Questions to ponder...

This one was passed to me by Mom! As my friend/colleague Larry Johnson (proprietor of the noted blog, No Quarter), "Way to go mom." (And as Mr. Johnson notes, "If anyone has the original link, let me know, we want to credit the originator.")

--If George W. Bush had proposed to double the debt within 10 years, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had criticized a state law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?

--If George W. Bush joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in the United States to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on?

--If George W. Bush had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one company had an accident would you have agreed?

--If George W. Bush had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87,000 American workers unemployed would you support him?

--If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a TelePrompTer installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

--If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

--If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

--If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

--If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States, would you have said that he is clueless.

--If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas, would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

--If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

--If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is?

--If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

--If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

--If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans (due to Katrina), would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

--If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved.

--If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

--If this these incidents did not occur under George W. Bush's watch, I wonder who was at the helm when they did...?

Meg vs. the Attention-Hungry Ambulance Chaser...

How do you handle a problem like Nicandra?

Sure, it's a cheap play on the old "Sound of Music" number, but things could have been much worse for Meg Whitman today when legal beagle/(insert derogatory adjectives here) Gloria Allred trotted out Whitman's former housekeeper...who just happens to be an illegal alien.

According to the Los Angeles Times, "Flanked by attorney Gloria Allred, former Whitman employee Nicandra Diaz made the accusations at a tearful Los Angeles press conference Wednesday. Diaz said she asked Whitman for help with her immigration status in 2009 and Whitman refused. 'I felt like she was throwing me away like a piece of garbage,' Diaz said."

Gloria Allred: she never met a camera she didn't like...(photo: rybanz.blogspot.com)

Ben Smith at Politico observes, "Allred said her client 'alleges that Ms. Whitman was aware of her status.' She provided no direct evidence for that but suggested Whitman should have known because of the nanny's references to her inability to travel outside the country and by alleged letters from the Social Security Administration reporting that her social security number did not match her name. Her employment and firing were a 'nightmare' said Allred, who cast the case in the most politically inflammatory terms possible, and said her client had been 'exploited, disrespected, humiliated, and emotionally and financially abused' and that she was filing a claim in state court for damages included unreimbursed mileage on the nanny's car. Allred then coached the nanny through a tearful press conference in which she recounted an argument between Whitman and her husband when they learned that she was in the country illegally, in which -- she claimed -- Whitman said the family was 'at fault' because they 'never asked' if she was in the country legally. 'I hope no one else has to suffer the way that I did,' she said. 'She treated me as if I was not a human being.'"

Below is video from an impromptu Q&A Whitman had following an appearance at Cisco today. (h/t: Shaky Hand Productions/SF Gate). The former eBay CEO does a credible - and very humane - job of explaining what happened.

From Politico: "Whitman said in a statement that she's 'worried' about Diaz and that she is being 'manipulated' by Allred. 'Nicky told me that she was admitting her deception now because she was aware that her lie might come out during the campaign. Nicky said she was concerned about hurting my family and me,' Whitman said. 'As required by law, once we learned she was an illegal worker, I immediately terminated Nicky’s employment. It was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done. I considered Nicky a friend and a part of our extended family.'"

The GOP/Whitman mailer on illegal immigration: Dems were hoping to hit an artery today...

Considering Whitman's quick, clear and strong denial of wrongdoing, it doesn't seem that this episode is likely to cut into her efforts. If anything - if what she asserts is true - it could even show that she "walks the walk." As Whitman and her team noted, the timing of Allred's allegations were suspicious. Any bets on who Allred works for? Who she's voting for?

Back to the original question: How do you handle a problem like Nicandra? Exactly the way Meg Whitman did today...

Whitman vs. Brown: Debate No. 1...

Tonight's early scorecard from the Whitman vs. Brown gubernatorial debate...

Overall, I score Meg the winner.

Neither one scored a decisive blow/knockout...tough for either to maximize their answers - or their opponent's - in the campaign.

Brown was much more energetic (someone cut off that guy's coffee intake, please) and Whitman came out of the box sounding like she was over-rehearsed.

There were 10 questions plus a closing statement (1 hr.)...

Round by round scoring, courtesy of this ringside judge...

