by Bill Claydon
Cross posted at RedState.com
The Veterans for Gibson coalition held a barbecue event for area veterans at Gurtler Brothers VFW Post 420 in Saratoga Springs on September 12th. Colonel Chris Gibson (R) is challenging incumbent Scott Murphy (D) in New York's 20th Congressional District. Veterans from all wars starting with World War II through to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were present and congratulated (by individual war) for their service.
The event was very well attended with the majority of picnic tables filled. Speakers thanked people for their enthusiasm and asked that they stay the course through election day.
Gibson spoke, reminding people of the need to live by a budget, citing growing up in a working family. His family lived within their means and did not spend money they didn't have. This is the model our Congress needs to adopt.
He talked further about the Constitution with its checks and balances to prevent any particular part of government from gaining too much power over the other or over the people. Gibson also stressed the need to eliminate some parts of the bureaucracy.
But the area where Gibson spoke the most about is the economy. As he noted, capital is frozen. Small businesses are holding onto what they have in terms of employees, but they cannot expand due to the uncertainty and terrible economic climate. They have no idea whether the tax cuts passed years ago will remain or whether they will be going up next year. With that in mind, businesses cannot possibly consider hiring new employees or investing in new equipment.
The "stimulus" was passed 20 months ago. (Note: Scott Murphy supported this "stimulus" but was not yet in Congress to actually vote on it.) We were recently at 9.5% unemployment but now are up to 9.6%. "That's the wrong direction," Gibson reminded people.
Citing 1931, when taxes went up after the 1929 stock market crash, Gibson pointed out that we need to learn from history. Raising taxes was the worst possible thing then and is the worst possible thing to do now in an attempt to "fix" the economy.
On health care, Gibson talked about wanting to repeal and REPLACE the current health care bill. Pointing out that the onerous regulations of the bill passed last spring are preventing businesses from hiring or expanding (note: self-proclaimed businessman Scott Murphy flip flopped and supported this bill), Gibson called for replacing it with something better. He wants to allow people to buy insurance over state lines, have more non-profit companies compete with for profit companies, introduce tort reform, and bring about other changes which will make health care affordable for people without the numerous problems in the multi-thousand page bill Congress pushed through earlier this year.
Noting that he has read the health care bill, he cannot see how this particular bill will help. He asked people to try and convince him otherwise. Nobody stepped forward.
Gibson also asked that we pay attention to what he is doing in Congress should he win. If he gets off track and supports bills which do not serve the people, he should be fired. It's refreshing to see a politician that is actually concerned about representing the people of the 20th district. Hopefully we'll have a representative like that come January 2011. It will be a welcome change from the status quo, in my opinion.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Friday, September 10, 2010
Michael Knowles responds to Congressman's Hall's former band mates from Orleans and their lawsuit against Young Voters for an Orlean's Reunion Tour
By Sam Foster
Yesterday, Congressman John Hall's former band, Orlean's, notified Michael Knowles, leader of Republican challenger Nan Hayworht's Young Voters for an Orlean's Reunion Tour that they intended to sue the group for trademark infringement and a whole list of cyber-lingo-sounding-torts like "cybersquatting."
I shot Michael Knowles and email to get his side of the story.
Sam Foster: Will you be complying with Orlean's demands to remove the site and turn over records?
Michael Knowles: These are some pretty desperate campaign tactics, though it unfortunately appears to be par for the course. The Young Voters for Nan Hayworth will not be intimidated by Congressman John Hall, campaign manager Patrick McGarrity, or any band member of Orleans. The First Amendment still applies to every citizen of the United States, even if they disagree with Congressman Hall.
Sam Foster: Orleans claims that your site is a subterfuge meant to disinform their fans, is that accurate?
