Middle Class Income Cap Continues to Drop

I love it when I'm right. If you watch me on KOB-TV's Eye on New Mexico tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., one of the topics you'll here me discuss is the rapidly declining middle class income cap. In order to stir the fires of class warfare, Senator Barack Obama first indicated that he would only be increasing taxes on those making over $250,000 per year in order to "redistribute wealth."

In his 30 minute Barackomercial, he dropped that number down to $200,000. His running mate, Senator Joe Biden, has moved that cap even lower to $150,000, and now campaign surrogate, Governor Bill Richardson, has it pegged at $120,000 per year.



Think about this for a minute. We're still in the campaign phase, and on a daily basis the Obama campaign is increasing the number of people who will see their life savings redistributed.

Mark my words, if Obama is elected, it won't be long before that number is lowered to $100,000. To put that in perspective, consider that if you have a household with two experience teachers or police officers or firefighters, they will probably be earning over a $100,000 a year. Obama and his friends want to see their "wealth" redistributed.

Reports of Giving up on New Mexico Premature

Just a few days ago, it was being "reported" by those with their own agenda that John McCain was giving up on winning New Mexico. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth and two campaign visits this Saturday prove that without a doubt:

New Mexico Road to Victory Rallies in New Mexico this Saturday
Join John and Cindy McCain and your New Mexico Ticket for either of our Road to Victory Rallies in New Mexico this Saturday, October 25th.

• Albuqerque, NM - Click here for more information and to find out how you can get tickets to this event.
• Mesilla, NM - Click here for more information and to find out how you can get tickets to this event.

If you haven't gotten your tickets yet, make sure to call today.

Just in Case

Sarah Palin got on my radar over a year ago by stumbling across the Campaign2008VictoryA blog. That same blogger recently sent out an email that had an interesting observation regarding Obama's polling lead:

The "polls" this year are more suspect than usual, with a lot of people saying they will vote for Obama -- but apparentely planning to vote for McCain-Palin.

Something similar happened in the Democratic Primaries, where Obama "polled" much better than he did in the voting booth (especially in PA, but also in several other states).

Remember way back to the NH Primary in January, where Obama had a "double-digit lead" and supposedly Mrs. Clinton was toast? She ended up winning that Primary by a substantial margin. She also won Texas and Indiana, where the polls showed Obama with a fairly comfortable lead.

In polls, as in the rest of life, most people will tell the surveyers what they really believe. However, many people will say what they think the pollsters want to hear. There's no other way to explain why the polls were so dramatically wrong in states such as NH and PA during the primaries.

Now, I realize that if Senator Obama doesn't win on Election Day, many of my far left-leaning readers will be evaluating their options. So, I thought I'd throw this out there...

Palin Draws 10,000 People in Roswell

On my way to my son's soccer game on Saturday, I passed by an early voting site in the predominantly conservative Northeast Heights in the early afternoon and was pleased to see a line winding out the door. Then on Sunday, an estimated 10,000 attended a campaign rally in Roswell with Sarah Palin (subscription):

Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin swooped into southeastern New Mexico on Sunday to aim a flurry of political shots at Democrat Barack Obama, coming within a ricochet of calling him a socialist during a campaign rally that drew an estimated 10,000-plus cheering fans.

After telling the huge crowd that the Democratic presidential contender intends to raise taxes on "Joe the Plumber" and "Ed the Dairyman," the Alaska governor added:

"Barack Obama calls it 'spreading wealth.' Joe Biden calls higher taxes 'patriotic.' But Joe the Plumber and Ed the Dairyman, I believe that they think it sounds more like socialism. Now is no time to experiment with socialism. It will destroy jobs. It will hurt our economy. And it's about time that we all call Barack Obama on it."

In 2004, New Mexico was delivered for President Bush due to the incredible turnout efforts in the southern and eastern parts of the state. Attendance at the rally seems to indicate that the turnout for John McCain in this part of the state is on track to meet or exceed those 2004 numbers.

The Stealth October Surprise

I just figured out this morning what is missing from this election cycle - the October Surprise. That moment when some terrible secret is revealed that is intended to give the other party the advantage going into the home stretch.

Then I took a look at two articles in this morning's Journal.  The first was the results of recent local polling (subscription):

"Two-thirds said the economy," he said. "I've never seen it that high." 

Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc. in Albuquerque, said the heavy voter focus on the economy is a political "double-whammy" for Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who trailed Democrat Barack Obama in New Mexico by five points in the same Journal Poll. 

"It continues to shine a light on an issue perceived as a strength for Obama while taking away the focus from other issues perceived as strengths for McCain," Sanderoff said.

"Barack Obama is rising in the polls not only because people see Obama as doing a better job on the economy. We've gotten off the focus of national security, the war on terrorism, immigration — the things McCain is seen as stronger on. That's the double-whammy," Sanderoff said.

Just last month — when New Mexicans were shelling out an average of $3.69 for a gallon of gasoline — another Research & Polling Inc. survey found the biggest issue facing people in the state was fuel prices, Sanderoff said.

And, the second article tied in nicely by reporting on the falling gas prices:

Call it the good news amongst all the bad: gas prices finally dropping under $3 a gallon all over town.

One sign Wednesday advertising $2.859 for unleaded was a magnet for a steady stream of cars and trucks at the Circle K at the northwest corner of Fourth and Montaño NW during the lunch hour.

 
"I bought this in 2005 — that's what I was paying then," said Ventana Ranch resident Corey Ryan, sitting in line in the cab of his heavy-duty Dodge Ram 2500 pickup.

"I drive this way to work, so I keep my eye out for low prices," he said, nodding at a gas station sign across Montaño for $3.089 a gallon. "Every once in a while, they get into a price war with the place across the street. Circle K's got them beat today. We all win out."

I'm sure it is all just coincidence, but you have to admit it the combination of the two make for one heck of an October surprise.

A Change in America

I have to admit. I have yet to catch a debate in real time - various obligations have outweighed the desire to watch the debate each time. Usually, I've caught them a couple of days after the fact online. Last night was no exception. Although this time, I DVR'd it and watched a couple of hours after the fact.

Why am I prefacing this post with all of this? Because I think it important to note the importance of this change in how we get our information. Sure, people have been talking for years about the time shifting that is occurring in viewing habits, but I think this will be the first Presidential election where the full impact of this change will be felt.

Do I feel inundated by political campaign commercials this season? No. I don't watch them, or at least not more than once (usually viewed online). On those rare occasions when I watch a television program, it is, like last night's debate, according to my own schedule with my finger firmly pressed on fast forward during those commercial breaks.

This option is being taken advantage of by more and more Americans each and every day. If you're like me, you didn't catch the Katie Couric interviews of Governor Palin live, but sought them out after hearing how poorly she did in order to see the soundbites in their context. The same is true for Tina Fey's Saturday night depictions of the Alaska Governor. I haven't watched Saturday Night Live since my teenage years. Sitting through all of the mediocre skits to see that one good one just isn't my idea of entertainment. But, the internet may just give Saturday Night Live a relevance for a whole new generation.

