POLS Stacking the Deck?

Boehner surprise: Dems barely get votes to adjourn after floor speech

House Democrats on Wednesday barely won a 210-209 vote to adjourn the House without extending the Bush tax cuts.

Thirty-nine House Democrats voted against adjournment after Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) urged opposition to the motion in a floor speech that said it would be irresponsible for Congress to leave without providing certainty on the tax issue. Dozens of Democrats in tough races voted against adjourning.

Does it seem odd to you that the vote to adjourn won by exactly one vote? It smells as bad as when House members tout their actions as responsible by voting for some bill they claim is good governance only to have it die in the Senate.  Like that wasn’t planned.

Sleazy politics one OH one would suggest the following. Both parties are in fear of voter anger commonly expressed by the tea party movement many love to dismiss. In this case, House Minority Leader John Boehner grabs a headline designed to make him look good. Likewise, the 39 Democrats are able to look better to voters by opposing adjournment. All the while the one vote victory was in the works.

Stanford Matthews

Clueless Politicians

NFL Calls Foul on Feingold Use of Randy Moss Footage
October 05, 2010

MILWAUKEE — The NFL is flagging Sen. Russ Feingold’s latest ad for using an unauthorized clip of Randy Moss pretending to moon the Green Bay crowd in 2004.

When a career politician has nothing to offer this is what a re-election campaign looks like.

Sen. Murkowski Asks Alaska Stations Not to Air Tea Party Ads
October 04, 2010

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s campaign is warning Alaska broadcasters not to air ads by a national tea party group that the campaign says are “littered with lies and intentional mischaracterizations” about her and her write-in campaign.

An example of a POL who can’t take ‘no’ for an answer after losing an election.

GOP Rep. Cao ‘Hurt’ After Obama Endorses Dem, Warns of Opponent’s Ethics History
October 04, 2010

Republican Rep. Joseph Cao — in an act of either selfless concern or political expediency — says he “must” warn President Obama that the Democratic candidate he’s endorsed in the race has a history of ethical problems.

RINO Cao has learned a hard lesson. Running as a Republican and voting as a Democrat has a downside. He may want to take RINO lessons from McCain, Snowe, Collins, Graham, etc. The list is large. That’s the problem.

Stanford Matthews

Why Sean Bielat for Congress?

Bielat is 35 years old, a Marine who spent four years on active duty and is now a major in the Reserve. He’s a graduate of Georgetown University with a master’s from Harvard and an MBA from Wharton. He’s devoted a good portion of his professional life to manufacturing the high-tech robots that defuse improvised explosive devices in Iraq and Afghanistan. In other words, he’s a serious man.

Sean Bielat for Congress

One of those David and Goliath stories may be playing out in Massachusetts politics. While the victory of Scott Brown as the one to replace the seat held by Ted Kennedy may have some thinking Taxachusetts is moving to the right it could simply be a matter of liberals staying home on election day.

And that may be one reason Sean Bielat could defeat Barney Frank in Massachusetts. More than one pundit has suggested GOP victories this fall will occur in part because the left is despondent. Midterm elections usually have a dismal turnout (not like the others are anything to brag about). The youth vote and other liberal leaning constituencies tend to ignore the midterms. All that adds to the chances for conservatives.

Recently Bielat’s campaign stated their internal polls indicate Barney Frank leads the race by 10 points while Frank’s crew scoffs at the suggestion and believes they lead by 20 points. Bielat contends Frank’s campaign is worried about the election given they brought in Bill Clinton to stump for Barney.

“If I don’t campaign I’m arrogant. But if I campaign effectively it shows I’m desperate. Why is it a sign of desperation to bring in a popular figure to say something nice about me?’’ Frank said in an interview. “Unless his view is that I should only be bringing in ineffective campaigners. Maybe next time I should bring in Jimmy Carter.’’

It’s not a difficult choice. Keep politicians like Barney Frank and John Kerry or elect those who have an interest in returning our nation to the values and principles that made it great. It seems strange that a state like Massachusetts with its historical ties to the founding of our nation would allow its elected officials to abandon those ideals.

Massachusetts should try out Sean Bielat. What have they got to lose beyond the couple of years a term implies. And they may benefit enough to extend that term the next time around. Bielat is correct. Barney Frank had much to do with Fannie and Freddie and the mortgage meltdown. What’s interesting is that Frank takes a shot at Carter in the quote above and has Bill Clinton campaigning for him. Two more players involved with providing houses to those who cannot pay for them and forcing banks to take the risk.

Elect Sean Bielat in Massachusetts.

Stanford Matthews


Bye bye Barney: Bielat has momentum. Help keep it going!

Another Reason to Throw the Bums Out

Democrats to stuff 20 bills into post-election lame-duck session
Democrats are considering cramming as many as 20 pieces of legislation into the lame-duck session they plan to hold after the Nov. 2 election.