Michael Knowles: The header of our website reads, "Get John Hall onstage and out of Congress." If Congressman Hall or his band mates think that is deceitful, I don't know how to convince them otherwise. I began to receive personal threats from Larry Hoppen even after I allowed him to place his own promotional material on our website, so I'm not sure that disinformation is really the reason for which the Young Voters for Nan Hayworth are being sued by John Hall's band mates. It just seems a little too political for me--no one in their right mind could possibly be deceived by our website.
Sam Foster: As you've previously told me, you are an Orleans fan. Does the possible lawsuit change your opinion of the group?
Michael Knowles: Well, it is unfortunate that the band I love has decided to sue me. However, this lawsuit does not change the beautiful lyrics of Sails, the upbeat rhythms of Still The One, or the heart-wrenching sentiment of Dance With Me. I am and will remain a loyal fan of Orleans. Of course, I'd be a much bigger fan if they'd again include Congressman Hall in their lineup.
Sam Foster: If your site in fact, supports the band. In what ways have you promoted the group over the last month of operation?
Michael Knowles: Our website provides several links to Orleans' official site and their Wikipedia entry, and our Blogroll links to their Twitter feed. When Larry Hoppen demanded that I post certain pictures and videos on the website, I complied within hours. We've linked to their news, events, and music. I really don't think there is anything more we could do to promote the group.
Yesterday, Congressman John Hall's former band, Orlean's, notified Michael Knowles, leader of Republican challenger Nan Hayworht's Young Voters for an Orlean's Reunion Tour that they intended to sue the group for trademark infringement and a whole list of cyber-lingo-sounding-torts like "cybersquatting."
I shot Michael Knowles and email to get his side of the story.
Sam Foster: Will you be complying with Orlean's demands to remove the site and turn over records?
Michael Knowles: These are some pretty desperate campaign tactics, though it unfortunately appears to be par for the course. The Young Voters for Nan Hayworth will not be intimidated by Congressman John Hall, campaign manager Patrick McGarrity, or any band member of Orleans. The First Amendment still applies to every citizen of the United States, even if they disagree with Congressman Hall.
Sam Foster: Orleans claims that your site is a subterfuge meant to disinform their fans, is that accurate?
Michael Knowles: The header of our website reads, "Get John Hall onstage and out of Congress." If Congressman Hall or his band mates think that is deceitful, I don't know how to convince them otherwise. I began to receive personal threats from Larry Hoppen even after I allowed him to place his own promotional material on our website, so I'm not sure that disinformation is really the reason for which the Young Voters for Nan Hayworth are being sued by John Hall's band mates. It just seems a little too political for me--no one in their right mind could possibly be deceived by our website.
Sam Foster: As you've previously told me, you are an Orleans fan. Does the possible lawsuit change your opinion of the group?
Michael Knowles: Well, it is unfortunate that the band I love has decided to sue me. However, this lawsuit does not change the beautiful lyrics of Sails, the upbeat rhythms of Still The One, or the heart-wrenching sentiment of Dance With Me. I am and will remain a loyal fan of Orleans. Of course, I'd be a much bigger fan if they'd again include Congressman Hall in their lineup.
Sam Foster: If your site in fact, supports the band. In what ways have you promoted the group over the last month of operation?
Michael Knowles: Our website provides several links to Orleans' official site and their Wikipedia entry, and our Blogroll links to their Twitter feed. When Larry Hoppen demanded that I post certain pictures and videos on the website, I complied within hours. We've linked to their news, events, and music. I really don't think there is anything more we could do to promote the group.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Scott Murphy concocts the least interesting campaign fraud allegation…EVER!
By Sam Foster
It was bound to happen; in a close race for NY's 20th congressional district you have to expect some dirt to get flung at one point. It looks like the blue side of the fence where Scott Murphy resides has come out with allegations that are certain to bore voters into the deepest of comas; The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20, which features a sleep inducing but enlightening education into the exciting world of accounting methods.
Get out the no-doze, as I explain…
It all started when a Chris Gibson aide had notified Maggie Habbermann at the Politico that Gibson had $504,000 cash-on-hand on July 9th prior to the official filing. No formal press release with official details was provided by the campaign, just a small addendum to the Politico's report. However, this figure touted on July 9th was not the same figure that appeared in Gibson's official public FEC filings.