1 - Budget: Brown
2 - Death penalty/crime: Whitman
3 - Jobs: Whitman
4- Public employee pensions/unions: Whitman
5- Experience: SPLIT
6 - Holding the line on cuts/funding for higher education: SPLIT
7- Campaign ads (misleading?): SPLIT
8- Immigration: BROWN
9 - Campaign funding (self vs. special interests): Whitman
10- Water: Whitman
CLOSING: Whitman

My scorecard: Whitman 4, plus closing; Brown 2; SPLIT 4.

The event, held at UC Davis (not far from Sacramento), was staffed by Sacto area media. The questioning was pretty predictable and weak. At least one question was a direct jab at Whitman.

Both had funny lines. Brown, taken to task by Whitman for his own stake in the state's pension system, said that his longevity (which precludes him tapping into it until he "retires") was a plus...joking that he's "best pension buy California's ever had" since if he wins, he won't collect till 76..or even into his 80s. Whitman's most memorable line: "Putting Brown in charge of pension reform like letting Dracula run blood bank."

Two more debates to go...

Keeping an eye on the candidates...

Heavyweight bout: In this corner, GOP challenger Meg Whitman, and in the other Gov. Moonbeam... (photo: Fresno Bee)

Tonight on the John Batchelor Show, I’ll give a quick rundown on the California gubernatorial debate between Meg Whitman (D) and Jerry Brown (D). If you don’t already know, Whitman is the former CEO of eBay (who has “invested” more than $120 million of her own money into her campaign), and Brown is the former two-term governor, three-time Democratic presidential primaries candidate, and current state attorney general. The debate, the first of three scheduled meetings between the two candidates, will be held at UC Davis. The “festivities” are scheduled to kick off at 6 p.m. PDT

According to the Los Angeles Times, “Each side has been actively trying to lower expectations for their candidate's performance Tuesday night. Whitman's campaign has pointed to Brown's debate experience dating back to his days on the debate team at St. Ignatius high school in San Francisco. ‘Jerry proved his oratorical abilities by winning the Freshman Elocution and Sophomore Oratorical contests, being chosen on the Silver and Gold Medal Debates,’ reads the text under his yearbook photo. Whitman's only debates were during the Republican primary against Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner.”

Jerry Brown, from the 1955 St. Ignatius high school yearbook (via LA Times)...

Most experts aren't expecting much - neither one is stellar when it comes to public oratory (these days) and both are in desperate need of charisma. One wrong word, stumble or major inaccuracy, however, could come back to haunt the candidate. The media will be, of course, looking to pounce on whomever goes off-script or can't handle the line of questioning. But since most of these affairs run according to note, little is likely to be accomplished tonight...

I’ll be on the John Batchelor Show at 9:50 p.m. PDT. Check the show's website or local listings for details...

I hope to see you there!

Color him Rahm?

Rahm Emanuel...

According to ABC News, “White House officials are preparing for Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to announce on Friday -- as Congress adjourns for recess -- that he is leaving his post to explore a run for mayor of Chicago.”

This comes as no surprise and rumors regarding Emanuel’s desire to be Boss Chicago have been floating for months. “Longtime Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley's announcement earlier this month that he would not seek reelection created the opportunity that Emanuel has long been seeking,” the ABC report adds.

As the report points out, there is a great deal of wonder if this is more than typical mid-term burnout – perhaps “a larger shakeup?”

“Emanuel's departure is just of many departures the White House has faced recently, including many from the president's economic team. Last week the White House announced that National Economic Council director Larry Summers is expected to leave the administration after the mid-term elections. Earlier this month Christina Romer resigned as the chairwoman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors. And Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orzsag resigned over the summer as well,” ABC reports. (Anita Dunn, the first communications director, and Desiree Rogers, the social secretary, also resigned.)

Just the latest...

Again, it’s not unusual for administration employees to leave after a year or two – whether it’s to start collecting as lobbyists or members of corporate boards, or because they’re just plain fatigued – but it was atypical to have seen such a large segment (the economic team) leave within months of each other. Of course, these are tough times for the economy and there is a sense the president needs fresh eyes on the game.

If you listen to responses from the White House, Team Obama has been making every effort to convince the media – and voters – that there’s any meaning to all of these departures. The timing is purely coincidental, right?

"I think there's no doubt that there will be people that return to their lives and their families," White House Press Sec. Robert Gibbs told ABC, saying the current raft of resignations was the typical kind of turnover that occurs within presidential administrations. "But we've got a while before that. We've got at least two months before this election -- or about two months before this election before we get to a lot of those decisions."