So, keeping all of this in mind, a couple of thoughts on last night's debate between Senator Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin. First, the good news - I found them both to be very likable. Senator Biden's knowledge of the world stage made something very clear. He has been a working Senator, and he had one of my favorite observations of the night:

Mike Mansfield, a former leader of the Senate, said to me one day -- he -- I made a criticism of Jesse Helms. He said, "What would you do if I told you Jesse Helms and Dot Helms had adopted a child who had braces and was in real need?" I said, "I'd feel like a jerk."

He said, "Joe, understand one thing. Everyone's sent here for a reason, because there's something in them that their folks like. Don't question their motive."

I have never since that moment in my first year questioned the motive of another member of the Congress or Senate with whom I've disagreed. I've questioned their judgment.

I have quite a few politically active friends on both sides of the aisle, and I can't tell you how true this is. The vast majority of those representing us (and working to elect them) are good people. Their hearts and intentions are in the right place. I found it interesting that a very similar comment was made be Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) in his recent floor speech against the bailout:

Mr. President, I have friends and colleagues whom I respect deeply who are on all sides of this bailout issue. One of them just spoke. We all to want do what is right for America, and I believe those who have crafted this plan had pure and noble motives. They want this country to succeed. They want prosperity. I just do not believe that this bill gets the job done. In fact, in the long term, I am convinced it will do more harm than good.

Sometimes its too easy to forget that most people are good people - although there are definitely some bad apples in the process. Both Senator Biden and Governor Palin are clearly good apples. But, there is a fundamental difference between the two. Governor Palin truly represents the future and Senator Biden the past. For all of his talk of change, Senator Obama could not have made a worse choice than Senator Biden to be his running mate. Not because Senator Biden is a bad or incapable person - I don't believe either is true, but because this is Senator Biden's last hurrah.

Assuming that change is really what we need, and I believe all indicators support that, the Obama campaign brings a big pink elephant into the room. The fundamental effects of change through a Democratic process are not felt in four years - maybe, not even in eight. So, if Senator Obama is elected at the end of the day where is his succession plan? The answer: He doesn't have one.

On the flip side, Governor Palin last night made it very clear that she is the symbol for the succession plan for the Republican Party - something we have been sorely lacking. She has exactly the type of keep it real and get back to bascis philosophy we need. As David Brooks fairly notes, Governor Palin's personal charm would not have worked well in the past:

Their primal need for political survival having been satisfied, her supporters then looked for her to shift the momentum. And here we come to the interesting cultural question posed by her performance. The presidency and the vice presidency once was the preserve of white men in suits. As the historian Ellen Fitzpatrick pointed out on PBS Thursday night, if, in 1984, Geraldine Ferraro had spoken in the relentlessly folksy tones that Palin used, she would have been hounded out of politics as fundamentally unserious.

But that was before casual Fridays, boxers or briefs and T-shirt-clad Silicon Valley executives. Today, Palin can hit those colloquial notes again and again, and it is not automatically disqualifying.

But, it is not the past that concerns us. It is the future, and for our future Sarah Palin showed last night why she fits the bill perfectly. Is she an expert on all of the issues? No. But, this is where a knowledge of business is critical. The most successful CEO's in America know that they don't have to be the smartest person in the room. They need to surround themselves with those people, and then make an "executive decision" based on the facts those people present.

Some you may say that's how President Bush was sold to us. Unfortunately, President Bush has one fatal flaw as a great executive, and it is not his motivation or ethics. It is his loyalty. Time and time again, he kept people in jobs when they should have been transitioned out.

Now, let's bring this full circle. Who won last night's debate? Governor Sarah Palin won. She won because she was the one with the most to lose. The biggest question America had regarding Sarah Palin is can she hold her own, and the answer last night was a resounding yes. Is she more knowledgeable than Senator Biden? No. Considering the age and experience gap, Senator Biden would have to be a fool for that to be true, and Biden is not.

However, Biden is no longer running for President. Barack Obama is. And, like Sarah Palin, Senator Obama is a very capable person, but a person who needs a few more years of on the job training before moving into the position of the presidency. In fact, in many ways, Obama is less prepared than Governor Sarah Palin to lead.

There is a change needed in America. The cultural change has already occured, and in my humble opinion, Governor Sarah Palin demonstrated last night why the McCain/Plain ticket is the embodiement of that change, and the Obama.Biden ticket is not.

Worth a Chuckle

A Ten Year Old's Perspective

My oldest son is ten years old. Early last week, he told me he really wanted to do something to make sure that John McCain was elected our next President. Apparently, they have been talking a lot about politics in one of his classes, and he has, unsurprisingly, been taking the Republican side of the discussion.

I asked him why he was supporting John McCain? His initial answer basically boiled down to two points. First, he doesn't think we should abandon the war in Iraq. As to the first point, Pulitzer winner Dexter Filkin has some interesting observations in a recent article for the New York Times:

Two years ago, when I last stayed in Baghdad, Karada Mariam was like the whole of the city: shuttered, shattered, broken and dead.

Abu Nawas Park — I didn’t recognize that, either. By the time I had left the country in August 2006, the two-mile stretch of riverside park was a grim, spooky, deserted place, a symbol for the dying city that Baghdad had become.

These days, the same park is filled with people: families with children, women in jeans, women walking alone. Even the nighttime, when Iraqis used to cower inside their homes, no longer scares them. I can hear their laughter wafting from the park. At sundown the other day, I had to weave my way through perhaps 2,000 people. It was an astonishing, beautiful scene — impossible, incomprehensible, only months ago.

Second, he thinks that if Senator Obama is elected, we'll have "free health care," but our taxes will go up. He doesn't think paying more in taxes is a good idea. On that second point, I should point out that in second grade he did have Junior Achievement that's when he learned that we all pay taxes to support government services, and how that's not a bad thing. I should also note that his younger brother, also seems to agree on that latter point. Last night at dinner, he announced that if Obama wins we'll pay more in taxes and gas prices will rise. According to him this is a bad thing because there will be less money for toys.

Now, before you think I'm brainwashing my kids, I should point out that they don't read this blog, and we really don't sit around the dinner table every night talking politics. However, they've been known to watch Discovery channel in the morning before school, and they are apparently being exposed to a lot of campaign commercials. To that end, I should also point out that they seem confused as to why the candidates are approving messages that spend the entire time talking about the other guy. But, I digress.

Well, I reached out to the John McCain camp and asked if there was any way that my ten year old could help out. They said, he'd be welcome to get on the phone and make survey calls, and that's exactly what he did. In fact, he went through a 125 telephone numbers before I told him, we really needed to get going.

Now, let me take a moment and be non-partisan. He was calling Albuquerque area Democrats and Independents to I.D. voters. I didn't make any calls, I just sat there and monitored -- prepared to jump in if it got nasty. It didn't, and for that I'd like the to thank anyone in Albuquerque who took the time this weekend to allow a 10 year old to get involved in the political process by answering a couple of simple survey questions. You made his day, and made his father very proud, not only of his son, but of the the people who make up this community.

I've got to run, but I want to share a final thought on the comments that have been reportedly made by Bernalillo County GOP Chairman Fernando C'deBaca. I should preface it by saying that I am hesitant to write anything about it because I challenged Mr. C'deBaca last year for the Chairmanship and lost. So, this is all I have to say.

