The following is from an email forwarded to me from the Southern Middle Tennessee Men's Club. Great information. I love the fact that Dear Harold beat out Maxine Waters and Barney Frank in the top 5 trip takers list...


Is It Unlawful or Unethical if Everybody Does It

Why would we elect Democrats or Republicans who are unethical?. Why aren’t they replaced? Is it because we may be guilty also and want our pork too? The Democrats have given House Majority Leader Tom DeLay hell over the past few weeks. The House acted in January to change the rules, but an investigation by the Political Money Line and Washington Post surfaced lots of dirt on both sides – Democrats and Republican alike. This article is a summary of the information disclosed.

Based on information disclosed by the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate, Members of Congress have received over $16 million ($16,168,014) during the last five years (from 2000 to winter 2005) traveling around the world at the expense of private organizations. About $8.8 million came from tax-exempt organizations (which are not required to disclose their donors to the public in the IRS Form 990 reports they must file) receive funds from lobbyists.
Data shows that 605 Members of Congress made 5,410 trips. Of these, Democrats took 3,025, Republicans took 2,375, and 10 trips were taken by others.
The following charts depict the number of trips taken and the cost per year; the 5 Member receiving the greatest amount and their Party; and the 5 Members making the most trips and their Party and the amount each spent.

Privately-funded Travel and Amount
Year # Trips Amount
2000 1015 $2,520,117
2001 1292 $3,774,860
2002 770 $2,485,801
2003 1253 $3,859,994
2004 789 $2,650,319
2005 part 286 $870,362

Members Receiving Most Gifts of Travel

Order Congress Member Party Amount
1. Sensenbrenner, James F. Republican $167,960
2. Green, Gene Democrat $165,436
3. Breaux, John B. Democrat $162,496
4. Wexler, Robert Democrat $161,599
5. Hinchley, Maurice Democrat $161,353

Note that after Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, the next four Members benefiting monetarily the most were Democrats. Yet, no Democrat has raised questions about any other Democrat. Their goal is to destroy House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Following through, Republican Sensenbrenner received the most gifts of travel (19 trips valued at $167,960). DeLay was 28th on the list (14 trips valued at $94,568). Rep. Harold Ford (D-Tenn.) traveled most (60 trips costing $61,000). Ford's expenses were less because his travels were within the United States.

Members Taking Most Trips

Order Congress Member Party # Trips
1. Breaux, John B. Democrat 61
2. Ford, Harold E. Jr. Democrat 60
3. Biden, Joseph R. Jr. Democrat 56
4. Waters, Maxine Democrat 52
5. Barney, Frank Democrat 51

Relative to the amount of travel, one can readily see that the Democrats took the most trips. Not a single Republican is listed in the top five.

DeLay is touted to be the most effective Majority Leader since the days when Democrats ruled. He has had the skills to resists and thwarts the Democrats' agenda. Since he continues to win re-election, Democrats are trying to take him down using their scandal machine.
DeLay is being excoriated by the Democrats because some of his trips, including one to Russia in 1997, appear to have been paid for at least in part by lobbyists, albeit through a non-profit organization. DeLay has said he had no knowledge of lobbyists funding such trips, which might have violated House ethics rules. Actually, the Democrats appear to be greater violators than DeLay and Republicans and the Democrats should look in the mirrow at all the fingers pointing back at Democrats.

If the Democrats are serious about "exposing" ethically questionable travel, there is plenty of data to investigate. For example:

· 127 + travel reports filed by members listed no destinations.
· 20 reports listed no trip sponsor.
· 106 reports listed no cost figures.
· 51 reports showed no purpose for the travel.
· 4 reports failed to show any travel dates.

Some members, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, has rushed to file amended reports after a Washington Post reporter inquired about it. She failed to report a 2004 trip to South Korea. She filed a full disclosure form "a few hours after the newspapers' inquiry" and sent a note to the ethics committee which said, "I did not know I was supposed to file these forms and I apologize for its lateness."

When comparisons with other Members' trips on the same dates for the same purposes are reviewed, one can readily visualize that:

· Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee's $10,667 trip in April 2002 probably was to Botswana.
· Representative Cal Dooley's $6,101 trip in November 2003 probably was to Costa Rica.
· Representative Jeff Flake's $1,520 tip in September 2001 was probably to Cuba.
· Representative Hilda Solis' $1,489 trip in February 2001 was probably to Mexico City.
· Representative Chris John's $2,385 trip in November 2000 was probably to Orlando, FL.
· Senator Conrad Burns' $2,396 trip in January 2002 was probably to Las Vegas, NV.

On 27 April 05, the House Republicans decided to rescind a rules change they has pushed through in January that led to the shutdown of the ethics committee, possibly clearing the way for consideration of charges against DeLay and others. The House Ethics Committee had not been operating because Democrats would not allow it to meet following the rules change that required an ethics complaint be dismissed if the evenly-divided panel deadlocked. With the dirt out on the Democrats, I doubt that the Democrats will proceed with serious ethics investigations.

Most Common Destination and Number of Visits
Order Destination # of Trips
1. USA 4,221
2. Mexico 131
3. Israel 131
4. Not specified 127
5. Italy 100

Organizations Spending Most

1. Aspen Institute $2,897,602
2. Ripon Society $694,042
3. American Israel Education Foundation $580,829
4. Int'l Management and Development Institute $525,406
5. Assn of American Railroads $384,735

Organizations spending the most for congressional travel, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, were the Aspen Institute ($2,897,602) and the Ripon Society ($694,042), both ideologically liberal organizations.