The liberals blew town without extending the Bush tax cuts. Their lame duck agenda claims to support tax cuts for those households earning less than $250K. This LAME lame duck proposal avoids the fact they could have done that quite easily before the break. It also avoids the fact they have other plans based on the outcome of the Nov 2 elections…. all bad.

They want to take another swing at ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. They want to pass the DREAM Act shamnesty bill as well as borrow more money for unemployment compensation and attempts to fix the failed idea of Obamacare.

You can read more about their failed agenda at the link below:

Bills competing for floor time in lame-duck session

All this is one more reason to throw the bums out in November.

Stanford Matthews

Toomey on Sestak Ads

Another Sestak Ad Declared False – When Will the Dishonesty End?

Wed, 09/29/2010

For Immediate Release—September 29, 2010
Contact: Nachama Soloveichik • Communications Director • 484.809.7994 •  646.528.1029
Contact: Kristin Anderson • Deputy Communications Director • 484.809.7994 • 612.280.5196
Contact: Tim Kelly • Press Secretary • 484.809.7994

Allentown, PA – Today, Politico reported that Congressman Joe Sestak has made false statements in yet another political ad.

Politico’s Ben Smith wrote:

“The pro-Israel group AIPAC is raising objections to a campaign ad from Rep. Joe Sestak that claims that, ‘According to AIPAC, Joe Sestak has a 100% pro-Israel voting record.’  The group, a spokesman said, does not issue such evaluations.  ‘Joe Sestak does not have a 100% voting record on Israel issues according to AIPAC. It couldn’t be true, we don’t rate or endorse candidates,’ said AIPAC spokesman Josh Block of the ad, which ran in the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent.”

This is not the first time Congressman Sestak has been dishonest about his own record:

- Congressman Sestak argued that he didn’t vote with Nancy Pelosi 100% of the time, but in 2009, he did vote with Speak Pelosi 100% of the time and 97% of the time over his congressional career. (Congressional Quarterly)

- Congressman Sestak made an ethics pledge on his campaign website to return contributions from people who have requested earmarks from his congressional office, but the Philadelphia Inquirer found that he had not returned $119,000 in campaign contributions. (Philadelphia Inquirer, 07/15/10) (Philadelphia Daily News, 07/28/10)

- In his new television ad, Congressman Sestak claims he is for middle-class tax cuts, but he has already voted for hundreds of billions of dollars in new tax increases on the middle class when he voted for the cap-and-trade energy bill (RC #477, 06/26/09), the government-run health care bill (RC #165, 3/21/10), the Death Tax (RC #959, 10/10/07), and the Democratic budgets (RC #377, 05/17/07) (RC #382, 06/05/08) (RC #216, 04/29/09).

In addition, over the past couple of months, Congressman Sestak and his Washington buddies have run a series of ads that have been declared false, wrong, or deceptive by outside, nonpartisan entities, including Sestak’s dishonest claim that Pat was a lobbyist for Wall Street.

- Lancaster New Era: “Sestak needs to clean up his act, and he should disavow the deceptive ads pedaled by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.” (Lancaster New Era, 09/14/10)

- The Philadelphia Inquirer: “Further, Toomey is not now, nor has he ever been – a registered lobbyist according to records kept by the Clerk of the U.S. House and the Secretary of the Senate.” (Philadelphia Inquirer, 09/20/10)

- WTAE ABC: “That’s false. Toomey has never been a lobbyist.  We checked the records.  Toomey is not now, and never was a registered lobbyist.” (WTAE ABC Pittsburgh, 09/23/10)

- The Associated Press: “The ad’s attempt to link Toomey to the troublesome derivatives is questionable.” (The Associated Press, 08/13/10)

- FactCheck.Org: “A Democratic Party ad says Republican Senate candidate Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania was a ‘Wall Street wheeler dealer’ trading in financial products that ‘wound up nearly destroying our economy.’  We find that to be false.” (Annenberg Political FactCheck Website, 08/17/10)

“As Congressman Sestak and his campaign gets more and more desperate, Joe Sestak has less and less regard for the truth,” Toomey Communications Director Nachama Soloveichik said.  “It is sad to see how Congressman Sestak has become just another Washington politician who will say anything to get elected.”

Out of Work in Wisconsin? Try Washington, D.C

For Immediate Release:
July 20, 2010
Contact: Kerry Niemcek (920) 499-4000

Democrat ‘jobs’ policies bring few to WI, but record numbers to Washington

(Green Bay, WI) – Earlier this week Politico ran an article detailing economic growth and federal spending in Washington, D.C since the beginning of the recession. To paraphrase authors Jim VandeHei and Zachary Abrahamson, new regulations and expansion of the federal government, pushed by Congressional Democrats and the Obama Administration is causing regulators, government implementers, and even private businesses to relocate to Washington.

“With the nation’s unemployment rate at 9.5 percent, Congress should focus more on growing the economy in the rest of the country, rather than just in their own backyard,” said Reid Ribble, a candidate for Congress in the 8th Congressional District.

