Rep. Rick Santorum Calls Himself Stupid (I think)

Enquiring minds find his recent statements lead to intriguing questions.  The Rep. on Sat. stated: “We will never have the media on our side, ever, in this country. We will never have the elite, smart people on our side.”

Despite the fact about the media being repeatedly proven untrue, I'm curious as to the definition of  "the elite," not to mention "smart." Sooo... being one of 435 in the entire U.S. sounds elite to me. Smart?  Able to read AND write?  Are elite & smart necessarily attached?

Then there is: "Santorum also criticized the libertarian wing of the Republican party who 'don’t want to talk about social issues,' saying that 'without the church and the family, there is no conservative movement, there is no basic values of America.'” Besides questionable syntax...

Read the Constitution lately?  Our founding fathers weren't exactly traditional Church members. So... none of them were Conservatives?  They had no basic values?  It boggles the mind...

It reminds me of the time I was out having breakfast one morning after an election I had run in as a liberal Democrat (lost to the long-time Republican liberal incumbent).  I ran into a candidate from a different race (who also lost) who is most definitely a conservative Rep. who also happens to be a staunch Catholic (whatever that means).  He met my family & we talked about many things- nothing political.  As we were leaving he remarked that, gee, he was surprised that I did have family values.  HUH???

But back to Rick's remarks.  Does this mean that ALL Republicans are neither elite nor smart?  Okay.  I can live with the latter (( especially after listening to Clint). His logic is impeccable, right?  Unless, of course, he is stupid.  Which would make his remarks applicable to him (except for the "elite" bit).  But who would give a fig for any remarks a non-smart man would make?  This just boggles the mind.  Does this mean I am smart?  Or... I can read & write after all.  Elite?  I think the most important point to be taken from the Santorum speech is (like Eastwood)... it certainly gave me LOL! Clint, baby- great actor, director; lousy extemp speaker.  Next time- use the script someone has written for you.  (Rick, hon, r u listening? )  Umm, Just a thought- isn't Clint one of the "elite?"

Some Context

As a native of Delaware, I think I'm uniquely qualified to offer my fellow Li'l Rhodians some context on Christine O'Donnell's primary victory over Mike Castle. No, it's not like Lincoln Chafee losing to Steve Laffey. It's like John Chafee losing to a bag lady.

Specter Switches Political Parties

Marked as one of the last northeast Republicans, Arlen decided to ditch a difficult oncoming Primary in Pa. & switch from being a Republican to a Democrat. Too bad our local Chafee never did the same in '06.

Weak & Inconsequential District Leadership

There is an opinion column in today's Projo by J. Michael Levesque- former Republican state chairman, and two-term mayor of West Warwick. In it he opines on the state of the once powerful Republican Party & the lack of leadership emanating from their defacto leader- Governor Carcieri.

the once powerful Republican Party has become so weak and inconsequential that it’s a rare sight to see a candidate for public office put the party label on his or her lawns signs.

He continues in his would-be elegy:

the now anemic five senators, who despite their talent and best intentions, like their counterparts in the House, are largely ignored by the Democratic leadership, the Republican Party seems a ship without a rudder.

That's us, folks! WE have one of the anemic senators ignored by Senate leadership. Which begs the more important and essential question: WHY? Are we out of our minds? Senator Gibbs was one of the legislators on the Permanent School Funding Formula Committee which just put forth the legislation reducing our area's funding from the state. Heard any comments from her?


The answer is: yes, we are out of our minds. Constantly re-electing a long-time Republican Senator who, btw, rec'd the second lowest majority in the last election after a quarter century of no turnover (she believes in term limits) paces us in the elk of, please shoot me in the foot. The Newport Daily News with its insane unspoken endorsement policy of half Dems & half Republicans, purporting to support us in the long term with the promise of a "balanced" Legislature, is NUTS!

In the "long term," we'll all be dead.

Republicans Plan URI Tuition Increases

While listening to "A Lively Experiment" I heard the NEA's Bob Walsh bring up the Republican's Jelly Doughnut Solution as his "weekly outrage." BTW- my weekly outrage was no women on this program. He mentioned that since URI receives 15% (actually it's 14%, Bob, but close enough) of the State budget for funding, the Republican solution would mean that in two years it would only receive 5% funding. Uh-oh. Since my son is now a frosh at URI, I decided to follow up on this.

