A Reminder of Why I Dropped CNN As My Browser Home Page

March 26th, 2010

Some of you may remember that I used to have CNN as my browser homepage, but changed to Instapundit instead, mainly due to CNN’s liberal bias, the ever-shrinking amount of real news, and their fugly redesign.

So today, with a possible war brewing between North and South Korea, what do you think CNN’s top story is?

“Model, alleged drug queen on the lam”

Also, it’s an embedded Flash video, with no apparent transcript available, and seems to exist mostly to pimp the story on one of their shows tonight.

Thanks, CNN, for reminding me why I dropped you, and why Fox News is kicking your ass.

Former Candidate Stephen Casey on the Texas House District 52 Race

March 25th, 2010

There’s a primary runoff for various races to be held on April 13. Since primary runoffs are notoriously low-turnout affairs (especially this year, with the high-profile Governor’s primary over), I thought I would do some coverage of the three Republican runoffs I’ll be voting in:

  • The Supreme Court of Texas Place 3 runoff between Rick Green and Debra Lehrmann
  • The State Board of Education District 10 runoff between Marsha Farney and Brian Russell
  • The Texas House District 52 runoff between Larry Gonzales and John Gordon

I want to address the last of these first. The results from the Texas House District 52 primary were:

John Gordon 4,454 (40.84%)
Larry Gonzales 4,091 (37.51%)
Stephen Casey 1,535 (14.07%)
Alyssa Eacono 825 (7.56%)

To start off, I’d like to do something a little different, and interview one of the losing candidates for the position, Stephen Casey. Casey earned my vote by being a staunch conservative, having some interesting ideas as to how to reform the tax system, and posted supporting quotations from The Federalist Papers on his issues page, something that warmed the cockles of my policy-wonkish heart. After coming in third, Casey endorsed Gonzales in the runoff.

I wanted to get Casey’s views on the race, as well as the election process in general, before moving on to Gonzales and Gordon. (I also wanted to get Alyssa Eacono’s views, but she’s already taken down her campaign website.) I sent Casey some questions via email, and he was kind enough to provide answers to them. My original questions are in italics below.

1. What prompted you to get into the race in the first place?

I was called to run; it is an internal prompting that, in light of the current political landscape, sought to restore the idea of “public servant” to this office. Too often people are elected and fill the office without making a significant difference to the district or state. I ran to change that.

2. Do you think the race received enough attention from local media outlets for voters to make an informed choice?

To a certain extent. The only drawback I see is that I ran an issues-based campaign and believe that local media does not offer enough time to discuss the issues in depth; rather it is short sound-byte type attention that “makes news” which gets printed.

3. Obviously Gonzales and Gordon had a significant fund-raising advantage over both you and Eacono. How did you go about raising money, and was the lack of it a significant hindrance to your campaign?

I believe I received what I needed to do what I was called to do. With any race, funding is important. I’m pleased to have come in third with the funding that I had. To receive 14% of the vote means that I had a strong vote/dollar ratio. This means the message has great value.

4. One of you major campaign proposals was to abolish a personal property tax and replace it with a consumption tax. How well was this proposal received, and do you think the voters and/or legislature is willing to consider such a huge tax system overhaul?

This proposal was received well and it is gaining momentum. It is hard to both campaign on an issue and “inform” voters on it at the same time. This was made a bit easier because it became an issue at the gubernatorial level and for good reason–it could help solve this upcoming budget shortfall if we truly grasped the boon to our economic cycle that would happen if we eliminated the property tax. We would be able to overcome, with fewer cuts, the upcoming projected
shortfall.

5. What was the main reason you endorsed Gonzales over Gordon?

I found Larry to have a personal approach, as well as a positive character and reputation community-wide that was friendly and personable even over
disagreeable issues. In addition, he has served people in a variety of capacities and done so with integrity.

6. If you had it to do over again, what would you do differently with your campaign?

Campaign infrastructure is important, and I learned a great deal. I still would lead with what I consider the most important question, “How Can I Serve You?”, but would ask more voters to volunteer time as well as contribute.

