Long time readers will know that I have always made my voting preferences and rationale known. Very often I am genuinely uncommitted to any particular candidate until late into the campaign. Campaigns are processes of discovery. It is our chance as voters to see where candidates claim to stand on issues, where they have stood in the past, and how they respond to the rigors of often contentious and personal battles. In the campaign for Alabama’s 5th Congressional District I have had the chance to evaluate all of the announced candidates and despite rumors that one or two others may enter this race my mind is made up. I will be voting for Mo Brooks.

My decision comes down to one word: trust. Far too often we’ve all been burned by voting for a politician only to see him (or her) change once he tasted the nectar of power. I consider trust – the knowledge that the person you vote for today will be the same person voting for you tomorrow – to be the number one quality to look for in a politician. And I have considerable faith in Brooks.

Mo is unashamed and unwavering in expressing his conservative beliefs. I’ve had the opportunity to see him engage and inform others in an array of venues, some friendly and some not, and regardless of who he is talking to his message is the same. He is a strident defender of and advocate for the free enterprise system that has made America great. His proven record on protecting taxpayers speaks for itself and serves as an indicator on how he will vote in the future. He was one of the very few public officials to oppose Bob Riley’s failed billion dollar “Amendment 1″ tax increase, going against the leader of his own party to fight an unnecessary increase in taxes.  In other words, you can rely on Brooks doing the right thing for you even when the right thing is perceived as politically unpopular.

In addition to ironclad conservative credentials Mo has critical experience in governance that will serve the 5th district well starting with his first day on the job. He has been a state legislator, district attorney, and county commissioner. He understands the mechanics of government and will be able to leverage that knowledge to tend to the interests of our district. And as a long time resident of Huntsville he knows the district and its needs well.

The more I contemplated the current field of candidates and the rumored candidates who may jump in the more I realized that there was no way I could vote for anyone other than Mo Brooks.

As for the other two announced candidates, they are simply polar opposites. Les Phillip is an honorable man who has served our country with distinction and I expect would do so again if elected. I’ve had the chance to talk to him and listen to him and find myself unable to say anything negative about him. His one shortcoming as a candidate is only that he lacks the record voters can judge. At best, Les will be as reliable as Mo. At worst, he may be more erratic in his voting. Same upside, but Brooks has less downside. As some Brooks supporters say, “Why settle for Les when you can have Mo?” Should Phillip be the GOP nominee, though, I will have no problem supporting him fully. Parker Griffith, however, is not an honorable man and has placed his own ambition ahead of the needs of the district. He will tell people anything in exchange for a vote and simply cannot be trusted. If he is the GOP nominee I will undervote this race in the general election before I vote for him.

Let me also speak to a couple of the frequent criticisms I have heard about Brooks. One that I’ve heard from some on the right side of the aisle is that he is a career politician. True, he has been in public office for many years. But I fail to see how that in any way disqualifies him considering that career has been spent fighting for conservative principles. He hasn’t been a political weather vane, pointing whichever way the wind blows in order to stay in office.  He hasn’t backed down from or allowed his political adversaries to run him over. I’ll take a politician who has spent a career conducting himself in a manner I generally agree with anytime.

The second, and more prevalent, criticism I’ve heard about Brooks is that he can be too polarizing for this district. It is fair to say that Brooks differs considerably from, say, Bud Cramer in terms of style. Mo speaks his mind. I don’t think he would disagree with that, but he maintains that he keeps the rhetoric on a policy level, not a personal one and that he has proven himself to be capable of working with Democrats. In the Alabama legislature I believe he was one of about a dozen Republicans in the 105 member house and on the Madison County Commission Democrats hold a 4-3 advantage, but those situations haven’t rendered him ineffective.

I look forward to watching this Republican primary play out. I feel confident that Parker Griffith will be exposed as the political opportunist that he is. I am equally confident that as Republican voters look for a conservative they can count on to represent this district that they will turn to Mo Brooks.

News Release

For Immediate Release

December 22, 2009

RE:  Parker Griffith Switches Parties

I am a candidate for Congress because, in these challenging times, America needs strong, dependable, unwavering leadership; leadership that won’t change with shifting political winds.

A few months ago, Parker Griffith enthusiastically voted to empower socialist House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

This year, Parker Griffith voted with socialist House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a whopping 85% of the time out of 991 votes cast in the U.S. House.  (Source:  WashingtonPost.com)

I look forward to debating Parker Griffith and giving him every opportunity to explain to Republican Primary voters how Parker Griffith’s vote to empower House Speaker Pelosi and how his 800+ votes with House Speaker Pelosi are in the best interest of America or qualify him to represent Republican Party values in the upcoming general election.

When I ran for the state legislature in 1982, I was advised to run as a Democrat because they said I could not win as a Republican.  I ran as a Republican because of my steadfast belief in conservative principles.  And I won, because voters want elected officials who stand on principles.

For over 25 years, I have consistently served the public and our conservative principles.  I have an established public record of fighting for our conservative values.

America and the 5^th Congressional District need a Congressman who will fight to protect and promote America’s foundational principles that have served us so well.

We need a Congressman who will promote NASA, national defense, TVA and the private sector jobs that enable us to take care of our families.

In these troubled times, America needs the 5^th District to provide strong, dependable, unwavering leadership.  That is exactly what Mo Brooks offers.

The anger and frustration that most of us feel at our out-of-control government was quite evident at the Health Care Rally held in Huntsville on November 21.  This event was part of a national day of protest against the proposed government-run healthcare system. The rally was organized by doctors, and attended by roughly 600-700 concerned and motivated citizens.