This information is based on an article by Cal Thomas and an investigative report by Political Money Line.

Ford feelin' the heat!

According to the previously mentioned "Draft Lincoln Davis" blog, they've already made the National Journal Hotline. Nashville has been buzzing with speculation over who would best beat Lincoln Davis (it is generally assumed that anybody but Corker could beat Ford).

Right now, the general consensus is Van would be the obvious choice as he is stronger statewide than the other candidates - as the real polling shows- and can beat Davis in his own district. Ed is counting on three time candidate Janice Bowling to pick up votes there, even though she was unable to convince 4th district voters she was a better option and got fewer votes than the Republicans above and below her on the ticket. Lincoln would beat Ed handily.

Corker might be able to squeak by in this scenario as the liberals would be less likely to vote for Davis than they would Ford and would need somebody to vote for.

If Davis does join the race, our Republican nominee may have a serious fight on their hands.

This scenario brings up the interesting prospect of finding a good Republican candidate for an open seat. There are a few names circulating about and nobody thinks Janice would pass up yet another shot. After endorsing Ed, Janice can kiss quite a bit of entrenched support goodbye. While I understand it is the state party's fault, the NRCC's fault, George W. Bush's fault, Van Hilleary's fault and probably God's fault that Janice could not convince a sufficient number of people to support her, many Republicans in the 4th District will likely decide to go with somebody that may have what it takes to garner the required support. Who that will be is a very good question.

NRO on Ford Jr.

http://www.nationalreview.com/miller/miller200504280759.asp

TENNESSEE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist isn't running for reelection, and Republicans stand a better-than-even chance of holding the seat. Their candidates currently include former congressman Ed Bryant, Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker, and Rep. Van Hilleary. Among Democrats, the favorite probably is congressman Harold Ford Jr. Bonus question: Does the rise of Sen. Barack Obama take some of the shine off Ford's bright-young-thing mojo?

I'd say so. Looks like the Dem's are beginning to agree.
http://draftlincoln.blogspot.com/

Ed Bryant- shades of gray.

After continuously touting a poll commissioned by Harold Ford Jr. as an indicator of success in the Republican Primary, Ed has continued his campaign of misleading supporters and the public at large by emailing articles and quotes from people that took Ed at face value - assuming like so many of used to, that he is an honest man.

Either Ed is ignorant of basic statistical sampling practices and has ignored the repeated requests of voters to set the record straight, or he is purposely misleading us.

In summary, Ed is either ignorant or lying. Neither characteristic should be found in our next Senator.

The only polling Ed has commissioned for the primary shows him right where Van's polling says he is -waaay behind. If the rumors are true that his money is drying up these attempts at deceiving the public will seem even more desperate.

Holy Moly! Bryant Calling the Kettle Black, again...

Lt. Governor Wilder supporter Ed Bryant came out swinging (flailing?) at Corker again today. We have all been amused at the scorched earth route Ed has been taking while trying to play the opposite "Statesman" role simultaneously.

Apparently Bryant has his undies in a twist over the recent hire of Chris LaCivita, one of the master-minds in the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth Campaign. Bryant has followed the lead of famed groups like MoveOn.org in bad mouthing Chris and doing his best to discredit one of the best Republican media guys in the country. Should Ed be worried about Chris working for Corker? Oh yeah. Ed doesn't stand a chance against Corker running the juvenile campaign he is running now.

Bryant goes on to blame Chris for the misconduct of one of his regional subordinates in the '02 campaign basically saying Chris was his boss and the responsibility is his. If we want to continue in that mind set, Senator Bill Frist was Chris' boss at the time and Bryant should lump him in as well. How far are they willing to go to beat up Chris?

If Bryant wants to run a scorched earth campaign, we can't stop him. But he needs to drop the charade of being a decent guy and admit to being the double talking politician his current campaign has proven himself to be. The first couple incidents it was easy enough to blame on his inexperienced campaign team. Now we have to assume Ed Bryant is either calling the shots and wants to run this campaign or is out to lunch. Neither scenario is good for the Party.

If Chris is responsible for the misdeeds of a subordinate, so is Frist.
If Bryant wants to beat up Bob Corker for planning a scorched earth campaign at some later date, he should back away from his current scorched earth campaign of distortion, double talk and innuendo.

Frist Doing the Right Thing

It looks as if Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist M.D. is determined to do the right thing concerning judicial filibusters. If he is able to push this through, I think he will gain a great deal of respect nationwide. He had been seen as somewhat soft or perhaps unwilling to hold a firm stance in the face of relentless Democrat rhetoric, but this issue seems to be disprooving that altogether.
http://tennessean.com/nation-world/archives/05/03/68651433.shtml?Element_ID=68651433

Bryant Supporters Explanation for Ed's Wilder Support

In response to the uproar over Bryant's repeated refusal to support his Party's nominee against Lt. Gov. John Wilder for the last decade or so, local Bryant apologists have begun saying it is an act of loyalty to the man that helped promote him for the position of U.S. Attorney.

I would have never made that connection, but that is what we are hearing from Bryant supporters. We all appreciate loyalty, and this is an argument that Burchett and Williams used to pacify some of their constituents, so maybe it will work for Ed.

But, when Burchett was claiming loyalty, many current Bryant supporters were claiming he had been bought. Guess they better start apologizing to Tim and Mike - unless it is suddenly ok...

In an effort to ease the process, here are the appropriate contact numbers:

Tim Burchett (615) 741-1766 Mike Williams (615) 741-2061

You guys have some calls to make.