7. Any other thoughts you’d like to share with readers on the race, or politics in general?

First, thanks to everyone who was involved in any manner in these races, and a more specific thank you to those who supported me through prayer and action. Please turn out to support Larry Gonzales for this runoff.

We need to think deeply and act with conviction regarding representative government. This means understanding our state’s founders and our nation’s founders as well as what they read and believed. Be involved and take seriously the privilege of self-government as it will only last as long as our involvement.

Thanks to Stephen Casey for responding. I hope to interview both Gonzales and Gordon in future posts.

The Battle Was Lost, The War Goes On

March 24th, 2010

So Stupak and his bloc caved, and ObamaCare is now the law of the land, at least until the lawsuits. (I like to think there’s a good chance the individual mandate will be overturned on 10th Amendment grounds. Then again, that supposes there’s a federal court that actually knows what the 10th Amendment says…)

Lessons? When push comes to shove, every Democrat is a liberal Democrat, and pro-lifers should know that every time they pull a level with a D next to the name, they’re voting for Nancy Pelosi, no matter what promises that candidate is willing to give on the campaign trail.

The only way to remedy this is for Republicans to campaign vigorously on repealing it, and defeat enough House Democrats in November.

More about this subject anon, but I hope to take a break from the ObamaCare coverage for a while. Look for some coverage of the Texas House District 52 race Real Soon Now.

Late ObamaCare Update: Heath Shuler A No, And So Is Harry Teague

March 20th, 2010

Rep. Heath Shuler (NC 11) finally makes a quarterback sneak into the “No on Obamacare” Endzone.

Rep. Harry Teague (NM 02) is also voting no. Investor’s Business Daily says this leaves Pelosi with zero margin; she has to run the table on every remaining undecided, or else break up the Stupak group, to pass the bill.

Of course, this is Washington. Someone may be counting out stacks of unmarked bills to flip a No vote even as we speak. But baring that, the road ahead is still very tough for Pelosi.

The fat lady isn’t quite singing just yet. But she’s starting to warm up.

Rep. Jason Altmire to Vote No on ObamaCare

March 19th, 2010

Altmire announced he would vote against ObamaCare. He was mentioned as a “must flip” for Pelosi in a lot of publications.

Here’s the profile I did on him last week. Glad to know his constituents made him see the light.

Quick and Dirty ObamaCare Update Friday 3/19

March 19th, 2010

Rep. Peter DeFazio (OR 04) switching from Yes to No?

Everyone know the preliminary CBO score that has ObamaCare reducing the deficit is pure fiction:

The Democrats know — and admit internally — that their proposed health-care overhaul would increase the deficit by twelve figures ($100,000,000,000) in 2017–2019. But they are firmly committed to hiding this fact from the American people.

Jeffrey Anderson at NRO also sees the count as 203 Yes, 214 No.

Rep. John Boccieri decides to commit political suicide by backing Pelosi against his constituents.

Rep. John Garamendi (CA 10) isn’t just going to vote for ObamaCare, his aides are going to call the police on constituents who ask him to vote otherwise.

Is the Stupak bloc being bought off with Pelosi promises?

Rep. Bobby Rush Switches from Yes to No to Maybe?

March 18th, 2010

So it appears.

Keep in mind that Bobby Rush is currently the only American politician to electorally kick Barack Obama’s ass. Some long-awaited payback for Obama challenging him, perhaps?

Still, I think when push comes to shove, I would be surprised to see Rep. Rush as a No on the final vote.

Quick and Dirty ObamaCare Updates

March 18th, 2010

The latest whip count shows Pelosi several votes short.

Politico says they’re still eight votes shy.

Rep. Michael Arcuri (D-NY) switches from a Yes to a No.

Jill Stanek says Pelosi doesn’t have the votes, and the Stupak 12 will hold firm.

Ace of Spades estimates that Pelosi needs 24 of 26 undecideds to win. I think his count is slightly optimistic.

Jeffrey Anderson at NRO takes the current count and estimates that if all undecideds vote the way they did in November, ObamaCare loses 207-224.

