Occupy Orange County: 'Get Money Out of Politics'

My initial reaction to Occupy Orange County was that it was almost like a tea party. But after turning out for the protest march at the Irvine Civic Center yesterday, I'm going walk back that analogy just a bit. The Orange County protests definitely have a suburban feel to them, but activists have established an encampment similar to New York and other major occupations. (See: "Irvine council lets Occupy group stay overnight.") And along with the tents comes a wider diversity of kooks and hippies, bolstered by a lot of Democrat-Socialist and communist-conspiracy-mongers. These are hardly limited government types.

I arrived around 11:45am, just in time for the group of over 100 protesters to begin their march at Harvard Avenue and Alton Parkway. Irvine City Councilman and former Democrat presidential candidate Larry Agran gave the movement his blessings. (See: "Occupy Orange County Morale Still High and Gaining Supporters.") And if there was one theme I noticed, it was the overall sense of conspiratorial one-world government and "End the Fed" ideology. Some folks are warning about "ideotic conspiracies." Perhaps ASFL progressives will take after their own "morans."

Here's the scene at parking lot at the Irvine Civic Center. I'm reminded of William Jacobson's bumper sticker coverage. This guy's car is classic. Notice the "Obama 2012" sticker in the window, right next to "UNIONS = JOBS." And not to mention the obligatory "Bush Lied People Died." And a couple of recent ones as well, like "America's 99% Solution":

If you're sporting "Millions of Dead Cops" bumpers stickers, I'm not sure if pulling up in front of the Irvine Police Station (at the Civic Center) is a good idea. It's a free country, I guess:

The procession gets under way at the corner of Alton and Harvard:

There were more "End the Fed" types than "End Israeli Apartheid" activists, but this guy was clearly of the latter variety:

At the information tents:

Now walking West on Alton toward Jamboree:

The Democrat-Socialists:

Lots of anti-Federal Reserve protesters:

Protesters were chanting: "You. Are. The 99 Percent! You. Are. The 99 Percent!"

I'm seeing more of this, anti-work ideologies: "Jobs Are Not the Answer." Seriously?

People before profits, ad nauseum:

Heading back over to Harvard, there's the encampment on the corner. You've got the suburban vibe:

Sitting on the corner is this old-timer with the "Remember Wisconsin" sign. He's holding forth on how Occupy Wall Street is the country's last chance to save democracy:

He's a dreamer:

Is this idealism, or fearmongering? I guess if Martin Luther King, Jr., said it, that's cool:

Now moving over by the information table:

That's Kyle on the right, the spokesman in charge yesterday morning. Interesting guy. He said two weeks ago, he'd never been involved in politics. He's talking to the woman who had a lot of questions. She was sympathetic to Occupy Wall Street but had seen the less savory coverage. She still had some reservations. Kyle responds with, "Well, there's a lot of different opinions out there." As I listened it didn't seem like he was articulating any real coherent agenda. So I asked him, "Can you summarize the movement down to one or two specific demands?" And he responded with, "Get money out of politics." And I said: "What would that do?" He says, "We'd have government by the people." It wasn't particularly edifying.

There wasn't a whole lot of literature set out at the table.

Maybe the dude should spend some time looking at the Occupy Orange County website. I asked Kyle if he supported revolutionary change, overthrowing capitalism in the United States. He said no. And with the exception of the anarchists with the "Millions of Dead Cops" bumper sticker, and the group hanging out with that pro-jihad dude, the Orange County protesters evinced more of a reformist agenda than some of the more radical occupy protests that have been in the news. That said, the information table had laid out a copy of the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City. And it's available at the Occupy Orange County website. And it's a fairly revolutionary manifesto. So I'm taking this as more the official position, which is Marxist and internationalist:

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known...

Ads for Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson Signal New Tactics for Outside Groups

At New York Times, "Ads by Democratic Senator May Open Door to New Tactics":

WASHINGTON — A new series of political advertisements on behalf of an embattled Nebraska senator could open the door to a flood of similar ads financed by outside groups and even businesses working directly with political candidates — a sharp departure from past practice.

The ads are innocuous enough on their face: Senator Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat up for re-election next year, is featured on television and radio commercials discussing Social Security, the national debt, war veterans and other hot-button issues. What is remarkable, campaign finance lawyers and political operatives say, is that the ads were produced and paid for by Democratic Party officials in Nebraska and Washington — with the senator’s close involvement as their star.