This from the URI Foundation website:

The State of Rhode Island contributes just 14 percent of URI’s operating budget, compared with 24 percent a decade ago.
To help make up this shortfall, URI has increased tuition an average of 7.5 percent each year over the past five years. These increases have made it more challenging for students with limited financial resources to pursue URI degrees.

What does this mean? My son attends URI & annually pays tuition $6400 & fees $2200 ( health insurance can add another $1000 unless you can prove in a timely fashion that you have it- I was not quick enough) amounting to appx. $8700. Of course, this does not include books, transportation, or housing/food. Campus housing (if you can get it & he could not) is $2751 per semester ($400 less for a triple) & food (many diff't options)- appx. $2000 per semester.


Now if they increase tuition 7.5% each year with 14% funding, let's extrapolate that. With 4% State funding, tuition will be increased 30% over a two year period & then 7.5% thereafter. This translates into appx. $550-600 increase each year after the initial $1800 increase. So in 3 years my son's tuition will be $9000 (quite a jump from the initial $6400) plus fees (no choice here & I figured in no increase) =$11,200. Throw in housing, & food (with no increases) and it's now over $20,000/yr. Not such a great buy now.

How does one justify this in an age demanding an educated force? Oh, I know how they do it. We fool everyone into thinking we're reducing taxes while what they are really doing is increasing tuition, fees, etc. so that the rich get richer and the rest of us ...well, who really cares. Only those who can afford it (rich) should be in college anyway. Isn't this the point of the new "ownership society?" A few have everything while everyone else is on "their own" with no social support whatsoever? But, wait, we're the everyone. We're "the people." When does government start remembering that? Maybe when we do & vote/act accordingly. Forget the "Jelly Doughnut Solution." It's just not worth if for what will only be a fleeting, momentary delight with rather unpleasant consequences.

Who Is Hugh Cort?

As Eileen notes here, thirteen presidential candidates made it on to the ballot here in Rhode Island, four Democrats and nine Republicans. The Democrats are the big three plus Kucinich, while the Republicans are the big six plus Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, and Hugh Cort. This naturally raises the question: Hugh Cort?

Since he's going to be on the ballot in November, we might as well find out who this guy is. First of all, he's not a joke candidate like Vermin Supreme. He is very, very serious, serious enough to have his own Wikipedia article, and serious enough to get onto the ballot here in Rhode Island.

As the article notes, Dr. Hugh Cort III is a psychiatrist and self-proclaimed antiterrorism expert from Alabama. He believes that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks, and that Osama bin Laden is planning to blow up ten US cities with suitcase nukes. He believes that the US should launch a bombing campaign against Iran, and that global warming is being caused by the sun getting hotter. His campaign literature states that "America has gotten so far away from God and His protection, with abortion, homosexual marriage, and many other sins, that destruction is coming on America a million times worse than 9/11."

So, who is Hugh Cort? Basically, he's your standard-issue modern-day conservative Republican, little different than "mainstream" candidates like Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee. The only real difference between him and them is that they have a lot of money to spend campaigning, and he doesn't.

Steve Laffey: The Gift That Keeps on Giving

Now that the holiday season is upon us once again, it seems like an appropriate time to thank the Republican Party of Rhode Island for their gift to the Democrats: Steve Laffey.

It was back in September 2005 that Laffey, the Mayor of Cranston, ignored the frantic entreaties of his fellow Rhode Island Republicans and launched a primary challenge against Senator Lincoln Chafee. Laffey quickly attracted the attention of the Club for Growth, a far-right antitax group that specializes in funding primary challenges to moderate Republicans.

Senator Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, then the chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, not being as crazy as the Club for Growth, knew that if Laffey won the Republican primary, Chafee's senate seat would fall like a ripe avocado into the hands of the Democrats, and would remain there for the foreseeable future. Determined to save the seat for Chafee, the NRSC poured millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours into the Republican primary.

