__________________________________________________

Follow @AriMFine, @AndrewLawton and @RyanWRuppert on Twitter to stay up-to-date on any and all important news.

Click HERE  for information about Mark Steyn’s appearance in London THIS MONDAY.

__________________________________________________

Click HERE to keep track of the GOP tsunami in the House and HERE for the Senate.

__________________________________________________

RGA: Remember November: The Final Act

Remember November: The Final Act from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

__________________________________________________

A Crossroads Election
By Thomas Sowell

Most elections are about particular policies, particular scandals or particular personalities. But these issues don’t mean as much this year– not because they are not important, but because this election is a crossroads election, one that can decide what path this country will take for many years to come.

Runaway “stimulus” spending, high unemployment and ObamaCare are all legitimate and important issues. It is just that freedom and survival are more important.

For all its sweeping and scary provisions, ObamaCare is not nearly as important as the way it was passed. If legislation can become laws passed without either the public or the Congress knowing what is in those laws, then the fundamental principle of a free, self-governing people is completely undermined.

Some members of Congress who voted for ObamaCare, and who are now telling us that they realize this legislation has flaws which they intend to correct, are missing the point.

The very reason for holding hearings on pending legislation, listening to witnesses on all sides of the issue, and having Congressional debates that will be reported and commented on in the media, is so that problems can be explored and alternatives considered before the legislation is voted into law.

Rushing ObamaCare into law too fast for anyone to have read it served no other purpose than to prevent this very process from taking place. The rush to pass this law that would not take effect until after the next two elections simply cut the voters out of the loop– and that is painfully close to ruling by decree.

Other actions and proposals by this administration likewise represent moves in the direction of arbitrary rule, worthy of a banana republic, with only a mocking facade of freedom.

These include threats against people who simply choose to express opinions counter to administration policy, such as a warning to an insurance company that there would be “zero tolerance” for “misinformation” when the insurance company said that ObamaCare would create costs that force up premiums.

Zero tolerance for the right of free speech guaranteed by the Constitution?

This warning comes from an administration with arbitrary powers that can impose ruinous costs on a given business.

Continue

__________________________________________________

National Review: How Big a Wave? Ask Cook and Rothenberg
By Henry Olsen

As we enter the final week of the election, everyone wants to know how big the House GOP wave will be. No one has a precise answer yet, but if past performance is any guide, the gold-standard psephologists when it comes to political fortune-telling are Charlie Cook and Stu Rothenberg — and yesterday, both of Cook and Rothenberg showed a massive shift to the GOP. If we use the accuracy of their 2006 and 2008 predications as an indicator, we will be able get a good idea of exactly how large the wave will be from their final House-race ratings, to be released on Monday.

Both men use similar categories: Some races are “Likely” (Cook) or “Favored” (Rothenberg) to go for one party or another; slightly tougher races to call are labeled as “Leaning” toward a party; those hardest to call are rated as toss-ups, which Rothenberg breaks down into three categories (pure, tilting Democratic, and tilting Republican).

For 2006 and 2008, both men have 100 percent records in their “Likely” or “Favored” categories for the winning party (in both years, the Democrats). Their records in the races they rate as “Leaning” toward the winning party are nearly as good: combined, only two seats in two years. Thus, any Democrat whose opponent is said to be “likely” or “favored” to win come Monday will almost surely go down to defeat.

What about the toss-ups? They break only slightly toward the winning party. In 2008, Cook rated 35 races as toss-ups; Democrats won 19 of them, or 54 percent. In 2006, he rated 39 races as toss-ups; Democrats won 22 of them, or 56 percent.

Rothenberg’s ratings are more complicated, but obtain nearly similar results. In 2008, he said 14 races were pure toss-ups; Democrats won seven of them. Democrats won nine of the 13 races labeled as tilting Democratic, and Republicans won all of toss-ups tilting their way. All together, Democrats won exactly half of the 32 toss-ups. In 2006, Democrats won ten of the 19 pure toss-ups, all of the races that were tilting Democratic, and one of the ten tilting Republican. Combine all the toss-ups and Democrats won 21 of 40, or 52.5 percent.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Hot Air: Kendrick Meek: Charlie of Orange (Crist) offered me his sister’s cross to get me to drop out

Mr. Crist, the Florida governor, had called Mr. Meek, a Miami congressman, earlier that morning, about 4:50 a.m., leaving a voice mail asking if they could meet up at the AIPAC gathering. “I’ll call you later this morning and see if we can work out a time to get together just you and me,” Mr. Crist said in the voice mail, which was played for Washington Wire by Mr. Meek. “Take care, buddy.”

