It's the Economy-- Again

There is no doubt now that the economy is, and will remain, the No. 1 issue in this year's presidential election -- and very likely influence who the nominees will be.

Barring a major setback in Iraq or the war on terrorism, the economic slowdown, and the guessing game about whether it falls into a recession, has set the stage for another long political battle over how to create new business investment, jobs and economic growth.

"Americans are most likely to mention aspects of the economy as the country's most important problem, followed by the war in Iraq," the Gallup Poll said last week. "Top-of-mind concern about the economy ... is now as high as it has been in about a year and a half."

The clearest sign of the economy's influence in the nominating contests came last week in Michigan, where the jobless rate soared to 7.4 percent, the highest in the nation.

Mitt Romney, whose early business career was spent plowing venture capital into promising companies that created jobs, won the GOP primary there convincingly with an optimistic message of investment and economic growth. He trounced John McCain, who said the state's lost jobs were "not coming back."

It was a must-win for Romney, who was born and raised there as the son of a popular governor, George Romney. But his victory also sent a timely reminder that both parties were in danger of forgetting last year: "It's the economy, stupid."

Whatever Romney's weaknesses may be on other issues, he certainly knows supply-side economics and how to unleash the power of the free market through tax-cut incentives to unlock the investment capital needed to innovate, create, compete and grow.

McCain's disturbing opposition to President Bush's tax cuts, a position he changed last year but one that suggested growth economics was not his strong suit, certainly helped Romney. Michigan has already been hurt badly by higher taxes, and Romney was running on cutting them.
But there was another image that helped him, too -- one of a take-charge, business-minded executive who has run a large investment company and who knows what works and exudes optimism about America's underestimated economic resilience.

Optimism seemed to be missing in much of the Democratic field. John Edwards was attacking "greedy" corporations, promising to bombard them with higher taxes and stiffer regulations if he becomes president. Hillary Clinton's campaign took a detour into racial politics, with several below-the-belt attacks on Barack Obama. If either one of them had an economic-growth message, it got lost in the crossfire of their civil-rights feud.

There was little difference in their economic agendas anyway, but on the message meter, Obama comes off as far more upbeat about the future, with a we-can-do-better challenge for the nation to set its sights on larger goals and ending the polarization that has paralyzed Washington in gridlock.

"I would say overall that few people are more bullish for the long term of the country and the economy than Obama," his adviser, University of Chicago economist Austan Goolsbee, told me last week.

When Obama talks euphemistically about "turning the page" and "not going back to refight past battles," he is talking about the bitter, polarizing, scandal-ridden era of the Clinton presidency. With his numbers rising and Clinton's eroding, his more optimistic view of the economy's future seems to be gaining ground among Democrats who want to move on.

In the meantime, the focus in Washington has turned to an economic-stimulus package that can put some liquidity into the hands of consumers to soften the downturn in the economy.

cont....

By Donald Lambro

The Huck Hoax

Mike Huckabee has pulled a neat trick. His appeal so far has been limited exclusively to evangelicals, yet the press has taken him seriously as a new populist force in the Republican Party who could at any moment "break out" to appeal to lower-income voters.

Who knew a candidate of Christian identity politics would be afforded such respect? But Huckabee has managed it, which is one reason why he should open a strategic-communications firm the day after he leaves the presidential race. The ability to gull analysts into making so much from so little is a rare and potentially lucrative talent.

Huckabee won Iowa for one reason -- he won an overwhelming plurality of evangelical voters in a GOP caucus where they made up an astonishing 60 percent of the electorate. Huckabee won 47 percent of evangelical voters, and only 14 percent of nonevangelicals -- less than John McCain and Fred Thompson, who tied for third in Iowa, and barely more than Ron Paul, who finished fifth.

On this basis, E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post declared "a revolution in Republican politics." David Brooks of The New York Times opined that Huckabee's win "opens up the way for a new coalition," given how profoundly he understands "middle-class anxiety." Huckabee's national campaign chairman Ed Rollins talked in similarly grand terms of rallying working-class voters to the GOP.