But back to Emanuel.

According to Emanuel’s hometown paper, The Chicago Tribune, the foul-mouthed, aggressive “former veteran Democratic strategist and fundraiser who served three terms in the U.S. House after helping elect Mayor Richard Daley and former President Bill Clinton, made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint [on the board] at Freddie Mac that required little effort.” (This is the same Freddie Mac whose “portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the current housing crisis” and helped drag down the economy.) “The Freddie Mac money was a small piece of the $16 million he made in a three-year interlude as an investment banker a decade ago,” the paper adds.

There’s little doubt that Emanuel, like his fellow departed are poised to clean up – again.

Orzsag, Romer and Summers will soon be cleaning up on the lecture circuit, with book deals, at think tanks and in academia (again). Emanuel, however, will outdo them all – exceeding the absolute power (in some ways) that his soon-to-be ex-boss is able to wield.

Soon, El Rahm will be the Head Honcho of Chicagoland: the Duchy of Daley; the Kingdom of Capone; and now the Empire of Emanuel.

To the victor – the lucky escapee – go the spoils.

Send in the clowns...

Clown college...

(photo by source)

Comedian Stephen Colbert (at table on right) prepares to "testify" before Congress...

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), not on many folks' "Top 10 Brightest Bulbs in Congress" lists, upped her game yesterday - and challenged others in Congress to do likewise - when she invited television comedian Stephen Colbert to testify on immigration issues yesterday.

Playing to a packed hearing room and a gaggle of cameras, Colbert yucked it up in the dry, deadpan character he plays on his Comedy Central show, "The Colbert Report." Republican committee members tried to quash his appearance, saying the comedian had no expertise (outside of comedy) and his testimony was essentially "worthless" and "a waste of time." The Democrats on the panel followed Lofgren's lead and pushed for Colbert's performance. (Some reports have put the costs associated with the comic's "hearing" at approximately $100,000.)

According to an Associated Press report, "House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers praised Colbert for drawing a roomful of onlookers and photographers. Then he asked the comedian to leave the room — and to leave the job of testifying to the expert witnesses, including Farm Workers President Arturo Rodriguez. 'You run your show, we run the committee,' said Conyers, D-Mich. There was some grumbling from some lawmakers about Colbert testifying in character — an unusual approach although not unprecedented. After all, lawmakers once heard testimony from the 'Sesame Street' puppet Elmo. Congressional committees frequently invite entertainment or sports personalities to testify on specific issues in an attempt to draw media attention. Colbert has no background or expertise in either farm labor issues or immigration policy. Colbert said he was there at the invitation of subcommittee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. And Conyers later gave him the go-ahead, apparently hoping Colbert's performance would counter the testimony of a political science professor who said illegal immigrants were competing with black and Hispanic citizens for jobs. Colbert's humor drew guffaws from the audience and several Democrats on the subcommittee. But most of the Republicans sat stone-faced."

I spoke with a member of the media who was present in the room during the comedian's "set." His view was that while Colbert didn't really bring anything meaningful to the debate over illegal immigration, "[Colbert] was hysterical. I laughed my ass off...(unlike most of the hearing room). That being said, I really don't know what was gained by Dems inviting a comedian to a Congressional hearing."

My guess: a little comic relief...

Late add: Commentary's John Podhoretz nails it - "This may have been the single biggest pointless blunder in American political history, and I am not kidding. With an election only five weeks from now in which Democrats are poised for major losses, this morning’s depiction of Congress as ludicrous dupes of a TV personality — which will be replayed for weeks — will make the analogistic point that the majority is unfit to be running things. How exactly will they argue otherwise? Did Colbert himself understand the damage he was going to do to the political and ideological forces he clearly supports by mocking the political process they control in this way?," Podhoretz adds. "Is he, secretly, more O’Reilly than O’Reilly? Whatever is the case, the disaster was predictable and could have been avoided. I know, because I predicted it. What I didn’t predict is that the House leadership and the Democratic leadership generally are in such a state of degeneration that they didn’t know, or didn’t try, to intervene before this political Jonestown. UPDATE: Oh my Lord. Speaker of the House Margaret Dumont Nancy Pelosi has defended Colbert’s appearance: 'He’s an American. He has a point of view.'”

