Miller County Republican Party

The Miller County Republican Committee will begin meeting at Big Jakes on Arkansas Blvd. the second Tuesday of odd numbered months (1,3,5,7,9,11) at 6:30 p.m. in January, 2015.

Aug 2, 2015

Can a Trump Ticket Win The Presidency?

Current polls show Trump as leading the Republican field for the Presidential nomination.  Those same polls also show that Trump would lose to a Hillary Clinton ticket.  To further complicate things there is division within the Republican party on Trump.  Some fully support him regardless of his past comments and stands and others point to those comments and stands to say he is just "playing" Republican but is really a Democrat.  Those people may need to remember that even Reagan was a Democrat at one time.

Regardless of what the polls say right now or the feelings within the party, the old saying must be applied that says "It ain't over until it's over".  The fact is we are a long way away from the elections and anyone could get the nomination for either party.  Another fact is that those polls showing Hillary Clinton defeating Trump do not take into account running mates.  A running mate can make or break you on several fronts.

When it comes to running mates, consider the last election.  The Democrat ticket had a Caucasian everyman type and an African American.  Voters could relate to the ticket.  Minorities could look to Obama and say, "he's for us!"  Voters could also look to Biden and say, "I bet I could have a beer with that guy!"  Democrats presented what in their mind, and apparently the voters as well, was a dream team.

Now, look at the Republican ticket.  Republicans put forth a former governor of a small northern state who happened to be rich,  and Caucasian.  The running mate was also from a northern state, Caucasian, and considered to be a rich, inside Washington guy.  Add the fact that neither of these candidates appeared to know how to talk to everyday folks and you have a disconnect with the voter.  In other words the ticket did not appeal to voters as much as the Democrat ticket did.

Fast forward to a potential Trump v Clinton battle.  Clinton has the advantage already.  She has a popular, former President as a husband, she's a woman, she has a long history of Washington service, and she brings an impressive resume along with supporters and potential cabinet members to the table.  Trump on the other hand appears to talk straight, he doesn't seem to play politics, and he knows how to run business....something our government as a whole does not appear to be able to do - if you don't believe me, just look at the shape of the United States Post Office compared to FedEx or UPS or any other delivery service.  Clinton alone has a clear advantage; however, a running mate decision could tip the balance.

For a moment disregard who Clinton might select as a running mate.  Let's just assume that it is someone from the political world - perhaps another Senator, etc.  Most people will not focus on her running mate.  Trump on the other hand will have a focus on who he selects.  If for example he selects another rich, upper class, person (whether in Congress or not) to run with him, he will likely lose the election.  However, that is not likely to happen with Trump.  Remember, Trump likes to win.  He has built a fortune on winning in business and he's not likely to turn that winning spirit off when it comes to selecting a running mate.  Trump will likely select a running mate who is considered the everyman, or who can connect with minorities, but at the same time has a strong service history in government.  He's going to look for a Colin Powell, Condoleezzza Rice, or a Marco Rubio as a running mate.  He's going to do the same thing that Obama did- he will look for a running mate that connects to people that he cannot or perhaps does not connect to as easily.

If Trump selects the right running mate, then the election will be anybody's at the end of the day.  Voters who call themselves Democrats, Republicans, or others and often vote for who they consider to be the best candidate regardless of party, will have a decision to make pending Trump's selection.  Naturally, party hardliners will vote for Trump regardless of his running mate just as Democrat hardliners will vote for Clinton no matter what her negative and questionable escapades have been in recent years.  

In the end, if Trump and Clinton receive the nominations from their parties, the battle will be for the undecided voter as it almost always has been.  That undecided voter will ultimately be more affected by the running mate selection of Trump than by Trump himself.  If Trump wins the nomination, he had better use that genius business mind of his to select a winning combination for the Republican ticket or American will be in for at least four more years of Democrat rule from the White House.

Jun 2, 2015

Gun Liability Insurance and Your 2nd Amendment

A house Democrat, Carolyn Maloney, has just taken another step toward further gun control in Washington.  Maloney has introduced a bill that is highly backed by the insurance companies (more money for them...there's a no brainer) that would require gun owners to have liability insurance.  If gun owners do not have liability insurance, they could face a fine of up to $10,000 for each gun.  Naturally, little to nothing is being said from the Maloney camp about these insurance companies contributing to her campaign, but plenty is being said about this new insurance need in America.

Now let's step back and think logically about this for a moment.  A gun owner who decides to have liability insurance is likely a smart guy.  It's not a bad thing, it's simply not required.  It's much like having a public get together where you want to practice your free speech.  Let's say you want to make a speech about stopping the lumber industry from cutting down trees.  You set up your wooden platform, you get your wooden speaker boxes out, and you set out your wooden chairs.  You fill out all your documents on paper made from trees, using pencils made from trees.  You feel like it's going to rain so you have a cover constructed over the platform using wood as supports.  You're all ready to go!  Except!  You think, "Wow, there's going to be a large crowd here to hear me talk about how we need to stop the lumber industry.  I'd better have some liability insurance."  So you go out and purchase a million dollars worth of liability insurance.  Now, were you required to purchase that liability insurance to hold your public speech?  No.  Was it a good idea?  Yes.  But, there was no law saying you had to get this insurance.

