Pennsylvania Congressional Candidates: Listen Up!

One of the main purposes of this blog is to have a continuing dialogue with the various Republican congressional candidates and their supporters. The key for Republicans confronting Democrat incumbents is to spend their scarce resources very wisely. Should candidates hire high-priced consultants? Only if those consultants are almost literally worth their weight in gold? Should the candidates spend large sums reserving TV time for commercials? Only if they've lost their minds.

As the election approaches, there will be hundreds of political ads -- especially for the presidential candidates -- airing. Left-wing special interest groups, such as the Democratic national committee, MoveOn.org and other entities will be airing nonstop "Hate McCain" ads. Viewers will be making liberal use of their TIVOs. Others will just engage in full-time channel switching.

Republican candidates need to create small armies of volunteers. Also, they need to start wearing out pairs of shoes going door-to-door and talking to small groups. Also, they need to do something many candidates hate: asking for modest ($50 or less) amounts of money, so they can keep their campaigns afloat.

In terms of appealing to voters, these Republican candidates need to make the point that they represent change. Voting to keep the same people in offices -- i.e., the Democrats -- represents not change but more of the same. They need to keep saying the following: "The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again . . . and expecting different results."

I'm also strongly recommending that most Republican congressional candidates (although not all perhaps) need to explain why a vote for their opponent is a a vote AGAINST John McCain. The old concept that a candidate should not link himself or herself to any other candidate would be counter-productive this year. McCain is going to win MOST congressional districts by a wide margin.

Also, in most counties there is a great distaste for Obama, who has expressed contempt for most Pennsylvanians (in the "bitter" comments). The key is for the Republicans to say loudly and often that they support McCain -- while their opponent does not.

Candidates who have a good plan and carry it out rigorously should do very well. When anyone asks them, "How can I help?", they need to have something simple and effective to recommend.


This is an add-on to the column below. Pennsylvania Republican candidates facing off against incumbent Democrats must realize one important fact: their Democratic opponent are going to raise tons of money.

At this point, Allyson Schwartz apparently already has raised more than $2 million -- and it's only May! Schwartz is the wife of a super-wealthy cardiologist and a darling of Emily's List, Moveon.org and other radical groups who advocate an America that's nothing more than an oppressive nanny-state. Is Schwartz beatable (and add the names Holden, Altmire, and (Patrick) Murphy)? If Marina Kats (in the 13th district) can raise enough money to run a powerful volunteer-intensive campaign, Mrs. Schwartz could be beaten. In general, Schwartz backs an agenda that's deeply harmful to the people of Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia.

The key to beating an entrenched Democrat is to run a different kind of campaign -- one that's extremely cost-effective. Enriching the Philadelphia area TV stations is not a cost-effective approach. There are in fact ways to run inexpensive campaigns that are very effective. I keep citing Christy Whitman's campaign against Bill Bradley in the 1990 U.S. Senate race in New Jersey. If Mrs. Whitman could get nearly 49% of the vote in a campaign in which she raised $900,000, then Marina Kats -- an extremely attractive candidate -- can perform a similar feat with $900,000.

Allyson Schwartz could become the first $5 million loser in the history of the House of Representatives. Schwartz is a terrible congresswoman. Marina Kats could be a great one. That's a very effective selling point.

I've given the candidates (and, in some cases) their staff members a way to contact Sharon Caliendo. She's a political consultant and activist in Oklahoma who works mainly in OK and TX. She has been associated with many winning campaigns. Her emphasis is on low-cost, high-impact politics, where candidates get a major bang for their buck. Neither she nor I are currently being paid anything by any candidate. That's not to say it will never happen, only that it's not happening now (by design), and that's fine with us. I will continue to support the candidates I've named right through November 4. Sharon's e-mail is SKCalien@aol.com.

One critical thing candidates need to do over the next many months is to collect as many addresses (particulary e-mail addresses) of supporters. Then, after the election, whether you win or lose, keep your e-mail lists -- and stay in touch (monthly or every other month perhaps) with your supporters. That will make the next campaign a lot easier than this one.

"I love the smell of napalm in the morning. It smells like victory." (Apocalypse Now)

I've never smelled napalm, and I hope I never do. However, I have experienced the scent of victory, and it always smells sweet.

