Blackwell For Governor in 06'

BLACKWELL WINS REPUBLICAN PRIMARY

2006-05-05T16:52:00.000-07:00

www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/living/community/14497288.htm?template=contentModules...5/4/2006

Following the outcome of Tuesday’s primaries it seems it will be Ken Blackwell who will run against the democrat candidate, Ted Strickland, in the November elections for Ohio’s next governor. The argument that it was Blackwell’s stance on economic issues more than moral ones that won the day for him is, I think, a reasonable theory. At the end of the day many people, who may be attracted to a candidate because of their moral stances and the value they have for their faith, will nevertheless cast their vote for a less “religious” or even “anti-religion” candidate who proposes more agreeable economic solutions. In Ken Blackwell’s case, many voters felt that he was a successful combination of a candidate who will be conservative on moral/social issues as well as govern in a way that is more in line with traditional republican ideals and policies. In the words of Carlo LoParo, Blackwell’s spokesman, “Voters like elected officials with a deep conviction to their faith. But what carries the day is their economic positions.”

Coupled with this is Petro’s own theory, touched on in his concession speech, which claimed that Blackwell’s exposure as secretary of state during the last presidential elections gave him a big head-start in campaigning “by at least two years.” Ohio and Florida were the two most “hotly contested” states, and as far as Ohio was concerned, Blackwell was one of the key figures in the spotlight during the whole ordeal. Of course, all the media attention surrounding a situation that surely angered a lot of Ohio’s voters (and the rest of the country for that matter) could just as easily have worked against him. The public has to have someone to blame mishaps on, someone to demand answers from, someone to hold accountable.

Yet another theory claims that Petro just simply “did not run a good campaign.” According to Mark Weaver, a Republican strategist, “who was not aligned with either Petro’s or Blackwell’s campaigns,” Petro, “looks like the status quo…walks like the status quo, talks like the status quo, and Ken Blackwell doesn’t.” And inasmuch as that would have appeal to voters, it would have contributed to Blackwell’s victory.

In the end, whether it was a matter of the attraction to personal faith-conviction and traditional “conservative” Republican policies, or a two-year head-start in campaigning via a botched balloting process, or being an anti-status quo “outsider” candidate that Ohio with its “anti-status quo feeling” was sold on, or a combination of all three theories - it was enough to get Ken Blackwell on the November ballot with Ted Strickland in the race for Ohio’s next governor. Whether or not these theories are true and whether or not they will contribute in Blackwell’s favor in the upcoming months against Strickland, well . . . that’s another story.

BLACKWELL VALUES A "FLEXIBLE SCHEDULE" EVEN AT THE COST OF CAMPAIGN COVERAGE

2006-04-28T13:25:00.000-07:00

www.dispatch.com/print_template.php?story=dispatch/2006/04/26/20060426-A1-04...4/27/2006

As the May 2nd primary for Ohio’s Governor rapidly approaches, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell and Attorney General Jim Petro are exhausting all their efforts in a last attempts to win the Republican nomination. Though they are equally committed to winning the race, they are nevertheless approaching last-minute campaigning strategies from different angles. While in Cleveland Petro had, “faced several cameras at the City Club,” Blackwell has been “meandering across” the state in a “customized charcoal bus” stopping at “Republican friendly destinations, a lone reporter trying to keep up in a separate vehicle.”

In his own words, Blackwell has been content during, what must be for both candidates, a very stressful crunch-phase of the campaign, to play “a little bit of cat and mouse with reporters.” Without having given any advance schedule to the media he has instead chosen to direct his “unconventional campaign for governor” with an open and uncertain schedule designed to have “optimum flexibility” to “fight the British,” aka Petro campaign, which he says, tends “to march in a straight line.”

I think Blackwell’s campaign method, being at present more of a “grass-roots” approach, shows he has a great deal of confidence that the Republican nomination is his for the taking on Tuesday. Whether or not that attitude is justified could be argued, but I personally don’t think it’s presumptuous on his part to allow himself a little respite from the grueling line-up of appearances and such, at this point. On the other hand, there’s a very real possibility that his “open” schedule could easily become even more congested than is the case when he has a calendar full of planned events. After all, how often is this not the case for an ordinary person when they would reserve a day for a break from their normal routine – we sometimes end up doing twice the amount of “running” as we would in the course of a normal day. At any rate, these few remaining days before the primary promise to be interesting and intense for all those keeping track of the race . . . May the best Republican win.

