The Ontario Republican

Kuhl Reports Best Fundraising Period Ever; Raises Over $333,000

2008-07-17T09:39:00.006-04:00

First, I must apologize for not blogging recently. With the wedding planning (which was this weekend, and we had a very special surprise visit at the reception from none other than Congressman Kuhl), and starting my new job, I've just been swamped. In addition, while I will be blogging throughout the fall campaign season, I will be on another two week hiatus starting this weekend for my honeymoon in Italy.

Second, I have good news to report on Kuhl's fundraising figures. According to the FEC, Congressman Kuhl has outraised Massa by $43,000. While Massa has around $50K more cash on hand, he still has $75K in outstanding debt, meaning he actually only has $577K cash on hand compared to Kuhl's $610,000 cash on hand.

Below is the Kuhl campaign's statement on the latest figures:

Bath, NY – U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr.'s campaign today announced Kuhl's best fundraising reporting period in his three campaigns for Congress. Kuhl will report raising over $333,000 during the second quarter. He announced his reelection plans just prior to the start of the quarter.

"I'm deeply humbled by the strong grassroots support my campaign is receiving throughout the 29th Congressional District," said Representative Kuhl. "I am proud to be an independent voice who has a record of delivering for my constituents. Western New Yorkers believe in lowering taxes, increasing the exploration of America's energy resources, finding affordable solutions to healthcare, and making our economy stronger so we can attract and retain competitive jobs. I look forward to continuing out on the campaign trail because I know we're on the right side of the important issues facing the families of my district."

Between April and June, Kuhl raised $333,201.43. Kuhl's previous best fundraising reporting period was three years ago – the second quarter of 2005.

Last week, Kuhl, a lifelong resident of Western New York, announced he will run on the Republican, Conservative and Independence Party lines this November.

UPDATE: According to the Star Gazette, the Massa campaign owes most of its $75,170 debt to Massa's wife...

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Endorses Kuhl for Congress

2008-05-20T15:09:00.002-04:00

The Kuhl campaign just announced today that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce endorsed Congressman Kuhl, citing his commitment to economic growth and job creation. Here is the press release:

Bath, NY – U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr.’s campaign announced that the United States Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Kuhl for reelection to the United States House of Representatives. The Chamber cited Kuhl’s pro-business leadership and his support of legislation that advances economic growth, job creation and less government.

“A key to reviving our economy is to ensure that we do everything we can to support businesses, which will lead to the creation of more jobs. I firmly believe that the reason I'm here in Washington is to create more jobs,” said Representative Kuhl. “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce shares this priority with me and plays a pivotal role in encouraging business growth around the nation. I thoroughly appreciate this endorsement and look forward to working with the Chamber in the future.”

“Randy Kuhl has been a champion for the people of Southern Tier, Finger Lakes region, and Rochester and an invaluable leader on important business issues,” said Bill Miller, Chamber senior vice president and political director. “On issues ranging from simplifying our tax code, containing our budget deficit, investing in our infrastructure, and improving education, New York's business community has no better friend than Randy Kuhl.”

The United States Chamber of Commerce is the world's largest business federation representing more than 3 million businesses. Last month, the Chamber awarded Kuhl the “Spirit of Enterprise” award for supporting pro-growth, pro-business legislation during the first session of the 110th Congress.

Houghton, Brooks To Serve As Honorary Campaign Co-Chairs for Kuhl Campaign

2008-05-19T11:17:00.002-04:00

I just got this press release from the Kuhl campaign:

Bath, NY – U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr.’s campaign announced that former U.S. Representative Amo Houghton and Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks have joined the campaign as Honorary Co-Chairs. Houghton represented Western New York in Congress from 1987 to 2005. Brooks is currently serving her second term as County Executive.

“I’m honored to have the support of Amo and Maggie,” said Representative Kuhl. “We have a strong team of supporters from around the district who will help me continue spreading my message of finding real solutions to keeping our taxes low, promoting a growth economy, giving families access to affordable healthcare and making sure every child receives a quality education.”

“Randy has asked me to be the Honorary Chairman of his campaign, and of course I’m delighted to accept,” said Houghton. “Randy is a good person and under a variety of trying circumstances in Washington has been an excellent Congressman.”

“Randy Kuhl is a great partner for our community and a strong voice for our region,” added Brooks. “Time and time again, he has delivered for the people of Monroe County by delivering important funds for public safety, education, and creating jobs. I am proud to support Congressman Randy Kuhl and am confident that he will continue to work hard for the residents of the 29th Congressional District."

Representative Kuhl, a lifelong resident of Western New York, has represented the 29th Congressional District since 2005. Prior to serving as a U.S. Congressman, Kuhl was elected to the New York State Assembly in 1980 and served there until being elected to the State Senate in 1986. In the Senate, he served as Assistant Majority Leader from 1995 to 2004.

About Amo Houghton:

Houghton served in the United States House of Representatives from 1987 to 2005. While in Congress, he was a member of the House Ways and Means Committee and the International Relations Committee. Houghton is the founder and chairman of the Republican Main Street Partnership and was responsible for the historic Bipartisan Congressional Retreat. In addition, he founded the John Quincy Adams Society, an issues forum that brings together moderate officeholders with top business leaders.

Houghton, the only former CEO of a Fortune 500 firm ever to serve in the House, is a graduate of Harvard University and Harvard Business School. He joined Corning Glass Works (now Corning, Incorporated) as an accountant in 1951 after serving as a Pfc. in the United States Marine Corps. He retired from Corning in 1986 after serving as president, board chairman and chief executive officer.

About Maggie Brooks:

Brooks, elected Monroe County’s fifth County Executive in 2003, is the first woman to hold the position. She was re-elected to a second term in 2007 by an historic 74 percent of the vote. In 2005, Brooks was appointed to the newly-created Federal Medicaid Commission, serving as the only public official from a local government to be appointed to the Commission.

Brooks previously served as Monroe County Clerk and as a Monroe County Legislator. She is well-known in the Greater Rochester area from her many years as a local television news anchor and radio reporter.

Congressman Kuhl Launches "Fix Washington" Project

2008-05-19T10:41:00.002-04:00

Last week, Congressman Kuhl unveiled his "Fix Washington" project as a way for constituents to introduce legislative proposals to the Congressman. Constituents can send their ideas to the Congressman through July 18, at which time five will be chosen to be voted for on Kuhl's website. The proposal that gets the most votes will be introduced by Congressman Kuhl on the House floor. IMHO, this is the ultimate constituent outreach.

If you would like to submit your own proposal, click here!

Kuhl Holds 20 Point Lead in Latest Poll

2008-05-13T09:06:00.003-04:00

My apologizes for not posting in weeks. I got extremely bogged down with other obligations, but I'm back, and what better way to be back than to report such good news.

A poll conducted earlier this year by McLaughlin & Associates shows that Congressman Kuhl now has a sizeable lead (a 20 point advantage) over Massa. According to this poll, Congressman Kuhl continues to build confidence with the voters, while Massa's favorable/unfavorable ratings are almost even.

Here's a quote from the NRCC on the poll:

"Rep. Randy Kuhl has been working in Congress to improve the economy and to meet the needs of families in New York's 29th District. And, as the numbers in this polling memo illustrate, Randy Kuhl is well-positioned to win in November. Eric Massa is a re-run candidate that now will carry the weight of a Democrat Congress that has voted for new taxes and increased spending at every turn on his shoulders," NRCC Spokeswoman Julie Shutley said.

Congressman Kuhl Responds To Today's MPN Editorial

2008-03-25T15:29:00.003-04:00

You know, because MPN has nothing else to complain about, they've decided to devote an entire editorial criticizing our congressman for sending out a mailer which informs constituents about the economic stimulus package. The editorial mentions that the IRS has already sent notices to us about the package details. I, for one, never received such a notice, though my fiancee did, even though we both qualify for the rebate. I'm sure many other constituents in our district also didn't receive this notice, and given that Kuhl's office has already received hundreds of calls on this matter, I think he's fully justified to send out a mailer to us about it.

Here is Congressman Kuhl's press release on the editorial:

WASHINGTON – March 25, 2008 - Today the Daily Messenger Post Newspaper published an editorial titled, “Campaigning on your nickel,” which criticized a recent district mailing Rep. Kuhl distributed to inform his constituents about the details of the economic stimulus package. To read the editorial click here.

Below is the Congressman’s response to their editorial:

In your March 25th editorial criticizing my mailing about the economic stimulus package you say, “Unless you’ve been conducting a census on polar bears north of the Arctic Circle, you’ve no doubt heard of the federal government’s economic stimulus package.” Well, it must have been a busy year for Arctic pollsters because nearly 200 residents of the 29th district called my office in early February with questions about their rebate check.

The purpose of my mailer was to inform my constituents about the details of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Your editorial actually pointed out why I distributed the mailing when you inaccurately said, “Although specific guidelines affect the bottom line, as long as you file a federal income tax return, you’re getting something.” That is wrong and frankly if you had read my mailing then you would have known the truth.

The truth is that some individuals who file a federal income tax return and who have less than $3,000 of qualifying income will not be eligible for the stimulus payment. There are also maximum income limits that will preclude those making above those limits from receiving a rebate check. Another important detail is that individuals who are not typically required to file a return, such as senior citizens, will have to file a tax return to get their rebate checks.

I understand that the editorial board at the Messenger Post Newspaper has a thorough understanding of tax regulation and the tax code. But this mailing was for everyone else with questions about when and how they are going to get the money they will use to put gas in their car and pay off their debt. And if MPN wants to follow up with the correct information about the details of the stimulus feel free to contact my office with any questions, like many of my constituents did.

Sincerely,

Rep. Randy Kuhl

=30=

Massa v. Dickert: Libel Case Settled

2008-03-17T15:58:00.003-04:00

It appears that, at long last, Eric has settled with Sanford Dickert, his former campaign manager, on the latter's libel suit against Massa.

Blogversation III: Blog Misinformation & "He Said, She Said"

2008-03-12T22:16:00.003-04:00

Rottenchester has a great roundup on the lastest postings in the Blogversation, and I would like to thank Evan, Rottenchester, and Exile for allowing me to participate in this great conversation and apologize for not posting my remarks on the last topic until now. The last few days have been very focused on other issues. On Friday, I was covering the Kuhl announcement, and when I was prepared to write my Blogversation response on Monday, the Spitzer scandal broke, so all of my limited free time from work (which is the only time I have to blog) had to be focused on such a big story, since it's not everyday that your governor resigns.

So with that, I'll give a brief reply to the last questions which Evan asked. First, Evan asked if we agreed on whether we "would like to see more fact-based reporting -- instead of the 'He said, She said' style." I do agree that the media have an obligation to gather factual information and present it to the public, and naturally, a simple recap of what one politician says and then the adversary's response would not fall under that obligation. Sometimes these exchanges remind me of those hilarious "Point/Counterpoint" skits which SNL ran in the late '70s with Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd (you remember, "Jane, you ignorant slut..."). And yet this is what the media are accused of doing on numerous occasions. I wouldn't say it's a journalist being lazy, but rather the fear of bias which factors into a journalist's decision when reporting such matters. I understand the fear, and a journalist has to walk that fine line between "fact reporting" and an "opinion commentary," and in some cases, a vindictive "hit job" on a particular candidate or issue. Of course, as I've stated before, I'm not a fan of the "objective journalist" model, and would prefer reporters who wear their politics on their sleeves rather than claim their "bias free" when they're not, but as journalists continue to strive for "objectivity" when reporting on political affairs, these issues will only continue to grow.

As to the question about whether the rise of blogs will either increase misinformation or rise to a form of respected journalism, the answer is that both will occur, as it did in the initial rise in newspaper or TV reporting so many years ago. Just as we complain about bias in the media today, one must not forget that in the 19th century, many (if not most) newspapers had strong ties to (and sometimes fully backed by) one political party or candidate, which only added to the rise of yellow journalism. I mean, have you ever wondered why so many newspapers across the country have names with the word "Democrat" or "Republican" in them? The great thing about misinformation today is that it can be dissected and commented on in a matter of minutes. Look at how blogs played an active role in reporting on the CBS Memogate in '04. Within hours of Dan Rather's initial report, swarms of blogs were already posting the memo images and concluding that they were fakes. Naturally, blogs can also add to the spread of misinformation, but humans are a gossipy creature, so that will happen with or without the blogosphere.

So, with that, I'd like to thank all the participants again, especially 13WHAM for making this possible, and would enjoy the opportunity to do this again real soon!

Massa on Client 9

2008-03-12T20:46:00.006-04:00

After a long afternoon away from the office, I just got around to reading Grievous Angel's coverage of today's Massa presser. Frankly, this type of response was Massa's only option given his close association with Spitzer in the last election. Plus after that wonderful ad the two did together started to float around again, continued silence would have only resulted in humorous YouTube remixes of the ad and Massa's association with Spitzer, like this one which was sent to me this morning.

So to combat that, we got lovely images of Massa standing in the cold yesterday "with a tea kettle of hot water" scraping off his Spitzer bumper sticker (what, was Spitzer's campaign so cheap it couldn't afford those easy to remove vinyl ones?). His remarks weren't gaffe free, though. After throwing Spitzer under the bus and praising David Paterson as "a man who listens," he analogized Paterson assuming the governorship "much like Lyndon Baines Johnson was able to get done what JFK couldn't get done." Of course, LBJ became president after JFK's assassination, while Paterson became governor after Spitzer's ejaculation, so I fail to see the connection.

And leave it to Massa to find a way to attack Congressman Kuhl. When asked about an innocuous article which mentioned that Kuhl is a good golfer (for shame!), Massa responded, "If you have enough time [as Congressman] to improve your golf game then there's something wrong." You know, because Heaven forbid that Congressman Kuhl is allowed play a round of golf once in a while. And it's this type of rhetoric which gets Rottenchester to state about St. Eric, "Watching him...I see a sense of honor and commitment that isn't always there in politicians." And I've been accused of being "over the top." Puhlease!

Massa Remains Mum on Client 9

2008-03-11T19:31:00.009-04:00

According to Rottenchester, Massa has apparently donated the $2,000.00 he received from Spitzer this year to the Steuben County's Net Domestic Abuse Program. Good for him.

I'm still wondering, though, why Massa's remaining silent about Eliot "John" Spitzer, especially after today's reports that Spitzer has "used hookers for 6 years" and spent "perhaps as much as $80,000" for such services over the years. Congressman Kuhl issued a statement today stating that Spitzer should step down. Most of the major New York papers have called for Spitzer's resignation, along with the local ones. Democrat Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand also called on Spitzer to resign today, as did local Democrat politicians in Ontario County, so why the continued silence, Eric?

UPDATE: Rottenchester has the full press release from Massa today, which I would have gladly posted before, but it wasn't on his campaign website. Regardless, Massa says, "If in fact these accusations are true, I hope the Governor does the right thing." Now, we can try to assume that Massa is suggesting that Spitzer should resign, but unlike Gillibrand and the other Dems I mentioned above, he's not flat out saying that. This comment appears to be ambiguous on purpose. It could mean to some that he's saying that Spitzer should resign, or merely that he should just plead for his family's forgiveness. So Eric, for the record, answer me this, "Yes or no, should Spitzer resign?"

Kuhl on Spitzer

2008-03-11T10:59:00.002-04:00

Congressman Kuhl issued the following statement today on the Spitzer scandal. We in the 29th are now waiting for Massa to come around and also call upon Spitzer to resign.

WASHINGTON – March 11 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (RC-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today:

"Yesterday was a sad day for the residents of New York State. I like many of you were shocked at these allegations. My thoughts and prayers are with the Spitzer family as they cope with this difficult time.

As the Governor puts the pieces of his life back together it is important that he puts the constituents of New York State ahead of his own political prosperity. Due to the personal, legal, and political ramifications of his alleged activity, I do not believe that it is in the best interest for him to remain as governor of this great state."

NRCC: Will Eric Massa Return Spitzer's Sleazy Money?

2008-03-11T08:10:00.001-04:00

The NRCC asks. And we in the district await the answer...

Spitzer & Massa: Together Again!

2008-03-10T22:02:00.002-04:00

I asked, and you responded. I present to you all, once again, that wonderful Massa/Spitzer ad, entitled "Day One":

NYT: Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

2008-03-10T15:27:00.017-04:00

The headline says it all. St. Eliot of New York "has been caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet with a high-priced prostitute at a Washington hotel last month."

I wonder if Massa will try to secure the good governor's endorsement again this year:

UPDATE: Here's Spitzer's apology. And here's a wonderful album of snapshots featuring the "venerable" Spitzer with his good buddy Eric Massa in Canandaigua. Enjoy!

