As we head into the homestretch of the race for the Republican nominee for President we need to heed certain lessons from the past. First we need to watch our rhetoric and yes this definitely includes myself. I would suggest that we are coming close to a finalization of the Republican contest. I would also suggest that any candidate who can win a presidential primary in conservative Clermont County deserves a second consideration and a unified party if he is the eventual nominee. Reagan as I mentioned was not the most conservative of governors in California just as Romney was not in Massachusetts – two states not overly known for producing conservative politicians. Reagan was not the first pick of many in either 1976 or 1980 but he made believers of us all. I am not suggesting that Governor Romney is a new Reagan. I am definitively stating that whoever the eventual Republican nominee may be is far better than the current occupant of the White House.

Secondly, we must not allow ourselves, our allies, the main stream media or our common foes to divide us. In 1858 Abraham Lincoln uttered the words, “A house divided against itself cannot stand”. Lincoln, the autodidact, had borrowed the phrase from the New Testament books of Matthew and Luke.  The concept, either in the biblical sense or Lincoln’s use, is easily and readily understood. Any house, any institution, any party cannot stand if it is divided itself. In order to withstand or win a “house” must be united with one goal in mind. Today many wish to speak of factions within the Republican Party. Friends we cannot allow ourselves to be divided. We must be careful so as not to divide ourselves. We must learn to speak with one another rather than at or to one another. I have not heard the word “establishment “used as much as a pejorative since the days of my youth when it was used by the likes of Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, and Huey Newton. I don’t believe any of us wish that connotation on anyone. It also does not help when a state party both tries to co-opt the Tea Party by use of its symbols and deny its members seats, duly won in an election, on the state central committee. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that the principles of the conservative base of the Republican Party and the Tea Party are one and the same.

As we move forward we need to realize that our motivation in this momentous fight is not for ourselves. If we fight only for ourselves than the fight is not worth the effort we are putting into it.  We fight not for ourselves but for the generations to come. We fight so that our sons and daughters and their sons and daughters will have the same opportunities that we have enjoyed. Seen in this light, it doesn’t matter who gets credit for a win.

After signing the Declaration of Independence Benjamin Franklin declared, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately”. As chairman I will gladly stand united with you if necessary after the next election at the gallows pole. I would rather paraphrase an even older maxim, “United we stand and win, divided we fall and fail”.  After all,this time, failure is not an option.

Click here to view.

Congratulations to the winning candidates!

In 2009 we celebrated the 2ooth anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth and this year we celebrate the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth. It seems that you could postulate a political theorem that approximately every 1oo years a great president is born.

Both of their lives had noteworthy similarities.

• Both were born into modest families. Lincoln was born in Kentucky to a hardscrabble farmer. Reagan was the son of a shoe salesman who came of age during the Great Depression.
• Both men had ties to Illinois where they were taught what we like to consider Mid-Western values of hard work and thrift. Lincoln’s family moved from Kentucky, after losing a farm to deed problems, first to Indiana and then to Illinois. It was in Illinois where Lincoln, the autodidact, would teach himself the law, and become a very successful attorney before going into politics. Reagan was born in Tampico, schooled in Dixon, and attended Eureka College, all in Illinois before striking out west.
• Both learned the art of statecraft from being an elected official at the state level. Lincoln served four terms as a member of the Illinois state legislature. Reagan was Governor of California. Both learned the value of forming coalitions, the art of give and take, the value of timing, in short, the art of governance at the state level.
  Both lost major elections that were in the national spotlight prior to being elected President. Lincoln’s lost to Douglas was for the soul of the nation which would be rectified by a bloody civil war. Reagan’s lost was for the soul of our party which would be rectified by his own election in 1980.
• Both Presidents inherited from their failed predecessors national nightmares. Buchanan handed Lincoln a nation already split in two and on the brink of civil war. Carter handed Reagan a nation he self diagnosed as in malaise along with stagflation, the infamous misery index ,the Iranian Revolution, gas lines, and the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with proxies in Central America.
• Both men invited into their presidential cabinets men who thought that they were better qualified to be President. For Lincoln, it was Seward, Cameron and Chase. The names of Haig, Stockman, and Regan should ring a familiar bell for Reagan.
• Both men were great communicators who could speak bluntly when necessary. “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong”. “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
• Both men believed that the United States was indeed exceptional. Lincoln spoke of “the last best hope of earth”. Reagan spoke of “a shining city on the hill”. Lincoln stated that he never had a political thought which did not emanate from the Declaration of independence. He cited that the most important sentence was the one that read, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…”
• Both, oddly enough, are trying to be claimed by liberals. I guess that another possible political theorem might be that for liberals the only good conservative is a dead conservative.

