I loved Joe Gerth's description of Ashley Judd's big campaign stop for Bruce Lunsford:
The Democrats might want to brief Ashley Judd a little better the next time they bring her to Kentucky for campaign events. She spoke -- largely about Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama -- at a get-out-the-vote rally Saturday at Iroquois Park in Louisville.
Apparently, the Kentucky native and actress didn't get the memo about Bruce Lunsford's wealth or that McConnell has been mentioning in television ads that Lunsford has 11 homes.
"Sen. (John) McCain has seven homes," she said, talking about the Republican presidential nominee. "Someone with seven homes is not going to be in touch with what it's like to be poor in the United States."
Lunsford was in the wings at the Iroquois Amphitheater; his staffers in the audience cringed.
Afterward, Lunsford said about half of his property is for investments, not to live in.
Like none of McCain's properties are for investment.
Showing posts with label Senate'08. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senate'08. Show all posts
Monday, November 3, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
McConnell Up By Eight Points
WHAS is reporting results of a new SUSA poll that show Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell beating Bruce Lunsford by eight points (53-45). Only three percent of voters (and that's rounded up) remain undecided.
Let's convince those last few undecideds and put this race away with a big margin so that we don't have to endure the spectacle of "perennial candidate" Bruce Lunsford running for Sen. Jim Bunning's seat.
Let's convince those last few undecideds and put this race away with a big margin so that we don't have to endure the spectacle of "perennial candidate" Bruce Lunsford running for Sen. Jim Bunning's seat.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Ann Coulter on Bruce Lunsford
Ann Coulter called Bruce Lunsford a "pinhead." Even worse, Coulter alluded to Lunsford as the guy Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is running against. It's like Lunsford doesn't even have a name. Now, however, he has a nickname: "pinhead."
PolitickerKy caught Coulter's comments on Fox:
Calling McConnell one of the two "smartest Republicans in the United States Senate," Coulter said the incumbent could be "hurt because Republicans are discouraged and don't go out to vote."
"If I could just say to voters of New Hampshire and Kentucky, please do not get rid of two of the smartest United States Senators - [New Hampshire Republican John] Sununu and McConnell," said Coulter to Fox anchor "And both of them are running against Democratic pinheads - vote for the smart Democrats, not these. Please. Please."
Shortly after those remarks were broadcast, the Lunsford campaign targeted Coulter's sentiment in an e-mail to supporters.
As Jake at PageOne notes, if Lunsford's campaign "hadn’t brought it up [Coulter's remark], no one would be laughing about it at this very moment."
Thanks, Bruce!
PolitickerKy caught Coulter's comments on Fox:
Calling McConnell one of the two "smartest Republicans in the United States Senate," Coulter said the incumbent could be "hurt because Republicans are discouraged and don't go out to vote."
"If I could just say to voters of New Hampshire and Kentucky, please do not get rid of two of the smartest United States Senators - [New Hampshire Republican John] Sununu and McConnell," said Coulter to Fox anchor "And both of them are running against Democratic pinheads - vote for the smart Democrats, not these. Please. Please."
Shortly after those remarks were broadcast, the Lunsford campaign targeted Coulter's sentiment in an e-mail to supporters.
As Jake at PageOne notes, if Lunsford's campaign "hadn’t brought it up [Coulter's remark], no one would be laughing about it at this very moment."
Thanks, Bruce!
Saturday, June 28, 2008
McConnell Vindicated on Campaign Finance
Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell has long opposed "campaign finance reform" on the grounds that it limits free speech. Yesterday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling suggests that Justice Samuel Alito -- and perhaps a majority of the Court -- agree with McConnell.
The Court struck down the "millionaire's amendment" that waived the contributions limit for candidates running against millionaires who self-fund their own campaign.
As McClatchey noted, McConnell's opposition to the "millionaire's amendment" comes at a steep cost:
Ironically, Thursday's Supreme Court ruling gives McConnell's Democratic opponent, Bruce Lunsford, the leeway to fund a stronger campaign against the senator, said Jennifer Duffy, a senior editor with the Cook Political Report.
