowledging he sent sexually graphic text messages to former House pages. Strickland appeared before reporters after the debate to elaborate on his responses to Blackwell's accusations.

The Democrat reiterated he never knowingly employed anyone in his campaign or congressional office that did not share his same values. But he does acknowledge a former employee was convicted of exposing himself.

As for the resolution, Strickland said he did not vote for or against the idea, but instead was recorded as present.

He said he supported a number of the ideas in the resolution, but could not vote yes because it contained a sentence he did not agree with.

That sentence, Strickland said, stated that sexually exploited children are unable to develop healthy affectionate relationships in later life, have sexual dysfunctions and have a tendency to become sexual abusers as adults.

Strickland said he did not believe that as a human being or psychologist, and he also believes God would not condemn a young victim to never having a chance to lead a normal adult life.

``I'm not angry tonight. I try to have some degree of understanding,'' Strickland said.

Blackwell would not disclose whether he planned to use the issues in television advertising in the final days of the campaign, and Strickland would not hazard a guess on the matter.

Strickland said Blackwell was desperate, but he did not believe he would be able to gain momentum by raising these types of allegations.

Strickland said he believes Blackwell's extreme positions are leading moderate Republicans and independent voters to his campaign.

During much of the debate, the candidates went over issues and positions raised in the first three encounters.

Like those earlier debates, Monday's was not aired statewide except on the Ohio News Network, a cable station.

Strickland reiterated his promise to ``Turnaround Ohio'' by using the state's natural resources -- corn, soybeans and coal -- to create jobs through breakthroughs in energy renewal programs.

He also said he promised to bring disparate groups together to address Ohio's unconstitutional school-funding program.

Calling himself the agent of change while labeling Strickland the status-quo candidate, Blackwell said he would jump-start Ohio's economy by cutting taxes by $1.2 billion in his first 100 days and redirect $1.4 billion to school classrooms while he developed a constitutional amendment to make the school-funding system constitutional.

Dennis J. Willard can be reached at 614-224-1613 or dwillard@thebeaconjournal.com.

 

Bush has a secret plan (that he chose to wait 3 years and 9 months to implement, to cost thousands of lifes, and to spend billion) BTW, is pot legal in Montana?


Iraq plan ignites Burns-Tester debate
Challenger calls conflict a quagmire

By CHARLES S. JOHNSON
Gazette State Bureau
Sen. Conrad Burns said at a debate Tuesday night that President Bush does have a plan for winning the war in Iraq, but he isn’t about to share it with the world.

Democratic Senate candidate Jon Tester replied that Bush’s only plan is to stay the course in Iraq, costing more American lives and billions of dollars, and to pass the war on to the next president who will take office in January 2009.

 

More eating their own ...


Nguyen denies knowing of mailing

O.C. GOP Chairman Scott Baugh disputes Tan Nguyen's claim that he didn't know an employee OKd letters to foreign-born Democrats warning them not to vote.

By MARTIN WISCKOL
The Orange County Register

Orange County GOP Chairman Scott Baugh has disputed GOP congressional candidate Tan Nguyen's claim that he had no knowledge of the mailing of a controversial letter erroneously telling immigrants not to vote.

Nguyen said earlier today in a statement that the mailing had been traced back to his campaign, and had occurred without his knowledge. Baugh disagreed.

"I've learned that Mr. Nguyen was involved in expediting that mailer," Baugh said. "I've had conversations with the attorney general and folks involved with the mail house. He called the mail house himself and told them to expedite the mailing.

Baugh says his earlier statement calling for Nguyen to drop out of the race has grown in its urgency."

The letter to as many as 14,000 Democrats in central Orange County immediately resulted in statements of condemnation ranging from Baugh to members of Congress to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Attorney General Bill Lockyer has launched an investigation.

Nguyen, a Republican, is challenging popular Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Garden Grove. He released a written statement this morning.

"The mailer was flawed and ill-conceived," he says in the statement. "Evidently, an employee took it upon herself to allow our database to be used to send out the letter. It was disseminated without my authorization or approval. The employee has been discharged."

Nguyen said he expects to talk to investigators today, and will hold a news conference tomorrow to answer questions. He said he will also address the issue of whether he will remain in the race.

In his statement, he says, "I will do whatever I can in the weeks before the election to encourage all citizens in this district to exercise the most important of their democratic privileges."

 

Republican Woes Lead to Feuding by Conservatives
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: October 20, 2006

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 — Tax-cutters are calling evangelicals bullies. Christian conservatives say Republicans in Congress have let them down. Hawks say President Bush is bungling the war in Iraq. And many conservatives blame Representative Mark Foley’s sexual messages to teenage pages.

With polls showing Republican control of Congress in jeopardy, conservative leaders are pointing fingers at one other in an increasingly testy circle of blame for potential Republican losses this fall.

“It is one of those rare defeats that will have many fathers,” said David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, expressing the gloomy view of many conservatives about the outcome on Election Day. “And they will all be somebody else.”

Whether the election will bear out their pessimism remains to be seen, and the factors that contribute to an electoral defeat are often complex and even contradictory. But the post-mortem recriminations can influence politics and policy for years after the fact. After 1992, Republicans shunned tax increases. After 1994, Democrats avoided gun control and health care reform. And 2004 led some Democrats to start quoting Scripture and rethinking abortion rights, while others opened an intraparty debate about the national security that is not yet resolved.