Many lessons can be gleaned from their respective lives but I would like to highlight two.

First is leadership. Leadership is an art not a science, it cannot be taught but can be learned. Leadership, sometimes necessarily loud, is more often quiet but firm. Leadership is not proud and does not give way or heed the vanity or petty jealousies of others. Leadership can always see the destination, if just a glimpse, regardless if the road is as wide as a modern interstate, or narrow as a country gravel lane, or as crooked and hilly as State Route 133. Leadership is steady and keeps its head when everyone else around them is losing their own. Finally leadership recognizes and embraces the Christian charities of love, faith, and hope. The Apostle Paul teaches us that the greatest among these are love but from a leadership perspective faith with an almost equal measure of hope are indispensible.

The second is greatness. Greatness is not self-anointed nor bequeathed by the mass media or talking head elites. Greatness is not about looks, the ability to speak, the college one attended, or one of many criteria that liberalism wants to triumph. Greatness rests in the minds, hearts, and souls of the American people. Greatness for Presidents rests on two things. In order to be great, Presidents must pursue policies that increase the freedom of their citizenry and increase the security of the nation.

I don’t mean freedom in some ethereal sense but in the real terms of a limited government which pursues policies that allow Americans to pursue and realize their full potentials without increasing the burden on others. The best quote on limited government belongs to Lincoln: “The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot do so well for themselves, in their separate and individual capacities. “ Reagan, who in order to tame the federal beast cut both taxes and the federal budget leading to a new era of prosperity, understood that cutting defense was foolhardy because of its importance to our nation and the free world. Reagan stated, ‘The top priority of the federal government is the safety of the country” and ”we have no choice but to maintain ready defense forces that are second to none. Yes the cost is high, but the price of neglect would be infinitely higher”.

Finally both of these men believed that the best days of America lie not in its past but in our collective future. If we can look to them and meet their standard I have no doubt that they are right. The last word on that subject belongs to Reagan who said “why shouldn’t we believe that, we’re Americans.”

Some sanity used to prevail regarding eligibility to vote on Election Day. Prior Ohio law stated that a person had to correct any changes, deficiencies, or discrepancies in his voter registration thirty days before an election to be eligible to vote, a clear hard fast easy to enforce rule to which we should return.

Motor Voter and HAVA instituted some laudable but shortsighted, with unforeseen consequences, changes to increase “voter participation” on Election Day. A person who is currently registered in Ohio but has moved is allowed to vote at their new poll without having to change their address prior to the election. Hence was born the “provisional ballot” to allow a registered Ohio voter to vote in their “new” precinct.

• Ohio law is also clear that a citizen must vote in their precinct, where they currently reside, in order for their vote to count.
• Numerous directives have flowed from the last two Secretaries of State to reinforce that code to local board of elections. (Prior to the provisional, there was a challenged ballot where if a citizen’s registration was successfully challenged at the poll then they would have to vote a ballot treated like the modern provisional to later be determined as to its eligibility by the local board of elections).
• Some election outcomes have been solely decided on the count of provisional ballots during the final canvas conducted by a board of elections. These aren’t necessarily elections where a handful of votes determined the outcome as provisionals can number in the thousands.
• Federal courts have also ruled that boards of elections are to ignore the legal requirement that someone must vote in their own precinct if someone can claim but not necessarily prove “poll worker error.”

It seems almost incredible to me that thousands of voters within a county - let alone one polling place - can be “directed” to a wrong precinct, be told that their vote will not count if they vote in the wrong precinct, vote and then expect their vote to count.

What happens when a truly local issue is caught in the middle of a provisional vote fight? For example, imagine a local school levy fails by four votes where we have a polling place with four precincts, two of which are in the school district. Ten provisional votes are cast at the polling place. The local board determines that half of the provisionals should have had the chance to vote on the school issue but didn’t because they voted in the wrong precinct. Would a court then step in and order a local board to allow these voters a second chance after the outcome has been announced?

