Two of the GOP candidates for Arkansas’ Senate seat this year have launched the first TV ads of the campaign. Col. Conrad Reynolds and Curtis Coleman both claim to be the first of the nine announced candidates to take their message to the television.
Reynold’s ad announces his upcoming campaign tour featuring Sam Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber, later this month. Coleman’s ad is titled “Conservative Comment” and takes on wasteful government spending. Both candidates keep their message positive without mentioning their Republican Challengers or Sen. Blanche Lincoln. (D-AR)
Here are the two 30 second ads followed by a poll where you can select which candidate’s ad is more effective.
You decide: Which ad is the most effective?
Yesterday, the people of Massachusetts went to the polls and voted for real “change” in Washington. And change is already coming. We, the people of these United States, would like to express our appreciation to all those Massachusetts voters who voted for Lt. Col. Scott Brown for US Senate.
Two weeks ago, we began urging readers across the country to volunteer on Brown’s campaign. At that time, Rasmussen Hundreds of you responded with donations of money and valuable time, and the fruit of your effort was harvested last night when Democrat Martha Coakley conceded and Brown declared victory. The significance of that victory cannot be overstated.
Your tireless efforts on behalf of the Brown campaign helped the Republican candidate win the seat formerly held by the hard left, liberal icon Ted Kennedy. Democrats practically declared Coakley the winner of the seat after her December victory in Massachusetts’ Democratic primary, and the majority of pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle believed likewise.
But Scott Brown didn’t give up. He didn’t throw in the towel because so many said he couldn’t win. And you didn’t either!
Voters in Massachusetts served as shock troops in the first battle of an offensive by the American people. An offensive to take this country back from those who campaigned as representatives of the people, but abandoned their constituents after taking office is now underway. Massachusetts will now serve as our beach head.
In the year after gaining complete control of both the Executive and Legislative branches of government, Democrats interpreted their historic victory in 2008 as a license by the American people to impose nothing less than Socialism on the electorate. Abandoning any semblance of bipartisanship, high-level Congressional Democrats met in secret with White House officials to make back room deals on every major piece of legislation crafted in Obama’s first year. Republican bills, amendments, and resolutions were ignored or voted down without serious consideration. Democrats had the power to impose their will on a resistant constituency and intended to use it.
Even as polls showed Brown gaining on Coakley and Democrats were forced to consider his victory a real possibility, Democrats continued to insist they would move forward on Obama’s health care legislation regardless of the outcome of this election. Threats to delay seating Brown or to violate long-standing Senate rules to subvert the will of the American people further alienated voters around the country.
Democrats proved just how out of touch they were.
Now the battle is on for the rest of the country. One third of the US Senate is up for grabs this fall, as is the entire House of Representatives. Republican Senator candidates in Arkansas, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Kentucky are leading their Democrat challengers by comfortable margins. In Illinois, Missouri, and California, Republican candidates are already polling closer to their Democrat opponents than Brown was to Coakley two weeks before he defeated her.
With the exception of California, these states are certainly less blue than Massachusetts. Therefore, it’s a real possibility that voters in these 11 states alone could put the Republican party back in the Senate driver’s seat. Charlie Cook of The Cook Political Report even speculated on MSNBC’s Hardball it’s possible that we might “see no Republican incumbent, House or Senate, lose” in 2010.
A Republican majority in the US Senate is now a very real possibility after the 2010 elections.
Democrat Congressmen were badly beaten up in town hall meetings throughout the summer and early fall as the push for Obama’s government takeover of the US health care system intensified. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) squeezed out a 5-vote victory for the Socialization of 1/6 of the US economy in November. It took every bit of political strength she had to twist the arms of enough Democrats from conservative districts to stand with her and the ultra-liberal wing of her party. Some of these Dems are already announcing plans not to run for re-election this year, and others who had been recruited by the DNCC to run against Republican incumbents have already dropped out of their races as well. It’s almost certain that Democrats will lose a substantial number of seats in November, but there may be an even more immediate consequence of Brown’s victory on the US House.
