Bluey Blog - Official Blog of Robert B. Bluey

John McCain’s $#@%$#@ Temper

John McCain has a temper. It’s well known to anyone who has worked on Capitol Hill, either as a staffer or in the press corps. As a former Capitol Hill reporter myself, I know there are stories that have never been reported about McCain’s temper. So far, though, McCain’s outbursts haven’t generated much attention on the campaign trail.

Therefore, it’s not all that surprising to read Mitt Romney’s top 10 list of the McCain’s profanity-laced tirades against fellow Republicans during his tenure in Congress. I knew this would come up, but I never figured it would be in the form of a press release from a Republican campaign.

1. Defending His Amnesty Bill, Sen. McCain Lost His Temper And “Screamed, ‘F*ck You!’ At Texas Sen. John Cornyn” (R-TX). “Presidential hopeful John McCain - who has been dogged for years by questions about his volcanic temper - erupted in an angry, profanity-laced tirade at a fellow Republican senator, sources told The Post yesterday. In a heated dispute over immigration-law overhaul, McCain screamed, ‘F— you!’ at Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who had been raising concerns about the legislation. ‘This is chickens—stuff,’ McCain snapped at Cornyn, according to several people in the room off the Senate floor Thursday. ‘You’ve always been against this bill, and you’re just trying to derail it.’” (Charles Hurt, “Raising McCain,” New York Post, 5/19/07)

This shows not only the desperation of Romney, but also why McCain needs to confront this problem. Oddly enough, Romney is doing McCain a favor by raising the matter now rather than letting the eventual Democrat nominee leak stories to the press corps during the general election, assuming McCain is the nominee. Contrast an angry McCain to a cheery Barack Obama, and this becomes a huge factor.

UPDATE — Jan. 10, 3:56 p.m.: Yesterday I learned that Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum featured this blog post on her show Sunday. Video of the segment is available on YouTube.

New Year’s Resolution for Republicans: End Earmarks

Earmarks were supposed to be a thing of the past for Republicans after allegations of corruption cost the GOP control of Congress in 2006. Throughout 2007, Republicans acknowledged repeatedly that straying from principles had hurt them dearly. But changing their profligate ways proved difficult: Just 14 Senate Republicans voted against the pork-laden omnibus spending bill this month.

With 2008 on the horizon and President Bush heading into the final year of his presidency, I write on Townhall about the one New Year’s resolution all Republicans ought to make: Shut down the favor factory that churns out earmarks.

Democrats Cut Union Watchdog’s Budget

A few months ago I told you about the Democrats’ attempt to cut the budget of the Office of Labor Management Standards, the federal government’s union watchdog. After recouping more than $100 million for American workers during the first six years of the Bush Administration, the office came under attack from union bigwigs this year.

Unions were as responsible as just about anyone for the shift in power on Capitol Hill, filling the Democrats’ campaign coffers with cash in 2006. Now they’re using their power as a way to undo the good work of the one government office that protects dues-paying union workers.

The mammoth $555-billion omnibus spending bill, which won approval in Congress last week, cuts the office’s budget by nearly $3 million, but it doesn’t do all the damage Big Labor had hoped for. You can read this week’s Townhall column to find out what I mean.

The Great Omnibusting Experiment

Why have I been neglecting my blog? There’s a good explanation. Trust me.

The past few days — ever since Friday afternoon, actually — I’ve been building and then writing for Heritage’s Omnibusting blog. I apologize for not letting my readers know in advance, but with so much to do and so little time to do it, I dropped the ball.

The good news is that the Omnibusting experiment is turning out to be a great success. We launched Omnibusting with the goal of shining sunlight on the awful omnibus spending bill that Democrats introduced in the wee hours of Monday morning. We have a great team at Heritage combing through the bill and collecting tips from our allies on Capitol Hill and in the conservative movement.

The blog itself is nothing fancy — just a WordPress-powered site with a standard theme that I customized for our purposes. But it’s been much more popular than I ever imagined, drawing links from high-trafficked blogs such as Instapundit, The Corner, Townhall, Michelle Malkin, Captain’s Quarters, Reason and Ace of Spades. Jackie Kucinich of The Hill even included it in a story.

