HOMERGOPRANO'S PICK FOR SUPER BOWL XLIII

Yes Folks, OUR ARIZONA CARDINALS

are in tomorrow's Super Bowl. What an amazing run the team has made through out the Playoffs!

I am writing this early as we are preparing for the Big Party we are throwing tomorrow.

I have always thought that a great Offense beats a great Defense. Nothing changing my mind.

How are the Obama Steelers going to defend 3 - 1,000 yard Pass Receivers?

The talk this week has been about ALL-World LARRY FITZGERALD.

But almost forgotten is ANQUAN BOLDIN & STEVE BREASTON, both top notch WR's.

I think Boldin is ready for a 'Break-Out' game since the OS will 'try' to double cover Fitz (Good Luck!) Plus the running game with EDGERRIN JAMES & TIM HIGHTOWER will continue to grind out the needed yards (believe it or not, the Cards are the Leading Rushing team in the Playoffs).

What can you say about KURT WARNER that hasn't already been said? This man (who hopefully tonight wins the 2009 NFL Man of the Year Award), is a future Hall of Famer, no doubt in my mind.

But the key to the Cardinals victory will be the D. If the Cards can keep Ben Rothelsburger from getting 'outside the pocket', the Cards will win!

Another reason to root for the Cardinals: Our Good Buddy TOUCHDOWN was smart earlier this year and placed a bet on the Cardinals winning the SB in Las Vegas! TD was going to donate his winnings to the AZ GOP, but after last week, he is going to go to LV and bet on Snake Eyes!

Here is my pick:

ARIZONA CARDINALS 38













OBAMA STEELERS 31

The Arizona Cardinals - WILL BEAT the Obama Steelers!

The Arizona Cardinals Are Determined Underdogs by Joseph Morgan The Bleacher Report

January 29, 2009

Once again, an underdog from Arizona will be on the national stage.
While the Arizona Cardinals share the same primary color of John McCain and the Republican Party, they hope to have a better result than the political maverick.

The Cardinals will face the Pittsburgh Steelers in Super Bowl XLIII Sunday, eager to win not only a Super Bowl championship, but some respect around the league as well.

Despite their incredible playoff run, the Cards are still seven-point underdogs for the big game Sunday, a role that they have become quite familiar with.

Facing the Atlanta Falcons at home, Arizona was an underdog to one of the league's most surprising teams in a very unexpected playoff matchup.

Experts speculated that the Cardinal defense wouldn't be able to stop Michael Turner and the Atlanta ground game, even with the support of a home crowd.

However, Arizona held Turner to 42 rushing yards and forced three turnovers, including Antrel Rolle's 27-yard fumble recovery for a touchdown that proved to be the difference in the game.

After defeating the Falcons, the Cardinals would travel to the dreaded East Coast, where they were 0-5 during the season, to face the Carolina Panthers.

Not surprisingly, the NFC West Champions were listed as underdogs, but by a much bigger margin against the 12-4 Panthers.

But the Cardinals would prove resilient once again, forcing six turnovers in an annihilation of heavily-favored Carolina 33-13 that shocked the NFL.

Coming off of a road victory against the Super Bowl XLII Champion New York Giants, the Philadelphia Eagles would travel to Glendale to play Arizona for the NFC Championship.

Once again, Coach Ken Whisenhunt's team was expected to lose.

Yet, the "never say die" Cardinals continued to impress, taking a 24-6 lead over the Eagles into halftime.

Then, it began to look like the wheels were finally coming off of Arizona's playoff bandwagon when Philadelphia stormed back to take a 25-24 early in the fourth quarter.

However, quarterback Kurt Warner stepped up when his team needed him most, leading the Cardinals offense 72 yards down the field on 14 plays.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE

Statement By Governor JAN BREWER

Statement by Governor Jan Brewer


Phoenix – “I want to thank the leadership and members of the Arizona Legislature for their hard work and diligence in promptly addressing one of the most difficult budget challenges in the history of the State of Arizona. They have answered the call, and they have done the people’s business.

“Make no mistake – the seeds of this significant budget
crisis have been sown for many years, and thus the solutions are neither easy nor painless. In just over 5 years, spending in the state budget increased from approximately $6 billion to $10 billion. Last year, with most economic indicators suggesting significant economic downturn, a new state budget was built on the false hope of increasing state revenues. More shockingly, new discretionary spending was approved without realistic funding and the state’s
rainy day fund was drained. This insatiable appetite for spending has left us with enormous challenges and few options.

“This is not a Republican or Democrat problem, it is a problem that all of us must confront with vigor and regardless of partisan affiliation. Additional fixes are very likely to be required for the fiscal year 2009 budget, and even more difficult decisions remain as we confront the realities of a $3.4 billion deficit for fiscal year 2010.

“We will be back working very hard next week to confront the
adversity and to place our great State of Arizona back on the path to
prosperity.”

MICHAEL STEELE ELECTED AS THE NEXT RNC CHAIRMAN! UPDATED

On the 6th Ballot, MICHAEL STEELE has been elected as the next Chairman of the RNC. Steele defeated Katon Dawson by a vote of 91 - 77! Congratulations Mr. Chairman!

Here is Chairman Steele's Acceptance Speech:

CLICK HERE TO SEE MICHAEL STEELE'S ACCEPTANCE SPEECH

Also Congratulations to Arizona Republican Party Chairman RANDY PULLEN who is now the new RNC Treasurer!

Michael "Man of" Steele gains momentum overnight in race for Republican National Committee Chairman

Early indications are that Politico Mafioso's friend and favorite pick for RNC Chairman, Michael Steele, has received a "last minute surge of support" for today's election, according to Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic.

This morning, both The Atlantic and the Baltimore Sun are reporting that Michael Steele's ideas for change in the GOP, a Blueprint for Tomorrow, found some fans in the closed-door electorate meetings and hospitality suites at the Capital Hilton in Washington, D.C..

Current RNC Chairman and alleged front-runner, Mike Duncan, was hand-picked for his position by George W. Bush and Karl Rove - a double 4-letter word death knell - for any wannabe GOP leader of the future. As the incumbent, Duncan is a "safe" vote for any National Committeeman who has to take a little blue pill to get excited about anything, finish the job and dream of the days he was like STEELE.