Pelosi may no longer be able to muster her razor thin majority to pass the reconciled bill that will come out of the secret, behind-closed-doors meetings being held to iron out the differences in the two chambers’ health care bills.
President Obama dithered on whether or not to make the trip to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley until Sunday. Finally, two days before the election, the President took Air Force One to Boston in an effort to motivate Democrats to get out the vote for Coakley. After campaigning for losing gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey last fall, Obama had to know this was a huge gamble. All along, he has counted on his political capital to sway Democrats with conservative constituencies to vote for his left-wing policies. Virginia and New Jersey were strikes one and two, Massachusetts proved to be strike three.
Obama’s inability to secure a Coakley victory in the deep blue Bay State has greatly compromised his ability to convince nervous Democrats they’re better off voting with him than their constituents. He’s now running very low on political capital.
Chairman of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele has already sent out a fund-raising letter calling Brown’s victory “our Party’s first victory of 2010.” But in his victory speech, Scott Brown was careful not to credit the Republican party, but the independent voters of Massachusetts for his victory. “Tonight the independent majority has delivered a great victory,” Brown said.
Checking the several blogs on the GOP’s website, not one article appears promoting Brown’s candidacy in the past two weeks. Not one article asking supporters to help elect a Republican candidate to Ted Kennedy’s old seat. Even RNC press releases over the last couple of weeks make no mention of the critical race. But now that Brown won, Steele hopes to siphon off some of the energy to convert it to funds for the RNC.
Brown realizes his victory was not an endorsement of the Republican establishment, but a rejection of the Democrat establishment. Michael Steele and the RNC haven’t yet figured that out.
Although the Republican party did little to help make Brown’s victory possible, conservative activists across the nation did, especially on the internet. Practically every conservative activist site we keep tabs on was consistently and continuously promoting Brown’s candidacy. Participants on these sites form the core of the rallies and town halls that slowed down Obama’s wave of Socialism when the Republican party could not. These are the people who participate in the Tea Parties and organize protests against Congressmen and Senators who refused to listen to their constituents.
The Tea Party movement has established itself as a force to be reckoned with in the upcoming congressional elections. The GOP better be careful not to take these conservative activists’ votes for granted, but must instead make concessions to once again win their trust.
In summary, Democrats with conservative constituencies have now been put on notice. The American people demand to be represented and not ruled! The Republican hierarchy will be tempted to believe they achieved this victory and seek to exploit it when in fact, the GOP can take very little credit for Brown’s victory. Tea Party activists should pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves for a job well don. But don’t get too comfortable.
Our challenge now will be two-fold. First, to continue the fight to remove those representatives who have refused to represent their constituents. But we must also now be careful to hold the Republican party accountable, and avoid being used by the establishment. The establishment led us into the abyss from which we’ve fought so hard to extract ourselves these past few months. Those of us who’ve participated in and believe in the Tea Party movement must continue to fight for reform in the Republican party.
For now though, congratulations. We’ve fought long and hard to achieve this victory.
Many thanks to all who made this possible. To Scott Brown. To the Massachusetts voters. And to all of those across the country who donated their time and money to help achieve this victory!
The following is an email from Senator John Thune (R-SD)
Thank you to those of you who’ve signed my petition against the Democrats’ health care bill.
I am leading the Republican charge to open health care reform negotiations to public scrutiny and challenging Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to allow C-SPAN to televise the closed-door negotiations going on between Senate and House Democrats and the White House.
During the presidential campaign in 2008 President Obama said of health care reform, “… we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies.”
Yet, that is not what has happened. Instead, the Democrats are negotiating this 2,000 + page bill among themselves and locking Republicans and the American people out.
I’m working to change that. Read the letter my Republican colleagues and I sent to Senator Harry Reid.
