Archive for the ‘Campaign financing’ Category

Read ‘Em and Weep – By The Numbers

April 28, 2016

The following is worth pondering:

Obamacare became law in 2010 primarily to provide health insurance for 30 to 40 million uninsured (approximately 10 to 12% of the population). Today, 20 million are still uninsured, health insurance costs continue to rise, and a growing number of illegal immigrants are obtaining free health care.

It is estimated that 3.5% of the population is homosexual. Only .3% of the population identifies as transgender but there is a push to pass new restroom laws in order to make them feel comfortable. Little concern is evident for the comfort of the other 99.7%.

Concern also seems to be missing for the 8.4% who have a substance use disorder, the 47,000 who died (in 2014) from a drug overdose, or the hundreds of thousands of veterans who died waiting for applications for care to be processed.

There were 12,942 gun homicides in 2015. There are over a million abortions, 41,000 suicides, 47,000 opioid drug deaths, and 88,000 alcohol-related deaths each year.

1.2 million high school students drop out each year. Only 37% of high school seniors are academically prepared for college but 65% will enroll in college after graduating and over 20% of them will take remedial classes.

Everyone from President Obama and John Kerry to Rachel Maddow uses the 97% scientist consensus to validate global warming, a percentage proven to be totally bogus.

The government claims a 5% unemployment rate but that ignores 94 million able-bodied people who can work but choose not to work or have stopped looking for employment. 34% of all Americans financially support the rest of the country.

According to Homeland Security, 99% of illegal immigrants who overstay visas aren’t investigated.

The top 1% earners pay 23.6% of taxes, amounting to 33.7% of their income. An estimated 45.3 % of households pay no federal income taxes.

An estimated $6 “billion” was spent in the 2012 political campaigns when 126 million people voted. That works out to $47.60 spent per voter. Approximately 93 million eligible citizens did not vote.

David J. Hentosh

Strouse Toes the Line

October 29, 2014

Kevin Strouse, the challenger to incumbent Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick in Pennsylvania’s 8th District, spews Democrat Party talking points as well as a grade school student reciting a poem from memory. Not one word sounds like his and not one idea strays from the party line.

What else can be expected from a “carpetbagger” sent by Nancy Pelosi to make a run at Fitzpatrick? Moving to Bucks County from Washington for the sole purpose of challenging Fitzpatrick, Strouse can’t distance himself from the disastrous Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda like many other Democrat candidates. He must toe the Pelosi line.

Pelosi’s choice of Strouse to do her bidding is a transparent, and poor, strategy. John Kerry’s Vietnam veteran status was highly touted in his run for president to appeal to the public’s respect for the military. It failed miserably because the left’s distaste for the military and Kerry’s bashing of the military after coming back from Vietnam could not be hidden.

Strouse, too, is a veteran as was Patrick Murphy before him, and it is getting stale for the Dems to keep using military service as a qualifier for their candidates. It doesn’t work. Also, Strouse’s CIA experience may have been beneficial years ago but today there is too much distrust in government agencies, especially Obama administration intelligence agencies, for it to be any help.

If you want to know what Strouse is running on, listen to a Pelosi/Reid/Obama speech and get it straight from the horse’s mouth. It is definitely time for a change, but not in the 8th District where Fitzpatrick has shown the leadership, experience, and competency sadly lacking at the top. Change needs to come where the Obama rubber stamp rules the day. Vote wisely.

David J. Hentosh

Voter Ignorance

October 15, 2014

On the “Morning Joe” show, longtime NY Democrat Donny Deutsch said: “There is a psychological reason to go to Mitt Romney…We kind of made a mistake four years ago. We get to do a do-over. He was right about Syria, he was right about a lot of things.” This is much more than just voter remorse; it is an admittance of voter ignorance.

The “we” Deutsch refers to are those who wanted to make history rather than make sense and those who refused to believe that experience counts. It was just plain stupid to vote for someone who had absolutely no experience at anything. Voting for Obama the second time was little more than blind partisanship.

Far too many people are ignorant of the issues and end up casting votes based solely on single issues, party affiliation, or just appearance. In national elections, that is irresponsible and dangerous. Deutsch foolishly thinks he gets a “do-over”, but some of Obama’s “transformation” is not reversible and the damage already done will take years to repair.

Obama tells crowds exactly what they want to hear and he uses emotionally charged issues to rally support. Nationalizing health insurance (Obamacare) and bringing our troops home from Iraq were the two issues he focused on and negative consequences of both were ignored. Those consequences were predicted but ignored by voters and we are in turmoil because of it.

