Club for Growth Freedom

The biggest news to come out of the Ron Paul campaign (www.ronpaul2008.com) last week was that the campaign raised $5.08 million during the third quarter of this year. <.>

Ron Paul may be the candidate who breaks through. Whatever happens, his campaign has turned into the most significant pro-freedom mass movement in modern American history, perhaps in all of our history.

However, things aren't all peachy, Ron Paul has admitted to some serious vices, which may make him unfit for higher office. :)

Also, Andrew Roth, over at the Club For Growth has told me (and given permission to announce here) that they are working on a piece, 'Ron Paul's Record on Economics Issues', due out in a few weeks time, joining those already in existence on Thompson, Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Huckbee, and Brownback. These reports offer excellent in depth analysis from, IMO, the most credible freemarket source in existence.

However, it will be interesting to see how they rate Paul, as he is often difficult to pin down by traditional methods. How many Congressmen vote against CAFTA and NAFTA because it is 'government managed trade', not free trade. In other words, if you vote against a 'free trade' bill because it's not free enough are you counted as having an 'anti free trade' record?

We shall see, but I very much look forward to seeing their report. I suspect many of their members would be quite thrilled with a Paul Presidency and are, perhaps, unaware of his exemplary record in Congress. I mean, forget abolishing the 'death tax', a laudable high priority for the Club For Growth, let's abolish the entire IRS! :)

He ran into his fellow Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, the then powerful chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and chief Senate sponsor of the Alaska Bridge to Nowhere. "He strolled up to me and said: 'Well, Tom, I hope you're satisfied for helping us lose the election.'"

evens was evidently still infuriated by Coburn's nationally publicized crusade against runaway pork-barrel spending over the past two years. To that, Coburn, never the shrinking violet, replied: "No, Ted, you lost us the election."
What a gall!

Nevada Politics, a new posting group, has been created in order to consolidate present and future posts on political happenings in Nevada and highlight 'Republican' Rep Jon Porter's porkbarreling spending/thieving. Also, I can now send Rep Porter a link informing him that a registered Republican voter is blogging about him unfavorably from within his district. :)

Andrew Roth, talented manager of the 'Club For Growth' blog, has requested that we partake in an exercise to find out and advertise how our Congresscritters feel about stealing from the American people. With $2.5 trillion dollars in Federal Spending, it is already abundantly clear they LOVE to steal from us. :) However, thanks to (R) Congressmen and CFG elected Candidate Jeff Flake, Congresspersons were forced to go on the record voting YES or NO on 19 'Flake' Amendments, which highlight some especially egregious pork. This effort to highlight the votes on these 19 amendments is gaining steam:

The Pork Scorecard is now listing 64 blogs, both conservative and liberal in ideology, that have written about 131 politicians.

So, I checked out my Congressmen (R) Jon Porter from Nevada's third district. Rep Jon Porter, a Republican?!, mind you, voted no, individually, on amendments attempting to toss out the following:

Rep Gibbons, the other Republican from NV, voted to scrap all 19 projects. Thank you sir! Of course, Rep Berkly, the Democratic Rep, voted to fund all 19 of the Amendments.

Congressman Porter, as a Nevada citizen, I thank you for taking the time to fund these initiatives so vital to the well-being of our state. I'm being sarcastic. Congressmen Porter and the rest of this sorry bunch are guilty of nothing less than outright theft. Legal stealing is no less im moral than illegal stealing, such as a mugging. :) Congressman Porter also recently voted to raise the minimum wage, another more subtle form of stealing, thus harming businesses, consumers, minorities and younger workers.

The 2006 Nevada Primary elections begin today, with general voting on August 15th. Unfortunately, no one is challenging Porter in the Republican party, but Joseph P. Silvestri is running on the Libertarian ticket. I'll bet Mr. Silvestri would be less of a thief than Jon Porter.