Mr. Meek was scheduled to speak at AIPAC about 8:30 and Mr. Crist at 10, but the governor showed up an hour early in hopes of catching the congressman.

Mr. Meek said he tried to avoid Mr. Crist, but as he left the stage, “there he was, right in front of me.”

“He said, ‘If you were to drop out and work with me and help me we together can beat Marco Rubio,’” Mr. Meek recalled. “I said, ‘Governor, that’s a non-starter.’

“Then he dug down into his pocket and pulled a small cross out,” Mr. Meek continued. “He said his sister gave it to him and he wanted to give it to me so I would think about it.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

Call Me Senator – From David Zucker

__________________________________________________

The Next President (Sarah Palin): Lisa, are you going to shut down my Facebook page for writing this?

Yesterday, Lisa Murkowski’s hired guns threatened radio host Dan Fagan, and more importantly, the station that airs Fagan’s show, with legal action for allegedly illegal “electioneering.” The station, unlike Murkowski, who is flush with millions of dollars from vested corporate interests, does not have a budget for a legal defense. So it did what any small market station would do when threatened by Beltway lawyers charging $500 to $1000 an hour – they pulled Dan Fagan off the air.

Does all this sound heavy handed? It is. It is an interference with Dan Fagan’s constitutional right to free speech. It is also a shocking indictment against Lisa Murkowski. How low will she go to hold onto power? First, she gets the Division of Elections to change its write-in process – a process that Judge Pfiffner correctly determined had been in place without change for 50 years. She is accepting financial support from federal contractors, an act that is highly questionable and now pending before the FEC. And today, she played her last card. She made it clear that if you disagree with her and encourage others to exercise their civic rights, she’ll take you off the air.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Us News: W 48% Obama 43%
By Paul Bedard

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, rapped by the White House for pledging to make Barack Obama a one-term president, seems to have the support of a majority of Americans. A new poll provided to Whispers says that 56 percent of likely voters want the president fired.

According to pollster Doug Schoen, whose new poll shows vast support for the Tea Party movement among voters, the president is still liked by about half the nation. In fact, more like him personally than like his policies. Some 48 percent think he’s a nice guy, while just 42 percent approve of his job performance.

But that personal favorability doesn’t translate into re-election support when voters are asked if Obama deserves a second term. Says Schoen: “Despite voters feelings toward Obama personally, 56 percent say he does not deserve to be re-elected, while 38 percent say he does deserve to be re-elected president.” Worse, Schoen adds, “43 percent say that Barack Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, while 48 percent say Bush was a better president than Obama has been.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

Discovery: What We All Knew – Liberalism is a Mental Disorder
Analysis by Liz Day

Is political ideology derived from a person’s social environment or is it a result of genetic predisposition?

It’s an interaction of both, according to a recent study on our political leanings that boosts both sides of the nature versus nurture debate.

Scientists at the University of California San Diego and Harvard University determined that people who carry a variant of the DRD4 gene are more likely to be liberals as adults, depending on the number of friendships they had during high school. They published their study in a recent issue of The Journal of Politics.

Data was analyzed from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (the same source for a recent study that found intelligent children drink more alcohol as adults).

The four authors, including UCSD’s James Fowler, wanted to explore if politics were heritable by identifying a specific gene variant associated with political leaning. They hypothesized that individuals with a genetic predisposition toward seeking out new experiences would tend to be more liberal.

The 7R variant of DRD4, a dopamine receptor gene, had previously been associated with novelty seeking. The researchers theorized novelty seeking would be related to openness, a psychological trait that has been associated with political liberalism.