But working-class voters haven't cooperated. In New Hampshire, where Huckabee finished a distant third, he won 33 percent of evangelicals, but just 7 percent of nonevangelicals -- less than Ron Paul. In Michigan, he lost evangelicals to Mitt Romney 34-29, and got just 8 percent of nonevangelicals -- again, less than Ron Paul. So among nonevangelicals, Huckabee is as much a fringe candidate as the sometimes bizarre libertarian purist.

Huckabee is a kinder and gentler Pat Robertson. His twinkle-in-the-eye and skill as a performer make him an upgrade over previous Christian conservative candidates, but don't give the average voter any reason to vote for him. His campaign has specialized in sanctimony layered on top of disingenuousness, low demagoguery and policy incoherence.

In Iowa, Huckabee played the religion card against his Mormon rival, all the while pretending he was doing no such thing. Then, he became enamored of his line that people should vote for a candidate who looks like someone they work with rather than someone who lays them off -- another shot at Romney. He concluded his TV ad in Michigan with the line, but it got him nothing. Ordinary looks don't constitute an economic policy.

Huckabee's campaign has been run on, to invoke two of his favorite substances, duct tape and WD-40.When reporters asked who his foreign-policy advisers were, he cited former ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton as someone with whom he has "spoken or will continue to speak." But he never had. His advisers then said he had e-mailed Bolton, which he had once without ever following up. It was vintage Huckabee -- slippery and laughably unserious.

Now Huckabee has gone from supporting the Bush amnesty plan and righteously declaring in a debate that children of illegals shouldn't be punished for the sins of their parents, to promising to chase them all -- man, woman and child -- from the country. It might be the most nakedly political turnabout any GOP candidate has made in the race.

The tragedy of Huckabee's campaign is that if he had sat down two years ago and thought seriously about what it would take to become the next president, he might have been able to make much more of his winsome ways. Instead, he ran on a kind of lark, without carefully considered policy, without fundraising, without organization. His warm persona and religious rhetoric have won evangelicals, but left other voters cold, despite the fanciful theories spun around his candidacy.

There are enough evangelicals in South Carolina and Florida for Huckabee to do well in the weeks ahead, but, ultimately, he is bound by the limits of his own Christian identity politics.

By Rich Lowry
Source: Townhall.com

Iraq: The Next Forgotten War

Photo © by David Leeson

Somewhere between the focus on the early Iowa Caucus and Brittney’s sister proving that a 16 year old can still ruin her life and future if they really put their mind to it, the Iraq war and the good it is doing has faded. The war that seemed to be the focus of the presidential candidates has been silenced by its unequivocal motion towards success. A new war has unfolded over the last several months and this war has been kicked aside by the mainstream media.

The John’s, or John McCain and John Edwards are the only two, both on opposite sides of the fence, that feel compelled to talk about it. Five months ago the democratic candidates almost seemed to plan out Iraq speeches and attempt to one up each other on what seemed to be the latest fad in taking the first opportunity to slander the Bush administration.

"I have said that as soon as I become president, I will ask the Joint Chiefs, secretary of defense, my security advisers to give me a plan to begin withdrawing our troops within 60 days," Hillary said on Meet The Press.

Let's take a look at the stats and how “well” the war has been going. According to the The Brookings Institution which is a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC that conducts independent research, Troop and civilian casualties have been at record lows.

-Civilian casualties were at around 2,900 civilians in Jan of 07, down to just about 600 last month.

-October, November and December represented some of the lowest soldier casualties since the beginning of the war. All three months combined yielded fewer casualties than the entire month of June.

-Attacks on coalition troops have fallen since June from 4,500-5,000 reported attacks, to around 1500 attacks.

-Iraq military and police casualties from August have decreased 88%.

-U.S. troop casualties caused by IED’s have fallen 87% since June.

