To summarize baseball legend Reggie Jackson: nobody boos a nobody. That is definitely true in the case of Governor Sarah Palin. I don’t think I am going out on a limb here when I speculate that individuals who repeatedly attack her anonymously view her as a threat. And that includes members of the media hell-bent tearing down young Republican up-and-comers as well as some in Governor Palin’s own party — a party desperately in need of redefining — who are motivated, for whatever reason, to try and crush their rivals.

The most recent and grossly unfair attack came from Vanity Fair magazine. The writer clearly had an unshakable point of view from the start and talked only to those who would criticize. For example, he personally asked me at event preceding the White House Correspondents Dinner if I would talk to him about Governor Palin. I agreed. He didn’t call. He didn’t email. He never once tried to get my take. I also know he never contacted campaign manager Rick Davis, or John McCain.

I have known many political leaders over four decades including all Republican presidents and VPs. I have come to know Sarah Palin over the past year and can state unequivocally that she is smart, curious, hard working, charming, and effective. She also has something her detractors clearly lack – a sense of honor and loyalty.

I know this is petty, but it reminds me of the 2004 presidential election where it was commonplace and accepted in much of the mainstream media to call President Bush stupid and Senator Kerry smart and insightful. At the end of the day, when Senator Kerry finally released his college transcripts, wouldn’t you know: he did quite a bit worse than President Bush.

I have seen Sarah up close with leading heavyweights, and have seen her hold her own and then some. At the dinner at my home referenced in the article, she engaged comfortably and deeply with people ranging from Alan Greenspan to Madeleine Albright to Mitch McConnell. She asked for a foreign policy discussion on her June 7 trip to Washington, and I saw her engage in an informed and spirited manner with Frank Carlucci.

Governor Palin has many admirers and defenders out there who will not allow her to be branded by jealous rivals with their own agenda and the elitists in the national media. I am not sure who the unnamed Vanity Fair sources are, but without question they lack chivalry and have acted in a craven manner. They also lack the facts. I am ashamed of my former campaign colleagues, whoever they are.

The Business section of the Washington Post has a great article today about my son, his service in the Navy and what it has taught him about business. Much as I would like to think so, even I didn’t teach him everything. Here’s a bit of it:

We will get to his business, but first I wanted to know from Malek whether his Navy years built skills that help him manage a $38 million business with 150 employees.

“You have to learn what works and what doesn’t work,” he said. “What works is you have to earn people’s respect and loyalty through example and how you treat them. What doesn’t work is assuming they are loyal automatically.”

He told me about being on a troop ship in the Pacific bound for Iraq and Desert Storm. His team was training for combat on four-hour shifts where half would sleep while the rest prepared. After several visits from a white-gloved senior officer inspecting the quarters for cleanliness, Malek blew up.
ad_icon

“I told him that my people needed their rest and they needed their sleep and this has got to stop,” Malek recalled.

Rebuffing the officer might have gotten him in trouble, but it bonded his men to him for the rest of the mission.

“I learned then that it is all about focusing on the mission and giving your team the best chance of succeeding,” he said.

As a Virginian and a member of the Republican Governor’s Association, I’m glad that the Democratic primary is settled and now the campaign for Virginia governor can begin. State Senator Creigh Deeds won the primary last night, after trailing by double digits less than three weeks ago.

The stakes in this year’s Virginia gubernatorial race are the highest ever. Even more than New Jersey, the other major off-year contest, the gubernatorial elections in my backyard are predictive of trends that will play out further into the cycle. I know that many felt our best chance would be against Clinton’s money man, Terry McAuliffe, but this Virginia Republican is not concerned. This race is not going to be about who our opponent is. We will win because of what the Republican Party is, and who and what we represent.

I believe our nominee, Bob McDonnell, is a major rising star in this party, and this race will prove it. For one thing, Bob brings a number of qualities to the race that previous GOP candidates in Virginia did not have. Better still, he carries none of their flaws.

He is a young polished lawyer and an Army veteran who grew up in liberal (though much less liberal back in the day) Northern Virginia and lives with his family in conservative Virginia Beach, so he can connect with young suburban families in a way that Jerry Kilgore had trouble doing in 2005. McDonnell is a great example of the kind of candidate who doesn’t have to “choose” between sticking to his values and appealing to moderate voters.

