The KRA Blog Rotating Header Image

Moore calls self a “moderate conservative”

Click for Moore's full letter to supporters

In an email to supporters today, Stephene Moore called herself a, “moderate and fiscal conservative.” What exactly that means, of course, is anyone’s guess.

It’s no secret that her husband has been anything but a fiscal conservative after supporting government take overs of every industry you can think of, from the financial sector to automobiles to our health care system. In an article on PrimeBuzz of the Kansas City Star, Stephene stated that she basically agreed with her husband’s votes, noting only that she wanted more oversight (control) of the bank bailout bill, leaving the reader to postulate that she would have supported such a bailout if more oversight had been included. What exactly is “moderate” or “fiscally conservative” about more taxes and more bailouts isn’t explained in her letter.

In this year’s election there are numerous candidates calling themselves “moderate” and “fiscally conservative” when their record reflects something much different. The fact is if voters want the change they thought they were getting in 2008, they must look past the buzz words certain candidates love to throw around. And that includes “conservative” that apparently every Republican candidate liked to call themselves before August, again many times in spite of a very liberal record.

Now, as far as how one can be a “moderate” and “fiscal conservative,” I’m at a loss. It would seem the label machine at Moore’s campaign headquarters seems to be working overtime.

Analyze this: Opinion masquerading as news

John Milburn of the Associated Press published a piece today on the various education proposals of Republican Sam Brownback and Democrat Tom Holland. Entitled “Analysis: School funding crucial,” the piece highlights a tactic used all too often by the press to publish editorial pieces as hard news.

One must look no further for evidence of this than KAKE Channel 10′s website where a condensed version was published under the byline of the Associated Press with no mention of “Analysis,” “Opinion” or otherwise with it.

The fact is in the past decade, “Analysis” has become in vogue with the press to justify using opinion pieces as news. Some claim it to be the brainchild of the mainstream media attempting to further influence the electorate. More likely it is simply the symptom of a press corps seriously strapped for cash partly due to them being completely out of touch on how to report real news relevant to the public.

Whatever the reason, it’s clear they are written in an attempt to publish select facts and influence the public. In this instance, it appears Milburn is attempting to explain away Brownback’s superior proposals on education in Kansas. It’s interesting that in attempting to place blame on the courts rather than the politicians for out of control education spending, Milburn actually validates past arguments by conservatives that unelected judges in Kansas virtually control over half the state’s budget.

While in the actual piece this isn’t necessarily the explicit message, it’s interesting to note this piece from the KAKE Channel 10 revision.

Both Republican Sam Brownback and Democrat Tom Holland say they will focus on preserving what they see as an excellent system of K-12 schools. Where they differ is how they would steer the behemoth system that consumes more than 50 percent of the state budget.

History would suggest that it’s more likely that litigation, not pontification, will decide the course.

In the past two decades, action or the threat of from the Kansas Supreme Court has played a bigger role than activity in the Statehouse.

If these last two sentences are true, then that means that unelected and unaccountable judges control our tax dollars and how they are spent, not elected officials who represent the people. This stronger language by KAKE 10 shows the power of “Analysis” pieces by the press and how they can morph into a story of their own. It just so happens that KAKE happened to take the piece in a direction that highlighted past arguments made by conservatives.

The piece also once again highlights Holland’s curious stance against revising the state’s finance formula due to increased property taxes while simultaneously advocating for increasing a district’s local option budget.

In any case, the public can analyze this, “Analysis” is just another word for “Editorial.”

Holland was against property tax increases before he was for them

Democrat Tom Holland, candidate for governor, has staked out an interesting campaign trail around the Kansas capital rather than in Kansas communities across the state.

It’s an interesting strategy that so far seems to be reaping what it is sewing. While Holland has consistently and loudly attacked Republican Sam Brownback from the halls of the state capital, he swung and missed when it came time for his innovative ideas on how to move Kansas forward.

The Topeka Capital Journal highlighted Holland’s non-sense best when it quoted Holland as saying Brownback’s education plan would result in, “significantly higher property taxes and guaranteed litigation.”

Too bad for Tom that Kansas schools have been suing the state for more than a decade and in fact won a verdict for more than $1 billion in additional funding, all under the direction of a Democratic administration. The state is faced with even more litigation this year, again under a Democratic administration. So far it seems to me and many Kansans that if a Democrat like Holland had a better idea, he’s had more than enough time to propose and pass it. Holland must be pretty dense to make such a statement in light of current and previous litigation.

But Holland just couldn’t stop himself and topped off his statement by expressing his support for… you guessed it… higher property taxes.

Holland said if elected governor he would maintain the state’s constitutional obligation to equalize opportunities for children while supporting a move to grant local school boards authority to raise additional property tax for schools through the local option budget process.

Tom, what do you think “local option budget process” means? Uhh, property taxes Tom, it means property taxes. And you just said you’d support raising them.

Tuesday we found out that Holland is just more of the same when it comes to what Kansas Democrats want to happen to our state. More money for the education bureaucracy, at a time when our state can least afford it, higher taxes and more government. That isn’t a detailed plan, it’s a hastily laid sketch for disaster.

While Holland has been screaming at the top of his lung, hoping to stick anything he can to his opponent, Sam Brownback has been touring the state, actually meeting with voters and fulfilling his promise to visit every one of Kansas’ 105 counties. So far Holland has become familiar with Shawnee County, especially the capital grounds, but so far has failed to meet many folks outside of that area.

