Monday, December 31, 2012

Thank you, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison

Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison is retiring from her seat as the new Congress is ushered in.  We Texans owe her a debt of gratitude for her service.  Our senior Senator worked tirelessly for causes dear to our hearts. She has consistently supported NASA, our military members and families, and women's health care,

First elected in a 1993, in a special election, Hutchison delivered her farewell speech to the Senate earlier this month.




Hutchison, who is retiring, has an impressive legislative record in her nearly 20 years in the Senate, including phasing out the controversial Wright Amendment, which limits service at Dallas Love Field; fixing the so-called marriage penalty, which taxed married couples at a higher rate; directing millions of dollars to higher education and research at Texas institutions; making state sales taxes an itemized deduction on federal income tax returns; and fighting for NASA dollars and the space program in the face of cutbacks.
"I think history will judge her as one of the greatest legislators we've ever had," said Patrick Oxford, chairman of the Bracewell & Giuliani law firm of Houston and a lifelong friend and supporter of Hutchison's. "She was Lyndon Johnson-level in terms of understanding the legislative process really well."
 As a woman, I appreciate her ground-breaking work to reform the IRA savings system so that women who are homemakers can also contribute to them.  She is being honored for that work by Texas Senator John Cornyn and Senator Barbara Mikulski.  They are behind the legislation recently passed to name the "homemaker IRA" after Hutchison.  The press release from Senator Cornyn's office:

MIKULSKI, CORNYN ANNOUNCE SENATE PASSAGE OF THEIR BILL TO RENAME PROVISION THAT LEVELED RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAYING FIELD FOR FAMILIES AS ‘KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON SPOUSAL IRA’Senators Championed Hutchison Legislation in 1996 to Allow Stay-at-Home Spouses to Make Equal, Fully Deductible Contributions to Retirement IRAs WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) today announced Senate passage of their bill to rename legislation championed by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) to allow working spouses and homemakers to contribute the same amount to their IRA savings as the ‘Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA.’ Senator Hutchison spearheaded the effort after she was sworn-in to the Senate in 1993 with the support of Senator Mikulski, and saw the legislation signed into law as part of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996.
 “It’s fitting that we recognize Senator Hutchison for her long-standing and steadfast advocacy for women,” Senator Mikulskisaid. “Her commitment to this legislation and to the women of America reflects the values of our nation. It rewards good parenting and families and recognizes that not all work is done in the marketplace. Moms and dads who are struggling to do the right thing for their family shouldn’t be penalized for staying at home. By amending this provision in our tax code, women and families across America will know that they’re benefiting from the Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA.” “I’m pleased to support this legislation to honor Senator Hutchison for her important efforts to help moms and dads who work full-time caring for their children at home plan for their future,” Senator Cornyn said. “As she retires from the Senate, Sen. Hutchison will be remembered for this and countless other contributions that have improved the lives of working Texans and Americans across the country.” Congress created the Spousal IRA in 1996. This legislation levels the playing field by allowing spouses who are non-wage earners to make equal, fully deductible contributions to individual retirement accounts. Women have traditionally been at a disadvantage in saving for retirement because they spend time in and out of the workforce. Currently, contributions of up to $5,000 for each spouse are allowed if the couple's wages or self-employment earnings are $10,000 or more.
As a political scientist, I am appreciative of the skill Hutchison used in working with Democrats in the Senate.  While it is en vogue in the current political environment to be as obstinate as possible to your opponents to appease the most strident within a party, the truth is that politics is the art of persuasion.  Coming together to work our solutions is a sign of maturity and the most patriotic of acts for the betterment of our country.


A hallmark of Hutchison's Senate career has been her willingness to work with Democrats, especially Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., whom Senate wags widely call her BFF (Best Friend Forever).
"When I first came to the Senate 20 years ago, Sen. Hutchison gave me a small briefcase that I still carry to this day. It hasn't worn out, and neither has our friendship," Feinstein said.
"I worked closely with Sen. Hutchison for two decades, particularly on issues related to women and families."
The two joined forces on the Amber Alert legislation for abducted children, named for Amber Hagerman of Arlington, who was abducted and killed in 1996.
They also collaborated on the Breast Cancer Stamp bill, which has raised more than $76 million for breast cancer research.
"Her legacy as a tireless advocate for these causes will live on," Feinstein said.


As a resident of Texas, I am grateful to Hutchison for promoting the passage of eliminating our state income taxes.  As State Controller, Hutchison produced that result for us.

She served us well.  Thank you, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison.


Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Starbucks Gets Political

Starbucks is engaging in a two day "cups campaign" to urge elected officials in Washington to "come together" on the matter of the fiscal cliff.  CEO Howard Schultz has instructed his Washington D.C. area  employees to write the words "come together" on cups Wednesday and Thursday.

Whether members of Congress actually drink in the message is another matter. While the concentration of Starbucks cafes is high in the vicinity of the White House, it's relatively low near the U.S. Capitol. Members of the House and Senate enjoy private dining facilities and many of their offices have coffee machines.
Starbucks' cup campaign aims to send a message to sharply divided politicians and serve as a rallying cry for the public in the days leading up to the January 1 deadline to avert harsh across-the-board government spending reductions and tax increases that could send the United States back into recession.
"We're paying attention, we're greatly disappointed in what's going on and we deserve better," Schultz told Reuters in a telephone interview. 

Schultz said this is a part of a bigger group's tactics:

The CEO said he has joined a growing list of high-powered business leaders, politicians and financial experts in endorsing the Campaign to Fix the Debt, (www.fixthedebt.org) a well-funded non-partisan group that is leaning on lawmakers to put the United States' financial house in order.
Starbucks plans to amplify its "come together" message via new and old media, including Twitter and Facebook posts, coverage on AOL's local news websites and advertisements in The Washington Post and The New York Times.
"If (the talks) do not progress, we will make this much bigger," Schultz said of the messaging campaign, which he said is voluntary for cafe employees. 

I'm finding it hard to image a large company run by a conservative CEO taking such action with the acceptance of the mainstream media in our country.  The double standard at the intersection of business and politics rears its ugly head again.

Actually, I would argue that the nation's voters don't want elected officials in Washington to "come together" at all.  A clear majority of the House of Representatives were re-elected, as was the President and the Senate.  That means that the voters indeed voted for the status quo.  It's the House versus the Senate and the  White House, just as it has been since 2010.

President Obama is fond of saying that he ran on raising taxes and increasing spending.  Well, those Republicans running for the House and the Senate ran on the exact opposite of that platform and they were elected, too.  Where does that put us?  It brings us divided government, just as the Founding Fathers intended.

As for the hand wringing by Starbuck's CEO Howard Schultz : I present this tweet reported by FNC's Chad Pergram on Capitol Hill: "In Geithner letter, he says failing to fix  actually ADDS time to solve debt ceiling, since spending cuts and tax hikes kick in."  

Geithner is voicing what many on both sides of the aisle, truth be told, are saying.  President Obama has already raised our taxes and all of that kicks in with the implementation of Obamacare.  Remember, the Supreme Court ruled Obamacare is a tax.  When you read the word "fee", you should think tax.  That is what it is, you know.


Fiscal cliff deal or not, taxes are going up.  Why shouldn't Republicans hold out for actual and immediate spending cuts instead of being played again with promises of future spending cuts?  We all know that those cuts never materialize. Also, only in Washington, D.C. is it a cut if spending remains the same and not increased. 