UPDATE2: If the above video doesn't work, that's because the Massa campaign just took it off YouTube. No worries though, I'm sure people will remember how much Massa embraced Spitzer and vice versa. Btw, does anyone out there have another copy of the video?

UPDATE3: Psst, Eric, if you're going to take down the video, perhaps you should also take down this post from your website mentioning the wonderful Spitzer endorsement, which links to that great ad. Just trying to help!

UPDATE4: Eric, if your webmaster doesn't know which page from your website to take down, it looks like this:

EXCLUSIVE: IT'S OFFICIAL...

2008-03-07T09:30:00.012-05:00

KUHL'S RUNNING...

You've officially heard it here first! After weeks of speculation and unsubstantiated rumors flying around, I am at the Monroe County Republican Committee's headquarters in Rochester where Randy Kuhl will be announcing any minute now that he will be seeking a third term in Congress.

Here's the text of Congressman Kuhl's prepared statement, which I obtained just moments ago:

WASHINGTON – March 7, 2008 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R,C-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today regarding his decision to announce his candidacy for the U.S. Congressional seat in the 29th District:

"Today, I stand before you to declare my intent to seek a third term as your representative in the United States Congress. When my constituents voted for me in 2004 and again in 2006 they chose to vote for a lifelong resident of the 29th District, who has the experience and convictions to represent their best interest. They know that I care about securing their jobs, protecting their families, and ensuring that they have a government that doesn't control their lives. They know that I represent them, not a political party or any interest group.

Three-quarters of Americans think that we are on the wrong track. From our faltering economy to the skyrocketing cost of oil, people are worried about keeping their jobs, paying for their healthcare and gasoline, and ensuring that their children grow up in a safe and happy home. Regardless of our political affiliation, we all want similar things. We want to know that when we work hard and follow the rules, we will be successful. We want solutions to our nation's problems, and these issues are not Republican problems or Democratic problems, but American problems.

In the good times and the bad, I have always been there to help my neighbors and fellow Americans. Whether I have helped you avoid the bureaucracy of the many government agencies or listened to you during one of my town meetings, I have maintained my devotion to you. I voted to cut taxes so you can keep more of your hard-earned money. I voted for the economic stimulus package that provides relief to cash-strapped Americans and business. I have voted against wasteful spending and abusive earmarks and demanded accountability and transparency from our government. I voted to bring jobs to the district because at the end of the day, the prosperity of our nation, our state, and our community relies on the ability of our citizens to earn a good income and be confident that their job is secure. But there is still a lot more to do. And there are people who want to raise taxes on your income, healthcare, capitol gains, gasoline, and reinstate the death and marriage tax penalty. There are people who are more concerned with making government larger and more expansive and taking your money to do it.

Two years ago, Democrats took the gavel and things have only gotten worse in Washington. We went from a Republican majority who lost its way to a Democratic majority with misguided priorities. And now, more than ever, we need to fight for the hard working men and women of Western New York. We need to make sure that we cut taxes, cut wasteful spending, and cut partisanship. We need to support our troops in Iraq, but we need to bring our men and women safely home as soon as possible, with the honor and dignity they deserve. We need to create energy policy that lessens our dependence on foreign oil and puts our nation on the way to energy independence immediately. We need to ensure that every man, woman and child has access to affordable healthcare.

My election to Congress provided me the opportunity to solve the problems that face our country. I believe in the American Dream. I believe that if you believe in your dream and you work for your dream, anything is possible. We must ensure that the people of New York have the opportunity to fulfill their dreams. I am running for re-election because there are serious issues facing this country and I feel that it is my duty and privilege to work for New Yorkers to ensure that their dreams can be realized. This is not a time for partisanship or political games, but a time for progress, action, and solutions. I am running to ensure that this great community has the best representation."

Developing...

UPDATE: I just came back from the press conference. One of the questions posed to Congressman Kuhl after he gave his statement was whether he expected a primary challenge. At the podium, he was flanked by Maggie Brooks (Monroe County Exec, who was rumored to be a candidate, but gave an absolutely wonderful introduction for Kuhl), Steve Minarik (MonroeGOP chairman), Jay Dutcher (OntarioGOP chairman), and Jack Clancy (YatesGOP chairman). As Congressman Kuhl was about to answer the question, Minarik assured everyone in the room with just one word, "No!" Congressman Kuhl followed suit and said that it was extremely unlikely, given all the support he has from the county committees, and stated that the remaining GOP committee chairmen from the Southern Tier will be joining him in Corning later today.

OntarioGOP Exclusive

2008-03-06T21:14:00.001-05:00

Check out my blog tomorrow morning for a web exclusive. Developing...

13WHAM: Sources Say Kuhl's Running

2008-03-05T21:04:00.006-05:00

I've been hoping. I've been praying. And Evan Dawson's colleague, Sean Carroll, is reporting on WHAM's blog that "at least four Republican sources" told him that Congressman Kuhl will announce his re-election bid on Friday. I hope they're right, but since Sean doesn't name any of his sources, I have no idea if they're reliable, so I guess we'll still have to wait until Friday to find out officially (I'm not knocking Sean's reporting here, I'm sure his sources are trustworthy, I guess I don't want to launch into premature celebration, so I'll remain cautiously optimistic for the next two days).

As for Sean's suggestion that there might be a GOP primary if Kuhl's running again, I highly doubt it. Granted, anything in politics is possible, but it's a bit too late in the season to challenge an incumbent congressman, especially when Republicans have to rally behind a candidate very early on in this swing district. The Republicans in Ontario County are all behind Congressman Kuhl, and frankly, to have a shot at winning in November, the victor must win, well, Victor and other swing townships in the second largest and fastest growing county in the district!

Blogversation II: How is the Media Evolving?

2008-03-04T21:28:00.007-05:00

Rottenchester has a good roundup of our blogversation here, along with his response to the latest question Evan has posed to us: "Where do you guys see the traditional media (and more specifically, the traditional local media) evolving? And perhaps more importantly, where is the traditional media currently failing in its coverage, style, or presentation?"

One does not need to perform an endless Google search on the subject to discover that national newspaper circulation and network evening news viewership are dwindling to the point that these news sources can be classified as endangered species, while nontraditional media, be it online, radio, or cable nets, are all on the rise. Here's a great article by George Will from 2005 on the subject, where he concludes:

The future of the big media that the young have abandoned is not certain. But do you remember when an automobile manufacturer, desperately seeking young customers, plaintively promised that its cars were "not your father's Oldsmobile"? Do you remember Oldsmobiles?

When it comes to the national MSM, there's no question that the drop in its consumers will continue at a fast pace. With internet users continually on the rise, why would people continue to pay for stale national/global news and a handful of opinion columns in the New York Times when they merely need to type in a few words on Google to find a plethora of news items and thousands of political commentators offering their unique insights on the day's events? Plus, if they still want to read the Times, they can merely visit its website and keep their hands ink-stained free. And why would people want to continue to wait for the NBC Nightly News just to see the same news reported throughout the day on the cable nets and online?

However, when it comes to local news, the situation is much different. Rottenchester is right that there is a rise in alternative media in the area (our blogs included), but certainly not at the level of national media sources. For example, throughout the day, I mostly follow national news online through nontraditional sources (e.g., Drudge Report, RealClearPolitics, various blogs, and then later in the day, Rush Limbaugh's website as I can't listen to his program at work usually), but for my local news, I'll go to the D&C's and Daily Messenger's websites (though I'm sure most people in the area get the paper edition) and watch the local news at night. I also read Fighting 29th and Rochesterturning daily, but more to see what they're saying about the local stories rather than as my source for local news.

So while I see national traditional media dying out, on the local level, Evan Dawson is safe with his day job for now.

As for ways in which the local media can improve, it's hard to say. Most of the major newspapers and networks have decent websites, and have been adding blogs to their online news coverage, WHAM especially. But some have committed a few unfortunate errors in their pursuits to move into the online community. The D&C's RocPets website comes to mind (I mean, really, did they have to create another forum for people to post mindless pictures of their pets?).

Blogversation I: Do I Consider Myself a Journalist?

2008-03-03T19:18:00.008-05:00

As you will see from Rottenchester's latest post, 13WHAM's Evan Dawson has asked local bloggers to participate in a "blogversation," and the first topic we will cover is answering the following question: "Do you consider yourselves journalists?"

I decided to consult my copy of The American Heritage College Dictionary (Third Edition) to get a definition for the word "journalist," which is defined as follows: 1. One whose occupation is journalism. 2. One who keeps a journal. In trying to determine my status as a "journalist," my first concern was determining whether my writing this blog is my "occupation," given my assumption that Evan wasn't asking whether we consider our blogs a type of diary. So I looked up the word "occupation," and found this definition: 1.a. An activity that is one's regular source of livelihood; a vocation. b. An activity engaged in esp. as a pastime; an avocation. Clearly my blogging does not fall under the first part of the definition, i.e., I have a day job that actually makes me money and has nothing to do with my blog, but my blogging certainly falls under the second part in that a synonym for "avocation" is "hobby."

Now that I've proved that I can be "occupied" as a journalist, I now need to determine whether my writings on this blog can be considered "journalism," which is defined as follows: 1. The collecting, writing, editing, and presentation of news or news articles. 2. Material written for publication in a newspaper or magazine or for broadcast. 3. The style of writing characteristic of newspapers and magazines, marked by the direct presentation of facts. 4. Newspapers and magazines. 5. An academic course in journalism. 6. Written material of current interest or popular appeal. While it's debatable whether what I engage in here falls under the first three definitions (which is what most people think of when they hear the word "journalism"), and it's clear that it does not fall under the fourth and fifth definitions, there is no question that my blog posts fall under the last, looser definition. Therefore, because my blogger status falls under the definition of "journalist," and unlike some occupations, e.g., doctors or lawyers, one does not necessarily need to attend a special school or hold a license to call oneself a "journalist," then I would answer the above question in the affirmative.

UPDATE: In my haste to reply to Evan's initial question, I forgot to answer a followup question he had posed on whether I was impressed with the liberal Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo for winning this year's George Polk Award for Legal Reporting, the first time that a blogger has won this prestigious award. The conservative in me is not a fan of the award's advisory panel consistently honoring liberal journalists, but the blogger in me is proud to see a fellow blogger, regardless of his ideology, win such an award, so kudos to Mr. Marshall.

Those Retirement Rumors

2008-02-27T13:33:00.003-05:00

On Monday, Rottenchester posted about the latest Randy Kuhl retirement rumor, this time involving the NRCC trying to convince Congressman Kuhl from seeking another term (you know, "We'll make him an offer he can't refuse..."). I agree with Rottenchester that this latest rumor sounds incredibly fishy, not only for the reasons he cites, but also because federal election laws forbid the NRCC from approaching any incumbent to have such a conversation anyway.

William F. Buckley Jr., 1925-2008

2008-02-27T13:00:00.003-05:00

"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!'"
~William F. Buckley, Jr.

I'm very saddened by the passing of WFB today. Building a political movement is much like building a house: You need to start with a firm foundation. And I would argue that while Edmund Burke was the father of conservatism in general, Buckley laid the foundation for the modern American conservative movement. Conservatives should be thankful that a man like Buckley existed, and that he never gave up on yelling "Stop!"

Ontario County's Growth

2008-02-22T00:42:00.003-05:00

13WHAM's Evan Dawson has a great story on Ontario County's growth compared to most of the region, along with a blog post about the Eastview Mall in Victor. It's great to read and watch stories like these about Ontario.

Dawson emailed me a few days ago to get my input on the story, and here was my response:

I think the Progressive Farmer put it best in 2006 by ranking Ontario County the "Best Place to Live" in the United States, because of its: "Great schools. Low crime. Excellent health care." I'm not originally from here, having grownup downstate and then living a few years in DC, but I fell in love with the area after meeting my then girlfriend (now fiancee) who's from the region. It's a beautiful county, right in the middle of the Finger Lakes region and New York State's wine country, and with its closeness to the third largest city in the state, Ontario County offers a unique opportunity to residents who commute to Rochester but want to live in either a rural or suburban setting. Besides, where else in America can one get a slice of delicious grape pie?

Congressman Kuhl's Statement on FISA

2008-02-19T11:27:00.003-05:00

I missed posting this statement from Congressman Kuhl over the weekend. As to his comments about the Clemens hearing last week, while I'm no Yankees fan, I fully agree that last week's congressional hearing on whether or not Roger Clemens used steroids was a joke. If it turns out that Clemens did in fact use roids, he should be punished, not by Congress, but by Bud Selig. And if Henry Waxman is so concerned about the state of baseball, I propose that he do us all a favor and resign from Congress and try to become the MLB Commissioner.

WASHINGTON, D.C., February 15 – U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R-Hammondsport) today issued the following statement regarding the priorities of the Democratic Leadership:

"America is fighting a battle against a potential recession, job loss, ramifications of war and famine, outlandish spending, and a failing health care system, but the Democratic leadership would rather hold a full-day hearing to determine if Roger Clemens used steroids. By being more concerned about sensationalism of cheating in baseball, the Democratic majority is cheating Americans out of the security and prosperity that their government has promised to uphold.

This week was another example of what happens when Congressional leadership fails to get their priorities in order. I understand that Speaker Pelosi wanted to get home for a wedding this weekend, but she put the bride and groom ahead of protecting our nation. By not allowing the bipartisan, Senate-passed FISA vote to be brought up on the floor, she has rendered U.S. intelligence officials unable to certify new terrorist surveillance without needless, cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles. I sure hope that was some amazing wedding cake.

Unless Roger Clemens has a plan to revive our faltering economy or pass legislation that will protect American from a terrorist attack, he has no business testifying on the Hill when Congress has more imperative issues to discuss. Maybe next week American Idol will hold their audition on Capitol Hill so the Democratic majority can delay taking up legislation to fix our porous borders or create solutions to Social Security.

The Democratic majority is out of touch with the American people. The majority has forgotten that the reason that they were sent to Washington was not to get a photo op with a celebrity, but to solve America's problems. I hope we can do better in future weeks."

Who Does My Brain Want to Vote For?

2008-02-17T22:21:00.002-05:00

So I took the Implicit Association Test from Harvard University today, which is designed to use your mental reflexes to rank the remaining presidential candidates in either a positive or negative light. Not surprisingly, in my results, Huckabee was ranked on top, followed by McCain, then Obama, and all the way at the bottom, Hillary. These results pretty much mirror my results from this online candidate selector, which had Huckabee at 68%, McCain at 55%, Obama at 18%, and Hillary at 10%. The interesting thing about the latter results is that it is generally viewed that Obama is more liberal than Hillary, and he was, in fact, rated as having the most liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate last year. But according to the quiz, there are a few (and I mean "few") issues that we do agree on: (1) we favor allowing churches to provide welfare services; (2) we favor a means in which illegal immigrants could earn citizenship (though I'm sure we disagree on the means); and (3) we agree that drug laws should be enforced. As for Hillary, we agree on the first two items, though supposedly not on the third issue concerning drugs. Granted, none of these issues are make-or-break issues for me, but still interesting that a hard-core conservative like me slightly agrees with Obama more than Hillary.

As for the Harvard test, it measures likeability more than one's preference on the issues, and in that contest between Obama and Hillary, Obama wins in a landslide. And while I like McCain, there's no question that Huckabee is the more affable of the two, IMHO.

House Republicans Protest Democrats’ Partisan Games at the Expense of America’s National Security

2008-02-14T15:03:00.002-05:00

CNN : "What they're doing here is that they're trying to bring awareness to what's going on. They're ratcheting up pressure on House Democrats on the FISA act, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. We heard from President Bush just a short time ago as well, so this is a full-court press that Republicans and President Bush are staging against House Democrats. This is a showdown over the legislation that governs how U.S. intelligence agencies oversee some communications between suspected terrorists." (Watch the full segment here.)

FOX: "There is some outrage on the Republican side. … The President and a number of Democrats and many Republicans in both the Senate and House are saying 'you have to pass a law, we cannot let the old law expire because there are problems in it.' The Leadership instead decided to pursue different matters and recess for a week without even taking up another effort." (Watch the full segment here.)

MSNBC: "A day when the President and these Republicans and a vast majority of the Senate feel as though the law governing the electronic surveillance of terrorists in this country should be taken up. That bill right now in limbo because the Senate has passed a bill that House Democrats are vehemently against … Congress due to go out on a week-long recess after they leave this week … Nancy Pelosi at this moment holding a press conference saying they will hold firm, they will not put the Senate bill on the floor…" (Watch the full segment here.)