Federal campaign rules restrict politicians from “coordinating” their advertisements with outside groups except under certain circumstances. Politicians — worried about tripping over the legal restrictions — have usually shied away from working directly with outside groups on ads. Instead, “issue” ads paid for by outside groups will typically hit on broad themes without focusing so squarely on a single lawmaker.

The Nebraska ads, which have cost Democrats more than $600,000 to run so far, could change that practice in a way that has wide implications for the 2012 elections, when 33 Senate seats and all 435 House seats will be up for grabs.

Interesting.

More at the link.

Republican Race for President Is Up for Grabs

I've said it a couple of times, but this is a strange year for GOP nomination politics. Candidates are still considering entering the race with a little over a year until November 2012. That goes against the normal imperatives of presidential nominating politics, at least in recent years, and I'm a little surprised.

In any case, at LAT, "In GOP contest, anything could happen":

Barely three months before the first votes are cast, the Republican race for president is up for grabs, complicated by the absence of a clear front-runner and the rules that have guided the GOP's selection process for the past several decades.

The rise of the "tea party" movement, with its contempt for convention, has undermined the tradition of bestowing the nomination on the candidate presumed next in line, who usually paid their dues through long service or a previous White House try.

At the same time, a new way of awarding delegates has largely eliminated the winner-take-all system that hastened selection of a nominee and forced the party to quickly close ranks.

The rise of so-called super PACs, independent political financing organizations unfettered by spending limits, also means that a candidate can stay competitive long after their campaign's donor base taps out, potentially extending the race beyond the first few contests.

The upshot is a GOP nominating race that is at least as unsettled as the competition four years ago, when Sen. John McCain of Arizona rose from the political graveyard and rallied to claim the nomination.

"We knew from the beginning this was going to be one of the most competitive nominating fights we've had," said Dick Wadhams, a Republican strategist who is neutral in the race. "We thought we had one back in 2008, but this one has already taken on more twists and turns than anything that happened in '08."

Continue reading.

VIDEO CREDIT: The Other McCain, "Is #PerryFail the Hot New #tcot Hashtag?"

Obama Courts Wealthy Contributors

Yeah, because Hope-and-Change has worn thin with the progressive youth of '08.

At Los Angeles Times, "Obama campaign team courts wealthy donors."

President Obama's reelection team has launched an invigorated effort to draw money from wealthy donors, buttressing the campaign against a potential decline in contributions from the everyday supporters who helped fuel his massive take in 2008.

A new program called Presidential Partners asks supporters to commit $75,800 to the Obama Victory Fund, a joint project of the campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

That would put Democratic contributors at the maximum they are allowed to give national party committees for the entire 2012 cycle — leaving then unable to donate to the party's congressional fundraising entities.

The effort to court deep-pocketed backers comes amid uncertainty about whether Obama will be able to reproduce the level of small donations that were estimated to have made up about half of the $745 million he raised in the 2008 campaign.

The Obama campaign has not given up on recharging that source of support: A recent email solicitation offered four supporters a chance to have "Dinner with Barack" for as little as a $5 donation.

But the increased emphasis on major fundraisers — including those who gathered money for Hillary Rodham Clinton's competing presidential bid — carries some risks. While Obama continues to woo supporters at low-dollar fundraisers, his meetings with high rollers — including a $35,800-a-plate dinner Thursday night with Wall Street executives in a posh Manhattan restaurant — could undercut the image he has tried to craft.

Yeah. "Dinner with Barack." And with Joe "Big Effin' Deal" Biden. Losers:

Palin Hauls in Nearly $500k In Just Over a Month

I wrote "Can Palin Win the 2012 GOP Nomination?" in July 2009, when Sarah Palin stepped down as Governor of Alaska. She was the "it girl" back then as much as she is now, which is amazing considering how much has happened since then. But one of the points I raised on Palin's chances for the 2012 nomintion was campaign finance:

Palin's two biggest goals can be summed up thus: Iowa and New Hampshire. Politically, Palin needs money. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama raised $100 million in 2007, the year leading into the primaries. The "entry fee" for the 2012 primaries will probably be twice that.

I expected Palin to be a blockuster fundraiser, and it's happening. See Jay Newton-Small (via Memeorandum):

Sarah Palin raised $469,000 between Oct. 13 and Nov. 22 bringing her total for the year to over $3 million, Tim Crawford, SarahPAC's treasurer, told TIME exclusively. Crawford attributed the surge of funds to energy surrounding the midterm elections, Palin's endorsements and her TLC reality show “Sarah Palin's Alaska.” Her second book, America By Heart, came out Nov. 23.