Howard Schultz is a Democrat and a liberal, no doubt about that.  He is also a business man which means he sometimes comes out for common sense economic policy.  This fiscal cliff statement, however, just seems like a political statement against the Republicans.  It doesn't make much sense to insult the intelligence of so many customers, does it?


Instead of just overspending for coffee, now Starbucks customers will be served a political slogan as well.






Obama Spits on Vietnam Veterans

President Obama has decided to nominate Senator John Kerry as the next Secretary of State. Let me be clear in my reaction.  John Kerry does not deserve the honor of representing our country around the world.

There are many reasons to not respect John Kerry.  Whether it is because of his slander of fellow Vietnam veterans or his symbolic photo op of throwing his medals at the gate of the White House or his despicable treatment of other candidates as he ran for President in 2004 (you may remember his stunt of publicly outing Mary Cheney during a debate to slap at her father), John Kerry has consistently proven himself to be a man with a single focus on his own advancement and little else.

Maybe the treatment of veterans doesn't matter anymore, if the war is old news. This election cycle saw the first election with neither the Republican nor the Democratic candidate being a veteran of military service.
The 2012 election was the first since 1932 in which none of the candidates was a war veteran. In 1932, New York Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt had been an Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President Woodrow Wilson, but he did not serve in the military. His cousin (and predecessor as president), Theodore Roosevelt, was famous for his charge up San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War of 1898.
The Winter Soldier hearings should be enough to disqualify Kerry but not for the current leadership in Washington. The old and fading ruling class of 1960's liberals have a few tricks remaining up their sleeves and are running out of time.

Senator Kerry has a nasty habit of siding with the bad guys.

Even if you don't think Kerry's use of the Vietnam war for his personal career enhancement is enough to criticize this nomination, his lousy record on foreign policy decisions should cause concern.  In today's stories the continuing war in Syria is on the forefront.  Who has been Assad's biggest cheerleader in recent years?  Yes. John Kerry.  Why, he and the Mrs. have enjoyed lovely dinners with Assad and his wife in Syria and Kerry vouches for Assad's character. Even Obama has had to reign in Kerry.

And in 2011, when Kerry again wanted to go to Syria, his visit was blocked--by the Obama administration. “The Obama administration and France reportedly nixed a visit by U.S. Sen. John Kerry to Syria. Kerry (D-Mass.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has cultivated a relationship with the Syrian regime otherwise treated as a pariah in the West in the hope of drawing it away from Iranian influence. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Kerry had planned a visit last month, but the governments of the United States and of French President Nicolas Sarkozy blocked the visit out of concern that it would signal ‘Western weakness’ as pro-Iranian and pro-Western forces jockeyed for influence in Syria's neighbor, Lebanon,” reported the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in March 2011.
Kerry praised Assad later in 2011 as being a "very generous" man. "Well, I personally believe that -- I mean, this is my belief, okay? But President Assad has been very generous with me in terms of the discussions we have had. And when I last went to -- the last several trips to Syria -- I asked President Assad to do certain things to build the relationship with the United States and sort of show the good faith that would help us to move the process forward," said Kerry at a think tank. 

Not enough, you say?  How about South America? Much closer geographically to home and of growing concern, our relationships with South American countries are dicey, at best.

 A left-wing world view and an earnest conviction that it is his destiny to impose it on others may make him a perfect fit in the Obama cabinet. But it won't be good for poor countries or for U.S. interests.
Latin America knows all too well the dangerous combination of Mr. Kerry's arrogance and, to be polite, let's say, naiveté. In 1985, in the midst of the Cold War, he led a congressional delegation to Nicaragua, where he met with Sandinista comandanteDaniel Ortega. The Sandinista reputation as a human-rights violator was already well-established, and the Soviets were stalking Central America. Nevertheless, Mr. Kerry came back from Managua advocating an end to U.S. support for the resistance known as the "Contras." The House took his advice and voted down a $14 million aid package to them. The next day Mr. Ortega flew to Moscow to get $200 million in support from the Kremlin. 

And, more recently, in 2009 in Honduras, complete with some history revision, to boot:

In June 2009, Mr. Kerry again went to bat for the dark side, this time in Honduras. President Manuel Zelaya, an ally of Hugo Chávez, had been unconstitutionally trying to extend his time in office. The Honduran Supreme Court ordered the military to arrest him. All the other branches of government, the Catholic Church, Honduras's human-rights ombudsman and Mr. Zelaya's own party backed the court's decision.
Mr. Chávez, Fidel Castro and the Obama administration became furious, called it a "coup d'état" and moved to isolate the tiny country. When Sen. Jim DeMint (R., S.C.) planned a fact-finding trip to Tegucigalpa, Mr. Kerry's office tried to stop him by blocking funding. When the Law Library of Congress concluded that the Honduran high court had acted legally, Mr. Kerry wrote to the head of the library demanding that the opinion be retracted and "corrected." In the spring of 2010, a Kerry staffer traveled to Honduras to pressure officials there to adopt the Obama administration's "coup" narrative.

Kerry is a man blinded by ego and ambition.  This nomination is the final spitting on Vietnam veterans, as well as placing a dangerously naive man onto the world stage on behalf of our foreign policy. I have no doubt that his fellow senators will vote him into place and that is the biggest tragedy. The club will prevail.


Thursday, December 20, 2012

Bork Slandered By Kennedy in Confirmation Hearing

The death of Judge Robert Bork was announced Wednesday.  He is perhaps best remembered for the brutal personal attacks he suffered during his appearance before the Senate Judicial Committee as part of the process for his Supreme Court nomination. For those of us old enough to remember this televised political lynching, it is an easy assessment to state that Ted Kennedy is responsible for today's brutal confirmation hearings. A man of low personal character himself, Kennedy was the logical water carrier for a well orchestrated Democratic opposition to any nominee put forward by President Reagan.

In the summer of 1987, President Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Bork to sit on the Supreme Court. Just 45 minutes later, Senator Ted Kennedy took to the Senate floor to launch an attack not seen before in the nomination process. A bit of the slander and unfettered character assassination brought forward by Senator Ted Kennedy, during that speech appalled most decent human beings:
 'Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens.

Joe Biden was the chairman of the committee.  An admitted plagiarizer and consistently wrong on big issues, Biden took it upon himself to write a brief and present it to the committee.  Bork later described this in a book as "so thoroughly misrepresented a plain record that it easily qualifies as world class in the category of scurrility."  Hollywood actor Gregory Peck narrated a political ad using the slanderous Democratic narrative, too.  

The Reagan administration was slow to respond.  Too much time passed and the damage was done. The nomination was not successful.  Judge Bork, highly respected and eminently well qualified to serve on the nation's highest court was denied the position by raw politics. His crime? He was a solid conservative. Liberals in Washington were determined to keep the Supreme Court a liberal-leaning one.

Thus, the term "Borked" was born.  

Like the other atrocities credited to him, Ted Kennedy was never held accountable for this political nuclear attack.  Our nation is worse for that.

Rest in peace, Judge Bork.

Obama Uses School Shooting in Fiscal Cliff Talking Points

President Obama held a press conference in the White House press room Wednesday with the subject of gun violence on the agenda. Instead, it devolved into a filibuster on the subject of the fiscal cliff negotiations.  It is as though the White House press corps cannot focus on more than one issue at a time.

"This is not some Washington commission", said the president,though, of course, it is exactly that. He announced his appointment of Vice President Biden to head up the 'task force' on gun violence and tasked the panel to present conclusions to him in about a month.  Obviously the majority in the White House press corps were not impressed by this move and went directly to questions on the fiscal cliff when he began calling on them for questions.