"The ruling will allow Lunsford to spend as much money as he wants without any recourse from McConnell," Duffy said.
Lunsford, a wealthy Louisville businessman, has coffers capable of bankrolling his campaign. Though he initially wrote in filing papers to the FEC that he doesn't intend to spend his own money, Lunsford became the first Kentucky candidate ever to trigger the millionaire's amendment when he pumped more than $1 million of his own money into his bid for U.S. Senate.
During his unsuccessful 2003 and 2007 runs for governor, Lunsford pumped $14 million of his own money into the campaigns.
After the toxicity of Hillary Clinton, and the endless parsing and backpedaling of Barack Obama, McConnell's respect for the first amendment reminds us that public servants are called to put country ahead of their own hides.
The Court struck down the "millionaire's amendment" that waived the contributions limit for candidates running against millionaires who self-fund their own campaign.
As McClatchey noted, McConnell's opposition to the "millionaire's amendment" comes at a steep cost:
Ironically, Thursday's Supreme Court ruling gives McConnell's Democratic opponent, Bruce Lunsford, the leeway to fund a stronger campaign against the senator, said Jennifer Duffy, a senior editor with the Cook Political Report.
"The ruling will allow Lunsford to spend as much money as he wants without any recourse from McConnell," Duffy said.
Lunsford, a wealthy Louisville businessman, has coffers capable of bankrolling his campaign. Though he initially wrote in filing papers to the FEC that he doesn't intend to spend his own money, Lunsford became the first Kentucky candidate ever to trigger the millionaire's amendment when he pumped more than $1 million of his own money into his bid for U.S. Senate.
During his unsuccessful 2003 and 2007 runs for governor, Lunsford pumped $14 million of his own money into the campaigns.
After the toxicity of Hillary Clinton, and the endless parsing and backpedaling of Barack Obama, McConnell's respect for the first amendment reminds us that public servants are called to put country ahead of their own hides.
Monday, February 11, 2008
The Left Reacts to Horne's Departure
Several themes emerge from comments on Demo-blogs in the hours following Andrew Horne's announcement that he is ending his campaign for U.S. Senate.
First, this wing of the Democrat party -- aggressive, vocal Horne backers -- had no idea that Horne planned to drop out. None. That led to much speculation as to the reason behind Horne's decision, with no explanation from Horne at this point. "Mar Ty" comments on Page One :
I am astounded. Yesterday the campaign was excited and planning ahead…800 volunteers…Andrew was upbeat and confident…what happened????I don’ t understand this at all. We supported Beshear…he was obviously better than Ernie. Is money that important…Andrew was fundraising and if he won the primary, there would have been netroot money coming in…like Obamas. This makes no sense. Wen were devoted slaves to the Horne enterprise.
Second, for all the confusion as to why Horne quit the race, there is initial consensus among the "progressive" bloggers that Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell's prospects for reelection could scarcely be brighter. As "Dude" comments on Bluegrass Roots, "In a related story, Mitch McConnell was re-elected as the Senior Senator from Kentucky."
Third, Gov. Steve Beshear is the target of all the wrath and despair of these Horne activists. Beshear's role, like Horne's motivation, became the subject of intense speculation. Beshear brought much of this upon himself when he urged Bruce Lunsford to run, and Horne has drawn more attention to Beshear by indicating in his withdrawal statement that he spoke with Beshear before quitting the race.
Finally, the comments reiterate that this faction of the Democrat Party despises Lunsford -- both because he has given money to Republicans (including McConnell) and because netroot bloggers perceive Lunsford as scheming with Beshear to shape the primary -- just like Beshear did in the 30th district senate race.
Greg Fischer quickly issued a Come to Daddy statement to the Horne supporters. The initial reaction to Fischer's overture was frigid -- much like that of Mitt Romney's supporters who are debating whether they can back John McCain or should just take a pass on this election.
