Jon Porter has absorbed too many Democratic values

Sometimes the best way to disinfect an icky, germ-laden sponge is to nuke it. Or else throw it away. After all, a sponge is a kitchen item meant to clean up counters and sinks, but usually in the end it becomes infected with unsavory items and can cause more harm than good. In the political arena, the effect is similar. Conservative voters install a Republican-in-name-only (RINO) politician to help reduce taxes and keep the government out of the private sector. When that same conservative politician ends up showing his true fiscal-moderate stripes by behaving more like a socialist Democrat, we at Liberty Watch have a term for that kind of impostor: �sponge Republican.�

Liberty Watch uses the sponge metaphor, because it seems to fit Nevada Congressman Jon Porter, who continues to betray conservative values, the most recent example being his vote in favor of the $700-billion bailout of Wall Street. 

The votes, however, are one thing; his repudiation of fellow Republican Dean Heller (who voted against the bailout) is another and more grievous act. Porter told the Associated Press the following: �All indicators are we�re on the verge of a national, international collapse. It�s not if or when, it�s now, it�s today, and for those who aren�t able to see this they�re blind.�

Calling Heller blind adds insult to the severe injury of putting taxpayers on the hook for the subprime mortgage fiasco. But for Porter, who only cares about defeating his challenger, Dina Titus, this November, betraying conservative principles is a small obstacle on the road to a long, successful political career. Just as a point of reference, consider that Democratic Representative Shelley Berkley, a total liberal, voted against the bailout. Does that give you any indication regarding how far left Porter�s fiscal attitudes are?

Clearly Porter is unfit for another congressional term and should stick to playing keyboard in that silly rock band of his. Here are several more valid reasons why Porter deserves the boot from Nevada voters.


Porter = Pork

Take, for instance, Porter�s inaction on the growing problem of government pork projects. Last year, the Club for Growth compiled a RePORK Card of all congressional members� votes on 50 anti-pork amendments in 2008. [Editor�s note: Club for Growth is a PAC that promotes the idea of prosperity and opportunity through economic freedom and fiscal conservatism.] Even though the Democratic majority vowed to return Congress to a path of fiscal responsibility, the 2008 appropriations bills were stuffed with wasteful projects. While Representatives John Campbell, Jeff Flake, Jeb Hensarling, Scott Garrett and David Obey offered 50 amendments to strip outrageous pork projects from appropriations bills, only one amendment, offered by Rep. Jeff Flake, passed.

The reason only one anti-pork amendment passed is strictly because of sponge Republicans like Porter.

His score on the Club for Growth RePORK card? A dismal 5 out of 50, meaning Porter only voted for five anti-pork amendments. On a real report card, he would have received a 10 percent, or F triple-minus! Does that score sound like a Republican to you?

�Jon Porter was never a conservative,� says Chuck Muth, Nevada-based conservative commentator, political consultant and President & CEO of Citizen Outreach. �It�s just that he was never forced to take any tough votes when Republicans were in the majority. Now that Democrats are in charge, Jon Porter has to vote on difficult issues that he�s never had to face before. And he�s voting like the fiscal moderate he truly is.�

On his widely read blog, �Muth�s Truths,� Muth has taken Porter to task for blaming the Wall Street meltdown on the Bush administration for not having �had more checks and balances in place.� As Muth best puts it:

�So according to Porter, the majority of Congress, including Heller, as well as a majority of American voters, is completely clueless. And the problem was President Bush not having enough regulations in place even though it was Democrats in the U.S. Senate who blocked a Republican bill to further regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac three years ago, and President Clinton who pressured the mortgage giants to give no-money-down �affordable housing� loans to people who shouldn�t have gotten them. Maybe it�s Jon Porter who�s clueless.�

Clueless would make some sense, except for the obvious fact that Porter campaign insider, Mike Slanker, insists on running things from 40,000 feet rather than get down and dirty on the ground and knock on some doors.


