Save Our Schools March and National Call to Action

I've forgotten now, but I'm sure I got a few NEA e-mails on this. Here's the website.

These people are angry and stupid, and dangerous combination. Video c/o Glenn Reynolds:

Barbara Efraim with House Speaker John Boehner

Barbara Efraim, formerly of Long Beach City College, is doing an internship with the National Women's Committee of the Republican Jewish Coalition in Washington. She keeps me updated by Facebook. Here she's meeting with Speaker Boehner, who's in the news more than ever. A little blurry with the mobile phone, but cool:

Outside Groups Spend Big on 2012 Ads

I've been seeing the Karl Rove Crossroads GPS ads on television, and they're covered at today's Los Angeles Times, "Independent groups getting a head start on 2012 campaign":

Reporting from Washington

An early television war fueled by independent groups is poised to shape the focus and landscape of the 2012 presidential race much as "tea-party"-backed organizations helped set the stage for Republican victories in 2010.

This summer — a full 16 months before the general election — television viewers across the country are already confronting hard-hitting commercials jousting over President Obama's record on the economy. Such political ads are usually confined to places such as Iowa and New Hampshire at this point in the race.

The ads aren't the work of the president's reelection campaign or the Republicans jockeying to run against him — they are the product of a new breed of well-funded outside groups seeking to define the contours of the 2012 campaign.

One of the biggest, Crossroads GPS, has pledged to spend $20 million in television advertising in July and August alone.

"I supported President Obama because he spoke so beautifully, but since then, things have gone from bad to much worse," says the character of a worried mom in the group's latest spot, running nationally on cable as well as on broadcast stations in six states.

Keep reading.

I'll look around for some of the other groups highlighted at the piece. The trend is not new, although the scale of outside spending for 2012 may break records.

Unions Made Wisconsin Judicial Election a Referendum on Walker's Budget Reform Bill, and They Still Couldn't Put It Away

And since the election's too close to call, progressives will likely steal a victory in the end. See Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "Supreme Court race still too close to call, Kloppenburg has narrow lead":

As of 9:45 this morning, the Associated Press had results for all but 5 of the state's 3,630 precincts and Kloppenburg had taken a 311 vote lead after Prosser had been ahead most of the night by less than 1,000 votes.

That close margin had political insiders from both sides talking about the possibility of a recount, which Wisconsin has avoided in statewide races in recent decades. Any recount could be followed by lawsuits - litigation that potentially would be decided by the high court.

The razor-thin result was the latest twist in Wisconsin's ongoing political turmoil. The state has drawn the attention of the nation in recent weeks because of the fight over a controversial law sharply restricting public employee unions, which caused massive weeks-long protests in the Capitol, a boycott of the Senate by Democrats and attempts to recall senators from both parties.

Interest groups on both sides had portrayed the election as a referendum on Gov. Scott Walker's agenda and particularly on the collective bargaining law. Conservatives backed Prosser, and liberals supported Kloppenburg, even though the candidates themselves insisted they were politically neutral.

As this race goes to recount, conservatives should keep two words in mind: Al Franken.

Ed Morrissey has more, with special attention to the left's epic underperformance:

The recount process may take weeks or even months, depending on who wins the official tally and how hard the other fights. In Minnesota, we have some experience with recounts, of course, and the one that finally settled the 2008 Senate campaign between Al Franken and Norm Coleman took until the following summer to conclude. It’s an easy bet that the unions have already begun to flood the zone with lawyers to assist in the recount and cash for operations supporting Kloppenburg. If anyone in Prosser’s camp wants to heed the lessons of the Minnesota recall, calls should be going out today for a similar effort — and probably should have started a week ago or more.

But the unions have a bigger problem. Many gave Prosser little chance of holding his seat in this off-year, otherwise sleepy election, as unions organized fiercely to unseat him before the state Supreme Court could hear the challenge to Scott Walker’s law. Given the usual lack of turnout for April elections in off years, the organizing power of the unions should have been overwhelming, and Prosser should have been toast even in less-progressive areas of the state. Instead, Wisconsin voters thundered to the polls to support Prosser, and Kloppenburg turned out to do poorly outside of Dane and Milwaukee counties — and even in Milwaukee, Kloppenburg led by just a 57/43 margin.

What should have been a slam-dunk if Walker’s proposal was really as extreme and disaffecting as unions claim turned out to be an even split. Given their power and the investment of time and money by the unions, this is an eye-opening stumble.

Photo Credit: Ann Althouse.

RELATED: "Recount may not be able to start for weeks" (via Memeorandum).

Sarah Palin's Comments on CPAC and GOProud

The clip's at Breitbart's, "Sarah Palin Throws Support Behind GOProud Participation at CPAC." And a teaser:

Well, I’ve never attended a CPAC conference ever so Sarah Palin Throws Support Behind GOProud Participation at CPAC." And quoted there: I was a little taken aback this go around when I couldn’t make it to this one either and then there was a speculation well I either agree or disagree with some of the groups or issues that CPAC is discussing ... perhaps what it is that you’re suggesting in the question is should the GOP, should conservatives not reach out to others, not participate in events or forums that perhaps are rising within those forums are issues that maybe we don’t personally agree with?