Today, NYS Democrats and Scott Murphy hope to make that small addendum on Maggie's blog post the largest issue at stake for NY-20 voters this November, as opposed to say…Murphy's fundraiser with Obama administration official Rahm Emanuel to reward Murphy's flip-flop vote on Obamacare.
The NYS Democratic Party issued the following statement:
This is about more than Chris Gibson puffing up his fundraising numbers to pretend he's a stronger candidate than he really is. It's about whether voters can trust Gibson to tell the truth when it really matters. Simply put, Gibson needs to show New Yorkers the money, starting with an account statement proving that he wasn't trying to pull a fast one on voters by lying about his campaign cash,
Chris Gibson's campaign argues that the figure in dispute was the campaign's bank balance as it stood on July 9th as opposed to the official cash-on-hand filing with the FEC. Both the Post Star and Times Union have reported the story, but is this really worth all the ink?
The heart of the issue is really a matter of two different methods of accounting. What could be more tedious? Gibson's campaign statement of $504,000 is a financial figure based on what we accountants call Cash Accounting; aka what's in your bank account this very moment. We use it everyday. In fact, if I asked you how much money you had, you'd probably state your cash holdings in a similar way.
However, FEC filings need to be filed in what's known as Accrual Accounting. The difference is essentially akin to your bank statement (cash accounting) versus your check register (accrual accounting). Since reporters and politicians live in the world of FEC filings, it makes sense why a casual statement of "we have $504,000" would be assumed as accrual based accounting by the media, but is this assumption from the press really a scandal?
A scandal would require that Chris Gibson, as the NYS Democrats put it, was "trying to pull a fast one on voters by lying about his campaign cash." The accusation is quite laughable. After all, Scott Murphy has nearly a three to one advantage in cash-on-hand. What would the Gibson campaign benefit by intentionally misleading the press regarding their cash-on-hand figure by $50,000 when Murphy has $1.5 million to Gibson's roughly $500,000? Even if it were possible to cajole the press into reporting that Gibson, and not Murphy, had a cash-on-hand advantage, why would his campaign bother doing it, given the fact that they had two better narratives; a) outraising Murphy in the 2nd quarter and b) a stunning show of single donor support.
The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20 is about as exciting as when Scott Murphy called his wife's cousin, his wife's sister. These types of things happen. How about moving on to something serious?
Update:
Chris Gibson's campaign just got caught red handed touting their own bank account on 7/9/10. Gibson's campaign turned itself in with the following statement:
...and The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20 comes to a conclusion...
It was bound to happen; in a close race for NY's 20th congressional district you have to expect some dirt to get flung at one point. It looks like the blue side of the fence where Scott Murphy resides has come out with allegations that are certain to bore voters into the deepest of comas; The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20, which features a sleep inducing but enlightening education into the exciting world of accounting methods.
Get out the no-doze, as I explain…
It all started when a Chris Gibson aide had notified Maggie Habbermann at the Politico that Gibson had $504,000 cash-on-hand on July 9th prior to the official filing. No formal press release with official details was provided by the campaign, just a small addendum to the Politico's report. However, this figure touted on July 9th was not the same figure that appeared in Gibson's official public FEC filings.
Today, NYS Democrats and Scott Murphy hope to make that small addendum on Maggie's blog post the largest issue at stake for NY-20 voters this November, as opposed to say…Murphy's fundraiser with Obama administration official Rahm Emanuel to reward Murphy's flip-flop vote on Obamacare.
The NYS Democratic Party issued the following statement:
This is about more than Chris Gibson puffing up his fundraising numbers to pretend he's a stronger candidate than he really is. It's about whether voters can trust Gibson to tell the truth when it really matters. Simply put, Gibson needs to show New Yorkers the money, starting with an account statement proving that he wasn't trying to pull a fast one on voters by lying about his campaign cash,
Chris Gibson's campaign argues that the figure in dispute was the campaign's bank balance as it stood on July 9th as opposed to the official cash-on-hand filing with the FEC. Both the Post Star and Times Union have reported the story, but is this really worth all the ink?