Thanks to ObamaCare, the Democrats have lost Howard Stern.

Updated: Is Pelosi’s whip Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA 09) flipping from Yes to No? Ace of Spades says yes.

Updated 2: A nice rundown by Michael Barone. “We’re still seeing only one November no vote switched publicly to yes—that of Dennis Kucinich, one of two Democrats who opposed the House bill from the left (with the other, Eric Massa, no longer in the House). We’ve seen more November yes votes switching publicly to no.”

Potential ObamaCare Flip Target Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (FL 24)

March 17th, 2010

Last week we discussed Rep. Jason Altmire as a possible “No-to-Yes” flip vote on ObamaCare. The other two names listed were Bart Gordon (TN 06), who has announced his retirement, and Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (FL 24). Let us now turn to the latter.

How important is her vote? Obama set aside 15-20 minutes to personally pitch ObamaCare to her last week.

Rep. Suzanne Kosmas

According to her campaign website, “Suzanne has utilized her experience as a former small business owner to become a leading advocate for small business issues. She has introduced or sponsored legislation to ease the burden of health care costs for small businesses, to institute a payroll tax holiday, and to cut taxes for entrepreneurs.”

Hmmm, since ObamaCare would force many small businesses to provide insurance or pay penalties, I fail to see how you could vote for it and still be considered pro-small business.

She voted against Obama’s 2009 budget in April 2009, one of only 20 Democrats to do so, which might indicate either that she has some fiscal conservatives leanings, or perhaps only that she lives in a very competitive district and was given leave to vote No by Pelosi as political cover since she didn’t need Kosmas’ vote.

She voted No on ObamaCare last time, and explained her reasons thus (including worries about the staggering cost), but her website makes her sound like she would be willing to flip to a Yes vote.

Her District

In central Florida, District 24 sprawls from NASA to Disney World. (Insert your own Mickey Mouse joke here.) McCain edged Obama 51% to 49%, indication that it’s very much an evenly divided swing district, and very possible to flip Republican, especially if ObamaCare passes.

In 2008 she beat Republican Tom Feeney, largely on the basis of his ties with lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Kosmas herself is no stranger to tainted money; it was only two weeks ago that she decided to give the U.S. Treasury the $14,000 she got from Rep. Charlie Rangel, despite the fact that his problems paying his taxes came up well over a year ago.


Rep. Suzanne Kosmas’s $17,000 Friend

This time around, she’s attracted a well-funded political outsider as a Republican challenger: Craig Miller, the former CEO of Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse.

Miller is more likely to prove a formidable opponent than one Larry Sinclair, whose claim to fame (such as it is) is writing a book alleging that he “engaged in homosexual acts with then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama [in 1999], who during these trysts not only procured cocaine for the author, but also smoked crack cocaine while being fellated.”

Her Backers

The Sunlight Foundation noted that Kosmas (along with Altmire, Frank Kratovil, Scott Murphy, Glenn Nye, Michael McMahon and Betsy Markey) as “as potential vote-flippers on the health care reform bill [heavily] reliant on campaign funds from party leadership and online progressive activists,” as all seven list “Leadership PACs (political action committees) in the top three career industry donors.”

Other than Rangel, her backers include Michael G. Helton, the President of NASCAR (if I had to guess, I would estimate that the overwhelming majority of NASCAR enthusiasts are opposed to ObamaCare), who gave $2,400, as did two members of private equity fund The Tavistock Group. She seems to be favored by lawyers and real estate interests, as well as liberal feminist PAC EMILY’s List (she voted against the Stupak Amendment). She has less-obvious health care industry ties than Altmire, but Peter J. Licari, the president of Complete HealthCare Resources, gave her $1,000.

Also among her donors is a John W. Holloway, who gave her $2,400 and listed his occupation as “self-employed/poet.” Since the number of people who make even $2,400 a year off poetry is probably vanishingly small, I think we can safely assume that Mr. Holloway’s money comes from being the son of ABC Fine Wine & Spirits founder John D. “Jack” Holloway.