Meanwhile, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has called into question the savings Democrats claim would result from their bill and has pointed out that health care costs under the bill will actually increase by more than $200 billion.
Of the purported “savings” in the bill, the report uses terms like “unrealistic”, “doubtful”, and “difficult to obtain,” as well as saying that the bill could lead to “price increases, cost-shifting, and/or changes in providers’ willingness to treat patients with low-reimbursement health coverage.”
That’s why I will continue to oppose the bill and will do all I can to see it defeated, along with all 39 of my Republican colleagues in the Senate.
If you want to know what you can do to help, in addition to contacting your elected representatives again, there’s only one additional thing I know of we can do: help deny the Democrats their 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
One week from today Massachusetts will elect a new Senator in a special election. Like me, Republican State Senator Scott Brown vehemently opposes the Democrats’ health care legislation and will vote to stop it, work to send it back to the drawing board and try to enact real reform that will lower costs without spending trillions of dollars and raising billions in new taxes we can’t afford.
The polls have shown the race in a dead heat. The Wall Street Journal says of him, “Mr. Brown … has been running against Washington’s blowout spending and has called for a freeze on the wages of federal employees.” And, “The mere fact that Democrats have to fight so hard to save Ted Kennedy’s seat shows how badly they have misjudged America by governing so far to the left.”
In an editorial the Boston Herald noted, “… if you’re not happy with the status quo, if you think the way business is being conducted on Capitol Hill today is a disgrace and an affront to taxpayers, then you probably agree it’s time for a change. Scott Brown can single-handedly deliver on that kind of change and the Herald is pleased to endorse his candidacy in the race for U.S. Senate.”
I couldn’t agree more, and I hope that you do also.
Thank you again for getting involved and helping us make a difference. I sincerely appreciate your interest and support.
Lt. Col. Scott Brown understands what so many in Washington, both Democrats and Republicans have apparently forgotten. Our Senators and Congressmen work for us!
“With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy’s seat, it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat!“–Scott Brown (R-MA)
Last week Rasmussen released a poll showing Brown trailing liberal Democrat Martha Coakley 50-41. Then a few days later, Democrat pollster Tom Jensen with Public Policy Polling found a plurality of Massachusetts voters supported Brown.
Today, Rasmussen’s newest numbers in the race support Jensen’s findings. In their latest poll, Coakley takes 49% and Brown earns 47%. Though most voters expect Brown to win, the race is amazingly close for the deep blue Bay State. Just a few weeks ago, no one expected Brown to even come close. But now he’s got momentum and has Democrats nervous.
Yesterday, Brown held a 24 hour online fundraising campaign and raked in $1.3 Million from small donations. Grassroots Americans from across the country recognized the importance of this race and gave generously to help Brown win the seat formerly held by Ted “Lady Killer” Kennedy (D).
You can help Brown take “the people’s seat” back for “the people.” Even if you can’t contribute financially, Brown’s website offers citizens from anywhere in the country to volunteer by making phone calls for his get-out-the-vote campaign. So please, contribute financially if you can. But even if that’s not possible at the moment, please make a few phone calls to make Brown the 41st vote that will put an end to Obama, Reid, and Pelosi cramming unconstitutional and unwanted legislation down the throats of the American people!
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines genocide as “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.”
So, if the 2,000+ pages of Democrat health care “reform” result in large numbers of doctors abandoning their elderly patients, or if the monstrous piece of legislation puts more seniors in a position of having to choose between medical treatment and heating their home in the winter, would it qualify the Democrats’ plan as genocide?
The Dems “reform” efforts are most certainly deliberate. They’ve spent months trying to cram their “reform” down our throats, even in the face of “unprecedented” opposition by their constituents. They’ve relentlessly pressed forward, against the will of those who elected them, ignoring calls from their constituents and heeding only the orders of their Dear Leader, Chairman ObaMao, to get something on his desk so he might proclaim victory.
