Andrew McCarthy Proposes a Party Other Than the GOP

(Updated and bumped)

Andrew McCarthy is a former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. A Republican, he is most notable for leading the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks. He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. He resigned from the Justice Department in 2003. He is currently a columnist for National Review.

Having said that, Andrew McCarthy is a pretty smart guy. Tonight, he appeared on the Mark Levin Show. His comments were remarkable in that it’s the first time that I’ve heard a prominent, conservative writer suggest that the GOP may need to be abandoned for another party. He made his comments in conjunction with John McCain’s recent denunciation of Michelle Bachmann on the Senate floor. Bachmann and several other Congressional Republicans had dared to question the potential influence of Huma Abedin on the State Department’s foreign policy. Michelle Bachmann’s questions are fact-based, McCain’s are not. Huma Abedin is mentioned in Bachmann’s letter to the Deputy Inspector General of the Department of State:

The Departments Deputy, Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin, has three family members – her late father, her mother and her brother – connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and /or organizations. Her position affords her routine access to the Secretary and to policy making…

You can read Andrew McCarthy’s excellent background piece in a recent article on

The Wages of Willful Blindness: Is It Time for Defenders of Liberty to Abandon the GOP?


I’ll post the audio of The Mark Levin Show here as soon as it’s available. In the meantime, here’s another good article written by Jeffrey Lord, on The American Spectator:

Is Huma Abedin the New Alger Hiss?

My observations of Sarah’s weekend speeches

While listening to Sarah Palin’s New Hampshire speech, something dawned on me. We are starting to see GOP candidates attack their opponents on a variety of topics. This is to be expected in an contested primary. How will this play out if Sarah gets into the race?

As an example, Mitt Romney has decided to attack Rick Perry as a “career politician”. Rick Perry turned around and suggested to listeners in South Carolina that Mitt Romney has no record of job creation. Meanwhile, Michelle Bachmann’s PAC has published a video that goes after Perry on his spending record in Texas. Ron Paul had already gone after all three of the above in a campaign ad several weeks ago.

So, let me get this straight. Romney attacks Perry as a career politician. Perry attacks Romney for dismal job growth. Bachmann attacks Perry on his spending record and Ron Paul attacks all of the above for, well, all of the above and then some.

In the meantime, Sarah Palin keeps talking about reform and offers solutions to end crony-capitalism. Not surprisingly, Sarah’s record of governance involves standing up against crony-capitalism, dramatically cutting spending, adding jobs at a much faster rate than Texas and being one of the most ethical administrations in Alaskan history.

Gee, I wonder what the GOP attacks will say about Sarah? Oh, she quit her job? Hmmm, she’s got a better record in 2.5 years than Perry in 10. She also reformed government entitlements, forward-funding retirement programs to allow budgetary control of that spending. Mitt Romney? Not so much, giving his state the template for Obamacare. Michelle Bachmann? Remind me again what Michelle Bachmann’s executive experience is outside of her job as a “tax attorney”? …..still waiting…..yawn…..(crickets).

Nope, it seems to me that Sarah Palin will be a difficult target to hit…unless you’re willing to “make things up!”

So it begins, as predicted

I didn’t expect it to take long for the media to begin asking the Republican presidential candidates about Sarah Palin’s proposal to eliminate all corporate taxes. In fact, I talked about it on The Roderic Deane Show today, stating that I thought it would be a topic of conservation on the Sunday news shows. It didn’t take long to be proven right.

What I find interesting about Michelle Bachmann’s comments is that she just can’t quite jump onto the “no corporate taxes” bandwagon and I know why. She’s a tax attorney! Her suggestion is to slowly reduce corporate tax rates over time with the admission that they could be reduced to zero as long as there were fundamental changes to the underlying tax code.

The new pro-Bachmann conservative meme

We know that the left likes to create false impressions about their favorite media target, Sarah Palin. They create a false idea and then repeat it over and over in the media until it becomes taken as fact. I wrote about a current left-wing meme here. It now appears that certain right-wing elements have taken up the same mission, only in this case it is in defense of a Bachmann Presidential run versus one by Sarah Palin.

Michelle Bachmann commented in an interview with Ralph Reed that she felt it was important to complete your parenting activities before entering public life. I blogged about it in a post titled “Sarah, who need enemies with friends like Bachmann?” I also included a video of Bachmann’s exchange with Reed.

It now appears that certain right-wing commentators have taken up Bachmann’s cause in portraying Sarah Palin as wrong in pursuing a political career while raising a family. In a post appearing on The American Spectator website, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. takes up where Bachmann left off. He writes:

Bachmann and Palin are sufficiently charismatic for me, and both have raised families, Bachmann five children of her own and 23 foster children before entering public life. That is the proper sequence of events: raise a family, enter public life.