I read (without attributing them) Mr. C'deBaca's comments to my son on the way to the McCain offices, and asked him for his opinion. His immediate response was "Dad, that's silly." After a moment more of reflection, he added, "And, by silly I mean ridiculous, not funny." It was the first of two times that I was to be proud of him that day.

A Heartbeat Away from the Presidency

Since Senator McCain picked Governor Palin to be his running mate, we've heard an awful lot of attacks coming from the Democrats and the mainstream media (Mr. Charles Gibson) about Sarah Palin being "only one heartbeat away from the presidency." Of course, this isn't the first time this strategy has been used by Democrats.



As I recall, that candidate ended up with only 10 of the 50 states in the Electoral College. You'd think they'd learn. If you enjoyed this trip down memory lane, you might want to go watch some more presidential commercials at the Museum of the Moving Image.

How Many Emails Accounts Do You Have?

I have about half a dozen email addresses. Some are business related. Some are personal. I try to keep them separate. I would venture to guess that a growing number, if not the vast majority of working Americans, have at least two email accounts. A work email account, and a personal email account - just like Governor Sarah Palin.

Unfortunately, someone has taken it upon themselves to hack into the Governor's personal email account, an account with personal family photos and private communications, and to post them online. The McCain camp has released the following statement:

"This is a shocking invasion of the Governor's privacy and a violation of law. The matter has been turned over to the appropriate authorities and we hope that anyone in possession of these emails will destroy them. We will have no further comment."

Personally, I think this stunt is going to backfire on the perpetrators. The problem the Democrats are having with Sarah Palin from a political strategy standpoint is that she is someone with whom the vast majority of Americans can relate.

This is only going to further cement the bond that Sarah Palin is developing with the American people. I would venture to guess that the vast majority of Americans cherish their privacy and would be appalled if someone hacked their personal email and put the contents out there for all to see. This invasion of privacy on the heels of the attack against Sarah Palin because her 17 year old daughter is pregnant is without a doubt a new low. And, I'm willing to bet that it will hurt Democrats in the polls come November.

Sarah Palin has a Sense of Humor

I didn't catch the SNL skit parodying Governor Sarah Palin and Senator Hilary Clinton until a few minutes ago.



But, Governor Palin's response just gives one more reason to love her:

Palin, on the other hand, found the sketch amusing, according to her spokesperson. The governor and the press corps watched the sketch in the back of her plane, laughing at Tina and Amy’s satirical take on the two politicians.

“She thought it was quite funny, particularly because she once dressed up as Tina Fey for Halloween,” Palin spokesperson Tracey Schmitt told CBS.

On top of everything else she has going for her, Governor Palin proves she has a sense of humor. The more you get to know her, the more likable she becomes. How many politicians can you say that about?

Joe Biden's First Choice

It looks like Senator Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate for Vice President, had a first choice as a running mate, and it wasn't his colleague Senator Barack Obama (if you're crunched for time skip ahead to 2:36 into the clip):



That's right, given half a chance, Senator Joe Biden would have run on the presidential ticket with none other than the Republican candidate for President, Senator John McCain. Heck, he went so far as to urge McCain to run on a John Kerry ticket in 2004. Kind of makes you wonder how all of the Democrats can claim that electing John McCain as President is the same as a Bush third term.

Who Am I?

I am under 45 years old,
I love the outdoors,
I hunt,
I am a Republican reformer,
I have taken on the Republican Party establishment,
I have many children,
I have a spot on the national ticket as vice
president with less than two years in the governor's office.
Did you guess?

Don't Believe Me, Trust the Democrats

Those of you reading this blog for awhile probably haven't failed to notice the troll infestation. My guess is that the number of trolls and their personal attacks against me will only continue to escalate as we get closer to Election Day. In case you're not up on all of your internet slang, Wikipedia defines an internet troll as follows:

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response^[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.^[2]

Now, I don't mind trolls. I see them as simply a predictable part of the blogosphere. Like the big mosquitoes in Alaska, they can't really do more than annoy you if you know what to expect. Speaking of Alaska and trolls, I couldn't help but notice that one of the more ornery trolls occupying this blog of late is awfully quick to try and portray me as only giving half the story when it comes to Governor Sarah Palin. Take this recent comment for example:

Here's a few things you neglected to mention...

Sarah Palin was enthusiastically in favor of the $400 million bridge to nowhere until it because a national laughing stock, then flip-flopped to pretend to be against it. Regardless, she took that $400 million for Alaska and authorized the building of the now supposedly unneeded road leading to the construction site of the bridge to nowhere. She also supports the other pork barrel bridge to nowhere that the vastly corrupt Republican Senator Ted Stevens secured for Alaska.

The problem is that the troll is wrong. But hey, don't believe me. Let's take a look at what the Alaska Democratic Party has to say about Governor Palin's record on the issue:

Former Gov. Frank Murkowski’s administration set aside about $113 million of the appropriation for the Ketchikan bridge. However, Gov. Sarah Palin said the $398 million bridge was $329 million short of full funding, and only $36 million in federal funds were set aside for it. She said it was clear Congress had little interest in spending any more money for it and that the state had higher priorities.

Those aren't Republican talking points. They're coming straight from the Democrats Party in great state of Alaska. Kind of makes anything else that particular troll has to say somewhat suspect, don't you think?

Palin Confirms Her Status as the Perfect Pick

I was on the road last night, so I didn't get to watch Sarah Palin's speech at GOP Convention. However, I just watched it this morning, and all I can say is that there is no more perfect candidate for Vice President of the United States.



There were several times during her speech where Governor Palin seemed to be speaking straight to New Mexicans:

A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

I grew up with those people.

They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America ... who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars.

They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.

Before Governor Palin was selected, I had a conversation with a producer from a PBS show, and I told him that one of Senator Obama's biggest challenges in winning New Mexico would be the urban versus rural divide. As an urbanite, who time and time again shows he is out of touch with rural values, Senator Obama has some serious challenges in appealing to the two thirds of the state population that lives in rural New Mexican towns. It was this population that turned out and delivered New Mexico for President Bush in 2004.

Every time the Obama camp and the mainstream media question Governor Palin's readiness because she comes from a small town in a sparsely populated state, they strengthen the resolve of proud rural New Mexicans to once again have their voices heard in the White House.

Ethics reform is another hot topic in New Mexico. Over the last several years we have been plagued by scandal after scandal with no end in sight. Politicians like Governor Richardson talk a good game publicly, while privately continuing their lucrative practice of pay-to-play politics. Governor Richardson, a beltway insider and key player in the Obama campaign, came to office and immediately purchased a jet to complement his lavish lifestyle. When his driver races his back to the Governor's mansion, he has a staff of personal chefs waiting to pamper his every need.

Compare Governor Richardson's approach to leadership to that of Governor Palin:

I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.

While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for.

That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay.

I also drive myself to work.

And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef - although I've got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her. I came to office promising to control spending - by request if possible and by veto if necessary.

The Governor with five kids at home doesn't need jets, drivers and personal chefs, but the Governor in a two-person household does? Where's the logic in that? Supposedly, the Democrats are the party of the masses, but you tell me which Governor lives more like you and me?