NO DEBATE FOR BLACKWELL

2006-04-13T20:17:00.000-07:00

www.news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060325/news01/603250349

Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Blackwell’s refusal to participate in the April 10th debate sponsored by the Plain Dealer, the Columbus Dispatch, and Dayton Daily News with Ohio’s Attorney General Jim Petro has sparked comments from Petro’s camp claiming that the refusal to participate on the part of Blackwell is due to the candidate’s preference for “negative attacks” and “empty rhetoric.” And in a certain sense, I think they are justified in taking the offensive in this matter though I may not necessarily agree with the reasoning they come up with in reference to Blackwell’s actions.
Debates and debating is, whether politicians and candidates like it or not, a big part of elections and politics in general. It would stand to reason that candidates knowing this to be the case would be willing and prepared to participate in public and widely-covered debates between themselves and their opponents. Debates provide the almost unparalleled opportunity for the public and more specifically - voters - to get “up close and personal” with the candidates who are vying for their votes. It shows the public that they are not afraid to answer questions or to be “put on the spot.” It demonstrates their ability to support their ideas, claims and promises in lucid and coherent language without the support of a written speech (although this doesn’t mean that they aren’t as prepared and well-rehearsed as possible for any and all possible questions and comments). Blackwell’s refusal to face Petro in the debate could easily be taken as a sign of weakness by voters, it could even potentially sway undecided voters away from Blackwell in Petro’s favor. I guess the deciding question would be, just how much do voters favor or even pay attention to debates to begin with and how many people - voters - will really be disappointed to hear the news that the debate will not take place? Perhaps it would be a surprisingly large number that would have eagerly tuned in, but for me personally, if I believe in a candidate and agree with their views - whether or not they had participated in a debate with their opponent would have absolutely no effect whatsoever on my decision to vote for them.

BLACKWELL COMPLIES WITH DECISION OF CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST HIM

2006-03-16T15:46:00.000-08:00

WWW.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/14090277.htm

Ohio's gubernatorial candidate Ken Blackwell has agree to remove "Social Security numbers from financial documents posted on his agency's Web site and to take steps to prevent the numbers from being posted there in the future." This came as the result of a class-action lawsuit filed against him by an Ohio truck driver "whose number appeared on Blackwell's Web site without his knowledge."

The numbers had been posted in compliance with a law that requires that the secretary of state submit "the social security numbers (which) appear on records of debts and other financial information used by banks and creditors in making loans," within 3 days.

This "identification measure" which has been describes as a "discrepancy" is now being examined for revision by both Republican and Democrat lawmakers, who "plan legislation to keep the numbers private."

After initially resisting the removal of the numbers, Blackwell is now taking extra precautions that will ensure privacy protection for individuals such as, "an online sign-in system requiring a password to search financial files."

Personally, I think it's a fairly terrifying prospect, in this age of "online crime" and identity theft, of having such information so easily accessible to anyone and everyone who wanted to access it. I think Blackwell acted wisely and was right to heed "the concerns raised by the lawsuit." I think it's precisely this kind of sensitivity to the needs and concerns of the people that will stand in his favor when it comes to voting time. It makes him appear to be a person who can be trusted, someone who will listen, someone who will act, someone who is not so unflexible that there can be little to no hope of compromise.

Christian Jenkins, attorney for Darrel Estep, who had filed the suit, summed up the whole issue well when he commented on Blackwell's response: "We've seen ...a decision to do the right thing - I see that as a very good result in a very short time."

Let us hope that if Blackwell is elected Ohio's next governor we will see much more of the same from him in the future - "very good results" in "a very short time."

BLACKWELL: ANTI-CATHOLIC?