In the case of the Republican Party this year, the skirmish among conservatives over what is going wrong has begun unusually early and turned unusually personal.

But almost regardless of the outcome on Nov. 7, many conservatives express frustration that the party has lost its ideological focus. And after six years of nearly continuous control over the White House and Congress, conservatives are having a hard time finding anyone but one another to blame.

“It is pre-criminations,” said Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, the conservative magazine. “If a party looks like it is going to take a real pounding, this sort of debate is healthy. What is unusual is that it is happening beforehand.”

Some conservative leaders have often been quicker in the past to turn on Republican officials and one another than their rank-and-file supporters. But this year polls show broad disaffection at the grass roots, prompting some Republicans — including former Speaker Newt Gingrich — to worry that the public sparring could dampen turnout.

This year’s antagonists also include some new critics, including Mr. Gingrich’s one-time lieutenant, Dick Armey, the former House Republican majority leader.

In recent weeks, Mr. Armey has stepped up a public campaign against the influence of Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and an influential voice among evangelical protestants. In an interview published last month in “The Elephant in the Room,” a book by Ryan Sager about splits among conservatives, Mr. Armey accused Congressional Republicans of “blatant pandering to James Dobson” and “his gang of thugs,” whom Mr. Armey called “real nasty bullies” — arguments he reprised on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and in an open letter on the Web site organization FreedomWorks.

In an interview this week, Mr. Armey said catering to Dr. Dobson and his allies had led the party to abandon budget-cutting. And he said Christian conservatives could cost Republicans seats around the country, especially in Ohio.

“The Republicans are talking about things like gay marriage and so forth, and the Democrats are talking about the things people care about, like how do I pay my bills?” he said.

Mr. Armey also pinned some of the blame on Tom DeLay, the former Republican House majority leader, who “was always more comfortable with the social conservatives, the evangelical wing of the party, than he was with the business wing.”

Mr. Armey, who identifies himself as an evangelical, said he was tired of Christian conservative leaders threatening that their supporters would stay away from the ballot box unless they got what they wanted.

“Economic conservatives,” he argued, were emerging as the swing voters in need of attention, in part because they had become more likely to vote Democratic in the years since President Bill Clinton was in office. “A lot of people believe he brought us from deficits to surpluses, and there is a certain empirical evidence there,” Mr. Armey acknowledged.

In a statement on Thursday, Dr. Dobson said Mr. Armey was “still ticked” over a long-ago House leadership race in which Dr. Dobson endorsed someone else, and he restated his warnings to Republicans that social conservative voters “would abandon them if they forgot the promises they had made.”

In a recent newsletter from Dr. Dobson’s organization, Representative Mark Souder, an Indiana Republican counting on Christian conservatives to turn out for his re-election, called Mr. Armey’s comments “disgusting” and insulting to “the many Christians around the United States who devoutly hold conservative moral beliefs.”

Christian conservatives began complaining last year that the Republicans had put proposed Social Security changes and tax changes ahead of issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, risking the support of social-issue voters.

Over the summer, Congress held a rush of votes on just those issues — an election-year ritual intended to motivate those voters — and in an interview last week Tony Perkins, president of the Christian conservative Family Research Council, said he believed it had begun to revive some grass-roots enthusiasm.

“But the Foley scandal just let the air out of the tires,” Mr. Perkins said.

Others dismissed the Foley scandal as largely irrelevant outside of Mr. Foley’s district. Several conservatives said Republican incumbents were using it as a scapegoat.

“It will make you feel better to say, I didn’t lose the election; Foley lost it for me,” said Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform. “Your wife and kids will believe it.”

Mr. Norquist said the Iraq war was the biggest drag on Republican candidates even before their big wins in 2004.

“Some people think we did it just to prove we could do it, like people who go running with weights on their ankles,” he said.

Many blame neoconservatives who argued most vocally for the invasion of Iraq. “The principal sin of the neoconservatives is overbearing arrogance,” Mr. Keene said. Neoconservatives, in turn, blamed Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld’s insistence on holding down troop levels for the fouling up of the war

“There is a bit of a battle between people who say, Hey, your tax cuts wrecked our war and people who say, Hey, your war wrecked our tax cuts,” said David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter who was among the war’s proponents.

Mr. Frum argued that the problem with the Iraq war was in its execution, not in the idea behind it. “The war has to be seen through the prism of Hurricane Katrina,” he argued, “because conservatives will support a tough war if they are confident in the war’s management.”

William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard and another prominent advocate of the invasion, said he doubted that soaring spending was turning off as many voters as tax-cutters like Mr. Norquist or Mr. Armey suggested.

“The spending bill that was supposedly going to destroy the Republican Party was the Medicare drug bill,” he said. “I have heard almost no one talk about it one way or the other.”

Mr. Kristol argued that the Bush administration was suffering politically for applying too little force, not too much. “I am struck that people have the sense in North Korea and Iran that things are spinning out of control,” he said.

Mr. Frum and others blamed the Republican Senate’s support for the president’s guest-worker immigration proposal for angering the grass-roots talk-radio crowd. But Mr. Norquist, who favored the immigration proposal, argued that the election would provide a verdict on “restrictionism” in the fate of Randy Graf, a Republican candidate in Arizona running on calls for tighter borders. Polls show Mr. Graf faces long odds.

Mr. Gingrich, for his part, made the best of the fray, saying, “I would rather have a movement active enough to bite itself rather than a movement so moribund it didn’t realize it was irritated.”