USD College Republicans

"Day without art" is ridiculous

A post on the ID Weeks blog states that, on Dec. 1, the library will cover first-floor art with black cloth in order to observe "Day without Art," in mourning for AIDS.

Yes, AIDS is bad. But so are lots of diseases. But the libraries don't normally cover the art in honor of lupus victims. Or those sufferers of diabetes. Etc.

That the libraries are discriminating against people with diseases other than AIDS is humorous in its irony- the PC crowd attempts to honor or mourn a group of people, (those with AIDS) then ends up discriminating against an even larger group of people (those with diseases other than AIDS).

Next comes the inevitable question: What does covering art actually DO? Nothing, of course.

But we like doing nothing. It's easy. It's cheap. Cover the paintings and feel better about yourself.

They'll say it's for "awareness." But who ISN'T aware of AIDS?

The simple truth is that AIDS won't be eradicated by covering art, but by loads of money funding a determined, focused effort in a laboratory. Any assertion to the contrary is ridiculous.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 10:29AM Nov 25, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[4]

Emanual is WH Chief of Staff

Illinois Rep. Rahn Emanual has accepted Obama's invitation to become the new WH Chief of Staff

Rahm Emanual has a reputation of being one of the most jarring, abrasive leaders in the Democratic Party. But he can get things done. Then again, there are many less abrasive Democrats who can get things done.

What a weird choice. Obama wants to reconcile Right and Left, yet chooses one of the most abrasive, hardcore partisans in the Democratic Party to head his staff? You'd think that he'd choose someone more positive and less divisive.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 03:46PM Nov 06, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[0]

Election Wrap-up

As we all know, Barack Obama, Tim Johnson, Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, and BJ Nesselhuf have all won election or reelection to President, US Senate, US House, and State Senate, respectively. CR friend Republican Dan Lederman of District 16 won his race for State House with around 35%. We congratulate Dan, as well as all of the Democrats.

This was an extremely trying election season. No Republican has ever run in such an unforgiving political climate, and the struggles were great.

Despite the difficulty, the USD College Republicans showed themselves to be a major player on campus. With respect to our friends in the USD Democrats, I think that the USD College Republicans greatly exceeded all expectations, mobilizing campus Republicans as they never have before. And it all happened in the most anti-Republican political climate in history.

Through canvassing and phone calls, debating the Democrats, putting flyers up around campus, and registering voters, the USD College Republicans made USD sit up and take note. I can only expect that they will be as- or more- active in coming years.

I think that the CRs hard work, dedication, and work on and off campus prove that they live up to their name as the BEST party on campus.

I thank them for all they have done, and I look forward to the gubernatorial race in 2010.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:51AM Nov 05, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Reps-Dems Debate

A packed crowd greeted the eight debaters last night.

I think both the CRs and the Dems argued their points deftly and passionately.

Many thanks to Rhino, Matt, Brittany, and Bill. And also to David Whitesock, our able referee, PSL, and the Volante.

You can see Volante Political Reporter Joe Sneve's liveblog, as well as pictures of the debate on the Volante website.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 11:03AM Oct 29, 2008 by College Republicans in University of South Dakota  |  Comments[0]

Republicans-Democrats Debate

What: Volante/Political Science League's annual USD College Republicans-USD College Democrats Debate
When: Tuesday, October 27, 2008, 7:00 PM
Where: Farber Hall in Old Main

Posted at 08:27PM Oct 27, 2008 by College Republicans in University of South Dakota  |  Comments[0]

Republicans rally; Democrats leave after photo op

Tonight, 20 College Republicans rallied outside the Neuharth Building in support of Chris Lien for Congress. Of course, he's debating incumbent Democrat Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin.

I arrived at 7:00 PM and the Dems were in full force. State Senator Ben Nesselhuf was in attendance- not surprising, as he has no classes to take and no formal work to do. The Democrats were excited and chuckling at the fact that I was the only CR present. The joke was on them. I had told the CRs to arrive at 7:30.

So three Lien staffers and myself stood around the Democrats until Herseth arrived. They scurried up to the parking lot for a pat on the back and a photo op. Of course, as soon as the photo op concluded, they scattered.

Not the College Republicans! More and more CRs showed up and we eventually covered the area from the corner of Cherry and Dakota to the Dakota Street door of the Neuharth Building.

