Who Can Wait 'Til November?

The upcoming midterm congressional elections will offer First District voters something that they are not used to: a choice. Incumbent Representative Jack Kingston (R–GA 01) has not been involved in a close campaign since his first win in 1992. In fact, the First District of Georgia is so solidly Republican that Democrats have frequently opted out of the race altogether. Such is not the case this year. Reverend Jim Nelson, a Democratic preacher from Savannah, has thrown his hat into the ring for the congressional seat, and he intends to give Kingston a run for his money.

Nelson, a Vietnam-era veteran of the U.S. Army, has made the central issue of his campaign the protection of veterans’ benefits. In a recent speech in Hinesville, he unveiled his Contract With American Veterans. Leading off his campaign with issues related to defense is a smart political move in a district dominated by military personnel, families, and sympathetic conservatives. However, the 350-word contract offers only one substantive proposal: that the Veteran’s Administration becomes mandated for obligatory budget funding – and that viewpoint is already championed by many congressional Republicans. The inexperienced Nelson has thus far offered merely sound bite generalizations on every other major issue facing the nation and the district.

Adversely, Jack Kingston has demonstrated that he is an opinion leader, a capable legislator, and a strong advocate of South Georgia in the House of Representatives. Therefore, we here at The Story endorse Jack Kingston for the First District congressional seat.

In his seven terms in Congress, Kingston has risen steadily through the ranks of the House Republican leadership, and that translates to solid representation for his district. He is the Vice-Chairman of the House Republican Conference, a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, and the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Agriculture. In his capacity as Vice-Chairman of the H.R.C., he is a major force in shaping and articulating the majority party’s policies. Kingston’s membership in the Appropriations Committee makes him a major player in the budgeting process. His chairmanship of the subcommittee on Agriculture translates to prime representation for the district’s many farmers. If Kingston were to lose his seat, the district would lose a large amount of influence in the House.

In addition to the favorably disproportionate influence he gives South Georgia in Congress, Kingston has pressed for legislation that will strengthen both the American economy and the average family’s budget. He is currently working with a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives in sponsoring the “Fuel Choices For American Security Act” (H.R. 4409). The proposed legislation would expand research into ethanol and methanol, both of which are bio-fuels that rely on American grown raw materials. If passed and successful, the long-term effect could be significant reductions in fuel prices, increases in both agricultural and industrial employment, a cleaner environment, and a foreign diplomacy more true to American principles. Being the House sponsor of this legislation, Kingston has taken the lead on the issue by traveling the country to deliver speeches, writing op-ed pieces for various media, and appearing on prime time cable news shows to discuss the proposal.

His opponent, Jim Nelson, claims that if he is elected, he will propose energy legislation aimed directly at cutting consumer costs. Jack Kingston has already sponsored a much more expansive bill, garnered 63 bipartisan cosponsors, and promoted it nationally. Make no mistake about it: this will be the most important issue to the average voter come November, and Kingston has already effectively won it.

Nelson also lists creating jobs and strengthening the economy as his priorities if he were to be elected. Unfortunately for Nelson, with the unemployment rate at 4.7% (which is lower than the average of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s), 17 straight quarters of strong economic growth, and the tell-tale $94 billion increase in tax revenues after the 2003 cuts – the issues of employment and economic prosperity should belong to the Republican incumbent.

Rep. Kingston has a long, distinguished, and active record both as a legislator and a leader. His record shows a willingness to reach across the aisle to find the right solutions for his constituents. Reverend Jim Nelson seems to be a good man with his heart in the right place, but he has not as of yet given us any reason to give the incumbent the boot. Jack Kingston is the right man for both District 1 and America.

Snow in May

Ladies and gentlemen, copy and paste what you are about to read and save it for reprint in the history books one day. You won't often hear me say this (or type it, for that matter), but...I was wrong.

A few days ago I commented on the White House shake-up and said that I expected nothing substantive to come of it. It seemed to be a show for the media. Instead, the Bush administration has addressed what is, unquestionably, its most obvious vulnerability: communication.

Today it has been confirmed by several news agencies that Tony Snow will be replacing White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan in two weeks.

Snow, a former George H.W. Bush speech writer and popular Fox News journalist, is the perfect man to articulate the administration's policy objectives. He has a quiet yet tough and humorous way of getting his point across. He never backs down, and when you think you have him nailed to the wall, he turns the tables and you quickly realize that he is the one holding the hammer. Most importantly, he is a well-known person that the American people can trust - which is just what this administration needs. The White House Press Corps will have one hell of a time trying to get the experienced politico/journalist to give them sound bites they can twist.