Let's say a church decides to open for services.  There's no mortgage on the building and no issues to be concerned about.  However, the church decides it would be a good idea to have building insurance. In the process, they also decide it's a good idea to have liability insurance since there will be hundreds of people attending church.  Did the church have to have building insurance?  No.  Did the church have to have liability?  No.  Was it a good idea for both?  Yes.

Insurance is a good idea.  But when it comes to our rights under the Bill of Rights, having insurance should be optional.  Imagine if the government required you to have liability insurance for any free speech forums?  Imagine if a church was required to have liability insurance before they could have a service.  To take this further, what if a newspaper was required to have liability insurance before they could publish an article about how bad the Democrat party is acting over liability insurance.  Let's say we let this gun liability insurance go through.  How long will it be before we face liability insurance to have a church service, or to hold a public meeting, or even to publish a track of information in the paper?  How long until you have to pay for your rights?

You might think I'm going overboard on this.  Maybe you think, "Well, liability insurance is okay."  Consider this, when was the last time you saw a significant drop in your home owners insurance, or your car insurance or your health insurance?  Further consider who is going to set this "gun liability" rate plan?  Will it cover one gun?  One owner?  You and your family or just you?

Once you allow any right within the Bill of Rights to require insurance you limit the right.  Today they want liability for guns, tomorrow it may be for your right to pray, or speak, or they may even require you to have liability insurance against illegal search and seizure.  When and where do we draw the line?

They have proposed a $10,000 fine per gun for failure to have the insurance.  One final thought for those who may think liability insurance for guns is long do you think it will be before they raise the rates to a level where you can no longer afford to have a gun?  What if each gun carried a minimum liability premium of $5,000 per year?  Do you really think the average gun owner could afford to exercise his right to bear arms anymore?  It's time to stop the attack on the Bill of Rights.  We do not need liability insurance for any of our rights.

May 5, 2015

Huckabee: Hope to Higher Ground

From USA Today
It's uncertain yet if Mike Huckabee's "Hope to Higher Ground" will catch on as a campaign phrase or if something else will take it's place, but one thing is now certain....Mike Huckabee is running for President in 2016.  The announcement was made in Hempstead Hall in Hope, Arkansas this morning around 11:00 a.m.  The building was packed with people from Arkansas government, including the current Governor Asa who gave a speech, to friends and family of the new, favorite son of Hope.  The Hope school band was present and busses of Hope school kids came to see the potential candidate make his announcement.   There was people present from as far away as Florida and almost all the major news stations covered the event.

After some singing and speeches, Mike finally took the stage to give the big announcement.  This was not done though before Janet Huckabee took the stage and gave an inspiring history of the man who would soon be announcing.  Mrs. Huckabee spoke not only like a mother and wife, but also like a lady who had already been in the role of first lady.  It was easy to forget for a moment that this lady was the first lady of Arkansas because she sounded so much like the kind of first lady most Americans would love to have in the White House.   Her grace seemed to steal the show as she told everyone how Mike sold two favorite guitars to buy a washer and dryer for the small struggling family when they were about to welcome their first baby into the world.  It started more than a few tears rolling in the room when she quoted Mike in regards to the Hurricane Katrina refuges arriving in Arkansas as saying "People first.  Paperwork later."  As she left the stage, she must have known she had stolen the hearts of the audience when she asked, "You all know I'm not the main attraction, right?" to the standing ovation.

When Mike finally took the stage he did what Mike Huckabee always does....he told it straight.  He did not dance around and lay out huge Presidential promises.  He told what he saw as wrong with America, what he saw as right, and what he wanted to fix about what was wrong.   Some in the Twitter universe ( were quick to jump on some of Mike's wording. More than a few times Mike said, "I will try."  People wanted to say that telling everyone he will try is an easy way to give an excuse later for not being able to do something.  I disagree.  For the first time in years, I was happy to hear a potential candidate say, "I will try."  Not a fancy promise like "I'm going to be the President and I'll have a pen and do it anyway!"  No, this was a simply promise that "I will try".  Mike knows something about government that our current president and others sometimes forgets.  You have to work with others in government to get things done and sometimes all you can do is try.  The immediate connection was that we have a candidate who is willing to work with Congress, not go around them.  We have a candidate who believes in term limits, believes in working with others, and has proven time-and-time again that he can do it.  Mike Huckabee is the only Governor of Arkansas to ever take office and find his office door nailed shut on the first day in office!  Can you imagine if someone had nailed the door to the White House shut when a President took office?  But Mike did not bow down to anger or use his power like some people might.  Instead, they removed the nails, opened the door, and reached out to those who had nailed it shut, across the line to a Democrat controlled state at the time, and he worked and got things done.  Mike Huckabee knows that when you "try" others see that and suddenly they feel compelled to "try" too.  Ultimately, when two sides of an issue decide to "try" a lot more gets done that will last than when someone depends on Executive Orders to last beyond their time in office.

Over the next few months Republicans will have to select a nominee for President.  That nominee should be honest, forthcoming in where he stands, and willing to help the people of this nation move toward greatness again.  Mike Huckabee could have stayed at his nice job with Fox News.  He was loved, respected, and there was no end in sight for the political commentaries he could do over the next several years, but instead he left that.  He left a better paying job because he believes we can move from the rays of hope we have today to higher ground tomorrow.  Whoever you want the nominee for the party to be, you would do well to stop and listen to Huckabee first.