He argued in 2001 that Bush's $1.6 trillion tax cut was not big enough. He has bucked the administration on a number of issues, refusing to vote for the aviation security act or Medicare prescription-drug benefits, one of only 25 Republicans to oppose the costly program.

"He's Newt's progeny," said Marshall Wittmann, a Democratic Leadership Council aide who previously worked for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). "A hard-core, true-believing, hard-charging right-winger who believes everything Newt said about dismantling government and transforming the culture. In many ways, he is trying to revive the spirit of the revolution of '94."

Press Release on the NRSC's Anti-Laffey Ad Campaign

NRSC ANTI-LAFFEY AD CAMPAIGN BACKFIRES
Following NRSC Ads, GOP Primary Voters More Likely To Support Chafee Challenger

Washington, D.C. — Results from a poll by the Club for Growth, the nation’s leading free-market advocacy organization with over 33,000 members, show that a Rhode Island TV ad campaign by the National Republican Senatorial Committee designed to help liberal incumbent Senator Lincoln Chafee appears to be angering core Republican voters and driving up support for his Republican primary challenger, Cranston, Rhode Island, Mayor Stephen Laffey.

The poll of 300 Republican primary voters was conducted by National Research Inc. on Nov. 14-15. The poll asked whether respondents had seen television ads about Stephen Laffey. Among those who had, three out of four respondents said the ads either made them more likely to support Laffey or had no effect. Among those who reported that the ads affected their views, nearly three out of five of those (or 58%) respondents reported they were more likely to support Laffey.

“From bridges to nowhere to campaign ads that have the opposite of their intended effect, some Republicans in Washington are proving that they are simply no good at spending other people’s money effectively,” said Pat Toomey, President of the Club for Growth. “If the NRSC really wants to win the support of GOP members in Rhode Island, they should try encouraging Sen. Lincoln Chafee to vote for what the Republican party is supposed to stand for — a pro-growth agenda of limited government, lower taxes and less federal spending.” The poll produced the following results:

THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE IS SPENDING MONEY ON ATTACK ADS AGAINST STEPHEN LAFFEY, A FELLOW REPUBLICAN HERE IN RHODE ISLAND. DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD BE SPENDING MONEY ON THIS NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN, OR SHOULD THEY BE SPENDING MONEY AGAINST DEMOCRATS INSTEAD?

SHOULD BE 9.3%

SPEND AGAINST DEMOCRATS 71.7%

DON‘T KNOW/REFUSED 19%

HAVE YOU SEEN ANY TELEVISION ADVERTISING OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS ABOUT STEPHEN LAFFEY?

YES 61%

NO 35.3%

DON‘T KNOW/REFUSED 3.7%

AND DID THE ADVERTISING MAKE YOU MORE LIKELY OR LESS LIKELY TO VOTE FOR STEPHEN LAFFEY IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY FOR U.S. SENATE?

MORE LIKELY 33.9%

LESS LIKELY 24.6%

NO EFFECT/UNDECIDED 39.3%

REFUSED 2.2%

“Washington-based Republicans’ elevation of incumbency protection over principle is disgusting rank-and-file GOP members. Great numbers of them are hoping for leaders who advocate returning the party to the pro-growth agenda that helped it achieve a governing majority in the first place,” concluded Toomey. “While I’m sure Mayor Laffey actually appreciates the results of the NRSC’s ads against him, it’s a sad commentary on the state of the Republican party leadership in Washington.”

11/18/05 The Hill Details threats made by pork barreling Republicans from Alaska over the 'bridge to nowhere', publicized by Club For Growth elected members Jeff Flake and Tom Coburn.

According to witnesses, Young warned Flake and Musgrave that he planned to stay in Congress a long time and would not forget the stinging defeat.

Another lawmaker present said Young directed more fire at other members at the meeting for not defending the projects, derogatively referred to as “pork,” in the transportation bill, despite having received millions of dollars in funding for projects in their districts.

Young called Flake “ungentlemanly” and, “out of the blue,” hurled angry words at Musgrave, another fiscal hawk.