So deliberate certainly fits the bill.
It wouldn’t fit the racial part of the definition, because we’d have equal opportunity to suffer among all races. But would it satisfy the requirement to systematically destroy a political or cultural group?
It’s not a huge leap to recognize that large numbers of doctors refusing to treat elderly patients would likely put many of our senior citizens out of the Democrats’ misery. If they get sick and can’t get treatment because there aren’t enough doctors, more will die. If the doctors who continue to treat our aged relatives demand a larger share of their fixed incomes, there will come a point when an old man or woman decides s/he’d rather die warm with a full belly than starving and cold with that pesky tumor removed.
Because the cuts would be targeted at medical care for seniors, it would make sense to say the destruction of our elder citizens would be systematic.
AARP’s vaunted political power qualifies our seniors as a political group and it wouldn’t be a stretch to label them a cultural group either. But even if one disagrees on the latter, old folks definitely qualify as a political group.
So if the Senate Democrats’ health care bill results in large numbers of doctors abandoning their medicare patients and causes those who continue to treat these patients to increase prices and charge for treatment that was formerly covered by the government health insurance option, we could pronounce the Democrats’ so-called health care “reform” as genocidal.
Today an elderly relative went to see his doctor, whose identity we will protect at this time. Along with the normal paperwork one leaves the doctor’s office with, he was given the following letter.
December 22, 2009
As I am sure many of you are aware there are considerable changes occurring in the healthcare (sic) field at the present time.
As of January 1st, there will be substantial negative changes in terms of reimbursement to physicians that accept Medicare patients. This will ultimately result in many physicians rejecting Medicare patients due to these severe restrictions on reimbursements.
My practice does not intend to stop seeing Medicare patients at this time, although if further cuts occur, as are promised that position undoubtedly will change. For the time being we will continue to see Medicare patients.
However, we will have to start charging for services that we have provided free of charge in the past. These charges will become effective January 1, 2010. A complete list of the appropriate fees will be available in my office upon request.
[Removed by request], M. D.
One might say, how is this? The Senate bill isn’t even law yet.
Correct. But…Harry Reid failed to achieve the nearly $250 billion “doctor fix” that would have put his cherished health care takeover bill over the cost that even his spendthrift Democrat puppets couldn’t swallow.
Now, even before the legislation is reconciled between the House and Senate, before it makes its way to Obama’s desk, before it’s signed into law, it’s adversely affecting the health care of elderly Americans. Harry Reid and every other Democrat that voted for this mountain of legislative garbage lied when they proclaimed it will not increase the deficit and it will extend Medicare.
It will KILL old people.
Democrats lie and the elderly will die!
Once again, Democrats are telling bold-faced lies when they claim their legislation will reduce the deficit and extend the life of Medicare! This time they’re using Bernie Madoff/Enron style accounting tricks to camouflage their lies.
In response to a request by Senator Jeff Sessions, the CBO today released a statement correcting the misrepresentations being propagated by Senate Democrats. Reid, President Obama, and other Democrats are claiming the CBO score indicates the Senate bill will reduce the deficit by $130 billion over the next 10 years and add 9 years to the lifespan of Medicare.
But the CBO says not so fast. It appears Democrats took great care in phrasing their request to the non-partisan agency, playing a sort of shell game to fool the American people with a slight of hand. Evidently, hen Harry Reid requested the CBO score, he only asked for the impact on the Medicare trust fund balance. That doesn’t sound so bad until you understand what the CBO calls “Trustfund Accounting.”
The Medicare Trust Fund doesn’t actually hold hard assets. It’s more like a drawer full of IOUs issued by the federal government, if it’s operating in the black. The Trust Fund takes money in and pays money out. If it takes in more than it pays out, the government takes the surplus and issues the Trust Fund an IOU.
Now it’s not like the government puts that money in a savings account. Our never frugal government spends that money it collected to pay for Medicare on something else! No plan on how to pay off the IOU when it comes due either. Just pass the debt on down to future generations.