Democrats are now campaigning as if they never agreed with Obama’s failing policies, but they all did. Many voters are unaware of this duplicity but it is a major factor in November’s elections because if elected, many of those Democrats will shed their denial and continue with Obama’s failed policies.

Much is said about the right to vote but little is said about the responsibility that comes with it. Voters are responsible for understanding the issues and the candidates. Stay home if you can’t shoulder that responsibility rather than cast an ignorant vote. The future of our country depends on it.

David J. Hentosh

Obama’s Dangerous Campaigning

September 30, 2012

Obama’s prime occupation for the past year has been campaigning for re-election. Refusing to ask hard questions, the biased media has been a willing partner in Obama’s attempt to hide his failures in order to get re-elected. Rather than investigate the administration’s glaring missteps and blunders, the media has focused on finding fault with Romney while echoing administration spin. This obsession with re-election has become a danger to the country.

Afghanistan, Obama’s “right” war, is failing and the American death toll is approaching 2000 at a current rate of approximately one per day. That’s slightly less than half the toll from 8 years of the Iraq war, and neither Obama nor the press mentions it. This is a far cry from the nightly reports of war deaths during the Bush administration. Afghanistan, for Obama’s sake, has become a silent, hidden war – and it is failing.

The economy, a definite smear on the Obama administration, continues to be spun as “recovering” in spite of all data and statistics, and voters are being told Obama has saved us from disaster. One need only look around to see the fallacy in this, yet, the spin continues in the hope of repetition becoming fact in voters’ minds.

Perhaps the most dangerous failure of Obama has been on the international front. Iran sneers at Obama and is on the verge of having nuclear weapons. Recent embassy attacks and deaths have been determined to have been planned terrorist actions and the administration is still immersed in blaming them on a video clip. The cover-up is part of a re-election campaign considering danger to the country as irrelevant.

We have had an absentee president for the past year and it is taking a toll. There is no national budget, immigration reform has been ignored, the Middle East is exploding, the economy is failing, class warfare is raging, the race card is alive and well, “green” policies hamper economic recovery, the deficit is increasing, and the media has lost all credibility

Obama’s solution is fund-raising, appearances on “The View” and “David Letterman”, ignoring national leaders, cover-ups, Romney bashing, and empty rhetoric. Four more months of this kind of irresponsible neglect is frightening. Four more years would be disastrous.

David J. Hentosh

More on President Obama’s Foreign Campaign Financing Accusations

October 12, 2010

We started in on the shameless behavior of the president, vice president, and others in the administration concerning their accusations about supposed foreign campaign financing, even though they have no proof. (Dems New Vision for America: Guilty until Proven Innocent) and continued today (Ed Gillespie’s Response to Obama’s Foreign Campaign Financing Accusations). Here’s more:

From Rich Lowry on National Review Online:

When Barack Obama went to the 2004 Democratic convention, where he made a splash as a mere U.S. Senate candidate, he told a reporter: “I’m LeBron, baby. I can play at this level.”

If he has a modicum of self-awareness, when he reflects on his closing argument during this campaign he’ll tell himself: “I’m McCarthy, baby. I can play in the gutter.”

Read the rest here: Obama’s McCarthyite Moment

By the Editors at National Review Online:

They can’t run against Bush, but the Democrats seem desperate to try the next best thing. How else to explain their sudden resurrection of Karl Rove as a political hate figure? “Karl Rove is at it again,” House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers recently told a gathering of left-wing activists. Conyers continued: “While we were deciding what to do with him” — a reference to the fact that the Judiciary Committee under Conyers has hounded Rove for years, fruitlessly, over picayune matters — “he was out doing more mischief. And so I think that calls for a reinvestigation of him.”

This is ridiculous. Rove’s alleged sin this time is to have acted as an adviser to American Crossroads and its sister group, Crossroads GPS (which stands for Grassroots Political Strategies). Democratic officials, liberal good-government groups, and even the Obama White House have accused Crossroads GPS of abusing its tax-exempt status to protect the identities of donors while engaging in prohibited campaign-finance activities. While American Crossroads is a 527 political-advocacy group and must disclose the identities of its donors, Crossroads GPS is a 501(c)(4) group, so it is not required to disclose the sources of its contributions.

