Politico is reporting that Governor Gary Johnson of New Mexico is dropping out of the Republican primary to run as a Libertarian candidate in the 2012 elections.

Ironically, at a time of national deficit, Governor Gary Johnson is among the few candidates running for president who has actually cut government, but the media has repeatedly cut him from the debate. In the New Mexico statehouse, he vetoed 750 bills, fired 1,200 state employees and left the state with a billion-dollar budget surplus, which is the sort of toughness that Republicans claim to long for, but Johnson has only been invited to two of the nationally televised debates, much to his dismay.

Johnson reportedly expressed frustration that he was not being invited to the debates and that, despite doing better in the polls than Jon Huntsman or several of the other established candidates, he could get no media attention. In early September, Johnson polled higher than Jon Huntsman and Rick Santorum, yet he wasn’t invited to the Reagan debate. He polled the same as Herman Cain at one point.

Media attention has been key for this election. Just ask Newt Gingrich, who used the force of his personality and the platform afforded by the mainstream media networks to run for president. For weeks Gingrich lacked organization, and his campaign had defections that seemed to have left it moribund, but he debated his way back into the game. That’s a lot easier to do if you actually get invited to the debates.

To be sure, Johnson has some views well outside of the Republican mainstream, but not out of the mainstream of American public opinion. He supports legalizing marijuana, but so do 50% of American voters. True, he does support the murder of the unborn, which is vastly unpopular in the Republican Party. But excluding a candidate who happens to have views outside of the Republican mainstream would see Ron Paul being excluded, too. He tends to have a foreign policy that few champion outside of the isolationist Right.

Those of us bordering on the conspiratorial will wonder if perhaps the reason Johnson was excluded was to shore up support for the other past libertarian, Ron Paul, or whether or not that was just a happy accident. Unlike Gary Johnson, Paul was actually a libertarian, some 24 years ago. He ran for the Libertarian Party nomination in 1988 and has had the libertarian wing of the Republican primary entirely to himself. Had he faced competition on that front, it is unlikely he could have built the organization that may now propel him past the Iowa caucus.

By contrast, Paul’s social conservative competitors, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum split the vote among themselves, making it still harder for a social conservative candidate to emerge. After Iowa, it seems likely that as many as two and possibly all three of those candidates may drop out, clearing the space once more for social conservative discontent. It simply took too long for the social conservative groups in Iowa to pick a standard bearer.

Of course, part of the problem here is the requirement that presidents must be good debaters, which is a very modern.  This idea–that the power of the presidency comes from the power to persuade and use the bully pulpit–comes from the progressive political scientist Richard Neustadt and not from the Constitution. The founding fathers knew well that the power of the presidency might not lend itself to great debaters. Indeed, the only candidate running with what Publius calls “energy in the executive”–the very attribute that the founders prized–is Rick Perry, whose tongue-tied performance or “oops” moments has made its candidacy moribund.

Even the non-candidate candidates would have had a hard time at the debates. It’s hard to see Mitch Daniels, the second coming of Calvin Coolidge, appearing along the others. Chris Christie, for all of his intellectual heft, could appear a tad bullying, while Paul Ryan might appear wonky and boyish. It’s far better to have the ideas discussed and debated than to have the politicians playing the part of media personality.

As Professor Charles R. Kesler, writing in the masterly Claremont Review of Books notes:

For an office designed at least partly with George Washington in mind, debating skills were never a high priority. The president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces; has the power to make treaties and appoint ambassadors, Supreme Court justices, and cabinet officers (with the Senate’s advice and consent); and wields the veto pen and issues pardons and reprieves at his discretion. But none of these or his few other constitutionally prescribed powers and duties requires him to debate anyone. The tradition of presidential debating is not only relatively new (Kennedy-Nixon in 1960 was the first), it tests an art or aptitude that is irrelevant to the job

Perhaps that’s why Newt Gingrich, who once fashioned himself as a kind of prime minister, has talked his way into front runner status. Perhaps the reason he is falling in the polls is that voters realize that while debate may be at a premium, talk is cheap. If he wins the nomination, Gingrich promises Lincoln-Douglas style debates with President Obama, who we are led to believe is a great debater, like Gingrich. There’s just one problem. Lincoln and Douglas debated for the Senate, not the presidency, and Lincoln, one of our greatest executives, lost that Senate race. So too did Nixon in the Nixon-Kennedy debates of 1960. It was said that Nixon, with his five o’clock shadow, didn’t look presidential compared to the boyish Kennedy. And, indeed, this argument about “looking” presidential is part of the reason that Obama bested McCain or why Romney, with his graying temples, looks the part of president, even if, perhaps, he doesn’t act it.

Looks aren’t everything. Ideas matter, too, and the debates have proven not to be the proper setting for those ideas being exposed.