The NRSC's effort in RI succeeded in staving off Laffey's challenge, thanks in large part to an influx of unaffiliated voters into the GOP primary, but at a cost. The primary challenge left the Rhode Island GOP divided and Chafee's hold on his seat precarious. As the general election neared, it became clear to the national Republican Party that they would have to intervene again. Once more, people and money that might have gone to other close races were diverted into the battle for Rhode Island, but this time, it didn't work. Chafee lost to Democratic challenger Sheldon Whitehouse. And not only did the GOP lose their seat in Rhode Island, they also saw several other incumbents go down to defeat. In particular, Senator George Felix Allen, Jr. of Virginia lost his seat to Democratic challenger James Webb.

Of course, there were a number of reasons Allen lost, especially the Macaca video and the months he spent preparing the groundwork for a presidential run when he should have been paying attention to the race in Virginia. But Laffey's primary challenge to Chafee, and Liddy Dole's panicked response, also played their part, and in a race as close as the Webb-Allen contest, even small factors can affect the outcome.

Which brings us to the 2008 presidential election. The GOP's presidential race is in a state of extreme flux, due in large part to the fact that rank-and-file voters aren't very happy with any of their choices. Back in April, when Republican frontrunner John McCain's first quarter fundraising numbers proved disappointing and his campaign began to falter, Republicans started to look for a man on a white horse to take up the frontrunner mantle.

What Republicans really needed was another George W. Bush, a dim-witted "regular guy" from a Southern state with no real record of accomplishment onto whom the GOP's various factions could project their own visions of the ideal candidate. Allen would have fitted this role admirably, and I think there can be little doubt that if his own presidential campaign hadn't been derailed by the loss of his senate seat, he would now be the Republican frontrunner, garnering adulation from the Corporate Media for his manifold virtues and bringing next year's election within stealing distance. Instead, Republican voters have been sorting through the rest of the candidates, going from Giuliani to Thompson to Romney to Huckabee, and now desperately giving McCain another look in their increasingly frantic quest to find someone they can all agree on.

As a Democrat, all I can do is say, thank you, Steve Laffey. You made it all possible.

(My thanks also to Donald B. Hawthorne of the blog Anchor Rising for inadvertantly giving me the title for this post.)

"Poverty Pimps"

The R.I. Republican Chair Giovanni Cicione’s in his radio rant also referred to "poverty pimps" - those who advocate for - the poor. Uh, what does he call the lobbyists of groups who belong to various business, religious, or other group interests & are well-paid for it, unlike the pp.'s? Just pimps?

So where is the outrage from Party members? Hello June, Bruce. What say you? Hello Republican Council members & school committees? Cat got your tongues?

Thanks to Projo & staff writers for pointing out the pp. term which I had missed.

