“A friend of mine chastised me the other day. He said I was being too hostile toward the occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere,” Wrote Erickson in the Friday blog. “[A]round the country there are… a lot of angry, unemployed people who just think the deck is stacked against them… These people are open to listen to anyone who is willing to take on Wall Street…. We shouldn’t let unwashed hippies be the only people they hear speaking to their concerns.

“[T]he time is right for a Republican candidate to take up the cause of populism against Wall Street.”

Erickson has mocked the Occupy Wall Street movement as anti-American, communist and vague and its supporters as generally filthy and unlikeable. That line got a lot of traction on the political right for weeks. Erickson even took the lead in formulating the right’s online response to the movement.

“We Are the 53 Percent” is the tea partyish response to “We Are the 99 Percent,” an Occupy Wall Street blog that posts stories of the overwhelmingly unemployed, underemployed, semi-employed, overworked, debt-ridden and uninsured population of the United States. That’s the 99 percent. The 53 percent referred to in the anti-Occupy blog refers to the specious GOP talking point that only 53 percent of households pay federal income taxes.

The stories posted at the “We Are the 53 Percent” are supposed to provide a peak into the lives and mindset of hardworking conservative contributors to American society, a supposed contrast with the kind of people who want a free-ride, which is how Erickson had been describing the Occupy supporters.

Just looking at the substance of the posts at the two sites, however, the lines get blurred. The stories of the 53 percent, including Erickson’s, are also about hardship, about being taken for granted or taken advantage of and being ignored by lawmakers. Gawker described the site as heartbreaking.

What makes “We Are the 53%” so heartbreaking isn’t that its contributors are enormous jerks-— it’s that so many of them could just as easily be writing in to “We Are the 99 Percent.” Like the guy… who can “barely afford” his rent. Or the “former marine” … who hasn’t had “4 consecutive days off in 4 years.” The phrase “I don’t have health insurance” pops up frequently on “We Are the 53%,” but not as a cry for help or an indictment of a broken system. Here, it’s a badge of pride.

Fox News is conducting an online poll that asks its readers if they support the Occupy Wall Street movement. Seventy percent of the first 190,000 respondents supported the movement.

Exaggerated bafflement about what the Occupy Wall Street supporters hope to achieve, an early line of dismissal, is now falling away, thanks in part to patient explainers like Alan Grayson.

The revolution that toppled the anachronistic and unresponsive French government in 1968 began with a student protest in Nanterre. That student sit-in started at the end of March. In May, students at the Sorbonne in Paris joined the protest. Then came more students at more schools. Then came the labor unions and factory workers. Then came celebrities and moms and dads. Last came the politicians. President DeGaulle on May 29 abandoned the capital and his wife gave her jewels to relatives for safekeeping. From a French military base in Germany, the World War II icon, an avatar for a certain kind of France as well as its president, decided to dissolve the government, which he did the next day.

Hat tip on the Fox poll to the Brad Blog.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Erick Erickson, Red State editor, says conservatives from across the nation “will tell us how we are going to take back America and fight for freedom.” According to the agenda, more than 370 people from across the U.S. will attend the event. #

RedState calls itself “the most widely read right of center blog on Capitol Hill” and says it “is the most often cited right of center blog in the media, and is widely considered one of the most influential voices of the grassroots on the right.” #

This is the third version of RedState Gathering that features, and several conservative politicians: Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Texas Gov. Rick Perry. #

This event is sponsored by Heritage Action for America, FreedomWorks, the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Let Freedom Ring and South Carolina Fair Tax, organizations that actively promote among other conservative policies a repeal of the Affordable Care Act, strong support for school choice and anti-abortion policies. #

Heritage Action — founded by The Heritage Foundation — says it focuses on policy politics, not electoral politics, while the Faith and Freedom Coalition, led by Ralph Reed, the former executive director of the Christian Coalition, works to enact legislation to support traditional values and lower taxes. #

South Carolina Fair Tax supports a plan to replace national income taxes and to eliminate the Internal Revenue Service and the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which authorizes Congress to collect taxes. #

FreedomWorks also calls for less taxes and government, and recently endorsed Adam Hasner, who is running for the GOP nomination to challenge Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. #

Hasner, a former state representative, is described on the RedState Gathering web page as “Florida’s next conservative rising star.” He has spoken repeatedly during his campaign about the dangers of Sharia in the Sunshine State, saying there is a “civilizational jihad” underway. He will speak on Saturday, while Gov. Scott is scheduled to speak Friday evening along with Sen. DeMint. #

The RedState Gathering 2011 will close with a presentation of Stephen K. Bannon’s The Undefeated, a movie that depicts Sarah Palin’s rise from “from obscurity to national prominence.” #

“[Cain] went from being unknown to a household name,” Erickson wrote in his morning wrap-up.