Obama Stimulus Could Mean Billions to ACORN

Billions of your tax dollars in possible subsidies for ACORN? $50 million for the National Endowment of the Arts? Billions of dollars more for other liberal pet projects? What exactly are our elected leaders doing? On Wednesday, the House of Representatives voted largely along party lines to pass the so-called "Obama stimulus bill."

But the only thing the bill will stimulate is BIG GOVERNMENT. It does very little to accomplish its stated purpose, which is to create jobs and stimulate the struggling economy.

Congressman Mike Pence said it best:

"[The] bill won't stimulate anything but more government and more debt. The slow and wasteful spending in the House Democrat bill is a disservice to millions of Americans who want to see this Congress take immediate action to get this economy moving again."

And what exactly is in this so-called stimulus bill?

$1.1 billion for Amtrak;
$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts;
$400 million for NASA to conduct climate change research;
$300 million for Americorps;
$1 billion for the Census;
$400 million for localities to buy green buses;
$650 million for the Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program;
$600 million for the acquisition of green cars;
$7.7 billion for the Federal Buildings Fund;

The list goes on ALL of it funding by your hard-earned tax dollars. Here's what Senator David Vitter (R-LA) had to say about the bill: "

It's just a long list of spending items. Not a real economic stimulus job creation bill. It's line after line after line of favorite liberal spending programs, and it amounts to a big government bill - not a job creation bill."

As Congressman Pence put it: What does $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $200 million to plant sod on the National Mall, $400 million for climate change research, and $200 million for contraception have to do with creating jobs?"

The answer is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

But heres the kicker

According to FOX News:

"Republican lawmakers are raising concerns that ACORN, the low-income advocacy group under investigation for voter registration fraud, could be eligible for billions in aid from the economic stimulus proposal "

Senator Vitter went so far as to say that the $4.19 billion that this so-called "stimulus bill" allocates to "neighborhood stabilization programs" could be viewed as a "payoff" to ACORN (or organizations similar to ACORN). The good news is there is hope to defeat this monstrosity of a bill. Yes, the House passed it, but not without bipartisan opposition. And, every Republican member in the House voted against it. That means our message is being heard.


- Send My Blast Faxes -

Pepsi's New Logo Under President John McCain by Ken Wheaton

Photo Credit: Michael Thibodeau

01.29.09 @ 11:44 AM

Pepsi's taking a lot of heat for a logo that seems to copy Barack Obama's election campaign. Indeed, Pepsi exec Frank Cooper came this close to saying "Nuh-uh, Barack cheated off of us."

You know what? He's probably more right than wrong. Pepsi's been rocking a circular logo with red, white and blue colors for decades. Then again, there's only so much you can do with that design and those colors, so of course it's going to be similar.

Of course, if Pepsi hadn't been jumping all over the Obama bandwagon with its ad messaging, the company wouldn't sound ridiculous when denying the connections. At any rate, at left is a logo as imagined by Michael Thibodeau, a managing partner at Verse Group.

Thibodeau's a logo designer by trade and created the MSN butterfly and the latest UPS shield among other things. This morning, over a cup of coffee, he imagined what Pepsi's logo would look like if things had turned out differently.

GOP Looks To Future With Today's Vote for Chairman By Kyle Trygstad

January 30, 2009


After sustaining significant losses in the last two election cycles, the leaders of the Republican Party find themselves gathered in Washington DC this week pondering the kind of existential questions normally reserved for philosophers and amnesiacs: Who are we and how did we get here?

Those questions will be answered, at least in part, later today when the Republican National Committee elects a new chairman whose job will be to help the party find a path back to power.

"It's obvious that in 2006 and 2008 we had a lot of trouble all over the country," said Katon Dawson, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party and one of five candidates for RNC chair. "No matter who gets elected, it's going to be a new party and new direction."

Who They Are

A quick look at the landscape shows what the GOP is dealing with: After the 2004 congressional elections, Republicans held a 30-seat advantage in the House and a 10-seat edge in the Senate; the GOP now has a 77-seat deficit in the House and -- should Al Franken (D- MN) be seated and Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) become the next U.S. Commerce Secretary -- a 20-seat deficit in the Senate.
And that's just in Congress. In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama won 53% of the popular vote, 365 electoral votes, and carried nine states that President Bush won in 2004 along with all of John Kerry's states.

"The results of the two recent elections are real, and so are the obstacles we face as a party," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a speech yesterday. "And my concern is that unless we do something to adapt, our status as a minority party may become too pronounced for an easy recovery."

How They Got Here

"The GOP got drunk with power, and it's time for an intervention," said Mark McKinnon, a former Bush adviser who worked on John McCain's primary campaign in 2008. "We need to be reminded about what America looks like and better reflect its diversity and values," McKinnon told RealClearPolitics.
McKinnon recently wrote that the Republicans' problem is that those "working in leadership and the trenches are largely old, white, male, out-of-touch, out of ideas, technology averse, and living in the past."

Looking around the hotel ballroom yesterday where GOP leaders from around the country were gathered, McKinnon's words seemed to ring true. Michigan Committeeman Keith Butler, one of three black RNC members, agreed.

"You need more young people in this room. You need other
people of different races," Butler said. "And that's part of the debate that's going on, and one of the things that came out here today."

Republicans are not just lacking minorities in party leadership positions, but also among elected officials and voters themselves. Out of 178 GOP House members, only six are minorities -- three are Latino, two Asian and one Native American. Comparatively, 64 of the 255 Democrats in the House are minorities -- 39 are African-American, 21 Latino and four Asian.

Even excluding African-Americans, who not surprisingly voted for Obama in record numbers this year, exit polling from 2008 found other minorities voting Democratic at a significantly higher rate than in 2004. That year, Bush trailed Kerry by just 9 percentage points among Latinos and 12 points among Asians. In 2008, Obama won the Latino vote by 36 points and the Asian vote by 27 points.

"With the growth of Hispanic voters in the state of Texas, if we don't do better with Hispanics we'll soon lose Texas," Butler said of the state that's voted Republican in the last eight presidential elections
and is the home of the party's last two presidents. "So we'll have to devise policies that reach out to minority voters, such as Hispanics. There is a debate going on right now about changing the face of this party and how it's going about that."

McConnell spent a significant portion of his speech on the importance of winning Latino voters.

"The future of campaigns and elections depends, for both parties, on the ability to attract voters from the Hispanic community," he said.
"This is particularly true for us, since Hispanic growth is even more dramatic in regions where we do best."