Congressman Kuhl: We Owe Our Deceased Veterans, Not the Other Way Around

2008-02-12T14:25:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl wrote the following post on The Hill's blog today, in which he announces that he's cosponsored H.R. 5148, a bill that would relieve families of paying certain debts if a veteran dies "as a result of an injury incurred or aggravated on active duty in a combat zone."

Criticism of DNC's "Superdelegates"

2008-02-10T13:24:00.000-05:00

With the prospect of a brokered Dem Convention seeming increasingly likely this year (especially after Obama went three for three yesterday in states as different as Louisiana, Washington, and Nebraska), Chris Bowers, an Obama supporter, indicates that he would quit the Dem party if the "superdelegates" don't vote for whom "the majority (or plurality) of its participants in primaries and caucuses want it to nominate" at the convention. Out of fairness to the Clinton campaign, he also advocates that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be allowed to vote at the convention, which would give her a few more delegates.

I can understand Bowers' frustration with the process, but this is not an argument to put forward now if you're an Obama fan. According to the latest CNN vote totals, Hillary has received just over 420,000 more votes than Obama when the vote tallies from Florida and Michigan are included. RealClearPolitics currently has Hillary having 3 more delegates than Obama, though that's without Florida and Michigan given that they won't have delegates seated at the convention at this time (though the DNC could change its minds on that decision), and the RCP polling national polling average has her beating Obama by 2.9%. However, Obama now has the momentum in this race and should continue to do well this month in states like ME (which is today, though this is the only race that I think is still "up in the air" left this month, given no current polls and New England having gone for Hillary thus far despite the Kennedy's), the VA-MD-DC trifecta on 2/12, WI (which usually votes similar to IA), and HI (where he grewup).

Yet, despite all this, what if Obama can't close the 400K voter gap, or there remains a razor thin delegate margin in June? Even though there is a lot of criticism against superdelegates, the fact is that we do not hold a national primary in this country. Instead, we have primary voters going to the polls during a six month period, during which they learn more about the candidates and make a decision at the time that they vote. And even when they vote, they're not voting for a particular candidate, but for the delegates to represent them at the convention, which is held more than eight months after the first caucus/primary contest. Because of this, I think it's very premature for an Obama supporter to say that he'd "quit the party" if the superdelegates don't support the "will of the people," because it's hard to claim a "will of the people" in the primary process. How many people who've already voted in the primary now regret their decision? What if something new transpires, or a scandal is revealed, against the "favored candidate" before the convention? Should the superdelegates vote for the candidate who received a plurality of the vote, or has a slight lead in delegates, then? And let's say that Hillary still has a slight lead in the vote total and delegate count then, but polls still show that the more liberal senator from Illinois has a better shot against McCain than Hillary, and the superdelegates decide that it's better for the party to nominate Obama in such circumstances? I'm sure under the latter scenario, Mr. Bowers would be singing a much different tune...

WHAM Followup

2008-02-06T13:44:00.000-05:00

Evan Dawson replied to my comments on Rottenchester's blog here (just scroll down through the comments), and I replied to his. Perhaps my use of the word "bias" was too strong in this matter, and I appreciate Evan for taking the time to reply. As I stated in my reply to him, "In the past, when I have criticized other media outfits in their reporting of stories (particularly the local papers), I never received a single response from them, so I'm glad you took the time to reply."

While I may still disagree about how this story was portrayed, having the reporter in question follow up with the bloggers on this was very helpful, and even though I normally watch WROC 8 for my local news, Evan, through his thoughtful followup, has given me reasons to watch his network instead.

Brazil Truth

2008-02-06T09:55:00.000-05:00

Rottenchester just posted a lengthly retort to my comments on his blog from last night, questioning how I could accused WHAM of media bias and providing a hypothetical if a Dem was investigated by the media for doing the same thing.

Yet, the proof of ~~bias~~ (see post above) is right on WHAM's website. Here's a link to the PDF on the channel's website with the expenditures. Notice something there? Right on the first page, the document is stamped January 31, 2008. Why is this relevant? Because Kuhl's office could NOT have provided the report to the reporter on the 2nd, since the report is not required to published until 60 days after the trip.

Here are excerpts from the Congressional Rules for "Official Travel" that apply to CODELS: "Additionally, the Speaker of the House may approve official foreign travel for a group rather than an individual. Group official foreign travel is called a 'congressional delegation' (CODEL). In the case of a CODEL, the committee chairman, ranking member, or senior employee must write the report for the entire group and submit the report to the Chair of the Committee on International Relations before the end of the session. The report should cover the per diem expenditures, transportation expenditures, and miscellaneous expenditures, as well as the reasons for the expenditures. Within 60 days of the beginning of the next regular session of Congress, the Chair of the Committee on International Relations must file a consolidated report of all committees' official foreign travel expenses with the Committee on House Administration. Changes may be made by submitting an amended report to the Clerk of the House (Emphasis added)." So as you can see the official foreign travel report should have been filed by "the committee chairman, ranking member, or senior employee" who "must write the report for the entire group" and it must be submitted before the end of the congressional session. Not in 30 days and certainly NOT by Congressman Kuhl! Even if Congressman Kuhl was traveling alone the rules state that "members must submit an expense report to the committee chairman within 60 days of the conclusion of the trip," not in 30 days. The 30 day rule applies only to officially connected travel, i.e., official travel paid by a private source, which this trip wasn't!

Super Tuesday Results

2008-02-06T00:37:00.000-05:00

As expected, McCain cleaned up tonight and is clearly the frontrunner on the GOP side. And given that Romney said earlier tonight that he's in this race for the long haul, one has to wonder how that's even possible after tonight. As for Huckabee, he had a decent night, and may have increased his chances of being McCain's runningmate.

On the Dem side, Hillary had a much better night than I anticipated, particularly in California. Yet, Obama did very well tonight, winning many states and delegates, kept his campaign alive, with some speculation that he may have received more delegates than Hillary tonight, though I don't know if that will hold given the margin in CA right now (55%-33% for Hillary with 17% of precincts reporting right now). But we'll just have to wait and see how the delegates are apportioned tomorrow. Whatever the outcome, I don't think the Dem race will be decided for quite a while.

The Price of Kuhl's Brazil Trip: $0.00671 Per Constituent

2008-02-05T20:40:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl just posted the total amount of his portion of the bipartisan Brazil delegation on energy independence: $4,028.93, or $0.00671 per constituent. Rottenchester found the post "snotty". But, when WHAM-13 has expended countless hours ~~trying to do a hit job on Congressman Kuhl~~ "getting to the truth", such a response is warranted. Now they're attacking the figure which Congressman Kuhl released since it may not include the cost of the military air transport. Of course, this expense would have been incurred anyway even if Congressman Kuhl didn't go, as his non-participation would not have cancelled the trip. Frankly, given that this trip helped in gathering information on energy independence, is encouraged by the State Department to foster diplomatic relations, and our congressman was invited by the Democratic organizer of the delegation, I would think that this should be a positive for Kuhl. It shows that he takes energy independence seriously, he's willing to help this country foster diplomatic ties, and it shows his bipartisan spirit by being invited to attend and represent our interests over there.

If only WHAM-13 cared so much about every other dollar that the feds waste rather than do a full "investigative report" on the legitimate spending of four grand...

Pre-Super Tuesday Results Analysis

2008-02-05T15:20:00.000-05:00

Given that the polls didn't open in New York until noon today, I haven't voted yet but will do so as soon as I get off from work. I don't anticipate any surprises on the GOP side. Even with CA appearing to be close (which allots its delegates proportionally), other mega-states like New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, and Arizona, are all solidly polling for McCain and they're all winner-take-all. In the South, McCain is leading in most of the states, with Huckabee chipping votes away from Romney, as what happened in the West Virginia convention, which Huckabee won by having McCain supporters go for him in the second ballot today.

Of course, there are some on the Right who are vehemently opposed to McCain, like Rush Limbaugh, who has indicated before that he may not vote in the general election if McCain is the GOP nominee. Others, like Ann Coulter, have expressly stated that they would prefer Hillary over McCain. Frankly, I understand their frustration with McCain but I do not comprehend why they are sooo negative about him. Here's a good article about the situation. There are clearly issues where I disagree with McCain, particularly McCain-Feingold (you know, that glorious bill that was supposed to "take money out of politics," but ended up making the system worse, empowering 527s, curtailing our First Amendment rights, and producing election after election where more money has been donated and spent each year). When it came to McCain's immigration bill, I had mixed feelings. While I understand the need to come up with a solution to the problem we face involving the 12-13 million illegal aliens in this country, I also recognize the need to secure the border. That's why Rudy had the best plan of all, IMHO, which was later adopted by McCain: Secure the border first, deport the criminals, and then deal with the other illegal immigrants later. To me, that's the best way to reach a consensus on this issue. And while I first cringed at the Gang of 14 idea, it ultimately produced good results in getting conservative justices on to the Supreme Court. So, in essence, my major issue with McCain is mostly over Campaign Finance Reform, which frankly, is not a "life or death" issue for me to preclude voting for him, and with an American Conservative Union lifetime rating of 82.3%, and the best chance the GOP has in keeping the White House, it seems to me that this vehement anti-McCain sentiment by some on the Right is extremely counterproductive. Fine, your guy Romney isn't going to be the nominee. My guy, Rudy, isn't either, but do what I did: Get over it! The only other major concern I have with McCain is his age and non-eloquent speaking style. Yet, for a man who spent more than five years in the hellish Hanoi Hotel and survived, he can most certainly survive being president and gets off from having to sound "eloquent."

On the Dem side, we just might have a horse race on our hands tonight. I still think Hillary will ultimately be their nominee, and the Dems will only have themselves to blame for the outcome of that decision. When you have a young, dynamic candidate who is the most liberal senator getting praise from Republicans, building a phenomenal grassroots coalition based on change, character, and honesty, and poll numbers showing that he has the best chance to beat John McCain in the fall, and you choose the other candidate, who along with her husband, has a scandal rap sheet that runs around the block and is viewed as one of the most polarizing figures in American politics, don't complain about the results in November. In fact, let's just think hypothetically that she actually pulls it off this year and wins the presidency. Does anyone actually believe that she will help the Dems on the Hill in 2010? For me, I see a clear pathway for the GOP to make huge gains in both houses of Congress (if not take both back) in such a scenario, a la 1994. And do you reasonably believe that she could get herself reelected? Oh sure, she might, but by a slim margin, further polarizing the Clinton image and this country.

Just some thoughts to chew over before the results come in later tonight.

Super Tuesday!

2008-02-05T08:14:00.000-05:00

Remember that today is Super Tuesday, so please go out to vote! Polls are open from 12pm to 9pm at your regular polling site.

Also, if you haven't already read my interview with Congressman Kuhl, click here!

EXCLUSIVE: Interview with U.S. Rep. John "Randy" Kuhl (R-NY)

2008-02-04T09:47:00.000-05:00

OntarioGOP: Congressman Kuhl, thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to speak with me today. Before we begin, I wanted to ask you about the presidential election since much of the news of late has been focused on the primaries, with all of the changes in the polls and the candidate field winnowing down. As you know from reading my blog, I was a huge supporter of Rudy Giuliani in his presidential bid, but with his exit from the race last week, I've decided to vote for John McCain tomorrow. You also announced last week that you were endorsing John McCain. How did you arrive at that decision?

Kuhl: With the announcement last week of New York's favorite son withdrawing his name from the race, my decision got a lot easier. I have a trust in Senator John McCain and I am confident in his experience, judgment, and ability to unite this country. Although, we have some ideological differences, John McCain stands by his beliefs and I know that he will work with Congress to find solutions to America's problems.

OntarioGOP: Now on to issues involving our district and the upcoming congressional campaign. In 2006, you ran a successful campaign in a year that many Republican incumbents did not win their reelection bids. What do you think made the difference for you in 2006?

Kuhl: I have held public office in the 29th District for over 27 years. When my constituents voted for me in 2006 they chose to vote for a lifelong resident of Upstate New York, who has the experience and convictions to represent their best interest. They know that I care about securing their jobs, protecting their families, and ensuring that they have a government that doesn't control their lives. They know that I represent them, not a political party or any interest group. In 2006, my constituents voted for me because they trust that I will find solutions to their problems and I am privileged and honored to have their trust.

OntarioGOP: As you know, about 45% of the registered voters in our district are either Republicans or Conservatives, while about 30% are members of left-of-center parties, i.e., Democrats, Working Families, and Green. The remaining 25% are either non-affiliated or members of another party, such as the Independence Party. Knowing these data, do you think that your views reflect the views and values of most of your constituents?

Kuhl: Regardless of your political affiliation, we all want similar things. We want to know that when we work hard and follow the rules, that we get rewarded in the end. We want solutions to our nation's problems, and these issues are not Republican concerns or Democratic concerns, but American concerns.

Over the past three years, I have held a town hall meeting in all 145 towns in our district. The issues and questions people have are concerns that are shared across party lines: "How much is gas going to go up?; How am I going to pay for my children's education?; Is this country safer than we were seven years ago?" My job as a Congressman is to provide answers and solutions to our nation's problems.

OntarioGOP: Over the past several months, Eric Massa has criticized you for your votes on the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), going as far as saying that he was making SCHIP his number one priority. What are the major issues involved with SCHIP, and why do you oppose the Democrats' proposed expansion of the program?

Kuhl: For over a decade, SCHIP has successfully provided health insurance to New York State's low-income children. SCHIP was designed by Republicans to cover children who did not have private health insurance and were not covered by Medicaid. However, the Democratic extension focused on enrolling higher-income kids who already are covered by private health insurance, instead of low-income, uninsured kids. Their plan also enables illegal aliens to fraudulently enroll in Medicaid and SCHIP by weakening the proof of citizenship. Also, their bill is the most regressive tax increase in American history and taxes the poor to benefit the rich. SCHIP was also designed for children, but the Democratic extension increases the number of adults on SCHIP, which allows even more resources to be taken away from low-income kids. And finally and most importantly, SCHIP was designed for low-income, poor children. The majority forgot that when they designed their extension, because there are still poor children not covered. We must ensure that we cover the low-income children first before considering expanding the program.

SCHIP is a vital program and I am pleased that Congress extended the program for 18-months which ensures that over 6 million children will continue to receive the medical care they need.

OntarioGOP: A few weeks ago, Massa attacked you for a trip you took to Brazil, in which you joined a bipartisan congressional delegation to examine Brazil's efforts in energy independence. What did you and the delegation learn from the trip, and why do you think the trip was important to take?

Kuhl: When I was approached by my colleague Eliot Engel to go on this bipartisan trip, I wanted to learn how Brazil reached energy independence and I wanted to increase my understanding of how alternative energy can succeed. Brazil saw the same signs the U.S. did in the 1970's and instead of sitting by and waiting for the energy crisis to occur, they began investing in a self-sustaining energy solution and now over 90% of Brazilian cars run off their home-grown ethanol supply. Upstate New York can learn from the Brazilian model without using sugarcane, the most prevalent natural resource available in Brazil. New York can learn to develop its natural resources, such as switch grass and other cellulosic feed stocks, in a similar fashion.

But the United States works closely with Brazil on a wide range of bilateral and regional issues. During my trip I met with border enforcement and discussed keeping narcotics, money laundering, and terrorism out of both of our countries. We had a meeting about the Amazon Rainforest and protecting the "Lung of our Planet."

This trip was enlightening and desperately needed. And for those people that want to belittle it for political gain, do not understand that as a country you can not hide your head in the sand and think that everything will be fine. This is a global economy and we must learn from one another to benefit from the successes and failures that we have experienced.

OntarioGOP: I understand that you have decided to wait until March or April to officially announce if you are running for reelection. If you do decide to run again, what issues do you think are the most important to the voters of our district this year?

Kuhl: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs and our economy. Upstate New York has not fully recovered from the early 1990's when a significant amount of jobs left our area. To combat this we must invest in business, both small and large, to ensure that there are incentives to employees in New York. Everything from providing a better infrastructure to support moving and building in the district to easing the tax burden for entrepreneurs.

Our economy is faltering and Americans are beginning 2008 with a deep concern over a potential recession. The bipartisan stimulus plan passed by the House will provide relief to cash strapped Americans and encourage business to invest in their future and their employees. By targeting both consumers and employers, this plan will provide both an immediate boost to the economy and a launching pad for growing small businesses.

It is important to note that this plan is only a short-term solution. We can not rely on this temporary relief to be the cure for our economy. We need to develop a long-term strategic plan to encourage sustainable growth in our economy.

OntarioGOP: I now want to ask you a question about constituent services. A few weeks ago, the Congressional Management Foundation gave your congressional website a "Silver Mouse Award" in its "Best Web Sites on Capitol Hill" category, an indication that your website is both user-friendly and holds a wealth of information for constituents. In addition, as you stated earlier, since being elected to Congress, you have held a public town hall meeting each year in all 145 cities and townships in the district. What other constituent services do you offer, and what services set you apart from other congressmen?