Even later add...Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the House Majority leader, summed up Colbert's appearance this way: ""I think it was an embarrassment for Mr. Colbert more than the House," the Maryland politician said on "Fox News Sunday.""What he had to say was not the way it should have been said," Hoyer added, calling the performance, "not appropriate."

The ad they've been waiting for...

You could hear the bells going off as soon as she said it...

On June 16, 2009, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) replied to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh's courtesy reply of "yes, ma'am," with an outburst that raised more than a few eyebrows. Since then, in e-mails and via call-ins on numerous media appearances, I've heard from pro-Carly Fiorina (U.S. senate candidate, R-CA) supporters who have wondered when Fiorina would make hay with the unflattering clip.

The wait is over...

From the Los Angeles Times:

"A week after her rival, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, aired spots attacking her tenure as chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina’s first general election ad uses campaign footage from a well-known exchange between Boxer and Army Corps of Engineers Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh at a hearing more than a year ago of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which Boxer chairs."

Boxer's exchange with the general:

"In the brief clip used by Fiorina’s team, Boxer has interrupted Walsh after he’s addressed her as ‘Ma’am’: “You know, do me a favor. Could you say ‘Senator’ instead of ‘Ma’am’? It’s just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it,” Boxer says to Walsh.

“Twenty eight years in Washington, and Barbara Boxer works hard for a title?” Fiorina says into the camera with a quick raise of her eyebrows. “I’ll really go to work — to end the arrogance in Washington.”

The Fiorina ad:

Was it worth the wait? Will it "move the dial" for Fiorina? We'll know in just a few weeks...

"We can absorb a terrorist attack"

Veteran journo Bob Woodward's latest book, "Obama's Wars," won't be released until Monday, but it's already raising eyebrows.

Among the revelations in the book (according to the Washington Post):

-- [President Barack] Obama told Woodward in the July interview that he didn't think about the Afghan war in the "classic" terms of the United States winning or losing. "I think about it more in terms of: Do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end?" he said.

-- The CIA created, controls and pays for a clandestine 3,000-man paramilitary army of local Afghans, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams. Woodward describes these teams as elite, well-trained units that conduct highly sensitive covert operations into Pakistan as part of a stepped-up campaign against al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens there.

-- Obama has kept in place or expanded 14 intelligence orders, known as findings, issued by his predecessor, George W. Bush. The orders provide the legal basis for the CIA's worldwide covert operations.

-- A new capability developed by the National Security Agency has dramatically increased the speed at which intercepted communications can be turned around into useful information for intelligence analysts and covert operators. "They talk, we listen. They move, we observe. Given the opportunity, we react operationally," then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell explained to Obama at a briefing two days after he was elected president.

-- A classified exercise in May showed that the government was woefully unprepared to deal with a nuclear terrorist attack in the United States. The scenario involved the detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon in Indianapolis and the simultaneous threat of a second blast in Los Angeles. Obama, in the interview with Woodward, called a nuclear attack here "a potential game changer." He said: "When I go down the list of things I have to worry about all the time, that is at the top, because that's one where you can't afford any mistakes."

-- Afghan President Hamid Karzai was diagnosed as manic depressive, according to U.S. intelligence reports. "He's on his meds, he's off his meds," Woodward quotes U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry as saying.

--By the end of the 2009 strategy review, Woodward reports, Obama concluded that no mission in Afghanistan could be successful without attacking the al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens operating with impunity in Pakistan's remote tribal regions. "We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan," Obama is quoted as saying at an Oval Office meeting on Nov. 25, 2009. Creating a more secure Afghanistan is imperative, the president said, "so the cancer doesn't spread" there.

Bob Woodward...

The part that bringing the most attention/criticism has been this: "Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, 'We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.'"

So, is this about "acceptable losses" or is it justifiable pride in the nation's strength and resiliency? The biggest criticism against this line of thinking is that "the best defense is a good offense." Chiefly, there are those at the Pentagon, Langley, Foggy Bottom - heck, even in the administration - who think there is no such thing as "acceptable losses."

The quote does ring a familiar bell...

General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless *distinguishable*, postwar environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed.
President Merkin Muffley: You're talking about mass murder, General, not war!
General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

(via IMDB)

Summer(s) wind(ed)...

Larry, we hardly knew ye...

From the Washington Post: "Larry Summers, the director of the National Economic Council, will return to a teaching position at Harvard University at the end of the year. 'I will always be grateful that at a time of great peril for our country, a man of Larry's brilliance, experience and judgment was willing to answer the call and lead our economic team,' said President Obama of Summer's impending departure."