The lesson once again is that a government should not try to be a super nanny but let some responsibility reside with an informed citizenry. We need to return to a hard fast easy to enforce court proof rule that places some of the burden and responsibility where it should rest – the voter.

From a liberal viewpoint no president should have been more in favor of government programs than our 16th president, Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was born onto a relatively poor family and his father hired him out as field laborer for wages at a young age. This led to an aversion for manual labor for Abe who would seek his life ambitions by using his head.

An autodidact he became a lawyer by studying under older attorneys and became a successful corporate attorney, then congressmen, then a failed candidate for United States Senate and eventually President of the United States. He did all of this basically by himself along with the aid of friends and supporters but not with the aid of some large government agency.

In fact Lincoln’s view of government was simple and conservative: “The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot do so well for themselves, in their separate and individual capacities”.

2010 stands to be a pivotal year for the conservative voters supporting the Republican Party. All statewide offices, the apportionment board, the Ohio General Assembly, the U.S. Congress and various local races are up for grabs. As the Republican Party moves forward into 2010 we should keep in mind the above quoted maxim of Lincoln.

Lincoln believed that the fundamental document of our nation’s founding was the Declaration of Independence and the following statement: We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal , that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…

The fundamental belief inherent in that beautiful sentence is that man is a fallen creature or if you rather that man is not perfectible. We must recognize that there are immutable laws that not only regulate nature but also human behavior. We recognize that the greatness of our country lies in the decisions made daily by a free people interacting with one another freely in a free market.

Therefore any solutions that government proposes should be limited, should enhance the liberty and freedom of its citizens, and should enhance our free market economy. We totally reject the notion that a few elites know better the solutions that effect millions than the millions themselves. We also totally reject the notion that a few should pick the winners and losers in our free market economy.

Last summer saw a revolution begin on the streets of our nation, a revolution that became known as “The Tea Party Movement”. Much hand wringing and consternation has been done in party circles regarding the movement. Let me be plain, if the intentions of the movement is to hold the Republican Party to core conservative values then you are welcome. You will find that the vast majority of party members, central committee members, and elected Republican office holders in Clermont County are true red conservatives.

2010 stands to be a pivotal year for the conservative voters supporting the Republican Party. All statewide offices, the apportionment board, the Ohio General Assembly, the U.S. Congress and various local races are up for grabs.

So, what is a conservative? The fundamental belief of a conservative must be that man is a fallen creature or if you want it in more secular terms that man is not perfectible. We should see ourselves as direct descendants of the Scot-Irish-English Enlightenment whose ultimate progeny is the most beautiful sentence written in North America: We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…

We recognize the maxim and injunction in Madison’s Federalist 51: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary .If angels were to govern men neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.” We recognize that there are immutable laws that not only regulate nature but also human behavior.

We recognize that the greatness of our country lies in the decisions made daily by a free people interacting with one another freely in a free market. Therefore any solutions that government proposes should be limited, should enhance the liberty and freedom of its citizens, and should enhance our free market economy. We totally reject the notion that a few elites know better the solutions that effect millions than the millions themselves. We also totally reject the notion that a few should pick the winners and losers in our free market economy.

To quote Lincoln:

“The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot do so well for themselves, in their separate and individual capacities.”

Last summer saw a revolution begin on the streets of our nation, a revolution that became known as “The Tea Party Movement”. Much hand wringing and consternation has been done in party circles regarding the movement. Let me be plain, if the intentions of the movement is to hold the Republican Party to core conservative values then you are welcome.

You will find that the vast majority of party members, central committee members, and elected Republican office holders in Clermont County are true red conservatives. If the intentions are self aggrandizement or third party candidacies then history shows that will lead to ruin for both the movement and the party. History shows that H. Ross Perot begat Bill Clinton. My message to the Republican Party is that you better heed the message to return to the values of our conservative core or we will be left on the ash heap of history as the next American Whig Party. If you don’t believe that is a possibility, I can only point out that the quote I used earlier was not Lincoln as a Republican but Lincoln as a Whig.