Of course, I realize that Governor Richardson is not running for President. So, let's bring it back to a Presidential ticket comparison. McCain/Palin versus Obama/Biden. When it comes to proven leadership at the top of the ticket, McCain/Palin win hands down. When it comes to a track record of change and bucking the political establishment, McCain/Palin win hands down. When it comes to dealing with energy or experience in world affairs, McCain/Palin win hands down.

On every measurement and in every category McCain/Palin is the more impressive ticket. And every time, someone tries to make the case that Governor Palin is not ready to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, we'll think of this:

When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.

And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities.

Governor Palin's proven track record of meeting family and community responsiblities combined with Senator McCain's proud history of fighting for this country means much more than Senator Obama's and Senator Biden's "experience" of winning elections.

No If Ands or Buts

How do you know the left is out of touch with the American public? Could it be because their Presidential nominee believes that during tough economic times people are worried about the price of arugala?

“Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?” [Senator Barack Obama] said. “I mean, they’re charging a lot of money for this stuff.”

The state of Iowa, for all of its vast food production, does not have a Whole Foods, a leading natural and organic foods market. The closest? Omaha, Minneapolis or Kansas City.

Or, maybe it is because Barack Obama is on record as stating that the only reason to have faith or support the second ammendment is because you're a bitter American:

[Senator Barack Obama] said: “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Or maybe, it is because they think in these times it is okay to enthusiastically run a man for Senate that believes women do NOT deserve to earn the same as men:



No, I'm not being fair. Each of those examples show why top of the ticket Democratic candidates are out of touch with the American public, but not why the activists on the left don't understand the values of the majority of Americans. For that, we just need to consider that they think that the fact that a 17 year old girl getting pregnant is a scandal.

It's not a scandal. It's just something that happens. And, it just reinforces the fact that Sarah Palin is exactly what this country needs. A real person, who is struggling with the same real struggles we all face. No if ands or buts, Sarah Palin becomes more likable everyday.

THRILLED About Sarah Palin

I can't tell you how excited I am about Senator McCain choosing Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his Vice-President. In August of last year, I had linked to a post that made a great case for selecting Sarah Palin to run as Vice-President:

However, the very best female candidate we have -- and this won't suprise anyone -- is Sarah Heath Palin, the governor of Alaska. With an approval rating in the 90s, she's the most popular state official in the nation. She's a mother of four attractive children, a wife who's a model of commitment to her spouse, and a pillar of honesty in a state with more than its share of political corruption.

She's extremely knowledgable about several critical issues, including energy, the environment, and education. There's no doubt she'll be as passionate about observing the U.S. constitution as she is about following Alaska's state document. She advocates the form of Christianity that emphasizes doing rather than talking. She's a lifetime supporter of Second Amendment rights.

As her electability and approval ratings show, she knows how to communicate with voters. She has just enough of a populist streak that she's not afraid to take on the big corporations (Exxon-Mobil, BP, and Conoco-Phillips) that, in the past, have generally had their way in Alaska.

Later that same week, I was on Eye on New Mexico, and because of the additional research I had done, I brought up what a great V.P. choice Sarah Palin would make. I've got video on my TIVO of that episode. Maybe this weekend, I'll pull it off and post it here.

Obama's Silence is Deafening

A leader takes a stand. When he sees a problem, he calls it as he sees it. It may not win him more friends. It may not be the smartest political move, but it is the measure of a good leader. And, in the end, the leader who is willing to take a stand based on principle earns respect.

John McCain has shown leadership time and time again throughout his career and he has shown it on the campaign trail:

This was evident in the conversation that was revisited and then revisited again and again regarding Senator McCain's request to the North Carolina GOP to not run an Obama attack ad based on Obama's longstanding relationship with controversial minister Jeremiah Wright.

Compare McCain's willingness to speak up to Barack Obama's silence in the face of the anti-Semitic attacks being launched against another member of Congress:

Yet, for all [of Barack Obama's] moralizing on the subject [of race], why is it that Obama is staying silent as members of his own party -- not to mention his own race -- in Tennessee use racial slurs to attack another member of his own party? And why is it that the national media has ignored this story? Perhaps its because the candidate being attacked, Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen, is not black but is Jewish? And perhaps its because his attackers are members of Tennessee's black religious community? And perhaps it is because the Congressional Black Caucus is funding Cohen's Democratic opponent, Nikki Tinker? And perhaps it is because Tinker is benefiting from this anti-Semitic attack against Cohen?

Obama may be a great orator. His campaign may have brilliantly marketed him as the catalyst for change. However, when given the opportunity to lead and speak up against politics of hate, Obama has already failed miserably. Change can only occur by electing a strong leader. Barack Obama is clearly demonstrting that he is not that leader.

UPDATE: It took a little while, but Senator Obama finally responded to the outrage.

The Child Walks Among Us

What can I say? I thought this was pretty funny.

Obama Says Whatever You Want to Hear

Obama to Build Security Force to Rival Military

Listening to this recent speech Senator Barack Obama gave in Colorado Springs brings to light some pretty scary stuff....

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

That statement comes at 16:42 into the speech, but strangely has been scrubbed from the transcript of the speech released to the press. Is it just me, or does Senator Obama's goals seem a little Stalinesque?

Hat tip to Blue Collar Muse for pointing this out and putting Obama's goal into perspective:

The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn’t count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. Defense budget was $439 billion.

Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that?

A new $439 billion second civilian national security force is not something that should be ignored. This deserves some straight answers from the Obama camp.

Obama Ad Analyzed

Despite efforts to portray Senator Barack Obama as the second coming, a quick review of the facts in one of Obama's ads shows that he's nothing more than politics as usual:

Obama sponsored or co-sponsored -- but did not "pass" -- the welfare and tax measures but does not mention that these were in the Illinois legislature in 1997 and 2000. He sponsored congressional measures that helped hospitalized veterans, but in a relatively minor way: extending beyond 90 days the period in which they can receive free meals and free phone calls to family members.

Obama may have turned down Wall Street jobs after graduating from Columbia University in 1983, but he spent a year working for Business International Corp. in New York before becoming a community organizer in Chicago, and he later joined a law firm there.

Change is a good thing. That's why we have term limits for President. But, despite the great marketing effort, the unfortunate truth is that Barack Obama does not represent change. The more we get to know him, the more it be comes clear - it's the same old bloated political promises with little in the way of performance to back them up.

Where's the Public Outcry?

Legislative session after legislative session in New Mexico we've had to endure the demands from the left to "reform" our election system by instituting public funding of elections. Yet, when the presumptive "champion for change" of the Democratic Party, Barack Obama opts out of public funding for his presidential race, the left is eerily silent:

Obama broke a previous pledge last week and announced that he would opt out of the public-financing system for presidential candidates. On a practical level, it wasn’t surprising: The Democrat has displayed a rare ability to raise huge amounts of money from average Americans, and that would have been hindered by accepting public financing.

But reducing the influence of money in politics is central to Obama’s “Change We Can Believe In” slogan and the message of his presidential campaign. It’s true that his campaign has found a different way to raise money, but the reality is that he pledged to use the public financing system in the general election if his opponent also agreed -- which McCain has done.

Now Obama, the candidate who asks Americans to be idealists and believe change is possible, is instead acting like a realist by deciding to break a promise because doing so will increase his chances of being elected.