About 10 days ago, I was talking to one of my candidates, and she confessed to occasionally being discouraged by Republicans who were fearful of going against her incumbent Democrat opponent. It's okay to be discouraged in campaigns, but it's essential to overcome the "down" feelings. The way you win is to act like a winner -- as Mrs. Clinton has done in Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

I'm backing five Republicans, but they aren't -- or shouldn't be -- running primarily as Republicans. They should be campaigning as good people, which they are. They have to go up to people -- many thousands of people -- and say, "Look, I know how to represent the people of this district. I'm a better candidate than my opponent. I'm also a better person than he (or she) is."

The people who hear that message may still vote for (or worse, give money) to the Democrat. But they will feel a little guilty for doing so.

All the candidates I'm support will be outspent -- sometimes by three-or-four-to-1. But when candidates have millions of dollars they tend to throw a lot of it down political ratholes. In campaigns, the one who works the hardest usually wins (or at least comes close).

In June and July, I'm going to make a major effort to advertise this site to make more Pennsylvanians (and interested parties in other states) aware that it exists. In September and October (and November!), it's easy to get attention for discussions of races for federal offices. I want the Republican candidates endorsed on this site to know that I have genuine affection and respect for them. Whatever I can do to help them generate support -- including financial contributions -- I'll do. Winning is part of a process, and sometimes it doesn't occur as quickly as we'd like.

Ask my friend and political ally, Diana Irey, who ran so hard and well against John Murtha. I was involved in both of Newt Gingrich's first two campaigns for the House, in 1974 and 1976. Running against a deeply entrenched Democrat, he lost both times -- by identical percentages of 52% to 48%. In 1978, his earlier opponent, faced with Newt's relentlessness, retired, and Gingrich finally won the "prize." He would not be denied.

When Diana lost to Murtha in 2006, I was driving home and, although defeat is always bitter in some ways, my thought was of Diana and what a wonderful woman she was. There is a way to lose -- a graceful one -- that is almost (but not quite) as good as winning. Right now, Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Marina Kats, Mike Livingston, and Tom Manion all looks like winners to me. Keep your chins up -- and think "victory."

Republican Disaster -- or Great Opportunity?

I was on BlogTalkRadio Thursday evening with Eric Dondero (host) and Murray Sabrin (Republican primary candidate for NJ U.S. Senate). The broadcast is avaiable (on podcast) at www.blogtalkradio.com/libertarian. I urge you to listen (only partly because I'm on it and you get to hear my Rochester, NY accent) but mainly because Eric and I launched something you haven't heard recently: a ferocious defense of the Iraq War (and John McCain's position on it). Would love to hear your thoughts at TalkTop65@aol.com. On the show I called attention to the web sites of Melissa Hart, Toni Gilhooley, Michael Livingston, Marina Kats, and Tom Manion. Tom is a former Marine colonel. Sadly, his son Travis was killed in action in Iraq. Say a prayer for Tom and his son.

Hart: http://www.peoplewithhart.com/
Gilhooley: http://www.gilhooleyforcongress.com/
Livingston: http://www.livingstonforcongress.com/
Kats: http://www.katsforcongress.com/.
Manion: http://www.votemanion.com/

Please take a few minutes to visit the web sites of these wonderful candidates -- and offer them whatever support you can provide. Thanks



Media, candidates, activists, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Candidates: I hope you'll establish a link on your own web site and tell your visitors that I'll be writing regularly about your campaign. The url for this blog is: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com. Eventually, our combined efforts should result in tens of thousands of "hits" on your web site, which will generate various form of support, including contributions. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin) I receive no financial support or direction from any candidate. If you need to correspond via e-mail, you can reach me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.

Today, I’m writing broadly about the following piece from http://www.politico.com/:

"GOP Leaders Warn of Election Disasterpolitico.com — Shell-shocked House Republicans got warnings from leaders past and present Tuesday: Your party’s message isn’t good enough to prevent disaster in November, and neither is the NRCC’s [National Republican Congressional Committee's] money. The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama or anti-Rev. Wright campaign, they are simply going to fail. More… (US Elections 2008)."

The article's message is either poppycock or balderdash. I haven't figured out which. A candidate's "brand" is not the Party. Rather, it is the candidate herself or himself. Also, if those supposed "leaders" had done a better job leading, well, things would be better.