The PAC spent $64,000 buying advance copies of her books, “just as we did last year” with her first book, Going Rogue, Crawford said. “They're a great fundraising tool for us.” Palin is in the midst of a two-week cross-country book tour.

Overall the PAC spent $581,000 between Oct. 13 and Nov. 22. ...

Keith Olbermann, a Memorial Tribute

From Reason.TV, via Big Government:

RELATED: "The Obligatory Olbermann Suspended Over Donations Post." Plus, "TV Newser: “Insiders” say Olbermann won’t be back."

*****

Check for hot updates throughout the day at American Power.

ADDED: From Ed Morrissey, "Reason TV’s valedictory salute to Olby."

The Obligatory Olbermann Suspended Over Donations Post

The main story is at WSJ, "MSNBC Suspends TV Host Over Political Contributions."

It's been the hot story on Memeorandum all day, especially William Kristol's defense, "Keep Keith!"

Although I'm with Michelle, "Support Olbermann? No Freaking Way."

Video Blast From the Past: "Without 'Fascistic Hatred,' Malkin Is Just a 'Mashed-Up Bag of Meat with Lipstick."

Money Was No Guarantee of Victory

At WaPo, "Whitman, Fiorina and McMahon: Spending Big, Failing Bigger":

LOS ANGELES - Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina and Linda McMahon had a lot in common.

All sharp, successful businesswomen who made millions as executives in the private sector, they identified 2010 as an apt historical moment for a Republican candidate with no political experience to break into politics. In pursuit of higher office, each committed considerable resources - more than $200 million combined - to challenge seemingly vulnerable Democrats.

Each risk taker came up far short of her goal.

Whitman, the 54-year-old former chief executive of eBay, burned through more than $140 million of her own money in a colossal loss in the California governor's race to a former governor, Attorney General Jerry Brown. Also in California, Fiorina, 56, the former Hewlett-Packard leader, spent about $7 million of her own funds in a bitter Senate loss to the incumbent, Barbara Boxer. And McMahon, 62, who with her husband built the smackdown empire called World Wrestling Entertainment in Connecticut, spent $50 million in seeking an open Senate seat, losing to Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.

The question isn't so much why three savvy businesswomen threw so much good money after bad in losing ventures to win political office. In a year when voters overwhelmingly registered their dissatisfaction with Democrats and the unemployment-riddled economy, the candidates had every reason to consider the millions a sound investment. Instead, the question is how they failed so resoundingly.

"It's in some ways like a highly underdeveloped country that suddenly strikes oil and they don't know what to do with the money and start spending it unwisely," said Ross Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University. Baker said that money is a threshold requirement in politics, "but above a certain amount you don't get a dividend for every extra dollar."

"And when it's your own money, you cast aside some of the restraints and keep spending, to the point where you cast aside certain other aspects of the campaign that might be deficient," he said.

More at the link.

I've already examined Whitman's liablities, and being a shitty candidate is probably just the best way to sum up her debacle. I've said less about Fiorina, although she was bit subdued for me, and I know nothing about McMahon.

Revved-Up GOP Ponders 2012

At WSJ, "Palin's Viability as Presidential Front-Runner Is Closely Scrutinized; 'Ideas Are Going to Matter'":

A revitalized Republican Party began looking toward the 2012 presidential election with renewed optimism about its prospects but uncertainty about who was best positioned to lead the charge.

Republican Sarah Palin was drawing especially close scrutiny from some in the GOP for signs of her viability as front-runner. Ms. Palin emerged from Tuesday's elections as a champion of the tea party movement that helped spur a Republican wave. But losses Tuesday by Ms. Palin's hand-picked candidates in Nevada and Delaware showed the limits to her powers, while preliminary results in her home state of Alaska showed her favored candidate, Joe Miller, was trailing.

"Sarah Palin is a beloved figure in the Republican Party, but now we shift gears—and, in the party, ideas are going to matter," said Katon Dawson, former chairman of the South Carolina GOP. He said Ms. Palin would "get fully vetted on her service in Alaska."

Ms. Palin's active media presence and endorsements in the midterm campaign have maintained her high profile as a spokeswoman for her party. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in mid-October, Republicans cited her most often as the "most important leader or spokesperson'' for the GOP. Ms. Palin was named by 19% of Republicans in the survey, ahead of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, at 16%, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, at 14%, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, at 13%.