First, this wing of the Democrat party -- aggressive, vocal Horne backers -- had no idea that Horne planned to drop out. None. That led to much speculation as to the reason behind Horne's decision, with no explanation from Horne at this point. "Mar Ty" comments on Page One :
I am astounded. Yesterday the campaign was excited and planning ahead…800 volunteers…Andrew was upbeat and confident…what happened????I don’ t understand this at all. We supported Beshear…he was obviously better than Ernie. Is money that important…Andrew was fundraising and if he won the primary, there would have been netroot money coming in…like Obamas. This makes no sense. Wen were devoted slaves to the Horne enterprise.
Second, for all the confusion as to why Horne quit the race, there is initial consensus among the "progressive" bloggers that Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell's prospects for reelection could scarcely be brighter. As "Dude" comments on Bluegrass Roots, "In a related story, Mitch McConnell was re-elected as the Senior Senator from Kentucky."
Third, Gov. Steve Beshear is the target of all the wrath and despair of these Horne activists. Beshear's role, like Horne's motivation, became the subject of intense speculation. Beshear brought much of this upon himself when he urged Bruce Lunsford to run, and Horne has drawn more attention to Beshear by indicating in his withdrawal statement that he spoke with Beshear before quitting the race.
Finally, the comments reiterate that this faction of the Democrat Party despises Lunsford -- both because he has given money to Republicans (including McConnell) and because netroot bloggers perceive Lunsford as scheming with Beshear to shape the primary -- just like Beshear did in the 30th district senate race.
Greg Fischer quickly issued a Come to Daddy statement to the Horne supporters. The initial reaction to Fischer's overture was frigid -- much like that of Mitt Romney's supporters who are debating whether they can back John McCain or should just take a pass on this election.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Horne Puts Cart Before Horse
Andrew Moveon.Horne has announced that the grand opening of his campaign headquarters will be next Tuesday. But he has yet to file his candidacy with Kentucky's Secretary of State.
The official site for the Secretary of State indicates that the only candidates to file for U.S. Senate thus far are Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, David L. Williams and Michael Cassarao. Williams might be an "embarrassment," and Cassaro might be an "impossibility," as Page One described them, but at least they know how to get on the ballot.
Horne, and any of the rich-guy wannabe senators, have until January 29th to file. Oh, the suspense is just killing me.
The official site for the Secretary of State indicates that the only candidates to file for U.S. Senate thus far are Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, David L. Williams and Michael Cassarao. Williams might be an "embarrassment," and Cassaro might be an "impossibility," as Page One described them, but at least they know how to get on the ballot.
Horne, and any of the rich-guy wannabe senators, have until January 29th to file. Oh, the suspense is just killing me.
Two Ugly Step-candidates Left Out
Page One reports that Andrew Moveon.Horne will appear in Northern Kentucky tonight -- without any of his primary opponents. The Kenton County Democratic Party, which is hosting the meet and greet, thinks that "Mr. Horne is currently the only Democrat who has officially filed to challenge Republican Senator Mitch McConnell in this fall’s general election."
In fact, as the post above shows, the Kenton County Democratic Party has it exactly backwards.
No doubt the ommission hurt the feelings of the other two actual candidates, whom Page One described as "perennial embarrassment David Lynn Williams and impossibility Michael Cassaro." This is what is known as adding insult onto injury.
In fact, as the post above shows, the Kenton County Democratic Party has it exactly backwards.
No doubt the ommission hurt the feelings of the other two actual candidates, whom Page One described as "perennial embarrassment David Lynn Williams and impossibility Michael Cassaro." This is what is known as adding insult onto injury.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Doctor-Lawyer Opposes McConnell
Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell has an actual opponent, undoubtedly the first of several. Dr. Michael G. Cassaro, Esq. of Prospect, announced that he will run for McConnell's seat. (If elected, would we call him the Honorable Senator Dr. Cassaro, Esq.? Good thing we colonists renounced titles.)
Cassaro, according to WHAS 11 Mark Hebert, practices medicine with a specialty in pain management, but was also educated as an engineer and an attorney (though he is not listed in the Louisville Bar Association 2007 Directory).
