It is after much reflection and discussion with my family and friends, that I have decided to suspend my career in politics. This was not an easy decision to reach, but after four years, I believe it is time to step aside and let others take my place.

When I entered this field four years ago, the consensus was that the Republican party needed to adapt, it needed to move into the 21st Century. Yes, it needed to adhere to its conservative principles, but it needed to look forward and not backward. It is this Republican party that I pledged to serve.

Alas, far from moving our country forward, we have only furthered the polarization of the American political landscape with divisive, hateful, and ignorant rhetoric, while providing next to nothing in the way of actual policy proposals that will restore our nation to greatness.

Despite wanting to be part of the solution, I have done nothing but contribute to the problem. This nation is more divided than at any point in recent memory, and the American people deserve more from their leaders than 5 second soundbites and an endless hate-filled blame game. They deserve real solutions from people willing to work together while still adhering to their core principles.

I will always consider myself a conservative. I believe in limited government, lower taxes, fair regulations, a strong national defense, personal responsibility, and energy independence. But we will never solve our substantial problems so long as we continue to call our president a “radical socialist hellbent on destroying the constitution,” and a Republican working to find common ground a “RINO.” It’s no wonder that there is no trust left in our institutions.

Our leaders continue to play to the most radical elements of the two parties and have divided this nation to the point where we no longer see each others as Americans. I am not a conservative first. I am an American. My neighbor is not my enemy because he is a liberal, he too is an American. We are all in this together. When did we forget such a basic concept? We all love our country, we just disagree on how to make it succeed. It’s not as though one party wants to end America and the other is the one that wants to save it. We all want what is best for our country.

It is because of these unfortunate realities, that I’m leaving what was a promising career in politics. After managing and winning campaigns, working on two presidential races, and working for a top GOP digital media firm, I have concluded that this is not a field worthy of my time.

I will now continue my life in the private sector, working for my family’s small business that has thrived for over 35 years, through Republican and Democratic administrations. We’ve created American manufacturing jobs even as most manufacturing has been shipped overseas, and we will continue to do so despite overregulation and an outdated tax code.

The issues facing our nation are complex and deserve to be treated as such. I can no longer go to work every day and blame everything on “Obama’s liberal agenda,” while telling voters that everything will be okay if we simply “lower taxes and cut spending.” America can and must do better. It has reached the point where I can no longer look myself in the mirror every morning and be proud of what I see. That is how I know it’s time to step aside.

Regards,

Benjamin Pollock

To determine just how low of a number that was, I did some very rough calculations.  First of all, I determined a rough number of “likely voters” based on the number of voters in past races.  In the 2008 primary, a year where both major parties hosted presidential primaries in New Hampshire, there were 850,836 registered voters. 30% were Republican and 44% independent.  Let’s say that out of that 44% independent, 30 had voted in a GOP primary before and 14 had not.  We will also assume that 80% of the registered voters had recent voting history, which equals 680,669.  So if we assume 60% of those (30% Republicans plus 30% independent) are the likely voters, we get a grand total of 408,401.  This is Huntsman’s target universe.

If the Huntsman campaign has contacted 18% of likely voters, that equates to 73,512 voters.  Now let’s say an average person can knock on 30 doors per hour or make 40 calls.  We’re assuming average walkers and people using traditional phones and not a VoIP system.  If time is evenly distributed between knocks and calls, then that’s 35 voter contacts per man hour.

Total number of man hours then spent in New Hampshire on voter contact then equals 2,100.  Today is November 16th, so let’s assume for conversation sake that his campaign has been knocking on doors and making calls since September 16th.  That is, I believe, 62 days.  That equates to roughly 34 man hours per day.  This means that between Huntsman field staff and volunteers, the equivalent of only 4 people are doing voter contact each day in New Hampshire.

Again, these are very rough calculations based on several assumptions, however it doesn’t look good for Huntsman.  In a state house race here in Texas, we can easily contact a few thousand voters per week without even breaking a sweat and with zero campaign apparatus.  For a campaign that is relying on a good showing in New Hampshire, I would expect better.  Needless to say, things don’t look good for Jon.

Perry’s defense for this law has been twofold.  His first argument is, “it’s a state issue.”  The second argument can be summed up as, “it is cheaper for the state to allow them to attend college because otherwise, these people will become a drain on society and rely on government handouts.”

The first argument may be completely true, however it completely misreads the mood of the Republican primary electorate, and I believe this argument is a nonstarter.  GOP primary voters love to talk about “states’ rights” and the 10th Amendment EXCEPT when they believe the state in question is doing something immoral or against conservative principles.  As a candidate, it is important to keep this in mind before shouting about states’ rights.  Look at what happened to the states’ rights argument for gay marriage.  Every Republican candidate that has previously come out in favor of state by state solutions has had to backtrack and support a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.  I believe illegal immigration is another issue that falls into this category.  Crying “states’ rights” isn’t going to fly with the base here.

