Posts Tagged ‘Sanford’

26th January
written by Sean Noble

Bob Robb, one of the best political commentators in Arizona, wrote a very insightful column yesterday headlined “Gingrich anti-establishment?”


There are some real gems worth repeating here:

Sometimes politics is staged as farce, as in the narrative in the Republican presidential primary that Newt Gingrich is the anti-establishment candidate.

The guy is a former speaker of the House of Representatives, for goodness sake. You know, third in line to be president.

Since being ousted as speaker, Gingrich has made himself wealthy as a political entrepreneur and operator. In fact, he got ousted in part because he starting doing too much of that while he was speaker.


Gingrich was as responsible as anyone for turning the Republican Party into the party of pork. Under his speakership, earmarks as a re-election tool proliferated.

In fact, virtually everything the tea party doesn’t like about the Republican establishment can be traced to Gingrich and his Majority Whip, later Majority Leader, Tom DeLay.

I remember the frustration of some of the true believers of the Class of ’94 when Gingrich and DeLay were advising the freshmen that the best way to win re-election was to send the bacon home.  Guys like my former boss John Shadegg and a his cohorts like Tom Coburn and Mark Sanford fought those guys every day.

Gingrich is no conservative.

26th February
written by Sean Noble

I’ll be blogging from CPAC for the next couple days.  I’ll be commenting on speeches by Sen. Tom Coburn, Congressman John Shadegg, RNC Chairman Michael Steele, Gov. Mark Sanford and Rush Limbaugh who concludes the conference on Saturday evening.

For those who don’t know, CPAC is the premiere conservative event each year.  It was at CPAC in 1974 that Reagan launched his Presidential run against Ford in 1976 with a speech about America being the “City upon a Hill” (sound familiar?)

To learn more about CPAC, go here.

25th February
written by Sean Noble

Governors will have to make some tough choices that Congress and Obama have forced upon them through policy changes in the stimulus bill.   At least one Democrat Governor is seriously considering not taking the federal money, because of the strings that are attached.

For most Governors, it’s too much of an enticement as they struggle to deal with massive budget deficits.  In Arizona Governor Brewer’s case, she faces the largest shortfall as a percentage of the total budget in the nation – no state has it as bad as Arizona.

That’s the legacy of Janet Napolitano.  The inheritance she left her successor was a two-year shortfall of nearly $5 billion.  That is an absolutely staggering sum.

So, it’s not likely that Brewer will join Governors like Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, or Haley Barbour of Mississippi.

But there is an important reason why Brewer will likely take the money – the obligations for Arizona are actually less severe than other states.  Jindal, Sanford and Barbour are reticent to take the federal money because they will have to make changes to unemployment laws and state health care laws to satisfy the desire Democrats in the House and Senate have for “government-creep,” that is, the requirement that states expand the scope of government services  to more and more people.

In an ironic twist, Napolitano had already broadened the scope of government so much that Arizona can take the money without fundamentally changing current law.

My point is this.  Brewer taking the money is not a sign of retreating on principle as compared to other Governors who don’t take the money.  It just demonstrates, yet one more time, the enduring legacy of a big-government liberal who tried to masquerade as a “moderate” and happened to be named Janet.

27th January
written by Sean Noble

Georgia Republican Congressman Phil Gingrey is telling Rush Limbaugh to butt out.  Not smart.

Rush Limbaugh has the most listened-to radio show in the history of the earth.  As a result, he is closer to the pulse of conservative, grassroots activist than most Members of Congress. 

Gingrey was elected long after the 1994 GOP Revolution, so he can be somewhat forgiven for not recognizing the power of Rush.  After the 1994 election, the new freshmen held a dinner at Camden Yards that featured Rush.  Rush was made an honorary member of the 1994 Republican Freshman class.  I was there, and it was historic.

(It was also memorable, because it was the first time in my life that I ate an anchovy.  They served a Caesar salad, with, what looked like to me, brownish little bacon strips.  I had a pretty rude surprise when I popped one in my mouth!)

That night, Rush talked about the clamoring for change the American people wanted and it was their desire for change that motivated them to get out and elect Republicans to the majority.  He said that the Members of Congress had an obligation and a duty to hold fast to the principles they campaigned on.

Sadly, very few of the Members listened and absorbed.  Of the 74 there that night, I can name, on one hand, those that have stuck to principle: John Shadegg (still in Congress), Tom Coburn (now in the Senate), Mark Sanford (Governor of South Carolina), and two who have been pretty good: Saxby Chambliss (now in the Senate) and Sam Brownback (now in the Senate).

Others who stayed principled, but who are no longer in office include Matt Salmon (AZ), Steve Largent (OK), J.C. Watts (OK), Mark Neumann (WI) and Gil Gutnecht (MN).

Gingrey should be figuring out ways to follow Limbaugh’s lead – not get in the way.