Jefferson the greatest proponent of human liberty, admittedly in word more than deed, had his own seal struck during life- something that seems odd now but not during his time. On it he had inscribed:

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”

The tyranny he most feared was the same we face: a centralized overbearing elite that through its actions is impinging upon the freedoms of its citizens. Jefferson also wrote: The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Metaphorically Jefferson was recognizing the need for an occasional revolution. It is time to repeat the revolutions of 1980 and 1994. Let the rebellion begin, let the bells of revolution ring a true conservative song.

Birth, a simple act which occurs daily, whose prodigy when reaching adulthood would admonish us with one additional commandment, simple and straight forward, that we love one another as He had loved us. His death would turn an old religion meant for a chosen few into a revealed religion for the multitudes.

As Christianity spread throughout the Greco-Roman world and later to all corners of the globe it would transform western civilization as we know it. The parent Judaic religion had a deep respect for the law so the same respect would become a cornerstone for the new religion. As the new religion’s teachings spread throughout society it was only a matter of time that the teaching from the admonishment, the additional commandment, would lead to new ideas.

Old ideas from Greek democracies infused with new ideas from Christianity would lead directly to the Scot-Irish-English Enlightenment and new ideas such as the rights of man and natural law. The Enlightenment in turn would lead to the most beautiful sentence originally written in North America:

“We hold these truths to be self evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness…”

As it became apparent to our Founding Fathers that the Articles of Confederation were inadequate for governing a new nation, they set about drafting a Constitution, a static document not only instituting a government but also limiting its powers.

As Madison put it in Federalist Number 51; “If men were angels, no government would be necessary….In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself”.

Our Constitution and the accompanying Bill of Rights accomplishes Madison’s ideal by not only creating a government but at the same time limiting its power. You will find as many “shall not’s” or infringements on the central government powers in our founding documents as grants of power. Those infringements ensure our freedoms would hold so dearly: freedom of religion, of speech, of assembly, the right to bear arms, the right to be secure in our homes, the right to own private property.

The Founders realized and time has proven that only a free people making free choices with a limited government would lead to prosperity unknown before to mankind.  All of this from an “insignificant” momentous act approximately two thousand years ago and one additional commandment: Love one another. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

In closing, I will not reiterate the accomplishments of the Bush presidency but simply reflect that he was a simple, direct, principled man – he said what he meant and what he meant he said. When he stated at Ground Zero shortly after 9/11 that those responsible would soon hear from us, they did.

Through a tremendous amount of fortitude and often even alone in his own administration, especially when it came to the idea of what turned out to be the most successful strategy in Iraq yet-the surge, he remained steadfast in his belief in democracy in the Middle East and in his role as commander-in-chief. Right before the inauguration, several conservative columnists wrote columns with the theme that President Bush “kept us safe”. Well, if that was all he accomplished and it wasn’t, let me speak as the father of a handsome 13 year old – job well done Mr. President.

In regards to the current occupant of the White House, I do not wish to say that he is unprincipled because I believe that gives off the wrong connotation. However contemplation leads to major reservations regarding him. Obama spent over half his life as Barry – as his Kenyan father abandoned him early, as he then spent several years in a Muslim household of his stepfather before spending the rest of his formative years with his grandparents in Hawaii.

Barry then goes to Occidental College but finds it not big enough or radical enough and in a quest to “find” himself he heads for Columbia and becomes Barack. With the help of a Columbia education, Chicago politicians, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers and his wife, Barack pretty much “finds” himself as a man of the left. He runs as a leftist for the Democratic Presidential nomination, wins, then runs to the center during the general election, and wins.

Pretty normal for a politician running for national office, except that since winning the election and especially since the inauguration we have received nothing but mixed signals, generally of the left, but still all muddled and mixed. I believe that this nation has elected a man who has few if any firm guiding principles – a virtual blank slate as if young Barry is still in search of the adult Barack but with an appalling amount of arrogance and overconfidence reminding one of a youth. I am afraid that we will soon, if we are not already, be paying for the mistakes resulting from his inexperience – witness the precipitous plunge of the Dow after the announcement of his stimulus package. The Dow stands at about half of its value from just 18 months ago.

Where does this leave us as a party? Immediately after the election there was a kneejerk reaction to the Republican “brand” as if a change in formula or a new commercial will make all the difference. There was open discussion revolving around the conservative nature of our party.