Independent voters also cited Ms. Palin as the "most important'' GOP leader, but they listed Mr. Romney second most frequently, with Mr. Huckabee a more distant third.

Other potential candidates include Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, South Dakota Sen. John Thune and Rep. Mike Pence (R., Ind.).

Matt Kibbe, president of the conservative tea-party group FreedomWorks, said Wednesday he would add a new name to the list: Florida Sen.-elect Marco Rubio, a 39-year-old Cuban-American who is a tea party hero and could help Republicans expand their reach to Hispanics and younger voters.

"The American people are looking for new blood," he said.

More at the link.

All this sounds serious, but the same assets will count in 2012 as in past races (grassroots support, media exposure and polling, and money --- lots of money, which will be Sarah Palin's key advantage over a number of other challengers for the GOP nomination).

Obama-Dems Reach New Low

At Cold Fury:

And with the sleazy passel of grifters currently running the criminal enterprise misnomered the “Democratic” Party, that’s saying something. But my God, the balls on our sorry excuse for a Pee-resident, and his henchmen too.

“Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie: They’re Bush Cronies. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce: They’re Shills for Big Business,” the ad’s narrator says. “And they’re stealing our democracy. Spending millions from secret donors to elect Republicans to do their bidding in Congress. It appears they’re even taking secret foreign money to influence our elections.”

The president leveled a similar charge while on the campaign trail last week in Maryland, saying, “Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations.”

“Have these people no shame?” Rove said of the attacks leveled at him and the Chamber. “Does the president of the United States have such little regard for the office he holds that he goes out there and makes these kind of baseless charges against his political enemies? This is just beyond the pale. How dare the president do this?”

“This is a desperate and I think disturbing trend by the President of the United States to tar his political adversaries with some kind of enemies list, without being unrestrained by any facts or evidence whatsoever.”

The punchline here, of course, is that one of the means by which the jug-eared son of a bitch hijacked American democracy and stole the ’08 election — aside from vote-suppression efforts by his pet goons in the New BlacKKK Fascist Party, and who even knows how many hundreds of thousands of instances of vote-fraud by his ACORN sneak-thieves — was via a long list of all kinds of financial chicanery up to and including…wait for it…accepting secret, illegal foreign campaign contributions. You were supposed to have forgotten all about that by now, assuming you’re among those who penetrated the Zombie Media blackout and knew of it at all. But Doug remembers, presenting a recounting of the shocking jiggery-pokery that helped put this swindler in the office he’s so manifestly unfit for. Glenn hasn’t forgotten, either.

Time to do more than just pay Democrat Socialist-style lip service to draining that swamp. Too bad this November we won’t have the opportunity to give it the good, thorough, top-down scrubbing it so desperately needs.

And there's an update at the blog, "The Bottom of the Barrel":

I could’ve attached this as an update to the “New low” post below, but it’s just too delicious to languish away down there. Come for the exposure of the sleazy lie, stay for the groveling-coward backpedaling:

White House officials acknowledged Friday that they had no specific evidence to indicate that the chamber had used money from foreign entities to finance political attack ads.

“The president was not suggesting any illegality,” Bob Bauer, the White House counsel, said. Instead, he said Mr. Obama’s reference to the chamber was meant to draw attention to the inadequacies of campaign disclosure laws in allowing groups to spend large amounts of money on politics without disclosing their donors.

Yeah, right. Spoken like a truly greasy, squirming lawyer trying to defend a most un-presidential president, who just stepped in a pile of his own deceitful bullshit and fell in right up to his scrawny neck.

Dirtbags.

And typical leftists.

Obama's Hypocrisy, Obama's Fraud

Just before the 2008 election I published an essay on campaign finance at Pajamas Media, "Obama’s Fundraising Fraud." No candidate in American history has raised more money for a presidential bid than Barack Obama. Great story, but what's normally stuffed under the rug is the massive amounts of money that were funneled to the campaign through illegal sources. This was widely documented at the time, but the MFM largely ignored the scandal (WaPo was the major exception). But now there's the new convenient outrage on the left over alleged foreign sources of campaign influence. Michelle has been reporting on this, "Newly nativist Democrats and their own foreign funny money." And also William Jacobson, "Obama Was Right About Xenophobic Bitter Clingers."