The heart of the issue is really a matter of two different methods of accounting. What could be more tedious? Gibson's campaign statement of $504,000 is a financial figure based on what we accountants call Cash Accounting; aka what's in your bank account this very moment. We use it everyday. In fact, if I asked you how much money you had, you'd probably state your cash holdings in a similar way.
However, FEC filings need to be filed in what's known as Accrual Accounting. The difference is essentially akin to your bank statement (cash accounting) versus your check register (accrual accounting). Since reporters and politicians live in the world of FEC filings, it makes sense why a casual statement of "we have $504,000" would be assumed as accrual based accounting by the media, but is this assumption from the press really a scandal?
A scandal would require that Chris Gibson, as the NYS Democrats put it, was "trying to pull a fast one on voters by lying about his campaign cash." The accusation is quite laughable. After all, Scott Murphy has nearly a three to one advantage in cash-on-hand. What would the Gibson campaign benefit by intentionally misleading the press regarding their cash-on-hand figure by $50,000 when Murphy has $1.5 million to Gibson's roughly $500,000? Even if it were possible to cajole the press into reporting that Gibson, and not Murphy, had a cash-on-hand advantage, why would his campaign bother doing it, given the fact that they had two better narratives; a) outraising Murphy in the 2nd quarter and b) a stunning show of single donor support.
The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20 is about as exciting as when Scott Murphy called his wife's cousin, his wife's sister. These types of things happen. How about moving on to something serious?
Update:
Chris Gibson's campaign just got caught red handed touting their own bank account on 7/9/10. Gibson's campaign turned itself in with the following statement:
$504 k was arrived at by the deposits of July 9th added to the bank balance. The apparent mistake was not realizing that the balance stated already included the deposit made that same day. This is a simple honest mistake, nothing more.
$ 447,375.51 balance July 9th
$ 56,871.61 deposit July 9th
...and The-Great-Gisbon-Accounting-Method-Fraud-Heard-'Round-NY20 comes to a conclusion...
Politico releases Republican roadmap to congressional control and Reed, Hayworth, Gibson, Hanna all made the list
By Sam Foster
Via Politico
Now that we are within 60 days until the November elections, we are about to get barraged with political prognostications. The Politico is early to the race and they have an interesting layout for predicting Republican's prospects for taking control of congress. They've created a three tier look at perspective house seats and many Upstate NY seats have made the list.
Here is how the tiered system works.
Via Politico
The first group includes the most imperiled Democratic seats — these are the "must-wins" — without which the GOP has no shot at House control. It's a roster filled with freshmen who benefited from Barack Obama's coattails, the most vulnerable veterans and Republican-friendly open seats where the retirement of a Democratic incumbent has created a prime pickup opportunity. If Republicans can't win most of these seats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will take the gavel again for the 112th Congress.
The second group of seats could be labeled the "majority makers" — a class of races that are within GOP reach but will require defeating well-prepared Democratic incumbents or winning on highly competitive terrain. If the GOP is winning most of these races on election night, a Republican majority will be close at hand. If not, Democrats still have a chance of waking up Nov. 3 with a slim margin in the House.
The third group could be described as the "landslide" class. For the most part, these districts are a tough climb for GOP candidates, because of either the strength of the Democratic incumbent or the partisan tilt of the seat. If the Democrats in this category start to fall on election night, a wave election is unfolding.
Must Win districts in NY:
NY-29
Democrats have not recovered from the resignation of Rep. Eric Massa and appear to have written off this GOP-leaning seat.