Kuhl: One of my jobs as a Congressman is to keep my constituents current on what is going on in the federal government and avoiding the bureaucracy and red tape of government agencies. Since we are living in an internet age, my website is a key source for conveying information. The links can be found on my website (under constituent services) connect you to important federal government links, federal grant notifications, internship opportunities, and important information that influence you and your family.

But offline, I can help you navigate the federal agencies or obtain a federal document, i.e. a passport. By calling my DC office, we can schedule tours of the White House or the Capitol and request to have a flag flown over the Capitol in honor or celebration of a loved one.

OntarioGOP: Finally, you have been in public service for many years, beginning your political career in the State Assembly, where you served for six years, then serving in the State Senate for 18 years, and now starting your fourth year in the U.S. House of Representatives. And before you became an elected official, you had been an attorney for 10 years. You definitely have a long and impressive resume, and have been involved in many decisions of historical significance, but I must ask, what do you think is your single most important accomplishment?

Kuhl: Besides raising three terrific sons, my biggest career achievement has been being accessible to the people I represent and help them fight the red tape and bureaucracies that our federal government can present. From holding telephone town halls to helping seniors understand Medicare to hosting a blog to communicate with the youth of my district, I always try to represent the people by listening to what they want and communicating my beliefs. Over the last four years, and the many years I was a State Senator and Assemblyman, I have held meetings with people that agreed and disagreed with my positions. It is important to me that I remain accessible to my constituents and make them feel like they have a true representation in Washington.

OntarioGOP: Congressman Kuhl, thank you very much.

NH Trip Makes the Paper

2008-02-02T15:44:00.000-05:00

As you know, the weekend before the New Hampshire primary, a group of us from Ontario and Cayuga counties went up there to volunteer on Rudy's campaign. Here's the story from the Daily Messenger, which came out yesterday.

Breaking News: Kuhl Endorses McCain

2008-01-31T10:54:00.000-05:00

And with that, I'll also report that I, too, have decided to vote for John McCain next Tuesday. As Drudge would say, developing...

UPDATE: More on the endorsement from the Star-Gazette.

Well That Was Quick

2008-01-29T23:50:00.000-05:00

So I was about to go to bed, when I saw I had a new email message in my inbox. It was from somebody high up in the McCain campaign, expressing his condolences and saying, "Rudy is a class act (and tremendous on taxes). Very good speech (though Mitt was incredibly rude to interrupt)." It's personal communications like these that will certainly help in making my decision on who I'm going to support now, hint, hint.

Florida Results

2008-01-29T21:23:00.000-05:00

Fox News and AP have just called the race in Florida for McCain, with McCain beating Romney by about 5 points with 62% of precincts reporting. In addition, Mark Halperin of Time Magazine is reporting that Rudy may endorse McCain as early as tomorrow.

Naturally, I'm very disappointed with the results, as anyone would be sad that their chosen candidate, who you've campaigned for, blogged for, and donated money to, didn't win. Rudy inspired me like no other candidate. I looked past his views on social issues because of his marvelous record in NYC and his leadership on 9/11. Once he promised that he would appoint conservative judges, he sealed my support. Rudy will always have my admiration and support in his future endeavours. And who knows where the road leads him. In just two short years, a fairly unpopular governor from New York will be up for reelection, so who knows...

Yet, tomorrow's another day, and there's still several Republican candidates to choose from, all with strong records and resumes. If, as reported, Rudy does drop out tomorrow, I will have to go through the process of selecting another candidate to vote for next Tuesday. Just for fun, I took one of those online presidential candidate selectors tonight, and here are my results for the top four candidates still left in the GOP field:

68% - Mike Huckabee
58% - Mitt Romney
55% - John McCain
33% - Ron Paul

Of course, other factors will also play a large role in my decision making, such as electability and endorsements. Right now, the polls show that McCain is the best candidate to beat either Hillary or Obama. Plus, if he receives Rudy's endorsement tomorrow, on top of his endorsement from Sam Brownback (who is actually the closest to me ideologically), that will increase points in McCain's column for me. However, I'm still in the process of making my decision. Ironically, for someone who has never understood the "undecided voter" (I always know who I'm voting for weeks, if not months, in advance), I'm now an undecided voter with less than one week to make up my mind. Certainly an election year like no other!

SOTU, Earmark Reform, and Florida

2008-01-29T14:00:00.000-05:00

Last night, President Bush gave his State of the Union address, and it was nice to see a familiar face like Congressman Kuhl in the gallery. Here are Congressman Kuhl's thoughts on the SOTU and Bush's legacy.

Prior to the speech, Congressman Kuhl wrote a post on his blog about earmark reform, an issue mentioned a bit in the SOTU, asking Democrats to join Republicans in this effort.

Finally, I thought I'd give my thoughts on the Florida primary before the results come in later tonight. It goes without saying that the polls aren't looking too favorably for Rudy right now, with each day showing that either McCain or Romney has the edge for first place. The results are going to be close, so I'm prepared for a long night. A lot of early votes were cast in this race, which certainly helps Rudy, and I would love for him to pull it off tonight, though I've prepared myself for a defeat. We shall see (and keep cross our fingers)...

Congressman Kuhl's Press Release on SCHIP

2008-01-28T10:33:00.000-05:00

About an hour ago, I linked to a story which appeared in the Daily Messenger over the weekend, which "reported" that Massa had accepted Congressman Kuhl's challenge to a debate on SCHIP, and included a statement from the Massa campaign that the debate "details were being worked out." I did find it odd that such a forum was being hosted this early in the campaign, especially since Congressman Kuhl has indicated that he would make a formal announcement on whether he's running for reelection around the time that the Massa people claimed the debate would be hosted. But I linked to it anyway since I couldn't believe that the Daily Messenger would be this wrong in its reporting.

Turns out that there is no debate, and that Massa's campaign misread Congressman Kuhl's press release. Rather than being an invitation to debate, it was a challenge to Massa to get his facts straight on SCHIP. In addition, it seems very clear to me that the Daily Messenger didn't even bother to contact Congressman Kuhl's office about this supposed debate (as doing so would have immediately put any rumors to rest on this), which doesn't surprise me at all for a paper that continues to show its bias for Massa. I can only imagine what went through their heads on this one: "Well, Eric's people say there's a debate, so it must be true, let's not even bother contacting Randy's office."

Here's the press release in its entirety, issued last Wednesday:

WASHINGTON – Jan. 23 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today:

"Mr. Massa continues to regurgitate the same ill-informed and incorrect statements about a deeply flawed SCHIP bill. From the levels of expansion to who can access this program, Mr. Massa needs to consult with his friends in the Democratic Party before spewing falsities about this particular bill. I am astonished at the amount of inaccuracies in Mr. Massa's position since prior to this bill he had simply repeated what Speaker Pelosi had told him to say. A puppet is only as smart as its master, and unfortunately this time the puppet decided to speak for itself and got the facts wrong.

I invite Mr. Massa to actually examine the flawed SCHIP bill and then take a stance. I refuse to vote for any SCHIP legislation that includes the most regressive tax increase in American history, enables coverage for illegal aliens, higher-income children, and adults, and spends billions of dollars to substitute private health insurance coverage with government-run healthcare coverage. Since Congress has already reauthorized and fully funded SCHIP for 18-months, we should not be rehashing last year’s battles, but instead working in a bipartisan manner to develop a longer-term reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program."

Here are the facts about the H.R. 3963:

1. H.R. 3963 enables illegal aliens to fraudulently enroll in Medicaid and SCHIP.

· H.R. 3963 severely weakens the current law by removing the documentation requests under the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA), specifically the burden that citizens and nationals provide documentation proving their citizenship in order to be covered under Medicaid and SCHIP. Instead, the bill would require that a name and Social Security number be provided as documentation of legal status to acquire coverage and that those names and Social Security numbers be submitted to the Secretary to be checked for validity.

· In addition, this provision does not require that the individual presenting the name and Social Security Number (SSN) to document in any way that he or she is actually the person he or she is claiming to be. This is an open door to fraud and
abuse.

2. H.R. 3963 taxes the poor to benefit the rich. The bill uses the funding gained from taxing the poor to pay for expanding SCHIP eligibility to higher-income families.

· In their official analysis of the H.R. 3963, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that 1.1 million new enrollees will be added to SCHIP as a result of an "expansion of SCHIP and Medicaid eligibility to new populations." This means that these children live in families whose incomes are too high in order to qualify for the SCHIP program today. H.R. 3963 will also allow New Jersey to receive full SCHIP reimbursements for families with incomes up to 350% of the Federal Poverty Level, which is $72,275 for a family of four this year and $84,455 for a family of five.

3. H.R. 3963 spends billions of dollars to substitute private health insurance coverage with government-run healthcare coverage.

· CBO projects that 50% of the 1.1 million new enrollees in the "expansion of SCHIP and Medicaid eligibility to new populations" category already have private health insurance coverage. This means that the taxpayers will simply be paying for the government to buy out the health insurance premiums of these children who already have quality private health insurance coverage instead of focusing on actually enrolling low-income, uninsured kids.

4. H.R. 3963 focuses on enrolling higher-income kids instead of low-income, uninsured kids.

· While CBO projects that H.R. 3963 will enroll 1.1 million kids who are in families with incomes too high to qualify for SCHIP now, only 800,000 currently SCHIP eligible kids will be enrolled as a result of H.R. 3963. This means that almost 50% more higher-income kids will be enrolled than current SCHIP eligible kids. Shouldn't SCHIP be focused on insuring low-income kids, not families who can already afford to purchase health insurance?

5. H.R. 3963 creates the most regressive tax increase in American history.

· In order to pay for 5 years of SCHIP and increased spending in Medicaid, H.R. 3963 will increase tobacco taxes by over $70 billion over the next 10 years. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) calls tobacco taxes "the most regressive of the federal taxes," meaning that the vast majority of any increases will be on the backs of low-income American families

6. H.R. 3963 increases the number of adults on SCHIP, allowing even more resources to be taken away from low-income, uninsured kids.

· According to official CBO projections, there could actually be over 500,000 more adults on SCHIP in 2012 than there are today. There were 700,596 adults enrolled in SCHIP at some point in FY2006, and CBO projects that up to 1,258,000 adults could be enrolled on SCHIP at some point during FY2012.

Kuhl in the News

2008-01-28T09:34:00.000-05:00

On Saturday, I was at a Randy Kuhl fundraiser at All Things Art in Canandaigua, where a great time was had by all, so with that I give you the latest items on Congressman Kuhl in the news:

Congressman Kuhl discussed his thoughts on the economic stimulus package with the Jamestown Post-Journal, reiterating his position that this plan is a short-term solution and that the government should not forget to give incentives to small businesses, as they provide jobs, which is the "best economic stimulus."

Congressman Kuhl also joined with Congresswoman Louise Slaughter in telling the Bush administration to backoff on its new border requirements, stating that the new regs would cause "more delays in passport backlogs and cost an already strapped American family more of their income."

Last, but not least, Eric Massa has accepted Congressman Kuhl's offer to debate the facts of SCHIP, which will most likely occur in March. Money quote: "A puppet [Eric Massa] is only as smart as its master [Nancy Pelosi], and unfortunately, this time the puppet decided to speak for itself and got the facts wrong. I invite Mr. Massa to actually examine the flawed SCHIP bill and then take a stance."

In Case You Missed It: Congressman Kuhl's Statement on the SCHIP Veto Override Vote

2008-01-25T14:49:00.000-05:00

I was very busy at work yesterday, so I didn't have time to post this statement from Congressman Kuhl on the SCHIP veto override vote. IMHO, he hit the nail on the head:

Today I maintained my support for the original purpose of the State Children's Health Insurance Program – to provide health insurance to low-income children. The effort made to override this veto is needless political maneuvering and achieves nothing more than continued gridlock in Congress. In December, Congress, in bi-partisan effort, passed a bill extending SCHIP for 18 months and increased funding and resources to cover current enrollment levels without raising taxes.

This veto override vote is especially disheartening in light of last week's attempt by both parties to work together on a plan for America's faltering economy. I was optimistic that we could work together to fix our nation's problems during the remaining months of the 110th Congress. However, by choosing to delay this vote from mid-December to just days before the State of the Union Address, it is the majority who has once again shown their vested interest in political pandering at the cost of America's children.

SCHIP is a pivotal program and I am pleased that we extended the program for 18 months. There are still half a million children eligible for the SCHIP program, but not enrolled. Before we begin expanding this program to cover adults, illegal immigrants, wealthier families, and kids who already have private insurance, we must ensure that the 500,000 children who go to bed tonight without healthcare get the priority status that they deserve. No parent should have to wonder what will happen to the son or daughter if they become ill. By continuing to push for a flawed bill, the majority refuses to serve the children that the program is intended for and continue to jeopardize the health of our most vulnerable citizens.

Those who call for me to support the veto override continue to turn a blind eye to the realities of bloated and bureaucratic programs. We must create a program that actually provides underprivileged children with healthcare, and does not put them in line behind adults, wealthy children, and illegal immigrants. If those who want this bloated program feel so compelled to aid these groups, they should offer separate bills on the floor of the House of Representatives for a yes or no vote. The reality is that no member of congress would ever offer such a bill, not because they are afraid, but because they know that it is not the will of the American people to cover these individuals. Congress needs to be focusing on protecting our borders, stimulating our economy, and serving America's children, not rehashing last year's fights.

This SCHIP Won't Sail, Again!

2008-01-23T10:19:00.000-05:00

Despite the Dems' failure last year to expand SCHIP in their efforts to make political fodder over trying to ~~cover health expenses for upper income families, illegal immigrants, and adults~~ provide more aid for Poor Children™, the Dems are trying to exploit the SCHIP issue in the New Year (again), scheduling a SCHIP veto override today. Here is House Republican Leader John Boehner's press release on the latest chapter in this never ending saga on the Dems exploiting a loser issue for them in the name of the Poor Children™, i.e., upper income families, illegal immigrants, and adults.

UPDATE: The Dems failed, again, to override the veto.

Conservatives Against McCain, For Rudy

2008-01-22T10:03:00.000-05:00

As you know, many prominent conservatives, including Rush Limbaugh and George Will, have been making the case over and over again against John McCain as the Republican nominee, with Rush going as far as saying that Rudy, Romney, and Thompson are the only candidates in this race who are trying to continue "the conservative tradition."

So it should come as no surprise to see a conservative columnist like Dennis Prager or an objectivist like Robert Tracinski coming out for Rudy one week before the Florida primary.

Congressman Kuhl Cosponsors Bill to Help Homeowners

2008-01-21T09:59:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl has cosponsored a bill to help homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages "to withdraw up to $25,000 from retirement accounts such as IRAs and 401(k)s without the standard 10 percent penalty in order to avoid falling behind in mortgage payments. In addition, the withdrawn funds would not be taxed if repaid into their fund within five years." To be sure, there is some criticism to the bill, mostly because of the fact that the funds would come from one's retirement savings, but if it's the choice between having a larger nest egg in the future or keeping your home right now, I think most would prefer the latter choice.

Congressman Kuhl Commends Dems for Attempting Bipartisanship, Massa Attacks

2008-01-19T22:41:00.000-05:00

For months now, Congressman Kuhl has been critical of the Dem leadership in the House for not trying to work with Republicans on a host of issues. So when the Dems approached House Republican Leader John Boehner to discuss an economic stimulus package, Congressman Kuhl commended it as a positive step forward. Eric Massa, of course, took this as an opportunity to be critical of Congressman Kuhl, because our good congressman actually had the audacity to be critical of the Dem leadership in the past. For shame!

Frankly, I don't see what's wrong with Congressman Kuhl calling out the Dems when they're not working with the Republicans on Capitol Hill, and then commends them when they appear to be reaching out. To me, that seems like healthy bipartisanship. Eric Massa, on the other hand, finds it to be an opportunity to complain. So much for Mr. "I Speak Donkey and Elephant" Good Ol' Bipartisan Eric Massa...

Nevada, South Carolina Results

2008-01-19T22:19:00.001-05:00

Romney's win today showed that he was smart to back out of South Carolina and campaign hard in Nevada this week, where according to the exit polls, 25% of the caucus-goers there are Mormon and 94% of them voted Romney. One thing that I have not seen played up at all is that McCain finished in third place, with 13% of the vote, in a state that borders his own...