He gave the best one liners and a brilliant defense of his lack of elected experience. He pointed out all the guys in Washington who have been elected and asked, “How’s that working out for ya?” It was a golden moment.

Cain also shined because of his business experience. He stood out from the crowd in knowledge of private sector job creation, the effects of government regulation, etc. Chris Wallace asked him how he could be elected President. Tonight we know – through sheer force of personality….

The more the voting pubic hears of Herman Cain, the more his rivals are going to come after him. He is this year’s Mike Huckabee.

Some will see Cain less as a 2012 Huckabee and more as a 2012 Palin, in that the one-liners may come to seem less charming and more like covering as the months before the election (19 of them!) wear on.

Here’s what Cain looks like without one-liners, answering a real question. He stumbles over the facts, gathering a Cliff Notes version of events into a narrative that will support an agenda that will turn off mainstream U.S. voters.

Gawker’s take on Cain is typically toss off and spot on:

Herman Cain, if president, says he’d answer more questions about The Mission before determining whether we stay in Afghanistan. Why not just answer them now, Candidate? Oh, he’s not “privy” to classified information now, so who knows? A durable answer for any two-year presidential campaign.

Slate’s Dave Weigel was at the debate and had the same take on Cain: The motivational speaker triumphed by speaking well without saying anything.

Cain, the businessman and motivational speaker, just kept repeating that he had plans to solve problems, and the candidates with careers in politics didn’t have plans. The thing about repeatedly saying you have a plan is that an audience believes it. Cain did well in a post-debate focus group conducted by Frank Luntz for Fox News because, to use some of their words, Cain was “articulate” and he “had plans.”

Also on stage were libertarians Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. Paul is the congressman from Texas and Johnson was the governor of New Mexico. They don’t think the government should be in the business of forcing Christian conservative values on women, gay people and pot smokers. They also think the government must stop borrowing money to spend in Afghanistan and Iraq. In other words, they believe in small government. They would have a better chance of winning the presidency outright than they do of winning the GOP nomination.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The Speaker grabbed headlines Monday by sending a letter to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi asking that the House cut funds for the Justice Department because it declared it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court. Attorney General Holder months ago declared he believed the 1996 law unconstitutionally discriminated against gay people when it made same-sex marriage illegal.

“It is my intent those funds be diverted to the House for reimbursement of any costs incurred by and associated with the House, and not DOJ, defending DOMA.”

The House Judiciary Committee on Friday held hearings on why DOMA must be defended even as analysis of the budget deal Boehner made with Democrats started to fill the airwaves and draw out harsh critics on the right.

Boehner won’t get the Justice Department money because the request is absurd on a practical level. Justice Departments always prioritize cases and there’s no easy way to calculate what Justice may be saving or spending by not taking the DOMA cases.

GOP presidential hopefuls meantime are waging their own practically hopeless but politically advantageous war on gay rights.

Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum have all said in the last weeks that they would reinstate the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” military policy that banned gay soldiers from serving openly, even though the Pentagon is moving full speed ahead to make the repeal passed last December a reality and to do so on schedule by the fall.

No matter, as Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly notes, even though most Americans favored the repeal and even though the repeal passed with bipartisan support and with strong support from military leaders, whether or not a candidate will commit to working to reinstate the law is likely to be a litmus test in 2012 Republican presidential campaigns.

Mormon Mitt Romney, Christian-right Michele Bachmann and anti-Muslim Herman Cain aren’t going to stand up for gay people. And the new Donald Trump in his late splashy embrace of “birtherism” has more than demonstrated he’s willing to pander to the farthest fringe without concern for the facts.

The Atlantic reports this month that libertarian maverick Ron Paul, testing the waters in Iowa in March, was being shuttled around by anti-gay marriage crusader Bob Vander Plaats, just like all the proto-GOP presidential candidates before him, It was on just such a tour with Vander Plaats that Pawlenty first said he would reinstate DADT.