This has generated a little controversy. Shane D'Aprile reports, "Conservative group wants answers from Palin on gay rights":

The conservative American Principles Project, which is already boycotting this week's Conservative Political Action Conference over the inclusion of a gay GOP group, is now demanding "clarity" from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

The organization wants to know exactly where Palin stands on the inclusion of GOProud as one of CPACs sponsors and wants clarity on her stance on gay marriage after Palin suggested over the weekend that she supports the group.

Asked about the controversy over GOProud's presence at CPAC, which has led to a boycott of the event by several leading conservative groups and Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Palin told the Christian Broadcasting Network that she desires a "healthy debate."

"Should conservatives not reach out to others, not participate in events or forums that perhaps arising within those forums are issues that maybe we don't personally agree with?" Palin asked. "And I say 'no.'"

Palin's comments to CBN were highlighted by Andrew Breitbart, who is a member of GOProud's board and will take part in one of the group's events during CPAC later this week.

But the interview raised the ire of APP's President Frank Cannon, who demanded answers from Palin on Monday.

"The concern of conservatives is over the participation of a group whose stated goals run at odds with that of core conservative principles, not over debate over those issues," Cannon said in a statement. "Governor Palin should clarify her comments by letting us know whether in her definition, traditional marriage is a core component of conservatism."

Palin's views on gay rights aren't entirely clear. She drew attention earlier this year after she re-tweeted a message from conservative talk host Tammy Bruce that was seen by many as expressing support for the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Palin later said she didn't support the repeal.

More at the link.

Also, a discussion by Kathryn Jean Lopez, "CPAC’s Culture Club: Sex and the Boycott."

Frankly, as a matter of pure policy, I doubt GOProud can be a genuinely conservative group, so when the American Principles Project reports that GOProud is actively lobbying in opposition to the defense of traditional marriage, that's a substantial problem. As quoted at the Lopez entry: "“It is no more acceptable as a participant at CPAC than a group that said it embraced the ‘traditional conservative agenda’ but actively worked for higher taxes and greater governmental control of the economy."

APP's full boycott letter is here: "CPAC Coalition Letter." And reading that reveals an even greater problem: GOProud is an "identity politics" organization adopting a "long-term strategy to impose" same-sex marriage. Sounds more like radical progressivism than conservatism.

In any case, we'll see how it goes. Perhaps I'll have a chance to swing by some of the GOProud events, and if so I'll publish reports and updates.

Where News is Power

"Aides Fight to Be Well Armed," at NYT (FWIW):

WASHINGTON — Bobby Maldonado has the morning routine of a well-trained marathoner.

With the help of three alarm clocks, he gets up at 4 a.m., is showered and out the door in less than an hour, and scans his BlackBerry almost constantly as he makes his pretimed 12- to 13-minute trek to the Red Line Metro stop where he catches the first train downtown.

He knows exactly where to stand so he can get into the car that deposits him just steps from the escalator at the Farragut North station. “It’s an efficiency thing,” he explained, “so I don’t get stuck behind people, so I hit the crosswalk at the right minute.” Cutting diagonally across Farragut Square, he arrives at his office at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on H Street just after 5:30 a.m. There, in a darkened cubicle, he scans the Internet for the day’s news and condenses it into a two-page memo that he shoots off to Thomas J. Donohue, the Chamber’s president, and other top executives before 8 a.m. He is never late.

Mr. Maldonado, 26, is one of the dozens of young aides throughout the city who rise before dawn to pore over the news to synthesize it, summarize it and spin it, so their bosses start the day well-prepared. Washington is a city that traffics in information, and as these 20-something staff members are learning, who knows what — and when they know it — can be the difference between professional advancement and barely scraping by.

“Information is the capital market of Washington, so you know something that other people don’t know and you know something earlier than other people know it, is a formulation for increasing your status and power,” said David Perlmutter, the director of the University of Iowa’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. “So any edge you can use to get stuff faster, earlier, better or exclusively is very important.”

This is interesting.

There's more at the link, but I like this passage especially:

Getting up early is nothing new, but the lightning speed of news on the Internet and the proliferation of outlets like Politico, which place a premium on “winning” the day, has made the job more demanding and pushed the mornings ever earlier.

I can spend all day blogging and searching for a scoop, so this hits close to home. An interesting study might be to examine how much greater a premium political actors put on up-to-the minute information today than in earlier years. It's not like this kind of thing is new. Back in the '60s, President Johnson had three televisions set up so he could flip back and forth between the major networks. And since at least Bill Clinton's administration, political campaigns have deployed rapid response teams working, ready and able to have "fact-check" ads on the air within 24-hours. But that quote with Politico recognizes a new qualitative dimension, illustrating the changes in the news cycle wrought by Internet technology. That is different.

RELATED: From Jake Tapper, "J ‘Accuse! President Obama Says Chamber of Commerce Using Foreign Funds to Influence US Elections, " and Doug Ross, "Ruh Roh: In 2010 the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Gave 43% of its Contributions to Democrats."