We will have video from the event as soon as it is available from the Lien campaign.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:14PM Oct 21, 2008 by College Republicans in Congress  |  Comments[20]

John and Barry at the Al Smith Dinner

If you're into politics, you've probably already seen this- McCain and Obama at New York's Al Smith Dinner. Obama was so-so, but McCain brought the house down, which is why I'm only posting his speech.

Posted at 08:25AM Oct 20, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[2]

NRA gives Higman an A, Nesselhuf an F

The new NRA rankings are out and the results are telling.

As expected, Jerad Higman received an A rating.

Nesselhuf received an F.

Ben Nesselhuf's ads are relying on an old, much better NRA rating. Hopefully he pull this misleading ad and use the new rating. Hunters will be happy he told the truth on this issue.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 12:43PM Oct 18, 2008 by College Republicans in State and Local Politics  |  Comments[2]

Senator Government

Last night, McCain had a slip of the tongue, calling Barry "Senator Government." In actuality, it was the most appropriate remark all night.

Today's Wall Street Journal has a piece entitled "Senator Government" that details the massive, inescapable growth of government that would occur in an Obama administration.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:59AM Oct 16, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[0]

Obama lets slip his economic philosophy

"I think, when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Yeah, Barry, except for the ones who earned the money in the first place.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:57AM Oct 16, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

New Chris Lien Ad

Posted at 09:13AM Oct 14, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[0]

Tim Johnson: Wall Street's second favorite

The blog South Dakota War College reports that SD Senator Tim Johnson received the second-highest amount of money from Wall Street:

----------------------------------------------------------------
Senate incumbents receiving the largest percentage of total from the finance sector

Jack Reed (D) ---Rhode Island---$1,240,655---31.3%
Tim Johnson (D) ---South Dakota---$1,330,004---30.6%
John E. Sununu (R) ---New Hampshire---$2,060,274---30.4%
Mike Enzi (R) ---Wyoming---$483,200---25.1%
Frank R. Lautenberg (D) ---New Jersey---$1,536,819---22.4%

----------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty sweet for Johnson, even after he rants about "CEO accountability."

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:09AM Oct 14, 2008 by College Republicans in Congress  |  Comments[0]

Obama's links to ACORN become clearer

The WSJ today published a scathing report about Barack Obama's ties to radical group ACORN

ACORN stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, and Obama has been heavily involved in ACORN activities for years.

Of course, ACORN has been caught registering false voters- felons, those still in prison, dead people, Mickey Mouse, and paying homeless- just to name a few.

You can find reports HERE, HERE, and HERE.

The Obama campaign is now distancing "The One" from ACORN, but the facts are clear. Obama was involved. We just need to know how much he knew about the illegal acts perpetrated by ACORN.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:43AM Oct 14, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[1]

Obama on his own proposal: "disastrous"

Today, Barack Obama rolled out a new proposal to deal with the financial crisis

The only problem is, Hillary Clinton had the idea before he did, and he called it "disastrous."

That's right, Barry, give 'em what they want to hear!

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 03:05PM Oct 13, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Krugman wins Nobel Prize

Paul Krugman has won the 2008 Nobel Prize in Economics

He won because of his analysis of trade theory, which was groundbreaking.

I just hope that those same critics of Milton Friedman, who separate his Nobel work from his political opinions, do the same for Krugman. He won for scientific papers, not his NYT column.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 10:22AM Oct 13, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[0]

The "carpetbagger" vs. the "native son"

I've heard the same line from many Nesselhuf supporters: "Higman is a 'carpetbagger.'" Simply, a carpetbagger is a person who moves to another geographic area to reap economic benefits.

There are a couple of reasons why that term is ridiculous when applied here:

1) The use of this term illustrates the fact that most Nesselhuf supporters are protectionist without knowing it. When they call Higman a "carpetbagger," they're essentially saying, "I don't like Higman because he came to South Dakota and is now prospering." That is protectionism in the first place and xenophobia in the second place. Most midwestern states, South Dakota included, are experiencing "brain drain." That is, the best and brightest are moving out of the midwest. So, when someone from out-of-state brings in a successful business and prospers, it should be applauded, not derided. Masaba has a $4 million payroll this year. That's an average of about $45,000 per year for each worker (of course, the actual salaries are different). This is not South Dakota money. Less than 1% of Higman's business is done in South Dakota. He is bringing in dollars from all corners of the US, helping make our little corner of South Dakota better for everyone.