So, how about it my friends on the left? Are you going to call on Senator Obama to opt in for public funding? If you don't, that's okay. I understand that winning is more important than pushing for public funding. Just do me a favor, okay? Don't get back on your high horse when the November election is over.

Obama Can't Afford Military Mistakes

Throughout the Democratic Primary Senator Hillary Clinton has questioned Senator Barack Obama's readiness to assume the role of Commander in Chief. Now, two recent occurrences indicate just how unschooled Senator Obama is in the military arena.

First, there was this Clintonesque type "oops" during his Memorial Day visit to Las Cruces:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is taking fire from Republicans after erroneously saying during his town-hall meeting with veterans in Las Cruces that his uncle was among the American soldiers who liberated Auschwitz during World War II.

Auschwitz was liberated by the Russians, not the Americans.

Then just a few days later, Obama's spokesman, Bill Burton had this to say:

"John McCain's proposal [to visit Iraq] is nothing more than a political stunt, and we don't need any more 'Mission Accomplished' banners or walks through Baghdad markets to know that Iraq's leaders have not made the political progress that was the stated purpose of the surge. The American people don't want any more false promises of progress, they deserve a real debate about a war that has overstretched our military, and cost us thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars without making us safer."

Say what????

Senator Obama is promising to pull the troops out of Iraq. Don't you think as a potential future Commander in Chief, he ought to be willing to spend some post-surge time on the ground with our generals in Iraq? Or maybe Senator Obama is afraid he might learn something while visiting. Something like:

According to the Military Times poll, more than 60% of active-duty servicemen believe the US is either "somewhat" or "very" likely to succeed in Iraq. But less than 20% of them think "the Iraqi military will be ready to replace large numbers of American troops" in 2 years or less. That suggests that a sizable number of the troops on the ground think that a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would amount to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Imagine if a soldier, marine, or guardsman were to express that opinion to Obama's face, in public, on the ground in Iraq.

Yeah, we couldn't have that happen, could we?

Second Soros Funded Organization Appears

Two George Soros funded organizations land in New Mexico in the same month. Coincidence? Uh, I don't think so. Now, before you think I've gone all black helicopter on you, let just look at the facts.

We're a battleground state. We're a battleground in the Presidential race, and we're a battleground for at least two Congressional seats and one Senate seat. There is a lot at stake here. And, if you're a businessman, on either side of the aisle, there is no better state in which to make a political investment. The odds are in your favor. So, I don't blame George Soros for choosing the Land of Enchantment for his playground.

I just don't think much of his tactics.

Obama is supposedly the candidate of "change." Clinton is well a Clinton. The two are quickly becoming caricatures of what most people despise about politics, outright lies and empty promises.



This all reeks of politics as usual. And, George Soros is adding the icing to the cake by launching, albeit through a proxy, an attack ad on a candidate in a fight that hasn't actually begun. Then to top it all off, the organization to which he has given millions, launches the attack based on the same set of lies and purposeful misrepresentation that the Democratic National Committee has been trying to seed with the American public.

But, hey don't take my word for it. Watch the latest video to be launched by MoveOn.org:



Now read the truth from a truly non-partisan source:

The clear implication is that if McCain is elected, we can expect to be battling in Iraq for many decades to come. But the admakers cut off the rest of McCain's response, which provides some badly needed context:

McCain, town hall meeting, Jan. 3: Maybe a hundred. ... We’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me, as long as Americans, as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. It’s fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world.

The DNC ad doesn't mention that McCain was speaking specifically about a peacetime presence. And the text of the ad paired with images of Iraq under siege leave a clear impression that McCain proposes to allow a century more of war, with U.S. involvement. That's not what he said, in New Hampshire or in other settings when he's been asked about it.

Pretty convenient to leave out the context, isn't it? It's also pretty sad. If they want to attack Senator McCain, they should do so on the facts. Instead, Soros & Co. show a disturbing commitment to purposely misleading the public.

Which, conveniently brings us full circle back to beginning of this post. I don't have a problem with George Soros trying to influence the outcome of New Mexico politics - that's just the way the game is played. I do have a problem with his tactics - lies and distortions.

After my last Soros post, I received a couple of nice notes from New Mexico Independent's paid contributors. As a result of those communications, I feel I should set the record straight. I don't judge any of those folks for taking a stipend. I don't have a problem with the left leaning tendencies of the majority of the contributors. I don't even have any problem with most of their views, despite the fact that they are contrary to my own. I believe we are all contributing to a discussion.

However, to pretend this site just accidentally in a non-partisan way happened to bring several left-leaning bloggers under one banner is not exactly being truthful. As to those who have commented that I'm listed on the blogroll... Yes, I've been aware of that from the get go. I'm also listed on the blogrolls of Democracy for New Mexico and State Senator Dede Feldman's blog. Are you going to tell me those are also non-partisan sites?

There is nothing wrong with being partisan. A partisan system is what makes our government work. It's all part of checks and balances. It is the failure to disclose that is the problem here.

Do you think it is just an oversight that MoveOn.org's latest ad is not analyzed on this "independent" site for what it is. Now, in all fairness, after my last Soros post I did receive an offer to submit articles to New Mexico Independent for consideration (as proof that they're a truly unbiased site).

So, I'll be happy to submit this one for publication. Please just let me know where to pick up my $1,500 stipend.

A Talk with John McCain

I had a chance to jump on a blogger only conference call for about thirty minutes this morning with Senator John McCain. The McCain camp has been great about reaching out to bloggers regularly and inviting us to call in and ask questions.

What most impressed me was Senator McCain's closing comments in which he expressed appreciation for the work bloggers are doing in promoting political discourse - whether in agreement or not. The frank conversation that occurred on the call made it clear that anything could be discussed. Sure, we were all bloggers from the right, but believe me, just because we're all on the same team does not mean that we all agree - especially when it comes to strategy, tactics and message.

This was evident in the conversation that was revisited and then revisited again and again regarding Senator McCain's request to the North Carolina GOP to not run an Obama attack ad based on Obama's longstanding relationship with controversial minister Jeremiah Wright.



It was clear that several bloggers on the call thought that the North Carolina GOP should run the ad.



However, Senator McCain did not waiver in his beliefs, instead he remained steadfastly respectful that it should not run as it distracted from the issues which really deserved focus. He also acknowledged that it was a request on his part, but that the North Carolina Republican Party was free to do what they wanted.

One of the issues Senator McCain felt was more deserving of attention was the empty promises made by the Democrats in 2006. For example this from an email I received the other day:

On the two-year anniversary of Speaker Pelosi’s pledge that “Democrats have a commonsense plan to bring down skyrocketing gas prices,” gas prices have set another new record, with regular unleaded clocking in at $3.556/gal., according to AAA. The average price of gas has gone up $1.25 – more than 50 percent – since the beginning of the 110th Congress.

The warming weather always means an opportunity for families to spend sometime together usually on a road trip. Unfortunately, the prices at the pump may put that time honored family tradition out of reach for many Americans. Senator McCain has proposed a rather simple solution, a tax holiday from Memorial Day to Labor Day. However, Senator Obama, once again proving he is out of touch with regular Americans, is opposing this tax holiday.