Who is ungentlemanly? A thief or the one exposing the thief? But the most galling part of this is yet to come:

House leaders have killed the project by adding language to the transportation appropriations bill erasing instructions funding the bridge that were in the authorization bill Congress passed this summer. Local Alaska officials now have a free hand to decide how to spend the more than $400 million slated for the bridges.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who with Young put together the transportation authorization bill, said that merely the name of the bridge had been deleted. He noted that Alaska would still get the money. Inhofe said that Stevens supported the proposal he showed him deleting reference to the bridge in the authorization bill.

So, they have not 'killed the project', they have just changed the wording so that the 'bridge' is not mentioned. Why have they done this? Because they have contempt for the American people. They believe that the American people are so stupid that we will believe our Congressmen when they say they 'killed' the funding for this wasteful porkbarelling bridge. They believe their deception will make this story go away.

[This] means campaigning members of Congress can argue, with a straight face even, that they "killed" the bridge to nowhere. And if you believe that, they have a bridge to sell you.

Bill Nye the Science Guy may not have approved of Congressman Jeff Flake's (R-AZ) vote against commemorating National Chemistry Week, but like-minded conservatives surely would rally behind the Club-backed member's premise behind his vote. Here's what Jeff had to say (periodic table key below):

Jeff of course is another congressman who won his first race with outstanding support from Club members. For those Club members who aren't up on their periodic table, Pb=lead, Au=gold, Ne=Neon and Sn=Tin.

By the time Senate debate began, what had been a largely conservative movement on the Web had crossed the aisle. Bloggers of all stripes were following the proceedings in real time, rooting for what they labeled fiscal sanity -- and for Katrina relief overall. "Honestly, there's no reason for any Democrat to vote against this amendment," opined The Daily Kos, which, along with the Talking Points Memo, are lefty counterparts to Instapundit.

Before the vote, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., delivered a speech in which she warned any senators voting in favor of defunding a Seattle sculpture park to watch their backs about projects in their home states. In the end, the amendment garnered a mere 13 "yeas."

Only one Democrat backed the bill: Wisconsin's Russ Feingold. "It's embarrassing that Feingold was the only Democrat voting for it," The Daily Kos said. "What a great way to show the country that Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility. Sheez."

Also includes some tidbits on Republican Senator Ted Stevens's temper tantrum, including threatening to resign if his $223 million bridge serving 50 people wasn't kept. What a bunch of Jokers our Senators are!

But the main reason I posted this article was to focus on the lefty blogosphere joining in the fight. This is similar to what occurred immediately after the Kelo decision. The corruption and thievery of our elected officials is so blatant, so apparent, and so obvious, that it is no longer being ignored because now ordinary people, via the power of the Internet, have the power and the means to see it for what it is and take our country back.

So, this is a hopeful sign, but we still have a long way to go. After all, the problem is not where the money is allocated, but the fact that government has the power to allocate it at all. And even if it did, government has no authority to provide charitable redistribution under the Constitution. Even Senator Coburn has not acknowledged these truisms.

That's the headline of an editorial from the Wall Street Journal last Friday, referring to freshman Senator Tom Coburn (elected last year in part with over $1 million in contributions from Club members). In the "go-along-to-get-along" Senate, you're considered a barbarian if you look out for the national interest instead of the pork in your home state.

Coburn forced his colleagues to vote on his amendment to defund the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", a $223 million pork project that connects an island community of only 50 people in Alaska. The savings would then be directed towards the rebuilding of a bridge near New Orleans that was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

Three cheers for Tom Coburn and kudos to all the Club members who supported him last year. Rome wasn't built in a day, and the Senate's traditions of pork won't be banished until and unless we make it politically impossible for them to continue. While his amendment was crushed, we take heart that Coburn had excellent support from other Senators elected with substantial Club member support: Jim DeMint (SC), John Sununu (NH), Wayne Allard (CO), Richard Burr (NC), and David Vitter (LA).