The Trust Fund Accounting system used by the CBO doesn’t account for what happens to the cash once it’s removed from the Trust Fund, or the government’s ability to repay the borrowed money. This accounting method treats Uncle Sam’s IOU the same as you and I treat our bank account. Just like the folks at the Medicare office could walk up to a teller and say “I’d like to withdraw all our money.”
The problem is, there is no money. It’s just a piece of paper that’s waiting for some future Congress to raise taxes on our children to repay the money.
In the current legislation, the CBO saw Reid’s bill would result in approximately $300 billion more being taken into the Medicare Trust Fund than it would pay out in the next. So Obama, Reid, and Pelosi will write out a professional looking IOU, hand it to the Medicare Trust Fund accountant and leave with $300 billion of taxpayers’ money. That money will be used to create new federal programs, fund abortions, pay bureaucrats, and other creative ways government finds to squander money.
“To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would essentially double-count a large share of those savings and thus overstate the improvement in the government’s fiscal position.”
But to make it look nice, Reid and his Democrat cohorts rigged it to look like $130 billion won’t be spent. So, in effect the deficit should be reduced by $130 billion. Sounds good right?
The problem is, they’re also trying to claim the entire $300 billion (of which they’ve blown $170 billion) is used to extend the viability of Medicare. Put simply, they want to spend the $170 billion now and say the $170 billion IOU they issued is going to keep Medicare going. Now, no one can be 100% sure, but it seems like doctors will probably start quitting when they begin getting government IOUs instead of greenbacks for compensation!
Obama, Reid, and other Democrats are counting that $170 billion twice. They’ve taken $300 billion from us they say we’ll get back in Medicare benefits. They’ve spent all but $130 billion of it, but continue to claim they’ve set aside the entire $300 billion for our benefit!
Here’s the real kicker. The only way we get that $170 billion in benefits we were promised is to raise taxes on our children!
This is nothing short of stealing from future generations! Harry Reid and his Democrat Senate comrades are nothing more than two-bit con artists who would sell our children’s future to satisfy our President who suffers with an “unprecedented” level of egotism and narcissism.
Tomorrow at 7:00 AM Eastern they vote to saddle our children and grandchildren with higher taxes, higher deficits, and a lower standard of living. Tomorrow morning, they will slap themselves on the back and congratulate themselves for conning us out of more of our money.
They’ll be home until the middle of January. Make a point of letting your Senators know you haven’t been fooled. Make sure they understand you know what they’re up to, and that you’ll do everything in your power to send them home when they’re next up for reelection.
Today or tomorrow, Arkansas Democrat Senator Blanche Lincoln plans to vote again to move Harry Reid’s Senate health care bill toward passage. This, in spite of the fact that 60% of her constituents oppose the bill.
With a vote looming on such important legislation, legislation that will impact every man, woman, and child in America, one would expect Senator Lincoln to want to hear her constituents’ opinions on the matter. But no!
She won’t even take their calls. Her office phone goes unanswered today. But just in case they’re reading the emails, please click here to email the link for the video below to Senator Lincoln today. If you’re from out of state, use Zip Code “72023“, and city “Cabot“, street address “112 S. First Street” to be sure the system let’s you through. (That’s the address of Democrat Representative Marion Berry’s Cabot office.)
Tell Lincoln to “Pick up the phone!” by copying and pasting the following link in your message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qh7bQ5cocE
You can also try to call her DC office at 202-224-4843, but good luck getting someone to pick up the phone.
You’ve likely already read that a Rasmussen poll recently found more likely voters would choose a third party Tea Party candidate than a GOP candidate if given that opportunity in next year’s congressional election. When asked to assume the Tea Party organized as a political party, 36% said they’d choose the Democrat, 23% the would pick the Tea Party candidate, 18% would select the Republican, and 22% were undecided.