That gives him a real advantage over Creigh Deeds, whose economic platform is more of a populist shtick targeted to the United Mine Workers than a sensible roads and schools plan for I-95 commuters. McDonnell cares about the issues Virginians care about, like transportation funding, college tuition costs, energy policy, taxes, and, of course, job creation. So Northern Virginia will be something it hasn’t been in recent elections: A battleground leaning Republican.

And Republicans will be more excited about McDonnell than the Democrats are about Deeds. It’s clear where he stands on the issues that are important to the Republicans Party, including taxes, religion and honoring our troops. Deeds, on the other hand, is going to have to activate his base and crank up the turn out better than he did last time around. In doing so, he is going have to walk the line between Prius drivers in Arlington and NASCAR fans in Bristol. He’s not an anti-gun zealot, which won’t please pastors in Hampton, and wants to soak the entrepreneurs and businesses on taxes, which won’t impress technology executives in Reston. And there should be no forgetting that Virginia is the new battle ground in big labor’s battle to expand its power. In a state that appreciates the right to work and still tilts conservative, the advantage goes to Bob.

McDonnell has also won respect on both sides of the aisle for his hard work. He’s been an energetic and eager candidate, with a great resume of accomplishment that he can actually run on. As I said on Hardball this week, governors are our best candidates and that’s a bench we must develop.

This won’t be the first time that McDonnell and Deeds have squared off in a statewide election. I still remember their 2005 race for Attorney General, where McDonnell beat Deeds by 323 votes. As someone who has been around politics and Virginia a long time, I believe McDonnell has what it takes to beat Deeds again.

In the months ahead, voters will come to see how he has been an experienced and steady hand in Richmond, and that he is the best bet to put this great Commonwealth back on the path of hard work and reform.

The national media will be watching, and the rest of the Republican Party should too.

Segment 1:

Segment 2:

Segment 3:

Segment 1:

Segment 2:

Segment 3:

Segment 4:

Segment 5:

Segment 1: 

Segment 2:

The subject of the environment is a difficult one for conservatives. The Left has owned the discussion for years, always pitching the issue in the direst terms, decade after decade. When we have tried to point out reasonable objections to this extremist rhetoric, such as that there is less than a scientific consensus about climate change, we have been called “deniers” or worse.

This is doubly unfair because there are few things more conservative than conservation. There can be no doubt that being good stewards of our natural resources is necessary for human sustainability and survival. Unfortunately, in the public’s mind the Left has a monopoly on setting wise environmental policy. What we understand, as the Left seems unwilling to acknowledge, is that environmental and economic policies are often very closely associated. There are always tradeoffs for any change in policy.

Right now congressional Democrats, led by Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, are trying to use that conventional wisdom to pass a bill that could be destructive on both fronts. As even some on the left have pointed out, the bill may not actually establish binding caps on emissions, and may in fact actually contribute to worldwide pollution. This kind of up-is-down outcome is no surprise to those of us who understand how government is often less efficient at coming up with solutions than it is generating unintended consequences.

But then there is the looming economic impact of the bill, and there is no doubt it would be a negative one. Last month the Heritage Foundation produced a report analzying the bill in economic terms. According to the study, Waxman-markey would:

• Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $7.4 trillion,
• Destroy 844,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 1,900,000 jobs,
• Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation,
• Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent,
• Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent,
• Raise an average family’s annual energy bill by $1,500, and
• Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 29 percent, or $33,400 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.

There seems little question the bill, if it became law, would lead to an increase in prices for consumers. And that only begins with gas and oil prices, because of the price of gas and oil is built into the price of everything.

What’s more, everybody knows that the real source of carbon emissions in the near future is not the United States. Like Western Europe, our economy is developed already and we have the technologies to run cleaner factories and plants. Everybody knows the real source in coming decades will be China, India and Russia. In fact, just last year China surpassed us to become the country responsible for more CO2 than any other. This trend will continue.

And it does not take a masters in economics to realize that these countries are not about to follow our lead. The United States has a little bit less than one car per person (1.3 to be exact) while China is not even close. It has one car for every 100 people. Why would they make it more expensive for them to close the gap with us? They’re no fools. They won’t. That’s why President Obama and the Democrats in Congress would be just as foolish to make it more expensive for us to maintain and extend our lead.