-2007 was also a benchmark for clearing out nearly 4 times the number of weapons cashes over previous years. In 2004 we cleared out 1,712 weapons cashes, and in 2007 we cleared 6,799.

Tom Foreman, from CNN Washington Bureau, had this to say. “The Iraqis no matter how much they have stumbled and failed in the political process are finally reopening their shops, their schools, and their neighborhoods.”

The point is to show how the war in Iraq has pushed candidates away because of the uncertainty it yields. There are of course a few moments of truth when a candidate can take credit for the current climate in Iraq without even doing anything. This is what Hillary said to Tim Russert on Meet The Press Sunday, January 13th.

"The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do what they should have been doing all along."

Now with the current success in Iraq, there are tough decisions that may need to be made. What if the war continues to do well, and a Democratic elect decides to still carry out a 30 or 60 day withdrawal plan put in motion from the campaign? Why would you leave if the operations are successful? It is this uncertainty that has shut the candidates up, and may keep them quiet.

Success in Iraq is now as tangible as a hanging chad and it cannot be flicked aside. I believe it is more important now to discuss a candidates plan for Iraq while it seems to be moving forward. How would Huckabee continue success there? How would running out on our allies look to the rest of the world? Would Obama continue to push oil revenue sharing in Iraq without military support? How would McCain convince Iraq of it's desperate need for new election laws? Will John Edwards be able to find that nice bottle of Port in his 40,000 square foot home? These are all questions that need to be answered.

One thing is for certain in my mind, if the war continues to be successful and we continue to win in Iraq, pulling our troops out on a 60 day retreat would destroy everything we have fought for, and everything some 3,921 Americans have died for. It will make Iraq the next Korea, and it will become a forgotten war. We will have gone in, toppled Sadam, lost lives and bolted; leaving the people of Iraq to the fate of our enemy.

By: Shawn VanHuss
Shawn is a writer for the American Defense Initiatve

Photo © by David Leeson

A Conservative Nightmare: Republican Nominee, John McCain

Mike Huckabee's campaign manager Ed Rollins has been ceaselessly pilloried on the Right for saying, "It's gone. The breakup of what was the Reagan coalition -- social conservatives, defense conservatives, anti-tax conservatives -- it doesn't mean a whole lot to people anymore."

While my gut impulse is to disagree with Rollins, the rapid rise of John McCain, the man who has done more to thwart Reagan conservatives than any other Republican over the last few years, is evidence that Rollins is right -- or at a minimum, evidence that movement conservatives have been marginalized in the Republican Party.

Amongst grassroots conservatives, John McCain's name is an expletive -- and for good reason -- because he has made a name for himself by knifing conservatives time and time again for the amusement of his liberal pals in the mainstream media.

McCain supports amnesty for illegal aliens, was behind the Gang of 14, is a gun grabber, opposed the Bush tax cuts, ran roughshod over the Constitution with McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform, opposes a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, was rumored to be considering switching parties multiple times, talked with John Kerry about being his Vice-President, lines up with the global warming alarmists, wants to close Gitmo, wants to coddle captured terrorists -- you can go on and on with this. In essence, John McCain is hawkish, he's fiscally conservative, he has a solid pro-life voting record that is at odds with his previously stated opposition to overturning Roe v. Wade ("I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade." --John McCain, 1999) -- and on everything else, he's a Democrat.

In other words, we're talking about a man who could fairly be called a Rockefeller Republican, a Country Club Republican, a RINO, or just a toweringly arrogant, out of touch D.C. insider who seems to assume that any position he takes is right solely because he happens to hold it. However, what John McCain cannot fairly be called is a conservative.

Granted, some of his leading competitors for the Republican nomination depart from the conservative orthodoxy in a number of ways as well, but in their defense, none of them has built a career out of smashing a boot into the faces of the very people they're going to need to vote for them in November.