This is a great day for Republicans, as we now have a trustworthy, likeable man charged with the responsibility of articulating our viewpoints and causes.

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,193093,00.html

Iran, Gas, Economy

Guess what? You still don't get a cogent argument. Here's what I'm thinking about today:

1. Turn on the television or pick up a newspaper and you are sure to hear Democrats talking about how President Bush is not doing enough to investigate price gouging as it relates to the current hike in gas prices. In 1999, crude prices were about 35 cents per gallon. Currently, crude is about $1.59 per gallon. That is an increase of 454%. Gas prices have risen 162% in that same period. Paying $3 per gallon at the pump is difficult for most people, but it is not nearly as difficult as it would be if "Big Oil" would have raised gas prices in proportion to the price they pay for crude.

a) China and India now consume as much oil as the whole world did 10 years ago; and, b) Exploration plummeted as a practice when crude was $20 a barrel some time ago. Math Time! a+b= massive demand and static supply. Add global instability, refinery issues, and gasbag politicians to the equation - and you are ready for a Huffy.

2. The Dow, Nasdaq, and S&P have been surging near record highs and unemployment is 4.7%(Recall that Bill Clinton bragged about maintaining a 6% unemployment rate during his re-election bid in 1996). Our economy is red hot. BUT:

a) The press has an innate liberal bias; b) 2006 is an election year; and, c) a hard view of the economy makes Republicans even more vulnerable in November. Math time! a+b+c= the press painting a picture of economic despair! Consider the ankle-grabbin' good time at the pump, and the public buys it!

3. I have heard many people argue that Iran is not close enough to building a bomb for us to concern ourselves with their activities. The same people say that the Iranian government is just a bunch of grandstanding nuts who should not be taken literally when they speak of wiping Israel off the map.

They said the same thing about Hitler in the 1930's. We know exactly the road down which Iran is heading. Even if the world is not yet in immediate danger, why should we stand idly by until we are? We call that situation an "Oh, Shit-uation". We WILL face devastating consequences if we allow ourselves to get into an "Oh, Shit-uation" with regards to a nuclear Iran .

More of the Same

I keep promising a well-researched, coherent post, but guess what? You're not getting one today. I am waiting for my partner to finish up her end of a project at 12:45 am in the library, so here are some more thoughts:

1. The Democratic party has been hard at work training its challengers for the mid-term congressional elections. The new national security sound bite sounds like this (according to Florida Democrat Tim Mahoney): "It's good to be tough on defense...but it's better to be tough and smart!" Ok. Fantastic. I agree. I cannot argue with that statement, and neither can you, dear reader. The problem lies in its indeterminate nature. Admittedly, the Republican party has many vulnerabilities heading into the November elections, and even the party faithful would like a meaningful dialogue to discuss the direction into which the party - and subsequently the country - are heading. The Democratic party, oft-criticized for having less of a platform than a place from which to throw political stones, has apparently not learned that the American people want to hear alternatives to the status quo. Until they can offer up solutions to the problems facing the country, they will continue to be irrelevant.

2. Iran has been elected to the United Nations Disarmament Committee. If in the past few days you have heard a faint, distant tapping noise, it was coming from New York. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annnan has been slamming his head against his desk in frustration since this transpired. This new episode is stealing the headlines from his efforts to re-legitimize the U.N. by doing away with the Political Punch Line Committee (i.e. The U.N. Human Rights Committee) in favor of the establishment of the new U.N. Council on Human Rights. The cornerstone of the new council will be its selective criteria for membership. The move was made to counter the criticism of the U.N. as a whole that came from having countries such as Libya sitting on the HRC. The U.S. is one of only four countries to vote against the new council, claiming that the measure does not go far enough (Math lesson: new bureaucratic shakeup = $$$$. U.S. Funding = 1/4 of U.N. $$$$. It had better go far enough, or it's not worth the $$$$ blown in a half-assed attempt). In the words of United States Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton, "The real test will be whether the new council addresses the tough issues in countries like Iran, Syria, Sudan, and so on."