Majority Makers districts in NY:
NY-24
After winning a 2008 reelection squeaker in this Republican-leaning upstate New York seat, Rep. Michael Arcuri is considered one of the top GOP targets in New York—and faces a rematch with Richard Hanna, who nearly defeated him two years ago.
NY-23
Rep. Bill Owens, who captured this upstate seat after Republicans fractured in a November 2009 special election, is vying for his first full term in a district that had been in GOP hands for roughly a century.
Republican Landslide districts in NY:
NY-19
Rep. John Hall has struggled to keep pace with the fundraising of Republican Nan Hayworth and his voting record has been criticized as too liberal for a district with a slight GOP voter registration advantage.
NY-20
Rep. Scott Murphy's 2009 special-election win in one of New York's most Republican-friendly districts was a setback for the GOP. He's worked hard to win a full term in November but his flip from opposition to the health care reform plan to support could prove to be a problem.
If a Nan Hayworth and Chris Gibson win is what it takes for the GOP to have a landslide victory this year, than Democrats are in for a rough night on November 2nd. Both candidates look quite formidable this year and they'll be tough to beat.
The Politico also had the Ann Marie Buerkle/Dan Maffei race on what they call, "the bubble." Meaning less competitive, but competitive still.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Endorsements may swing momentum to David Malpass for NY Senate
By Sam Foster
Polls have shown that Joe Dioguardi has a slim lead amongst his opponents for the opportunity to face Kirsten Gillibrand for this year's senate race. However, David Malpass is quickly stacking up some key endorsements. Last week it was the NY Post. This week, former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Giuliani said of Malpass:
"David Malpass is a serious thinker who will serve in the tradition of some of New York's most distinguished United States senators," said Mayor Giuliani. "David is a life-long fiscal conservative who has stayed true to his principles of limited government, low taxes and strong economic growth throughout his entire career, dating back to his service to President Reagan. I'm thrilled to endorse him as the next U.S. Senator because I know he will be a leader that New Yorkers can be proud of."
"I'm deeply honored to receive the endorsement of 'America's Mayor' Rudy Giuliani," said Mr. Malpass. "Mayor Giuliani has proved that individuals with backbone can make a real difference in public office and in that spirit I will serve in the United States Senate. Our nation is in dire need of principled conservatives who will stop the spending madness of the current Congress and bring fiscal sanity back to the federal government."
Hoffman Better Abide by Next Week's Decision
Doug Hoffman's loss in November ate at the heart of Conservativeactivists across the Nation. It was the low-water mark in a off year election that saw Conservatism overrun two Obama backed candidacies with relative ease, Republicans win countless local elections across the Nation (especially the North East), and a strong pro-marriage victory in liberal Maine.
But that Hoffman loss still stings. What started out as an insurgent/revolt campaign against a Republican who seemed to support few Conservative ideals, turned into the "race of the year" for new and old media types, as the election shifted from Democrat Bill Owens vs. Republican Dede Scozzafava, to Democrat Bill Owens vs.Conservative Doug Hoffman.
Hoffman would end up losing by 3,500 votes, due largely to Scozzafava's name remaining on the ballot when she withdrew her candidacy the week of the vote, and her last-minute cut-throat endorsement of Bill Owens, the Democratic candidate who eventually became what we all expected him to be all along: A solid pro-Pelosi/Obama vote in Congress.
Why I am bringing this up again?
Because the Republican Nominee in New York's 23rd congressional district will be selected next Tuesday. And some individuals are concerned that if Doug Hoffman doesn't win the nomination, that he will once again run for Congress on the Conservative Party line, assuring a Bill Owens victory on election day. Something no-one wants.
If Doug Hoffman wins on Tuesday, he wins the Nomination. But if Matt Doheny (a Conservative portfolio manager) is the victor on Tuesday, he wins the Nomination. My hope is that Hoffman wins, but if he doesn't - I will not be able to support him. There is a time when men (and women) place themselves above others, for the wrong reason. And if Hoffman runs again on the Conservative Party line against the Republican Nominee, it would be for the wrong reason.