2006-03-02T20:23:00.000-08:00

www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?idCategory=34&idsub=127&id=2707

Republican candidate for governor Ken Blackwell has recently been made the target of accusations that he is “Anti-Catholic.” This is of course entirely ironic because Blackwell has consistently taken the same position as the Catholic church on many of the controversial social issues that are being disputed today such as abortion and school vouchers. Aside from being completely unfounded, the even greater insult that comes along with this accusation is the fact that it was made by “an organization which rejects the Catholic Church’s stance on . . .” these same issues - the Ohio Democratic Catholic Caucus. Huh?? Blackwell is apparently co-authoring a book with Jerry Corsi entitled, “Rebuilding America.” Corsi had, in the past, made some “anti-Catholic” jokes on the Web, for which he has long since apologized.
The whole thing sounds to me like a comic book episode in which the hero tries to solve the riddle: “Is the enemy of my friend my enemy? Or is the enemy of my enemy my enemy?” Or yet again, and even more confusing: “Is my friend my enemy?” In other words, consider the irrationality behind a group, “Catholic” in name but not in the ideologies they support, slandering a former vice-president and professor of a Catholic university (which Blackwell is) and calling him “anti-Catholic” because his co-author had once publically made anti-catholic remarks. If the closest the Democratic Catholic Caucus can get to “digging up dirt” on Blackwell is to exploit some long forgotten and much recanted remarks that Corsi had made - I don’t think it’s anything Blackwell needs lose sleep over. Especially if Ohio’s catholic voters know anything about Blackwell or anything about the so-called “Catholic” Democratic group.

BLACKWELL MAY BECOME CASUALTY OF NOE SCANDAL

2006-02-16T14:26:00.000-08:00

www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060214/news09/60214001

Ken Blackwell may be just one of the Republicans who will suffer a political backlash as a result of the Tom Noe rare-coin scandal this Fall. The view of U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland that, “the allegations against Mr. Noe are a product of the state’s one-party rule,” may prove to be a sentiment with the power to spread, as the investigation progresses. Noe, a Republican, who had received $50 million from the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation, to invest in rare-coins, had made contributions to both Petro and Blackwell and likewise many other causes in the months following the first installment he received from the Bureau in the amount of $25 million. Strickland went on to say that the scandal was the result of “an arrogance that comes from a one-party rule that is devoid of appropriate checks and balances.” In one respect, I consider this an interesting theory but not a realistic one - does Strickland really mean to pin the Noe scandal on the entire Ohio Republican party? A convenient concept, surely, especially since it comes from a Democratic point of view but one so biased, so undiscriminating, it doesn’t “limp,” – it drags.

Although, according to Youngstown State University political science professor, Bill Binning, “Blackwell is more separated from it,” than Petro, nevertheless if Binning’s suspicion that “the public (may) not (be) that discriminating,” when it comes to distinguishing between the Republicans, candidates or supporters, then the Noe scandal could reveal itself to be a detriment for Blackwell come election time.

To add yet more fuel to the fire, Blackwell’s campaign manager, Mike Hernon, accused Jim Petro, Ohio’s Attorney General and candidate for governor, of “ignoring warnings from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commision . . .to investigate the investment practices of the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Comp.” Naturally, the allegations were denied and called “ridiculous” by Bob Paduchik, Petro’s campaign manager and were described as the exploiting of “a very tragic situation.” Only time will tell what effect, if any, the Noe rare-coin scandal will have on the outcome of the election. Personally, I can’t agree with Binning’s statement overflowing with pessimistic foreboding, “If it (the Noe case) gets to be a big stink and you’re a Republican, you get that big stink on you and you have a problem.”

Contrary to what Binning thinks, I believe it’s a safe bet to predict that Noe and his “big stink” will be going to the showers alone.

BLACKWELL AHEAD IN THE POLLS AS NEW "HB3" BILL IS PROPOSED

2006-02-02T14:42:00.000-08:00

www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2006/1754
www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/news/state/13736798.htm

Gubernatorial candidate, Ken Blackwell’s potential to win the Ohio 2006 election is looking more favorable every day. One of the recent developments contributing to this is the proposed bill “HB3,” which according to Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, co-authors of “How the GOP Stole America’s 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008 will, make it virtually impossible for anyone but a Republican to carry the Buckeye State in future statewide and federal elections.”

The bill is designed to create greater security against illegal voting or tampering with votes as it will require several different forms of identification to verify a persons identity and will also “eliminate the state statutes that allowed citizens to challenge the outcome of federal elections within the state” (Fitrakis and Harvey). I don’t think anyone wants to see the mess we had with Ohio in the last presidential election to ever happen again. The new bill, “HB3,” which is expected to pass, would mean that any challenges or disputes to elections for Senate, Congress, or President, would have to go directly to Congress. The matter would be entirely out of the State’s hands.

