Scott R. Sullivan

September 3rd, 2008 by Scott

Gov. Palin has hit a home run tonight with a speech that just rocked! From the comments about their opponents to her conservative beliefs. And a nice surprise visit from John McCain at the conclusion of her speech (I know Obama did this, but it seems a tad bit more sincere tonight).

But it was the little things in her speech that really hit home. Little things about her life, how she made decisions, choices she made and so much more.

The best line was about her experiences as a Mayer of an Alaskan town. “Sort of like a community leader, with responsibility,” was her response. This is going to be a GREAT race and I am so proud to support McCain and Palin.

For the longest time, I believed Gov. Romney would be the Veep choice and then run for president in 2012. I believe this night will cement her nomination for the Republican ticket in four years when I suspect, John McCain decides to not run due to his age.

Bravo, Gov. Palin. Godspeed.

August 29th, 2008 by Scott

Presidential nominee, John McCain, has chosen Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate. I’ve got to be honest. I, like many, didn’t see this one coming!

However, as I find out more about Gov. Palin, the more I like her. She brings a conservative background to the ticket, which is what McCain needed to do.

Also, she’s a Governor. That’s key, as I’ve mentioned many times. While I was for supporting Gov. Jindal or Gov. Romney, I’m perfectly happy having Gov. Palin on the ticket.

She’s for drilling in ANWR, lowering taxes, cutting government spending (she nixed the ‘bridge to nowhere’), and goes hunting at midnight sometimes! Love it!

July 23rd, 2008 by Scott

The news is in. Over half of Americans agree that we are winning the war on terrror:

Over half of American voters (51%) now believe the United States and its allies are winning the war on terror, the highest figure recorded in nearly four years by Rasmussen Reports in a nationwide survey.

Last July, just 36% thought the U.S. and its allies were winning. At that time, an equal number—36%–thought the terrorists were ahead.

Other indicators in the survey also show that Americans have growing confidence that things are looking up in the war on terror.
(Source)

Let’s recap. Last year, only 36% of Americans thought we were winning. The Democrats wanted us to retreat and cut our losses in Iraq. They wanted to quit.

One year later, it turns out President Bush was right. The Republicans were right. The surge worked. We are winning. And most Americans now agree.

It just goes to show that a war should NOT be fought based on weekly opinion polls.

July 20th, 2008 by Scott

In one of Obama’s recent ads, he says:

He passed a law to move people from welfare to work, slashed the rolls by eighty percent. Passed tax cuts for workers; health care for kids.

The truth of the matter is, he was mandated to sign that law by a bill written by the 1994 Republican Congress and signed into law by President Clinton:

First, the law in question wasn’t dreamed up out of thin air by its sponsors. It was the follow-up to the welfare reform act, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, that President Clinton signed on Aug. 26, 1996. That law gave states the ability to design their own welfare programs as long as they met certain federal requirements, including limits on how long recipients could get benefits.

Welfare reform was successful in moving people off public assistance. There was about a 78 percent drop in the number of families receiving public assistance in Illinois between 1998 and 2006. It was the federal law, hammered out by Clinton and the Republican Congress, that set the wheels in motion and forced states to act. Nationwide, the number of families on welfare declined quite a bit as well, going from 3,146,870 in ‘98 to 1,805,900 in ‘06, a decrease of almost 43 percent.(Source)

So why are we interested in putting Obama in the White House, when it was the 1994 Republican Congress and their Contract With America that initiated this action?

It was the Republican Congress that helped get people off welfare and become responsible, productive citizens. Let’s remember that.

May 21st, 2008 by Scott

Three cheers. For what? Three candidates on the short list for McCain’s running mate.

I’ve been clear in the past that McCain wasn’t my first choice for the Republican nomination. There are many attributes that I do like about McCain, but I feel there are many others that represent the conservative base much more than he.

I have always maintained that Romney was more closely aligned with the conservative base than McCain.

In fact, I even posted an article back in March about the very real possibility of Romney being selected as the Vice Presidential running mate.

Well, the names are starting to surface and just as I had predicted, Romney’s in the top three. Not only that, but there are some very interesting things about the top three veep candidates.

First, all three are Governors. Gov. Romney (MA), Gov. Crist (FL), and Gov. Jindal (LA). I wrote a lengthy article in December of 2007 about how Governors have an advantage when running for the White House.

While anything can happen, I think this is very telling on how the 2008 general election will turn out in November. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama both have history against them against Sen. McCain and GOVERNOR Romney, Jindal or Crist.

I think part of this advantage comes from the fact that a Governor of a state is like a mini-federal government. They preside over a House and Senate of the state. They have state budgets they work with. They have State Departments, Departments of Commerce, Transportation, etc. and are in control of the state militia, the National Guard.

Compare this to a Senator, like Obama and Clinton. They are just one of 100 of a group. They are part of the “problem” of Washington, not the solution. That’s why even though the President has an all-time low approval rating, Congress’ approval rating is even LOWER!

Back to the top three names. I’ll skip Romney for now, since I’ve discussed him in depth before.

Gov. Jindal looks very promising. He’s the youngest Governor in the country and has been hailed as the next Ronald Reagan! His voting record backs up these claims. He has voted for gun rights, to lower taxes, and most importantly, understands the global war on terror. This is a man we need in the White House.

Gov. Crist is right up there as well. He’s a hardliner when it comes to law and order: he’s for the death penalty, and was called “Chain Gang Charlie” because he favored using convicts to be used for roadside labor.

There is much more to both of these Governors. Of these two new names, I personally favor Jindal. He’s likable, young, VERY conservative, and brings some energy and enthusiasm to the table.