Young voters are another demographic Republicans are losing badly. In 2008, Obama won the 18 to 29-year-old bloc by 34 points. The only age group John McCain won was those 65 years and older.

A major reason Republicans offer for their decline in support across the country is the political drag of an unpopular president. "Considering the economic crisis and the unpopularity of George W. Bush, I think we did pretty well" in 2008, said Virginia Committeeman Morton Blackwell, referring to McCain's 6-point loss in the Old Dominion, which hadn't voted Democratic since 1964.

Other issues Blackwell pointed out were the "enormous imbalance of resources" and the fact that Republicans have been slow to keep up with technology, particularly "with the social networking, viral marketing operation."

Where They Go From Here

The discussion this week was not only about learning lessons from the past, but about what course the party should set for the future. McKinnon thinks Republicans first need to remind themselves what the country looks like. "Let's put the Republican Party elite in an amazing race," he said. "Take everyone from the Winter Meeting, plant them in downtown Los Angeles, take away all their belongings, strip them down to their shorts, give them $100 and make them find their way back to Washington, D.C."

Not surprisingly, those in attendance yesterday had other ideas.

"We have to speak to the issues that the middle class cares about. They want the economy fixed," Butler said. "We have to I.D. those issues that young voters care about. And you have to include them in the process."

McConnell told RNC members yesterday that the party needed to change its image, which currently "isn't very pretty."

"Ask most people what Republicans think about immigrants, and they'll say we fear them," McConnell said. "Ask most people what
we think about the environment, and they'll say we don't care about it. Ask most people what we think about the family, and they'll tell you we don't -- until about a month before Election Day."

Dawson, who will know his fate in the race for chairman by this afternoon, said the GOP needs to get back to its fundamentals and learn from its mistakes.

"If we don't take what brought us to national prominence all over the country and continue to run like Republicans, we might not be successful," he said. "On the other side, I think we're going to be very successful because when you go through two cycles like this, it's sort of like burning your hand on the kitchen stove -- you only burn it once. We burned it twice this time."

Gov Brewer and PA Gov Rendell Place Bet on Super Bowl

Governor Brewer, Pennsylvania Governor Rendell
Place Their Bets on Sunday’s Big Game



Phoenix – Arizona Governor Jan Brewer today accepted a friendly wager from Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell on the outcome of Sunday’s Super Bowl game between the Arizona Cardinals and the Pittsburgh Steelers and expressed confidence that the Arizona Cardinals are primed to bring home their first NFL championship.

“I was thrilled to receive and accept Governor Rendell’s
wager,” stated Brewer. “I can’t wait to watch the Arizona Cardinals shock the world on Sunday. I respect the incredible talent and intense defense of the Steelers, but am confident that our Cards will rise to the challenge and bring home Arizona’s first-ever NFL Championship title and the Lombardi Trophy.”

Under the wager, the state with the losing team must offer up a three-day vacation to a resident of the state with the winning team. The respective companies, organizations and venues, donated, accommodations, meals and tickets to the different venues included in each vacation package.

If the Cardinals win, a designated charity will receive three nights at a luxurious, world-class hotel in Pittsburgh; a trip on the Duquesne Incline to the top of Mount Washington for dinner at one of Pittsburgh’s finest restaurants, Le Mont; two of the best seats available at a regular season Pirates, Steelers or Penguins home game; and admission to a number of the area’s outstanding attractions, such as the Andy Warhol Museum, Heinz History Center and Sports Museum, the Mattress Factory – world-renowned for its installation art – and a performance at one of the Cultural District’s five theaters.




If Pittsburgh wins, a Pennsylvania resident will receive a trip for two to Phoenix that includes three nights at the Wigwam Golf Resort and Spa, a luxurious and renowned Arizona landmark; two rounds of golf on any of the resort’s three, 18-hole championship golf courses; dinner for two at one of the city’s finest restaurants; and two seats at a regular season home game of one of Arizona’s major league sports teams (the Cardinals, Suns, Diamondbacks or Coyotes).

“I can’t wait for some lucky Cardinal fans to travel to Pittsburgh and enjoy all that the landmark, historic city has to offer,” joked Brewer. “In the unlikely event that we have to cough up our Arizona vacation package, two lucky individuals will be able to bask in the glorious desert sun, enjoy world renowned accommodations and golf at the Wigwam Resort, as well as take in the beauty and grandeur of our great State.”

Governor Brewer will designate a reputable charity to which the winning travel package will be donated.

Travel arrangements are not included.

Someone is looking more like a Peanut Farmer By HJS

HJS comments:

Reminds me of a President named Carter,
Who should have been a non-starter.
He apologized to the East
Looking weak-kneed at least!
We're still reaping the whirlwind from that quarter.

The Bedouin respects strength and power.
And has only disgust when men cower!
They never compromise
With nations they despise
And to them a century is an hour.

The Day America Lost the War on Terror

Ben Shapiro

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

On Nov. 4, 2008, America lost the war on terror. President Barack Obama’s feckless, pathetically apologetic perspective on foreign policy spells the end of the quest for liberty in the Middle East. It spells the end of America’s moral leadership in the global war for freedom. And it spells the end of a hard-fought campaign to protect America. Our enemies must be happily celebrating their great good fortune in America’s election of this platitudinous, morally relativistic, Jimmy Carter carbon copy in the midst of battle.

On Jan. 26, 2009, Obama granted his first television interview as president of the United States to Al Arabiya, the Dubai-based television network part-owned by the Saudi government. In the interview, he demonstrated with the utmost clarity that his understanding is inversely proportional to his arrogance.

He started by humbling America before the world.

“(A)ll too often the United States starts by dictating,”
Obama said, shame for his country dripping from his lips. “So let’s listen.”

There was no call for the Muslim world, which has sponsored genocide after genocide, terrorist group upon terrorist group, to listen.

Obama apologized for President Bush’s “Islamic fascism” terminology, equating Muslim terrorism with nonexistent terrorism by Jews and Christians: “the language we use matters.

And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations -- whether Muslim or any other faith in the past -- that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith's name.” There was no call for the Muslim world to actively fight terrorism -- honesty is not the Obama administration’s policy.