Republicans Heart Teachers, But HATE Unions

I've been trying for a few days to figure out why the recent press release by the Republican Chair (see Phoneix's "Not for Nothing" blog), Barrington lawyer & State Republican counsel, Gio Cicione, bothers me so much, cause it does. It's not that I'm a stranger to the vitriolic rhetoric released on the national level. In the past decade, it reached the level of "de riguer" for Republican party officials.
I suppose the surprise is that it's reached here and struck on a more personal level. While not a current member of the NEA, I certainly have been in the position that many members now find themselves in - Sept. & no contract.
The angry, demeaning wordstream aimed at the Union and officials takes the form of being directed to the NEA. But substitute any union at all, and the spewing fountain of demeaning language will do. While this one-sided conversation did not mention things like pensions, overtime, seniority, etc., it could easily be substituted for any teacher-specific rhetoric.
Today in the "Newport Daily News" there was a letter from a Portsmouth senior (62 & disabled). She bemoans the fact that if you collect more than $733 in Soc. Security a month, you are not eligible for Medicaid or food stamps. Now she understands why people can end up living on the street. Then advice is offered to young people to "make sure you work for a company that guarantees a pension, not one that can cancel it at any time. My employers did this to me." And then the real kicker, "You must be very, very careful who you vote for." While the former is now impossible to do (thanks to recent federal legislation there are NO pension guarantees, let alone companies who feel obligated to even bother offering pensions), the last sentence certainly rings true enough.
The barbed insults thrown an at teachers regarding their leadership is meant to undermine faith in the Union. But it won't work. Never has. The teachers must be surprised to learn that they have absolutely no authority or control over the actions of their own officials and are pawns. Cicione also emphasizes union leadership’s tactics of authorizing an illegal strike hurts the reputation of teachers who get caught in the middle and have no authority to overrule their own union. “The NEA is breaking the law, and using both teachers and students as pawns for their political gain.”
Pawns? Blooming idiots? On our own we are intelligent, reasonable human beings, but when those Union leaders get ahold of us, we become brainless, obedient robots. The idea that the opposite is true, that in union we find the strength & the voice to express our views, is not even considered. Duh.
Even more ironic is the sudden manufactured concern of "creating chaos for families scrambling for child care arrangements at the last minute." Funny, affordable child care isn't often mentioned on the state Republican agenda.
Another dart that hits home is his concern with teachers supposedly "breaking the law" and wanting the government to file RICO charges against the NEA leadership. "RICO" charges are what Tony Soprano was always worried about, and what brought the "Teflon Don," down. Serious stuff.
Years ago my family was embroiled in civil court over an item that would be considered peanuts to most, but involved my families' livelihood. The case dragged on as they always do. While my family was victorious, it was costly, destroyed long-time relationships, and likely contributed to the sudden death of my Dad. I know the financial strain and tension even small cases can result in, let alone serious charges like RICO which are not only costly but can result in long jail terms.
The fact that a lawyer is making these charges does not escape unnoticed. A few lawyers in business use their legal knowledge like a sword & hammer to maniuplate those unable to offer resistance. Even though that may not be the case here, it is meant to intimidate while opening the pockets of the federal government to bring charges against those who will actually have to cough up funding.
I can't help but echo the senior's observation that elections are just around the corner and this is the time to become involved. I would hope that any candidate running against a Republican opponent, remember & use the Chair's statements & challenge them to reiterate their thoughts on his words. For those who often remark that there seems to be little difference between the Parties, especially on the State and Local levels, I am reminded of Texas columnist Molly Ivins words, "It's like, duh. Just when you thought there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties, the Republicans go and prove you're wrong."
And not one leading Republican official has murmered a public disclaimer of dissent. Not a one. A hat tip to blogger Justin Katz at Anchor Rising who did and Tom Shevling at R.I. Report, a former Republican who has disafilliated.

Government Underfoot

The best part about running for office, just like blogging, is all the interesting people that you meet. I met Tom when I spotted his blog one day, "Newport 9." Then when I went to the first of Whitehouse's pasta dinners, I spotted him with a large button with his blog's name. Hey, are you??? We ran into each other many times after that. And as you can tell, that's where the idea for my blog's name came from.
His blog is now gone (sigh!), but you can't keep a good man done (at least not for long). So here is Tom's first post of many. I have a life so I don't edit.



I'd like to begin this inaugural post at RI12 by thanking Eileen for inviting me over here. For reasons that seemed good to me, I discontinued my original blog, Newport 9, but Eileen felt that I should still have a place on the internets, and she has graciously offered me space on her own blog to share whatever thoughts happen to lodge themselves within my echoing cranium, and I have graciously accepted.

The topic of today's post is a simple one: why the Democrats are better than the Republicans. You'd think this would be self-evident, but given how many Republicans there are in this country, apparently it's not. I'm reminded why Democrats are better than Republicans every time I take my dogs for a walk.

As we wander around Newport, we occasionally come across a small metal plate affixed within the concrete of the sidewalk. The plate says:

BUILT
BY
WORKS PROGRESS
ADMINISTRATION
1935 - 1937

The Works Progress Administration, or WPA, was a government agency set up during the New Deal to build infrastructure and employ workers during the Great Depression, thereby ameliorating two problems facing the country back then: too little infrastructure, and too many unemployed workers. The WPA built dams, bridges, libraries, airports; the Riverwalk in San Antonio, Texas; the Picnic Shelter in Piedmont Park, Atlanta; and of course, the sidewalks in Newport, Rhode Island.

Seventy years after they were built, the sidewalks of Newport still provide value to the good people of this city (and their dogs), a testament to the power of good government to improve the lives of generations of citizens, and a testament to those Democratic politicians of the 1930s who embraced the concept of good government and made it work.