Moreover, if Nesselhuf supporters wanted only native South Dakotans to prosper, our economic development would be terrible. Do Nesselhuf supporters want to build a wall around South Dakota? Around Clay County? Around Vermillion?

Nesselhuf's supporters' protectionist thinking is misguided and dangerous. Higman knows what national and international trade are. He deals with them on a daily basis. The closest Nesselhuf has come to them are in a classroom.

2) The Nesselhuf campaign recently sent out a mailing labeling Nesselhuf a "native son" or something akin to that. This is another xenophobic attack, implying that, because he's a native-born South Dakotan, that Nesselhuf is better-suited for the State Senate. So, I must ask him: What have you done? You've simply voted for bills that others wrote, then spinning wildly, said you got "special clearance" for them! There are only four years difference between you and Higman. He nurtured a small business into a multimillion dollar business and you took a decade to finish school.

It looks like the "carpetbagger" has done more for Vermillion than the "native son."

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:57AM Oct 13, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[0]

Against Obama? You're racist.

From Real Clear Politics

This is becoming a very strange campaign.

On CNN last evening both David Gergen and Ed Rollins echoed the current mantra that the "old" noble McCain is gone-and a "new" nastier one has emerged, largely because of his attacks on Ayers, perhaps his planned future ads on Wright, and a few unhinged people shouting at his campaign stops.

Recently Christopher Buckley endorsed Obama, likewise lamenting the loss of the old noble McCain. New York Times columnist David Brooks dubbed Palin a "cancer," and he suggested that Obama's instant recall of Niehbuhr sent a tingle up his leg as Obama once did to Chris Matthews as well.

A couple of thoughts: the George Bush, Sr. / Willie Horton campaign was far tougher; so were the Bush 2000/2004 efforts. If anything, McCain's campaign is subdued in comparison to what we've seen on both sides in past years. Indeed, McCain as a vicious campaigner is a complete fabrication, but, again, a brilliant subterfuge on the part of Team Obama that, in fact, has run, via appendages, the far more vicious race.

Obama and his surrogates have repeatedly engaged in racial politics (as Bill Clinton lamented when in fury he denounced the "race card"). When there was never evidence that McCain was using race as a wedge issue, it was clear Obama most surely was--preemptively, on at least two occasions--warning Americans he would soon be the victim of opposition racial stereotyping.

His surrogates like Biden and those in the Senate continue to link legitimate worries about Obama's past with racism. Second, for about 3 months all we've heard are references to McCain's age, with adjectives and phrases like confused, can't remember any more, disturbed, lost his bearings, etc.

Moreover, so far, McCain supporters have not broken into Biden's email, or accused Biden of being a Nazi, or accused anyone of not bearing one of their own children, or photo-shopped grotesque pictures of Obama on the Internet (as in the Atlantic magazine case). I don't think deranged McCain supporters in Hollywood or television almost daily are quoted as damning Obama in unusually crude terms. Nor are white racist ministers calling McCain a 'messiah' or McCain operatives fraudulently swarming voter registration centers. And on and on.

Instead I think what we are seeing again is an interesting phenomenon of the old nice/now mean McCain. A great many moderates and conservatives are worn out and tired of Bush and Bush hatred, the European furor, serial charges of racism and illiberalism, and finally, in their weariness, think that Obama will, in a variety of ways, just make all the ickiness go away-as if he will make all of us be liked abroad and end racial and red/blue fighting at home. They should ask themselves whether Jimmy Carter restored American popularity with his human rights campaigns, praise of left-wing dictators, dialogue during the hostage crisis (cf. "The Great Satan"), boasts of no more inordinate fear of communism, etc., or whether Obama, in his Trinity/Acorn/Pfleger years, brought racial healing and understanding to Chicago.

Second, with Obama now with an 6-8 point lead, some in the DC/NY corridor these last three weeks figure it's time now to jump or at least sort of jump, since the train they think is leaving the station and there might be still be some space at the dinner table on the caboose. They also believe as intellectuals that the similarly astute Obamians may on occasion inspire, or admire them as the like-minded who cultivate the life of the mind-in contrast to the "cancer" Sarah Palin, who, with her husband Todd, could hardly discuss Proust with them or could offer little if any sophisticated table-talk other than the proper chokes on shotguns or optimum RPMs on snow-machines.

