Dreams Into Lightning 2

Bolton to Endorse Romney

Apparently Newt Gingrich's plans for John Bolton weren't enough to keep Bolton from endorsing Mitt Romney in the Republican primaries.

Huntsman Enters GOP Primary

MSNBC: 'Calling the condition of America "totally unacceptable," former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman formally entered the 2012 Republican presidential sweepstakes on Tuesday, promising new jobs, energy independence and a simpler tax code. "Today I am a candidate for the office of president of the United States of America," Huntsman declared at Liberty State Park in New Jersey, the same site where Ronald Reagan announced his presidential candidacy in 1980.' Huntsman is seen as potentially friendly to gay rights groups; here's Independent Gay Forum from a week ago:

Let’s note that CNN didn’t invite former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson to the debate, and that likely candidate Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and former U.S. ambassador to China, has not yet declared and so was absent. Both oppose the constitutional amendment and wouldn’t reinstate DADT.

The GOP candidates last night made a number of strong points on the catastrophic deficit growth led by President Obama and congressional Democrats, and the perils of the Democrats’ blocking efforts at (and demagogic scare-mongering over) entitlement reform. But, with the exceptions noted, their fealty to using the government to enforce anti-gay discrimination makes them unacceptable. Here’s hoping Huntsman declares soon. ...

However, notes Alana Goodman at Commentary, Huntsman may have an Iran problem:

Back in 2009, the nuclear watchdog group United Against a Nuclear Iran reportedly discovered Huntsman Corp., the family business that helped fund Huntsman’s early political career, was selling polyurethane from its Tehran-based subsidiary. The watchdog was concerned the polyurethane could be used to build weapons and sent the following letter to the corporation:

“How can it be that Ambassador Huntsman could persuade the Chinese government to impose further economic sanctions on Iran when his namesake former company continues to do business in Iran?” read the letter from United Against a Nuclear Iran, a nonpartisan group founded by the late diplomat Richard Holbrooke and veteran Mideast envoy Dennis Ross.

The subsidiary closed shop under pressure in 2010, though Huntsman had already divested completely from the business back in 2005. But the multi-billion dollar corporation, which is still controlled by members of the Huntsman family and is swiftly expanding its reach in Asia, may become an issue for the presidential hopeful.

Perhaps most disconcerting is Huntsman Corp.’s current view on sanctions. Huntsman’s brother Peter now runs the company ...

Parallel Texas Universes

Joe Straus, a Jewish Republican, is the current Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives. He's up for re-election.

Beyond that, things get a little murky.

Ron Kampeas at JTA:

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- In Texas, the Tea Party passed its first Jewish test even before its legislators had been sworn in.

Deeply conservative forces in the Lone Star State firmly repudiated the effort by evangelical Christians to unseat the powerful Jewish speaker of the Texas House of Representatives because he wasn’t a “true Christian conservative.”

Michelle Goldberg at Tablet:

Joe Straus, the Republican speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, has been targeted by the Tea Party. The anti-Semitic attacks against him suggest not all politics is local.

Last month, Texas primary voters started receiving robocalls urging them to jettison the Republican speaker of the state House of Representatives, Joe Straus, who is Jewish, in favor of a “true Christian.” Ray Myers, chairman of the Kaufman County Tea Party, sent out a widely circulated email supporting one of Straus’ opponents and saying, “[W]e finally found a Christian Conservative who decided not to be pushed around by the Joe Straus thugs.” Another viral email promised, “Straus is going down in Jesus [sic] name.”

I'm going to spend this evening wading through this gibberish, and I'll post my thoughts on these two articles when I'm done. Meanwhile, you're invited to follow the links and see what you can come up with. (The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is baffled too.)

Republicans Leading the Fight for Gay Marriage in California - LA Weekly

Patrick Range McDonald and Matthew Fleischer, LA Weekly:

Powerful Republicans, through happenstance and well-orchestrated public policy, were leading the charge for the legalization and defense of same-sex marriage in California. It was something state Democrats, the seemingly natural allies of the gay-rights movement, could never completely pull off.

Via GayPatriot.

GOP 2.0

What is GOP 2.0?

STRENGTHEN NATIONAL DEFENSE - increase the size, capability and efficiency of our Armed Forces, bringing back our defense spending to historical levels as percentage of GDP.

GAIN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE - open up ANWR and the OCS to exploration; aggressively pursue nuclear energy and green technologies; and incent private industry to aggressively pursue clean, renewable energy sources.

SECURE THE BORDERS - build physical barriers immediately as a precursor to an overarching, sensible immigration policy. If the boat's sinking, you plug the holes first.

DEATH TO EARMARKS - zero tolerance for earmarks.

DEATH TO CORRUPTION - zero tolerance for corruption.

ENGLISH AS NATIONAL LANGUAGE - national unity requires a national language. That language is English.

IMPLEMENT FLAT TAX OR FAIR TAX - simplify the tax system by eradicating a tax code gone mad.