However, social environment was critical. The more friends gene carriers have in high school, the more likely they are to be liberals as adults. The authors write, “Ten friends can move a person with two copies of 7R allele almost halfway from being a conservative to moderate or from being moderate to liberal.”

They theorize a larger social network may bring more diverse viewpoints, which could be an influence on the liberal development.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Financial Times: A presidency heading for a fiscal train wreck
By Nouriel Roubini

What has been the fiscal performance of President Barack Obama? He inherited the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, as well as a budget deficit that – after much needed bail-outs and a series of reckless tax cuts – was already close to $1,000bn. His stimulus package, together with a backstop of the financial system, low rates and quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve, prevented another depression. Mr Obama also deserves credit that the US, alone among advanced economies, currently supports a “growth now”, rather than an “austerity now” path.

But this is but one half of the picture; we must also judge his first two years on his ability to anticipate what the economy will need tomorrow. Here the picture is much less positive. Given the likely path of fiscal policy after next Tuesday’s election – with the expiration of existing stimulus and transfer payments, and even with most of the 2001-03 tax cuts being kept – the US economy will soon experience serious fiscal drag just when it needs a further boost. Problematically, the administration’s failures leave it relying on the Fed, which is bent on further QE, likely to be announced next Wednesday. But studies show this will have little effect on US growth in 2011, so fiscal policy should be doing some of the lifting to prevent a double dip recession.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Newsweek: Rush Limbaugh: Always Right
by Zev Chafets

Rush Limbaugh wants Republicans in Congress to send the president a “repeal bill every week.”

People sometimes ask Rush Limbaugh if he has plans to run for public office, and his answer is always the same—he can’t afford the pay cut.

This is a rare understatement by El Rushbo. His annual income is greater than the combined salary of the entire U.S. Senate (and you can toss in a few dozen congressmen and cabinet secretaries for good measure). “I certainly don’t derive my living by what goes on in Washington, and I’m not dependent on what happens there,” he boasted to his radio audience in September. “The further away that city is from my life, the more prosperous I am.”

Limbaugh, who lives like a pasha in an oceanside estate in Palm Beach, Fla., doesn’t need to go to Washington to be heard there. His voice carries to the nation’s capital and beyond, to every state and congressional district in the country. The Rush Limbaugh Show is on the air three hours a day, five days a week, carried by some 650 radio stations. Industry estimates put his weekly audience somewhere between 15 million and 20 million. Talkers Magazine recently named him the most important radio host of all time.

Limbaugh has wielded political influence since his show first went national 22 years ago. In 1994 he was so important to the Republican congressional landslide that the GOP House freshman class made him an honorary member. But never before in his long career has Limbaugh had the degree of political influence he currently enjoys. It is not an exaggeration to say, as former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel did, that Limbaugh is “the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party.” He intends to use that force and energy to shape the Republican side of the next Congress.

In a recent e-mail exchange, Limbaugh laid out his to-do list, which includes repeal of the health-care law and the financial-regulatory-reform bill; ending the ban on offshore drilling; the reprivatization of General Motors, Chrysler, and the student-loan program; a spike in the heart of cap-and-trade legislation (he regards global warming as a hoax); the elimination of the capital-gains tax; a reduction of the corporate tax rate to 20 percent; and replacement of the progressive income-tax code with a flat or “fair” tax.

Continue

__________________________________________________

National Review: Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?
By: Jonah Goldberg (a recent guest on Strictly Right Radio)

I’d like to ask a simple question: Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?

In case you didn’t know, Assange is the Australian computer programmer behind WikiLeaks, a massive — and massively successful — effort to disclose secret or classified information. In a series of recent dumps, he unveiled thousands upon thousands of classified documents from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Military and other government officials insist that WikiLeaks is doing serious damage to American national security and is going to get people killed, including brave Iraqis and Afghans who’ve risked their lives and the lives of their families to help us.

Even Assange agrees. He told the New Yorker earlier this year that he fully understands innocent people might die as a result of the “collateral damage” of his work and that WikiLeaks may have “blood on our hands.” WikiLeaks is easily among the most significant and well-publicized breaches of American national security since the Rosenbergs gave the Soviets the bomb.