If our “leaders” (former and present) are people like Don Young (political architect of the “Bridge to Nowhere”), Tom DeLay, Mark Foley, Newt-of-many-wives and Tom Reynolds (who had to spend $5.2 million to get reelected in a solidly Republican district), well we can live without leaders like them.

The real leaders of the Republican Party are people like Bonnie West of Washington, PA, Sharon Caliendo of Norman, Oklahoma, Adam Brickley of Colorado Springs, and Brad Marston of Boston, Massachusetts. They’re out there this year – as in the past – busting their butts to send great candidates to Washington, DC. You’ve never heard of them perhaps, but you’ve seen the political fruits of their labors.

Political operative Sharon Caliendo is one of the main reasons Dr. Tom Coburn is in the U.S. Senate – and not back practicing gynecology. Adam Brickley almost single-handedly engineering the rise of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to national prominence and vice-presidential consideration. Brad Marston helped resuscitate what appeared to be the stone-dead campaign of John McCain. Bonnie West has been a key factor in revitalizing the Republican Party in a critical area of western Pennsylvania.

I wouldn’t trade one of them for four Tom DeLays.There's much hand-wringing lately over the loss of Republican candidate Woody Jenkins in a supposedly "safe" election in Louisiana. As Karl Rove put it Tuesday night, "Look, Woody Jenkins [who's lost more elections than Britney Spears has misplaced underwear] is a fine man, but he's terrible candidate." I support only exceptional candidates.

As for Woody's loss, the best way to get candidates for congressional races is NOT to "round up all the usual suspects." Instead, get people who have great integrity and a real passion for the voters of their district. They usually win – later if not sooner.

Long-time readers will know that I regularly rage against the NRCC for not giving Diana Irey a dime. She was the Republican candidate who ran so ferociously and well against “The Prince of Pork,” John Murtha. It can be a thankless task running against someone like Murtha who has sold his soul to every lobbyist with a bag-full of cash.

Diana raised $856,000 on her own. She got contributions from all 50 states. Her total number of contributors was 7,000 – significantly more than Murtha’s total, although he had many more large donors. Many of those who donated to Diana’s campaign were giving money for the first time to a political candidate.

The Diana Lynn Ireys of the world are the future of the Republican Party. She is a rock of integrity, a devoted Christian who has “a love affair with humanity.” She’s teenie (5 foot, 100 pounds) but as an orator she outdoes Barack Obama.

At the same time Diana was getting zip from the national Republican establishment, Mark Foley – prior to the nasty e-mails scandal – had accumulated a campaign war chest of, oh, $2 million. I assume Mark was not one of the “leaders” cited by Politico.com.

How can good Republican candidates – in spite of Politco’s ominous message – win this year? A while back, Sharon Caliendo sent me her analysis of how Mary Fallin, a congresswoman from the Oklahoma City area (5th district) won.

Some people, even the brilliant Michael Barone, portray Mary’s district as a Republican “slam-dunk.” But is it really? In fact, the district is two-third white – and one-third other. In fact, it sounds suspiciously like one of those districts where Democrats run unopposed election cycle after election cycle.

Sharon said that Mary went door-to-door month after month. She wore out several pairs of shoes. She raised a good deal of money, mainly because she would not take “no” for an answer. She ended up winning by 60% to 37% in what was supposedly (and actually) a horrible year for Republicans.

I am working very hard to ensure that John McCain wins the 21 electoral votes of Pennsylvania, which probably will ensure that he wins the presidency.

I’m also doing everything in my power to ensure that Melissa Hart wins back her congressional seat in western Pennsylvania, that Toni Gilhooley wins her uphill battle in Harrisburg and parts east, and that Marina Kats defeats the indescribably awful Allyson Schwartz in Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia. I’m also supporting Michael Livingston in a very difficult race in Philadelphia.

These three women will come nowhere near outspending their opponents, but they will outwork them and outsmart them. Gee, what do we have to do to restore the Republican “brand?” We need to go out with superior candidates – like Melissa, Toni, Michael, and Marina – and advance the process of winning elections.

Sharon Caliendo added the following comment about the NRCC (which is not having a good day on this blog): "There was another seat that they wasted tons of money on before this one too. I want to go back to the days where we supported our Congressional candidates and not an organization like the NRCC that plays favorites. Campaigns were less expensive then too and the candidates elected were not beholden to the powers that be at NRCC."