Obama repeated the Clintonian line that the Palestinian Arab-Israeli conflict could be solved by pressing Israel into negotiations with terrorists -- a foolish conceit that has cost Israeli and Palestinian lives. He talked about getting rid of “preconceptions” regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict -- code for embracing negotiations with Hamas. He pledged to talk with Iran -- on the same day that Iran’s government spokesman branded the Holocaust “a big lie.” He bought into the Muslim-sponsored notion that the Palestinian Arab-Israeli conflict lies at the heart of all trouble in the Middle East. He praised the one-sided Saudi peace plan as an act of “great courage.”

Most sickeningly, Obama openly jettisoned his constitutional role as the caretaker for America’s national interest. Instead, Obama posed himself as an honest broker between America and the Muslim world.

“(T)he United States has a stake in the well-being of the
Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect,” he said. “I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.”

Obama didn’t stop there. He stated that his job is to speak for the Muslim world, defending them from Americans’ negative perceptions: “And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”

No, Mr. President. Your job is not to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world harbors us no ill will. That is their job. The Muslim world must demonstrate with its words and actions that they do not wish America replaced with an Islamic state. They must demonstrate that they do not support terrorism against America and our allies.

Your job is to protect and defend the United States of America. That is your sworn duty.

And you abrogate your sworn duty every time you go on Arab television stations and apologize for America’s foreign policy. You abrogate your sworn duty every time you force American allies to negotiate with terrorists. You abrogate your sworn duty every time you pledge to protect the interests “not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity” -- the same ordinary people who elect Hamas, prop up the Ayatollahs, supported the Taliban, recruit for al-Qaida, and live off of the beneficence of Hezbollah. Not all Muslims are “extraordinary people,” and the interests of suffering Muslims do not always align with American interests.

On Nov. 4, 2008, Americans elected their first international president. They elected a man who does not seek to preserve American values. Leftists perceived George W. Bush as an imperialist for American interests; by the same token, Obama is an imperialist for “global interests.” In a war to save America from implacable foes, Obama’s Global Interest Imperialism dooms American
exceptionalism to the ash heap of history. With it may go the last, best hope of Earth.

RNC Chairman’s Race: 24 Hours To Go And Still No Favorite by John Gizzi

01/29/2009




Two of the 168 members of the Republican National Committee who will elect the party’s new national chairman Friday came to have lunch with me yesterday.

Each is backing a different horse in the six-candidate race for the GOP helm. But both wrote down their individual head counts of where the race is now and were in agreement: Bush-appointed Chairman Mike Duncan is the front-runner for re-election with forty-something votes, and his closest rival at this point is South Carolina State Chairman Katon Dawson, with a vote total in the low 30’s.

The question I had for both was how on earth does Duncan -- who came to the RNC post as operating head with Florida Sen. Mel Martinez (“Amnesty Mel”) as “general chairman” -- merit a bid for another term, let alone be in the position of front-runner?

“You get to do a lot of things when you’re the national chairman,” one of the pair told me. He noted that there are several key committees a chairman can appoint members to and that there are numerous foreign junkets to be doled out. And, of course, there is the “familiarity factor:” Duncan is a genuinely nice person and has had two years to know his colleagues who do the voting.

As to whether the members would actually use good nature and familiarity as a reason to elect someone to be their party’s top spokesman, that still seems a reach.

Just as they agreed Duncan is the front-runner, the two RNC members I spoke to concur in awarding Dawson second-place. The South Carolinian had a good week last week, picking up more endorsements from fellow Southerners such as Tennessee Chairman Robin Smith and National Committeeman John Ryder and non-Southerners such as North Dakota National Committeeman Curly Haugland, and National Committeewomen Dee Dee Benkie of Indiana and Demetra Del Monte of Illinois.

The leading argument against Dawson has been that he once belonged to a whites-only country club does not seem to be hurting him. Virtually all RNC members accept his explanation that he had been trying to integrate the club and many resent some of the internet sniping at the South Carolinian. (One anonymous salvo featured an ersatz headline of USA Today proclaiming “RNC Members Choose Whites-Only Chairman” and reporting that the White House “rejoices” over the election of Dawson as national chairman).

Who’s On Third?

My two inside sources say Michael Steele is in third place, but were not as confident as they were about Duncan and Dawson being one-two. The former Maryland lieutenant governor and Fox news commentator made a strong impression in the last debate before RNC members and clearly has strong across-the-board backing. Stalwart conservatives such as California RNC member Shawn Steel and more moderate fixtures such as Arizona Committeewoman Sharon Giese and Florida Chairman Jim Greer are on Team Steele.

Much like the country club charge against Dawson, the claim that Steele is somehow less than conservative just doesn’t seem to be sticking.

With respect to my two companions on the inside, my feeling is that Michigan Chairman Saul Anuzis caught a tailwind of sorts last week and probably has a slight edge over Steele. His endorsement from Colorado Chairman Dick Wadhams Monday came on the heels of a blessing from Rhode Island Chairman Gio (for Giovanni) Cicione. Last night (Tuesday), Washington State Committeewoman Fredi Simpson came out for self-styled “Kemp-Gingrich Republican” Anuzis.

In a conversation last week, Anuzis admitted he was not running first or second but pointed out “I’m second choice for a lot of folks.” If, as many expected, the balloting for chairman goes to four or five ballots, the Anuzis forces believe their man will start moving to the front.

Others are not so sure. As one of my lunch companions put it, “That was Rudy Giuliani’s strategy in ’08 -- just wait to later primary states and I will catch up. It didn’t work so well.

No one argues that former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell is running fifth out of sixth (former Tennnessee Chairman Chip Saltsman is in last place and may not have the necessary votes to be nominated).

Blackwell did have strong backing from national conservative leaders and from such RNC conservatives as Virginia Committeeman Morton Blackwell and Texas Chairman Tina Benkiser (who is her self a candidate for national co-chairman). But he has never been able to build on that and release the names of new supporters on a regular basis as have the top four contenders.

As we concluded lunch the two RNC members were mulling over where Blackwell’s 12-to-15 estimated votes would go when and if he pulls out of the race (They both agreed they would be split among the “Big Four”).

Parting Shots

And that leads to the conclusion virtually no one on the inside of the RNC or outside and reporting on it argues: that the contest will go through several ballots, possibly six or seven, before someone gets the “magic 85” (majority) and a chairman is chosen. All expected horse-trading and wheeling and dealing to get intense.

In 1993, it took several ballots at the RNC conclave in St. Louis for Haley Barbour to overcome four opponents (two of whom served with him on the committee) and win the chairmanship.