The Politics of Poverty

One of the better articles on the subject that I've seen this year:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/ac/

Implicit in compassionate conservatism was the epochal paradigm shift that
is now all but explicit. Taken together, compassionate conservatism's elements
added up to a sweeping rejection of liberal orthodoxy about how to help the
poor, which a half century's worth of experience had discredited. If you want to
help the poor, compassionate conservatives argued, liberate them from dependency
through welfare reform; free their communities from criminal anarchy through
activist policing; give them the education they need to succeed in a modern
economy by holding their schools accountable; and let them enjoy the rewards of
work by taxing their modest wages lightly--or not at all.

Ethics Question- When is it ok to be gray?

The talk at the coffee shop last night was mostly split between the Wilder/Bryant problem and the passage of the ethics bill. The conversation moved into the gray area of political spin -namely, where do you draw the line in order to maintain a respectable ethical standard?

Our conversations usually aren't very heated as this group of friends are friends first and political junkies second. Represented were several Van supporters, two leaning towards Ed and one convinced that Corker could not lose since he will out fundraise the others period, and likely by a large margin.

The question we kicked around most was whether it seemed hypocritical for someone that does not miss an opportunity to tout his faith and push the following vision of himself:

His quiet, but firm demeanor mirrors the stature and statesmanship
Tennessee expects from her U.S. Senators. (from Ed's website)

then allow and even push his his supporters to trumpet the result of Harold Ford Jr.'s latest poll -which has no bearing on the Republican Primary at all. Is it proper to use something of that nature to advance your cause when you know it is not accurate for your purposes? Is it proper to use your media contacts to amplify those inaccuracies then have your supporters email the stories all over the place? That's hard to judge, I mean really, this is politics and politics isn't for sissies, but portraying yourself as a stand-up, do good moral leader then acting like a Ford probably will only diminish your reputation and appeal. While none of us felt like saying Ed is "bearing false witness," as a group we felt is was beneath him and a little slimy. The good news is, such actions this early on make it easier to define the character of his campaign.


The Tennessee Journal
The Weekly Insider's Newsletter on Tennessee Government, Politics, and Business
Vol. 31. No.15April 11, 2005

"A poll conducted March 22-24 for Ford by Global Strategy Group found him in close races with three Republican contenders in hypothetical general election matchups -- all within the margin of error. A memo detailing parts of the poll was given to Democratic fundraisers. But it also fell into the hands of the Ed Bryant campaign, which circulated it publicly because it included a GOP primary question that showed Bryant leading with 35% to Van Hilleary's 26% and Bob Corker's 15%. Beth Harwell wasn't included in the survey. Of course it was a general election poll, and the sub-sample of Republicans totaled only 190. Perhaps a bigger problem than the sample size though, was that the poll was geographically stratified for the general election rather than the primary. About a third of the voters in the last non-presidential general election, in 2002, were in East Tennessee. About 47% of Republican primary voters were."

Buzz of the Day- Bryant / Wilder Connection

Didn't see this one coming, and it is taking a long time for me to push the "publish" button because I wish it weren't true. It is too important to ignore though, so here we go. This is all over Nashville today. Apparently, Ed Bryant has a history of not supporting Republican opposition to Lt. Gov. Wilder. I know he was not publicly supporting Ron Stallings, but if the buzz is true, he turned down several opportunities to support a popular, well qualified Republican in favor of the guy seen in the infamous "pickin' and grinning" video clip made famous by Steve Gill. If you can't support the G.O.P in your stronghold, why should we expect you to shake things up in D.C.? Fair question, I think.

I can't imagine the West Tennesseans that worked so hard for Ron and his predecessors will be very pleased as details emerge. For that matter, anyone bothered by the actions of "turncoats" Tim Burchett (R+/-) and Mike Williams(R+/-) for not electing a Republican Lt. Governor after the historic Republican State Senate takeover should at least take a moment to consider this.

It's always best to look at these things from different angles. One theory is that Ed's reasoning was probably that he didn't want to offend the Democrats in his old district by supporting his Party's candidate since he would be running soon and will be using those folks as part of his base vote. Luckily for so many State Reps and Senators, Van and Beth did not abandon the Party. They were all over the place working to build the base and elect Republicans. Granted, Ed did attend events in East TN with other GOP notables. I'm pretty sure Corker only leaves Chattanooga to campaign for himself, although he has sent money.

It is not fair to say that if Ed had stood up for a fellow Republican, we would be calling Ron Ramsey "Lt. Governor" now, but it is fair to ask why he chose not to support his party's candidate publicly like so many others in and out of the district did. Until I see some proof, I choose not to believe that Ed actively campaigned against the Republican candidates, but he certainly opted not to help. This is definitely a "say it ain't so" moment for the Party in general.

Somebody should call Ed's campaign office and ask them why Ed has never supported the Republican running against Wilder. It is a fair question that needs to be asked. In an area where Ed is strongest, he decided not to help. If it turns out that he was actively working against the G.O.P. it will be a major blow to his senatorial efforts. Might help him in Knoxville though...

If the buzz is not true, I hope Ed clears it up soon and I will be very, very pleased to say it wasn't correct. We need to be able to depend on our leaders to support the base, our ideals and the Party. Part of that is helping others of likemind rise to leadership positions so they too can take up the banner and fight the good fight with you.

--an email just came in simply saying Ed didn't like Ron Stallings or the others personally, and chose to use his time elsewhere. I think that would be easier for me to understand, although Ron Stallings is a great guy and would have been a noteworthy Senator, not to mention the benefit of retiring Wilder.

Hopefully, Ed Bryant will address this issue so we can put it to bed early.