.......Which brings me to the current mood of the Republican base: as is, they're grouchy, irritated, and unmotivated by the GOP's performance of late. If John McCain becomes the Republican Party's nominee, you have to think conservatives will become utterly despondent. Sure, a John McCain vs. Barack Obama or John McCain vs. Hillary Clinton match-up might look good on paper, but how are we going to elect someone who makes conservatives despondent?
Moreover, how are we going to elect someone who is richly, heartily despised by most of the conservative media? Republicans are always complaining that the mainstream media is against them and that the conservative media, diligent though it is, doesn't have the firepower to adequately combat them. So what happens when the mainstream media inevitably turns on John McCain and predictably, few members of the already outgunned conservative media like McCain well enough to even fight for him?

Then there's the illegal immigration issue, which was the biggest domestic issue of 2007 and figures to be an enormous emotional issue in 2008. John McCain does not represent the position of most Republicans on illegal immigration. To the contrary, he has a position that is functionally identical to that of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

So here's a little "straight talk" for you: having John McCain lose in 2008, because he's pro-amnesty, would probably scare Congress so badly that they wouldn't even consider voting on a path to citizenship before 2013, while a John McCain victory would signal to Congress that they can go ahead and proceed with amnesty, because conservatives don't care about the issue very much.

Now, am I saying that Republicans should vote for a third party or stay home if John McCain is the nominee? Absolutely not. I don't believe in protest votes and besides, the presidency is bigger than any one issue. Still, when you set up a situation where people on your own side are perversely incentivized to sabotage the candidacy of your party's President over the biggest domestic issue of last year, you're not just asking for trouble, you're begging for it.

What kind of trouble? Millions and millions of Republicans staying home, conservatives putting equal priority on fighting the Democrats and fighting against the ideas of their own candidate for the presidency, a third party effort, fund raising for Republican candidates dropping even lower than the anemic level it's already at and perhaps losing an extra 2-3 Senate seats and another 5-10 House seats -- or perhaps not.

After all, this has been a wildly unpredictable election season and gloom and doom scenarios often don't come to pass. However, when a political party selects a man as a leader who is wildly out of step with the views of the majority of people who belong to it, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that party is going to have one hell of a rough time. If that's the road that the Republican Party goes down in 2008, may God help us all.

By John Hawkins
from: Towhnall.com

Giuliani Talks About Insurance in Fla.

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani said Saturday that his experience as New York City's mayor during the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks is a big reason why he supports a national insurance backup fund.

"Maybe I feel more strongly about this because of what I went through as mayor. I don't even know how to describe Sept. 11. I don't know if catastrophe is even the right word," Giuliani said. "There's no possible way we could have gotten through that alone. No possible way."

A national catastrophe fund is a top federal priority for Gov. Charlie Crist and two Democratic congressmen from Florida, Ron Klein and Tim Mahoney, have a bill that passed the House which would create a the backup fund in hopes of making property insurance more affordable and accessible.

"I more than most realize how important it was to us to have federal help, federal backup," Giuliani said during a town hall meeting at a senior center. "Look, it's going to be there because of the kind of people we are. We might as well try to organize it in a sensible way."

He spoke about familiar themes before taking questions _ fighting terrorism, limiting medical malpractice lawsuit awards and improving health care through private competition.

One young boy asked him if he was scared during the terrorist attacks which brought down the World Trade Center towers.

"I didn't have time to be," Giuliani said, before talking for several minutes about the experience. "Because it happened so fast, all that you could do was to think about the next decision to make and to remain as calm as possible."

While other Republican candidates are focusing on the Michigan primary Tuesday and next Saturday's South Carolina primary, Giuliani is sinking nearly all his time and resources into Florida's Jan. 29 primary.

He later spoke to about 300 people at a Charlotte County Young Professional Republicans dinner, where he stressed the importance of the Florida primary.

"You're like the door opener to 20 more primaries. What Florida says is going to be enormously important," he said. "Let's make Florida really count."

BY: BRENDAN FARRINGTON
Townhall.com