Perhaps, given that he is a physician, Cassaro can discuss the issue of healthcare with a little more thoughtfulness than the left has shown in the senate race thus far.
Take the issue of the State Children Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Republicans, including McConnell, agreed to renew the program to give free health insurance for poor children who don't qualify for Medicaid.
The Democrats insisted that the program be increased to cover more children -- those whose family income is well above the poverty line. Under the Democrats' proposed expansion, for example, a family of four with an $84,000 income in New York would qualify for SCHIP. The president correctly vetoed the program as expanded, and McConnell supported the president when the Democrats tried to override the veto.
In response, the Democrats ran ads against McConnell, asserting, in essence, that he hates children (even though he is the father of three girls).
It's the same logic that we saw with the proposed Louisville Library Tax: if you oppose the tax, that means you hate books. But the voters didn't fall for it.
Republicans don't hate small children (or books). To the contrary, as Susan Estrich complained, while promoting her book on the Laura Ingraham show, conservatives buy more books than liberals. And one of the unintended consequences of the Democrats' assault on families and fetuses is that Republicans bear more children than Democrats.
No, McConnell and Republicans agree that poor children need access to affordable healthcare. The issue, however, is how best to accomplish that goal. That's why the Republican leader has urged the Democrats to renew the coverage for those children previously covered -- for whom there is bipartisan support. Instead, the Democrats risk coverage for the neediest children while trying to expand the program.
Legislators draw lines to allocate scarce resources. So the real issue in the SCHIP debate is how far up from the poverty line we draw the line -- three hundred percent, or as the Democrats have demanded, four hundred percent above the poverty line -- or further?
Truthfully, many Democrats don't want to draw a line, any line, because that necessarily means leaving children out, thereby forcing their parents to hold down jobs and buy health insurance. That's why the SCHIP debate, at its core, is about universal health insurance.
Oregon voters recently confronted a ballot initiative that would have imposed universal health care for children, to be funded by cigarette taxes -- virtually the identical plan that Democrats have pushed in Congress. Though more liberal than the average Kentuckian, Oregon voters rejected the plan by a margin of three to two. Notwithstanding the negative advertising funded by out of state interest groups, McConnell 's approach of renewing SCHIP but holding the line on its expansion comports with the values of Kentucky voters.
Why would the Democrats expand SCHIP when we have not yet solved how to fund Social Security? Like building an addition when you can't pay your mortgage, it's just profligate. But Democrats know that the surest way to guarantee an entitlement's permanency is to give the middle class a piece of it. And that is exactly what the SCHIP expansion would do, at least incrementally.
So the question for Dr. Cassaro, Esq., to address when he formally announces his candidacy today, is whether he is ready to practice medicine for the government, if the senate gig doesn't work out. Maybe that's why he hedged his bets and went to law school.
Cassaro, according to WHAS 11 Mark Hebert, practices medicine with a specialty in pain management, but was also educated as an engineer and an attorney (though he is not listed in the Louisville Bar Association 2007 Directory).
Perhaps, given that he is a physician, Cassaro can discuss the issue of healthcare with a little more thoughtfulness than the left has shown in the senate race thus far.
Take the issue of the State Children Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Republicans, including McConnell, agreed to renew the program to give free health insurance for poor children who don't qualify for Medicaid.
The Democrats insisted that the program be increased to cover more children -- those whose family income is well above the poverty line. Under the Democrats' proposed expansion, for example, a family of four with an $84,000 income in New York would qualify for SCHIP. The president correctly vetoed the program as expanded, and McConnell supported the president when the Democrats tried to override the veto.
In response, the Democrats ran ads against McConnell, asserting, in essence, that he hates children (even though he is the father of three girls).
It's the same logic that we saw with the proposed Louisville Library Tax: if you oppose the tax, that means you hate books. But the voters didn't fall for it.
Republicans don't hate small children (or books). To the contrary, as Susan Estrich complained, while promoting her book on the Laura Ingraham show, conservatives buy more books than liberals. And one of the unintended consequences of the Democrats' assault on families and fetuses is that Republicans bear more children than Democrats.