And third, a lot of moderates who would not vote for McCain liked him when he was a sophisticated, ironic maverick loser scoring points against the simplistic Bush and other cardboard-cut-out conservatives. Now he has the onus of winning a campaign and can't be a noble, tragic loser; so it is easy to say he is no good since he is less than perfect. The sure iconoclastic loser has an attraction that the mainstream conservative possible winner does not.

Obama, as I have said ad nauseam, has brilliantly prepped the battlefield to such a degree that a Farrakhan endorsement or surrogates calling Palin a quasi-Nazi or a bimbo, or smearing McCain as near senile is irrelevant; yet one screamer in a crowd of tens of thousands is proof of McCain's and Palin's racism and hatred.

Again, most conservatives know this paradox, but for some being outraged, as the conservative voice of reason, at McCain's supposed low road ensures a CNN spot, or some future rehabilitation during the expected Obama regnum of the next eight years. I think should I write a column suddenly taking the "high road", praising Obama's wit, taste in books, and metrosexuality, I would be dubbed principled rather than cynical, 'even-handed' rather than self-serving, and a maverick rather than toadish.

Yet for a self-acclaimed conservative to vote Obama would mean that higher taxes, larger government, more entitlements, more of a UN-centered foreign policy, dialogue with an Iran, less coal,oil, and nuclear energy production at home, more "oppression" studies and "reparations", leftish Supreme Court judges, open borders (I could go on) were the truly conservative positions, or perhaps suddenly truly the 'right' positions. And as far as ethics go, in fact, a cursory review of the past Obama campaigns would reveal a ruthlessness never seen in any of McCain's efforts. Obama's record is far more left than McCain's is far right. Obama the healer has proven to be the most partisan in the Senate, McCain one of the most bipartisan.

Yet to believe that truth would be--if we remember that scene in Tolkien's The Two Towers--to trust the grating harsh voice of Gandalf detailing the dangers of Saruman rather than the mellifluous charm of the latter who in soothing tones outlines his own victimhood.

Posted at 12:40AM Oct 13, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Obama's 95% illusion

From today's Wall Street Journal

One of Barack Obama's most potent campaign claims is that he'll cut taxes for no less than 95% of "working families." He's even promising to cut taxes enough that the government's tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% -- which is lower than it is today.

It's a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he's also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of "tax cut."

For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase "tax credit." Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals:

- A $500 tax credit ($1,000 a couple) to "make work pay" that phases out at income of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 per couple.

- A $4,000 tax credit for college tuition.

- A 10% mortgage interest tax credit (on top of the existing mortgage interest deduction and other housing subsidies).

- A "savings" tax credit of 50% up to $1,000.

- An expansion of the earned-income tax credit that would allow single workers to receive as much as $555 a year, up from $175 now, and give these workers up to $1,110 if they are paying child support.

- A child care credit of 50% up to $6,000 of expenses a year.

- A "clean car" tax credit of up to $7,000 on the purchase of certain vehicles.

Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut.

The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.

The total annual expenditures on refundable "tax credits" would rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to $1.054 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center. This means that the tax-credit welfare state would soon cost four times actual cash welfare. By redefining such income payments as "tax credits," the Obama campaign also redefines them away as a tax share of GDP. Presto, the federal tax burden looks much smaller than it really is.

The political left defends "refundability" on grounds that these payments help to offset the payroll tax. And that was at least plausible when the only major refundable credit was the earned-income tax credit. Taken together, however, these tax credit payments would exceed payroll levies for most low-income workers.

It is also true that John McCain proposes a refundable tax credit -- his $5,000 to help individuals buy health insurance. We've written before that we prefer a tax deduction for individual health care, rather than a credit. But the big difference with Mr. Obama is that Mr. McCain's proposal replaces the tax subsidy for employer-sponsored health insurance that individuals don't now receive if they buy on their own. It merely changes the nature of the tax subsidy; it doesn't create a new one.

There's another catch: Because Mr. Obama's tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. The marginal tax rate refers to the rate on the next dollar of income earned. As the nearby chart illustrates, the marginal rate for millions of low- and middle-income workers would spike as they earn more income.

Some families with an income of $40,000 could lose up to 40 cents in vanishing credits for every additional dollar earned from working overtime or taking a new job. As public policy, this is contradictory. The tax credits are sold in the name of "making work pay," but in practice they can be a disincentive to working harder, especially if you're a lower-income couple getting raises of $1,000 or $2,000 a year. One mystery -- among many -- of the McCain campaign is why it has allowed Mr. Obama's 95% illusion to go unanswered.