Four years later, it also took a while for Jim Nicholson to beat six foes (all but one of whom was a RNC member) to become chairman.

So why should it be any different this year?

Sorry, I’m still not picking any winner. Just keep your eye on the candidates serving on the RNC now.

And -- surprise! -- both of my lunch companions requested anonymity.

John Gizzi is Political Editor of HUMAN EVENTS.

GOP, PUSH FREE ENTERPRISE By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com on January 27, 2009

Printer-Friendly Version

How should House and Senate Republicans react to the Trojan horse stimulus package proposed by the Obama administration?

In the name of economic stimulus, it not only has every item any liberal ever asked of Santa Claus on Christmas eve, it also contains the seeds of a permanent shift toward a European-style socialist democracy. Its dramatic exemption of more than half of
Americans from paying federal income taxes (it is now about one-third who don't pay them) and its generosity in awarding this voting majority a welfare check -- called a refundable tax credit -- moves the politics of taxation sharply to the left.

The federal government's acquisition of preferred stock in virtually all our major banks sets the stage for full nationalization. After all, if the feds are using their "preferred" status to hog all the dividends, why should any private person buy bank stock?

By demanding that Citibank cancel its plans to buy a private jet, the Obama administration is tapping into a justified populist anger against the greed, privilege, stupidity and sense of entitlement of the Wall Street biggies. But he is also setting the precedent for government control over the actions of private banks. If Obama extends his power to the selection of management and policies regarding the lending of money, nationalization will become a de facto reality.

And once the government controls the banks, it controls the economy. At best, we will have a Japanese system where winks and nods from bureaucrats turn industrial policy upside-down; at worst, we will have outright federal control, with government-appointed latter-day Blagojeviches determining who gets loans and who doesn't.

With only 41 votes in the Senate and a distant minority in the House, what should Republicans do in the face of this onslaught against the basic free-market, private-enterprise system?

The answer is for the Republicans to caucus and come up with a Free Enterprise Amendment to add to the stimulus package. The amendment should spell out what the government may not do
in influencing the policy of private banks. It should, for example, make it illegal for the feds to urge certain lending policies on banks or to suggest specific loans that might be granted. It should enjoin the feds from intervening in decisions on who should manage various aspects of bank operations.

The idea would be to cordon off large parts of the private sector, even in subsidized institutions, to bar public federal government influence.

A well-drawn amendment would be akin to the protections in the Bill of Rights against government intervention in certain activities such as religion, press, speech, petitioning and assembly. It would lay down markers indicating what the feds may not do.

This amendment could draw strong support from Democrats and might even be negotiable with the Obama administration. Democrats are not anxious to be labeled as the party of socialism, and Republicans, who know the stimulus package will pass anyway, are looking for a way to, at minimum, influence it. Sitting on the sidelines and voting no is not the way to win friends and influence people.

If moderate Democrats and the administration prove truculent or overly limited in what they will accept, the Free Enterprise Amendment gives the Republican Party a place to stand in a filibuster. To filibuster merely to reduce the size of the stimulus or to influence the mix of the tax cuts or the specifics of the spending would not appeal to an America in shellshock over the depression. But a strong stand -- refusing to allow the stimulus package to come up for a vote -- in order to make sure that our economy remains private and that socialism does not come inside the Trojan horse makes a great deal of sense and will be seen by the American people as a wise use of power by the Republicans. Rather than asking the Republicans why they won't pass the stimulus package, they will ask Obama why he does not accede to so acceptable an amendment.

And the amendment, once passed, will be worth its weight in stopping bureaucrats from crossing lines that should not be crossed. One can easily see the day when prosecutions for violations of this amendment become commonplace.

Who Is Most To Blame For America’s Current Economic Crisis?

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!

Republicans Rally Against the “Stimulus” By Robert Romano

The newly inaugurated President Barack Obama spent some of his honeymoon political capital—a recent Zogby poll finds his approval rating at about 52 percent—attempting to persuade House Republicans to vote in favor of the so-called “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.” Alas, to no avail.

Although the House of Representatives voted 244-188 in favor of the $819 billion spending bill—the so-called “stimulus—not a single House Republican voted in favor. House Republican Leader John Boehner (OH-8), Whip Eric Cantor (VA-7), and Conference Chair Mike Pence (IN-6) deserve the gratitude of the American people for voicing dissent to the shackling the American taxpayer—their children, and their children’s children—with a mountain of debt for perpetuity.

ALG News has confirmed from top Capitol Hill sources that the one Republican who was not present, Ginny Brown Waite (FL-5), had to leave early due to a family emergency. For the record, she would have voted against to the $819 billion debt stimulus.

To make matters worse for Mr. Obama—and in particular for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—11 House Democrats simply could not bring themselves to vote with their party: Bobby Bright (AL-2), Parker Griffith (AL-5), Allen Boyd (FL-2), Walter Minnick (ID-1), Brad Ellsworth (IN-8), Frank Kratovil (MD-1), Collin Peterson (MN-7), Gene Taylor (MS-4), Heath Shuler (NC-11), Paul Kanjorski (PA-11) and Jim Cooper (TN-5). Their Nay votes say implicitly what everybody knows explicitly: the extravagant $819 billion spending spree by the House—the largest spending bill ever—can simply not be justified to taxpayers.

In truth, Mr. Obama was, and is, desperate to garner Republican support for his Keynesian, command-and-control approach to economics. That’s not because bipartisanship makes throwing money at problems government created more effective. It’s because he fears those policies will fail. And when they do fail, he needs to have so-called “bipartisan” cover for the legislation so that his Party does not fall on a lonely spear. That is why he personally visited with Republican leaders on the Hill—including top conservative leaders—in what was quickly dubbed his “Charm Offensive.”

The bottom line: the siren’s song failed, and Mr. Obama is going to have to find some other Republicans to help him if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Peloisi, and he do not want to be left holding the bailout bag all alone.

His next move will be to take his siren’s song to the Senate. But, the fact is, he likely will not find willing participants to provide cover there, either. According to the Washington Post, the deficit could be close to $2 trillion even without the “stimulus,” the monetary base has never been higher according to the Fed, and the national debt of $10.7 trillion has never been greater. Forty percent of the privately held debt comes due this year, and Senate Republicans know that in order to pay for that debt being called in, let alone the $819 spending bill, the U.S. will have to borrow yet more money from overseas. That is, if the nation’s foreign creditors are even willing to oblige Big Government insatiable, hideous addiction to spending.