In South Carolina, I was hoping that Huckabee would beat McCain to slow the Senator's momentum going into Florida, but with a three percent margin of victory for McCain, there is no question in my mind that Huckabee would have won South Carolina but for Fred Thompson staking his whole candidacy in this state, taking many votes away from Huckabee.

But now it comes down to Florida, and the Giuliani campaign is up for the fight. Here's a statement from Tony Carbonetti, Rudy's senior political advisor, which contrasts Rudy's views on taxes with the other candidates:

We congratulate Senator John McCain on winning the South Carolina primary. While the race remains wide open, we welcome the candidates to Florida for a real discussion of the issues we've been talking about since day one. Florida voters know that in a field where one candidate twice voted against the Bush tax cuts and another wasn't even sure they were a good idea, Rudy is the only candidate who has a record of cutting taxes, a plan for the largest tax cut in modern American history, and a proven ability to jumpstart the economy.

ATR Releases Presidential Candidate Tax Reform Matrix

2008-01-18T16:54:00.000-05:00

Today, Americans for Tax Reform released a "Presidential Candidate Tax Matrix", which serves as a quick reference guide for all of the major presidential candidates' positions on taxes. According to ATR President Grover Norquist, "When taxpayers go into the voting booth to decide who the best pro-taxpayer candidate is, this guide will save time and energy." And the matrix clearly shows that Rudy Giuliani has supported the most pro-growth tax reforms of all the major presidential candidates.

Congressman Kuhl Believes Economic Stimulus Package Should Include Tax Cuts

2008-01-18T11:07:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl proves once again that he's a Taxpayer's Best Friend. From the Corning Leader:

U.S. Rep. John R. "Randy" Kuhl Jr. supports some kind of congressional action to give the ailing national economy a boost.

Exactly what should be included in a stimulus package will likely be debated in weeks to come. Kuhl believes at least some of it should include tax breaks for businesses and investors.

"What we need to do is put more money in the hands of people of who invest in money or invest in creating jobs," he said.

That could also include making permanent part, or all, of President Bush's tax cuts adopted in 2001 and 2003. The tax cuts are expected to expire in 2011.

Democrats have criticized the Bush tax cuts as breaks for the wealthy. Kuhl defended them as being effective and more inclusive than Democrats portray.

"In one shape or another they can be very, very good for boosting the economy on a national basis," Kuhl said.

Kuhl said he would also favor a reduction in capital gains tax for corporations and lowering the prime lending rate.

Kuhl said he is skeptical that giving Americans one-time rebate checks of $300 to $600 would have the desired effect.

"It puts more money into the economy but that's just wealth redistribution. That doesn't create jobs, per se," he said.

Congressman Kuhl Helps Form Bipartisan "Congressional Appalachian Caucus"

2008-01-18T11:03:00.000-05:00

From Business First of Buffalo:

Rep. John "Randy" Kuhl Jr., whose congressional district includes Olean and all of Cattaraugus and Allegany counties, has joined with a bipartisan group of House lawmakers to form the Congressional Appalachian Caucus.

Kuhl, R-Hammondsport, said the group will focus on building federal support for work of the Appalachian Regional Commission.

The ARC is a federal-state partnership that aims to create opportunities for economic growth in 410 counties in the 13 states included in the Appalachian Region.

Congressman Kuhl Co-Sponsors Legislation to Regulate Political Robo-Calls

2008-01-17T21:30:00.000-05:00

Today, Congressman Kuhl announced that he was co-sponsoring legislation to expand the scope of the Do Not Call Registry by adding to the list politically-oriented Robo-Calls.

There is no question that this will be hugely popular with most people (including myself, who, despite all of the data shown to me indicating that these calls "increase turnout," believes they "anger voters"), but there is certainly a First Amendment issue here, and if this bill becomes law, there will definitely be a legal challenge to it.

In 2004, SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal on a Tenth Circuit decision which held that the Do Not Call Registry is a "valid commercial speech regulation" (emphasis added). The key word, of course, was "commercial," and this bill would be a limitation on "political" speech, which naturally raises far more red flags with the courts than commercial speech. However, because this regulation would be a content-neutral restriction, it would only be subject to immediate scrutiny by the courts, as opposed to a content-based restriction, which would be subject to strict scrutiny. All the government would have to do is prove that the law serves an important objective (citizens view Robo-Calls as an invasion of privacy, and we want to protect citizens), the law is narrowly tailored (only bans pre-recorded mass phone calls to individuals who sign up not to receive such calls), and there remains ample alternatives for the communication (live people making the calling, TV ads, mailers, demonstrations, etc.). Granted, that's a very simplified overview of the issues involved here, but frankly, IMHO, if the government can prove the above to the satisfaction of the courts and the law is drafted properly and would survive either a vagueness or overbreath challenge, it should pass muster with the courts, or at the very least make for extremely interesting law review articles.

In the meantime, if you don't want to continue to receive such calls, one of the easiest way to decrease the frequency of political Robo-Calls is to not put your phone number down on your voter registration application. It's listed as "optional" for a reason! Plus, by not listing your phone number on your voter registration application, you will substantially limit even live calls from a campaign, political party, 527, etc. Granted, I love volunteering to do phone banking for a campaign, but by not listing your phone number, you would save yourself from receiving a call you consider "unwanted," and I would save myself from being yelled at or hungup on. It's a win-win!

Rudy At His Best

2008-01-16T22:32:00.000-05:00

Hillary can cry all she wants to, but this is the type of unscripted moment that makes one look truly presidential:

It's moments like these that remind me of where I was on 9/11 and why I strongly support Rudy for president. I was in DC at the time, starting my junior year of college. Back in those days, I had the luxury of staying up at all hours of the night and sleeping in the next day, so since I had a 10:00 am class, I decided to sleep in, when I got a call around 9:00 am from a friend telling me that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. I immediately turned on the news to see what happened, and one of the first scenes I saw was of Mayor Giuliani at Ground Zero, taking immediate control of the situation. I remember seeing him looking out for one of his aides and scolding him for not wearing his mask, but if I recall correctly, the Mayor didn't seem to keep his mask on as much given that he had to take command. Moments later, NBC turned to its Pentagon correspondent, who immediately informed them about a loud "boom" he heard outside and that the complex was being evacuated. Classes hadn't been cancelled yet, so I walked to my class (which was a religion course taught by a wonderful DeSales-Oblate), and before our professor arrived, all of us were talking about the rumors we heard going on in DC: "they bombed the Capitol building," "a bomb was found at the Mall," etc. Our professor always started class with a short prayer, but the prayer that day lasted at least 10 minutes, which certainly helped and calmed us, after which we discussed the day's events. We received word that classes were cancelled a short time later, and as I walked back to my dorm, I could see the smoke billowing from the Pentagon, which was just a few short miles away. I spent the rest of the day, as most people, watching the news and seeing Mayor Giuliani lead us all through the crisis. The next few weeks, we saw the Mayor go through the struggle of attending countless funerals, hugging the loved ones of 9/11 victims, and helping this nation heal. This video certainly brought me back to those days, showcasing Rudy's leadership, kindness and warmth.

A quick note about the protester: From those at the podium, it appeared he was protesting the war, when he was in fact a pro-life protester. As a pro-lifer who has participated in the March for Life, I was truly disgusted by this display. When the mother of a fallen soldier takes the stage to speak about her son, who sacrificed his life for our country, you do not heckle her about Rudy's position on abortion. I'm not saying that pro-lifers shouldn't exercise their First Amendment rights, but this was clearly neither the time nor the place for such a demonstration. Also, as a retort to the protester on Rudy's views, here's my take on the issue.

Rudy's New Ad in Florida

2008-01-16T11:57:00.000-05:00

Michigan Results

2008-01-15T21:08:00.000-05:00

With about 10% of precincts reporting and Romney up by 6 points, both Fox and NBC just called the MI race for Romney, who essentially had to win tonight to have any shot at winning the nomination. It's one thing to lose a state that borders your current home where you were governor, but quite another to lose in a state where you were born and raised and where your own father was governor.

I predict that this result will end McCain's NH bounce, which came at Rudy's expense. Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics put it best, posting the following a few hours ago after the exit polls were released:

How does the saying go? Once an accident, twice a coincidence, three times a trend. If Romney wins tonight we'll have three different winners in the first three primary states (no offense, Wyoming) which means the only thing consistent about this year's Republican race thus far is chaos - and that makes Rudy Giuliani one very happy camper.

It also makes his supporters happy campers too!

"Giuliani -- Still Very Much In It"

2008-01-15T11:49:00.000-05:00

From the WaPo blog, The Fix. Money quote:

The truth of the matter is that the fundamentals that Giuliani needed to be in place to have a chance at the nomination remain. The GOP field is muddled, the wealthy candidate could be out of the race as early as Tuesday, and it is clear that Florida's primary will matter. The stories of an alleged fundraising shortfall have the potential to gum up the works for Giuliani, but it now seems likely that he will have the chance his campaign has long hoped for: To have a win in Florida mean something.

The Rudy "Strategery"

2008-01-14T23:55:00.000-05:00

For months now, I've written several posts on Rudy's big-state "strategery" and how it was the most effective one given the (a) delegate math; (b) new, front-loaded primary schedule; and (c) lack of a clear primary challenger against him. National Review columnist Rich Lowery, a Romney backer, offers his thoughts on it here.

I'll admit that I've been feeling frustrated these last few days, something I should have prepared myself for earlier knowing that Rudy was putting much of his hopes on winning Florida and backing away from the earlier states, so seeing Candidate A or B winning the first few contests and seeing Rudy slip in the polls hasn't been fun. On the other hand, I refuse to think that the sky is falling for Rudy in such a scrambled race at this point, given how all the talking heads have been proven so wrong. After Hillary's loss in Iowa, the MSM was already gearing up to write (and in some cases, did write) her political obit. Even her own campaign was spinning about her upcoming loss last Tuesday, and yet she still won in New Hampshire. After Romney lost both Iowa and New Hampshire, the conventional wisdom (which even I speculated) was that he was done for, and now he has a slight lead in the polls against McCain in Michigan, with the voters going to the polls later today. Heck, as of last summer, everyone was saying that McCain's campaign was over, and in September, Thompson looked like to be the Savior of the GOP to some. Frankly, it's been decades since both parties have had such topsy-turvy primary races.

Right now, the RCP average in Florida shows a dead heat between Rudy and McCain, with McCain obviously receiving a nice bounce from his win last week, and it goes without question that McCain's bounce is at Rudy's expense, as Huckabee's bounce was at Romney's and Thompson's expense. However, we still have two weeks to go between now and Florida, with Michigan, Nevada, and South Carolina all between. From all of the relatives and friends I know in Florida, they all tell me that the only ads they're seeing down there are for Rudy, which certainly bodes well for the former mayor as all the other candidates are splitting their ads and money between two to three states. If McCain loses or comes in close tomorrow in Michigan, his bounce will surely end, and if he does manage to win by a good margin tomorrow, his old adversaries will surely come back to haunt him. Granted, I'm not a big fan of fellow party members viciously attacking any GOP candidates, as any one of them could be the nominee, and whoever that is, the party should come behind him and do everything it can to help him win in November (Note: There is a difference in promoting your candidate of choice and showcasing the other's policy differences and/or potential weaknesses, but not to the point of completely trashing them, as frankly, all of the major GOP candidates would be far better than Hillary or Obama). But, because of all the dynamics and possibilities, plus "front-runner" backlash, this race remains very much wide open, and that's exactly where Rudy's campaign wants it in the run up to Florida. As I always say, we shall see...

UPDATE: Clips like these certainly keep my hopes up:

UPDATE 2: Jon Voight, one of my favorite actors of all time, endorsed Rudy today!

Congressman Kuhl's Website Wins Award

2008-01-14T23:30:00.000-05:00

A few months ago, I listed some of the wonderful features which Congressman Kuhl's website offers constituents. And I'm not the only one to take note: The Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) gave Congressman Kuhl's website a "Silver Mouse Award" in its "Best Web Sites on Capitol Hill" category. Of the best websites, Congressman Kuhl's was the only website recognized of all of the Rochester-area representatives, and one of three to be recognized from New York. The CMF is a "non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to promoting a more effective Congress."

Hat tip: Rottenchester.

Another Rudy Ad, On Taxes

2008-01-10T21:38:00.000-05:00

Rudy's New Ad in Florida

2008-01-10T21:33:00.002-05:00

Reaction to Massa Presser

2008-01-09T19:58:00.000-05:00

One of these days, I would absolutely love to attend a Massa press conference. I wonder how welcomed I would be...

Regardless, here's my reaction to his presser:

1) If the NH primary results are an indication that people are "fed up with politics as usual in Washington, DC" and want to dismantle the "good old boy network," how come the Dems voted for the establishment candidate there? True, Hillary's not physiologically a "boy", but she's most certainly part of that damn network!

2) I highly doubt that Congressman Kuhl's recent mailer on SCHIP cost "hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money." And what's exactly wrong with informing constituents directly on where he stands on an important issue, and even informs them on how to apply for this program?

3) The complaint that Congressman Kuhl has with the "Post Office Congress" isn't that they choose to honor distinguished citizens by naming post offices and federal buildings after them, but rather he believes that on top of doing nice things like that, Congress should also be passing laws that have a real positive affect on the country, and the Dem leadership has failed to do that in 2007. The reason for dubbing it the "Post Office Congress" is because of "the 155 bills signed into law, over one-third of them renamed post offices and court houses" and that "only six [of the 155 bills] will really have a positive affect on the American people." You see, Eric, Congress can rename a post office or two (which Congressman Kuhl has no problem with for a distinguish American, like Congressional Medal of Honor winner Jason Dunham) and pass substantive laws too!

4) Massa repeated his shtick that he's "bi-lingual," i.e., he "speak[s] donkey and elephant, eat[s] carrots and peanuts." You see, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Massa was once a Republican, but switched parties ~~for political gain~~ because he felt "disenfranchised" by the GOP. But as a former Republican, he thinks he can still speak "elephant." Of course, I can't find a single major issue that he runs on in which he has a conservative viewpoint. You see, Republican voters primarily fall into three groups: social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and foreign policy conservatives. If Massa genuinely wants to claim that he speaks "elephant" (and I will define "speaks" as being at least somewhat fluent, merely because you can say "Bonjour" doesn't mean you can "speak" French), then he should prove that he appeals to at least one group of these voters. For example, U.S. Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) can legitimately claim that he speaks "elephant" since he appeals to social conservatives with his pro-life views. NM Gov. Bill Richardson (who sadly exited his quest for the presidency today) speaks "elephant" to fiscal conservatives, given his tax cutting record as governor. And when he was still a Democrat, Joe Lieberman's views on Iraq and the War on Terror greatly appealed to the foreign policy conservatives (yes, I know, he got pushed out of his party because of these views and is now an Independent, but since he held these views back when he was a Democrat, he's still a good example). Yet, Massa doesn't hold a view on any significant issue in which he can honestly claim that he "speaks elephant" and "eats peanuts." Instead, he's a proud pro-choice, economic "progressive," who vehemently opposes the Iraq War. Sounds like a typical liberal to me, at least through the ears of one who actually speaks "elephant."

MSNBC Pundits Say Rudy's Strategy is "Perfect"

2008-01-09T19:37:00.000-05:00

ATR, Club for Growth Both Praise Rudy's Tax Cut Plan

2008-01-09T15:36:00.000-05:00

Here's the press release on the Club for Growth's praise of Rudy's tax cut plan.

And here's the press release from Americans for Tax Reform, which also reminds voters that neither John McCain nor Fred Thompson have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge:

RUDY GIULIANI TAX CUT PLAN THE BIGGEST IN HISTORY
AND MOST PRO-GROWTH IN GOP PRESIDENTIAL FIELD

Plan would cut the capital gains tax, slash the corporate income tax, and create a simplified alternate tax system for families and small businesses

WASHINGTON, DC – Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani today released a pro-growth tax cut package. This $6.3 trillion measure is the largest tax cut of all time. It is the most pro-growth tax cut package of anyone running for President.

Giuliani’s tax plan makes all the Bush tax cuts permanent, including full repeal of the death tax. It indexes the alternative minimum tax (AMT) to inflation, and eventually repeals it. It reduces the corporate income tax from today’s 35 percent, the second-highest in the developed world, to 25 percent, more in line with our European competitors. It slashes the capital gains and qualified dividends tax rate from 15 percent to 10 percent (and indexes capital assets to inflation), which will boost the value of every American’s 401(k) and IRA. It replaces the
current hodgepodge of dozens of tax-advantaged savings accounts with a simplified system of Retirement Savings Accounts and Lifetime Savings Accounts. It gives all Americans the ability to purchase health insurance pre-tax through a health care standard deduction.