Posted at 12:30AM Oct 13, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Liberal "tolerance"

Posted at 10:08PM Oct 12, 2008 by College Republicans in Republicans  |  Comments[0]

D-Days Update

Today, the College Republicans marched in the D-Days parade with Jerad Higman, Chris Lien, and Joel Dykstra. Many thinks to Dan Lederman for letting us use his truck and trailer! We had an army of volunteers for each candidate, throwing out many pounds of candy, stickers, t-shirts, frisbees, cups, and beads.

We had a massive caravan: the CR float, the Chris Lien van, the Higman truck and trailer, the Higman four wheelers, and a massive million-dollar rock crusher from Masaba. It was just another reminder of the amount of money that Higman's business brings into Vermillion, yet another reason that he's miles ahead of the competition (who, appropriately, had a pickup truck with a sign).

All-in-all, it was a fantastic day!

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 02:38AM Oct 12, 2008 by College Republicans in University of South Dakota  |  Comments[0]

Biden's spin

Hey Joe- What good is getting money for armor when you're pulling the troops out in the same bill?

Posted at 08:46PM Oct 02, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Palin owning on energy

Palin knows about energy and she's kicking the crap out of Biden's radical talking points.

She also caught him on badmouthing clean coal a few weeks ago.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:36PM Oct 02, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Roll over, Marx

It's no longer "redistribution of wealth." It's "fairness."

Thanks for the update, Joe.

Posted at 08:21PM Oct 02, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Biden's Lies

Biden is talking about deregulation, deregulation, deregulation, and how it's so bad.

The truth is, deregulation has nothing to do with the current financial "crisis."

He also fails to mention that government is the PROBLEM with the current high price of health care. If we added MORE regulation to our health care system, we would have nationalized health care.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:14PM Oct 02, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Teachers unions: politics over kids

I think I'll be a teacher. That way, I can spread my partisan agenda with no qualms from the teachers unions

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 08:02AM Oct 02, 2008 by College Republicans in Education  |  Comments[0]

If you want more than politics on the blog server

...post more.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 11:10PM Sep 29, 2008 by College Republicans in General  |  Comments[2]

Line of the night

"I agree with Senator McCain."

More to come.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:51PM Sep 26, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

NOW who's bringing politics into the financial "crisis?"

Mark Ambinder is reporting that Chris Dodd, another old, white-haired man, insinuated that John McCain caused a ruckus during yesterday's bigwig meeting about the bailout at the White House. But the truth is that McCain and the Republicans listened openly and calmly.
-----
Though Sen. Chris Dodd implied that Sen. McCain sandbagged the rest of the negotiators by bringing up alternative proposals, McCain himself did not bring up those proposals, according to four independent sources briefed by four different principals inside the meeting, including two Republicans and two Democrats.
-----
Even though I think the bailout is a terrible idea and a political stunt to begin with, the people who were crying about the evils of "presidential politics" in this process seem to be the ones who are INJECTING presidential politics into it themselves.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:11AM Sep 26, 2008 by College Republicans in Presidential Race 2008  |  Comments[0]

Private police forces?

This article about police force budget cuts says that in Palm Beach, police may stop responding to some calls due to lack of funds.

This got me thinking about remedies to the situation. If the budget can't be increased through cuts in other areas or by raising taxes (two things that are often undesirable), why not allow private police forces?

I'm not to familiar with the argument in favor of private police forces, so I Googled it and found this interesting article. I also found part of a longer article
:
-----
We tend to think of the police services as being provided by the government. Actually, in the USA there are more private police, security guards, etc., than there are governmental police. In a libertarian society, this trend would be accentuated. There is no agreement yet on whether a vestigial police force is necessary.
-----

This is a fascinating problem and I hope some discussion of private police forces is at least entertained by the powers-that-be.

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 09:22AM Sep 25, 2008 by College Republicans in Libertarianism  |  Comments[0]

Hypocrisy

Green idealists are most likely to take long flights.

-----
The research team questioned 200 people on their environmental attitudes and split them into three groups, based on a commitment to green living.

They found the longest and the most frequent flights were taken by those who were most aware of environmental issues, including the threat posed by climate change.
-----
HT: Drudge

-Matt Hittle

Posted at 11:18PM Sep 24, 2008 by College Republicans in Ridiculous!  |  Comments[0]