Update: Apparently, this is old news. Don't know why it is just now coming to the attention of the political class in Nashville, but according to Jeff Ward at TeamGOP.org, this was known last summer- rather surprising that it wasn't mentioned then. Jeff took the time to talk about this with Ron Stallings:

I spoke with my friend Ron Stallings today and told him what was going on, Ron told me that he"understood Ed's neutral position in my race, I don't have any hurt feelings at all.

He [Ed Bryant] just did not want to work against Wilder."

http://www.teamgop.org/blog/

It is an interesting read. I agree with the statement that you can't compare Ed apples to apples with Burchett or Williams, but the gripe (as I have heard it) was that if Ed had supported Ron or the Republican candidates before him, the Burchett/Williams debacle may never have happened. The assumption being Ed could have put them over the top and helped retire Wilder. Don't know if that is true, but if Ed is as strong in West TN as his people say he is, it could well be.

This type of behavior is what makes it so hard for the Party to recruit good candidates. Why go through the pains of running for office if the "Republican" star in your area can't be bothered to help? Can you justify inaction at home by saying he worked elsewhere or that, "President Bush didn't get involved in that race either...?"

An Opportunity To Make A Lasting Change In TN Politics.

Memphis, like most urban areas, has been largely controlled by the Democrat machine for years. For a number of reasons, mainly class envy and fear monograms by the Dem's, urban areas continually elect Democrats and continually blame Republicans for their plight. I must admit, the Dem's are pro's when it comes to conning their constituents.

If urban areas want to see a change, they must start by electing leaders with new ideas. The common street definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. Luckily, many people are waking up to this fact. The Ford scandals are helping to shine a light on it in Memphis as is a fantastic Republican candidate for State Senate in Memphis - Mary Ann McNeil. They are holding a special election in May to replace retiring Dem, Roscoe Dixon.

McNeil is a proven administrator who holds a masters degree in education from
the University of Memphis. Her career in teaching in both city and county
schools culminated in her role as Principal at Crosswind Elementary in
Collierville where she spent 10 years. As such she received the PTA’s Tennessee
Outstanding Principal Award in 2003 and the Life Achievement Award from the
national PTA. Since retiring she has worked as a school improvement consultant
with the Tennessee Department of Education. As a dedicated leader, McNeil has
served as a member of the Collierville Chamber of Commerce, Leadership
Collierville, the Brooks Museum League, Republican Women of Purpose, the Shelby
County Education Association. (from Shelby County GOP website)

What they did not mention is the fact that Mary is a black woman that knows the needs and the people of the district intimately. The fact that we have a strong, well respected conservative black woman running for state senate in an urban area is cause to celebrate. Bringing a positive change to the district requires new ideas and new leadership. We have that and more in Mary Ann McNeil. What a great opportunity to help build a stronger state. Whether you and I agree on anything else, this is one issue all Republicans can and should support. Please contact the Shelby County Party at the link below and help elect Mary Ann McNeil to the State Senate.

A couple more Republican Senators and we might actually have the majority...

http://www.shelbygop.org/wordpress/?p=96

Hilleary Comments On Ford's Poll Numbers

In a recent email sent to supporters (found here), Van took the time to set the record straight on the Ford poll Ed Bryant and his staffers have been heralding. I'm more than a little surprised that Ed would try to pull a fast one like this, but I did notice after reviewing his statements that he has been careful to label the poll as being commissioned by Ford. Still, his supporters don't seem to mind the farce and continue to prop up a false poll, they most likely aren't familiar with polling practices so I won't hold them accountable. The only poll recently taken with proper weighting to be relevant in the Republican Primary shows Van with a commanding lead.

For what it is worth, I admire Van for taking the high road here and not taking shots at Ed for propagating what is basically a lie. It could be considered gray and I guess Ed justifies it by saying he is just referencing a poll and leaves the part out about it not being anywhere near statistically relevant to our primary. That just doesn't seem like the principled guy I thought Ed to be, it seems dishonest and deceitful.

Here are the most important parts of the email for anyone not clicking the link above:

And finally, in case you missed it, just to set the record straight....

The Bryant campaign has been touting a recent general election poll done by Democrat Harold Ford, Jr. The poll was taken of a sampling of general election voters that may have shown meaningful information for any future general election match-up, but did not render meaningful information for a primary election match-up, even though the Bryant campaign has suggested otherwise. The sample of general election voters, when used for a Republican Primary result, under-sampled East Tennessee, over-sampled West Tennessee, and had an overall sample of Republican voters so small that no statistically sound or meaningful result could be rendered for the Republican Primary on a statewide level.

The Tennessee Journal noted that in its April 11 issue, calling attention to the fact that the Ford poll was weighted for the general election - which gives East Tennessee only one-third of the vote contribution - and was not weighted for the primary election, in which East Tennessee would get nearly half the vote. That incorrect weighting would naturally reward a West Tennessee candidate.The paragraph below is excerpted from The Tennessee Journal.

The Tennessee Journal
The Weekly Insider's Newsletter on Tennessee Government, Politics, and Business
Vol. 31. No.15April 11, 2005

"A poll conducted March 22-24 for Ford by Global Strategy Group found him in close races with three Republican contenders in hypothetical general election matchups -- all within the margin of error. A memo detailing parts of the poll was given to Democratic fundraisers. But it also fell into the hands of the Ed Bryant campaign, which circulated it publicly because it included a GOP primary question that showed Bryant leading with 35% to Van Hilleary's 26% and Bob Corker's 15%. Beth Harwell wasn't included in the survey. Of course it was a general election poll, and the sub-sample of Republicans totaled only 190. Perhaps a bigger problem than the sample size though, was that the poll was geographically stratified for the general election rather than the primary. About a third of the voters in the last non-presidential general election, in 2002, were in East Tennessee. About 47% of Republican primary voters were."