The president was particularly narcissistic during his exchange with reporters.  He spoke as though he thinks Republican objections to his proposals solely have to do with them not liking him.  The president continues to sound like a middle school girl.  It is always all about him and it is always the other side who is being mean to him.  It is pathetic, to put it mildly.

President Obama is hell-bent to raise taxes and continue spending with wild abandon. This is the reason that Republicans will not support his proposals thus far. First Obama simply presented his 2013 budget which received not one vote from either side of the aisle in the House or Senate and has also refused the suggestions of his own appointed Simpson-Bowles commission.  Who is the non-compromiser here?


Mr. Obama won't agree even to $1 in cuts for every $1 of revenue. His latest offer calls for $1.3 trillion in new revenues paired with the vague promise of $930 billion in future budget cuts. Mr. Obama's offer also wipes out the $972 billion in cuts agreed to in the July 2011 debt-ceiling deal and adds at least $80 billion in new stimulus spending.
In response, Mr. Boehner has offered "Plan B." Tax rates on annual income above $1 million would rise to 39.6% from 35%, but lower rates on everyone else would become permanent and the Alternative Minimum Tax would disappear.
Mr. Boehner's thinking is that preventing increases on more than 99% of taxpayers could help Republicans escape from a battle they cannot win. Better for the GOP to show the president rabid for more taxes and spending, and then to pivot toward a debate about spending. Here Republicans will hold the upper hand: Mr. Obama needs the House to approve his debt-ceiling increase (likely by March). He won't get it without spending cuts.


A strange narrative began. His real message turned around to exploit the recent mass murder in Connecticut as the reason that opposition in Congress should just fold and accept unconditionally whatever he proposes as fiscal solutions. He went from saying the GOP doesn't like him and is blocking meaningful negotiations out of spite to saying that recent events demand everyone work together.  It was an exercise of passive aggressive behavior right before our eyes.  As Charles Krauthammer said on a cable news channel panel, the president was "excessively self-righteous" in his tone and words.

 And when you think about what we've gone through over the last couple of months -- a devastating hurricane, and now one of the worst tragedies in our memory -- the country deserves folks to be willing to compromise on behalf of the greater good, and not tangle themselves up in a whole bunch of ideological positions that don’t make much sense.
What the president implies is that those with a different political philosophy are not interested in doing what is right for all the country - the greater good.  This is a real character flaw with Barack Obama and it is why he cannot rise to statesman level in leadership.  It is simply not in his character to be an honest agent of leading the nation forward.

Shame on him for allowing this press conference that was to address gun violence to turn into a self-righteous filibuster.  At the end of the press conference I tweeted my feeling after sitting through this exercise:


Well, that's 40 minutes I'm not getting back.











Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Benghazi Investigation Report Released

The special investigation into the terrorist attacks on our consulate in Benghazi and the CIA building has ended and their conclusions have been issued in a report.  The unclassified version has hit the Internet and what was commonly thought is now verified: the security measures in place at the  facility were  "grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place."

Also expected, the report leaves Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama held curiously unaccountable for the failures that led to the death of our ambassador and three other Americans there.

It was reported, belatedly, that Hillary Clinton had a stomach virus which led to suffering a concussion from a fall earlier last week. Under doctor's advice, she was working from home during her recovery. She would be unavailable to testify before Congress, after all.  Why did it take a week for that information to be released to the press?  

John Bolton said this on a cable news show about Hillary's concussion excuse for not testifying before Congress as she was scheduled to do this week:

"You know, every foreign service officer in every foreign ministry in the world knows the phrase I am about to use. When you don't want to go to a meeting or conference, or an event, you have a 'diplomatic illness,' Bolton told Van Susteren. "And this is a diplomatic illness to beat the band.

You may remember that John Bolton was denied an appointment to be the ambassador to the  U.N. during the George W. Bush administration by Senate Democrats who simply didn't like his political philosophy.  It was just politics. Now that Susan Rice has been denied the appointment of being Secretary of State for her professional decision-making skills, suddenly objections are racist and misogynist.  The political double standard is alive and well in Washington, D.C.

Clinton has responded in writing to the report.  Addressed to Sen John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee and probable successor to her position, which includes a standard Washington solution - increase bureaucracy and create a new position to handle the problems. The new position is called the Deputy Assistant of Security of State for High Threat Posts. There are common sense actions being taken, too, which should have previously been in place.  Top among these actions is hiring additional Diplomatic Security personnel.

So, Wednesday the elected officials will be briefed on the findings of this investigation.  Hillary Clinton will not be there.  It is unclear if or when she intends to finally sit down and answer questions on this event. It has been three months and still Clinton is given a pass.  She claims to take responsibility for her department as she avoids taking responsibility.  She allowed Susan Rice to take the fall and set it up so that her friend John Kerry would succeed her as Secretary of State.  She is still in her position and will remain there until she resigns, as planned, in January.

Business as usual.





Monday, December 17, 2012

Gov Haley Appoints Rep Scott to U.S. Senate

This is the press release issued by the South Carolina Senate GOP upon the appointment of Rep Tim Scott to the U.S. Senate by Governor Nikki Haley:Congratulations Congressman Tim Scott! Earlier today, Governor Nikki Haley announced that she has chosen Scott to replace Jim DeMint as United States Senator from South Carolina. Scott vowed to focus on our country's debt and budget issues. He will also make history as the first African-American senator from South Carolina. We'd like to congratulate him and wish him all the best in the Senate.

Rep Tim Scott will be the first black Senator from the state of South Carolina.


South Carolina Republican Tim Scott will become just the seventh African American in American history to serve in the U.S. Senate when he is sworn in to replace Jim DeMint.
He will be the fourth Republican African American senator and the third from the Deep South. Three African American Democrats — all from Illinois — have served.


I had the pleasure of meeting and hearing a speech delivered by Rep Scott in Myrtle Beach, S.C. last January during the GOP Presidential Primary debate weekend.  I knew he was a rising star from his performance and his obvious connection with the audience. 

Scott has the kind of American Dream story that Barack Obama does not - raised by a single mom who worked 16 hours a day and went on to a successful college career. Then he began a successful business before going into politics. He received 65% of the vote in his 2010 race.

Prior to being elected to Congress, Tim served on Charleston County Council for 13 years, including four terms as Chair and in the South Carolina House of Representatives for two years where he was elected Chairman of the Freshman Caucus and House Whip.  He was the owner of Tim Scott Allstate and partner of Pathway Real Estate Group.

Governor Haley, the first Indian-American woman to be elected governor, appointed the first black U.S. senator from her state.  He will be the only black senator serving in the U.S. Senate when he assumes his new seat.





FLOTUS Claims Voter Suppression in Full Force


Recently, the First Lady said this on a nationally televised morning talk show:  “Voter suppression was in full force in so many states all over this country,”  This isn't proven by the results of the numbers reported from various demographics yet she states it as though it is the truth.  What a dog whistler that woman is!  Barack Obama received the support of black voters, senior voters, young voters, Asian-American voters and Hispanic -American voters in larger numbers than Mitt Romney.  Even in electoral victory, Democrats chose to exhibit the least common denominator in basic decency.

Here is something Michelle Obama didn't bother to mention, though.  The votes of the U.S. military overseas was suppressed.  Due to continued incompetence of our government's bureaucracy, the ballots were not mailed overseas in time to be filled out and returned to be processed in time for the election.  Who desires to be protected in the voting process more than those fighting for our freedoms overseas?