Of course, if only we had more time to dig through the bill, then maybe we’d have a chance at scuttling it.

UPDATE — 5:57 p.m.: I can’t believe I forgot to mention the coolest things we’ve done at Heritage for the omnibus. With the help of Rob Neppell of Porkbuster, we’re featuring a searchable and linkable version of the bill. Because the House made it available only as a PDF, Rob’s handiwork gives bloggers the ability to link to specific pages.

Obey Follows DeMint’s Advice on Omnibus

Just one week ago Sen. Jim DeMint was struggling to get fellow Republicans to follow his advice on federal spending. But today it seems DeMint’s idea about how to solve the budget stalemate on Capitol Hill is picking up steam — including from the most unlikely person, House Appropriations Chairman Dave Obey.

When Obey announced yesterday that he wouldn’t bring to the House floor a mammoth omnibus spending bill because it included funding for troops and thousands of earmarks, the liberal Wisconsin Democrat sounded like he was reading from a script written by DeMint.

I want no linkage whatsoever between domestic and the war. I want the war to be dealt with totally on its own. We shouldn’t be trading off domestic priorities for the war.

Switch the order of the words in the last sentence, and that’s exactly the message DeMint delivered a week ago at the Heritage Foundation. At the time, it appeared DeMint would struggle to convince his own leadership about the importance of not taking the Democrats’ bait and voting for the combination of a mammoth omnibus and troop funding bill. Such an approach would have escalated the number of earmarks by 10,000 or more.

Comments from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell last week suggesting the GOP would cave on the spending fight raised alarm among fiscal conservatives and inspired a harsh column from Robert Novak about McConnell’s penchant for pork. In an attempt to get back in the good graces of conservatives, McConnell has said repeatedly this week that he’s standing with President Bush and House Minority Leader John Boehner on this one. An e-mail circulated by McConnell’s staff put it bluntly:

Contrary to some reports and speculation, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell agrees with House Republican Leader John Boehner and President Bush that the Democrats’ funding deal that was reported over the weekend is unacceptable.

As I wrote on Sunday for Townhall, there’s no reason McConnell shouldn’t be pushing for a continuing resolution instead of an omnibus, saving taxpayers an estimated $31 billion. With Obey unwilling to go along with his leadership to end the budget stalemate, it’s a battle the GOP should be ready to fight.

Questions That Raise Questions

After taking last week off for Thanksgiving, my column is back at Townhall. There was plenty to write about regarding the CNN/YouTube debate.

On that note, RedState and Human Events are proposing a do-over debate. Meanwhile, YouTube’s Steve Grove is inviting you to voice your opinion about the debate.

What to Expect at the CNN/YouTube Debate

I’m blogging from St. Petersburg, Fla., today in advance of tonight’s Republican debate, which is being hosted by the Republican Party of Florida, CNN and YouTube at the Progress Energy Center’s Mahaffey Theater. The debate’s unique format — the candidates will be asked questions submitted via YouTube — offers the GOP an opportunity to reach a younger audience.

After balking at the opportunity to participate in such a debate this summer, the Republican candidates gave into pressure from conservative bloggers, led by Patrick Ruffini and David All. Nearly 5,000 video questions were submitted to YouTube, and judging from the number asked at the Democratic debate in July, we can expect to see about 40 tonight.

YouTube encouraged bloggers to trek to St. Petersburg to watch it firsthand. A select number of us will take part in a lunch discussion about YouTube’s impact on politics, featuring a handful of video bloggers who submitted questions for tonight’s debate. Later in the day, Mary Katharine Ham of Townhall will join Patrick, David and me to offer commentary and analysis. Stay tuned for updates. The debate runs from 8-10 p.m. on CNN.