Liberals will see the results above and salivate, already tasting a split of the conservative vote. They can point to last month’s special election in New York’s 23rd congressional district as more evidence that 2010 will be a year of infighting that will temper the historical advantage of the opposition when one party holds the White House and both houses of Congress.
In NY-23, when the GOP threw its nomination to a candidate with virtually no conservative credentials, the Tea Party mobilized to support a true conservative running as an independent in the race. Even though the National Republican Congressional Committee spent nearly a million dollars promoting the liberal GOP candidate, she was forced from the race when polls showed her placing last in the three way race. Democrat Bill Owens won the traditionally Republican seat, with the conservative candidate Doug Hoffman coming in a close second.
So the question is, “How can the GOP avoid the mistakes of NY-23 and win the support of the 23% who would prefer a Tea Party candidate?”
Before we can answer that question, it’s important to understand the dependence of the Tea Party on the internet and social networking sites. The mainstream media largely ignored the protest movement as it grew and often understated the size of crowds who attended. The movement’s growth was made possible by news spread through non-traditional sources such as blogs, conservative online news organizations, and social networking sites. Its members work, play, socialize, and organize via the internet. So a candidate’s ability to win the support of the Tea Party voters will largely depend on his/her ability to function in this online environment.
In Arkansas, Republican candidates for US Senate are beginning to recognize that their chances for success may hinge on their ability to win the support of Tea Partiers in the state. This Saturday, Tea Parties across the state have teamed up with other conservative groups to sponsor a rally that will feature Michelle Malkin as keynote speaker. But, all seven announced 2010 GOP Senate candidates and an independent running for the seat will speak at the event as well.
Last week, the Republican Party of Arkansas held an Iowa-style Straw Poll for next year’s Senate race at its annual Winter Leadership Conference. The value of a strong Tea Party-GOP alliance was evidenced by the stronger than expected second place finish of Curtis Coleman. Some had already written Coleman off, declaring State Senator Gilbert Baker the front runner who would crush all his primary opponents.
Coleman is the founder and former CEO of Safe Foods, Inc. He’s not a politician, but a businessman who says “We are now suffering the greatest erosion of our personal liberties in history.” He promises to do everything he can to stop that erosion if he’s elected to represent Arkansas in the US Senate. And his message is resonating with the people of Arkansas.
In August, polls already showed Arkansas’ Democrat Senator Blanche Lincoln trailing Coleman by one point. A December 3rd Rasmussen poll now has the businessman leading the Democrat politician by 4 percent! Though Baker was practically announced the winner of next May’s primary, Coleman finished only two points behind him in last week’s straw poll. In a press release following the straw poll, Coleman points out several reasons the two point loss was really a win for his team:
- The Baker campaign spent an estimated 5 times as much as our campaign did on the straw poll.
- There is an unconfirmed report that the Baker campaign bought more than twice as many delegate tickets as our campaign.
- About 40 of our delegates were not able to be in Hot Springs and vote in the straw poll and, based on the approximate number of total votes cast, we estimate that we placed second by only about 14 votes.
- Approximately 80 people voted for us who were not there as one of “our” delegates.
So how has Coleman, whose name recognition was virtually non-existent at the outset of the campaign, spread his message and connected with enough Arkansans that it now looks like he could defeat the incumbent Lincoln in November?
To start with, he’s attended Tea Party events since last spring. Coleman’s been seen shaking hands, introducing himself and telling people face-to-face what he plans to carry to Washington if elected. He’s spoken at several of these events and connects with this group of voters who identify themselves more as conservatives than as Republicans.
When asked whether he thought the Rasmussen poll mentioned earlier spelled a GOP-3rd party split of the Republican vote, Coleman says “I’ve found that members of the TEA Party and the foundation members of the GOP are looking for the same things in a candidate: principle, passion, conviction, courage, and commitment to do far more than just win the election. My message to the our TEA Party supporters is the same as to our Republican supporters: I am a conservative Republican. Conservative first, Republican second…Members of the TEA Party and the Republican Party agree on this: we are much stronger united than divided.”