Read the rest here: Demonizing Karl Rove

Michael Barone at the Washington Examiner:

Glenn Reynolds nails this one: the Obama Democrats’ campaign riff against foreign donations to Democrats is bogus—and according to the New York Times, no less. This looks like a matter of projection, since it’s well documented that the 2008 Obama campaign did not put in place address verification software that would have routinely prevented most foreign donations. In effect they were encouraging donations by foreign nationals. Here’s the Washington Post on this back in October 2008:

Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged.”

Read the rest here: Pot Calls Kettle…


We have stated on many occasions in the past that union bosses are in control of the federal government and that today’s Democrats are merely a bunch of puppets doing (or attempting to do) labor’s bidding—a de facto Labor Party.  For the latest example, one only need to look as far as the controversy the White House and DNC have stirred up. The demonization of the Chamber of Commerce, accusing the federation of ‘taking foreign donations’ to ’steal our Democracy,’ is but the latest attack in a multi-year campaign to destroy the federation.

This latest round, though, is an attack that is without foundation and one that has many people aghast at the false charges.

Read the rest here: Think Bigger: What’s Really Behind Democrats’ Attacks on the Chamber of Commerce

We call on the President, the Vice President, others in the administration who have made similar accusations (such as David Axelrod) to provide proof.

Ed Gillespie’s Response to Obama’s Foreign Campaign Financing Accusations

October 12, 2010

From the Washington Post, by Ed Gillespie:

Democrats’ Desperation Tactics on Campaign Finance

In their latest attempt to distract voters from their job-killing policies, President Obama, his White House and senior Democrats in Congress have added to their long list of bogeymen the outside groups that seek to help elect Republicans in November. They threaten congressional investigations, discuss private tax information and level baseless accusations of criminal activity against those who have been public in seeking to defeat Democratic candidates and their liberal agenda. Without a trace of irony, powerful Democratic officeholders lament that many who support these groups wish to remain anonymous.

None of these Democrats expressed concern about such outside spending in 2008, when more than $400 million was spent to help elect Barack Obama, much of it from undisclosed donors. The liberal groups and Democrats who supported the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which established the legal framework for this new campaign spending, were much faster to adapt to its contours than the Republicans and conservative groups that largely opposed it, and liberal outside groups massively outspent Republicans in the past two election cycles.

Read the rest here: Democrats’ Desperation Tactics on Campaign Finance

Dems New Vision for America: Guilty until Proven Innocent

October 11, 2010

The object of President Obama’s ire this week is Republican fundraisers, specifically The Chamber of Commerce, Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie.

In comments that indicate the Democrats’ desperation, President Obama accused Republicans of getting secret donations to fund campaign advertising.

The Democrats have offered no evidence that any of them are using foreign money influence elections, but instead, want them to disprove the assertions. (Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? In this case, the Dems think you’re guilty until you can prove you’re innocent. )

Understand that a number of groups contributing to liberal causes (think, unions, and Center for American Progress) don’t reveal their donors and fund lots of political ads. Apparently the President isn’t worried about that.

The long and short of the Dems–and sadly, the President’s–strategy for this election is to throw lots of crap at the wall and see what sticks.

Here’s the story from, of all places, the New York Times.  Obama Ratchets Up Tone Against GOP.

Perhaps not so coincidentally, there’s this from earlier last week in the Washington Post:

A lawyer for the Republican National Committee today said the party will ask the Federal Election Commission to look into the source of thousands of small-dollar contributions to the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama.

The RNC is alleging that the Obama campaign was so hungry for donations it “looked the other way” as contributions piled up from suspicious, and possibly even illegal foreign donors.

“We believe that the American people should know first and foremost if foreign money is pouring into a presidential election,” said RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross.

Cairncross alleged there was mounting evidence of this, and cited a report in the current issue of Newsweek magazine that documents a handful of instances where donors made repeated small donations using fake names, such as “Good Will” and “Doodad Pro.”

Read the rest here: RNC to File FEC Complaint on Obama Fundraising Practices.

How sad Obama is reducing the office of the presidency to political flamethrower. Has he no shame?

**Updated:  And then there’s this:  Foreign Money? Really? Democrats Peddle an Unproven Claim. From  Ouch!


Donations to PA 8th Candidates

May 3, 2010

From today’s Intelligencer.

When Fred Beans, one of the area’s top businessmen, writes a check for a political candidate, that lawmaker typically has been a Republican.

Jim Greenwood, Jon Fox, the Republican National Committee, and back in his GOP days, Arlen Specter, have benefited from Beans’ largesse.