This is not something that benefits the rich, since they are more likely to fly to their vacation destination. Instead, this is a direct affront to the working American families. Those who are going to feel the crunch at the pump the most. It looks like Senator Obama is committed to giving working Americans in small towns across the country a reason to be bitter.

A Man Who Knows About Monarchies

Governor Bill Richardson and Clinton strategist James Carville appear to have had an entertaining little debate on Larry King. This is by far my favorite part of the exchange (subscription):

Richardson told King that he believes Clinton was too negative during her quest to win Pennsylvania.

There's a sense of "clinging to the throne," Richardson said, clearly referring to the Clinton camp. "You know, we're America, we're not Monaco."

This coming from a man who has made a habit of tossing aside the New Mexico Constitution when it suits his needs. I hope during the next legislative session our legislators take time to remind the Governor that "You know, we're America, we're not Monaco." After all, they don't call him King Bill for nothing.

Who Says I Don't Have a Sense of Humor?

I know you probably don't have 9 minutes to watch a clip. And, yes, some of you might find some of this offensive. But, don't click away just yet. You HAVE to stick around for the Hillary stuff. It's a riot.

(Hat tip: NewMexiKen).

Question for Congressman Tom Udall

The Man is Uncle Sam

I'm a small business owner. Actually, I own two. A friend of mine told me once that he wanted to start a business because he "didn't want to spend his entire life working for the man." Like many, he wanted to be his own boss. Control his own destiny. Reap the rewards he sowed instead of creating wealth for someone else's gain.

There is only one problem with all this...

When you are your own boss, you suddenly become painfully aware of just how much of the wealth you are creating is going to the government in the form of taxes. On average, I work 12 to 16 hour days and have from day one of officially becoming an entrepreneur. Yet, thanks to our government's commitment to tax and spend, more than a third of my time is spent working to pay for bigger and bigger government.

People have been conditioned to think of taxes as simply the government collecting a portion of the money you earn. We are taught that money is the root of all evil. So, parting with it for the greater good must be a good thing.

But, that conditioning is wrong. The government is not taxing our money. The government is taxing our time. Whereas, money is of little true value. Time is priceless. Everyone has only a finite amount of time.

If I work 12 hour days, five days a week, and pay thirty percent in taxes, then one full month of my life each and every year is spent working for the government. That's one month that I don't get to use to strengthen my family, improve my community or better the world. Every year the government takes one month of my life. Every year, they take one month of yours.

Is the world better off because of it? I don't think so.

Both of the Democratic nominees for President believe that the answer to all of America's problems lies in bigger government. Senator Barack Obama has been packaged as the nominee of "change." But, I would argue that nothing will change if Senator Obama is elected President - at least nothing for the better. Instead, of working one month a year for the government, we can all expect to add another week or more of additional time stolen from our lives to pay for his programs.

Both of the Democratic candidates believe that more government programs and more regulations are the answer to solving every social and economic hurdle that arises. By comparison, Senator John McCain believes, and is promoting, a pro-growth agenda that is focused on small businesses and entrepreneurs, less taxation and more free trade.

Take a listen to what RNC Victory Chairman Carly Fiorina had to say about Senator McCain's economic agenda:



As long as government continues to grow, we are all working for the man... and The Man is Uncle Sam.

Denish Attacks GOP for Supporting Pueblo

In a bizarre twist that could only be described as a publicity stunt gone bad, Lt. Governor Diane Denish, NM Chair for Hillary Clinton, held a joint press conference with Obama supporter State Representative Al Park to criticize the Republican National Committee's (RNC) choice of Santa Ana Pueblo's Tamaya Resort.

Supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama stood shoulder-to-shoulder at a community center in Albuquerque's Barelas neighborhood, home to many low-income people, the while Republican state party chairmen met at the luxurious Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort at Santa Ana Pueblo.

Would Lt. Governor Denish have preferred that the RNC hold their Chairman's meeting in a downtown location as opposed to showing their support for the Native American community by choosing to introduce people from all over the nation and as far away as American Samoa to the entrepreneurial success story of one of New Mexico's pueblos?

This is just another unfortunate example of prominent Democrats attempting to cause friction among hard working Americans by pitting one minority against another. In this case, the Democrats choose to hold a press conference in the largely Hispanic Barelas community to decry the RNC's support of Native Americans.

What makes this intentionally racial manipulation even more transparent is that only a few weeks have passed since the Democratic Party of New Mexico chose to hold their State Pre-Primary Convention at the Santa Ana Center as opposed to say the National Hispanic Cultural Center in Barelas.

While the Democrats were holding their hate based press conference, the Republicans were reaching out to members of New Mexico's grassroots community. How do I know, well, I was one of those members.

Carly Fiorina, RNC Victory Chairman and former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, picked up the phone to give me, a local Hispanic blogger, a call and discuss a variety of issues important to New Mexicans. I didn't ask for the opportunity to visit with Chairman Fiorina, but it is obvious the RNC is eager to talk to everyday New Mexicans to get their input.

Over this weekend, I plan on doing a series of posts about the topics we discussed, so make sure to check back. Until then, I'll leave you with this question: When was the last time the Democratic National Committee held their Chairman's meeting in New Mexico?

The Truth About Presidential Tempers

A lot has been made by the left about Senator John McCain's passion on the issues. Granted, they usually call it McCain's temper. Yet, the Clinton Democrats sure don't seem to take offense when former President Clinton goes ballistic at the very mention of Governor Bill Richardson (subscription):

"Five times to my face (Richardson) said that he would never do that," a San Francisco Chronicle column had the "red-faced, finger-pointing" former president saying during a private meeting last weekend with superdelegates in California.

The column by Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross, relying on reports from those in attendance, immediately went national. It raced across political blogs— including at least one in England— the New York Post carried a "Bill Clinton Unleashes Tirade ... " headline on its online version of the story.

Now, here's the dilemma...

We here in New Mexico have suffered time and time again Governor Bill Richardson saying one thing and doing another. We've listened to him as he looked us straight in the eye while running for re-election as Governor and tell us that he was not going to run for President.

We've had to endure press conference after press conference where he has claimed to have successfully improved public education. Only to learn that each year's failure surpasses that of the previous year.

We've swallowed the bitter pill of a guy who claims to cut taxes while increasing fees and nearly doubling the size of government. And, increasing those fees on those who can least afford to have them imposed.

Heck, we've even had to listen to the Governor state that the super delegate vote should follow popular vote and then turn around and promises his vote to advance his own self interests.



Keeping all of this in mind, it is not that hard to believe former President Bill Clinton's claim that Governor Bill Richardson looked him straight in the eye and five times told him that he would never endorse Senator Obama. There is only one problem. The man making the claim is President Clinton. A man who has done his fair share of looking us in the eye saying one thing when the truth has been something quite different. A man whose wife also has proven that there is nothing she will not lie about if it will further her own career.

So, at the end of day, it basically boils down to this. The worse that can actually be said about Governor Bill Richardson is that he is a Clinton Democrat.

Fruit Fly Research in France

So, I always thought New Mexico's special interest spending of taxpayer's money at the state level was ridiculous. But, it looks like that tilapia farm in Hidalgo county that got shot down two sessions ago is nothing compared to the type of earmarks coming out of one Congressman's district in Pennsylvania.