Gee, why can't the NRCC raise any decent money? Perhaps because contributors have figured out the national Party is sending it mainly to the GOP's version of "The Ghosts of Christmas Past." The NRCC should restrict itself to technical and communications support for candidates.

Conervatives, Libertarians, Republicans: Send Money

"Americans [unlike every other nation in the world] identify ourselves by fidelity to certain political principles." (Justice Antonin Scalia)

This weekend -- and continuing well into next week -- I'll be writing about my favorite congressional candidates, some of them mainly conservative, some mainly libertarian, but all of them Republicans with much in common. These candidates need --and eminently deserve -- your political, financial, and moral support. They include:

Melissa Hart, who lost her race for re-election in 2006 in PA's 4th congressional district (west and north of Pittsburgh) and is running again to regain it. Melissa is a slight favorite to win, mainly because John McCain should carry the district by a huge margin -- and thus help propel Melissa to victory. I've written a lot about Melissa (who was -- and will be -- my congressional representative) and will write a great deal more.

Toni Gilhooley, a 25-year-veteran of the Pennsylvania State Police who is running against Democratic incumbent Tim Holden in Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district (Harrisburg and surrounding communities). Toni is a big underdog, but as I'll explain, she has the drive and personal characteristics needed to achieve an upset.

Marina Kats, an attorney and an immigrant from Russia, who's running against extreme leftist Allyson Schwartz, in Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district (Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia). I've said -- humorously but accurately -- that Marina is the most beautiful young woman ever to run for Congress. She's also an underdog, but with the national attention her campaign will receive. she has a chance to do the impossible: beat militant leftist Allyson Schwartz.
Michael Livingston, a law professor and tax expert, who's running against Democratic incumbent Chaka Fattah in Pennsylvania's 2d congressional district (Philadelphia). A true libertarian Republican (Marina also fits that definition), Michael will wage a strong campaign against an opponent who currently appears to be unbeatable. I'll be writing a lot more about Michael in the coming months.

What do I wish YOU would do right now? I hope you'll click on the candidates' names above, go to their web sites, learn about them, and make at least a small donation to their campaigns (perhaps $10 or, if you can afford it, $200 or more).

Granted, very few Americans ever donate to a political campaign -- perhaps 2% of the population. However, if you don't contribute to candidates you believe in, they have little chance of getting their message across. Everyone reading this piece has one vote, but those who do contribute are leveraging (increasing) their influence on the election.

In 2006, I worked hard on the campaign of Republican Diana Lynn Irey, who ran against "The Prince of Pork," John Murtha. Diana didn't win the election, but she was able to get support from 7,000 donors. In fact, she had many more individual contributors than Murtha, one of the most powerful -- and objectionable -- individuals in the U.S. Congress. Diana established a foundation for the future, hers and the Republican Party's in Pennsylvania.

Yesterday, Friday, I had a long phone conversation with Toni Gilhooley. She is an absolutely remarkable woman. Trust me, Toni is exactly the kind of individual we need in the House of Representatives. Her opponent, Tim Holden, passes himself off as a "conservative Democrat," which is something like claiming to be "the world's tallest midget."

In fact, one of the first things Holden did in the current Congress was to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Of course, in that single action Holden -- the supposed "conservative" -- ensured that left-wing Democrats would head every important committee. He also ensured that no "conservative" -- or even moderate -- legislation would ever see the light of day.

That's a little detail Tim Holden withholds from his constituents. It's a detail Toni Gilhooley MUST get across to 17th district voters if she hopes to win. In other words, she has to drive home the point that Tim Holden, amiable as he seems to be, is a total impostor. In return, the voters have to consider the real possibility that Holden is not the man they've thought he was.

Also, anyone who is going to vote for John McCain in the 17th -- and most people will -- must realize that they're cancelling out their vote if they cast a ballot for Holden.

In the case of Marina Kats, her opponent, Allyson Schwartz raises a massive amount of campaign funds -- more than $7 million in the last two election cycles. Who donates to Schwartz? The most left-wing political action committees and individuals in the U.S. People who contribute to Schwartz take a dim view of America's role as a powerful, dynamic force on the world stage. (If you'd like to take a look at Schwartz's contributors, go to www.openscrets.org and type in the name "Schwartz." You'll recognize a lot of the names).