3. Despite the recent Chief of Staff shake-up at the White House, I do not believe any truly substantive changes will be made to the administration. New Chief Joshua Bolten is a Bush loyalist who has been speaking softly and thus far carrying a small stick. He has talked of the need to "renew and refresh" the administration, and who can argue with that? He recently called on those within the administration who were thinking about quitting to do so now. There is no point to making a public statement like that - except in a weak attempt to convince the country that you are making changes. What Bolten needs to do is convince the American people that the Bush administration is going to completely change the way that it does business. The only way to accomplish that is by giving several high-level advisors the boot. We'll see if he comes through in the coming months. P.S. Donald Rumsfeld, since taking over the DOD in 2001, has had as his stated goal the reorganization of the U.S. Army. He has attempted to create an elite, lightweight, 21st century fighting force. In order to do so, he has slashed the Army's bureaucracy. This has upset many ranking military officials - read, the 6 ticked off general officers. Rumsfeld's plan for the military makes sense. He is a straight-shooter, which makes him a bad politician. He's not the right man to go after in this witch hunt.

Bed time.

Here's What You Should Think

I'm tired and don't feel like trying to impress you with my vocabulary and/or syntax. Here:

Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition has pledged to pay for the tuition of the stripper who accused the Duke lacrosse team of rape. For those of you who are not familiar with this story, a black stripper accused the white Duke students of gang-raping her after a party a few weeks ago. Since then, the team has undergone DNA tests, all of which came up negative. Additionally, the police officer who arrived at the scene declared that the accuser was, "passed out drunk". No indictments have been handed down, and no arrests have been made. Jackson has said that his organization will pay for her tuition whether or not her story turns out to be true. If they did it... they should hang. If they didn't, they deserve a massive apology and that woman deserves jail time. But, according to Jackson, even if she is filing a false report and accusing innocent people of a heinous crime, SHE still has been wronged. Why does anyone pay attention to Jesse Jackson?

The opening day of the film United 93 is rapidly approaching. There will be those who say that Hollywood is exploiting 9/11 for a few extra bucks. In some respects, they are correct. However, the film has been endorsed by family members of those on the doomed flight, and the word is that the project was done as respectfully and as realistically as possible. It will be painful for many Americans to relive the emotional stress of that awful day, but this is a story that needs to be told.

I heard a fantastic analogy in regards to the immigration debate today: "Why don't people think that by jumping ahead in the line to citizenship - Mexicans will upset everyone else? It's like waiting in a long line for tickets to a Braves World Series game for a week, and then 10 minutes before the game someone just walks up to the front and strolls in." That's an excellent point. There are countless people waiting on their citizenship who have done things the right way. Why should we grant virtual amnesty to a particular group of people who a) broke the law, and b) have the gall to march on our streets and make demands of our government?
-Baseball can solve all of our problems.

Speaking of Baseball, thank God for John Smoltz. He's the first Braves starting pitcher to pick up a win this season. Tonight he struck out 4 in a dominant complete game shutout. This was exactly what both fans and our bullpen needed. He's about as reliable as they come. Smoltz for governor. Jeff Francouer has also turned it on in the past few games. He's gone deep three times and gotten several key 2 out RBI. Those are the two good stories. The one we need to watch is Edgar Renteria's rib injury. That can really agitate a shortstop.

Happy Easter. One day I will put effort into this once again!

Random

Sorry I haven't updated the site. I know my loyal readers have been getting upset. So I apologize to both of you. Here are some random thoughts to keep you satisfied.

1. The protests in Paris are the the inevitable result of a leftist economy. Freeing up the markets seems unacceptable to the masses, who have a profound sense of entitlement after years of socialist-leaning economic policies. The irony of the situation is that the labor laws WOULD decrease the staggeringly high youth unemployment rate (currently 22% for would-be workers under age 26). Employers will not grow their workforce with the current laws which make it nearly impossible to fire an employee. With the proposed two year probationary period, the employing firm is given new freedom and flexibility and can find a broader, more productive work force. Productivity spurs economic growth. Entitlement, ew.

2. Cynthia McKinney used her race to unjustly smear a Capitol Police officer to cover her own abhorrible behavior. What an insult to those who truly experience the evils of racism. Excuses, ew.

3. Tom DeLay's resignation will ultimately help Republicans in November. Respected political observers have weighed in on the subject and most have come to the conclusion that Democrats will not be able to raise as much for their warchest in that district (anti-DeLay sentiment is strong). On the flip side, DeLay, a fund raising genius, will still work for the Republican running to replace him. He made his move early enough in the season so that it will be old news come November. Big money politicians, ew.

4. The immigration debate is dominating the news right now. One thing we can all agree on is that we should not be essentially told what to do by law-breakers waving the flags of foreign countries on our streets. I support the latest proposal, but with reservations. That will be an entire topic in my very next post, hopefully tomorrow. Procrastination, ew.

5. Phil Mickelson won his second Masters Tournament today. That is great. The Braves' bullpen blew a 9th inning lead in San Francisco today. That is awful. Chris Reitsma, ew.