So again, I ask: Why wasn’t Assange garroted in his hotel room years ago?

It’s a serious question.

In almost every corner of the popular culture, there are people who assume incredible competence on the part of our intelligence agencies. We take it as a given that spooks can, in the immortal words of Elvis, take care of business in a flash. In the Jason Bourne movies, say the wrong word into your cell phone, and assassins will find you at the train station in minutes. In AMC’s Rubicon, if you pay too close attention to crossword puzzles, your train will be “accidentally” derailed. In Three Days of the Condor, if you ask your bosses the wrong question, a postman with an ice-bullet-shooting machine gun will pay you a visit.

Continue

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

Charlie Crist is a Detestable & Pathetic Human Being

__________________________________________________

Wall Street Journal: Stop Bashing Business, Mr. President: If we tried to start The Home Depot today, it’s a stone cold certainty that it would never have gotten off the ground.

By: Ken Langone

Although I was glad that you answered a question of mine at the Sept. 20 town-hall meeting you hosted in Washington, D.C., Mr. President, I must say that the event seemed more like a lecture than a dialogue. For more than two years the country has listened to your sharp rhetoric about how American businesses are short-changing workers, fleecing customers, cheating borrowers, and generally “driving the economy into a ditch,” to borrow your oft-repeated phrase.

My question to you was why, during a time when investment and dynamism are so critical to our country, was it necessary to vilify the very people who deliver that growth? Instead of offering a straight answer, you informed me that I was part of a “reckless” group that had made “bad decisions” and now required your guidance, if only I’d stop “resisting” it.

I’m sure that kind of argument draws cheers from the partisan faithful. But to my ears it sounded patronizing. Of course, one of the chief conceits of centralized economic planning is that the planners know better than everybody else.

But there’s a much deeper problem than whether I am personally irked or not. Your insistence that your policies are necessary and beneficial to business is utterly at odds with what you and your administration are saying elsewhere. You pick a fight with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, accusing it of using foreign money to influence congressional elections, something the chamber adamantly denies. Your U.S. attorney in New York, Preet Bahrara, compares investment firms to Mexican drug cartels and says he wants the power to wiretap Wall Street when he sees fit. And you drew guffaws of approving laughter with your car-wreck metaphor, recently telling a crowd that those who differ with your approach are “standing up on the road, sipping a Slurpee” while you are “shoving” and “sweating” to fix the broken-down jalopy of state.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Politico: Daniels open to VAT, oil Tax Hike
Alternate Headline: Mitch Daniels Presidential Ambitions, RIP

By: James Hohmann

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels opened the door Thursday to supporting both a value added tax and a tariff on imported oil, bold proposals that could cause trouble for him with conservatives as he flirts with a long-shot bid for the presidency.

The Republican, staying mum about his 2012 plans, was the guest of honor at a dinner sponsored by the conservative Hudson Institute. He received an award named for Herman Kahn, the legendary nuclear theorist who founded the respected institute 49 years ago and helped inspire the character “Dr. Strangelove” in the movie by the same name.

Daniels, once the Hudson Institute’s chief executive, described himself as an acolyte of Kahn’s and marveled at the creative thinking evident in his 1982 book, “The Coming Boom.”

Daniels recited from Kahn’s book: “It would be most useful to redesign the tax system to discourage consumption and encourage savings and investment. One obvious possibility is a value added tax and flat income tax, with the only exception being a lower standard deduction.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

LA Times: Obama’s outsized ego

By: Jonah Goldberg

“That’s all right, all of you know who I am,” President Obama joked last week when the presidential seal fell off his podium during a speech in Pittsburgh.

Even though the incident made headlines for no discernible journalistic reason, it was noteworthy as a succinct example of Obama’s arrogance problem. Rather than make a self-deprecating joke, he opted instead to make a self-inflating one, as if to say that the title mattered less than the man.

The good news is that it’s apparently not racist to call Obama arrogant anymore. Not long ago, Keith Olbermann and other gargoyles on the parapets of establishment liberalism insisted that if you were to call attention to the fact that Obama ostentatiously holds himself in very high regard, you were really calling him “uppity,” if you know what I mean.