While I probably would have been a little bit angrier than the Hilleary Campaign at the Bryant spin machine, I appreciate Van being a statesman. Ultimately, we rely on our leaders to be honest and forthright with us. I'm glad we can count on Van for that.

Will The TN Gubernatorial Candidates Please Stand Up?

The clock is ticking and we don't have anyone to run against Bredesen for governor. Sure, there are rumors that he will vacate to run for Senate but if the other rumors about his Presidential/Vice-Presidential aspirations are true, the Senate has proven itself a poor platform from which to run. Hopefully, Bill Frist will break that streak (although he will be out of office at that point), but it is unlikely a freshman Democrat Senator could.

Right now the the only people really talking about a potential run are Scooter Clippard and Jim Henry. I don't know Scooter, but I hear he is a likeable and wealthy guy. He better be very wealthy to run a statewide race with no name recognition. Jim Henry is another likeable guy, but I really don't think he is known statewide to a large degree. His biggest negatives are ties to the income tax movement and his decision to not actively support the nominee when he lost the Republican primary in '02. There are large pockets of grassroots supporters that give him a healthy portion of blame for Bredesen being elected. His positives are he fights hard and mean ( required against Bredesen I think) and knows more about state government than most of our existing legislators. If he and Van could have a meeting of the minds he might be able to pull it off. I just wonder if he could win when so many conservative grassroots folks are upset with him and Bredesen probably has not offended the squishy moderates that elected him. Jim would be a good governor I think, but it would take a terrific effort to get there.

Beth Harwell would be a fantastic choice, if she could be persuaded to run. In addition to being a very well spoken, well educated woman, she just epitomizes the Republican Party today. I'm not aware of any baggage from previous campaigns and her positives are enviable. It would take a big effort to raise her name ID, but that is what campaigns are for. It just seems like a good idea to me. It is easy to see Beth leading the charge for a House majority, a real Senate majority and to take back the Governor's seat. We are overdue for a Republican Revolution and Beth Harwell seems the likeliest to lead the crusade.

I don't think Ed or Van should consider leaving the Senate race to run against Bredesen. This won't win me brownie points with either, but I don't think Bredesen has screwed up enough yet for Hilleary to be seen as the white knight, particularly since Bredesen has successfully implemented many of Van's ideas. Tenncare will be interesting, but I'm not convinced it will get big enough. Ed seems better suited to legislative activities than to executive and I think he has said that himself. That is not meant as a slight for those sensitive souls offended earlier. I'm trying to play nice. Ed would be a very good governor and would be well loved and could help redeem the sins of the last republican administration. I'd love to see Van as governor. His ideas and passion for improving education and healthcare would be a tremendous plus for our sate, but I just don't think this is the time.

There are a couple other names out on the grapevine. Mark Norris was often mentioned until the last month or two. Apparently he has put an end to the talk and has no intention of running. I'm hoping Mark has a long political career in TN. We need good guys like him.

Ron Ramesy would be a good candidate but he has said no so many times he may have talked himself out of it. I don't really know much about Ron other than he is leading the ethics probe against Ford and is said to be a decent man that is fighting the good fight.

Just my opinions... ;)

Thoughts on the SEC

The BFB blog seems hell bent on magnifying mole-hills in regard to the SEC and Hilleary's role as National Committeeman. This one is particularly funny since 99.9995% or more Tennessee Republicans don't know what the SEC is or does. I personally think the SEC needs rejuvenation - particularly after watching their glacial pace at taking action when that racist schmuck snuck on the GOP ballot for congress out in west TN and their efforts with the RINO senators backing Wilder over a well qualified Republican. There are, however, a bunch of great people on the SEC and I believe the group is moving in the right direction overall.

I understand Ryder has has his undies in a twist since there was resistance to re-writing the party constitution to allow him to serve more than the allotted time as committeeman and I also understand Ryder is backing Bryant. I'm not saying Ryder is responsible for the rumors or the groundswell (read mole-hill) that the BFB guys are trying to make out of this, but it seems that this stems from a few people close to him. Personally I think Ryder is a good guy and has done great work for the party, but you can't just go changing the rules anytime they don't suit you.

What I am saying is that the position of National committeeman is not a vehicle to drive dollars into a Senate campaign particularly in a contested primary. Anyone that believes that has not done their homework. It is a position in which you can help shape the national agenda and strengthen the party as a whole. I suspect that is why Van ran for and was elected to the position. A dear friend on the SEC told me this whole thing was silly and most members were blindsided and a bit taken aback by the accusations from the Bryant camp. I'm under the impression that this is actually helpful to the Hilleary team because it puts Ed in a bad light.
The SEC as a groups has historically done just about anything to avoid conflict or controversy and injecting a trial balloon like this doesn't seem likely to win many new supporters.

So far, there has been no official word from Bryant on this. Kinda makes you wonder if he cares. If he doesn't, and there is no legitimate reason why he should that I have been able to discern, it seems disingenuous for him to allow his supporters to make such silly accusations. I've talked to a few friends about this looking for a reason for Van to back away and I really can't find anything. There may well be a good reason, but right now it just seems like sour grapes from a few people that didn't get their way when they wanted to re-write existing rules to suit their purposes.