REDUCE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT - provide "whistleblower-style" awards for reducing the size of government and task the IRS (which will no longer have to worry about enforcing the tax code) with achieving the reduction goals on an annual basis

SPUR HEALTHCARE COMPETITION - Address health-care deficiencies - with competitive, free-market solutions, not Government largesse.

ADDRESS ENTITLEMENTS - engage a bipartisan consortium to create a multi-million dollar competition to incent teams from private industry and academia to create solutions for our social security and Medicare liabilities.

Sign me up.

Log Cabin: Senator Larry Craig Should Resign

*** UPDATE: He will. ***

Log Cabin Republicans, via e-mail release:

Log Cabin has been providing a strong voice in the midst of the scandal involving Senator Larry Craig (R-ID). His behavior has been inappropriate and illegal. His explanation is not credible. He should take responsibility for his poor judgment and illegal behavior by resigning.

Senator Craig has a terrible record on gay rights issues, so obviously hypocrisy is part of this story. However, even if he had a good record on gay issues his behavior would still be illegal and inappropriate.

See also:

Log Cabin's Patrick Sammon on CNN.

UPDATE via Insty: Senator Larry Craig will resign tomorrow, Saturday, September 1, 2007.

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig will announce Saturday he will resign from the Senate amid a furor over his arrest and guilty plea in a police sex sting in an airport men's room, Republican officials said Friday.

Democrats: Desperately Seeking Archie Bunker

"Once again, the Democrats attempt to define the GOP not as it is, but as they wish it were."

Gay Patriot West is talking here about the DNC's desperate attempt to weaken Rudy Giuliani's candidacy for the White House by "highlight[ing] Giuliani’s stance on gay issues in order to play on the bias of social conservatives, assuming that these Republicans would never support a candidate with such a record."

GPW goes on:

They even feature quote by Pat Buchanan. It’s amusing that while nearly all Republicans, including social conservatives, have distanced themselves from that angry man, the Left continues to define him as “Conservative Leader.” Buchanan’s politics have increasingly come to resemble not those of the conservative mainstream, but those of left-wing activists.

Once again, the Democrats attempt to define the GOP not as it is, but as they wish it were.

What this release really shows is that Democrats fear Giuliani’s candidacy. They want bring his differences from social conservatives to the fore in order to heighten divisions within the GOP and prevent his nomination.

To be sure, the former New York City Mayor will not have an easy time winning over many social conservatives. But, he has impressed the party’s rank and file with his leadership and resolve.

Read the rest here.

Remarks. Watch for the Democrats to keep trying to play this losing hand. Whenever a strong, sensible, social moderate like Giuliani comes up in political conversation, count the number of nanoseconds it takes the Democrats to start talking about the GOP conservative "base".

Wherefore "base"? Because when the DNC talk about the "conservative base", they want you to picture bible-thumping rednecks. As I noted in my post on Mary Cheney's baby, the liberal Left needs Archie Bunker. The Democrats can't win a debate on the real issues, so they have to create a caricatured image of their opponents and hope that you, the public, will be too dumb to see through it.

But as Gay Patriot West observes,

Instead of Rudy snubbing the conservative base, as the Democrats contend, he has been reaching out to them, highlighting areas of common ground, notably his intention, once elected, to appoint strict constructionist judges to the federal bench.

This is a real issue, and a real conservative issue. But it's not what the Democrats want to talk about. So they'll throw a bunch of stuff at Giuliani and hope something sticks.

I won't duplicate Gay Patriot's effort in dismissing the irrelevant Pat Buchanan, so let's take the DNC's quote from David Frum. Here is Frum as quoted in the DNC press release:

Frum Said Giuliani Can't Win. Neoconservative David Frum, ex-speechwriter to President Bush, put it bluntly when asked about Giuliani's shot at the nomination. "He has one obstacle in his way: the social conservatives. And he shouldn't just assume he can get past it," Frum said. [New York Daily News, 11/15/06]

Emphasis in original. Now here is the quote as it appears in the New York Daily News:

Neoconservative David Frum, ex-speechwriter to President Bush, put it bluntly when asked about Giuliani's shot at the nomination.

"He has one obstacle in his way: the social conservatives. And he shouldn't just assume he can get past it," Frum said.

It is, of course, the same quote. But I'm repeating it because I want you to see what it looks like without the DNC's all-important interpolation: "Frum Said Giuliani Can't Win." Frum certainly did not say Giuliani can't win, at least not in the quoted text. What he said was that Giuliani "should not assume" that the social conservatives will not present "an obstacle". In other words, Frum said exactly what GPW is saying here:

To be sure, the former New York City Mayor will not have an easy time winning over many social conservatives.

But as GPW explains,

If he can focus on those issues which unite our party, he could persuade those currently opposed to (or skeptical about) his candidacy to support him, particularly given the alternative of a Democratic president beholden to the far left.

And this is what the Democrats are afraid of.

Related. Mary Cheney's baby.