Senator Cornyn (R-TX) tried to produce better results on behalf of our military but didn't experience much success.  Where was Michelle Obama's outrage over this voter suppression?  She touts her concern for military families in election year speeches and at fundraisers yet this is a basic right being ignored.  Could it be due to the fact that so much of the military vote goes to Republicans? 

I noticed that our First Lady didn't attend the memorial service for the murdered school children in Connecticut, though the President did and spoke to the people there in a televised speech.  He alleges he wrote that speech himself.  Though he saw fit to bring politics into the speech, he did mostly strike the right tone.  What doesn't strike the right tone is an absent First Lady.  The First Couple is tasked with being the top comforters in our country when a tragedy strikes.  

Is it too much to ask that Michelle Obama honor the taxpayers who afford her with living a very large lifestyle by doing the right thing and performing the most basic of tasks?

Friday, December 14, 2012

Susan Rice Will Not Be Secretary of State

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations has asked to be taken off the short list for consideration to replace Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Susan Rice, though not formally nominated for the position, has made the request to the White House and explained this decision Thursday.
On Sept. 16, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was unavailable after a grueling week, the White House asked me to appear on five Sunday talk shows to discuss a range of foreign policy issues: the protests against our diplomatic facilities around the world; the attack in Benghazi, Libya; and Iran’s nuclear program.
She gave four specific points in her decision-making process.  These two are most interesting, in my opinion:
Second, I deeply respect Congress’s role in our system of government. After the despicable terrorist attacks that took the lives of four colleagues in Benghazi, our government must work through serious questions and bring the perpetrators to justice. We must strengthen security at our diplomatic posts and improve our intelligence in a volatile Middle East. Accomplishing these goals is far more important than political fights or personal attacks. Third, the American people expect us to come together to keep our nation safe. U.S. leadership abroad is and always has been strengthened when we transcend partisan differences on matters of national security. America is seriously weakened when politics come first. If any good can come out of the experience of the past few months, I hope that it will be a renewed focus on the business of the American people — and a renewed insistence that the process of selecting potential candidates for high national security office be treated in the best bipartisan traditions of our country.
While it is preferable to keep petty partisan politics to a minimum during nomination disputes, it is quite another thing to blame this battle on standard politics.  This battle was all about the fact that Team Obama was determined to present Barack Obama as the guy who banished al-Qaeda and that narrative was to be a key point in the president's re-election campaign.  You all remember the talking point of "General Motors is alive and bin Laden is dead", don't you?  Rice was sent out to be the patsy to take the heat for Obama, and, more specifically, Hillary Clinton on those Sunday talk shows. At the time, those of us political junkies who suffer through these shows were questioning Rice's appearances as a surrogate.  Obama was right. Rice didn't have anything to do with Benghazi.  It should have been Clinton on those shows answering questions.

You may recall this bit of theater uttered by President Obama as he stepped forward to stick up for the little lady:
"If Senator McCain and Senator Graham want to go after somebody, they should go after me. I'm happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador? Who had nothing to do with Benghazi? To besmirch her reputation? It's outrageous." 

Instead of admitting that it was himself and his White House that threw Rice to the wolves in the press that fateful Sunday morning with disingenuous talking points, he sounds as though he is asking Senators McCain and Graham to step outside and settle the dispute using fisticuffs. Well, no one ever mistook Barack Obama for a statesman.

It is becoming clear why Rice has decided to throw herself on her own sword now.  It is not only those mean Republicans promising some tough questions about her nomination during the hearing process - it is also clear that Democrats are questioning her placement as Secretary of State.  Not only is Rice's decision-making process under scrutiny from Republicans in the senate.  Her previous service in the Clinton administration leaves much to be desired.  Her performance during the Rwanda genocide years, for example, leap to the forefront.

It is the job for the U.S. Senate to question the nominees brought forward by the president.  Republicans are being blamed for this mess due to charges of racism and misogyny. That might be more effective if the last Republican administration had not produced the first black woman Secretary of State, as well as the first black male Secretary of State.  Oops. Was Senator Barbara Boxer, for example, called a racist or misogynist for loudly opposing Condoleezza Rice's nomination?

We remember, as well, the utter politicization of John Bolton's expected nomination to the U.N. ambassadorship, too. Just move along, nothing to see here.

Here's the reality: Hillary Clinton wants Senator John Kerry to be the next Secretary of State.  Susan Rice fell out of favor with Hillary Clinton when she chose to be an early supporter of Barack Obama's in the 2008 Democratic party's  presidential primary. Clinton felt betrayed by Rice's lack of loyalty, as she had been a member of the Clinton administration.  That race for the nomination was ugly.  Hillary felt entitled to the job.  Her consolation prize was to be named Secretary of State in the first term of the Obama administration.   The criticisms coming for the Democrats on the potential Rice nomination, as well as the stinging opinion pieces by nationally read liberal columnists, are from Clinton (Bill and Hillary) loyalists.

By stepping aside, Susan Rice chose to avert the Libyan terrorist attacks from additional front page headlines. Republicans rightfully demanded she take responsibility for her choice of being this administration's patsy.  Democrats focused on her personal traits, as well as her previous performance within the State Department.  She was in a no-win situation.  Her proclamations of rising above politics in the process are meaningless.


Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Hey, GOP - Woman Up!

I saw a headline asking this question in an article I read online today:
Can Jindal, Rubio and Ryan Save The Republican Party? It brought back the discussion I enjoyed with a friend over coffee this morning.  We were discussing the recent presidential election (what else?) and she said the key to the GOP defeat was the woman voter.  The knee jerk reaction - with some validity - was that Republicans failed miserably to win Latino votes and that is a true enough fact. But, a glaring reality is that women vote in larger numbers than any other demographic indicator in elections. 

So, I see this headline and immediately my mind edits it to say Martinez, Ayotte and McMorris-Rodgers instead of the male names there. That's a Republican woman governor, senator and representative - same as the men listed. The switch was easy for me to do but what about the rest of my party?  My favorite line from the Republican National Convention was delivered by Governor Martinez as she told the story of realizing where her true politicial home was - "Damn, we're Republicans", she told her husband.  They made the switch from Democrats to Republicans after that.

Senator Ayotte is being moved into the forefront on national security/foreign policy affairs.  The terrorist attacks in Libya and the demands for an investigation into all that being the latest example of her leadership.  Senators Graham and McCain have brought her into the fold as the third amigo to fill outgoing Senator Leiberman's place.

Speaker Boehner failed spectacularly to appoint any women as committee chairs for the top tier committees.  He did appoint Cathy McMorris-Rodgers, the highest ranking Republican woman in Congress as House committee chairman  .  She will now rank fourth in the House leadership.

Any or all of these women would easily fit into that piece's headline as saviors of the Republican party.  All of these women reach out and support other women in the Republican party.  The face of the Republican party has to expand to include more than white men. The bonus is the diversity of women within the Republican party.

Social issues are only a part of the Republican party yet that is what comes to mind when women think of my party.  To assume, for example, that Latino women voters will find a natural home in the Republican party because they are conservative on social issues is not the whole picture.  Latino women will tell you that they also may be in need of fiscal safety nets and that is where the split often appears.  They feel unwelcome in my party. Being a working, productive member of society doesn't mean you can always go it alone.

The Republican party is the party of smaller, more efficient government.  We are not the party of no government.  There is a real lack of concise communication coming from the most vocal in my party and often the tone is mean-spirited, intentionally or not.  The label of compassionate conservative is no longer en vogue and that is a pity.  We are a lesser party for that.