The reality of this race is that it will cause division, big and small, in the party. It is fair to say that Ed and Van are well liked by the vast majority of the party and we now have to choose. Those of us that have chosen to be vocal about the decision will meet resistance from the opposing side. Ultimately, Ed and Van will come together to support whoever the nominee is as will their supporters. I really believe that. The problem we face is, how do we actively support our chosen candidate without giving the dem's an excessive amount of ammo? My answer to that is to decide now to come together and support the conservative nominee.

In the governor's race last time there was no coming together after the primary. Jim Henry didn't make any effort to clean up his mess and it didn't look like Van reached out that much. I'm no insider, but that was the impression I was under at the time. I was in Knoxville then and it seemed to me that Bredesen's work was largely done for him by Jim Henry. All he had to do was continue and amplify the rather mean and baseless attacks Henry started and write himself a few million dollar checks and viola. More on Jim later. I actually like him.

There must be some friction now between Ed and Van, but I really can't see either one not coming together to support the winner in the primary. Ed's reputation has always been that of a quiet, good hearted fellow and I can't believe he will let his media guy go too much farther in their attempts to position Ed as an aggressive campaigner. Van has a history of not using negative information about his opponents, preferring to take the statesman route instead.
(I know this because I dated a Van staffer at one time - that's all the personal info you get today- and no, I'm not currently single so quit asking... :) )

Anyway, this SEC stuff just doesn't seem like Ed to me. He must know the limitations of the position and it is hard to imagine him being concerned about it. Either way, I'd guess the attention benefits Van since most of the few people currently paying attention seem to be thinking the effort to remove Van is unseemly and unwarranted. Time will tell, but I suspect VH would have resigned the post anyway due to time constraints of an active Senate campaign, full work load and most importantly, family life.

Thanks for visiting. It's just my opinion, relax. ;)

Will TN Political Blogs Make A Difference In 2006

One of the more interesting occurrences since starting this blog is a more realistic understanding of the the blogging world and who lurks therein. I started this blog on a whim and seem to have upset the grand order of things. It is really fascinating how easy it is to upset the conjectural navel gazers that make up the majority of TN conservative blogs. My opinion of most bloggers before starting this was not really that high, my fascination was with the amount of buzz a blogger could generate having no real knowledge base or expertise. We have kids in their mid 20's quoting Sun Tzu and 50+ year old seasoned politicos worrying about it. How the hell did that happen?

Can the "blogosphere" change the course of the political game in 2006? Yes, I think it can, and here is why:

Politicians and their staffers, former staffers and wannabe staffers are very paranoid people as a whole. They assume if they are reading something there must be thousands of others doing the same. This is FALSE in all but a few rare exceptions. It is the buzz and spin from the politicos that give blogs their power. Major catch 22.

"Did you see what so and so said about Rep., Sen., Candidate X?"
"No, I'll go see..." "Hey Staffer Jane, look at this...", "Oh, no..."

Suddenly the "Plaza" is all a buzz over what blogger X said. The reality is only a few nervous politicians and a few bored bloggers have actually read it and give a darn about it.

Most of our bloggers have little stats links that let us see the traffic they get every day, not very clever if you want to act like a bigshot. Very few blogs get more than a couple hundred hits a day. There are obvious exceptions, but most are pretty low volume operations that generate their traffic via links on other low volume sites. It seems very much like an unsuccessful Amway operation. A bunch of would be journalists interlinking and propping each other up through daily visits to see what blogger copied and pasted which interesting article from Drudge so they can mention it and paste a link into their blog, earn brownie points and hope against hope they get a link back. A tremendous waste of electrons in my opinion, but hey, if it keeps them off the streets between Star Trek Conventions (thanks to Jeff Ward for that one), so much the better.

That really cracks me up. I recently was at a College Republican meeting where the bulk of the conversation, before and after was "how many hits did your blog get today" and "if only I could get a link from ..." If these are the guys shaping the political atmosphere in Tennessee, we are all in trouble. Nothing wrong with blogging or wanting to be popular for what you write, but just because somebody took 5 minutes to set up a blog does not make them an expert at anything- me included.

Can a blog be a powerful tool - absolutely, but the ability to share your navel ponderings doesn't mean you should -or that anyone else will take you as seriously as you do. Most of the blog talk that I hear in my circles is poking fun at how serious some of these boys take themselves. I had no idea how true that was. I actually turned off the comments area of this site (once I was told how by a new friend) because of some rather spooky comments a couple visitors left. Some of these guys really should seek treatment :) push for the big dosage...

I suppose my point is, you should not be looking for hard news here or in in most blogs. This blog is an effort by one person with opinions and bias that dictate what I write ( not all that dissimilar from CBS, I suppose). If you want to base your political decisions on the opinion of file clerks, washed up political hacks, has-beens or someone you don't know from Adam or Eve then go right ahead. Doesn't seem like a smart thing to do to me.

My advice is simply to watch the candidates, speak with them when you can, do your research and go with your gut. Take the blogs seriously if you want, but keep in mind that the opinions you read could be coming from this guy. It is most likely worse...

Will the "blogosphere" change the course of the political game in 2006? Yes, I think it can, and here is how:

If the candidates blog it could be interesting and attract a significant audience.
If it does not attract and maintain a significant visitor base it should be discontinued. It is better not to start than start then stop. A daily candidate blog before July '06 is an inefficient use of time. Go weekly.

I find it hard to believe that unaffiliated blogs like mine or those of ex-staffer/volunteers will really play much of a role. There is just no reason to take us seriously or believe we know something that isn't in the mass media. It will be fun to launch the occasional salvo at the opposing team, but honestly we aren't breaking news by cutting and pasting articles from rural newspapers.