“This tax cut—the largest in history—would represent a monumental leap forward for the American taxpayer and the U.S. economy,” said ATR President Grover Norquist. “In particular, cutting the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax is just what is needed to keep us from falling into recession.”

In addition, the Giuliani tax cut plan creates an alternate “Fair And Simple Tax (FAST)” system that American families and small businesses could choose to go into each year, with a three-bracket structure, a 30 percent top rate, and only the most popular deductions in place.

“Most Americans, when given the choice to go into this simplified system, will flock toward it and never switch back,” continued Norquist. “Hong Kong has had an alternate tax system for years and the vast majority of residents use it happily.”

In addition to his tax cut proposal, Giuliani has committed in writing to the American people to oppose and veto all tax increases. This pledge has also been adopted by every other Republican presidential candidate except John McCain and Fred Thompson. It hasn’t been adopted by any Democrat presidential hopeful.

More of the Do Nothing Congress

2008-01-09T14:23:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl has a recap of the reactions in the editorial pages across the country regarding the Dems' underwhelming year in Congress.

Rudy Retains Lead in Florida

2008-01-09T00:13:00.000-05:00

Given the results of the Hawkeye Cauci, I was anxious to see what the polls looked like in Florida. And a new poll has Rudy still up by 5 points in the Sunshine State, and the RCP polling average has him up by 5.2 points there. And while McCain, Romney, and Huckabee move onto Michigan, Nevada, and South Carolina (joining Thompson in the latter state), Rudy can keep pounding the pavement and airing his ads in Florida with virtually no competition for weeks. I had projected that if Romney didn't win New Hampshire, he was done. But McCain beat Romney by only five points in NH, and has spent most of his resources there, while Romney still has the money to pose a serious challenge in MI, where he grew up and where his family had significant political power, and NV, which has a significant Mormon population. While I don't think Romney has a shot at winning the nomination at this point, he can act as a spoiler for McCain and Huckabee in the mid-January races, drying up their money and resources before Florida and Super Tuesday, which ultimately plays into Rudy's strategy.

Also, if this election has proven anything, it's that you can't trust the MSM punditry when they tell you that a candidate is dead. Hell, just yesterday, they were speculating big time about Hillary exiting the race and her staffers running away in droves to Obama's campaign, something I never believed (she would fight to the death before ever conceding). So nobody should think Rudy's out simply because the MSM "speculates" so.

The NH Election Night Speeches

2008-01-08T23:16:00.000-05:00

After all the excitement and positives things said about Obama's and Huckabee's victory speeches in Iowa on Thursday, here are my thoughts on tonight's speeches:

Romney: He seemed very upbeat, even though at the time he made his concession speech, he was down about 9 points (he eventually catched up to McCain, down only by 5 points right now). He is a very good speaker, very eloquent, and I can understand why people are appealed to him. But if it wasn't for his flips and flops and such negative tone in this race, he might actually be leading at this point. Instead, you get him, in good 'ol Olympic fashion, talking about his two "silver place" finishes and him taking the "gold" in that all important primary state: Wyoming!

McCain: Boy did his age show tonight! He wins NH, keeps his campaign alive, and he bored me. Now, I'm a big Rudy supporter, no question about it, but one of the main reasons (aside from the issues) is that every time he speaks, I'm on the edge of my seat. I do have misgivings with McCain, but his life story inspires me and I would naturally support him (or any of the other GOP candidates) if he ultimately wins the primary. Yet, if he wins the primary, he has to generate excitement to win in the end, and tonight's speech didn't do it for me. And with NH proving that a win in IA doesn't translate into a win in other states, and with his lack of resources at this time, he's going to have to be more inspiring than he was tonight.

Edwards: Why is he still in the race? How does he inspire people? He has always come across to me as a complete and utter phony. The Southern charm shtick just doesn't work for me.

Obama: Truly the best speech of the night, and it came after a stunning loss. I hardly agree with him on any issue (though he is good on pork spending), but he definitely inspires people. My only concern is how long can he keep this "change" momentum up? It worked in Iowa, but after a certain point, he'll need to start being much more specific, and as he details his positions on more issues, people will ultimately realize just how liberal he is. In fact, most of the criticism about his unspecified "change" sounds just like Russell Kirk's sixth tenet of conservative thought: "Recognition that change may not be salutary reform: hasty innovation may be a devouring conflagration, rather than a torch of progress. Society must alter, for prudent change is the means of social preservation; but a statesman must take Providence into his calculations, and a statesman's chief virtue, according to Plato and Burke, is prudence." Nevertheless, his speeches do work much more effectively when he's not so issue-oriented, i.e., laundry list proposals don't inspire most people, and actually appear to be very similar to Ronald Reagan's style, who of course was the "Great Communicator."

Hillary: Please, please, please, let me NOT have to listen to this for four years. For all of her husband's failings, he was certainly a great speaker. You knew he was lying through his teeth, but at least you wouldn't mind talking one-on-one with the guy at your local bar. Hillary is certainly the anti-Obama speech-wise, doing a short laundry list tonight and in most of her other speeches. And tonight, I was not inspired at all. It was all "me, me, ME" and not enough "you, you, YOU" as Obama's speech was tonight.

NH: Mid-Counting Analysis

2008-01-08T22:27:00.000-05:00

Shocked doesn't begin to describe how I feel about the results coming in tonight. Right now, Hillary is beating Obama by 3 points, and the AP just called this race for Hillary. While McCain was projected the winner earlier this evening, Romney has closed the gap to 6 points at this time. I won't do the "Winners and Losers" feature as I did with the Iowa Caucus results, since everything has been turned upside down at this point. But I will note one HUGE loser: the MSM and their opinion polls. While the GOP race is somewhat mirroring the weekend polls (so much for that "late Romney surge"), the MSM blew it in the Dem race. It was wall-to-wall Obama coverage since Thursday, with all the polls showing him with very large leads. Early reports today stated that the Dems were running out of ballots, and since Obama was projected to win the independents, that was an early indication of another big Obama victory tonight. Because of this, many, including myself, predicted that Obama would win by a double-digit margin in NH.

But one thing is certain: Both races remain wide open, with no single "frontrunner" in either race.

NH: Pre-Results Analysis

2008-01-08T15:59:00.000-05:00

With the polls about to close in a few hours, I thought I'd offer some pre-results analysis of the race. During the weekend in NH, I thought McCain would edge out Romney in NH. Even though I saw far more signage for Romney on the ground, I thought his loss in IA, coupled with more people knowing about his constant flip-flops, would get the better of him. But with (a) the latest polls showing that McCain has plateaued, i.e., he started the weekend with around a 6 point lead but now has dropped to a 3.6 lead over Romney, with the latest poll showing Romney beating McCain by 3 points (though this is the only poll that has Romney up); (b) Romney's performance in the Fox News roundtable on Sunday night; and (c) the fact that independent voter turnout in the Dem primary caused them to run out of ballots earlier today, while McCain needs the independent vote, suggests to me that McCain won't have the big night that most people projected, and may in fact fall short to Romney. Bob Novak also sees Romney "rallying" in NH these last couple of days.

However, even if McCain wins tonight, he still doesn't have the money to compete effectively elsewhere, using up most of his resources in New Hampshire after several months of poor fundraising. I think McCain has to win big in NH, over 5%, in order to compete effectively against Romney in Michigan. And if he loses tonight, his campaign is, for all intents and purposes, over.

As for where Rudy stands, I'm sure his campaign would prefer a Romney victory tonight. Not because they prefer him over McCain (far from it), but because they believe (correctly) that most of McCain's supporters would choose Rudy over the other candidates if McCain drops out, and the sooner, the better.

I'm thinking the Republican race will be close, less than a 3% margin. The more this race scatters in the early states, the better for Rudy in the long run.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention what I thought of the Dem race. Obama, by 12!

Huge Turnout: NH Running Out of Ballots

2008-01-08T13:38:00.000-05:00

Well, Drudge has the siren out, so we all know this is big! While most people's first thoughts on this will be "Obama-mania" (which it is), my first thought was that this is yet another reason to move to electronic voting machines. I know, some of you will say (panting), "But, OR, we can't, we just CAN'T, evildoers could rig the machines, voter fraud, AHHH!" So I guess we'll just have to stay with the current system in most places of the country, because polling places running out of ballots is far better for democracy than going electronic.

Regardless, if the Dems are running out of ballots, I predict that Obama will have another huge win tonight. In addition, this also shows that far more independents are voting in the Dem primary than the Republican one, indicating to me that McCain, who is depending on the independent vote, will not have as great of a night as most people are predicting. But we shall see...

Massa Weighs in on the Presidential Race

2008-01-07T10:59:00.000-05:00

Eric Massa believes that the Iowa Caucus results showed a "mandate for change in both parties." Fair enough. But then he goes on to say, "We have to elect people who are bilingual, who speak both donkey and elephant." And the question I have for him is, "When have you ever spoken 'elephant'?"

Campaigning in NH this Weekend for Rudy

2008-01-04T17:01:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow morning, a group of Ontario County Republicans, including myself, will be travelling to the Granite State to campaign for Rudy, arriving back late Sunday night. I'm very excited to see firsthand what it's like in New Hampshire just days before the primary, and I'm sure a great time will be had by all.

DA Investigating Allegations of Voter Fraud in Victor

2008-01-04T11:44:00.000-05:00

We'll see how this plays out. From the D&C.

Cheerful Rudy

2008-01-04T00:07:00.000-05:00

Following up on my Hawkeye Cauci results post, John Podhoretz agrees with my assessment that the Iowa results benefit Rudy.

Hawkeye Cauci Results

2008-01-03T22:06:00.000-05:00

As you know, both Huckabee and Obama came out on top tonight, and if you're listening to the MSM or surfing the web right now, you'd think this was SHOCKING! "OMG, who could have predicted this???" Well, Bob Novak for one on the Democrat race, who also predicted Clinton coming in third, which it's appearing to be right now. And on the Republican race, the RCP polling average was very close with the candidate placements, i.e., Huck 1st, Mitt 2nd, McCain and Thompson virtually tied, etc.

So after all of the money spent and not a single delegate being awarded tonight (at least on the Republican side), here's who benefited tonight:

1) Obama: Clearly the HUGE winner tonight, even more so than Huckabee in that Obama needed to win here to have any chance in other states, whereas I could have foreseen Huckabee still winning in South Carolina even if he lost here and New Hampshire (plus should Rudy win, I still view Huck as runningmate material, which is still a nice prize, whereas I don't see Hillary picking Obama). Obama has certainly dented the Hillary campaign, especially if she ultimately finishes in third place. But now he actually has to win some other states, and since Hillary currently leads in essentially every other state (save perhaps Illinois), he still has a big mountain to climb.

2) Huckabee: If you're in first place, and by a much larger margin than what the polls showed, then you've certainly had a good night. Now let's see how his win impacts NH...

3) Giuliani: Despite finishing in last place for the major candidates (though in a state that he hasn't seriously campaigned in for months), Huckabee winning Iowa helped Rudy, more so than McCain. Whereas Rudy and McCain are competing mostly against Romney in NH, MI, etc., Rudy needed a Huckabee victory to stop Romney's momentum. Rudy doesn't need to even win in NH next week to win the primary, i.e., the Florida firewall strategy, though a third place or close fourth place finish there would help.

4) McCain: Not beating Thompson here hurts [wow, as the numbers keep coming in, he may have bested Thompson; but wait, new numbers now show Thompson back in third, my mind's about to explode!], but again, McCain, like Rudy, needed Huck to beat Romney here for McCain to have a shot at winning the NH primary next week. However, McCain just needs to hope that Huck's finish here doesn't ultimately give him enough momentum for Huck to best him in NH next week.

5) Thompson: For such a lackluster campaign, finishing in third place or close to tied with McCain isn't quite bad at all. I mean, hell, he beat Ron Paul!

And now for the losers:

1) Edwards: Was there any way for Edwards to win the nomination without winning Iowa? Not at all. He may still keep the campaign going for a few more weeks, hope for a surprise in South Carolina, but frankly, he's done, and it's about time. I never understood why he was chosen as Kerry's runningmate in '04. Despite polls showing that he couldn't even win reelection for his Senate seat in NC, they still picked him, because you know, "We need to compete in the South." And what happened? The race was decided in the Midwest. Back in October of 2003, as a panelist on a local access cable TV talkshow in Ithaca, I was asked who I thought would win the Dem primary. Given Dean-mania at the time, everyone said Howard Dean, except for me who predicted a Kerry/Gephardt ticket, believing correctly that Dean would somehow implode (I had no idea by how much, though). And had Kerry followed his gut and picked the Midwestern, union-backed Gephardt instead of the Southern Ken doll, we just might be looking at Kerry's reelection campaign this year (granted, I shudder at the thought!).

2) Romney: It's not shocking that he lost; it's shocking that he lost by 9 points after all of the money and volunteers he pumped into this state. The domino effect against him started tonight!

3) Clinton: Certainly an embarrassing loss that will be covered endlessly for the next few days before NH, but she's still the frontrunner.

4) Biden & Dodd: They dropped out tonight. Raise your hands if you actually knew they were running...

5) The rest of the field: We hardly knew thee, literally!

Number of Republicans in U.S. Increases in December to Two-Year High

2008-01-03T14:03:00.000-05:00

With New Year's and all of the coverage going on with Iowa and New Hampshire, here's a new poll of which I haven't seen much coverage, but it certainly bodes well for the GOP:

The number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans jumped nearly two percentage points in December to 34.2%. That's the largest market share for the Republican brand in nearly two years, since January 2006 (see history from January 2004 to present).

At the same time, the number of Democrats fell to 36.3%. That's down a point compared to a month ago. During 2007, the number of Democrats has ranged from a low of 35.9% in July to a high of 37.8% in February. ...

[I]t is startling to note that the Democrats have lost two-thirds of the partisan advantage since taking control of Congress. ...

[Speaker] Pelosi herself is viewed favorably by 38% and unfavorably by 51% of voters nationwide. At her peak, shortly after becoming the first woman Speaker of the House, Pelosi was viewed favorably by 49% of voters. [Editor's Note: I wonder if it's because she's leading this "Do Nothing Congress"?]

Rasmussen also notes that these figures are for "all adults, not Likely Voters." During my years of political involvement, I've always been told that Republicans do far better in likely voter polls than just adults polls, so if this is an all adults poll, I would speculate that the numbers look even better for the GOP when the sample is likely voters. I think polls like this give further proof that other polling outfits should stop substantially underestimating the number of Republicans in their samples.

On top of this poll comes this article on how the RNC has raised $32.5 million more than the DNC in 2007, and has $14.4 million more in cash-on-hand. Happy New Year, indeed!

Is Conservative Blog Readership on the Rise?

2008-01-03T09:56:00.000-05:00

This post led Rottenchester to speculate that the national left-of-center blogs might be decreasing in viewership because of the rise of local left-of-center blogs. Andrew Sullivan ponders whether "the intellectual ferment among conservatives [is] more engrossing right now" in explaining the rise of viewship of national right-of-center blogs.

Both offer valid points. As the blogoshere continues to expand in both content and readership, the "ol' stalwarts" like Daily Kos lose readers to more independent, locally run liberal blogs that cover both national as well as local politics. I believe the same phenomenon will eventually happen to national conservative blogs like Red State as more local conservative blogs like mine continue to grow.

But why the rise of national conservative blogs over the last few months? I think Sullivan has a valid point here. Prior to December, most people knew that Hillary was the inevitable Democrat nominee, while the Republican race was still fairly scattered, with Rudy appearing to lead the pack but not by runaway numbers. Over the last few months, the Republican primary has gotten even more uncertain, with many conservative pundits and bloggers scattering their endorsements. In fact, read the last few days of Red State posts, and you'll see several different endorsements by their editors for each of the top five candidates. Even though Obama and Edwards are rising in Iowa, the latest polls still show Hillary leading both nationally and in every other state contest, making the Democrat primary much more of a snoozer, despite the MSM's panting for Obama. (Editor's note: I'm not bashing Obama here. Between him and Hillary, I'd choose him in a heartbeat, but one must admit that the MSM did everything it could to level the playing field here and create a horserace, generating much news for them to "report" in the last month, leading to the rise of both Huckabee and Obama, for better or for worse.)

However, you will notice the greatest rise in national conservative blog readership came in October, and has been slightly decreasing since. Back in October, the Republican primary was not as in flux as it is today, since Rudy appeared to be the clear frontrunner then. I'm not exactly sure what caused this rise in October, particularly since my blog readership has only increased since then. Granted, I started this project in October, so one can only hope for more readers today. Scrolling through Michelle Malkin's October postings, I noticed that the whole Rush Limbaugh "phony soldiers" controversy and auction of that silly letter all happened then, so that could be one of many reasons for this, as nothing solidifies hardcore conservatives (including me) like the MSM and liberal blogs misreporting a story, along with Democrat senators trying to censor a conservative, particularly if that conservative is Rush Limbaugh.