Clearly, there will be are numerous of issues in the months to come that may warrant bipartisan support. Shackling the American taxpayers, and their progeny, to a mountain of debt so Mr. Obama can claim a “bipartisan” political victory is not one of them. Senate Republicans should stand with their House colleagues against this madness, and do everything in their power to stop the “stimulus” from stimulating the debt.

Robert Romano is the Editor of ALG News Bureau.
http://alg31blog.timberlakepublishing.com/default.asp?Display=918

Card Check Update: Beware the "Compromise" From Patrick Hynes

Please note the latest development on the card check debate:


Conservative Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.), warned conservative bloggers in a conference call earlier this year he fears Democratic leadership would push both provisions to rile Republicans and then strike secret ballot language.

“They could load it up to begin with and fight everyone and then pull a few things to say they’ll compromise,” DeMint said.

As he put it, Democrats could “go out with a secret ballot and be magnanimous and withdraw it. Then some Republicans may breathe a sigh of relief and vote for arbitration” which “could actually be worse in the way it slows decision making.”


This is because the arbitration process is long and complicated. Arbitration rulings in Michigan take, on average, nearly 15 months to complete, according to the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.


As currently written, the arbitration clause dictates the businesses are given a strict, 120 time period to come to an agreement with unions once negotiations begin. If no agreement is reached within the 120 day window a federal arbitrators from Washington D.C. would then come into the workplace to determine wages and benefits. Employees and employers would lose all negotiating power at that point.

If labor officials did not like the way negotiations were heading during those 120 days, they would have the option of waiting it out to have the federal arbitrators settle compensation agreements. This scenario is considered Big Labor’s “trump card,” since a federal arbitrators is likely to be more sympathetic to labor’s priorities, especially under the Obama Administration.

EFCA critics, like DeMint, insist this “trump card” threatens workplaces just as much as the elimination of secret ballots and eliminating that provision is no compromise. And, it looks like he may be right about Obama’s strategy.



CLICK HERE TO READ The Card Check "Compromise"

Amanda Carpenter

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Handing over the reigns to the Arizona and Maricopa County Republican Empire....and sittin’ this one out By 'The GHOST'

I’m taking a break from recruiting and apologizing for the GOP. My family needs me. This is a perfect time to reconnect with my wife and (nearly adult) children. I’m not a sore loser; but, I will admit that I’m not extreme enough for the current Arizona and Maricopa County Republican leadership. I’ll also confess this….my mind needs a rest from all of the venom, name calling, embarrassing antics, anger and hostility. Unity – Schmunity. It’ll never happen here in Arizona. Why can’t we be honest and admit that it is impossible? It is impossible, Mr. Ash/Pullen/Haney. Desirable? Yes. Possible? No.

There have been calls from around the State to compromise and just work together to elect Republicans in the future while ignoring reality. However, compromise rises out of negotiations on behalf of two or more concerned parties. There is no negotiating with the newly
elected AZ GOP leadership, only submission and obedience are tolerated. I don’t submit to anyone – only God. I don’t conform. I don’t fake it and I would never expect anyone else to. The State GOP and MCRC are supposed to work to elect Republicans – without administering a secret purity litmus test. How can we move forward without admitting the truth? The current AZ GOP leadership is committing GOP genocide in this state.

Think about this Mr. Ash, Mr. Pullen and Mr. Haney……. Jews, Catholics and evangelical Christians have completely different religious ideologies. They may work together and agree on one or two social/platform issues within the GOP but if you start asking about the Messiah, Salvation, Worship, Communion, the Rapture and who is the ‘go to guy’ – God, Jesus or a priest/pope………you’re in trouble. There will never be any agreement or compromise. There shouldn’t be. It is what it is. You should expect no less of us “we thought we were but I guess we’re not Republican/angry/pure enough” Republicans drowning in the GOP abyss here in Arizona.

Our kids are watching and listening to everything
that is said and done. The GOP won’t be able to buy a vote from them in the future unless it learns the real value of the spirit of compromise, tolerance and acceptance.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with refusing to be bullied or shamed into volunteering for the AZ GOP when I am disgusted by those in leadership. People leave their jobs, churches or other civic organizations all of the time when there is a big leadership change. I’ll cling to my life-long belief in “the party principles” but claim no current affiliation with the local party. It’s an act of courage to stand up for MY principles. In reality, it will only be for a short time – in church it’s called a “season”. My “season” of a sabbatical from the AZ GOP is here. I’m on vacation. I’m waving the white flag. I’m a working man with a family. I’m sure there are plenty of retired and pure-enough folks waiting to volunteer and contribute. Knock yourself out.

Congressman JEFF FLAKE - Why we need to stop 'pay to play'

Pay to play. It's never really been a secret in Washington, D.C., but the egregiousness of this practice is just starting to rear its ugly head.

In today's Roll Call , it is being reported that longtime Rep. Jack Murtha's (D-PA) campaign was well funded by those for whom he secured earmarks. When he was in the fight for his political life last fall, Rep. Murtha cashed in chips he had accumulated through earmarking.

As you know, I've long railed against this practice. It's completely unethical, irresponsible and an incredible waste of your tax dollars. Governor Blagojevich's recent scandal in allegedly trying to sell a U.S. Senate seat is just another example of the 'Pay to Play' mentality.

It's time we end this practice once and for all.

With the new administration's focus on change, I've offered a new piece of legislation aimed at cutting the connection between earmarks and campaign contributions by clarifying that campaign contributions do, in fact, constitute a "financial interest" that often influence congressional earmarking.

A piece ran in today's Roll Call about my efforts. I encourage you to read it here.
I'd appreciate hearing back from you about this or any other issue you may be concerned about.

Please read the article from Roll Call and leave a comment for me on www.JeffFlake.com.

Best Regards,

Jeff Flake

Putting the Pig Before the Bacon By Robert Romano

01/28/2009

"We will ban all earmarks in the recovery package. And I describe earmarks as the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review. So what I'm saying is, we're not having earmarks in the recovery package, period."—Then President-elect Barack Obama, January 6th, 2009.

President Barack Obama may be serious about banning pork in the new “stimulus” bill. And, perhaps, no individual members of Congress will insert “pet projects” (i.e. earmarks) into the legislation that is ultimately passed by Congress and presented for his signature.