I agree with Bill Hobbs that certain candidates should blog. It is foolish to take time away from more important issues (i.e. fundraising), but if you can attract and maintain an audience you should be able to convert them into donors and voters.

There are certain personality types that just aren't dynamic enough for this medium. I suppose their managers could do it for them, but who really can get excited about that. I believe charismatic candidates can benefit greatly from this medium, but they typically are very aggressive in utilizing all media available.

I appreciate Hobbs' energetic promotion of the medium, and he is right to predict a glorious future for it -assuming those with a talent for writing do and the bulk of those that think they do but don't, refrain. There is a great chance that I fit in the latter group, but the beauty of this blog is, I didn't invite you :)

When I started this, I did not intend to spend this much time with it. Blogging can be a lot of fun and a good release from the daily grind. That said, I'm going to sign off now. I've got to arrange some black helicopter flyovers near certain Nashville law firms and Memphis shanties.


I know, I should not be enjoying this quite so much....

Beth Harwell

Some people seem to think this is an anti-Bryant blog. It certainly is not meant to be. In fact, if it is anti-anything it would be anti-losing Frist's seat to a democrat. I've obviously got a strong view on who can do the best job and that seems to offend those with opposing views. Fine by me.

Since so many people seem to care about what I write at the moment, it seems like a good time to mention a candidate I adore - Beth Harwell. She is a very knowledgeable and effective spokesperson for the party and has been dueling Dem's in Nashville for almost 20 years. Tennessee Republicans' would be very wise to persuade her to run for Governor. Her bio is amazing, she is a fantastic public speaker and championed the November conservative victories in TN.

With a well funded liberal and two former congressmen it will be all but impossible to gain traction in the Senate race. I believe Beth would make a fantastic Senator, but we truly need somebody like her to oppose Bredesen. I don't want to come across as trying to clear the field, and it must seem that way to some but Beth just embodies what we need to win that race and then govern effectively.

From a logical standpoint, it will take Beth quite a bit more money than Van or Ed to run an effective race, she just isn't as well known. Not quite Corker money, but she will need considerably more than Ed or Van. Corker has to raise at least twice as much as Van just to counter the negatives he has built up.

Beth has a great fundraiser and will likely post impressive numbers once they report, but it is just difficult to imagine them being able to out raise Van and Ed by any significant margin.

The tactic that wins it for her is Ed and Van beat the stuffing out of Corker and themselves (maybe not so far fetched judging by the stir the BFB guys and I have created the past few days), but it seems like a very long shot. Check her out at www.bethharwell.org

If you agree that we need someone like Beth to take back the Governor's mansion please drop her a note. Whatever she decides, Tennessean's are blessed to have people like Beth Harwell willing to serve us.

I really do believe that once Ed or Van has a significant financial advantages the other will back out. I know it sounds odd, but I think it will happen. For what it is worth, if it is Van on the short end of the stick, I'll see if the BFB guys have room for one more :)

Party Division

I'm amazed at the number of emails I recieved after such a short period online. The encouragement is appreciated. There were, however, two unimpressed individuals concerned that if we (conservatives)continued to point out the liberal/moderate positions of former mayor Corker, we would split the party and allow a democrat to take the seat.

B.S.

I think Corker will do as much for the Republican Party in Tennessee as Don Sundquist did. Speaking of which, anyone want to make odds on Corker's name being thrown about during all the forthcoming Sundquist indictments/hearings? Rumors at the "Plaza" are rampant, but this one seems to have staying power.

I vote partyline and would probably force myself to vote for Bob if he won the nomination, but I'd expect Sundquist type results.


Looks like the Blogging for Bryant guys are chasing their tails trying to figure out who I am. Kinda funny! I am rather amused with the attention, but sad that they are impuning somebody I've never met. Not so smart guys -pun intended.

I would not have a problem casting a ballot for Ed should he prevail in the primary. I think he is a good decent man with honorable intentions. But, since we have a choice, I'd rather choose somebody that can make a difference and fight for Tennessee values. Ed just doesn't strike me as a leader. I'm sure he is a great lawyer, but he is truly lacking in the charisma department. Based on his record in the House, I'm not so certain he would be able to overcome the liberal spin and affect positive change in the judiciary as he wants to do. I hate to back track, but the Lewisnky foul-up is evidence in how Ed handles high profile national issues. He certainly was not alone in that debacle,but his actions did play a major role.

I do need to admit that the rumor I alluded to regarding the current Bryant team being responsible for the BFB site was not quite correct. One of the authors outed himself as a former staffer and future campaign volunteer. Between this guy and Mrs. Bowling, Ed is really attracting a class team. I know, that was rude, and I apologize. I wish their actions didn't reflect so badly on a man I have true respect for, but the reality is that they do.

Finally, I would like to offer condolences to any other people the Bryant team decides to smear because of my decision to speak my mind.

Corker - a conservative?

While it is quite a bit of fun to poke fun at Bryant's handful of zealots, the big fight is going to come down to Hilleary and Corker. My problem with Corker is his duplicity. Can you truly be a conservative if you raise taxes to fund programs that are at best unnecessary?

The word that comes to mind to label a person who spearheaded countless development programs paid for with taxpayer money which resulted in raising his net worth dramatically by increasing the value of his commercial property holdings isn't "conservative", it is "crook." You really aren't supposed to use government in such a manner - unless your last name is Ford...

If your current stance on abortion is dramatically different than your position the last time you ran a statewide race, are we to assume a conversion or diversion?

If I were a betting woman, I'd say the moneyed moderates which comprise Corker's base are hoping for personal gain and have little interest in advancing the GOP or conservative ideals. I predict quite a few interesting connections will come to light in this area.