One of the objections concerning this bill is that the “restrictive” ID requirements of: a photo ID, a utility bill, a bank statement, a government check or other government document showing the name and current address of the voter will “virtually eliminate the homeless, elderly and impoverished from the voting rolls” (Fitrakis and Harvey).

Furthermore, according to Fitrakis and Harvery the new ID requirements are “perfectly designed to slow down the voting process in inner city precincts,” which is “meant to allow Republican “challengers” to intimidate anyone who turns up to vote in heavily Democratic precincts,” a bit of a stretch of the imagination if you ask me, nevertheless if this theory were true it would obviously play strongly in the favor of republican gubernatorial hopeful, Ken Blackwell (or Attorney General, Jim Petro, for that matter). This would also become particularly significant for future presidential elections because, as was cited by Fitrakis and Harvey, “only one presidential candidate - John F. Kennedy in 1960 - has won the White House without carrying Ohio.”

All this comes on the heels of the announcement that Betty Montgomery has officially dropped out of the race for governor and Jim Petro, the other republican candidate running for office is apparently behind in the polls. “The poll showed Blackwell leading 40 percent points to 30 over Petro in the primary, but also noted that 29 percent of respondents were undecided” (Welsh-Huggins). These results were shared by Bob Bennett, Ohio Republican Party chairman, with the two candidates whom he had a private meeting with. “Based on the reaction of both campaigns after the results were released neither candidate had immediate plans to leave the race” (Welsh-Huggins).

Blackwell Takes Offense at Accusation of 31 Pastors

2006-01-26T20:03:00.000-08:00

www.columbusdispatch.com/news-story.php

BLACKWELL TAKES OFFENCE AT ACCUSATION OF 31 PASTORS

Separation of Church and State has been and continues to be a sticky issue that many conservative politicians and religious Americans in general find themselves continually tip-toeing around. In particular, those in Church leadership need to take extra precautions when deciding if and how they can demonstrate personal support for various candidates on the one hand, and yet not “cross the line” where they would be considered, as Churchmen, to be “illegally engaging in partisan politics,” on the other.
I have personally witnessed some Catholic priests use the rather innovative and clever technique when giving homilies of, without mentioning particular candidates by name, making it clear that it would be immoral and contrary to Church teaching to support a political candidate who is pro-abortion or who endorses the legalization of gay marriage, for example. Phrased in this manner, it isn’t necessary to endorse one candidate by name or denounce some other because of his or her stances on these or similar issues - in these instances, we all know who they are talking about. But, as was mentioned, one must be careful lest the accusations start flying. The accusation, that is, that such religious authorities are overstepping their boundaries and using their influence as community leaders to meddle in affairs of state.
This accusation was recently leveled, by 31 Columbus-area pastors, against the “Ohio Restoration Project,” and several “allied religious entities” who had invited Ohio gubernatorial candidate, Kenneth Blackwell, to address the assembly of 450 pastors and Christian conservatives at a luncheon last week.
Aside from seeking an Internal Revenue Service investigation that could possibly result in the accused churches losing their tax-exempt status, “the pastors also asked the IRS to seek a court injunction “if these churches’ flagrant political campaign activities do not cease immediately””.
Upon hearing the accusation and impending investigation against these Churches, candidate for governor, Kenneth Blackwell offered these rousing words to the accused pastors, “You tell those 31 bullies that you aren’t about to be whupped.” He further claimed that “political and social and cultural forces are trying to run God out of the public square.” One need only to consider the recent and hotly debated issues of whether or not it is a violation of the separation of Church and State to have the Ten Commandments publically displayed in government buildings, and if it could be considered “unconstitutional” to have the words “one nation under God” included in the Pledge of Allegiance.
“Blackwell said he was invited to events sponsored by Rev. Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church in Columbus and Rev. Russell Johnson, pastor of Fairfield Christian Church and chairman of Ohio Restoration Project, including (the) lunch, because of his vocal support for a successful 2004 ballot issue to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage and because of his long opposition to abortion rights.
"The last time I checked, there was not anything (in the IRS code) that prohibited them from recognizing my leadership in the public square," Blackwell said.”
Johnson called the actions of the pastors a "secular jihad against expressions of faith" and said, "We are not going away. We will not be intimidated."
Perhaps he could have likewise said simply, even as it is expressed on our own currency, “In God We Trust.”