Perry’s second argument, however, is quite strong.  Mitt Romney and the other candidates would have the voter believe that Perry’s choice was between deporting illegals and giving them in-state tuition.  This is a false choice and misrepresents the issue to voters.  Furthermore, Rick Perry is the only candidate on that stage who has had to stare down the barrel of the Federal government’s failed immigration policies and make the tough choice.  Northern candidates such as Romney, Santorum, and Bachmann, have the luxury of speaking hypothetically.  They get to talk about what they would have done if they had been in Perry’s position, but truthfully, we cannot know what they would have done because they never faced the challenge head on and acted.  This was not a choice Texas Republicans wanted to make; it was a choice they were forced to make, and if Mitt Romney had governed a border state instead of a state isolated up in the Northeast, he would understand that.

We must remember that the ONLY reason Perry and the Texas Legislature were forced to make this decision was because the Federal government has continually failed in its Constitutionally mandated obligation to defend our borders.  You can bet that if Rick Perry had his way, that border would be secure.

So Texas was truly faced with two options.  Option A is to let illegal immigrant students live as permanent residents of Texas with no access to higher education, therefore ensuring them a permanent underclass status.  Such a scenario would necessarily result in pressure on state budgets, quality of services, and the taxpayers.

The second option, and the one chosen by Texas, says that any student who has lived in Texas for three years, has graduated from a Texas high school, and is pursuing legal citizenship, has the right to attend Texas public universities at an in-state rate.

This option may not sit well with many people, and I certainly had initial reservations about it, but when we objectively look at the facts, the only conclusion is that this was the right choice.  Children who entered the country illegally, by no fault of their own, are receiving a quality education, pursuing legal citizenship, becoming productive members of society, and contributing to the economy and tax base instead of being a burden on society and the government.  This policy makes sense, pure and simple.

And we must remember that this choice was forced upon Texas by the inaction of the Federal government, and as President, I am fully confident that Rick Perry will take great strides to secure the border and ensure that other states will not be forced to make the same tough choices as Texas.  Comprehensive immigration reform is the only solution to the illegal immigration problem, and until this takes place, states will continue to do the best they can to play with the hand the Federal government deals them.

The right wing of the GOP has always been an important “base,” and to be sure, it does an important job of holding the more moderate elements of the GOP accountable.  However, it was not until the 2010 election that the Tea Party and its allies were a true force.  Most impartial observers would argue that the Tea Party has hijacked the GOP while still remaining a minority.  This vocal minority has been allowed to suddenly establish a ideological purity test to determine what it means to be “Republican.”  It is important to keep in mind that until the Tea Party came around, the terms “Republican” and “conservative” were not necessarily considered synonymous.

When you ask and conservative who their hero is, more likely than not, they will say Ronald Reagan.  While Ronald Reagan was indeed a great president and a conservative, I contend that he would be considered a RINO by today’s Tea Party and GOP should he be running for reelection in 2012.

• Under Reagan, the federal workforce increased by 60,000 employees.  Not very “small government” of him.
• The Federal debt increased from $700 billion to $3 trillion.  Where was “cut, cap, and balance?”
• After initially slashing taxes, Reagan increased taxes 11 times when he realized he needed to control deficits.
• Reagan instituted the largest corporate hike in history and raised the federal gas tax.

Reagan sure sounds like a “RINO” to me.  He was a great president, did an excellent job, and worked with his opponents when required.  However under today’s Tea Party-dominated GOP, Reagan wouldn’t stand a chance.  This element of the party needs to look into the mirror and realize that it is so unhinged from the facts and from the realities of governing a nation that its own hero wouldn’t stand a chance in today’s Republican Party.  And that’s a frightening thought.

I am in no way anti-Tea Party.  I am just pointing out a fact that seems to get frequently overlooked.  So instead of petty name calling, let’s stick to what matters: individual liberty, smaller and smarter government, strong national defense, and free markets.

Well, if a $5/month flat fee isn’t transparent, then I don’t know what is.  But let’s also keep in mind that nobody is in any way being mistreated by this bank and this kind of rhetoric from the president is irresponsible at best.  Nobody anywhere is required to make a debit card transaction for any purchase of any product.  A debit card is a convenience that we get when we have a bank account.  And keep in mind too that nowadays, most checking accounts are “free checking” accounts and we pay nothing for this convenience.  The bank is not charging people to deposit or withdraw money from their accounts or to write checks.  It is charging for the convenience of using a debit card.  Seems well within the bank’s rights to me.

But here is the crucial piece of missing information:  Bank of America’s decision to charge this $5 fee is a direct result of financial reform legislation championed by Obama and the Democrats that has HALVED swipe fees (the amount banks charge retailers for the convenience of debit card transactions).  It costs money to operate a debit card network, and there must be a source of revenue for the bank to pay for the debit card service.  Banks have to make up for the revenue loss somewhere and it’s very likely that this $5 fee will not actually cover the entire revenue loss.  Obama basically forced this upon the banks.  But also keep in mind that if a bank wants to charge account holders for a convenience feature, it has the right to do so without the President of the United States intervening.