Coleman is capitalizing on the fact that Tea Party and GOP voters can soundly defeat the Democrats next year, if they can become allies. Remember, a combined Tea Party/GOP candidate takes 41% vs. Democrats’ 36% in the Rasmussen poll. In fact Coleman states, “I think the TEA Party can strengthen the GOP, but– to a large degree – that’s up to the GOP.”
In other words, not just any GOP candidate is guaranteed the support of Tea Party voters. The NY-23 congressional race discussed above proves his point. The Republican Party can’t count on voters’ dissatisfaction with Democrats to win votes, but must enlist candidates who satisfy the demands of conservatism, responsibility, and accountability to bring Tea Party voters into the GOP camp.
Coleman also recognized, early on, the benefits of a strong internet presence. With the mainstream media fawning over every Socialist turn taken by the Obama administration, there was little airtime available for coverage of a largely unknown upstart candidate for US Senate in Arkansas. Coleman compensated by taking his campaign to the internet from the start. He says, “The internet and its related social media have certainly given us the opportunity to build state and national name ID that probably would not have been possible otherwise, and therefore have facilitated our critical grass-roots organizational efforts.”
His campaign was still in its exploratory committee stage when he made his first post on his blog. He’s diligently updated his blog since then, posting a total of 44 articles while maintaining a busy campaign schedule traveling to all corners of the state for the more traditional campaigning methods of stump speeches and handshakes. But his blog is only part of his online strategy.
He’s also discovered the tremendous value of social networking sites in today’s political campaign. He’s active on Facebook and Twitter, often posting into the wee hours of the morning. One young supporter who traveled to Hot Springs from Malvern for last week’s straw poll was heard saying, “The reason I’m supporting you is because you’re so accessible,” speaking of their Facebook correspondence. He responds to emails personally, and often at hours when most people are snugly tucked in their beds.
Though some of his GOP opponents have made use of the internet and Tea Party to a lesser degree, and most now seem to be ramping up their presence in these arenas, Curtis Coleman has been building his grassroots base on the internet nearly from day one. His strategy seems to be paying off after defying formiddable odds in the straw poll last week.
The Republican Party needs to pay attention to what’s happening in Arkansas. New York showed us what will happen if the GOP simply hopes to exploit the Tea Party and depend on a nominating process that has failed the party miserably. This Arkansas Senate race is showing what can happen if the party actually embraces the ideas of the movement, welcomes them into the fold, and uses the internet to get its message out in spite of a mainstream media hell bent on furthering the Democrat agenda.
Apparently some of those anti-socialist, profit-seeking special interest groups got to Democratic Senators in their closed-door meetings and inserted language into Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s Obamacare bill that will allow insurance companies to place annual limits on benefits to cover costly medical conditions.
That’s right! The supposedly compassionate, caring, sympathetic, empathetic Democrats gave ear to insurance company interests who want to make a profit on their policies. From the AP article, Health care loophole would allow coverage limits.
A loophole in the Senate health care bill would let insurers place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses such as cancer, prompting a rebuke from patient advocates.
The legislation that originally passed the Senate health committee last summer would have banned such limits, but a tweak to that provision weakened it in the bill now moving toward a Senate vote.
As currently written, the Senate Democratic health care bill would permit insurance companies to place annual limits on the dollar value of medical care, as long as those limits are not “unreasonable.” The bill does not define what level of limits would be allowable, delegating that task to administration officials.
Then of course, in the now commonplace Democratic example of so-called transparency, nobody seems to know who changed the language in the bill! It seems these jackasses aren’t quite clear on the definition of transparent.
Officials of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network said they were taken by surprise when the earlier ban on annual coverage limits was undercut, adding that they have not been able to get a satisfactory explanation.