Today we have the most dynamic market, but President Obama seems determined to sacrifice our competitive advantage for the sake of a campaign pledge to his base on the anti-business Left. Ironically, the most likely destination for the jobs would be none other than China and India.

Reducing carbon emissions can be a worthy goal, but it must be considered along with other objectives, especially the most important — ensuring that the United States remains the world’s strongest economy. The Waxman-Markey bill that President Obama is so eager to sign does not even come close to doing that.

Imagine my surprise to visit Politico today and find a story about me and my blog: “GOP kingmaker leans toward Mitt Romney.” As the headline indicates, it’s not an unflattering article, and it pays notice to my post of May 15 about the leaders who are our party’s best hopes for the future.

But I do want to make a couple points of clarification. RedState also picked up the item that same day, where it received 62 comments (although one of them was my own). That may not set any world records, but it was a vigorous debate about our best and brightest. Others mentioned some very promising individuals I had left out, including Bobby Jindal. There was also some lively discussion about the role of moderates in the party.

The second is that I do not want to give anyone too much hope (or strike too much fear) that I am nearing an endorsement of any potential candidate. I did include Romney’s name prominently and offered both praise and critical observations. I wish him the best of luck if he decides to run again, just as I wish the same to others who may try in 2012 — and thanks to Politico for reading. 

I have enjoyed assiduously Chris Cillizza’s frequent articles on the top ten most influential Republicans and have had the privilege of knowing some of them quite well through my chairmanship of the Executive Roundtable for the Republican Governor’s Association. This, plus concerns on the current Administration’s direction (think assault on free enterprise and march toward socialism) have led me to some early thoughts on who might both lead our party back and who might be our nominee in 2012.

So, for better, or for worse, based on my personal experiences, here are my top ten who are leading the debate today, some of whom we should be looking to for 2012. Given that I believe the solutions to most of our country’s problems aren’t found in Washington, you will find few on my list who serve in Congress.

1. Mitt Romney — The almost-nominee with the established organization, fundraising network, time, and talent to get the nomination this time. He does retain an image problem with some Republicans, who are not sold on his conservative credentials or upset with him for changing his emphasis of issues from his time as governor to presidential candidate. But he is self-aware and very smart. I believe he will start reintroducing himself early on, and possibly be in the best position when the serious campaigning begins in early 2011.

2. Mark Sanford — Mark is the soft spoken but thoughtful and challenging leader of RGA. He could be a challenger to Mitt or on the ticket if he decides to go that way. His leadership on the stimulus funds was extremely important to the integrity of our small government values by rejecting the federal bailout in the first place and solution-minded innovation by agreeing to accept the money if and only if the South Carolina legislature used it to pay down the state’s debt. At a time when the Republican Party needs to offer creative solutions, Mark is doing exactly that.

3. Haley Barbour — Extremely sound on policies, clear thinking and the best political strategist, well liked by all factions, more likely a king maker than king, but one never knows. As governor of Mississippi, he did a far better job responding to Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath than Kathleen Blanco. Now she is not in office, but Barbour still is. He does not have the best name recognition, which may be a good thing considering that much of his career had been based in Washington. Now that he has credibility as an effective governor, that background may no longer be a liability, and should help him with fundraising. And he has always been a terrific organizer. Haley was RNC chairman during the 1994 Republican revolution. Maybe he has some ideas about how to recapture that spirit.

4. Dick Cheney — That’s right, I am putting Dick Cheney on this list. He deserves to be. He is willing and able to take it to Obama, no matter the criticism, and he’s on point in defending the Bush-era policies that led to 8 years of safety, now endangered by the new administration letting political correctness trump clear thinking on national security. Of course, we know that he won’t run but if the past few weeks tell us anything, he will be around. His presence alone will challenge other future leaders in the party to be more prepared, less squishy and sharper on core issues like foreign policy. And it would be fun to see the liberal establishment howl.

5. Emerging GOP Senate candidates in blue states — Think Charlie Crist, and possibly George Pataki, Mark Kirk, or Mike Castle. Yes, they are moderates and especially a few weeks after Arlen Specter’s opportunistic party switch “moderate” is all but a four-letter word. But can we ever expect to be a majority party without embracing a big tent philosophy that encourages those at the middle of the spectrum to think of themselves as Republicans? We need people like Mark Kirk and people like Mark Sanford both to be proud members of the GOP.