What legacy have the Republicans left to the people of this country? Pretty much the only positive accomplishment they can point to is President Eisenhower's interstate highway system, and even that was actually created by Democrats: Representative George Hyde Fallon of Maryland, and Senator Albert Gore, Sr., of Tennessee.

As for George W. Bush, what legacies will he leave behind him after departing from the White House? Well, all the budget deficits he ran up will still be unpaid, and all the people he's managed to kill will still be dead, and that's about it.

And that's why Democrats are better than Republicans.

Rep. Loughlin Defines Republicans Again

This time the Rep. goes big time by being published in Projo. Seems as if he did a little cleaning up of his original guest op ed piece in the "Newport Daily News" (see below). Do you think that he read the critique below & on "Newport Nine?" Nah! The latter had his published in the daily snooze (sorry, no link).

Same critique now. Oddly enough, nowhere in the article does Loughlin use the word "jobs," but it makes for a great headline.

Wonder who did the rewrite? The grammatical error is gone & other changes were made. Projo editors may have cleaned it up or House Republican staffers who have, like, dictionaries.

Rep. Loughlin Defines Republicans???

It’s the biggest bunch of baloney since an Oscar Mayer commercial. I’m referring to Rep. John Loughlin’s apology for being a Republican in Thurs. “Newport Daily News.” Sorry, no free link. It’s a “Guest View” entitled, “R.I. Republicans must Present Vision.” There’s a “Duh!” moment if ever there was one.

Rep. Loughlin represents Little Compton & some of Tiverton. He had no opposition this election so this article affords him an opportunity to elucidate on what his “vision” is. He must be feeling somewhat intimidated by the Dem. victories this Fall & the desertion of Rep. Scott recently from the Republican party. Having a Republican represent our District is as useful as teats on a bull.

Part of the R.I. Republican Party’s core principles is a “limited government.” One sure wouldn’t guess this from the Party’s expansion of government on the national scene. Or the Guv’s wanting to raise salaries and add jobs for non-certified office holders today. The guv’s reason for this comes from his spokesman, “I understand that the funds to pay for these positions and salary increases are coming from gambling revenues that would not have otherwise been provided to the state. As a result, there is no cost to the taxpayer.” Hey, buddy, it’s ALL our money!

Another core belief is that of “expanding economic opportunity by creating new wealth in society is far preferable to perpetuating a culture of dependency through government-run programs.” Translation: the rich get richer and everyone else…well, remember it’s the “ownership society.” Problems? Well, you’re on your own. What, you don’t buy the trickle-down malarkey? It worked well for Vanderbilt and Rockefeller. That part in our Constitution” to promote the general welfare” was a typographical error. All taxes are bad, don’t you know?

He then points to “the biggest threat to our prosperity today is the ever-esculating tax burden and its ringleader, the real-estate property tax.” And here I thought it was the loss of good-paying jobs. The irony is that he quotes Teddy Roosevelt twice in the article. It was Teddy who wanted to heavily tax the wealthiest and help to redistribute wealth. Taxes received from the federal and state governments have been cut so much in recent years that local communities, the bottom of the food chain, have had no other choice but to raise taxes. As I’ve said many times, while the fed’l & state legislators take bows for reducing taxes (yet giving us a plethora of un-funded mandates), it’s left up to local council people to either raise taxes or cut essential services.

Rep. Loughlin states Republicans believe in “protecting our environment.” Guess they’ve missed how the Guv keeps refusing to sign the regional pact for reduction of greenhouse gases. Or do they still not believe in global warning like the Prez?

His last quote was quite on the mark, though. “If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your trouble, you wouldn’t sit for a month.” You’ve got a national party that has split into different factions. This has translated into a state party that has the same factions and no one able or willing to unify it. Perhaps they should all become Democrats. Or perhaps they just don’t have a viable agenda. In fact, after reading his article, I’m still not sure what the agenda is. Perhaps it’s all an oxymoron. Say one thing but do another. But make it sound good.

I have to wonder why this article was written by a two-term legislator when our District has the two longest serving Republicans (Long & Gibbs). One would think that they would be able to best articulate the “Republican vision.” Maybe they’ve forgotten it.

See more comments on this at Newport Nine. Oops, I missed the grammatical error. Thanks, Tom!