If McCain chooses any of these three, I’ll be happy. If he chooses Jindal or Romney, I’ll be VERY happy. Because, in all likelyhood, this Governor turned Veep will run for President in 2012. Its just a hunch, but I just don’t see McCain running for two terms, due to his age.

And… as I’ve said before, my Governor v. Senator race will mean so much more. Can’t wait!

December 29th, 2007 by Scott

History favors the Republicans for the 2008 Presidential Elections. Why is that, you ask? Looking back at where all the candidates come from, there is a statistical advantage for the Republicans this election year.

History has favored governors and vice presidents to win the White House. I went back and researched the qualifications and previous “jobs” of all U.S. Presidents since Roosevelt. Take a look at the positions held by our presidents at the time they ran for president:

Presidents who were Governors while running: 5

December 26th, 2007 by Scott

In a Washington Times article published today, Lawrence Kudlow hits some of the highlights of President Bush’s 2007 accomplishments. Kudlow is right on the mark in many areas. Allow me to expand with the Democratic/Republican “2007 predictions.”

After all, hindsight is 20/20.

The Economy

Democratic Prediction: 2007 Recession

The Huffington Post: Sep 10, 2007 - Strained by an ailing housing market and credit woes, the economy in 2007 is expected to log its worst growth in five years and should be somewhat sluggish next year. The No. 1 risk, though, is that the economy will lose its footing altogether and fall into a recession, forecasters say.

The New York Times: September 8, 2007 - Suddenly, analysts are talking about a possible recession. And that’s not good news for anybody. A few more months like August would make a recession likely.

ABC: Democrat Chris Dodd Predicts Recession: November 11, 2007 - Senate Banking Committee Chairman Senator Chris Dodd, D-Conn., predicted this morning that the country is headed into a recession. “Well, it’s certainly pointing in that direction. We hope that’s not the case, but there are many people who watch this minute to minute and would have drawn that conclusion. Some are even predicting a far greater likelihood than I would at this juncture,” Dodd said in a “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” interview.

Actual Outcome: 2007 Sees Record Economic Growth
(Source: Federal Fact Sheet: December 12, 2007)

• November 2007 Marks Record 51st Consecutive Month of Job Growth
• More Than 8.3 Million Jobs Created Since August 2003 In Longest Continuous Run Of Job Growth On Record
• 94,000 jobs created in November.
• GDP grew at 4.9 percent annual rate in the third quarter of 2007 (six years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 2.8 percent a year since 2001)

Iraq Troop Surge

Democratic Prediction: Troop Surge Will Fail

Democrat Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader (in The Huffington Post) December 19, 2006 - Frankly, I don’t believe that more troops is the answer for Iraq.

Arianna Huffington (in the Huffington Post) June 14, 2007 - The Democrats need to stick with Reid’s plan to ratchet up the pressure on the president — and especially on Congressional Republicans who will have to face the wrath of voters in 2008. It is the right thing to do — both on moral grounds and on political grounds.

Stephen Schlesinger April 19, 2007 - This, after several months of the so-called Bush “surge”, which was going to decisively change the direction of the war in Iraq. The surge is a disaster.

‘Surge’ Strategy Is Recipe For Disaster - John Nichols, CBS December 20, 2006 - The “surge” strategy is ridiculous on its face. Strategists in Washington should be developing a plan for U.S. troops to surge homeward, not pushing a scheme to send more young men and women into a hopeless —and deadly — quagmire.

Actual Outcome: Troop Surge Worked

The Washington Times: August 21, 2007 - Top Senate Democrats have started to acknowledge progress in Iraq, with the chairman of the Armed Services Committee yesterday saying the U.S. troop surge is producing “measurable results.”

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan highlighted improved security in Baghdad and al Qaeda losses in Anbar province as examples of success — a shift for Democrats who have mainly discounted or ignored advances on the battlefield for weeks.

“The military aspects of President Bush’s new strategy in Iraq … appear to have produced some credible and positive results,” Mr. Levin said in a joint statement with Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, after a two-day visit last week to Iraq.

Facts from MIT: September 14, 2007 - … civilian fatalities have declined without any concurrent increase in casualties among coalition and Iraqi troops.

General Petraeus: Iraq troop surge is working (UK Telegraph) December 9, 2007 - America’s military commander in Iraq gave President George W Bush a major boost last night by telling the US Congress that his “surge” policy was working and troop levels should be reduced by 30,000 over the next 10 months.

Iraq says most of Al-Qaeda network destroyed in 2007 - The Iraqi interior ministry lauded its achievements over the past year on Saturday, saying that 75 percent of Al-Qaeda’s networks in the country had been destroyed in 12 months.
Ministry spokesman Abdul Karim Khalaf also outlined sharp falls in the numbers of assassinations, kidnappings and death squad murders. Breitbart, Dec. 29, 2007

What’s Ahead in 2008?
I even see the trends pointing to a better 2008. With Congress’ dismal approval ratings, I even predict that we’ll see a return to a Republican controlled House and Senate in November 2008 and continue to hold the White House.

I will continue to document why I feel the Republicans will win all three branches as I follow the course of the primaries and the election year events. But there is one underlying theme that you’ll see and you can see in the above analysis.

Democrats like to lower the bar and tell us how much things will go wrong. Republicans like to look forward and find ways to raise the bar.

After all, look at the predictions above. Even with a Democratic controlled House and Senate, the Democrats had to shout doom and gloom. “We’re going to have a recession! We’re losing in Iraq!”

Why? Because anything that is good for the country is bad for them. Success for the country means that the Bush Doctrine is working. It means the tax cuts worked. It means the troop surge worked.

Stay tuned!