So what should you expect to see tonight? Nikki Schwab of U.S. News & World Report has a good article in which yours truly is quoted. I also talked about it on yesterday’s POTUS ‘08 show on XM Radio with my Heritage Foundation colleagues Brian Darling and Heath Hall. (Click here to listen.) In general, I suspect CNN has gone to great lengths to narrow down the questions in a way that’s fair and balanced. Even so, not everyone will be pleased by what’s asked and what’s omitted. That being said, I think it’s safe to say we’ll see a good combination of serious policy-based questions (like this one on net neutrality asked by MelissaJenna) and humorous skits meant to make us laugh.

Yesterday during his visit to the Heritage Foundation’s Conservative Bloggers’ Briefing, I cornered Media Research Center President Brent Bozell to get his thoughts. I’ve posted it on YouTube (where else?) for your viewing pleasure.

Tech Talk on Heritage’s POTUS ‘08 Show

Heritage’s show on XM Radio’s POTUS ‘08 channel is now posted on our website if you’d like to listen. I make my appearance at 53 minutes into the show. We cover the viral nature of Mike Huckabee’s ad with actor Chuck Norris, Newsweek’s decision to hire liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos, and MTV and MySpace’s event with John McCain on Dec. 3 at 7 p.m. Our regular host Ernest Istook is in China, so Peter Brookes handled the duties today.

The Role of Reagan in 2008 and Beyond

When a group of conservative members of Congress led by Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. Jeb Hensarling launched a new group named after former President Ronald Reagan, probably the last thing they expected was to hear criticism from their friends on the right. But that’s exactly what happened shortly after the formation of the Reagan21 caucus.

Two young conservatives, Patrick Ruffini and Erick Erickson, were quoted in The Hill last week voicing their complaints. Patrick’s were focused on the lack of a web strategy for Reagan21 (it still doesn’t have a website), but Erick’s addressed a more touchy subject.

“I think the intentions are good, but I seem to remember Reagan being dead,” stated Erick Erickson, editor of RedState.org. “Basically, what it says is ‘We’re completely unoriginal and uninspired, so let’s go back to the old playbook.’”

Erickson stressed the principles behind the group are sound: “I think their heart is in the right place … but they need to re-brand.”

I’m glad Erick is in good standing with the vast right-wing conspiracy because any negative talk about Reagan can usually get you run out of the movement. But what Erick had to say is actually good point that many young conservatives are trying to express — just perhaps a little more politely.

It’s interesting that this debate is taking place now, just months before voters will pick the Republican nominee for president. All of the candidates are doing their best to convince voters they’re the second coming of Reagan, but no one has come close to sealing the deal.

Krissah Williams writes in today’s Washington Post about Reagan’s impact on young conservatives — albeit some of the most politically active students on the planet. I’m quoted in the piece along with my Heritage Foundation colleague Lee Edwards.

While I was asked specifically about the 2008 race and why no candidate can truly say he embodies all the characteristics of Reagan, Lee shares an important point that older conservatives need to remember about us enthusiastic youngsters.

“They are somewhat like so many other, more senior conservatives — a little disillusioned right now,” said Lee Edwards, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation. “To quote Reagan: ‘What we need is a party of bold colors, not pale pastels.’ Young people love bold colors, God bless them.”

Lee is absolutely correct. We do love bold colors. We also love Reagan. But as Erick expressed in the context of Reagan21, we also don’t identify with Reagan the same way as DeMint and Hensarling’s generation. I’m a huge Reagan fan, but I was only 9 years old when he left office.

At a time when fewer young people are identifying themselves as conservatives or Republicans, I think this conflict threatens to do significant damage to the movement in 2008 and the years to come if we don’t find a way to appeal to conservatives who are both young and old. Clearly there’s a place for Reagan, but I’d argue that we should focus less on his image and put a greater emphasis on his principles.

More Praise for Clarence Thomas

Last Monday I was able to hear Clarence Thomas speak to The Heritage Foundation’s President’s Club at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington. (I posted the video last week.) It was an uplifting speech that inspired me to write this column for Townhall about his positive attitude, sound advice and commitment to principles.