The task in front of us is to present a real alternative to the tax and spend Democrats. We have to present a way for those currently in need of safety net programs with reasonable paths going forward. A common thread  is a focus on education and school choice as a way to personal economic freedom.  Dependency on government assistance limits a person's future and that message can be delivered in a sincere and civil voice.

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.  Wake up, Republicans. Women vote.


Friday, December 07, 2012

Remembering Pearl Harbor Attack

Dec 7, 1941 - "a day which will live in infamy"


I have two lines of thought about this day in history.  I remember my mother telling me about the day from her memories as a young girl and the effects World War II had on her family.  I also have a memory of a college professor who shared the day with his class.

My mother remembered the day and how she learned of the attack by explaining to us,her daughters, that she was enjoying a movie matinee when the news broke to the audience.  I had an uncle who was so bitter over the war that he refused to buy products made in Japan.  

My father-in-law served in the war in the northern Africa/Italy theatre. Like most of the Greatest Generation, he did not easily share his stories of the war, and he refused to visit Europe in his later life as his wife did on vacations.

In college, my Freshman Philosophy professor was Japanese.  He invited the class to his home, just off campus, for sake and conversation on December 7th.  I clearly remember that social event to this day and also how difficult it was to listen to his lectures in class as his accent was still so thick.

I wish that President Obama was a bit less self-absorbed and more inclined to physically attend events honoring our veterans, especially those of World War II and the Korean War, as our veterans are dying off so rapidly now.  Obama did finally tweet out recognition of the day and linked it to his standard presidential proclamation.  Maybe he had a pressing golf game because we know he is not doing his job  on figuring out a path to fiscal stability.


NATIONAL PEARL HARBOR REMEMBRANCE DAY, 2012
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
On December 7, 1941, our Nation suffered one of the most devastating attacks ever to befall the American people. In less than 2 hours, the bombs that rained on Pearl Harbor robbed thousands of men, women, and children of their lives; in little more than a day, our country was thrust into the greatest conflict the world had ever known. We mark this anniversary by honoring the patriots who perished more than seven decades ago, extending our thoughts and prayers to the loved ones they left behind, and showing our gratitude to a generation of service members who carried our Nation through some of the 20th century's darkest moments.
In his address to the Congress, President Franklin D. Roosevelt affirmed that "with confidence in our Armed Forces -- with the unbounding determination of our people -- we will gain the inevitable triumph." Millions stood up and shipped out to meet that call to service, fighting heroically on Europe's distant shores and pressing island by island across the Pacific. Millions more carried out the fight in factories and shipyards here at home, building the arsenal of democracy that propelled America to the victory President Roosevelt foresaw. On every front, we faced down impossible odds -- and out of the ashes of conflict, America rose more prepared than ever to meet the challenges of the day, sure that there was no trial we could not overcome.
Today, we pay solemn tribute to America's sons and daughters who made the ultimate sacrifice at Oahu. As we do, let us also reaffirm that their legacy will always burn bright -- whether in the memory of those who knew them, the spirit of service that guides our men and women in uniform today, or the heart of the country they kept strong and free.
The Congress, by Public Law 103-308, as amended, has designated December 7 of each year as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day."
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim December 7, 2012, as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. I encourage all Americans to observe this solemn day of remembrance and to honor our military, past and present, with appropriate ceremonies and activities. I urge all Federal agencies and interested organizations, groups, and individuals to fly the flag of the United States at half-staff this December 7 in honor of those American patriots who died as a result of their service at Pearl Harbor.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixth day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.
BARACK OBAMA

Thursday, December 06, 2012

DeMint Moves to The Heritage Foundation

South Carolina's junior senator decided to pursue the big bucks and accepted the presidency of The Heritage Foundation with the announcement coming out of the blue on Thursday morning.  Oh, did that come off as a bit harsh? You may not want to continue on here.

DeMint is admired by many in the conservative voting world.  I admit up front that I am not one of those people.  It's not that I don't think he has done an effective job in advancing his own agenda because I do.  I also think he advances the worst in conservative politics, too.  For that reason it is impossible to look at his departure from the senate with rose colored glasses.

Some in the conservative think tank world are welcoming DeMint's decision.  That is predictable.  HERE is the statement from Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a premier state think tank in Texas.  Full disclosure - I support TPPF and their good work on conservative policy.  I blog my support frequently.

Here's the thing - does anyone think that if Mitt Romney won the presidential election and/or if the GOP was competent enough to win back control of the U.S. Senate in what should have been a cake walk that DeMint would be leaving just two years into his six year term?  Of course not.  Yes, he had murmured that he'd be leaving elected office at the end of this term but no one thought he wouldn't finish his term.  You know, if you are putting yourself out there as a highly principled public servant, should you at least finish what you asked for from your constituency?

THIS article  explains the connection between Heritage and it's political action wing.  It is assumed that DeMint will continue on with the recent political activity pursued by those in the action wing.  There is no doubt that DeMint will boost fundraising results for the Foundation despite today's malaise felt by a majority of conservatives and Republicans.

This is very similar to a politician leaving office to pursue a more lucrative career as a lobbyist.  I understand the need to make money after so many years in elected office - DeMint entered the U.S. House of Representatives in 1997 - and the salary of the exiting president at Heritage is said to be $1
million.  Nice.

DeMint enjoys the kudos he receives as a kingmaker among those seeking political office.  He brought along several candidates I completely support in the senate.  At the end of the day, however, he is just another politician.  Ego and all.  Today's announcement proved that.

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

Republicans Approach Immigration Reform

From a blurb in The Wall Street Journal: Margaret Thatcher writing in the Daily Telegraph, Jan 30, 1975:
One of the most hackneyed of political quotations is Disraeli's dictum that the Tory party "is a national party or it is nothing." Yet it means more than the obvious truths that Conservatives must put the interests of the whole nation first and must seek their electoral support among all classes and sections of the community. It means also that the party cannot long survive unless its policies are in tune with the deepest and best instincts of the British people. . . . My kind of Tory party would make no secret of its belief in individual freedom and individual prosperity, in the maintenance of law and order, in the wide distribution of private property, in rewards for energy, skill and thrift, in diversity of choice, in the preservation of local rights in local communities. Size is not all, any more than economic growth is all. Even efficiency is not enough. People come first—their needs, their hopes, their choice, their values and ideals. We have to understand these first—to be seen to be listening with sympathy and concern. It is important to be able to lead, certainly. But you cannot for long lead people where they do not want to go.
I have the highest respect for Margaret Thatcher and her political wisdom.  Substitute the word "Tory" with the word "Republican".  Do you understand what she is saying?  A huge barrier the Republican party faces today is the lack of communication skills in our speakers.  If we do not learn to get our message across to the population, we will continue to shrink as a party and as the agenda-setters.  Nothing could be clearer as the last presidential election.

Peggy Noonan notes this about the lack of basic tact in today's political discourse:

One of the biggest things often missing in politics? Tact. Simple tact. This is one of many reasons it would be good to see more Republican women rise and speak for the party: because they still have more of it than the men.
In the last few days, immigration reform has been the topic of several speeches delivered by those offering the path forward.  For instance, I have recently heard remarks delivered by Rep Paul Ryan, Senator Marco Rubio and former president George W. Bush.  All call for common sense, compassionate immigration policy reform.  Especially when it comes to the children born and raised here, with no knowledge or experience in another country, we must find a path with perimeters that allows them to transition into full community status.

I read this on Facebook today: from the George W. Bush Presidential Center: Did you know that more than 40% of all companies on the 2010 Fortune 500 list were founded by an immigrant or the child of an immigrant? Read more in the 4% Growth Project's Immigration Handbook.