That's one key quality that we look for in candidates when recommending them to Club members: political nerve. We find it more often than any other group.

Here is another article by the WP talking about this, including some quotes from thieving Republican Congressman. Even some on the left are upset about it... How did your Senator vote?

9/20/05 A story of huge importance that has received little mention in the mainstream press. The Club For Growth is the most outstanding political organization in the United States. It works by pooling the money of members and targeting pro-growth candidates in an incredibly efficient way. It is not a 'pro-Republican' Group, actually, it is an anti-Republican group, which is, perhaps, why it was targeted. They have effectively challenged establishment Republicans in their primaries, nominating Republicans who were not backed by the party, but won the nomination. One of these is Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, the only Senator in the United States who seems to understand the Constitution.

Coburn's performance confirms dread of him as a senator by establishment Republicans, both in Oklahoma and the nation's capital.

A plain-spoken obstetrician from Muskogee, Okla., Dr. Coburn won no popularity contests with a principled assault on pork during his House tenure (1995-2000) that was ended by self-imposed term limits. He entered the Senate determined to keep a low profile, but that is difficult considering the Washington spending carnival under Republican rule.

Citing calls for ''sacrifice'' by Americans, he declared that ''it is no sacrifice on the part of Congress to steal $51.2 billion from our grandchildren.''

The Club For Growth has had incredible influence behind the scenes and this influence is always pro-growth, pro-freedom and positive. Why is the FEC after them? In an email to club members, CFG President Pat Toomey said:

Finally, I must say that our efforts to work this out with the FEC were a real eye-opener for me. The arrogance and unfair treatment was incredible. At one point when the Club asked the FEC how we could operate consistent with their view of the law, they refused to tell us.

Is the Republican party behind this scheme? I hate to float conspiracy theories, especially without evidence, but the FEC, like all Federal agencies and panels, is under political control.

FEC Vice Chairman Michael Toner rated the case "one of the most important suits the commission has brought in recent years."

"At stake is whether Club for Growth will be able to continue raising and spending millions of dollars in soft money for activities influencing federal elections," said Toner, a Republican.

The Republican party must be loosing many of their fundraisers to this new organization that has vowed to elect people that don't produce charts like these. Would they really 'eat their own', to keep their monopoly on Conservative donor money? But how can they expect to keep their donors when the Republican majority leader in the house, Tom Delay, says things like this:

9/15/05 Washington Times House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said yesterday that Republicans have done so well in cutting spending that he declared an "ongoing victory," and said there is simply no fat left to cut in the federal budget.

    Asked if that meant the government was running at peak efficiency, Mr. DeLay said, "Yes, after 11 years of Republican majority we've pared it down pretty good."
    "Excluding military and homeland security, American taxpayers have witnessed the largest spending increase under any preceding president and Congress since the Great Depression," he said.
      American Conservative Union Chairman David A. Keene said federal spending already was "spiraling out of control" before Katrina, and conservatives are "increasingly losing faith in the president and the Republican leadership in Congress."

Mr. Keene said annual nonmilitary and non-homeland security spending increased $303 billion between fiscal year 2001 and 2005; the acknowledged federal debt increased more than $2 trillion since fiscal year 2000; and the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill is estimated to increase the government's unfunded obligations by $16 trillion.

"This is hardly a well-oiled machine," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican. "There's a lot of fat to trim. ... I wonder if we've been serving in the same Congress."

It makes me wonder if Delay is on the same planet? How can he say such at thing? The Republican party is no longer the party of limited government. Who is Jeff Flake? A Club For Growth bankrolled candidate.

Delay was named porker of the month by CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste).

Mr. Delay, if we wanted liberals in Congress we would have elected them. The only way to redeem yourself is to immediately apologize for your statement and begin abolishing government agencies.