What kind of person is Marina Kats, a woman born in Russia and now seen by many as an embodiment of The American Dream? Here's how The Philadelphia Bulletin described her:
"Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq.

"Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."

Kats says, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."

In contrast, Allyson Schwartz favors a timetable for Iraq withdrawal, with all the bloodshed, political chaos, and national security threats that would result. Ms. Schwartz doesn't live in a world where her strongest supporters wear flag pins and send their sons and daughters off to defend America. Instead, she lives in world dominated by polls and irritated by America's exceptional role in world history.

Yes, that's harsh, but is there any evidence it's untrue?

If Schwartz shares Kats's strong felling about the American flag, she has kept them a secret. It's apparently not a subject she discusses, even though her own immigrant background is not all that dissimilar from Kats's. One sign of Schwartz's thinking on the subject is that she voted against the amendment to prohibit flag-burning.

If you want American politics to change for the better, I suggest the way to bring that about is to support Marina Kats, Toni Gilhooley, Melissa Hart, and Michael Livingston. They need votes and your best wishes -- but most of all at this crucial moment, they need your money to get across their compelling messages

(Here's the link to the article in The Bulletin. I urge you to read it:)http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=19335675&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=618959&rfi=6

Note: If you'd like to contribute to Hart, Gilhooley, and Livingston, you can do so at their web sites. Marina Kats has a preliminary web site up, but until the permanent one is available in a few days, you can send a check to her at:

Kats for Congress

PO Box 91

Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006

I hope every blogger or other online communicator will either reprint this column or pass it along to friends and family members. Note: Different Republican candidates will not agree on every issue. The views expressed here are my own. The candidates can speak for themselves when it comes specific issues.

Me Live on Political Pistachio

On Monday, February 25, I'll be on blog talk radio with Adam Brickley, who has engineered the highly successful Draft Sarah Palin (Alaska Governor) for VP movement. We'll be on Douglas Gibbs's Political Pistachio program at 7 p.m. Eastern time, and I hope you'll tune in. Also, call in if you'd like. Here's the link: http://blogtalkradio.com/politicalpistachio.

Doug has a great show, and one of his guests next week will be Kathleen Willey, who claims (credibly) that President Bill Clinton molested her in the Oval Office. Ms. Willey joins a long list of women (Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, and many who remain nameless) whose relationships with former President Clinton have not been fruitful, to say the least.

On Monday, Adam and I will be discussing possible vice-presidential choices for Senator McCain. If you'd like to see Adam's site, something of a shrine to Gov. Palin (pronounced PALE-in), go to: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/. Even if Sarah doesn't get the nomination, she is a GOP political superstar-in-the-making. She reminds me a lot of my Washington County, PA friend Diana Lynn Irey, who ran a heroic campaign in 2006 against the evil John Murtha.

This weekend I'll be writing about the Washington County, PA GOP and its web site.

Please see below about how you can contribute the campaign of an American hero, Senator John McCain.

OBAMA SUPPORTS "LIVE BIRTH ABORTION"

I wrote the following to a Yahoo Group of Black Conservatives (I desegregated the group) today regarding Mark McKinnon, who said he would leave his position as an advertising consultant in the McCain Campaign if Obama is the nominee:

I have heard (on MSNBC) that Mark McKinnon is basically a hired gun -- and a Democrat. If he disagrees with Obama on "several fundamental issues," as he says, then he would seem to have a moral obligation as an American to oppose Obama. That's what the political process is (supposedly) about. Thus, McKinnon seems to be cultivating his 15-minutes-of-fame.

I've been accused of launching attacks on Barack Obama. Let me be clear on that point.

I have attackedObama on my blog and elsewhere on what are basically character issues. I agree with John McCain that there are many signs that Barack -- a words-man -- is not a man of his word. McCain was talking about Obama's on-again, off-again pledge to accept public financing in the general election.

In January, 2006, Obama said the following to Tim Russert on Meet the Press: "I will serve out my full fix-year term [in the Senate]." When Russert asked him again if he would run for President or Vice-President, he said, "I will not." Earlier, however, in December, 2006, he had made a visit to New Hampshire, where he told a crowd he "would participate in the process," by which he meant the presidential election process.

(You can find this information on p. 542 of Michael Barone's The Almanac of American Politics. For his New Hampshire remarks, google Obama + New Hampshire + December, 2006, as I did.)