You may remember that Bush attempted to push immigration reform during his time in the White House but due to bad messaging and poorly written policy, the legislation went nowhere.  You may also remember that he received 40% of the Latino vote as a presidential candidate, and over 60% as a candidate for Texas governor.

Senator Rubio's remarks made at the 2012 Jack Kemp Foundation Dinner are HERE.

It's a crucial issue and it's time for Republicans to be on the offense, not defense.  It's a start.
  



Saturday, December 01, 2012

World AIDS Day

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio released the following video statement marking World AIDS Day on December 1.


Friday, November 30, 2012

Boehner Announces a Woman Committee Chair After All

Pay attention, Republicans: sometimes when enough of us speak up and let the leadership of the party know we are not happy about some decisions being made, they actually listen and respond.  Case in point - Speaker Boehner has appointed Rep Candice Miller, (R-MI) a woman, to head up the Committee on House Administration.  Well, it's a start.

What exactly is the Committee on House Administration? I looked it up. Here is the summary from the website:

The Committee on House Administration is charged with the oversight of federal elections and the day-to-day operations of the House of Representatives. With the 112th Congress, two subcommittees were added to the Committee's jurisdiction: the Subcommittee on Elections, which examines issues related to elections and voting systems, including the adoption of Help America Vote Act (HAVA) provisions at the state level, and the Subcommittee on Oversight which will focus on identifying and reducing wasteful spending within House operations and establish best practices to help improve services to the House community.
Sounds like a committee to keep everything organized.  I have no doubt that a woman will do this job with distinction.  Whether it is the public sector or the private sector, we all know that it is the women in the organization that are the ones keeping things running.

Speaker Boehner made the following statement as he made the announcement:

In a statement, Boehner said Miller “has a big job ahead” leading a committee responsible for the nuts and bolts of House operations — including orientation for new members and office assignments.

Do Democrats have more women serving in committee leadership? Yes. Do I care? No.  I only care about my party and how it is progressing with diversity in leadership.  I already know that the Democrats claim to be the party more favorable to women yet continue to act otherwise. I'm expecting better from my own party.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

What Conservatives are Doing Wrong with Hispanics and How to Fix It

Are you interested in expanding the Republican party by bringing in Latino voters? After the disturbing results in the 2012 presidential election were studied, Republicans clearly have a lot of work to do to persuade Latino voters to come back to the party. Remember, as recently as the 2004 election, George W. Bush received 40% of the Latino vote.

 My friend, Michelle Lancaster, is involved in a project to bring back Latino voters to the Republican party. A primer has been written and I want to encourage you to read it. Yes, it is a little lengthy but so what? Isn't understanding how to advance the conservative agenda worth a few minutes of your time? Of course it is.

Conservative Outreach to Hispanics - A Primer. 


What Conservatives are Doing Wrong with Hispanics, and How to Fix it
The 2012 elections were a wake-up call to Republicans and conservatives. Many were not expecting Obama to win reelection decisively, much less win at all. While the chorus of blame and finger-pointing ran rampant on television, radio, the blogosphere and social media, one underlying issue was being commonly accepted: the GOP and conservatives must reverse the devastating trend with the Hispanic vote.

  Since George W. Bush’s peak of receiving 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, the GOP has been hemorrhaging support from this key electorate, with Romney receiving an embarrassing 27% of the Hispanic vote in his defeat. Meanwhile, the Hispanic electorate is likely to double by 2030 to a potential 40 million Latinos eligible to vote. [1]

This is a primer not to place blame or say “I told you so.” This is a plan that is meant to be a comprehensive starting guide for GOP insiders, politicians, and grassroots conservatives to address the problems we face with earning Hispanic vote, while providing specific, targeted solutions. These are substantive strategies which can and should begin as soon as possible. There is no quick fix to this issue. It will take 4 years of dedication and hard work to win back what conservatives lost 8 years ago.
Please remember that we are promoting conservatism because it is best for everyone and not just for votes alone. When we operate to just win votes, it is obvious and this is how we lose people and communities. Although we are often criticized for not being compassionate, we are compassionate and we need to show it in our efforts. This will take four years in the short-run but our efforts should be continuous in the long-run.
For each issue/problem we highlight, we will point out whom among the movement needs to hear it the most; whether it be GOP elections insiders at the local, state, or national level, current GOP politicians, or the conservative grassroots movement.
I. Ground Game or Lack Thereof (Everyone) 
At its core, the biggest problem the GOP and conservatives have with Hispanics and minority groups in general is a lack of a ground game. The GOP lags behind the Democrats because for years, the middle-aged to elderly white voting class has been the most reliable voting bloc, and they have traditionally voted for Republicans. Therefore, conservatives and the GOP have never had the need for a major ground effort to bring them to the polls. The changing demographics in the United States necessitate a concerted ground effort with the GOP.
Ignoring Urban Outreach is No Longer an Option
A subset on the issue is the seeming fear of the urban outreach. The GOP and conservatives must accept they are going to have to do the hard work and reach out to Hispanics and other minority groups in what are generally Democrat strongholds: large cities and urban areas. Facts show more and more people are moving towards the cities, and the GOP is running out of rural and suburban voters to engage with. In addition, these urban areas are where the vast majority of Hispanics and other minorities live. If conservatives and the GOP do not begin to set up an infrastructure now, we will not win in 2016.
Redefining the “Likely Voter”
In addition to moving to the cities, the movement needs to break from the conventional wisdom of what a “likely voter” is among Hispanics. For whites, the “likely voter” is over 40 with a college education, and a middle class income or higher and who have voted previously. For Hispanics, the rules are different. The median age of the Hispanic voter in 2012 was 27. [2] Hispanics are disproportionately poor, attain less education, and because of their youth, many are either 1st or 2nd time voters. Focusing only on the number of Hispanics who match the “likely voter” makeup among whites will not be enough to make a dent in the Democrat’s steep majority. Therefore, in order to gain success in this unfamiliar territory, we must acknowledge the distinct cultural differences that exist and lay out a plan that reflects those distinctions.
Finally, there is an overwhelming distrust of Republicans among Latinos – especially Latino youth, many of which did not immigrate to this country but were born here. They don’t see conservatives in their communities, but they see liberals on a daily basis. How can this be fixed?
Show Up!
The simple answer is Republicans need to start showing up at events and in the community. The difficult answer is it requires investment of time, effort, and leg work. It would be wise for campaigns and local GOP offices to keep track of cultural festivals in the area and reserve a booth in order to disseminate information. These are perfect venues for voter registration drives!
GOP candidates need to be appearing at these events because we guarantee the Independent and Democrat candidates already do. There are plenty of websites that a Google search will turn up that list these local cultural events in your area. If you are unable to find these events in Google, you can also seek out towns or neighborhoods with large Hispanic populations and go
to the local town hall/community center/library to find calendars or flyers for events. Another option is to search for local Hispanic organizations. For example, there's a Puerto Rican Association in Dallas. Not only do these organizations hold their own events, you can ask to speak at group meetings.
Don’t just attend these events – hold them! If you are a GOP office or a local conservative group, hold cultural events or utilize Latino cultural celebrations to engage the community. For example, hold a family friendly 3 Kings Day Block Party at a local school with booths, food, dancing, and performances. For a more educational twist have an event promoting freedom on Jose Marti’s birthday. These are great ways to unite people while also having fun.
When phone banking and canvassing, go into the urban neighborhoods! One consistently sees liberal candidates going door to door in black and Latino neighborhoods but never conservatives. How can conservatives expect minorities to vote conservative if they are never exposed to conservative principles? Go to the bodega on the corner and explain how free market principles help his store. Go to the single mom working at Denny’s and tell her how ObamaCare is going to cost her the full time job there so she will have to get a second job. We guarantee you no one is saying these things to them right now.
How do we know? If you looked at GOP walk-books during the campaign they simply skip over certain neighborhoods. Instead their books and calls focus on getting the base out instead of possibly expanding it. Fine, in an election year that makes sense – but now is the time to lay down the groundwork so that in 2014 and 2016 more minorities will be part of that potential base.
Community Service
Have some free time on a Saturday? Take your family to do volunteer work or help a charity that focuses on the Latino community. This is a great way to give back, show compassion, stick to our cherished idea of private charity, and make connections in your local Latino communities. Hispanics are disproportionately affected by high unemployment, poverty rates similar to those in Latin America, and lack of quality education. [3]
Know Your Voter
With the success of the Obama campaign, it is now more important than ever that the party and grassroots organizations know who the potential voters are to the last detail. This realization is especially critical with the Hispanic population. Overall culture, traditions, political priorities, and even dialect of Spanish differ among Hispanic nationalities, so do your research prior to making those initial phone calls and setting up that first booth.
Also, realize that Hispanics are a young demographic and that Latino youth may not find ACDC cool – they may prefer artists like Jay-Z, and Wisin y Yandel, they may not. Turn to more creative mediums like spoken word, music, and dance when attempting to engage Latino youth. Become more culturally aware – pick up your local Hispanic newspaper and look through the events section, follow some conservative Latinos on twitter, and engage the Hispanics around you.
II. Stop Throwing Out Nothing But Spanish TV Ads and Start Engaging Spanish Media (GOP Insiders, Politicians)