I enjoy the bronch because instead of being the usual 3rd or 5th or (heaven forbid!) 7th wheel, I get to enjoy a lovely eggs benedict and mimosa among the company of my dearest bros. And that’s a big deal. I don’t have many “dearest” bros. I do however have lots of bros who know me on a fairly superficial level; even the ones I have been friends with for years. Anyway, when I am at bronch, the looks of pity and general uncomfortable atmosphere created by my 3rd or 5th wheeling are not to be had.

Sunday brunch is always something to look forward to. I enjoy fine foods and wearing sophisticated brunch attire. While Saturday is great for working out and hitting the corner coffee shop in your workout gear, Sunday is brunchday. Or as it was this past weekend: BROnchday.

The bros and I hit up a lovely little spot called Bread Winners. The benedict was delish, however the ham was a bit on the salty side. This is coming from a man who loves his salty foods! And of course the $10 mimosa was exquisite, however it was nonetheless a ten buck mimosa! There is something to be said for value…especially in this economy.

A few weeks back, I took a lady friend to Sunday brunch at a chic Italian cafe called Taverna. The atmosphere was great, the food was of high quality and reasonably priced, and the mimosas were only $1! And fear not, such a bargain did not attract the riff raff one might expect. Molto bene!

Thanks for reading,

Seacrest out!

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If  George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If  George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If  George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If  George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod, would you have thought this embarrassingly tacky?

If  George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?

If  George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If  George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment? Bush speaks Spanish, btw.

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word “advice” would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and “potatoe” as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite and doesn’t really care about the environment?

If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved? More likely, you would have called for his impeachment over his abuse of Executive power.

If  George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved or would you have called him a fascist?

Last week, Sprint CEO Dan Hesse was being interviewed by Charlie Rose about the Palm Pre.  Rose asked Hesse how the Pre was doing against the iPhone, and he admitted it was doing very poorly.  Here’s the exchange:

Q: Is the Palm Pre making a dent into the iPhone market?
A: Aaah… It’s-it’s doing well, but you can almost put the iPhone, to be fair, in a separate category. The Apple brand and that device have done so well, it’s almost not… it’s like comparing someone to Michael Jordan.

Well, this is obviously an amazing blunder.  Clearly, Hesse was trying to downplay expectations for the Pre (as they have been doing since it was initially announced), however he really messed this one up.  Michael Jordan is arguably the best basketball player ever, and therefore he is saying the iPhone is the best phone ever.  Well who wants the Brian Scalabrine of phones (Palm Pre) when they can get the Michael Jordan of phones for the same price?

What he should have pointed out is that the iPhone has been on the market for two years and is on its third generation, while the Pre has only been out for a couple months.  Given this scenario, Sprint is comfortable with its current position in the market and it looks forward to continuing its longstanding relationship with Palm as it releases additional exciting handsets in the near future. He could have also gone on to point out that there are several great features that are unique to the Pre and that Sprint feels that they are gaining momentum as these features are starting to resonate with consumers.

But instead, he shoots himself in the foot and further marginalizes the underwhelming Pre.  A link to my source and a video of the exchange can be found here.

Today I want to take a couple of minutes to briefly discuss President Obama’s Address to America’s Schoolchildren that took place yesterday, the full text of which can be viewed here.

This address caused incredible controversy even before it was delivered.  The conservative media outlets were ablaze with angry parents threatening to keep their kids out of school in order to prevent Obama’s “socialist indoctrination.”  This despite the fact that the White House released both the subject of the speech and the actual text of the address in advance.  And of course, I have to assume that when Reagan and Bush 41 addressed schoolkids in a similar fashion, they were simply being patriots and not messengers of “conservative indoctrination.”

What is this “socialist” message Obama spread to our impressionable youth yesterday?  In short it can be summed up as, “work hard, stay in school, make no excuses, and be responsible for your own actions.”  Wow, I can definitely see what all the fuss was all about.  In fact, if these aren’t conservative principles, I don’t know what are.

But here, I’ll let President Obama share his message in his own words: “The circumstances of your life — what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home — none of that is an excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude in school. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. There is no excuse for not trying.”  Sounds good to me.

I recommend everyone click the link above and take the couple minutes to read the president’s remarks.  Whether I agree with him politically or not, Barack Obama is a role model for the nation’s kids.  He was raised by a single mom, had to move around several times, and had to overcome racial barriers.  The fact that he overcame all of that to become President of the United States is a story he is obligated to share with America’s children.

The message delivered in this speech is one for which us Republicans should be applauding him.  Our hateful anti-Obama rhetoric has reached absurd levels not unlike the blind Bush hatred of the past several years.  We need to do a better job of picking our battles and making an effort to elevate ourselves above such absurdity.  Most people are sick of the ignorance displayed by Republicans.  How about we try disagreeing in a gentlemanly manner, focusing on actual differences in policy, instead of appealing to passions and inciting hate.  I know that is far too much to ask, but “dare to dream,” right?