I've attacked Michelle Obama for words she said (about never being proud of her country until very recently). On MSNBC at this moment (4 p.m. ET), Michelle Obama is supposedly "clarifying her remarks." She is not clarifying anything. She says, "We've overcome diversities that we should all be proud of." Whatever that means. I thought we were in favor of diversity. We'd better be!

She's not suffering from gratuitous attacks. They're not based on thin air. They're reflective of positions Obama and his wife have taken. They need to be less careless with words, which are supposed to be their strong points.

Be clear on this: I will never intentionally say anything about them that's untrue. But if they want to assume the nation's highest positions, they should cease spewing out nonsense.

One areas where we won't hear any ringing words from Obama is on the subject of abortion.

Barack Obama has voted against providing medical care in the case of so-called "live birth abortions." That happens (rarely) when an abortion is botched and the embryo is born alive, thus becoming a child (and an American citizen). This is the same Obama who is for "universal health care" -- except, of course, in the case of a child gasping for life.

(Barone's words on this follow: "He voted against requiring medical care for fetuses who surived abortions . . . ). That's not exactly a position which is going to "bring the nation together," as Obama claims is his goal. When he and Michelle talk about their concern for America's children, we need to press them on exactly which children get excluded.

They preach unity, but they practice the worst forms of division.

Yes, Obama, the political preacher man, has a 'dream." But with many of his extreme views, the question is how he can sleep at night.

_________________________

The Myth of Obama

It's absolutey critical to "introduce" the American people to Barack Obama, and John McCain and Cindy McCain were doing just that yesterday. Among other things, McCain said something quite fascinating, that Obama is advocating "a holidy from history." I don't advocate that as a campaign slogan, but it demonstrates that McCain has Obama's number. He's saying that Obama's "soaring rhetoric' has left the stratosphere and totally detached itself from reality. Unfortunately, some people will remain forever bamboozled, including the college-freshman types mindlessly chanting "Yes, we can!" No, you can't, something most two-year-olds learn when they turn 3.

Obama is talking about our society's failures in regard to children. This from the guy who voted to deny medical assistance to children born alive in botched abortions. I guess "universal health care" has its limitations.

In terms of education, Obama's "plan," like Bill Clinton's is to do nothing other than pay of the Teacher's Union. Parental choice? He doesn't have that "dream." Merit pay for excellent teachers? Not during his watch.

Health care? That means more patients, the same number of providers, and somehow lots of imaginary "savings."

As for the War on Terror, his goal seems to be to leave Iraq to al Qaeda and, at the same time, invade Pakistan. He quotes JFK, but very selectively, missing the famous line about: "We will pay any price, bear any burden to ensure the survival of liberty." Perhaps Caroline Kennedy can remind her new hero about that one. It's vitally important to defeat this snake-oil-salesman, the man-of-words who turns out (as with campaign finance) not to be a man-of-HIS-word.

NOTE TO PENNSYLVANIANS: IN THE COMING WEEKS, I'M GOING TO DISCUSS HOW ACTIVISTS (PEOPLE LIKE YOU) CAN LEVERAGE YOUR POWER IN ELECTIONS. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS YOU CAN DO IS TO WORK WITH YOUR LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS, PARTICULARLY THE COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTIES.

SOON, I'LL BE FEATURING THE WASHINGTON COUNTY (PA) REPUBLICAN ORGANIZATION. IT'S ONE OF THE BETTER GOP GROUPS IN THE STATE. THE EMPHASIS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, HISTORICALLY A DEMOCRATIC AREA, IS ON BUILDING THE PARTY, AND THEY'RE SUCCEEDING. IN THE LAST ELECTION, THEY ELECTED THE FIRST REPUBLICAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY.

THE BEST KNOWN POLITICAL FIGURE IN THE COUNTY IS COMMISSIONER DIANA LYNN IREY, WHO RAN FOR CONGRESS AGAINST JOHN MURTHA IN 2006. BONNIE WEST IS THE HEAD OF THE LOCAL ORGANIZATION, AND SHE'S AN EMERGING POLITICAL STAR.

If you'd like take a look at Washington County GOP's web site: http://washingtoncountyrepublicanparty.blogspot.com. It's a good one, even though the guest editorial by former Senator Rick Santorum has outlived its usefulness. It's important to keep web sites current and relevant, which Washington County usually does.