According to Politico, the federal government spent more than $20 billion on federal procurement money in Fairfax County, Virginia – the county just outside Washington D.C. In contrast, Wisconsin, actually shed private sector and government jobs in June, according to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development.

“Actions like these are exactly why the general public is upset with government,” Ribble said. “Politicians in Washington are more focused on passing laws that stifle job creation in the rest of the nation than helping the districts they represent. Voters are sick of politics as usual, and it’s long passed time to change that mentality in Washington.”

- 30 -

admin note: This press release may be from July but it is no less relevant now.

Stanford Matthews



The New York Post sent a photographer to the Buffalo home where Carl Paladino’s 10-year-old daughter lives with her mother. This photographer attempted to take photos of the child through the windows and subsequently attempted to follow the girl to a playground.

We believe this conduct puts Carl Paladino’s daughter in harm’s way, susceptible to kidnapping or sexual predators. This behavior by The New York Post and their senior political editor Fred Dicker is unacceptable. Endangering the safety of a 10-year-old child is repugnant.

Carl Paladino is passionate about the need to clean up the mess in Albany. The only thing he is more passionate about is his family. Carl is deeply concerned about the privacy of his children and grandchildren. His concern is well founded: in April his corporate and campaign office was threatened with a bomb by a serial felon – this man is being prosecuted today.

Fred Dicker has demonstrated his bias in this campaign from the beginning. Veteran observers recall a similar bias during the campaigns that elected Eliot Spitzer and George Pataki.

On September 17th, Mr. Dicker wrote of Cuomo’s “tax and spending cut plan,” although Mr. Cuomo has proposed no tax cut and no spending cut. Rather, Andrew Cuomo proposes to “slow the rate of growth of taxes.”

When Andrew Cuomo’s campaign charged Carl Paladino with receiving millions of dollars in state leases, Mr. Dicker failed to note that Andrew Cuomo or his Democratic predecessor reviewed and approved all of Mr. Paladino’s leases.

When Mr. Dicker attacked Paladino campaign chairwoman Nancy Naples, for awarding bond underwriting to an underwriter active in the Conservative Party, Mr. Dicker failed to note that the Comptroller who succeeded Nancy did the very same thing and Nancy was never accused of any improper conduct. And Mr. Dicker knew it, because I told him. He failed to write it because it didn’t fit the Cuomo campaign plan.

Andrew Cuomo is on Fred Dicker’s speed dial.

Sadly, while Fred Dicker may be on the payroll of The New York Post, his outrageous bias toward Mr. Cuomo is demonstrated again and again through his coverage of this campaign. Every political reporter and observer in the state knows his bias.

Carl Paladino has been repeatedly asked irrelevant questions regarding relationships he may have had while married. We challenge Fred Dicker to ask Andrew Cuomo this question on the record, since it has been posed repeatedly to Carl Paladino: “Did you engage in extramarital relationships while you were married?” A simple “Yes” or “No” will suffice.

Mr. Dicker will not ask this question of Cuomo, nor will Andrew Cuomo answer it.

Mr. Dicker gets extra Cuomo Brownie Points by claiming Carl threatened him. Carl has used this exact word choice throughout this campaign and several times on Mr. Dicker’s radio show: he’ll take out this government. He’ll take out the bad guys. He’ll take out Sheldon Silver.

Carl feels the same about Mr. Dicker, who is the best example of the cozy relationship some media have with the ruling elite. This is part of the problem in Albany, and Carl will take out the trash.

Mr. Dicker’s real purpose in this charade is to help Andrew Cuomo avoid a public debate, where he might be forced to answer questions about his disastrous stewardship of the U.S. Department of Housing, where he’s largely responsible for the sub prime mortgage crisis by requiring government agencies to purchase hundreds of millions of dollars worth of bad mortgages, costing U.S. taxpayers $2.4 trillion or why he has failed to prosecute Obama advisor and big Democratic fundraiser Steve Rattner for bribery, instead prosecuting the state official whose brother received the bribe, but not prosecuting Mr. Rattner, who made the $77,000 bribe in order to receive $75 million in state pension funds.

New York voters can judge Carl Paladino and Andrew Cuomo’s relative fitness for the governorship only through such a debate. If Andrew Cuomo does not have the courage to debate his opponents, how can he have the courage to break the stranglehold of the special interests destroying this state?

Carl has returned to Buffalo to console his upset daughter. The Post photographers are gone. But will Mr. Dicker, who has no children, publish the photos? That is Carl’s main concern.


Ron Johnson vs Russell Feingold

Wisconsin Senate: Johnson (R) Jumps to Largest Lead Yet Over Feingold (D)

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Republican Ron Johnson now leads incumbent Democrat Russ Feingold by 12 points in Wisconsin’s race for the U.S. Senate.

The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Voters shows Johnson picking up 54% support, while Feingold, who is running for his fourth term in the Senate, gets 42% of the vote with leaners included. Two percent (2%) prefer some other candidate, and two percent (2%) more are undecided.

Click Here for More

Stanford Matthews