Now what was once taboo has become undeniable. Even the New Yorker’s David Remnick, author of a loving biography of Obama, tells Der Spiegel, “Obama has a considerable ego.”

And here’s Time’s Mark Halperin: “With the exception of core Obama administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusion: The White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

Newsmax: Interview With The Next president of the United States (My headline)

__________________________________________________

American Spectator: Is It Time for a Convention?

By Philip Klein

In August, Missouri became the latest state to rebel against the new national health care law when 71 percent of voters supported a ballot initiative rejecting the legislation’s requirement that individuals purchase government-approved insurance. Several other states will consider similar measures on the ballot this November.

However satisfying this backlash against ObamaCare may be to opponents of the law, these state-based efforts could all be for naught if the U.S. Supreme Court sides with Congress and rules that the legislation’s individual mandate is constitutional.

Such a decision would have far-reaching consequences, giving broad new power to the federal government over individuals and states. It would mean that the interstate Commerce Clause would have been interpreted so broadly as to allow the federal government to regulate the activities of people who choose not to engage in commerce, and within a health insurance market where businesses aren’t even allowed to sell their products across state lines. It would represent the culmination of decades in erosion of the concept of the separation of powers between federal and state governments, and the boldest example of congressional over-reach in the age of Obama.

In that scenario, short of repeal, the only remaining way to fight the law would be to amend the Constitution. Given how polarized the modern U.S. Senate is, it’s highly unlikely that a proposed amendment would garner the necessary 67 votes needed to amend the Constitution in the traditional manner. Yet the Founding Fathers left the states one last check on federal power.

Under Article V of the Constitution, “Congress… on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which… shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States.”

The Constitution has never been amended through a convention of the states, and this route remains controversial, with many conservatives fearing that the meeting would turn into a circus in the modern media age, and open the door to a wholesale rewriting of the nation’s founding document. Yet a new body of research suggests that these fears are unwarranted, and that there are enough checks built into the system to prevent what scholars refer to as a “runaway convention.” With state legislators and grassroots activists searching for ways to limit the abuses of Congress, the possibility has begun to generate more chatter.

Continue

After losing to Christine O’Donnell, Mike Castle immediately announced that he will not endorse the chosen candidate of his party. When asked if he thought the national party would support O’Donnell, Castle said he did not know, then snidely threw in “they [the national party] should save their money.” Of course – only a spineless RINO like Castle can win.*

The party establishment has endorsed losers in seven states now. They have opposed Marco Rubio, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Joe Miller, Ken Buck, Mike Lee and now Christine O’Donnell. Meanwhile, the upper echelon of the party has pushed candidates like Chralie Crist and Mike Castle. In addition, the party leadership’s stated position is to support incumbents, like Lisa Murkowski this election cycle, and other loyal Republicans, like Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chafee and Dede Scozzafava. Notice a trend? Besides all these candidates being losers, none of them supported the GOP after it had outlived its usefulness for them. Arlen Specter even switched parties. But the establishment knows best.

The GOP ruling class is getting nervous. They know that the 2010 class of Republicans is not coming to Washington to climb the social ladder. Former Senate surrender Majority  Leader Trent Lott told the Washington Post of the new breed of Republicans, all endorsed, brought to the forefront, and financially supported by Jim DeMint, “We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples… as soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.” In the same Post story, Bob Bennett, who lost in Utah, said “That’s my concern, that at the moment there is not a cohesive Republican strategy of this is what we’re going to do. And certainly among the tea-party types there’s clearly no strategy of this is what we’re going to do.” The GOP establishment is not just afraid of the Tea Party movement, some of the party leaders are downright resentful. The establishment fears and understands that the election of true citizen legislators spells the end of their reign.

The ruling class Republicans are being replaced by what was noted above as a ‘new breed’ of Republicans. These new Republicans are true to the vision of the Founders. They are regular, country class, Americans. These citizen legislators are running because they have seen the destruction caused by decades of ruling class politicians in both parties. These Republicans are not going to be persuaded into voting for Amnesty, No Child Left Behind or another TARP. Instead, the new GOP will fight big government and offer a choice, not an echo.