“We don’t know who put it in, or why it was put in,” said Stephen Finan, a policy expert with the cancer society’s advocacy affiliate.
Democratic officials of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee would not comment publicly but said the bill contains numerous provisions that will benefit patients with cancer and other life-threatening illnesses, not to mention improvements in preventive care.
And, of course, the ever opaquely transparent Democratic dishonesty continues in the form of a linguistic shell game designed to confuse and confound the American people. It’s as if the Dems’ promise the people an immediate $1000 benefit and simultaneously take away $10000 in benefits next year.
Democrats have touted a series of consumer protections as immediate benefits Americans will secure through the legislation. Both the Senate and House bills, for example, ban lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage.
But Finan said the change in the Senate bill essentially invalidates the legislation’s ban on lifetime limits.
“If you can have annual limits, saying there’s no lifetime limits becomes meaningless,” he said. A patient battling aggressive disease in its later stages could conceivably exhaust insurance benefits in the course of a year.
Not to mention the fact that no one lives forever! If you’re 35 and a $100,000 annual limit was placed on your insurance benefits, you’ve certainly got a lifetime limit of less than $10 million because it’s pretty much certain you won’t live to be 135.
And now we’re told a group of 10 Senators has come up with a compromise that strips the bill of its public option, but they won’t let the American people see it!
Kill this bill and make them let us in on what they have planned for OUR health care system!
Was it too much to hope for that the GOP might actually have learned a lesson from the disastrous turn of events in New York’s 23rd Congressional District earlier this month? After the NRCC blew nearly a million dollars on a RINO candidate who, in the end, dropped out and endorsed her Democratic rival, you’d think leaders of the Republican Party would realize victory isn’t assured in 2010 because a candidate has an “R” beside his name. And maybe they have.
One might even expect GOP heavyweights to recognize the grassroots’ aversion to candidates too deeply entrenched in the political establishment, especially when their adherence to conservative principles is in question. But even if they can’t take quite that big a step at the moment, the essential lesson from NY-23 is the national party needs to step aside and let the grassroots determine their nominee. But does that mean they can’t offer any help until a candidate is chosen?
In Arkansas, a state where Democratic Senator Mark Pryor didn’t even face a Republican challenger last year, there are already seven announced Republican candidates running for Democrat Blanche Lincoln’s Senate seat in 2010. Only two hold political office, while the others come from a variety of backgrounds–farming, business, medicine, and military–but have never run for office. This may be the most contested Republican primary for national office in Arkansas’ history.
After Senator John Cornyn’s (R-TX) promise that the National Republican Senatorial Committee “will not spend money in a contested primary,” conservatives in the state probably assumed the national GOP hierarchy would stand aside and let Arkansans decide who would stand against Lincoln next November. But some are wondering if Cornyn and his colleagues at the top of the GOP food chain are already working to anoint a candidate in the crowded field.
Cornyn, along with Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY), David Vitter (R-LA), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) held an NRSC fundraiser last week for Arkansas State Senator Gilbert Baker in Washington and there are shouts from every corner that this reeks of the Scozzafava scenario in New York. But Amber Wilkerson Marchand, spokeswoman for the NRSC says, “Baker had asked to have the fundraiser at the committee’s headquarters in Washington, and that the group would allow other candidates to have events there if they asked.”
Though we’ve been unable to reach all of Baker’s opponents, we did reach Arkansas Tea Party, Inc. founder and 2010 GOP Senate candidate Tom Cox. When asked if the committee had offered to host a similar event for his campaign he stated, “I can’t speak for the other candidates, but they [NRSC] made that offer to me.” So it doesn’t appear they plan to anoint Baker in the Arkansas race.
It looks like the NRSC might have learned from their congressional counterpart’s costly error last month that sent Democrat Bill Owens to the US House. They’re simply helping candidates raise much needed cash to unseat Lincoln.
Relax folks. No crisis here.