No, McConnell and Republicans agree that poor children need access to affordable healthcare. The issue, however, is how best to accomplish that goal. That's why the Republican leader has urged the Democrats to renew the coverage for those children previously covered -- for whom there is bipartisan support. Instead, the Democrats risk coverage for the neediest children while trying to expand the program.
Legislators draw lines to allocate scarce resources. So the real issue in the SCHIP debate is how far up from the poverty line we draw the line -- three hundred percent, or as the Democrats have demanded, four hundred percent above the poverty line -- or further?
Truthfully, many Democrats don't want to draw a line, any line, because that necessarily means leaving children out, thereby forcing their parents to hold down jobs and buy health insurance. That's why the SCHIP debate, at its core, is about universal health insurance.
Oregon voters recently confronted a ballot initiative that would have imposed universal health care for children, to be funded by cigarette taxes -- virtually the identical plan that Democrats have pushed in Congress. Though more liberal than the average Kentuckian, Oregon voters rejected the plan by a margin of three to two. Notwithstanding the negative advertising funded by out of state interest groups, McConnell 's approach of renewing SCHIP but holding the line on its expansion comports with the values of Kentucky voters.
Why would the Democrats expand SCHIP when we have not yet solved how to fund Social Security? Like building an addition when you can't pay your mortgage, it's just profligate. But Democrats know that the surest way to guarantee an entitlement's permanency is to give the middle class a piece of it. And that is exactly what the SCHIP expansion would do, at least incrementally.
So the question for Dr. Cassaro, Esq., to address when he formally announces his candidacy today, is whether he is ready to practice medicine for the government, if the senate gig doesn't work out. Maybe that's why he hedged his bets and went to law school.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Stumbo Stumbles on Election Law Compliance
Soon to be Former-Attorney General Greg Stumbo has spent the last four years playing "gotcha" whenever Governor Ernie Fletcher violated any provision of the law, no matter how small. But Stumbo can't seem to adhere to the same high standard that he has demanded of others.
As Captain's Quarters notes, Stumbo failed to file required forms with the Federal Election Commission that would have disclosed Stumbo's individual donors. This would have told us, for instance, whether Stumbo is drawing money from out of state (Barbara Streisand, can you spare a dime?)
Stumbo said he's "on pace" to raise $200,000 to test the waters for a senate bid. Voters are entitled know the identity of his donors. So far, however, it appears that Stumbo has not filed the required updates.
Stumbo promised "to push for election laws that protect citizens from corruption and hidden influence," and yet has not complied with exisging laws. Former FEC Chair Brad Smith, discussing Stumbo's failure to file, notes that "as is so often the case, those in apparent violation have long lobbied for more complex, more burdensome laws."
Stumbo, moreover, brought this reporting requirement upon himself when he filed papers with the FEC last July to announce an exploratory committee for Mitch McConnell's U.S. Senate seat. If Stumbo can't or won't file the FEC quarterly reports, maybe he ought to explore a new line of employment -- in the private sector.
As Captain's Quarters notes, Stumbo failed to file required forms with the Federal Election Commission that would have disclosed Stumbo's individual donors. This would have told us, for instance, whether Stumbo is drawing money from out of state (Barbara Streisand, can you spare a dime?)
Stumbo said he's "on pace" to raise $200,000 to test the waters for a senate bid. Voters are entitled know the identity of his donors. So far, however, it appears that Stumbo has not filed the required updates.
Stumbo promised "to push for election laws that protect citizens from corruption and hidden influence," and yet has not complied with exisging laws. Former FEC Chair Brad Smith, discussing Stumbo's failure to file, notes that "as is so often the case, those in apparent violation have long lobbied for more complex, more burdensome laws."
Stumbo, moreover, brought this reporting requirement upon himself when he filed papers with the FEC last July to announce an exploratory committee for Mitch McConnell's U.S. Senate seat. If Stumbo can't or won't file the FEC quarterly reports, maybe he ought to explore a new line of employment -- in the private sector.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)