Although our current Congressman may not be listening, Mo Brooks was there to be a part of this rally – there to listen and there to share his beliefs about ways to return our government to its founding principles.

Socialized medicine is not the answer. Government intervention in the doctor-patient relationship is not the answer.  A government takeover of yet another industry is not the answer. Entitlement programs that we cannot afford are not the answer.

Instead, we must firmly hold on to our liberty and freedom – that IS the answer.  We must nurture free markets and capitalism. We must remove artificially inflated health care prices that are driven by frivolous lawsuits and government-created insurance monopolies. And, we must stop inducing illegal aliens to come to America with the lure of free health care that drives up insurance and health care costs for all Americans.

Yes, the health care system needs reform. But, we must not destroy the best healthcare system in the world and replace it with socialized medicine.  And, we must always recognize that a patient and doctor are much more qualified to make decisions about what medical procedures are appropriate than any government bureaucrat will ever be.

In an interview this week, Politico Magazine reported:

Parker Griffith (D-Ala.)

“[Parker Griffith] won by a hairbreadth in 2008 — with 51 percent of the vote — and . . .  [he] said he wasn’t sure exactly how loud the message from Tuesday’s Democratic losses in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races were, but he said the point was clear.

“I should be nervous,” he said.

He said the current Democratic agenda has “the potential to cost some of our frontline members their seats.”

He also asks that he be identified as a conservative, independent Blue Dog — rather than as a Democrat.”

Politico Magazine, By JONATHAN ALLEN & MANU RAJU | 11/5/09 4:43 AM EST.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29170.html

Mo’s Response:

Mr. Griffith should be nervous.  His policies have angered and alarmed his constituents.  In the first ten months of his tenure, millions of Americans around the country have become politically active to oppose them.  Millions of other Americans have lost their jobs.

In North Alabama, hundreds of high-tech and defense and NASA support jobs have been lost due to changing Washington priorities.  More job losses are expected because Mr. Griffith’s party has NASA and national defense at the bottom of their priority lists.

If Mr. Griffith does not want to be identified as a Democrat, then why did he run as one, and why is he running again as one in 2010?

If Mr. Griffith does not want to be affiliated with Washington Democrats, then why did he help empower Nancy Pelosi by voting to make her Speaker of the House?

It is obvious Mr. Griffith wants to be all things to all people.  That is not leadership America needs, especially in these challenging times.

America needs leaders with a clear vision of where we have been, where we are, and where we must go.  A leader does not have association by convenience, switching his loyalties to whoever provides the most political mileage.

Trying to be all things to all people is not a new strategy for Mr. Griffith.  He voted for the Cap and Trade Tax Increase . . . before he voted against it.  *1

Mr. Griffith voted against the $780 billion stimulus package because, he says, it was too big and America could not afford the debt . . . yet he voted against every single amendment to reduce its size. *2

America needs leadership, not a politician who plays both sides of all issues, and definitely not a politician like Mr. Griffith who tells people in the 5^th Congressional District that he’s doing one thing while his voting record proves he does something entirely different.

I am a candidate for Congress because I believe in the foundational principles that, for six decades, have made America the greatest nation in world history.  I have defended those principles as a           legislator, district attorney and county commissioner.  I’ll fight for them as a Congressman.

Shifting political winds will not cause me to change my course from right to wrong.

*1.  On 6/26/09, Griffith voted for the Cap & Trade Tax Increase (House Roll Call vote 476) before he voted against it (Vote 477).  Vote 476 was on a substitute bill that was an alternative national energy proposal (no tax increases with an emphasis on more nuclear power and off-shore oil exploration as the means for handling America’s energy needs.  Vote 476 gave Griffith a choice:  he could vote for the substitute or to protect Cap & Trade from the substitute.  Griffith chose to protect the Cap & Trade Tax Increase from all procedural and substantive threats.

*2.  On 1/28/09, Griffith claimed he voted against Obama’s Stimulus Bill because it was too large (“maxing out our credit cards”; H. Times, 2/18/09), yet Griffith supported the Stimulus Bill by voting against all amendments to cut its size (House Roll Call votes 42, 43, 44).

Vote 42 was on an amendment to strike $355 billion in discretionary funding from the Stimulus bill.

Vote 43 was an amendment to strike supplemental funding for Amtrak.

Vote 44 was an amendment to strike income tax “refunds” to be paid to people who don’t pay income taxes (i.e. – wealth transfers to people who either do not work or who don’t earn enough money to pay taxes).  Absurd, but true.

The Madison County Young Republicans sponsored a picinic on Saturday, September 26th at the Monte Sano picnic grounds.   Of course, it poured rain, but everyone was dry under the wonderful pavillion!  Many candidates and elected officials attended.  Everyone got to mingle and then hear a two-minute presentation from each candidate and elected official.  Also represented were the Fair Tax organization, Republican Women of Madison, and the Huntsville Tea Party.  YR President Shannon Moore and all the YR’s did a fabulous job of providing delicious hot dogs with all the fixins and a great political forum!

Mo was at the Colbert County Fair Friday night.  The Colbert County Republican Party had a booth there, and Mo got to talk to people strolling by.  Just like everywhere Mo has been, people expressed their dissatisfaction with Congress and their agenda for bigger government, huge deficit spending, and socialized medicine.  No, you are not seeing double!  You are seeing Mo’s banner that features a picture of him taken in front of Congress during his trip to Washington, D.C. in June.