You can read the rest here.

Special note to Michelle Bachmann. The last and only sitting member of the U.S. House of Representatives to win the Presidency was James A. Garfield, in 1881. The only others to attempt it and fail were Henry Clay (1824) and John Anderson (1980). I might also add that the last attempt by John Anderson fell well short, losing to Ronald Reagan.

Current meme: Bachmann has eclipsed Palin

In a blogpost today at Generational Dysfunction, there is this:

We can always depend on the mainstream media to seize on any angle in an attempt to denigrate Sarah Palin. Their new meme is that Michelle Bachmann has eclipsed Sarah Palin due to her performance in the GOP debate held last Monday evening.

According to U.S. News and World Report (a liberal rag if there ever was one):

There are many parallels between Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann—and not simply because they are the GOP’s only serious female 2012 prospects. The two fill the same Tea Party, mama-bear space, and they both love to creatively interpret history. But, as pundits speculate whether the two are friends or foes, it seems that space isn’t big enough for the two of them.

U.S. News’s Whispers column (“Bachmann: The Smart Version of Palin”) pits the two against each other in education (Bachmann wins), family (Bachmann), politics (Palin), fundraising (Bachmann), and other areas. “So how is the nation supposed to choose between Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann if they both get into the presidential race?” Whispers asks. “In a word: smarts. If we had to make a pick based on school smarts and book smarts, Bachmann would win. Because when it comes to picking presidents, the nation has a history of going for the brainy candidates.”

And when it comes to lame-stream media attention, Bachmann has a habit of absorbing the spotlight when Palin fades. When Palin laid low after what many called her narcissistic response to the tragic shooting at Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s “Congress on Your Corner” event in January, Bachmann entered center stage with her Tea Party response to President Obama’s State of the Union speech. After the media din subsided from Palin’s to-campaign-or-not-to-campaign New England bus tour, Bachmann came on strong and articulate in Monday’s GOP debate and had the media cycle saying, Sarah who?

There is so much wrong with this article.

First, Whispers picks “smarts” as to why Bachmann is better than Palin. Unfortunately, their definition of “smarts” simple relates to the fact that Bachmann received two law degrees. Isn’t this the last thing we need in the White House, another attorney?

Second, regarding family, Whispers states that having raised 23 foster children ranks Bachmann ahead of Palin, even though they both have 5 of their own. If that were a true indicator of family strength, maybe we should hold up Osama bin Laden as the ultimate family man with the estimated 26 children he fathered with multiple, concurrent wives.

Third, Whispers picks Bachmann over Palin in fundraising. This in itself is laughable since Sarah Palin actively campaigned for Bachmann during her 2010 re-election bid. Why do you think that was?

But there you have it: the current lamestream media meme.

I wonder what they’ll think of next?

Update: For the record, Ronald Reagan attended Eureka College in Illinois, majoring in economics and sociology. Hmmm, no law degree?

Sarah, who need enemies with friends like Bachmann?

I’ve been holding off commenting about Michelle Bachmann’s posture toward Sarah Palin, willing to give her the benefit of a doubt. However, there have been two things happen in the last two weeks that tells me otherwise. First was her new front-man Ed Rollins, who stated in an interview on Fox News Radio, (per The Daily Caller):

“Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years,” Rollins said. “She got the vice-presidential thing handed to her. She didn’t go to work in the sense of trying [to] gain more substance. She gave up her governorship.

The right-wing blogosphere erupted in protest and rightly so.

Sarah Palin campaigned for Michelle in last year’s Congressional elections. What about Reagan’s so-called 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican? Reagan followed that sentiment throughout his political career and obviously, it served him well.

But now comes something else from Michelle Bachmann that I just can’t let slide. In an interview with Ralph Reed, she backhandedly castigates Sarah Palin for her decision to run for elected office while still having small children at home. What? Why should that dissuade any politician from running for office? I might have let it slide if Ralph Reed hadn’t mentioned Sarah Palin in his question to Bachmann.

Here is the video:

Let’s see, who else had small children after winning the Presidency? Off the top of my head, John Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Oh, I get it, they were all Democrats! But wait, I seem to remember that Theodore Roosevelt had a large family and Abraham Lincoln had small children as well. Oh, one other thing, they were men. What a bunch of bull!

Maybe Michelle Bachmann needs to go back to raising more foster children. That effort seemed to preclude her willingness to enter politics to secure their future in this country. Let someone else do THAT heavy lifting!