Your comments and speculations on this are both encouraged and appreciated.

Tomorrow, It Begins!

2007-12-31T10:09:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow is the first day of 2008. Next year we will be inundated with campaign ads from presidential and congressional candidates alike. While we've already seen the beginning of the campaign season, what we will witness next year will only make the last several months look like pre-season scrimmages between Pop Warner football teams, i.e., completely irrelevant.

While most of the country will focus mainly on the presidential race, those of us in New York's 29th Congressional district will concentrate more on the congressional campaign. I started this blog three months ago with the express purpose of supporting Republicans who represent Ontario County, NY, and there is no question that the Dems will do anything in their power to unseat Randy Kuhl and try to expand their majority in Congress, making this the number one race in our area. Last year, despite the extreme unpopularity of the Iraq War at the time, and various scandals coming out against certain members of the GOP, Congressman Kuhl still beat a very tough challenger by a 2.9% margin. And even though he won in every county other than a bluish part of Monroe County, his margin of victory here in Ontario County was the slimiest in the district: 2.4%.

This year, though, with even leading Democrats admitting that the Iraq War surge is working, the Dems decided to focus their attention elsewhere to "kitchen table" issues, more specifically ~~socialized medicine~~ "health care." Back in October, when Congressman Kuhl was fighting against the Dem leadership's plan to expand SCHIP to idiotic levels, Massa told Time magazine that he was "now making SCHIP his No. 1 priority." Liberal 527s started airing attack ads around the clock demonizing our good Congressman, but his position ultimately prevailed, and as Rottenchester pointed out yesterday, Congressman Kuhl can still tell voters that "he 'voted for S-CHIP', and he has plenty of time before the 2008 campaign for voters to forget what happened this year" (Editor's note: Given that Gallup poll, I don't think Congressman Kuhl wants voters to forget that he fought against expanding this program to cover upper-income families, and because he and other Republicans stood up against the lies and deceptions that Dems and liberals threw at them, the program retained its intended purpose: to cover children from lower-income families, which is exactly where most people stand on the issue!).

So with the surge working in Iraq, with SCHIP (Massa's "no. 1 priority") no longer an issue, and with voters' approval of the Democrat-led Congress swirling in the toilet for months, where does Massa go from here? Honestly, I have no idea, but a lot can happen in eleven months, and I'm sure he'll campaign even more aggressively than he did in 2006. Therefore, if we are determined to keep Randy Kuhl in Congress, we must work even harder than we did last year. When over 45% of the voters in the 29th are either registered Republicans or Conservatives, our job is certainly much easier than Massa's, but rather than aim for a mere win, our goal needs to be an overwhelming, runaway victory (think more of what the Pats did to our Bills a few weeks ago rather than squeaking by the Giants on Saturday).

The biggest county up for grabs, of course, is Ontario County, and Massa's people know it! Even though nearly 46% of the voters in this part of the county are either registered Republicans or Conservatives, Congressman Kuhl only received 702 more votes here than Massa, despite the fact that the bluest area of our county, Geneva, is not even in the district! Fortunately, we have already begun to mobilize supporters here like never before. A new Young Republicans chapter was created here over the summer (to join, simply email ontarioyrs@gmail.com). This blog's viewership has more than tripled since October. And the Ontario County Republican Committee is committed to expanding its voter outreach to unprecedented levels next year.

According to the Cook Political Report, this race is listed as "Lean Republican." Let's surprise all of the pundits next year and win big. Congressman Kuhl deserves our full-fledged support, and we deserve to have him reelected next year. So with that, I wish you all a Happy and Prosperous New Year!

Rudy's "Looking Good"

2007-12-31T09:48:00.000-05:00

Click here for a memo from Brent Seaborn, Strategy Director for the Giuliani campaign. The last month has certainly not been the greatest for Rudy, but even after the Huckabee rise, Rudy still leads in the RealClearPolitics national polling average by 3.5%, and he still holds the lead in the Intrade Market Prices for the Republican nomination. As I've stated before, Rudy's "stragetery" all along was to survive in January, win Florida, and sail to victory on Super Tuesday. And as Seaborn's memo notes, Rudy's still up in Florida and most of the states holding their primaries on Super Tuesday, including delegate-rich New York, California, New Jersey, Connecticut, etc. Definitely take a look at Seaborn's memo; it's a great read, and blows the "conventional wisdom" out of the water.

Also, following up on my earlier post about Rudy's Rochester visit, it was a great honor for me to meet him on his visit up here. There are plans for some folks from our area to campaign for him in New Hampshire this weekend. The plans are still being finalized, but if nothing changes, I'll be leaving for the Granite State on Friday, most likely returning late Sunday night.

Rudy Out of Hospital, Coming to Rochester

2007-12-20T21:54:00.000-05:00

As you all probably know, Rudy was hospitalized last night in St. Louis for flu-like symptoms, but I'm happy to report that he's been released, feeling better, and according to 13WHAM, will still be visiting the Rochester area tomorrow night for his scheduled fundraiser and other events. Earlier this week, I was invited to one of the events to meet Rudy, which was definitely a HUGE Christmas present, so I'm very much looking forward to still meeting him tomorrow night!

Today's Wrap-Up Headlines

2007-12-20T18:09:00.000-05:00

"After One Year in Power in Congress, Dems Don’t Get Much Done," McClatchy, December 20, 2007

"Key Setbacks Dim Luster of Democrats' Year," Washington Post, December 20, 2007

"Democratic Congress Recesses With A Whimper," U.S. News and World Report, December 20, 2007

"Democrats Savor Power for a Year But End It Feeling Unfulfilled," Los Angeles Times, December 20, 2007

"Party Base Slams top Democrats for Yielding," Washington Times, December 20, 2007

"Congress's Mixed Results; Democratic Promises Meet Legislative Reality," Washington Post Editorial, December 20, 2007

"Democrats Will Start 2008 With Low Ratings," New York Sun, December 20, 2007

"Chance of Iraq Policy Change Slim for Democrats," Congressional Quarterly, December 19, 2007

"Democrats Hit Limits of PAY-GO Rule," Congressional Quarterly, December 19, 2007

"AMT Patch Passes, Without Offsets But With Consternation," CongressDaily AM, December 20, 2007

"House GOP is Pleased," Roll Call, December 20, 2007

Holiday Wishes from Rudy

2007-12-19T15:09:00.000-05:00

Kuhl Votes for Omnibus and Energy Bills

2007-12-18T18:01:00.000-05:00

The Hornell Evening Tribune has the story on the omnibus spending bill here. The passage of this bill helps to continue to fund the Iraq War (i.e., for our men and women fighting for us over there) and gives additional support to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

From Congressman Kuhl:

As the clock ticks closer to recess, the Democratic leadership is struggling to complete all of the work of Congress in only a few days. Last night I voted for the Omnibus Appropriation Bill. The passing of this omnibus ends the months of uncertainty for government agencies waiting to find out what their budget will be for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. This country has gone without a budget for too long and I am pleased that the Democratic majority finally decided to put political games aside and fund the critical agencies that keep our country running. In addition, I secured $5.1 million in federal funds in the Omnibus bill for the 29th district for a wide spectrum of projects. Funding theses vital programs and projects are critical to the economic development of the 29th District. For more information click here.

Today, I voted for the Energy Bill. This energy bill is vastly better than the previous House energy bill that included a $21.5 billion dollar tax increase and was a job killer. This bill raises automobile fuel efficiency standards, mandates additional production of ethanol, reduces home energy consumption, and does not include the offensive tax hikes. While I believe that the bill should have included the renewable portfolio standard for electric utilities, this legislation is a good first step to achieving energy independence.

IRRESPONSIBLE: Democrats Prepare to Sock 23 Million Middle-Class Americans with Massive Tax Hike

2007-12-18T15:00:00.000-05:00

From The Hill:

Hoyer says Congress may not be able to patch AMT

By Mike Soraghan
Posted: 12/18/07 12:06 PM [ET]

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) hinted Tuesday that Congress may not be able to stop a big tax increase from hitting 23 million Americans.

Hoyer, pressed on whether Congress would resolve disputes over the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), said, "Maybe."

His remark came as a surprise, since it has widely been assumed that Democrats will give up their effort to "pay for" the AMT patch and go with the Senate plan to load the cost onto the deficit.

Hoyer's statement came the morning after nearly 30 conservative Blue Dog Democrats signaled their discontent with the Senate AMT plan by voting with Republicans against an adjournment resolution.

Hoyer was asked about efforts to resolve the dispute. He said he had come to the 11 a.m. briefing directly from the meeting to resolve the impasse and did not know the "state of play on AMT."

"There's no deal" with the Blue Dogs, he said.

An AMT patch must be passed soon to avoid a big tax hike. By waiting as long as they have, lawmakers have already raised the risk of a tax-filing mess that could provide fodder for political attacks. The IRS says it needs seven weeks from the time the president signs the AMT patch into law to update its forms and re-program its computers.

Unlike Some, Kuhl Doesn't Spend Taxpayer Money to Lease a Car

2007-12-18T07:58:00.000-05:00

According to the D&C, "[t]hree of the Rochester area's five members of Congress are among a minority of House members who use taxpayer-funded accounts to lease vehicles in their districts." Congressman Kuhl was one of the two in the area who does NOT use taxpayer-funds to lease a car.

The three congresspeople who do this practice "cited their districts' size as the reason for needing to lease a car." What irks me the most about this response is that Congressman Kuhl has the largest district geographically in New York, from Gates to the eastern most part of Chemung County and the western most part of Cattaraugus County, which is larger than the size of the State of Connecticut, and yet he doesn't need to use tax dollars to fund a car to travel through his district, despite the fact that he continues to visit each of the 145 towns in his district at least once a year. If any congressperson from New York could justify his district's size as a reason for this expense, it's Congressman Kuhl, and yet he chooses not to do it.

Kuhl Votes Against Tax Increase

2007-12-17T12:25:00.000-05:00

As I reported previously, the Senate passed an AMT patch that would not include a tax increase, and Congressman Kuhl applauded this action. However, the Dems in the House were still trying to push through an AMT patch with a tax increase, which Congressman Kuhl voted against, keeping his status as a Taxpayer's Best Friend. From the Hornell Evening Tribune:

U.S. Rep. John "Randy" Kuhl, R-29, is in favor of the [AMT] fix, but voted against a bill passed by the House Wednesday to do just that, because he said it increased taxes to make up the gap.

"The Senate passed a bill last week that would index the AMT without any tax increases in it," he said Thursday morning, during his weekly telephone press conference call. "The House majority has not taken the same position, as a result of the adoption of the 'paygo' rule, it's meant, in my estimation, to give the majority the ability to raise taxes under the guise of pay as you go. The House fix included tax increases, which I did not support, because I don't believe you need to put permanent increases in to take care of a temporary problem.

"They say that we cannot index this issue without having taxes make up for the loss of revenue," Kuhl added. "That's the stalemate we've had."

Massa, of course, supports the tax increase, claiming the bill will only tax "high income earners."

But here's a great column from Michael Barone on the issue (note the section in bold that counters Massa's claim):

Democrats, conscious of the popularity of some recent governors who have raised taxes (like Mark Warner of Virginia), seem on the surface unfazed by the political risks of tax increases and are preparing to argue that they'll raise taxes only on the rich. But this may be awkward at a time when the budget deficit is rapidly declining and when we face the nontrivial possibility of a recession.

A tax increase in a recession is usually not a good idea. And Republicans will say that when Democrats promise to tax the rich, they end up raising taxes on the ordinary person, as Bill Clinton and the Democratic Congress did in 1993. The Democrats' desperation to patch the AMT and their willingness to break their own paygo rule suggest that they fear the wrath of those New Jersey suburbanites more than they let on. [Emphasis added]

Kuhl Co-Sponsors Bills on Health Issues

2007-12-14T10:05:00.000-05:00

First, Congressman Kuhl co-sponsored a bill designating the first week of June as National CPR and AED Awareness Week.

Second, Congressman Kuhl has co-sponsored a bill saving projects for disabled children.

Kuhl: A Taxpayer's Best Friend

2007-12-13T12:51:00.001-05:00

Two days ago, Rottenchester reported on Channel 13's ~~hit job~~ "in-depth story" on Congressman Kuhl's bipartisan fact-finding mission to Brazil. 13WHAM's web article posed the following question, "How much did it cost taxpayers for U.S. Representative Randy Kuhl (R, N.Y.) to spend six days in Brazil?" The figures haven't come out yet, but I can only assume that it was a few thousand dollars.

As part of my response to this story, I wanted to contrast this with the millions of dollars that Congressman Kuhl has saved average taxpayers through his votes in Congress. So, I contacted Americans for Tax Reform to get its response on Kuhl's tax record. This morning, I received the following statement from ATR President, Grover Norquist:

Randy Kuhl has pledged in writing to the people of his district that he would oppose income tax hikes. He has kept his word. On a series of tax and limited government votes, Kuhl has demonstrated real leadership. In the last Congress, he had a "Hero of the Taxpayer" voting score of 92%. [OntarioGOP Note: Kuhl's ATR rating in 2006 was 95%, and in 2005 was 88%, giving him a combined ATR score of 92% in the 109th Congress.]

Kuhl's strength in defending the taxpayers of the 29th district of New York is particularly-praiseworthy given the unrelenting opposition of Big Labor. Time and again, he has sided with taxpayers over corrupt union bosses seeking to spend taxpayer dollars to enrich themselves.

Question to Channel 13: Why do you want to investigate the cost of a few thousand dollars for a legitimate, previously disclosed trip, while ignoring the tax savings that Congressman Kuhl's constituents have received through his service?

Dems Fail in Congress, Turning on Each Other

2007-12-13T10:15:00.000-05:00

With the latest Gallup poll showing that 70% of Americans disapprove of Congress' job performance, come the latest headlines:

Washington Post: Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures

Wall Street Journal: Intraparty Feuds Dog Democrats, Stall Congress

USA Today: Surge's success holds chance to seize the moment in Iraq; Instead, Democrats are lost in time...

UPDATE: Great minds think alike. From Congressman Kuhl's blog:

Yesterday, Republican Leader John Boehner said "What's going on now is something I've never seen in the 17 years that I've been here in terms of how you finish at the end. I've seen things jammed up. I've seen us here late. But at least someone had a plan. There appears to be no plan." Indeed, the following headlines in today's news illustrate a majority in complete and utter disarray:
Washington Post: Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures
Wall Street Journal: Intraparty Feuds Dog Democrats, Stall Congress
The Hill: Dems Cave on Spending
L.A. Times: Democrats bow to Bush spending limit
S.F. Chronicle: GOP not budging and Democrats face need to cut spending
Associated Press: Bush, GOP Prevail on Host of Hill Issues
Washington Post: Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures

Kuhl, GOP Challenging Dems on Pork

2007-12-11T17:49:00.000-05:00

From Congressman Kuhl:

Today the Democratic leadership is planning to unveil their massive appropriations bill, covering funding for nearly all federal agencies. To protect the American people from the thousands of earmarks and frivolous pork, the GOP leaders have assembled a virtual "Butcher Shop" to find and publicize scores of wasteful earmarks, pork-barrel spending, and harmful policy that will be included into the Majority's "omnibus" spending bill.

Just like several other critical bills, the Democratic majority is crafting this legislation behind closed doors to avoid criticism and debate. This means that I will not get to see or review any of the new earmarks until the final legislation is introduced. Hiding bills until the last minute goes against a promise that Speaker Pelosi made: "Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bill and conference report text prior to floor consideration." (Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "A New Direction for America," p. 24

I encourage you all to check out the Butcher Shop. This site will dissect what are likely to be hundreds of pages of legislation, looking for earmarks. It is vital that the Democratic leadership be kept accountable for their pet projects. The Butcher Shop is our attempt at making sure that they are not wasting taxpayers' money.

Kuhl Announces Security Grant to Firefighters

2007-12-10T12:04:00.000-05:00

Congressman Kuhl announced last week that the "Belfast Fire Department will receive $92,942 for operations and safety programs from the Department of Homeland Security's Fire Grant Program."

Senate Passes AMT Patch

2007-12-07T17:23:00.000-05:00

Finally, the Senate passed an AMT patch last night that won't raise taxes, unlike Rangel's proposal in the House. Congressman Kuhl applauded the Senate for this, and is "hopeful that the House leadership will see the movement from the Senate and bring a clean AMT patch to the floor immediately."