According to the Atlantic, Vander Plaats took Paul on tour to Christian gatherings here and there and Paul dutifully talked about how the American family has been diminished and that all of our rights, like our lives, “come from our Creator.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The National Review editorial board called the deal “fake” and urged Congress to reject it:

We’d vote “no,” even if we understand the impulse to move on to more important matters and to avoid a leap into the dark that might include a politically damaging shutdown. At the very least, freshmen and other conservatives should be frank about the deal’s shortcomings, refusing to exaggerate its merits as their leadership often has. The episode is strike one against the speakership of John Boehner.

RedState’s Erick Erickson is also warning House Republicans against supporting the deal:

If House Republicans vote for the bipartisan compromise, they should be driven into the street by the tea party movement and horsewhipped — metaphorically speaking. In reality, they should be primaried.

What started out as $38.5 billion in cuts, turned into around $14 billion in cuts and a bunch of accounting gimmicks. Each new day brings new disgusting revelations. According to the Congressional Budget Office, “total federal outlays will still rise by approximately $177 billion.” Yes, that says “rise” not “decrease.

A House vote is expected late Thursday.

Erick Erickson, the prominent conservative blogger at RedState, wrote, “[T]his hire forces me to pay attention to Tim Pawlenty and you should too now. Putting a twenty-something in such a position is a bold and risky move. But Nick Ayers’s track record suggests Pawlenty is suddenly a force to be reckoned with — especially for guys like me who were counting him out before he really got started.”

Ayers most recently ran the Republican Governors Association, a group that spent almost a million dollars attempting to take Dayton down during the 2010 election by funneling money to Minnesota’s Future, an LLC that some allege was designed to mask the source of the funds. That setup generated campaign finance complaints which were eventually dismissed.

In an email announcing his decision to work for Pawlenty, Ayers said that God pointed him in Pawlenty’s direction:

Over the past six months, I have prayed deeply about my purpose in life and how best to utilize the talents God has given me. I wanted my decision to be wholly about how best to serve Him, not what was most politically or financially expedient for my family and me. As He often does in walks of faith, He has called me to a higher purpose. I believe that our Nation is truly on the wrong path. We need a new direction that is positive and hopeful. Simply said, we need new leadership. I believe that Governor Pawlenty is best positioned to provide that leadership. Therefore, I am pleased today to join Governor and Mrs. Pawlenty in their pursuit of the presidency.

Pawlenty’s is not the first campaign for Ayers. In 2006, he ran the campaign for Georgia Gov. Sonny Purdue, the first Republican elected to that state’s executive office since Reconstruction. It was during the 2006 campaign that Ayers was arrested of driving under the influence of alcohol.

And it’s not the first of Pawlenty’s staffers to have a rap sheet involving alcohol. Last weekend, Pawlenty staffer Ben Foster was arrested after he drunkenly tried to enter a home he thought was his friend’s but turned out to be in an entirely different Iowa city.

Former Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams is already in the race and has scored a major political endorsement. Over the long weekend, he announced that his campaign will be backed by former President George H.W. Bush.

Hutchison’s move to retire was not a major surprise to many in the state, as she had previously indicated that she would resign her seat while she sought to displace Gov. Rick Perry (though she later recanted on that pledge). Williams had already declared his intention to seek his party’s nomination at that time, so he has been actively in the race since last year.

Another prominent potential candidate edged closer to making his bid official Monday. Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams will resign from his position later this week The Texas Tribune reported, likely allowing the Republican to begin his presumed Senate campaign. Texas Railroad Commissioners are responsible for overseeing Texas’ vast oil and gas industry.

Michael Williams’ possible campaign has already received favorable reviews from a number of national figures in the more conservative wing of the Republican Party. South Carolina U.S. senator and GOP kingmaker in 2010 Jim DeMint has already stated that he intends to support either Michael Williams or former solicitor general Ted Cruz, a message echoed by prominent conservative blogger Erick Erickson at Red State.

Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka reported that in addition to his desire to seek higher office, Michael Williams had other motivations for resigning from his current position:

I was told by a former member of the Commission that Williams’ two co-commissioners, Elizabeth Ames Jones and David Porter, would have voted to remove Williams as chairman at the commission’s next meeting. (Indeed, moments after that phone conversation, the former commissioner called to say that Williams had resigned.) The reason for the enmity at the commission is a long-simmering dispute between natural gas pipeline companies and natural gas producers over the fees that pipelines can charge.