And Sister Toldjah caps it off with more on the left's blatant hypocrisy: "Barack Obama: so hypocritical, it’s almost grotesque."

Forget whether the charge is correct or not. Ignore the fact that this is a desperate, xenophobic smear job by a party facing a massacre at the polls.

It’s the hypocrisy that’s jaw-dropping, given that Obama’s own presidential campaign winked at foreign money. Michael Barone explains:

Glenn Reynolds nails this one: the Obama Democrats’ campaign riff against foreign donations to Democrats is bogus—and according to the New York Times, no less. This looks like a matter of projection, since it’s well documented that the 2008 Obama campaign did not put in place address verification software that would have routinely prevented most foreign donations. In effect they were encouraging donations by foreign nationals. Here’s the Washington Post on this back in October 2008: Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged.”

Go read the rest of the article and follow the other links back to reports from 2008 on the Obama campaign and odd donations. Here’s another. Obama and the Democrats engaged in rampant cheating regarding foreign donations, and now they have the gall to falsely accuse the Chamber of Commerce of doing what they themselves did?

More: "Axelrod: Chamber must prove foreign money allegations false." (Via Memeorandum.)

Surprise! Meg Whitman Uses Personal Fortune to Mount Nasty Hardball Campaign

Meg Whitman, wannabe conservative, Vann Jones acolyte, and GOP gubernatorial candidate, apparently knows a thing or two about Saul Alinsky. See, "Whitman No Rookie at Playing Hardball":

Meg Whitman is campaigning for governor as a political outsider, but behind the scenes she is playing classic political hardball in her quest for the Republican nomination.

She tried to push her chief GOP opponent, Steve Poizner, out of the primary contest with a consultant's threat to wage a negative ad campaign that would destroy his career. Her advisors have worked, with some success, to siphon away Poizner supporters, orchestrating calls by former Gov. Pete Wilson and others for the party to unite -- four months before the primary election -- behind her candidacy.

And Whitman's team warned labor leaders that if they gave money to Democratic operatives planning to attack her, the billionaire candidate would respond by spending millions to qualify a ballot initiative that would make it harder for unions to use dues for political purposes.

Observers say Whitman's embrace of rough-and-tumble politics should surprise no one, given her track record as the hard-nosed former chief executive of EBay.

"She's coming from a world that's absolutely a hardball world," said Thad Kousser, a visiting professor at Stanford University who specializes in state politics. "And anybody who thinks you don't become a politician being the CEO of a major corporation is crazy."

Asked about the tough moves by Whitman and her aides, her spokesman, Tucker Bounds, said her campaign "is committed to putting her in the most effective position" to explain her vision for improving California. He said talking to voters is her main focus.

Political analysts say Whitman's use of her wealth to intimidate her opponents -- she's moved $39 million of her own money into her campaign -- can backfire if voters believe she is trying to buy the election. Wealthy executives have won as political newcomers elsewhere but have largely failed in California.

The image of Whitman, 53, using her riches as a club was on display this month when Poizner -- himself a multimillionaire -- released an e-mail to his camp from her consultant, Mike Murphy. It said she could spend $40 million "tearing up" Poizner, also 53.

"It's arrogance," said K.B. Forbes, a GOP communications consultant who is not working in California at the moment. "It's going to turn off the electorate."

As I've said a couple of times, I wish we had Bob McDonnell in California:

See also, Michelle, "Memo to GOP Candidates: Stop Mindlessly Praising Commies in Green Clothing," and John Hawkins, "Meg Whitman’s Slap In The Face Of Sarah Palin Fans: Hiring Mike Murphy."

Obama’s Finance Hypocrisy

Folks might want to go back and take a look at the very first piece I published at Pajamas Media, "Obama’s Fundraising Fraud."

At the time of writing, in late October 2008, the Barack Obama presidential campaign had raised more the $200 million in small contribution of $200 or less. Such small individual donations are not reported to the FEC, as I noted at the essay:

These small donations do not require public disclosure under FEC guidelines, and the Obama campaign refuses to make public its list of contributors. Obama earlier announced he’d accept public financing if the GOP nominee did the same (and then, of course, broke his pledge in June after realizing he’d far surpass previous fundraising records). So there’s a pattern. By keeping his donor list secret now, the Illinois senator has heightened speculation of financial impropriety. Not only can Obama’s inside operatives organize massive bundling operations outside the law, there are no safeguards against the new “fat cat” contributors who bundle their own cash. Hillary Clinton’s Norman Hsu scandal from late-2007 points to the kind of abuses possible under the current regime. A more serious breach of faith may be taking place right now in the Obama camp.