Contact Information

Here’s her main contact form.

Here’s a meeting request form.

Here’s here office contact information from her website.

Congresswoman Suzanne M. Kosmas
Washington D.C. Office
238 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2706
Fax: (202) 226-6299

Local Office
Congresswoman Suzanne M. Kosmas
1000 City Center Circle, 2nd Floor
Port Orange, FL 32129
Phone: (386) 756-9798
Fax: (386) 756-9903

Congresswoman Suzanne M. Kosmas
12424 Research Parkway, Ste 135
Orlando, FL 32826
Phone: (407)-208-1106
Fax: (407)-208-1108
Toll free number: 1-877-9-KOSMAS (1-877-956-7627)

Here’s a page to request a speaking engagement from Rep. Kosmas.

I would suggest trying to contact her through her reelection campaign website, but that page unhelpfully states “You cannot send more than 3 messages per hour. Please try again later,” despite my not having sent a single message. Methinks that many people unhappy with ObamaCare may have tried that route already…

Conclusion

Kosmas is probably more likely to flip to a Yes than Altmire who, since my post last week, has sounded more like he’s leaning toward the No camp. Kosmas, not being in the Stupak group, is going to be a harder sell to keep a No. However, should she cave-in on ObamaCare, Republicans should have an excellent chance of flipping her seat in November.

Steven Seagal: Pistolero?

March 16th, 2010

You may have noticed the (relatively) new show on A&E (A&E?) called Steven Seagal Lawman, which features his real-life work with the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office in Louisiana.


In Full-Bore Squinty Mode

Seagal is an easy person to dislike. As an actor, he’s a fine martial artist, and as a movie martial artist, he’s not 1/10th as engaging as Jackie Chan or Chuck Norris. Plus there was that scathing article in Spy magazine back in the 1990s that basically accused him of being an asshole phony who hung out with mafia figures. And don’t get me started on his music career.

So it’s easy view his job as a part-time police officer as some sort of publicity stunt. On the other hand, Seagal has evidently been doing this for 20 years, which is an absurdly long time to do something just as a publicity stunt, especially since Seagal was a big enough star in the late 80s and early 90s that he probably could have spent the time snorting blow off the backs of hookers instead. So more power to him.

Since Dwight over at Whipped Cream Difficulties has some sort of ironic attachment to Mr. Seagal (it was his fault I ended up watching Urban Justice, and lo it did stink unto the heavens), he insisted that we watch the premier episode of Steven Seagal Lawman, which is basically Cops except duller. But what made me bring it up for the purpose of this blog was the part during the show where Seagal offers some firearms training to a fellow officer, during which Seagal seemed to shoot some nice tight groups.


Dwight made me watch it. Learn from my misfortune.

Since I know noted firearms instructor Karl Rehn (who you may remember from his piece on the Ft. Hood shooter), I thought I would solicit his impressions on Mr. Seagal’s training technique.

Here are Karl’s comments:

Observations:

Seagal appears to be a good shot and does seem to understand the fundamentals.
The grip he uses is “state of the art” circa 1975 – not a bad grip but not as good as what 99% of the schools teach now.
The more upper body and grip strength you have the less technique matters when it comes to grip and stance.

Grip’s not as important as trigger manipulation and that’s basically what he was telling his student, and that’s what they were working on during the session.

You can always teach an accurate shooter to go faster; it’s harder to teach a fast, sloppy shooter to shoot accurately.

Minus a few points for the student not wearing eye protection when shooting – particularly since they were shooting steel plates for some of the drills. You never know with these TV things whether the student chose to wear his sunglasses on his hat instead of on his eyes because the producer told him to, or because he was having trouble seeing the sights through the dark glasses and they didn’t have any clear glasses with them, or nobody thought about it because there are still a lot of folks out there that don’t treat eye protection as mandatory when shooting.

So, in summary: Seagal’s firearms advice may not be state-of-the-art, but you could do worse.

FWIW, here’s another view of Seagal’s pistol prowess, this one from a first-hand perspective.