Hotline reported that a senior Republican leadership aide criticized Senator DeMint for his endorsement of Christine O’Donnell. The courageous anonymous aide said “DeMint took it a step too far here, and I think he has lost the remaining credibility he had, even within the caucus, DeMint is not interested in a majority, he’d rather establish himself as the leader on the fringe.” Think they’re nervous? The Republican leadership should be worried – Jim DeMint’s ‘fringe’ of citizen legislators is coming to town and their elections signals the end of the ruling class’ ownership of the Republican Party.

*UPDATE: last night the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) announced that they would not support Christine O’Donnell. After 12 hours of relentless criticism for their vindictive position, the NRSC has backtracked and is now supporting O’Donnell.

And there you have it – Crist, who is clearly running as an independent because he has certain core convictions (?) won’t say who he will caucus with. I’m sure his campaign will be an ideas-based one.

Charlie Crist was a poor Governor of Florida; he was a lousy candidate in the GOP Senatorial primary; and, he would be a brutal Senator. He has no core principles, save what is best for Charlie Crist. In fact, ‘lifelong Republican’ Charlie Crist went so far as to try to get Rhambo and Dr. Demento Dean to stand with him against Floridians.

Crist’s kind, unscrupulous self-promoters, are the problem with the GOP. The party does not need Charlie Crists who have no core convictions. It is not enough for the GOP to win, conservatism has to win. Conservatism will save the United States. The Republican Party is only a vessel to advance conservatism. A Senator Crist would not be a roadblock in the Obama agenda, he would embrace big government socialism, as he has done in the past. In November, Marco Rubio will prevail. He will be a leading light in the GOP for years to come. Charlie, well, he’ll have a lot of time to work on that tan.

You can listen to this episode online here or subscribe in iTunes.

(Told you so…)

Despite repeatedly assuring voters that he would not seek the Senate seat as an independent, sources close to Crist say that he’s having a change of heart.

It may be the worst-kept secret in American politics today, and it’s apparently about to become a reality. Reliable sources informed me today that embattled Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, whose early lead in his US Senate Republican primary race against former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio has essentially reversed itself in the polls, is preparing to announce sooner rather than later that he will leave the GOP and continue his run for Senate as an independent. Sources add that the speech Crist will use in his announcement is now being drafted.

As Reagan said, when it comes to people who wont subscribe to true conservative principles, “let them go their way.” However, I must admit that I’m a bit concerned about how this will affect Rubio (the conservative one) in the general election. If it was a standard race with a Republican versus a Democrat, Rubio would take it hands-down. However, the presence of a “moderate conservative” (gag) could off-set things a bit.

However, at least Florida doesn’t have to worry about having a boring political ‘scene.’

H/T to AllahPundit.

McCain said “We have to convince these independent voters out there that we did learn our lesson about spending and we will be fiscally responsible.” One wonders where TARP, which McCain stopped his campaign to go persuade Republicans to vote for, fits into that picture. It is rich to hear the man who made a campaign promise to buy all of America’s underwater mortgages talk about fiscal responsibility.

You have to read on in the article to come across the real gem in the piece. Throughout the article, Mr. Progressive Republican answers questions about how the GOP is out of touch, and that if they want to win in the future they have to listen to the people. And who has their finger on the pulse of the USA better than the Maverick himself? Well, just about anyone else. When asked a specific question, it is clear that the Mac still doesn’t  get it. With Marco Rubio pulling away from Obama’s favorite Republican McCain said “sure, I’d be glad to help [Charlie Crist]” in his primary battle. So let me get this right, the problem is that the GOP embraced big spending policies and was out of touch while they were in power, so to solve that the Mac would “be glad” to support Charlie Crist, who was a huge supporter of the Porkulus bill, and has been demolished in the polls by a real conservative that connects with Floridians. Crist literally embraced Obama, while campaigning for the biggest, most wasteful spending bill in American history. Marco Rubio headlined CPAC. Marco Rubio is the model for the future for the GOP, not John McCain and definitely not Charlie Crist. Hopefully in the November general election Americans will have the opportunity to vote fr J.D. Hayworth in Arizona. We already know they’ll have have Rubio on the ballot.