Because of the lack of a ground operation, the GOP has left itself to overly rely upon television ads and indirect forms of communication to try and reach the Hispanic audience. The problem is that television ads in general don’t have a very good return on investment, and will reach only a limited audience, especially in Spanish-speaking neighborhoods. The way you speak to and spread a message to Hispanics is through direct, personal communication. Not through external and relatively “easy” marketing like television and radio ads.
Furthermore, many of these ads are out of touch and seem out of place. Candidates or spokesmen for them never seem to appear on “black radio” or “Spanish radio” stations. Meanwhile Democrats are consistently giving interviews, talking about pop culture, and more. If any of you watch BET or Telemundo or Univision, you will constantly see liberal ads, speakers, and programs. Most of this is because all media trends heavily left, but this is also in part to lack of effort on our part. We need to be finding ways to tap into the audiences of these stations and getting our message out there.
It should be noted that Hispanics also watch less TV than overall population, but more streaming video online. Blacks watch more TV than any other demographic. Asians watch less traditional TV than any demographic, but more streaming video than anyone else. [4] Therefore, if you wanted to get the Hispanic vote – why weren’t there more web ads? You couldn’t click on YouTube without seeing an Obama ad, but a conservative ad was rare.
Understand the Culture
One of the reasons Marco Rubio has so much cross-over appeal is that not only is he relatable, but he engages the public like a normal person. He listens to 2pac and tweets about his sports teams. President Obama sings Al Green and his wife can dance “the Dougie.” Knowing these
things about the candidates make them more real as opposed to another name on a yard sign. No one is saying that candidates have to be rap connoisseurs to win – but it doesn’t hurt to show that you are engaged in pop culture and are human too.
Have a Consistent Media Presence
The solution here for the GOP is to embrace and engage Spanish and minority media outlets, don't just simply purchase airtime. Candidates should be doing interviews on radio and television and appear on the Sunday shows on Univision and Telemundo. Are they biased? Most likely. But has that stopped GOP politicians and pundits from appearing on MSNBC, NBC, etc.? Of course not. Bear in mind that it shouldn't just be Rubio, Martinez, or Labrador doing all this work in Spanish media. Non-Hispanic politicians should be willing and able to go on these venues as well.
III. Using and Speaking Spanish is a Must (Conservative Grassroots)

Going beyond the ads, it appears that there are many in the conservative movement who are antagonistic about the use of Spanish-language media or communication. We hate to break it to some, but while we and many others are of the agreement that English should be the language of government, many Hispanics prefer to speak Spanish within their community. Even those who are bilingual will speak Spanish with family and friends, as well as watch Spanish-language media. Since the end of the Mexican-American War, Spanish has been an integrated language in the United States. We say this only to address the hostilities some conservatives have towards the language. If you are going to reach out to the Hispanic community, Spanish must be a key component of it.
Don’t Assume
On the flip side, don’t assume all Hispanics speak Spanish and don’t assume you have to use the four words you do know in Spanish when speaking to Hispanics. If you only know a few broken phrases in Spanish, it comes off as awkward when you try to use them with someone you know speaks English. Just use common sense. If you knew someone spoke English fluently but was of a French background, would you feel compelled to speak broken French to them? No, so don’t do that to Hispanics either.
How and Where to Utilize Spanish
If you don't speak Spanish, find someone who does to help you out either at events or translations. For the love of everything stay away from Google Translate when transcribing printed materials! If you don't know someone who speaks Spanish, go to your local county
courthouse and see if you can find court-approved translators. Many work freelance and ask to hire them to do printed translations. Keep in mind that simple translations are better – they don’t have to be grandiloquent.
IV. The Conservative Grassroots Must Get Involved and Help (Conservative Grassroots)

In addition to not having a presence on the ground, non-Hispanic conservatives have been woefully inadequate at assisting Hispanic conservatives in spreading the message and lending support. Speaking from anecdotal evidence, we and many other Hispanic conservatives have been consistently frustrated by the lack of support from the conservative grassroots and bloggers. When we try to promote an event that is meant to cater to Hispanic conservatives or spreading the conservative message to a Hispanic audience, support from non-Hispanic conservatives with large audiences (whether it be in the form of twitter followers, website audiences, or talk radio listeners) has been minimal at best, or met with hesitation.
This is a trend that must change. Because Hispanic conservatives are greatly outnumbered by Hispanic liberals, we desperately need the support of the grassroots movement help spread the message. At the moment, Hispanic conservatives do not have the infrastructure to communicate on our own.
Commit to Engaging the Community and Lending Your Voice
For talk radio and blogs: start having segments on Hispanics and the Hispanic vote! Bring on representatives from right leaning Hispanic organizations and promote them on your show and website. Offer to write for conservative Hispanic media outlets. We're not asking for every ounce of airtime or site space, we only ask for a committed voice that will support Hispanic engagement, and won't fizzle away when the election becomes a memory. Here is a list of organizations and outlets where you can get started right away:
Conservative or Free-Market Hispanic Organizations
1 The LIBRE Initiative (@LIBREInitiative)
LIBRE is a non-partisan, non-profit that promotes economic freedom to the US Hispanic community. LIBRE grassroots efforts include: small businesses, faith communities, women, and youth efforts. Read more or sign up to volunteer here: www.thelibreinitiative.com
2 The Hispanic Leadership Network (@HispanicLN)
An organization dedicated to promoting center-right issues to the Hispanic community. http://hispanicleadershipnetwork.org/
3 The Latino Coalition (@LatinoCoalition)
www.thelatinocoalition.com
4 Republican National Hispanic Assembly (@RNHA)
A Republican organization dedicated to promoting GOP platform and conservative ideas to the Hispanic population. www.rhna.org

Conservative Hispanic Media/Advocacy/Communication Outlets
1 The Americano (@TheAmericano) www.theamericano.com
2 Heritage Libertad (@LibertadUSA) www.libertad.org
3 Puentes Research and Communications, Inc. www.puentesresearch.com

Statistical Analysis of Hispanic Demographics
1 Pew Hispanic Center (@PewHispanic) www.pewhispanic.org
2 Latino Decisions (@LatinoDecisions) www.latinodecisions.com

Many of the organizations listed above also have volunteer opportunities, and not just in election time.