Blogging for Bryant?

A friend emailed a link to a blog dedicated to advancing the level of spin from the Bryant camp.

This is a must read for anyone interested in revisionist history and watching sycophants in action. While it does not seem to be attracting much notice, there is a rumor going around that it is the brainchild of a Bryant staffer and a family member. Isn't that classy.

Bryant, for those of you that care to recall, was the prosecutor that allowed Monica Lewinsky to become a media sensation and allowed the left to characterize the Clinton Impeachment as nothing but a sex scandal. Ed may be a nice guy, but his inability to handle the situation properly dealt a major blow to the conservative movement -pun intended. He really botched that for us.

The Blogging for Bryant guys seem to be demanding Van Hilleary layout why he should be our next senator. Apparently these mental giants don't know that is what a campaign does and what Van, Ed Corker and presumably Beth Harwell are busy doing. With 18 months before the primary, I think everybody has time to make their case. Are these guys as freaked out about this as they seem?

My favorite brain fart from Team Bryant is the attempted slam on Hilleary that he lost the 2002 Gubernatorial race. Funny thing is, Bryant could not beat his opponent -uber moderate Lamar Alexander- in a Republican primary. If memory serves, Van won his primary contest and went on to to lose the closest gubernatorial race in history, thanks in large part to a bunch of moderate dunderheads that believed the Jim Henry/ Phil Bredesen spin that Harvard boy Phil would ride in and save Tenncare. That worked out great didn't it...

I've heard plenty of spin about Lamar being an political icon and that Bryant put up a massive fight in the face of overwhelming odds. That is a big load of BS. At the time, that simply wasn't true. He was a former, ex- had been politico with multiple failed attempts at higher office, from President on down. If Bryant could not overcome the moderate wing of the party against somebody- in a Republican Primary- with a very long track record of recent political failure what chance does he have now? Lamar has used his position well and has redeemed and glossed over many past insufficiencies. Now he is the icon, not then. Another weak argument from Ed.

Actually, I don't really think much of this stuff comes from Ed. I'm thinking it is the amateur team he has put together. It isn't their fault this is their first big race, but Ed should have loosened the purse strings and retained some professionals like Van and Bob. Even Beth had the sense to get Brian Kaegi early - a very smart move.

It is a beautiful day here in Music City- I'm off to the park.

Q1 money update

Grapevine:

Corker at 617,000 (3 months)
Hilleary 387,000 (after 2 weeks)
Bryant 386,000 (3 months)

Corker is on pace to easily eclipse Bryant. Hilleary has yet to hold a fundraiser and has caught up in a couple weeks so it looks like Ed will fall by the wayside sooner than expected. Don't expect him to go willingly though. Friends and family will have to ease him out. This next quarter will be the biggie of the year I think.

Corker knows that he has to raise several times more than Van to be competitive. He has way too much baggage including pro-choice gaffs, rasing taxes and an opportunistic streak in his Chattanooga business dealings. It will take a big pile of cash to keep those things covered and I'm not sure that it can be done these days. The internet will play some role in keeping the truth out there.

Hilleary and Bryant Camps Reporting Roughly Equal for Q1

According to http://www.wbir.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=24940 both the Bryant and Hilleary campaigns brought in about $400,000 in Q1, 2005. No word yet on the Corker campaign but they had better bring in at least $400,000 to have any credibility with those of us currently watching the fight. It's one thing to have all the Haslams in the state (including those in diapers) max out to you and another to have real people ante up.

I haven't heard it mentioned yet, but when you look at the time invested in raising money this quarter, Van accomplished in a couple of weeks what took Ed three months to do. Next quarter reports should be telling. I'm predicting Ed will feel some serious pressure not to be a spoiler here. The grapevine has been saying his campaign is running scared and there is ample evidence to that effect, but it will take a massive fundraising effort from Team Van to get Ed out of the race in my opinion.

Janice Bowling on Bryant's Team

Just checked my email and caught the notice from the ever spastic Bryant for Senate campaign touting an endorsement from Janice Bowling. This is the lady that was handed a conservative district and pre-made grassroots team and managed to lose badly two times in a row to a crooked "blue dog". If memory serves, more than 50,000 voters in the districted voted for the conservative at the top of the ticket then chose not to vote for Janice the first go 'round. Last cycle was even worse.

I don't know if it was the quilt she wore all summer the first campaign, those god-awful jingles or her inabilty to be honest that lost it for her. I do know she offended most of the conservative women I know in the district with her clownish antics and gossip mongering. I guess Ed doesn't know much about the 4th district if he truly thinks Janice is respected there. Probably should have had his numbers people look at how poorly she did the last two cycles. She underperformed the top and lower levels of the ticket each time. I'm not sure what all it takes to do that, but whatever it is, I would not want it associated with me!

I'm not surprised she is backing Bryant since she has been blaming everybody and thier pets for her losses, but truth be told, she would not have won the last primary if it weren't for Van Hilleary. He stayed out of it as much as possible because he knew both opponents even though her opponent had far better credentials.

New blogger on the scene!

After wading through the tons of sensless ramblings currently called the Tennessee Blogosphere, I decided it may be fun to throw my perspective into the mix. There are very few female bloggers on the scene and even fewer conservative female bloggers with political insight and training - sounds like a niche to me.

I've worked on a number of conservative campaigns in Tennessee and Georgia (my home state) and have lived in Nashville for 6 years. Currently working on my MBA and work with several national issue groups on the policy side of things.

Thanks for visiting, tell your friends and come back often!!