There are rarely ever serious consquences to financial impropriety in campaign fundraising, and with "Mr. Chicago Boy" in the White House, it's common knowledge that this administration is the most corrupt in decades. So I had to literally shake my head in disgust upon reading this statement from the White House:

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less.

Also, just now at Pajamas, "Supreme Court Strikes Down Campaign Finance Laws: A Decisive Blow for the First Amendment."

And of course, here it comes: "Democrats Plan to Push Bill to Limit Impact of Campaign Finance Decision."

Carly 'Golden Parachute' Fiorina Makes Pitch for Campaign Contributions

Just got this finance pitch in my inbox, from Carly Fiorina's campaign:

Not interested, of course. Recall Michelle Malkin's earlier entry, "Carly Fiorina channels Dede Scozzafava, wields race/gender card against conservative rival."

Don't give this woman money, obviously. Not only is she RINO, she doesn't need the cash:

Fiorina’s personal wealth means that she can fight Boxer dollar for dollar in a state where money (and the television ads it buys) is absolutely critical.

Recall Ms. Fiorina's golden parachute from Hewlett-Packard in 2005, "Carly may get $42 million: Severance of $21.4M excludes another $21M in options, restricted stock and pension."

Fiorina's payout was a troubling issue during John McCain's campaign last year, "McCain Economic Adviser Carly Fiorina's Golden Parachute" (and for Sarah Palin too, who spoke the McCain party line about reforming Wall Street).

Check out Chuck Devore's home page instead. This guy's a conservative!

Doug Hoffman to Conservatives: 'Take Back the Party!'

From Doug Hoffman's column at the New York Post, "Take Back the Party!":

At this time, three months ago, I was wrestling with a decision. A decision as to whether or not to run in a special election to fill the seat vacated by the new secretary of the Army, John McHugh. If you had told me 90 days later I would be penning an op-ed piece for the New York Post, I would have laughed in disbelief. I would have laughed even louder had you told me that I would be receiving endorsement and support from political leaders like Fred Thompson, former Majority Leader Dick Armey, or Sarah Palin. Or appearing on broadcast media with national audiences, as their hosts peppered me with questions about the future of the GOP and our nation.

You see I’m not a professional politician; I’ve never sought elected office. I grew up poor in Saranac Lake, in the heart of the Adirondacks. My siblings and I were raised in a single-parent household by our mother. We worked to help her pay the mortgage. But, like so many others in this great land, I worked hard, got a good education, did a six-year stint in the military, married, landed a good job with a “big eight” accounting firm and started living the American dream.

It’s funny what can happen in America, when you are able to dream and have the courage to follow your dreams. At 27 I was hired as controller of the organizing committee for the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid. Three years later I bought the accounting firm that employed my mother. Now I have six offices spread across the northern reaches of New York and a dozen other small businesses in the Adirondacks that employ my wife, children and hopefully someday, my grandchildren. I am living the American Dream.

The reason I’m running for office is to ensure that others share the same opportunities.

The rest is here.

Hat Tip: Robert Stacy McCain.

Obama Wants Your Money!

Barack Obama has put out another plea for cash to augment the over $600 million he's already raised. Andrew Malcolm has the story:

It seems like only a week ago that The Ticket was whining about Barack Obama whining that after raising $605 million through September to buy the presidency, he was asking all of us one last time for just $10 more for some reason.

And we figured out that, October money aside, he'd have to spend $12.5 million a day just to unload September's haul by Nov. 4.

The Democrat is already outspending the Republican by three and four-to-one, which if it was the other way around would surely be unconscionable.

So last night Obama dumped several million bucks on several TV networks, which they don't mind, to talk at us slickly for 27 minutes about his change that we need.

And when that was over, pingo, here comes another e-mail from Windy City HQ. You'll never guess what. He wants more money. More. Still.

It was a blessedly short message. He called us by our first name and signed only his first name; so we must be pals. He put the entire fate of his historic campaign in our hands. "The campaign is in your hands," he wrote.

Read the rest here.

Malcolm says: Enough already!

I just love the Warning! button!

Related: Don't miss Powerline's update on the Obama campaign contribution donor scandal, "Obama Shrugged: An Update" (how do you think "The One" financed those 30-minute informercials?).