V. The Rhetoric Must Be Addressed - But the Policy Need Not Completely Change (Everyone)

Immigration Rhetoric
Immigration is an issue that must be addressed. There’s no going around it. And the biggest problem behind the immigration issue with the GOP and conservatives is the rhetoric used to advocate our position. The GOP/Conservative position has always been the rule of law. In other words, if one is to come to this country to live or work, they must adhere to the proper channels. But the rhetoric, whether or not it is accurately described by the mainstream media, has been among the primary reasons Hispanics are turned off by the GOP. Statements like, “self-deportation,” “deport them all!” and “speak English! English only!” are slogans that are instant turn offs with Hispanics, regardless of whether you try to explain your position or not. It is an instant non-starter.
We’re not saying those conservatives who support the hard line stance do not have a valid point or that they should cave into the “free and clear amnesty,” but that the manner in which they
articulate their position must change. In addition, the conservative position on immigration reform differs among the movement. This is an internal debate that conservatives all around must have.
Speaking of amnesty, this term needs to be defined. Our immigration system IS in fact broken, hence the reason we have over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country. But calling ANY proposal that MAY allow a small segment of illegal immigrants to obtain legal status (not necessarily citizenship) "amnesty" is another nonstarter with Hispanics. For any reform to pass there will be a give and take, including that dreaded word, “compromise.” But there are issues in which the GOP can use as leverage at the negotiation table. Senators Rubio, Kyl, and Hutchison are some of the conservatives doing great work to find common ground and find a solution agreeable to both sides regarding immigration and the DREAM Act. Conservatives would be wise to throw weight behind them on the issue.
Conservatives must also shame out and shun any racist elements in our midst. Racists exist in all movements and to say conservatives don’t have any is a lie. Take a look at several of the threats that conservative minorities get from other “conservatives” and you will see what we mean. This racist and harmful rhetoric often includes terms like “anchor babies” and classless jokes about wanting a “free ride” or being janitors or criminals. These hateful people need to be publicly shamed lest they taint the entire movement.
In addition, embracing or tolerating truly “anti-immigrant” politicians and organizations needs to stop. We refer to has-been politicians like Tom Tancredo and organizations like NumbersUSA and FAIR. They may support the hard line stance like many conservatives, but they go even further: advocating a near full stoppage of ANY immigration to the USA, legal or otherwise. No matter how much you dress it up, the media will eat it alive, and even then, it’s a terrible policy to advocate to begin with. These politicians and groups must be condemned by conservatives and the GOP alike.
Hispanics are not Single Issue Voters
We must also note that not all Hispanics have immigration as their number one policy concern. Many are still concerned with issues that everyone else is regardless of ethnicity; the economy, education, healthcare, cost of food and taxes, etc. But immigration is an issue that must be addressed and cannot be ignored. The Democrats would prefer that we DID ignore it so that it can continue to be used as a political football with Hispanic voters.
Puerto Rico’s Status as an Initiative
One specific issue that the GOP can utilize and take the initiative on is the status of Puerto Rico. For the first time the island voted made clear the desire to obtain statehood. The ironic aspect of this issue is that the more prominent Hispanic Democrats in the House are hostile towards statehood. The GOP has the opportunity to be champion and advocate for what is a growing Hispanic demographic. The right to self-delineate has been supported for Puerto Rico in the GOP platform for years.
VI. The Success of Rubio, Labrador, and Martinez is a False Trophy of Hispanic Outreach (Everyone)

These and most of the other Hispanic Republican politicians were voted in not with Hispanic voters, but with white voters. Getting the Hispanic vote means more than having a Hispanic on the ballot, as recent elections have shown. Marco Rubio didn’t win the overall Hispanic vote in the 2010 election. He was aided with the Cuban vote, but for the more centrist (and growing) Puerto Rican and Dominican electorate, he didn’t get nearly the same amount of support. And in regards to Congressman Labrador, it doesn’t need to be said that he was not voted in with the aid of the “massive” Hispanic electorate in Idaho. In 2012, Ted Cruz did not win the majority of the Latino vote.
That is not to say that these politicians cannot be utilized in our mission. They can be the policy standard bearers for the GOP in their respective Congressional houses. Rubio has already started with his earlier modified-DREAM Act, and Raul Labrador, though of Puerto Rican descent was an immigration attorney for 15 years before winning his seat in Congress. The fact that they are both Tea Party candidates is also a plus.
Luis Fortuño Deserves Recognition
While Rubio and Labrador are just two examples of the many impressive Latinos in the GOP, there are also conservative minorities that are completely glossed over. One of, if not the most successful Governors of the past term was Luis Fortuño from Puerto Rico. He did more to advance fiscal conservatism than almost anyone in the past four years. However, it’s no surprise that most white conservatives don’t even know his name. While we can’t rely on just having Hispanic politicians, we must use them more efficiently as resources.
But this all gets away from the fact that it takes more than a Hispanic surname to sway Hispanic voters. No one politician or policy change is a quick fix to the serious problem the movement faces.
VII. The GOP Primary Schedule (GOP insiders)

One suggestion specifically for the GOP is to take a serious look at its primary schedule. While Florida is third in line with the primary dates and Nevada not far behind, the GOP should look to changing its primary schedule to bring in states with growing Hispanic populations front and center. Why is Texas, a reliably red state with a substantial Hispanic population holding its primary in March? States like Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Virginia should move their primaries towards the front of the pack, thereby requiring primary candidates to acknowledge and engage those growing Hispanic populations.
Conclusion

Trying to keep this as short yet comprehensive as possible, there are several problems with the GOP’s outreach to Hispanics. However, there are countless solutions. Start by realizing that your definition of outreach – may not be what is needed. Realize that not all of the pundits and talking heads have the answers and turn to people who are actually part of the demographic you are trying to reach. There are several conservative Latinos who should be on conservative radio, featured in conservative publications, and used as tools to engage the Latino community – but instead you see the same commentators regardless of the issue.
The Latino vote, regardless of what the media says, is an opportunity we can no longer ignore or approach half-heartedly. Latinos are hard-working people who gave up their lives in their home countries to risk everything for a piece of the American Dream. Appeal to that passion for life, the yearning for success, and the traditional values that celebrate family and community. Conservative principles are more beneficial for Latinos, and for everyone, than liberal ideology. We just need to put in the coordinated effort to make that crystal clear.

This piece is a collaboration from Brittney Morrett and Samuel Rosado, with contributions by Michelle Lancaster and Ben Domenech. The views expressed here are the personal views of the authors and do not speak for their employers or any organizations of which they may be affiliated. Brittney and Samuel live on the east coast. For more information on how to get involved in your city or help with Hispanic outreach, contact them at bmorrett@gmail.com and samuelarosado@gmail.com. You can also reach them via Twitter at @BMorrett and @SARosado.

[1] Pew Hispanic Center. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/11/14/an-awakened-giant-the-hispanic-electorate-is-likely-to-double-by-2030/
[2] Ibid.
[3] Pew Hispanic Center. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2011/11/08/hispanic-poverty-rate-highest-in-new-supplemental-census-measure/
[4] Nielsen Wire. http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/american-video-habits-by-age-gender-and-ethnicity/