Lincoln stated in a speech in Columbus in 1859 that the “chief and real purpose of the Republican Party is eminently conservative” and “proposes nothing save and except to restore this government to its original tone…and there to maintain it looking for no further change…than that which the original framers of the government themselves expected and looked forward to”. I will go one tiny step further than Father Abe. I believe that a strong majority of our party, and I include myself, think of themselves as conservatives first and Republicans second. In other words, as conservatives we view the Republican Party as the best vehicle which holds true to certain principles, certain beliefs, certain truths, such as:

• We believe in the sanctity of all human life.
• We believe that the fundamental unit of organization in our society is the family based on the marriage of one man to one woman.
• We believe that the establishment clause in the 1st Amendment is just that, an establishment clause which does not bar religion from the public square.
• We believe that the 2nd amendment means what is clearly stated that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
• We believe that courts should interpret the law as to its original intent and not make law or legislate from bench.
• We believe that the proper size and scope of the government can be described by the same word and that word is “small.”

Lincoln on this issue states “The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot do so well for themselves, in their separate and individual capacities.”

We believe that the fundamental unit of change, the source of all ingenuity, progress, and greatness of this nation is the individual and that the government’s proper role is not to over regulate, over tax, or unnecessarily hinder the individual in his pursuit of gain but to provide the proper infrastructure and then get out of the way.

We believe that we are the sons and daughters of the Scot/Irish/English Enlightenment which believes that our natural rights derive from our Divine Creator.

In an excellent article titled,  ”The Conservative Lincoln,” in the February 23rd edition of the National Review, preeminent Lincoln historian Allen Guelzo states, “At the core of Lincoln’s conservatism was the Declaration of Independence. He said he had, “…never had a feeling politically that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence.”

In particular he regarded Jefferson’s key sentence—“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”—as the proposition to which the American republic had been “dedicated” at its birth.

These beliefs, truths, and principles cannot be the subject of negotiations, compromises, bargains, deals, or trade-offs in an illusory attempt to attract new members- for what is really at stake is the heart, the soul, and the very foundation of our party.”

There has been a lot of loose talk about “one party rule” and “corruption”. To listen to some you would believe that all members of a party should be judged by the actions of one or a few members. Individual members may be corrupt or unethical but it would be unthinkable that all members would be corrupt.

If you wish to judge all by actions of a few then a quick review may be relevant. Former Democrat Attorney General Marc Dann’s misdeeds in office are still good for headlines alleging misspent funds, sexual harassment suits, and various forms of cronyism. Dann ran on a mantra of “change” but later admitted publicly that he was not ready to serve in office. Democrat Cuyahoga County Recorder Patrick O’Malley was forced to resign after a federal obscenity charge while his fellow Democrat County Commissioner Jimmy Dimora and County Auditor Frank Russo face possible federal grand jury corruption charges after raids by the FBI and IRS. I could elaborate further but my point is you can’t judge all by the actions of a few.

Any perceived or real problem at the countywide level was handled by the Republican primary voters . Taking the lead of the party they overwhelmingly rejected the incumbent in question and placed Ed Humphrey, a man of integrity with years of business and civic experience, on the ballot for county commissioner. The Republican voters showed they were attentive and we are confident that they will handle any future real or perceived problems at any level of government at the appropriate election.

What seems to get lost in the discussion is how the problems came to light. Republican State Auditor Mary Taylor made the findings in a state audit and referred them to the Ohio Ethics Commission. You could argue “well that’s her job” as surely as it is. Consider Mary Taylor came into an overwhelmingly Republican county, a county that provided her winning margin in 2006, and had the guts to issue findings against an entrenched incumbent and issue such findings to the Ohio Ethics Commission. Courageous Republican women seem to be coming to the forefront these days, a phenomenon that we look forward to being repeated. Between the Republican primary voters and Mary Taylor’s action it should totally deny the notion that we won’t clean our own house.

Did you hear about the 2007county audit completed by the Auditor of State – no big headlines blaring “Good News”. In the audit conducted this year there were no “findings” made against the county – an outcome not unusual for Clermont County. There is another outcome which was highly unusual. There were no recommendations or suggestions from the State Auditor on how your county office holders could improve. Highly unusual but highly indicative of the county government that the overwhelming majority of your county officeholders provide. From the top of our ticket, Senator McCain and Governor Palin, to the bottom we are providing candidates with experience you can trust – no rookies here.