That changed last month when the head of the Fred Beans Automotive Group and his wife, Gisela, each wrote a $2,300 check to Patrick Murphy for Congress. That’s the same amount Beans gave to Murphy’s 2008 Republican opponent, Tom Manion.

Murphy, the two-term Democrat, provided assistance to Beans’ dealerships during General Motors’ bankruptcy.

“Murphy has been working hard to keep jobs in Pennsylvania,” Beans said last week. “He’s been supportive of (car) dealers that lost franchises. I feel like he’s listened to our concerns.”

Beans, who employs 1,500 people, may not be as keen with Murphy over health care reform. Saying the 2,700 page “health care program is a killer for us,” he wondered why there couldn’t be a “20-page condensed version.”

Asked if he would vote for Murphy, Beans said, “Today? Probably. I feel like I probably would.”

The Beans’ donations were listed by the Federal Election Commission as part of candidate reports filed last month for first quarter 2010 campaign contributions.

Mike Fitzpatrick, seeking to win the Republican nomination and challenge Murphy, also had the Beans as benefactors. Gisela gave him $500 and Fred $250.

But the former congressman really cashed in on his promise to lead the fight to repeal the recently passed health care legislation.

Read the rest here.

Murphy’s Timing Brings Embarrassment

March 4, 2010

A recent Bucks County Courier Times article ( was very enlightening concerning the National Taxpayers Union’s (NTU) annual rating of Congress. The rating is based on the fiscal responsibility to taxpayers that lawmakers display through their voting record. Congressman Patrick Murphy (D-PA) received an 8% rating which is an “F” grade, thereby, labeling him as a heavy spender.

Although 267 other senators and representatives received an “F” grade, Murphy’s failing grade comes on the heels of his boasting last week about the NTU’s endorsement of his plan to end the Market Access Program and last December’s boasting about the NTU’s endorsement of a bill he was backing. Consequently, this recent rating has to be an embarrassment to Murphy and one can expect he will no longer cite the NTU.

Also embarrassing to Murphy is the $19,000 that Charles Rangel (D-NY) donated to Murphy’s campaign efforts ( Rangel has just been forced to step down as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee because of ethics violations ( Murphy’s spokeswoman refused to say whether Murphy would return that money but did say that Murphy made a decision in early 2009 to refuse any more donations from Rangel. That seems a little too convenient and makes one wonder if that decision was communicated to anyone outside of his office before now.

It is also convenient that Murphy publically called for Rangel to step down as chairman at almost the exact time that Rangel announced he was doing so ( The timing of Murphy’s statement could very well be a coincidence, but there are many who do not believe in coincidences and, therefore, look askance at the timing of that announcement.

As long as Murphy continues to blindly follow a party line and ingratiate himself with party leaders, he will find himself in situations that require embarrassing spin and backpedaling. That can quickly become very tiresome, both for Murphy and for voters.

David J. Hentosh

Patrick Murphy, Congressman to the Stars?

October 18, 2009

In today’s (Sunday, Oct. 18) Doylestown Intelligencer, an article (Money Pours in to Murphy) suggests that Patrick Murphy’s campaign is raising a ton of money.  According to the article, he’s raised $325,000 in the quarter ending Sept. 30, which makes his total for the year almost $1.2 million.   Only one PA candidate raised more money than Murphy: 12th district Republican candidate William Russell, who’s running against Murphy mentor John Murtha.

The more interesting part of the article points out how much money Murphy is raising outside of Pennsylvania.  The Intel reports that actress Felicity Huffman has donated $2500 to Murphy, apparently not her first contribution.  Laurie David, former wife of the Seinfeld creator, contributed $2000.

According to Center for Responsive Politics, Murphy is eighth of the 435 members of the House of Representatives in receiving money from out-of-state contributors.  (He’s received $193,099, which is 36% of his total.)  This means that Murphy received more than a third of his donations from people he doesn’t represent.

By the way, Joe Sestak follows him at ninth in the house with $191,718 (29.6% of his total.)  And Arlen Specter is fourth in the Senate at pulling money from outside the state, with almost 45% coming from outside of Pennsylvania.

Even more interesting, Murphy received $64,000 just from the Chicago area.

My question is, why are people in Hollywood—and Chicago, of all the ironies—so supportive of our local representative?  What is he doing that is appealing to those on the left coast and those from the hotbed of political heavy-handedness?

I don’t know the answer, but I can tell you this:  Whatever the attraction of people in Hollywood and Chicago to Murphy, it likely isn’t in our local—or the country’s—best interests.