"Summers leaves as the economic recovery limps along with unemployment stuck near 10 percent. He would be the third high-level member of the Obama economic team to leave this year, following the departures of budget director Peter Orszag and Christina Romer, head of the Council of Economic Advisers." (Fox)

The Economic (bad) Dream Team (left to right): Summers, Peter Orszag, Timothy Geithner and Christina Romer...

And then there was one: Geithner - last man standing...

At least I think he's standing...

This is your healthcare...

(photo by p0ps Harlow)

And this is your healthcare when it belongs to the government:

(photo by me)

Any questions?

My convo with Carly...

Actually, "our" conversation with Carly - Carly Fiorina.

Earlier this week on the John Batchelor Show, Messrs. Batchelor, Devin Nunes and I interviewed Fiorina, the woman looking to unseat three-term U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA).

Carly Fiorina...

The following, from Batchelor's blog, describes the encounter:

"Spoke to Carly Fiorina and Devin Nunes CA-21 (R) re the senate race in California, and learned that Barbara Boxer has just launched an ad campaign attacking Fiorina as a rich, spoiled, indifferent and failed capitalist for her tenure at HP. Fiornia pushed back accordingly; mention that building HP into the big cheese in Silicon Valleyis her legacy. The surprise to me is that Boxer has heretofore committed her campaign to preaching on green jobs and energy reform in California and nationally, and now she is shifting to ad hominem. Not a strong move."

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA 21)...

Batchelor continues: "Devin Nunes spoke passionately of the mandated water troubles in the San Joaquin Valley caused by radical environmentalists in San Francisco and Los Angeles and by regulation from Sacramento. Jeff Bliss raised the San Bruno investigation, and Carly Fiorina commented that Barbara Boxer ran a committee on the environment and energy and that she had done nothing in her service to address the out-of-date energy infrastructure in California that gives us a sixty-year-old pipe failure. Of the Tea Party, Carly Fiorina said she has attended many events and will again and welcomes the energy of citizens who are disgusted with the business as usual of Washington and Sacramento."

The podcast is here...

The John Batchelor Show...

Highly recommended…

From time to time, we here at The Bliss Index® take the time to recommend books, tracts, pamphlets and other publications that will serve to educate and illuminate.

The latest is “Restoring the Republic: A Clear, Concise, and Colorful Blueprint for America's Future” by Devin Nunes, who just happens to represent California’s 21^st congressional district in the San Joaquin Valley. (Full disclosure, Nunes is a regular guest on the John Batchelor Show, which yours truly co- and guest-hosts on occasion.)

In short, “Restoring the Republic” is a wake-up call…and a prescription for what ails America. Featuring firsthand accounts and fresh anecdotes from D.C.’s halls of power, Nunes calls for a return to First Principles and common sense.

"Politicians often merely complain and demagogue instead of offering practical solutions to the problems we face," Nunes writes. "And so nothing gets done; or worse, government gets bigger, Washington grows more powerful, and still the problems grow worse. Either way, everyday people lose."

Elected to Congress in 2002 at age 29, the eight-year House veteran uses his first book to discuss issues ranging from environmentalism to foreign policy; from defense to energy policies; and the federal budget.

One example includes what he thinks it will take for America to achieve economic recovery and become less dependent on foreign energy sources, with Nunes going full-bore at the “environmental lobby.”

"Don't be fooled by their smiley-faced rhetoric about 'sustainability' and 'green jobs',” he writes. “The environmental lobby is peddling extreme, anti-prosperity, big-government socialist policies that would spike energy prices, severely limit energy supplies, kill jobs and depress the American economy for decades to come.”

In a recent piece for the website Big Government, Nunes amplifies upon the book's theme(s): “As the 2010 elections rapidly approach, the Republican leadership must put forward a credible plan that reforms entitlements, simplifies the tax code and has a real energy policy. These policy changes would result in a balanced budget, a shrinking trade deficit, repayment of the national debt and put Americans back to work. History will reward Republicans if we are honest with the American people; but first we must be honest with ourselves.”

The party – and the country – would be well-served if the leadership read (and heeded) “Restoring the Republic.”

I recommend you read it, too.

Bonus: Here is Nunes’ recent interview on the TNR network.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA)

Book details here...