New York's 23rd congressional district - Defeat Owens, Support the Republican.
But that Hoffman loss still stings. What started out as an insurgent/revolt campaign against a Republican who seemed to support few Conservative ideals, turned into the "race of the year" for new and old media types, as the election shifted from Democrat Bill Owens vs. Republican Dede Scozzafava, to Democrat Bill Owens vs.Conservative Doug Hoffman.
Hoffman would end up losing by 3,500 votes, due largely to Scozzafava's name remaining on the ballot when she withdrew her candidacy the week of the vote, and her last-minute cut-throat endorsement of Bill Owens, the Democratic candidate who eventually became what we all expected him to be all along: A solid pro-Pelosi/Obama vote in Congress.
Why I am bringing this up again?
Because the Republican Nominee in New York's 23rd congressional district will be selected next Tuesday. And some individuals are concerned that if Doug Hoffman doesn't win the nomination, that he will once again run for Congress on the Conservative Party line, assuring a Bill Owens victory on election day. Something no-one wants.
If Doug Hoffman wins on Tuesday, he wins the Nomination. But if Matt Doheny (a Conservative portfolio manager) is the victor on Tuesday, he wins the Nomination. My hope is that Hoffman wins, but if he doesn't - I will not be able to support him. There is a time when men (and women) place themselves above others, for the wrong reason. And if Hoffman runs again on the Conservative Party line against the Republican Nominee, it would be for the wrong reason.
New York's 23rd congressional district - Defeat Owens, Support the Republican.
Originally posted at JiP
Scott Murphy can’t compete with Republican Challenger Chris Gibson on single donor support
By Sam Foster
It is instructive to watch Scott Murphy buy ad after ad about how he is closely tied to the district, yet it hasn't translated in donor support.
Scott Murphy's campaign shot from the hip last week when releasing preliminary fundraising numbers for the 3rd quarter. Murphy touted nearly $325k raised so far. However, his press release was quite anemic as far as the details for his sources of funding. Clearly, Murphy was looking to influence the media template with a message that his campaign had reclaimed momentum.
Turns out, Murphy's edge in fundraising is little more than politicking as his FEC report shows serious lack of voter support when compared to Republican challenger Chris Gibson's. It turns out nearly half of this quarter's funding is from PACs, while Gibson nearly tripled the number of Scott Murphy's single donors by 937-322.
Via Chris Gibson's press release:
It means little to have a large campaign war chest if the voters aren't on your side. I'd take a large number of single donors over media marketing any day.
It is instructive to watch Scott Murphy buy ad after ad about how he is closely tied to the district, yet it hasn't translated in donor support.
Scott Murphy's campaign shot from the hip last week when releasing preliminary fundraising numbers for the 3rd quarter. Murphy touted nearly $325k raised so far. However, his press release was quite anemic as far as the details for his sources of funding. Clearly, Murphy was looking to influence the media template with a message that his campaign had reclaimed momentum.
Turns out, Murphy's edge in fundraising is little more than politicking as his FEC report shows serious lack of voter support when compared to Republican challenger Chris Gibson's. It turns out nearly half of this quarter's funding is from PACs, while Gibson nearly tripled the number of Scott Murphy's single donors by 937-322.
Via Chris Gibson's press release:
Gibson raised a total of $261,955.82 from across 949 donations, 937 of which were from individuals' contributions. Over 91% of all the individual contributions were from New York. The total amount raised by Gibson from individuals was $236,690.12 compared to Murphy's $183,645.79. The amount raised from New York individuals by Gibson was $206,815.90 compared to Murphy's $101,837.00. Congressman Murphy raised 43% of his total contribution, $141,103.81, from PACs, political parties and sitting members of Congress campaign organizations. That is compared to $25,265.70, or less than 10% of total contributions, collected by Gibson from like organizations across 12 donations.
It means little to have a large campaign war chest if the voters aren't on your side. I'd take a large number of single donors over media marketing any day.