RedState hope to take it back with Chris Hackett. Mr. Hackett, a CPA, is both a fiscal and social conservative. He is pro-life and anti-earmarks. His opponent, Chris Carney, has been spending federal dollars on earmarks claiming they bring the bacon home to the tenth. The problem is, Carney can't explain how his vote for fruit fly research in France brings jobs home. Chris Hackett, on the other hand, can deftly explain how growth in Washington kills jobs in the 10th.

Fruit fly research in France paid for by American Taxpayers? That's just too much. It's no wonder presidential candidate, Senator John McCain thinks a one year moratorium on federal earmarks is a good idea.

Memories Caught on Tape

Bill Richardson Endorsement of Obama

It probably looks like I've been avoiding writing something about Bill Richardson endorsing Barack Obama. I haven't. In fact, I already wrote about it back in January:

Yet, is Richardson calling it quits? Not yet. Mind you, he's got a job to do here with the pending legislative session, but he's just not willing to throw in the towel. Why? Well, he likes the national limelight too much. New Mexicans know (or at least they should be now) that Bill Richardson is in the game for Bill Richardson. And, based on the reports of Richardson throwing his Iowa votes to Obama, the Clintons now know it too.

Richardson is a deal maker of the first order. So, what kind of deal do you think he struck with Obama? You don't think he would shun the Clintons without some sort of backup plan, do you?

It looks like Governor Richardson (or should I say Secretary of State Richardson) just stuck to the plan.

Democratic Vote Buying

There has been a lot of talk both in the local and national news about the Democratic Party's superdelegate system, and the role they may play in picking the Democratic nominee for President:

First-term Rep. Carol Shea-Porter supports Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, even though her New Hampshire constituents voted for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"It came to a virtual draw in our state" in last month's primary, she says of the mismatch in positions. "I think it's a moot question."

In her case, perhaps so. But Shea-Porter is not alone, and increasingly in the close Democratic race, the political intentions of delegates picked outside the primaries and caucuses are cause for controversy.

It turns out that one reason that superdelegates are going to vote against their constituents desire is cold, hard cash. It seems being a superdelegate is one way Democrats are able to pad their campaign coffers:

At least two of New Mexico's Democratic "superdelegates" — party leaders who might end up choosing the nominee for president if the race between U.S. Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton remains tight — have received campaign contributions from the candidates.

Obama's political action committee, Hope Fund, in 2005 made two contributions totaling $4,200 to U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman's 2006 re-election campaign. Meanwhile, Clinton's HILLPAC gave $5,000 to Gov. Bill Richardson's 2006 gubernatorial race.

Keep that in mind the next time you hear about Democrats calling for campaign ethics reform in New Mexico.

Some People Just Shouldn't Talk

So, Patricia Madrid has decided to jump in the fray and attack the Democratic Party volunteers for a poorly run caucus. Mind you, this was the sitting attorney general that lost a Democratic leaning district during a year when Republicans across the country got the boot from Congress.

Call me crazy, but I'm thinking this is the last person in the world who should be taking a whack at anyone's ability to organize volunteers and achieve results. Then, to add insult to injury, she throws in this classic Madridism:

In addition, a party-run caucus puts a critical vote in the hands of volunteers instead of paid, trained election workers.

“It (the caucus system) doesn’t have all the checks and balances and the years of experience of a proper election,” Madrid said.

Excuse me??? Ms. Madrid, have you actually been paying attention to how elections are run in New Mexico? I can't remember the last time an important election in New Mexico was actually decided on, or for that matter somewhere near, Election Day. As I recall, by the time you were ready to admit defeat in 2006, the Christmas shopping season was well under way.

As to "paid, trained election workers," it has obviously been a LONG time since you were down in the trenches. Let me recommend that you take a walk down memory lane and revisit just how well that paid election worker system is operating in New Mexico. Or maybe, instead of Monday morning quarterbacking, you could have offered to help raise the money, or volunteer your time, so that your party could do its caucus right.

Personally, I find it amusing that New Mexico's Democratic Caucus has suffered from the same inability as the state's paid Democratic machine to count ballots in a timely manner, or to have enough ballots at an election site. But, that aside, I just find it offensive that folks like Governor Bill Richardson or Patricia Madrid refused to get involved in the process, and then spend the days after pointing fingers at volunteers... VOLUNTEERS.

We really do need new leadership in New Mexico.

Governor Bill Richardson is a Class Act

Governor Bill Richardson spends the better part of a year gallivanting around the country and doing his best impression of Don Quixote, then comes back to New Mexico, grows a beard, and starts throwing barbs at everyone he can find. First, he calls the Legislature a bunch of do nothings, and now he takes aims at his own state party:

Gov. Bill Richardson released a statement tonight expressing his disappointment at how the caucus was run. Richardson was instrumental in getting the state’s Democrats to switch in 2004 to a caucus system that allowed them to move up the date and have a greater voice in the presidential selection process.

In the news release, the governor took credit for the success of the 2004 caucus, saying it was well-organized, well-funded and well-executed “through his personal efforts and those of his organization.” This year, the release stated, he was focused on running for president and is now focused on the Legislature.

Sorry, but if you ask me, the sitting Democratic Governor, who just happened to run for President, is the de facto head of the State Democratic Party. If he had still been in the race, you better believe he would have lent a hand and asked his minions to help. Instead, like a spoiled child, he is now pointing fingers at everyone else and saying, "It's your fault."

Kind of makes you wonder who he is going to blame when awareness of the economic downturn in New Mexico becomes common knowledge. If he stays true to form, there is no way he'll own up to the fact that his bad investments and unsound fiscal policy are the culprit, anymore then he is willing to take credit for the lack of leadership he has shown since returning to New Mexico.

One last note... neither the legislature, nor the Democratic Party officials are paid to do their job. They are volunteers. As someone, who at once upon a time ran a not-for-profit, I can tell you it is in truly bad form to blame the volunteers for the shortcomings of the paid staff.

Post Super-Tuesday Discussion with RNC Chairman Mike Duncan

This morning, I had an opportunity to talk one-on-one with Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Mike Duncan about the Super Tuesday results, and what bearing they have on the direction of the Presidential Campaign.

The first thing we talked about was the fact that on the Democratic side, there is no clear front runner and that is a clear indication that the Democratic Party is a party deeply divided right now. On the one hand, there are serious questions as to whether or not Senator Barack Obama has the experience needed to lead the country as Commander in Chief.

There also was a striking division between Clinton and Obama in views of their qualifications to be commander in chief vs. perceptions of who'd do more to unite the country. Obama was seen as more likely than Clinton to unite the country, by 50 percent to 39 percent; but Democrats said Clinton was most qualified to be commander in chief, by a nearly identical 51 percent to 36 percent.

On the other hand, huge numbers of people are grappling with whether or not Senator Hillary Clinton can be trusted.

The fact that these questions continue to loom as a large shadow over the Democratic race seem to indicate that the Democrats will go all the way to the Convention before deciding on a nominee. By contrast, on the Republican side we are seemingly moving toward picking a nominee in the not too distant future. This is good news for the Republican Party as it means that we can turn an eye (and our resources) toward winning in November.