6. Sarah Palin — She is vastly underestimated by the press, has an enormous grasp of issues and a strong devotion to what is important to Alaska, where she will be re-elected easily, and will be the most powerful money and mobilization magnet in GOP for some time.

7. Bob McDonnell — No one outside of Virginia knows him yet, but he’s the best GOP candidate for governor in many years. He is also and able to build a center-right majority. As such, he will win the 2009 race, and this will embolden others to run and start the way back for the GOP. If you have any doubts, look back at 1993 when after a 1992 drubbing for the GOP, the election of Allen and Whitman paved the way for takeover of Congress in 1994. Bob’s victory will propel him to become one of the party’s biggest new stars.

8. Jon Huntsman — His clarity and charismatic style combined with his call for inclusiveness and outreach continues to register with those who believe in the big tent approach, while being a strong leader on traditional issues dear to hearts of conservatives. If he does run for president, many will consider it an experiment in Republican re-branding, and the results may be far-reaching.

9. Paul Ryan — At 39, Ryan is the the go-to budget expert in the House, with a clear and compelling message on economic reform. He is sure to continue prodding others to new policy ideas and proposals with his clear-thinking views. I believe he is sure to emerge as one of the party’s leading voices and one who will be short-listed for VP in 2012. As a protégé of my great friend Jack Kemp, Paul Ryan is the real next coming of Jack.

10. Eric Cantor — Like Ryan a forceful and clear-thinking leader with energy, charm, and smarts. His rise from working in his family’s small business and then the Virginia legislature to a leadership role in the House GOP caucus is a true testament to his talent and dedication. My guess is he has what it takes to become Speaker of the House, and I’d bet that one day he will.

I’ve thought of others, like John McCain, for still being the most talked about and followed in Senate. Another promising leader is Mitch Daniels, who excelled in the Bush administration and is starting his second term as Indiana’s governor. And perhaps I have missed a few, and can learn something from you. I welcome your feedback in the comments. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

It is with great regret that this is the second time in less than a week that I am sharing my thoughts with you about a recently departed friend.  That said, this one is much different and far more heart-wrenching than the first.

I have been a Jack Kemp Republican my entire life. His message of hope and compassion mixed with fiscal conservatism, lower taxes, less government, and individual empowerment have guided me throughout my years in both business and politics. I always thought Jack was the true heir to Ronald Reagan and he was an incredible inspiration to so many of us.

His influence on Republican policy can hardly be measured. Jack was one of the earliest to recognize the importance of Arthur Laffer’s supply-side theories. He was instrumental in putting tax cuts at the top of Ronald Reagan’s agenda, and the Kemp-Roth tax cuts are among the most important economic policies of the 20th century.  Without them, it’s impossible to say whether President Bush would have taken the same course twenty years later.  And thanks to his past as a championship-winning quarterback with the AFL Buffalo Bills, Jack understood minorities and others outside of the usual, traditional Republican constituencies better than most of us.  For decades he urged us to go outside of our electoral comfort zone and reach out to African-Americans and Latinos because he believed they shared our values and that by sharing the power of our ideas with more people we could help lift millions out of poverty and into the “opportunity society,” as he aptly called it.  We are not all the way there yet, but when we arrive, Jack will deserve a big share of the credit.

Jack was also a great personal friend.  For years we traveled together, Marlene and I stayed with the Kemps at their home in Colorado to celebrate his 70th, and they visited often with us at our home as well.

I’ll never forget last August in Colorado when John McCain came to be with our most successful fundraisers and supporters, and the next day Mark Sanford, Jon Huntsman, John Thune, and Jack talked to the group.  Of course, the former QB was the ultimate closer and Jack wound it up with soaring rhetoric that argued passionately and compellingly for a greater control of government spending, more emphasis on growth incentives, and an increased reliance on the individual vs. government to lead us out of our current malaise. At the conclusion he tossed the mic to me and walked off to a standing and rousing ovation. It was Jack at his best, as I will always remember him.

He was a treasure to the cause and our country and he will be deeply missed.  As our own party seeks new ideas and new leadership for the future, I can only hope that in doing so, we are reminded of Jack Kemp.  If we are lucky and if we are smart, we will find someone who can channel his passion for conservative principle and policy, his energy, his inclusiveness and his passion that excited and inspired so many for so long.

Goodbye for now, old friend, but you will always be with us.

Fred