A new KWCH/Survey USA poll shows that Holland is way behind Republican Sam Brownback. Brownback leads Holland 67% to 25% with a margin of error of only 3.9%.

It’s unfortunate that Holland has decided that campaigning means calling press conference after press conference at the capital and then saying one thing when he supports another. But perhaps Holland knows he doesn’t stand a chance against the Republican wave that’s coming to Kansas this November and this is just his last desperate attempt to spend as much time as he can in the capital.

Official Democrat blog says don’t worry, Dr. Johnston won’t back party

It’s one of those, “Huh?” moments.

After the U.S. Senate results were in, Sen. John Cornyn issued a statement critical of the Democratic candidate, Lisa Johnston.

“Democrat nominee Lisa Johnston has clearly demonstrated that she would simply serve as another rubberstamp for President Obama and Harry Reid’s out-of-control economic agenda if she makes it to Washington.”

The “huh” moment came when the Kansas Democratic Party’s official blog came to Johnston’s aid by guarenteeing that she’ll be no rubberstamp. In fact according to them, it’s nothing more than mudslinging because, you know, she’s already told them she won’t be another rubberstamp for Harry Reid and Obama. She’s going to vote against her own party. You know, the party that’s posting her response on it’s own official blog.

“During a July 15, 2010 bipartisan candidate forum in Mound City, KS, Lisa was asked “Will you as a Senator vote according to the wishes of the people you represent even if it meant voting against your party line?” She replied, “Absolutely, without question. One of the things I am committed to is leading with integrity and having an independent mind.”

Independent mind? Right. Which is why the party’s official blog had to write about it. Because the Kansas Democratic Party has clearly demonstrated their willingness to fully support candidates that don’t 100% adhere to an all out liberal mind set.

Psst. Does party leadership’s endorsement of Chris Steineger ringer a bell? The name Mark Gilstrap jog anybody’s memory? The guy who voted against his party and got thanked with a party recruited and funded primary opponent?

Yea right, the KDP is going to support somebody who doesn’t tow the party line. Because they’ve clearly been so tolerant in the past.

Besides, how is she going to respond to a puff question like that?

“Oh yes, I believe 100% in the economic and social policies of our President and Harry Reid, both of which I know nearly 70% of the voting public in Kansas don’t approve of. I think what they’ve done for America is right on. I’d support government run health care that I know not a single sane Kansas voter supports and I’d pretty much go to Washington and jump however high Harry Reid told me I needed to jump.”

Now that would have been a truthful response. Of course it also would have been a suicidal response.

Oh, and by the way, I know the elitists at the KDP probably won’t figure this out anytime soon, but by continually referring to your candidate as, “Dr. Lisa Johnston,” all you’re doing to making her seem as if she’s better than the people she wants to represent. Only elitists like Johnston insist on people recognizing her educational status by calling her “Doctor.” We know power tripping on your students is educationally in vogue Lisa, but you should really get a grip on that before you have a Barbara Boxer moment at a candidate forum. I’m not sure what’s up with Democrats and their love of titles but apparently it’s a universal thing.

Maybe instead of Doctor, Lisa would prefer to be addressed as “Independent Doctor Lisa Johnston.” Or “Independent, committed, not a politician, independent, vote against my party, independent Doctor Lisa Johnston.” She could be like the educational elite who put more letters about how educated they are behind their name than are in their name.

Oh, that’d make an awesome “I approve this message” message.

“My name is Independent, committed, honorable, independent, not really a Democrat, independent, Doctor Pepper, independent, Doctor, Doctor Lisa Johnston, and I have to tell you I approve this message because I’m clearly smarter than you and I’m not quite sure you’d figure that out without me telling you.”

All kidding aside, does anybody really think Johnston (PhD, MD, DO, MSKJLEKKWIUTH, blah…) won’t be just another “Yes” vote for Reid and Obama?

Nah, I didn’t think so.

With stagnant poll numbers, Wasinger should bow out, endorse Huelskamp

KWCH Channel 12 in Wichita today released a new poll of the First Congressional District showing a three-way tie for the lead between state Sens. Tim Huelskamp and Jim Barnett and businessman Tracey Mann.

Candidate Rob Wasinger of Cottonwood Falls polled at only 12%, which is still within the margin of error of his showing in previous polls. Today’s results show what previous polls have illustrated for some time now, that if Rob Wasinger continues to be a candidate in this race, he may single-handedly split the conservative vote and give a win to liberal Jim Barnett or Tracey Mann.

In any other election year, Rob would more than likely be a perfectly acceptable candidate. But in today’s political environment of candidates saying one thing and then once elected doing another, it’s vital that voters in the First District elect a candidate with a proven track record of conservative values. Tim Huelskamp has a 16 year record as a state Senator where he has consistently fought for conservative principles, whether they be popular or not.

In light of Sen. Huelskamp’s outstanding record and superior position in the polls, conservative voters should rally around his candidacy immediately.

With only a week until election day, it has become clear that Rob cannot win this election; all he can do is hand the seat to a liberal Republican for years to come.

Rob Wasinger is a good man and candidate, but in this particular race the choice just couldn’t be more clear. Trusting that Rob values the conservative movement more than his personal political career, it would be prudent for him to end his campaign and immediately support Tim Huelskamp.