7/8/05 NewsMax Some very disturbing news describing a rift in the Club For Growth. Regular readers know that I consider the Club For Growth the best political organization in existence, and indeed, most likely accomplishes more good for the world than any other charitable donation. I have deep admiration and respect for Stephan Moore, the hard hitting, clear writing, former president, who apparently has clashed with some board members and has now formed a new organization. It seems to me the present market for this sort of organization is not big enough for two of them. I hope I am wrong, yet it would be a shame if personality clashes weakened a growing, influential, and vitally important player in the American Political landscape. I bet I speak for a majority of Club For Growth members when I say, "Get it together boys!"

6/23/05 Roll Call More on how Senator Tom Coburn, Club For Growth bankrolled candidate, is doing his utmost to protect our money and liberty in Congress. The freshman is using his power as a Senator to put a hold - or secret filibuster threat - on any bill he believes would create a new spending program, whether it is included in an appropriations bill or an authorizing bill.
That means that many a Senator's home-state pet project could be held up indefinitely by a man known for sticking to his guns, even to the point of making enemies. Thieves don't like being called out.
"I don't think we ought to be passing new legislation, spending new money when we can't pay for what we're doing today, and we're not willing to cut what we're doing today," said Coburn in a recent interview. Common sense... in Washington?

"It's not about Ted Stevens [porkbarreling 'Republican' senator]," Coburn said. "It's about, if we're going to spend new money then we ought to be able to say, 'Here's where we'll get the money to pay for this,' or we ought not to be doing this."

Given that [Coburn's shenanigans], Senators aren't even safe anymore thinking that their pet programs are protected because they've already become law. [Gasp! We can't have that can we?] "He's elated to have a forum like this and plans to use it to its full potential," Hart said. Good. Tom Coburn is perhaps the only Senator who is actually representing his constituents and truly focusing on shrinking government. Still, during his more than 30 years in Congress, Lott said he has learned something about how to keep the likes of Coburn from stopping his pet projects from becoming law. "The way I do it is, I fold them into bills where you can't find it," Lott said. "I've been around here long enough to know how to bury it."

Senator Lott is on the record talking about stealing your family's money in order to transfer it to his own political constituents in wasteful bloated spending bills. Senator Lott is engaging in criminal behavior. Of course, it's perfectly legal, but it is morally criminal. It's like a bank robber boasting to the police what a great thief he is and the police not doing anything. 'We the people', are the apathetic police. We need to vote these corrupt politicians out of office and elect more people like Tom Coburn. Club For Growth.

5/8/05 New York Post I started trying to take excerpts from this piece, but soon realized I'd end up posting the whole thing. It tells us something we already know: Conservatism is dead in the GOP. President Bush is the biggest domestic spender in 30 years, and that's excluding defense and homeland security. A majority of 'Republicans' today would rather win their brownie points off social issues than do anything to shrink government. Here is the report from the Cato institute (that this Post story was based on) and an earlier story. My recommendation: never give to the Republican party again. Either stick to the Club For Growth or check out these guys and see if you agree with 'em. Bush has 3 more budgets to submit, let's hope he feels the heat and attempts to salvage his tattered domestic legacy.

The first correction ever posted in the blog section here at neoperspectives.com. Unfortunately I made an error when writing a post last week 4/28 (below) regarding the Club For Growth's endorsement of Mike Pence. Alert readers have pointed out that the Club had not yet officially endorsed Pence for President. I assumed they had done so based on a few facts:

1. I received a (mass) email from Pat Toomey, current President of the CFG, lauding Pence for cutting pork and stating something like 'Wouldn't he make a great President?' or 'Wouldn't you like to see him run?' I'm paraphrasing because I've since deleted the email (if any readers have this please send me a copy).

"Mike is charismatic. He's articulate, but he's not shrill or mean the
way some conservatives can be," said Stephen Moore, former president
of the Club for Growth, a conservative political action committee. "I
think a lot of us are looking around and saying, 'Who is the next
great conservative hero? Where is the next Ronald Reagan in our
party?' . . . The Study Committee has close to 100 members now. That's
a high water mark. So it means that all legislation that passes
Congress is going to have go through Mike Pence."