Energy Bill

2007-12-07T14:22:00.000-05:00

As Rottenchester reported today, Congressman Kuhl voted against the Democrat's Energy Bill. The major reasons are because the now amended bill does not do anything whatsoever to help lower gas prices and the like, but rather will increase taxes and, ultimately, the price of gas. The bill also contains many silly earmarks, like completing a rainforest in Iowa and financing a speaking tour for Al ~~Bore~~ Gore, which are detailed below.

From Congressman Kuhl:

Today I voted against the Democratic No-Energy Bill. This bill (which is a 1,055 page bill and was introduced last night at 8:30 p.m.) doesn’t include anything to lower gas prices for American families, doesn’t include anything to help families deal with heating costs this winter, and doesn’t include anything to increase domestic energy production. In fact, the only things that the Democratic energy bill does are to increase taxes, raise gas and home heating costs, and kill American jobs. I can not vote for a bill that includes a $21.5 billion dollar tax increase and causes a net loss of 4.9 million American jobs by 2030.

If the tax increase wasn’t enough, this bill is loaded with mind-boggling pork that will let Members of Congress channel billions to their preferred “green” constituencies. Including $3 billion in funds for green projects like:

Financing a speaking tour by former Vice President Al Gore to promote his documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Replacing police cars in Beverly Hills with Lexus Hybrids,
Buying energy-efficient hybrid snow-mobiles for ski resorts in Aspen.
Completing an indoor rainforest in Iowa - Because when I think of the rainforest, I think of Iowa.
Also included in this bill is a plethora of hidden earmarks including:

Sen. Baucus’ $161 million earmark for the Plum Creek Timber Company’s Montana Land Holdings for “native fish habitat conservation.” An earmark to a timber company for fish conservation? Maybe I am missing something but last time I checked fish don’t live in trees.
Chairman Rangel’s $2 billion earmark for the state of New York to develop a rail line from the JFK Airport to lower Manhattan.
The bill also includes $200 million in assistance for countries like China and India to develop energy technologies, purchase oil, and increase coal plants. With the overwhelming amount of ridiculous and hidden earmarks, it is no surprise that Speaker Pelosi hid this bill until late last night. It is unfortunate that Democrats have chosen to address this issue in such a political manipulative way, because the bill contains many provisions that I support wholeheartedly. For example, I am a cosponsor of a bill that would increase CAFÉ standards for vehicles to 35 mpg by 2020; a cosponsor of legislation to establish a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that would require utilities to produce 15 percent of electricity from renewable energy sources by 2020; and I recently sent a letter to leadership urging inclusion of an enhanced and expanded Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). We need a real solution to the energy crisis and that can only occur when the Democratic leadership stops playing games.

What's Wrong with This "Hornell Evening Tribune" Headline?

2007-12-07T07:21:00.000-05:00

This is the headline appearing in the Hornell Evening Tribune: "'Sorry' but it didn't happen: Kuhl, Massa agree on one thing: Challenger didn't apologize over criticism of Brazil trip".

What's wrong with it? When I first read it, my heart skipped a beat since it's not what we've been reporting here this week. But if you actually read the article, you discover that they still don't agree on what happened. The only thing they agree on is that Massa didn't apologize to Engel directly, since Engel was in Brazil (as I reported here), but Massa's still claiming he didn't call Engel's office to apologize, while Kuhl (via the information relayed to him by Engel's office), still says that Massa did call Engel's office to apologize about this whole flap (read here for why that's very relevant). The Evening Tribune's headline is only adding more confusion to this whole thing:

Massa, the Democrat who challenged Kuhl in 2006 and will again in 2008, denied the claim made in the e-mail, saying he's never spoken to Engel before.

"I called Eliot Engel's office to verify what the Washington Post said about the delegation trip," he said. "That's the only conversation I've had there. [OntarioGOP Note: This is the first time that I know of where Massa actually admits to calling Engel's office.]

"What Randy is talking about, I have no idea," Massa added.

During his weekly telephone press conference call this morning, Kuhl was asked whether or not Massa had apologized, due to the conflicting statements made by the 29th Congressional seat opponents.

"He hasn't," Kuhl said. "He called Eliot Engel's office to apologize, but Eliot was in Brazil and wasn't reachable."

Asked why Massa was apologizing, Kuhl said he assumed because of the comments made about the trip.

"Eliot Engel was insulted by it," he said. "His (Massa's) statements speak for themselves."

Kuhl referred media inquiries about the matter to Engel, because the two had discussed the alleged apology attempt.

"That's the statement Eliot Engel made to me," he said. "You'd have to question Eliot Engel or his staff about it, but that was the message given to me." (Emphasis added)

UPDATE: I should have slammed the first paragraph of the article to begin with: "So, apparently Eric Massa didn't apologize to the man who planned a congressional delegation trip to Brazil last week." There are two sides to this story, even after you read the whole article, and apparently the Evening Tribune only sides with Massa's version if that's how they want to begin this story. Shameless!

Rudy Filing in NY Tomorrow!

2007-12-06T12:04:00.000-05:00

Rudy will be filing the appropriate paperwork to qualify for the New York Republican Presidential Primary ballot tomorrow at 12:00 pm, at the New York State Board of Elections, 40 Steuben Street in Albany. This isn't shocking, obviously, given that he's the favorite son of New York, and his massive lead in the primary polls here, but it would be newsworthy if another Republican candidate actually decided to file in New York, which none have done to date.

While tomorrow is the deadline for Republican presidential candidates to file for New York's primary by submitting petitions, December 11th is the deadline for Republicans to file if they are either (a) receiving presidential primary matching fund payments (or meet the eligibility criteria regarding matchable contributions), or (b) determined by the Republican commissioners of the State Board of Elections to be a "nationally known and recognized candidate and the candidacy of such person for the party nomination for president is generally and seriously advocated or recognized according to reports in the national or state news media."

What Was Missing from Massa's Press Conference?

2007-12-05T16:05:00.000-05:00

Rottenchester has a recap of Massa's presser from earlier today, and do you know what was missing? Not a single reporter asked Massa about his private apology to Engel about the Brazil trip. Instead, we have Massa claiming the following:

By calling me ignorant in the newspaper, Randy Kuhl clearly wants this trip to become the central issue in this election. I want to talk about the economy, health care for children, how we fund home heating assistance. Randy Kuhl wants to talk about this trip because he won't answer simple questions.

Um, Eric, I don't think Congressman Kuhl is trying to make this trip a central issue of the campaign, but rather your overall ignorance, of which this present case is a prime example. Even a Democrat Congressman from New York has questioned your fitness to serve in Congress, so it's a perfectly legitimate issue! Fortunately, a reporter did raise a question about Massa's above comment. According to Rottenchester, "Rick Miller of the Olean paper asked whether it wasn't Massa who's making it an issue," which of course he is. Massa responded about going on and on about some trip that some people from Corning took or something, and the issue was dropped. Otherwise, it was just an ordinary, incoherent Massa presser, with some fine gems, including "Don't tell me what Democrats are saying [about the surge]" and that he won't be voting for Rudy Giuliani (oh darn, really?).

The Relevance of Massa's Apology and Flip Flop

2007-12-04T19:18:00.000-05:00

In response to my previous post's update, Rottenchester got the following comment from Massa spokesman Jared Smith: "Eric Massa has made absolutely no apologies on this subject and stands by his previous statements."

So now we have a categorical denial from Massa, while Eliot Engel's office still asserts that Massa called them while Engel was away to apologize.

This whole episode speaks volumes for Massa and his campaign. Massa had a field day with bashing Congressman Kuhl about this trip for a week now. He thought he had a campaign issue and ran with it, gaining some press coverage and generating lots of buzz in the blogosphere in an otherwise slow news week. Yet, in order to attack Congressman Kuhl, Massa would have to imply that the five Democrats who also went on this bipartisan trip were wrong in going, particularly the trip's organizer, Eliot Engel, a fellow Democrat from New York serving his tenth term in Congress. Massa derided this trip publicly, yet Engel's office claims that Massa privately called them to apologize. This is as two faced as you can get. He actively drums up this non-story to create controversy, and then knowing this would anger the Democrats on the trip, he does an about-face privately. You know, "Psst, I really didn't mean to offend you, just my opponent. I mean, I almost won last year, and I need to exploit this as much as I can. Sorry!"

And then, after it's revealed publicly that he did call to apologize, he refutes it. Yet, one has to ask, why on Earth would Eliot Engel's office lie about this? Engel is a Democrat's Democrat, a guy who would love to see his party gain seats next year. In fact, it only stands to reason that Massa would want to apologize to such a powerful New York Democrat like Engel, given his seniority in the party, his access to donors, his contacts on Capitol Hill, etc.

But after Engel's office publicly disclosed Massa's apology, this created a conundrum for Massa. He either had to (a) admit that he did apologize to Engel, which would mean that Congressman Kuhl also deserved an apology (i.e., Congressman Kuhl did the exact same thing as Engel here, so logically, he should get an apology too), or (b) deny that he apologized, since it makes him look weak and hypocritical to the public after how much he drummed up this issue. Massa chose the latter route, but now risks being publicly accused of lying from a senior member of his own party and/or privately lose the support of such a high ranking New York Democrat.

Massa's certainly dug a big hole for himself...

Massa Flip-Flopping on Apology

2007-12-04T14:52:00.000-05:00

Rottenchester contacted the Massa campaign today about the story I posted yesterday regarding Massa's apology to U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) for his remarks about the Brazil trip. Massa now claims that he hasn't talked to Engel about this and stands by his original statement. However, Meghan Tisinger, Congressman Kuhl's press secretary, just confirmed with me that Engel is backing up their story that Massa did indeed call him to apologize about this.

UPDATE: Megan Tisinger just emailed me with a clarification on this. Because Engel was in Brazil, Massa did not talk directly to Engel, but did call Engel's office to apologize. Note that Massa's now claiming that he "not had the opportunity to speak with Congressman Engel." Obviously Massa's trying to wiggle out of this by stating flatly that he didn't talk to Engel directly, which is technically true, but with no mention that he had spoken with someone in Engel's office to apologize.

U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) Questions Massa's "Fitness to Serve in Congress"

2007-12-03T15:47:00.000-05:00

So Massa thought he had a campaign issue with Congressman Kuhl's bipartisan fact-finding mission to Brazil. Instead, a leading Democrat congressman from New York responded to the criticism by questioning Massa's "fitness to serve in Congress" and an editorial appeared in the D&C stating that "Massa's assertion that learning more about ethanol production in Brazil doesn't help Kuhl's constituents, who include Monroe County residents, is wrong" (Emphasis added). Massa ultimately apologized to the Democrat congressman in question, U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel.

Here's a statement from Congressman Kuhl on the matter:

WASHINGTON – Dec. 3 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today about Eric Massa's apology to Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) after Massa made inappropriate comments on the congressional delegation mission to Brazil:

"Over the last few days Mr. Massa has made false accusations and insulted the reasoning behind a bipartisan congressional delegation mission to Brazil. Friday during an interview with Brian Tumulty of Gannett News, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) who chaired the congressional delegation trip to Brazil, was asked about Mr. Massa's statement. Rep. Engel responded by calling it a cheap shot and questioned "[Mr. Massa's] fitness to serve in Congress." Mr. Massa then called Rep. Engel's Washington DC office to apologize for his inappropriate comments."

"While I have grown accustom to Mr. Massa's misguided and self-serving attacks, it is unbelievable that he would attack members of his own political party and then upon getting criticized by a Democratic leader, turn around and redact his comments. This bipartisan congressional delegation trip allowed nine representatives to see firsthand how energy independence can positively affect the economic and environmental welfare of a prosperous nation. It is unclear how Mr. Massa believes a trip to Iowa by this delegation would produce equally valuable results."

"This trip has allowed us to gain a greater understanding of South America's largest and most populous nation and meet with Brazilian leaders, including the Vice President, in an effort to form a stronger alliance. As our country faces the challenges of the twenty-first century, it is imperative that we work in tandem with our global partners to find solutions to benefit us all. We cannot ignore the great progress and ideas emerging from all corners of the world. As representatives of the United States, we have the duty to ensure our constituents have access to the best the world has to offer and to work unilaterally to improve the lives of all Americans."

The Conservative Mind and Imagination

2007-12-02T12:13:00.000-05:00

Gallup released a poll a few days ago showing that "Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent." In addition, the poll finds that the "relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education."

I wasn't sure how I was going to comment on this poll without it looking like I was saying, "Haha, Republicans are saner than others." Yet, a poll with these findings can't be ignored after similar polls have shown that Republicans are happier, are more satisfied with their committed relationships, and even report having better sex lives than others.

I know that some (mostly liberals) will dismiss these findings with the age old stereotype that Republicans have more money, and ergo, better lives. However, as the Gallup poll shows, Republicans of all income ranges report better mental health than others of the same income level. So, again, why these findings?

I think these polls demonstrate "the role of the imagination as a source of wisdom and as a source of more or less dangerous illusion" (Claes G. Ryn, Will, Imagination, and Reason: Babbitt, Croce, and the Problem of Reality, p. 147). In other words, "[c]ertain types of imagination draw us into misleading views of the world, and indeed, may make us lose touch with realty. Other types tend to improve our hold on life" (Ibid.). I firmly believe that most conservatives hold a type of imagination that ultimately gives them an improved outlook on life.

Why do I believe this? Russell Kirk, one of the greatest conservative philosophers of the 20th century, tried in vain to compile a list of beliefs which all conservatives have in common. He eventually came up with six canons of conservative thought and wrote about them in The Conservative Mind. Here's his second canon:

Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems; conservatives resist what Robert Graves calls "Logicalism" in society. This prejudice has been called "the conservatism of enjoyment"--a sense that life is worth living, according to Walter Bagehot "the proper source of an animated Conservatism."

It is this resistance to "Logicalism" that makes conservatives abhor utopian thinkers, which Kirk deals with in his fifth canon. On the other hand, the modern liberal's main goal is to create a utopia through increasing the influence and power of the state, particularly in welfare matters, thereby creating what might be called a "nanny state." Since most conservatives realize (or if you prefer, imagine) that human existence can never be completely quantified, which is the only way that utopias can ever be achieved, i.e., you cannot create perfection without a fully complete knowledge of human existence, they settle with this outlook on life while focusing their energies on other pursuits to achieve fulfillment. Most liberals, however, will never give up on their imagined utopias, and as we all know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, making for a much more miserable outlook on life.

Anyway, just some philosophical musings on a snowy day while watching football. Feel free to leave a comment if you'd like.

Comments Now Unmoderated

2007-12-02T11:22:00.000-05:00

When I first started this blog, I decided to moderate all comments posted and either accept or reject them before publishing, based on my previous experience with other blogs I've authored. During the two months I've had this blog, I've only rejected one comment, simply because it was a profanity-laced screed. I thought this was a good practice until yesterday when I received an email from someone stating that his comments weren't being published. He thought that I was rejecting his comments, when in fact they never appeared, an error which I attribute to a Blogger glitch.

Therefore, since I've only had to reject one comment in two months and the purpose of this blog is to foster healthy debate, I've decided to set the comment settings to publish all comments to a post automatically without my pre-approval. I still reserve the right to delete any comments which I deem offensive, and if the comments section turns into total anarchy as we get closer to next year's election, then I will change the settings back. Furthermore, any comment left on this blog will automatically be emailed to me, allowing me the chance to rapidly remove any unruly comments, and all commenters will have to complete a word verification step to prevent comment spam.

You might be asking yourself, "Well, how do I make sure my comment isn't deleted?" While the moderating of comments on my blog is completely subjective, simple rules of common decency will be applied. If you still have no idea of what I mean by this, here are some example comments. If your comment is "I agree/disagree with Candidate A because of X, Y, and Z," your comment is perfectly acceptable. If your comment is "Candidate B is an f'ing a--hole" or "Candidate C's wife is a slut," your comment will definitely be deleted. Any comments bordering on offensive but still have some factual basis, such as "Candidate C's wife is a slut, and here's a link to her arrest report for hooking," will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

I hope my rules are simple enough to follow, but we shall see...

Potential Challenger Against Arcuri

2007-12-01T00:44:00.000-05:00

While most of Ontario County is in the 29th Congressional district, we can't forget our friends in Geneva who live in the 24th. From the Syracuse Post-Standard:

With time running out to find a challenger to freshman Rep. Michael Arcuri, D-Utica, for the 2008 election, Republicans said Thursday they may have a candidate.

Richard L. Hanna, an Oneida County businessman, is giving serious consideration to running on the Republican ticket for the 24th Congressional District seat, a party spokesman said.