Slanker = Wanker

There are many reasons to jettison Slanker from Porter�s campaign, but the most obvious is that, because of fake Republicans like Porter watering down the conservative message in the Silver State, there�s a very good chance John McCain will lose Nevada to socialist Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. Furthermore, Porter puts all candidates with an R by their name at serious risk, making them victims of circumstance at a time when Republicans need to stick to our conservative principles now more than ever. Watch out, Republican candidates Sean Fellows and Jon Ozark, whose assembly districts fall within Porter�s congressional district. Should your campaigns fail by close numbers, be sure to thank party-boy Porter.

There are nearly 31,000 more registered Democrats in Porter�s district because of his inactiveness in reaching out to voters. When Republican voters called Porter�s office to express their disapproval of the bailout, Slanker advised Porter to ignore them and make the politically expedient decision rather than the right one. Slanker has been reading the same headlines we�ve all been reading, headlines that report how Democrats have been out-registering Republicans for many months now. What has been done to counteract this surge? Nothing, save for acting more like, and voting more socialist, than even the Democrats themselves � namely Dina �Taxus.�

By the early part of this year, no doubt having sensed the political winds shifting, Porter began voting with House Democrats, even to the point of, as one Nevada blogger noted, �supporting veto overrides of President Bush.�

There was Porter�s support for the expansion of SCHIP (State Children�s Health Insurance Program, a backdoor means of ushering in Hillary Clinton�s national healthcare nightmare) in the face of a Bush veto threat. There was his refusal to join his Republican House colleagues in a staged walkout in front of news cameras to protest the Democrats� unwillingness to renew the White House�s anti-terror laws. He also split with his party to vote for extending unemployment benefits, and expanding post-service aid for military personnel. Heck, Porter has even voted green, like a dyed-in-the-wool liberal.

And don�t forget how Porter joined the Democrats to override Bush�s veto of the farm bill (which included money for �stress counseling� for farmers) and voted for a tax package that would be offset by raising taxes on offshore corporate earnings. In both cases, Porter essentially voted for tax increases, betraying the cornerstone value of any self-respecting Republican.

This schizophrenic two-step intensifies the closer we get to the November elections, suggesting that this is a poorly considered re-election ploy on the part of Porter�s campaign manager, and that siding with Democrats is a way for Porter to ensure his political well-being rather than the well-being of Nevada taxpayers. As UNLV political science professor David Damore succinctly puts it on his PoliticalTickerNV.com blog: �Unfortunately for Porter, the forces that shaped the dynamics in 2006 have only gotten worse for his side. Thanks to incredible caucus related mobilization, the 3rd Congressional District (Clark County) now tilts strongly Democratic. Instead of drawing a novice opponent with a thin resume that he could easily define, Porter must now contend with a battle-tested challenger who carried the district two years ago when Democrats held only a slight registration advantage.�


Liberal vs. Liberal

Instead of rushing to join the Democrats in sabotaging President Bush�s limited-government policies, Porter could have done more to beef up registering Republicans in his district. But when your campaign merely consists of trying to beat Titus at her own liberal game, the little things (cough!) like reaching out to fellow conservatives just seems like a waste of time.

The only waste, of course, will be Porter, who has made enough poor decisions this year to dampen conservative turnout at the polls and help bring about a Titus win and a Democratic avalanche in Nevada. The stakes are too high in 2008. Every campaign matters, and when a poor campaign is run by a RINO, it impacts and drags down all the surrounding and genuine conservatives. If conservative voters can�t tell the difference between a liberal and a conservative candidate, they simply won�t show up.

More perversely, Porter is slamming his challenger and former state senator Titus in a new TV ad for voting for the largest tax hike in Nevada�s history back in 2003.

�This is the same Jon Porter who voted with Nancy Pelosi and the liberal Democrats to override the President�s veto of the liberal expansion of the liberal SCHIP program,� says Muth. �Who regularly votes with Nancy Pelosi and the liberal Democrats against cutting earmarks from budget bills, and who voted to override the president�s veto of the pork-stuffed labor/health/ education bill � and who is asking people to re-elect him so that Nancy Pelosi won�t have another liberal vote in Congress. The obvious question is: Who would know the difference?�

The obvious answer: It�s time to throw out the sponge.