Though others have been more active after Hutchison’s initial announcement, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is expected to be the frontrunner to gain the GOP nomination. He is unlikely to announce an official campaign anytime soon, as he is currently occupied with overseeing the start of the state Senate’s new session through his position as lieutenant governor.
He would start the nomination competition with an advantage over his opponents: He has much experience winning statewide campaigns, higher name recognition through his current title (the Texas lieutenant governor is a far more powerful position than most other states) and holds a campaign war chest with $1.8 million as of eight days before the last general election, when he easily held his seat.

Earmarks erode the ability to say no to more government, and they corrupt often-good politicians with the enjoyment and the power of directing other people’s money to those who come to them and ask. And at times, earmarks directly enable increased government when they are used to buy lawmakers off. It is standard procedure for powerful Chairmen to demand that anyone with earmarks in a bill vote for the overall bill lest the projects get struck. Look no further than the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase.

Probably no aspect of the entire deal-making process during the health care debate drew more ire from the right — or was cited more often by Republicans as evidence of the bill’s inherent fishiness — than those two provisions. McConnell’s current intransigence on earmarks risks making the GOP’s principled stand against such deals look like a complete scam.

Conservatives are also concerned that McConnell’s main argument in favor of the practice — that Congress should decide where to send federal dollars over the Obama administration — underscores the minority leader’s lack of conservative bonafides. If McConnell is serious about limiting the size of the federal government, the logic among conservatives goes, why is he so worried about pulling in federal dollars to his district?

Earmarks might be a miniscule portion of the federal budget, but they’re quickly finding their place as a wedge between pragmatists and purists in the Republican Party as it prepares for its party conference next week.

It is absolute and utter nonsense. This contest is not in the least bit a race between the tea party and the establishment and the only people who think it is are the people who’ve sat inside Washington, D.C. all year licking their chops waiting for a Republican Civil War.

This. Is. Not. It.

This is a matter of who would be the best face for the GOP to explain their positions to those not of the GOP and Tea Party. It is also a matter of showing the GOP is serious about cutting spending. That is why Jeb Hensarling will probably get it.

We all know and love Michelle Bachmann, but while she is one of the best at firing up the base, she is not necessarily the best at explaining GOP policy to a media typically hostile to the GOP.

I think Erickson is probably right. While the news has been flush with stories about the leadership battle, eagerly talking up the potential for a rift between the Tea Party the GOP establishment over the issue, I haven’t seen much evidence that Tea Party groups are getting up in arms about the issue. That’s not to say that the budding factions might not clash on all sorts of issues down the road — just that this one might not be one of them.

The New York Times obtained a draft of a confidential memo to be distributed to all incoming House Republican lawmakers, in which Armey and FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe tell lawmakers that working to repeal health care reform is “nonnegotiable,” and they’ll become the target of a major backlash if they don’t succeed in doing so.

“Politically speaking, your only choice is to get on offense and start moving boldly ahead to repeal, replace and defund Obamacare in 2011, or risk rejection by the voters in 2012,” Armey and Kibbe wrote.

Meanwhile, Erikson wrote yesterday, “We have a significant opportunity to improve the Senate GOP through some primaries [in 2012],” and he provided a list of all the Senate Republicans up for re-election in the next cycle:

John Barasso (WY)
Scott Brown (MA)
Bob Corker (TN)
John Ensign (NV)
Orrin Hatch (UT)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Jon Kyl (AZ)
Richard Lugar (IN)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Roger Wicker (MS)

Note that this is just the list of Senate Republicans running. Not all will be targets, but it will be from these men and women that the tea party movement starts looking for targets.

Now, before you all get giddy about Olympia Snowe, I would respectfully suggest that Corker, Hatch, Hutchison, Lugar, and Wicker make better targets as we have a much greater certainty of both beating them in primaries and also winning the general election.

Wicker and Corker in particular make exciting prospects for the tea party movement.

At this point, the aforementioned writings represent idle threats and not any sort of movement with real popular backing. But with the experiences of their successfully primaried colleagues like Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah), Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) fresh in the minds of most Republican congressmen, such threats might be enough to keep them marching in lockstep with the Tea Party’s demands throughout the next legislative session.