But, of course, in the final analysis, that does not mean that the $825 billion legislation will be any less wasteful. Because, it will not matter to the American taxpayer whether the bacon was added to the package piecemeal—or if the entire pig was served up upon introduction, as appears to be the case here.

As ALG News reported yesterday in “The Top-Ten Bottom Feeders,” the debt stimulus has plenty of pork: $300 billion to bail out state governments from record deficits, $4.19 billion for “neighborhood stabilization” that’s really a disguised payout to groups like ACORN that are made eligible for said funds, $650 million for digital TV coupons, and $21 million for sod.
According to top Capitol Hill sources close to the process, instead of the typical earmark process—the Christmas tree decoration approach as described by Mr. Obama in the above quotation—pet projects have been inserted as specific sections of the bill itself. In short, why nickel and dime it, when you can just go whole hog?

This cynical approach gives the new President political cover to “deliver” on his promise—and yet affords individual members the opportunity to once again bring home the bacon.

It’s a lot like having your cake and eating it, too. To the President’s credit, Mr. Obama did ask yesterday for Congressional leaders to remove a so-called “family planning” provision allocating some $200 million for contraceptives that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had touted as a cost-cutting measure. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that such a measure—which was really a special interest payout to the Planned Parenthood lobby—“does not belong in the economic recovery and reinvestment plan.” That’s probably because procreation hasn’t a wit to do with economic recovery or reinvestment.

And, of course, neither does bailing out state governments from deficits that they created by profligate spending to the tune of $300 billion. Nor $4.19 billion for “neighborhood stabilization.” Nor $600 million for new cars for the federal government. Etc., etc. Will Mr. Obama be going through the legislation with a fine tooth comb to find the bacon bits that are sprinkled on just about every page?—“period.” Even if he did, individual members of Congress just may be a bit too greedy—just a little too power-hungry, to even help their Party’s leader to keep an important promise. Other examples of disguised earmarks are highlighted at SenateConservatives.com: $70 million for a supercomputer at National Center for Environmental Prediction in Camp Springs, Maryland, or $250 million for repairs to a NASA facility in Texas and California, $70 million of which “is to improve NASA’s supercomputing capabilities…” Supercomputers are clearly weighing heavily on the salons’ minds.

Unfortunately, media outlets like MSNBC chose to print Mr. Obama’s contentions verbatim without one word of caution. And without one mention of opposition from those on the other side of the aisle—or even within his own party.

That may make for very good public relations for the new President. But it does nothing to ensure that waste, fraud, and abuse are not allocated, aggregated, and perpetrated in the $825 billion boondoggle headed for Mr. Obama’s desk.

The truth is, once Congress brings him the bill, they can bring home the bacon—without ever mentioning anything so distasteful as earmarks, pork, pet projects, or outright political payoffs.
Robert Romano is the Editor of ALG News Bureau.

200 Economists Against the Stimulus Written by Adam Bitely

NetRight Nation Blog

Tuesday, 27 January 2009 19:03

A letter will be placed in the Washington Post, NY Times and Roll Call today.

This letter is signed by 200 economists declaring that more government involvement to the economic crisis will do nothing to solve the problem as well as refuting the claim that ALL economists are Keynesian. Hats off to these guys!

The names are listed below:

BURTON ABRAMS, Univ. of Delaware
DOUGLAS ADIE, Ohio University
RYAN AMACHER, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
J.J.ARIAS, Georgia College & State University
HOWARD BAETJER, JR., Towson University
STACIE BECK, Univ. of Delaware
DON BELLANTE, Univ. of South Florida
JAMES BENNETT, George Mason University
BRUCE BENSON, Florida State University
SANJAI BHAGAT, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
MARK BILS, Univ. of Rochester
ALBERTO BISIN, New York University
WALTER BLOCK, Loyola University New Orleans
CECIL BOHANON, Ball State University
MICHELE BOLDRIN,Washington University in St. Louis
DONALD BOOTH, Chapman University
MICHAEL BORDO, Rutgers University
SAMUEL BOSTAPH, Univ. of Dallas
SCOTT BRADFORD, Brigham Young University
GENEVIEVE BRIAND, Eastern Washington University
GEORGE BROWER, Moravian College
JAMES BUCHANAN, Nobel laureate
RICHARD BURDEKIN, Claremont McKenna College
HENRY BUTLER, Northwestern University
WILLIAM BUTOS, Trinity College
PETER CALCAGNO, College of Charleston
BRYAN CAPLAN, George Mason University
ART CARDEN, Rhodes College
JAMES CARDON, Brigham Young University
DUSTIN CHAMBERS, Salisbury University
EMILY CHAMLEE-WRIGHT, Beloit College
V.V. CHARI, Univ. of Minnesota
BARRY CHISWICK, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
LAWRENCE CIMA, John Carroll University
J.R. CLARK, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
GIAN LUCA CLEMENTI, New York University
R.MORRIS COATS, Nicholls State University
JOHN COCHRAN, Metropolitan State College
JOHN COCHRANE, Univ. of Chicago
JOHN COGAN, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
JOHN COLEMAN, Duke University
BOYD COLLIER, Tarleton State University
ROBERT COLLINGE, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
LEE COPPOCK, Univ. of Virginia
MARIO CRUCINI, Vanderbilt University
CHRISTOPHER CULP, Univ. of Chicago
KIRBY CUNDIFF, Northeastern State University
ANTONY DAVIES, Duquesne University
JOHN DAWSON, Appalachian State University
CLARENCE DEITSCH, Ball State University
ARTHUR DIAMOND, JR., Univ. of Nebraska at Omaha
JOHN DOBRA, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
JAMES DORN, Towson University
CHRISTOPHER DOUGLAS, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
FLOYD DUNCAN, Virginia Military Institute
FRANCIS EGAN, Trinity College
JOHN EGGER, Towson University
KENNETH ELZINGA, Univ. of Virginia
PAUL EVANS, Ohio State University
EUGENE FAMA, Univ. of Chicago
W. KEN FARR, Georgia College & State University
HARTMUT FISCHER, Univ. of San Francisco
FRED FOLDVARY, Santa Clara University
MURRAY FRANK, Univ. of Minnesota
PETER FRANK,Wingate University
TIMOTHY FUERST, Bowling Green State University
B. DELWORTH GARDNER, Brigham Young University
JOHN GAREN, Univ. of Kentucky
RICK GEDDES, Cornell University
AARON GELLMAN, Northwestern University
WILLIAM GERDES, Clarke College
MICHAEL GIBBS, Univ. of Chicago
STEPHAN GOHMANN, Univ. of Louisville
RODOLFO GONZALEZ, San Jose State University
RICHARD GORDON, Penn State University
PETER GORDON, Univ. of Southern California
ERNIE GOSS, Creighton University
PAUL GREGORY, Univ. of Houston
EARL GRINOLS, Baylor University
DANIEL GROPPER, Auburn University
R.W. HAFER, Southern IllinoisUniversity, Edwardsville
ARTHUR HALL, Univ. of Kansas
STEVE HANKE, John Hopkins
STEPHEN HAPPEL, Arizona State University
FRANK HEFNER, College of Charleston
RONALD HEINER, George Mason University
DAVID HENDERSON, Hoover Institution,Stanford University
ROBERT HERREN, North Dakota State University
GAILEN HITE, Columbia University
STEVEN HORWITZ, St. Lawrence University
JOHN HOWE, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia
JEFFREY HUMMEL, San Jose State University
BRUCE HUTCHINSON, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
BRIAN JACOBSEN,Wisconsin Lutheran College
JASON JOHNSTON, Univ. of Pennsylvania
BOYAN JOVANOVIC, New York University
JONATHAN KARPOFF, Univ. of Washington
BARRY KEATING, Univ. of Notre Dame
NAVEEN KHANNA, Michigan State University
NICHOLAS KIEFER, Cornell University
DANIEL KLEIN, George Mason University
PAUL KOCH, Univ. of Kansas
NARAYANA KOCHERLAKOTA, Univ. of Minnesota
MAREK KOLAR, Delta College
ROGER KOPPL, Fairleigh Dickinson University
KISHORE KULKARNI, MetropolitanState College of Denver
DEEPAK LAL, UCLA
GEORGE LANGELETT, South Dakota State University
JAMES LARRIVIERE, Spring Hill College
ROBERT LAWSON, Auburn University
JOHN LEVENDIS, Loyola University New Orleans
DAVID LEVINE,Washington University in St. Louis
PETER LEWIN, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
DEAN LILLARD, Cornell University
ZHENG LIU, Emory University
ALAN LOCKARD, Binghampton University
EDWARD LOPEZ, San Jose State University
JOHN LUNN, Hope College
GLENN MACDONALD,WashingtonUniversity in St. Louis
MICHAEL MARLOW, CaliforniaPolytechnic State University
DERYL MARTIN, Tennessee Tech University
DALE MATCHECK, Northwood University
DEIRDRE MCCLOSKEY, Univ. of Illinois, Chicago
JOHN MCDERMOTT, Univ. of South Carolina
JOSEPH MCGARRITY, Univ. of Central Arkansas
ROGER MEINERS, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
ALLAN MELTZER, Carnegie Mellon University
JOHN MERRIFIELD, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
JAMES MILLER III, George Mason University
JEFFREY MIRON, Harvard University
THOMAS MOELLER, Texas Christian University
JOHN MOORHOUSE,Wake Forest University
ANDREA MORO, Vanderbilt University
ANDREW MORRISS, Univ. of Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign
MICHAEL MUNGER, Duke University
KEVIN MURPHY, Univ. of Southern California
RICHARD MUTH, Emory University
CHARLES NELSON, Univ. of Washington
SETH NORTON, Wheaton College
LEE OHANIAN, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
LYDIA ORTEGA, San Jose State University
EVAN OSBORNE, Wright State University
RANDALL PARKER, East Carolina University
DONALD PARSONS, George Washington University
SAM PELTZMAN, Univ. of Chicago
MARK PERRY, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
CHRISTOPHER PHELAN, Univ. of Minnesota
GORDON PHILLIPS, Univ. of Maryland
MICHAEL PIPPENGER, Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks
TOMASZ PISKORSKI, Columbia University
BRENNAN PLATT, Brigham Young University
JOSEPH POMYKALA, Towson University
WILLIAM POOLE, Univ. of Delaware
BARRY POULSON, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
BENJAMIN POWELL, Suffolk University
EDWARD PRESCOTT, Nobel laureate
GARY QUINLIVAN, Saint Vincent College
REZA RAMAZANI, Saint Michael’s College
ADRIANO RAMPINI, Duke University
ERIC RASMUSEN, Indiana University
MARIO RIZZO, New York University
RICHARD ROLL, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
ROBERT ROSSANA,Wayne State University
JAMES ROUMASSET, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
JOHN ROWE, Univ. of South Florida
CHARLES ROWLEY, George Mason University
JUAN RUBIO-RAMIREZ, Duke University
ROY RUFFIN, Univ. of Houston
KEVIN SALYER, Univ. of California, Davis
PAVEL SAVOR, Univ. of Pennsylvania
RONALD SCHMIDT, Univ. of Rochester
CARLOS SEIGLIE, Rutgers University
WILLIAM SHUGHART II, Univ. of Mississippi
CHARLES SKIPTON, Univ. of Tampa
JAMES SMITH,Western Carolina University
VERNON SMITH, Nobel laureate
LAWRENCE SOUTHWICK, JR., Univ. at Buffalo
DEAN STANSEL, Florida Gulf Coast University
HOUSTON STOKES, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
BRIAN STROW,Western Kentucky University
SHIRLEY SVORNY, California StateUniversity, Northridge
JOHN TATOM, Indiana State University
WADE THOMAS, State Universityof New York at Oneonta
HENRY THOMPSON, Auburn University
ALEX TOKAREV, The King’s College
EDWARD TOWER, Duke University
LEO TROY, Rutgers University
DAVID TUERCK, Suffolk University
CHARLOTTE TWIGHT, Boise State University
KAMAL UPADHYAYA, Univ. of New Haven
CHARLES UPTON, Kent State University
T. NORMANVAN COTT, Ball State University
RICHARD VEDDER, Ohio University
RICHARD WAGNER, George Mason University
DOUGLAS M. WALKER, College of Charleston
DOUGLAS O. WALKER, Regent University
CHRISTOPHER WESTLEY, JacksonvilleState University
LAWRENCE WHITE, Univ. of Missouri at St. Louis
WALTER WILLIAMS, George Mason University
DOUG WILLS, Univ. of Washington Tacoma
DENNIS WILSON,Western Kentucky University
GARY WOLFRAM, Hillsdale College
HUIZHONG ZHOU,Western Michigan University