3. The CFG has frequently mentioned Pence in their blogs and in news stories they've posted.

4. The CFG members donated over 50k to Pence as a candidate in this past election cycle and I'm assuming in past ones as well.

5. Moore has this to say about the Medicare drug prescription bill boondoggle that the Club opposed: Two lieutenants quickly emerged to lead the conservative revolt against the bill: Pat Toomey and Mike Pence. Both of them were elected with Club support, of course. <.> Sitting in the Oval Office of the White House, he [Pence] told George Bush: "With all due respect, Mr. President, I didn't come to this town to create new entitlements, but to rein in the ones we already have."

6. Pence was one of the few Republicans to openly support Pat Toomey, current CFG president, in his near upset win over PA 'Republican' Senator Arlen Spector. The Toomey blog states this:

"Seems to me to be the easiest thing in the world to come back after a
very difficult race and take the ball and go home," said Rep. Mike
Pence, R-Ind., who backed Toomey his the Primary race. "And he hasn't
done that. He has come back and taken lessons learned and continued to
exercise the leadership that we cherish." "It's going to be part of your legacy here," Pence told Toomey.

So, all of this, including their pattern of early endorsements, contributed to my misunderstanding that the Club had endorsed Mike Pence. I still believe they are actively supporting Pence's possible candidacy and that an official endorsement is likely forthcoming. Apologies for the error. :)
Comments (5) | Trackback (0)

After a bad statewide election, issues with Tabor, and some marital problems, the Club For Growth is shying away from their initial endorsement of CO Governor Bill Ownes and has (seemingly) fallen behind Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, another strong government slashing Conservative. I'd been hoping SC governor Mark Sanford would get in the race, but it appears he is adamant about not running. Pence may be the best bet for 2008. Why do I like Mike Pence? Because this past week he stood up to the 'Conservative' leadership in Congress and now any Representative can force a vote on any aspect of the budget. This will force lawmakers to go on record when they steal, say, $500,000 for the International Coffee Organization (true story), instead of being able to hide all their pork deep in large appropriations bills. Pence is also strongly in favor of opening our socialistic public school system up to private competition and was the only house member to serve as a plaintiff against the unconstitutional and failed campaign finance 'reform' bill.

Why do I take the Club For Growth's (leaning towards) endorsement so seriously? Because they bankroll the election of people like Senator Tom Coburn of OK who believes in the radical concept that families will spend their money better than government. "There isn’t going to be an appropriations bill that I don’t go after,” Coburn vowed. Robert Novak reports: The Oklahoma GOP establishment thought it was finished with Coburn when he fulfilled his term-limit pledge and left Congress after three terms, ending in 2000. His subsequent memoir showed his contempt for Capitol Hill mores. When a Senate seat opened for the 2004 election, Coburn withstood vicious attacks in both the Republican primary and general election campaign. [The Club For Growth's financial backing was a primary reason he won] Dr. Tom Coburn, a U.S. senator from Oklahoma for less than four months, last week was up to old tricks he started playing in the House a decade ago. He was making colleagues' lives miserable by exposing wasteful, unnecessary spending that is supposed to stay hidden. The Senate establishment, like its House counterpart, has retaliated by bringing ethics charges against the obstetrician-senator for going home to Muskogee, Okla., to deliver babies. The Washington Post reports that thieving Senators are stuffing a must pass emergency military spending bill with tons of pork: Meanwhile, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) will go against the flow by attempting to strip out funds that he deems are not urgently needed. As Mark Twain said: It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress.

I've made two more references to the Club For Growth on this site. Go to 'find' on your browser and type in 'Club For Growth' to find these mentionings at:

SHOULD BE	9.3%
SPEND AGAINST DEMOCRATS	71.7%
DON‘T KNOW/REFUSED	19%

MORE LIKELY	33.9%
LESS LIKELY	24.6%
NO EFFECT/UNDECIDED	39.3%
REFUSED	2.2%