Today, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty filed papers with the Federal
Election Commission to launch a new PAC called Freedom First. Its objective,
according to a statement, is to "help elect conservatives in 2009
and 2010." But given reports
that he is starting to put together a presidential campaign team,
Pawlenty faced questions in a new media conference call this
morning -- the very first question, I believe, from Politics
Daily's Matt Lewis -- about whether this was really about
2012.
Pawlenty maintained that he has not decided whether he is going
to seek the Republican presidential nomination, that his PAC
legally and structurally is not about his own political
ambitions, and that this will soon become clear when people see
the results of its work on behalf of conservative candidates
throughout the country over the next election cycle.
In his introductory remarks, Pawlenty spent a lot of time
explaining why he picked "Freedom First" as the name of his PAC.
He emphasized the importance of freedom and liberty as
foundational principles for the country and party, talked about
his record controlling spending in a liberal state, and pointed
out that he accomplished the first cuts in real terms over a
two-year budget cycle. Pawlenty noted the rhetorical disadvantage
conservatives are at competing against candidates who promise to
give out "free stuff." Pawlenty said that people in distress are
likely to grab at the first floating object they find to keep
their heads above water. It's up to conservatives to explain that
the free stuff doesn't really come free.
This is noteworthy because Pawlenty -- coiner of the term "party
of Sam's Club" -- has been a candidate some big-government
conservatives hoped would run on their vision. But Pawlenty's
strong emphasis on fiscal conservatism and issues like school
choice seems to run counter to that. In fact, he talked enough
about liberty, freedom, and the Founders that at times he almost
sounded like Ron Paul-enty.
What we need are ideas, ideas, ideas, not 35 people running for
office. We need to elect folks who might have a chance of
actually serving, not taking. That comes from ideas. The
Republicans have been accused of not having any. Let's get with
it. We cannot not tolerate any more government fraud, lies, half
truths, I'll vote for you if you vote for me garbage anymore. We
need to elevate the quality of candidates running for office.
Sarah| 10.1.09 @ 3:28PM
What we need are ideas, ideas, ideas, not 35 people running for office. We need to elect folks who might have a chance of actually serving, not taking. That comes from ideas. The Republicans have been accused of not having any. Let's get with it. We cannot not tolerate any more government fraud, lies, half truths, I'll vote for you if you vote for me garbage anymore. We need to elevate the quality of candidates running for office.