The Chairman and I did speak about that all important political resource - money. Turns out that the Republican base is energized right now, and it is showing not only by the record number of people turning out at the polls across the country, but by their willingness to give their hard earned money.

Last year, Chairman Duncan raised over $80 million dollars. The same cannot be said for Democratic Chairman Howard Dean. It hasn't yet been released to the news media, but last month the RNC had another great fundraising month and finished with over $20 million on hand. Our Democratic counterparts aren't anywhere near that.

That's clearly evident on the home front here in New Mexico, where Democratic Party Chairman, Brian Colon has been lamenting the fact that he just doesn't have the resources available to him that were available in 2004:

Brian Colon, state Democratic Party chairman, said without the injection of money from the candidates' get-out-the-vote efforts, it will be tough to get people to the polls this time.

''The only thing that I kind of lose some sleep over is I wish I had half a million dollars to promote the thing,'' Colon said during a recent break from answering phones at the party's Albuquerque headquarters.

On the flip side, the Republican Party in New Mexico is being nationally recognized for its organization and ability to deliver results. In April, the New Mexico GOP will be hosting the RNC Chairman's Meeting in Albuquerque. As a blue state that turned red in the last election, we've won the right to be at the epicenter of the Victory campaign for 2008.

These are exciting times. The 27 million people who have turned out to vote in Republican and Democratic primaries and caucuses thus far show that the American people are once engaged in the process. Partisan politics aside, this is a GOOD for America.

It's Coming - The Endorsement

As we all know by now, Governor Bill Richardson spent yesterday watching the Super Bowl at his mansion with former President Bill Clinton. Now, he may not have officially endorsed Hillary Clinton, but that's called sending out a strong message.

Expect the Governor's endorsement of Senator Clinton to come sometime before Wednesday. My only hope is that he doesn't pick up ANOTHER page from Hillary's playbook when it comes to universal healthcare:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

Ouch, "garnish the wages of workers" Isn't garnishing wages something we do to deadbeat dads and other people who fail to pay their debts? I'm sure that's going to go over well with the voters.

Can you imagine? You're working at a minimum wage job, maybe two, to make ends meet and President Hillary Clinton wants to garnish your wages to ensure you have health insurance. Yeah, that's brilliant health care policy. Clinton and Richardson are made for each other.

As a comical aside, how did these two great proponents of universal health care, former President Clinton and Governor Richardson, while away the time with the big game on the screen:

Political questions were off-limits as Clinton and Richardson sat glued to the television in a room that smelled of cigars, a table holding sandwiches and fresh fruit at arm's length.

Now, I like a good cigar as much as the next guy, but then again, I'm not asking that everyone be lumped into the same insurance pool as me.

A Classic Strategy

The Democratic Party of New Mexico is playing a classic game of "underpromise and overdeliver" when it comes to Tuesday's presidential caucus (subscription):

When Gov. Bill Richardson successfully pushed in 2003 to hold a New Mexico Democratic presidential contest in early February, the goal was to shine more political attention on the state.

The tactic worked in 2004: Candidates made dozens of trips to New Mexico in advance of that year's Democratic caucus. Voters for many weeks couldn't turn on the TV or pick up a newspaper without seeing a reminder of the event.

But lots of other states have since decided to move their contests to early February, too.

Now, Democratic leaders think New Mexico voter turnout for the party's presidential caucus on Tuesday could pale in comparison to turnout the first time around.

State Democratic Party Chairman Brian Colón said this week he anticipates 30,000 to 40,000 of New Mexico's 532,000-plus registered Democrats to show up at caucus locations on the Super Tuesday compared to more than 100,000 last time.

In contrast, voter turnout in other states' 2008 Democratic nominating contests has shattered past records as excitement over the race between front-runners Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama has mounted.

Mark my words. When turnout in New Mexico exceeds the 30,000 to 40,000 predicted, Democratic leaders will turn around and say:

We far exceeded our expectations. Despite the fact, that significantly less money was spent than years passed, more than [fill-in the blank] the number of people we projected turned out. This is a clear indication that people are eager for a change in Washington. Blah, blah, blah....

I don't often make predictions, but I feel confident about this one.

Richardson Makes First Big Mistake

It didn't even take five minutes for Governor Richardson to make his first big mistake. He's back in New Mexico to make his bail out speech from the Presidential campaign, and one of his first acts is to "snub" New Mexico's political reporters:

Richardson's withdrawal was expected. But one surprise today was how he treated the New Mexico press corps. Before Richardson appeared in the Rotunda, his chief campaign flack Pahl Shipley announced that Richardson would not answer questions after his announcement. That in itself isn't exactly surprising. While I was in Iowa and New Hampshire the past few days, practically the only thing that Richardson spokesman Tom Reynolds ever said to me was "The governor's not taking any questions."

But where did Richardson go immediately after his speech? To the Capitol television studio to do interviews on Fox News and CNN.

Watch Matt Grubbs' report on KOAT -- specifically the last part. You'll see campaign aide Katie Roberts telling local reporters to "please show respect" for the governor as he goes about his "official business."

Official business meaning holing up in the television studio for an hout and a half so he could be on national t.v.

Bad move, Governor. These are the folks you definitely are going to need on your side as you try and thrust a bank breaking HillaryCare type of health insurance mandate on New Mexicans during the short thirty day legislative session.

Of course, I'm not buying the Governor's line that he's "back." The man loves the national press just a little too much for his own good, which means he's got two choices at this point.

1. He goes out on the campaign trail for one of the candidates to head up their Hispanic voter efforts.
2. He becomes a talking head commentator on the presidential campaign for the national media.

I just don't see him staying put here. Especially, not after the dose of reality those in the legislature are about to give him this session.

Governor and ACLU See the Light

Governor Bill Richardson's decision to acknowledge defeat in the Presidential campaign (subscription) today is going to go down as the best decision he has made in the entire race.

Stung by dismal showings in Iowa and New Hampshire, and scraping the bottom of his campaign war chest, Gov. Bill Richardson apparently is ending his bid for the presidency.

Richardson's national campaign finance chairman, Ed Romero of Albuquerque, told the Journal on Wednesday that he has been informed the governor will have a news conference today announcing his decision to withdraw from the race for the Democratic nomination.

Romero added that he is already making calls on behalf of Hillary Clinton, who won the New Hampshire primary election Tuesday.

There is nothing wrong with giving it a try and losing, but he was on the verge of looking foolish, and that's not good for the Governor or New Mexico.

Speaking of good decisions, according to a recent press release, it looks like the ACLU has abandoned their frivolous lawsuit against Senator Rod Adair:

Today however, in an unprecedented move for that organization, the ACLU moved to dismiss their own lawsuit, with prejudice, agreed they themselves are liable for all the fees they have incurred for their three attorneys and their entire legal team. As part of the settlement the ACLU was required to issue the following statement:

“The ACLU-NM acknowledges that Senator Rod Adair is a strong supporter of the United States and New Mexico Constitutions.”

Adair acknowledged the clear and total victory in the case, “The statement they released concerning my well-known commitment to civil rights for everyone contradicts, word-for-word, the frivolous complaint they had filed, he said, “I cannot imagine a more complete surrender by anyone in any case in New Mexico history.”

It's like everyone is seeing the light at the same time.