There might be some reforms that are possible. Maybe less is more. Maybe fewer candidates on the stage would mean better debates and fewer free-for-alls. Maybe candidates with only double-digits should be allowed into the debates, with a rotating chair for a candidate in the single digits. Who knows?  Maybe Shakespeare knows best.

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts… As You Like It Act 2, scene 7, 139–143

But there are some parts that seem below the office of president.

We saw this dynamic play out recently in the Washington Post’s vicious and sloppy attack on Sen. Marco Rubio. Rubio is, of course, a quickly rising star in the Republican Party; one with broad – even national – appeal. Clearly the left knows the threat Sen. Rubio presents to its grip on Hispanic voters, so they felt it necessary to muddy him up with a shoddy news story questioning his family story.

Now come the attacks on New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez. The attacks on Martinez are much subtler than those on Sen. Rubio, but no less dangerous if left unanswered. They come in the form of a pervasive rumor about her family origins; a rumor that has been reported uncritically by the mainstream media, including the New York Times.

Here we have a popular and successful Latina politician with a bold, conservative agenda in an important swing state. As far as the mainstream media is concerned, there has to be a catch.

“Ms. Martinez, who grew up along the border, is also Mexican-American, with news reports since her election revealing that her paternal grandfather came to the United States as an illegal immigrant,” wrote Marc Lacey in a New York Times profile three months ago.

“…The New Mexican’s Sandra Baltazar Martínez reported recently, at least two of the governor’s grandparents also were [undocumented immigrants],” wrote the Santa Fe New Mexican in a recent editorial.

Lest you be under any illusions about the nature and motives of these news items, bear in mind that Gov. Martinez wants to roll back certain of her predecessor’s policies regarding illegal immigration in New Mexico, most notably, a policy that allows illegal immigrants to secure drivers licenses. “The governor’s opponents have pointed to her immigrant grandparents as an example of why New Mexico should welcome illegal immigrants and continue to allow them to get a driver’s license,” reports the Associated Press.

Obviously, the stage is set for the media and her political rivals to paint Gov. Martinez as a hypocrite and a traitor to her people.

There’s only one problem: The story about Martinez’s grandparents is junk. The Governor’s grandparents were not U.S. citizens, but they were most certainly not illegal immigrants.

According to Barry Massey of the Associated Press:

The 1930 U.S. census has been cited in published reports as indicating the governor’s grandparents were illegal immigrants. However, the census only records they were not U.S. citizens at the time they were living in El Paso. The census used a code, “AL” to designate they were “aliens,” meaning they were not citizens and had not filed papers declaring their intent to become citizens. It does not indicate their immigration status or whether they were living in the United States legally, according to historians and immigration experts.

Two experts quoted in Massey’s story make it clear that Martinez’s grandparents lived well within the law at the time.

“There was no such thing as an undocumented immigrant during that time” in the American Southwest, said [immigration law expert and director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance at the University of Houston Michael A.] Olivas, a Santa Fe resident. “There was no secure Mexican border and people came and went with no problem.”

The census lists 1910 as the year Martinez’s grandfather, Adolfo Martinez, immigrated to the U.S. He worked as a taxi driver and spoke English. Her grandmother, Francisca Martinez, came to the U.S. in 1915, according to the same census document.

Her grandparents had U.S. government permits to cross the border on several occasions, according to documents provided to the AP by the governor’s political committee. They were dated from 1908 through 1931, and several were issued by the U.S. Department of Labor’s immigration service.

“So he understood the process and seemed to have followed the process,” the governor said of her grandfather.

Guadalupe San Miguel, Jr., a history professor at the University of Houston and a noted scholar of Mexican-American history, said it wasn’t until a 1924 federal law outlined rules for immigrants with proper documents.
“But they did not apply the law to people from the Western Hemisphere,” said San Miguel. “It only applied to people from Europe, Africa and Asia, for example.”

Gov. Susana Martinez doesn’t fit into the box in which the mainstream media and the political left would like to contain her. So naturally, they will endeavor to bring her down. But the potentially damaging narrative about Gov. Martinez’s grandparents is a bogus myth.

In the midst of this firestorm, Judicial Watch took aggressive action, launching a national television advertising campaign to combat illegal immigration. The purpose of the campaign is to collect petitions from the American people to send to the governors of all 50 states, urging them to obey and enforce all laws against illegal immigration. This campaign to encourage our nation’s governors to stand strong on illegal immigration law enforcement has become more urgent now that the Obama DOJ has decided to sue states for merely trying to protect their citizens from the scourge of illegal immigration.

But it’s not just the federal government that is to blame. Some states have decided to side with the illegal aliens, rolling out the welcome mat for illegal aliens through costly and unlawful sanctuary policies. That’s why we’re going national with this petition campaign. The petition campaign is being driven by a series of television advertisements that began broadcasting this week in California, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, as well as nationwide on Fox Business News (FBN) and the Military Channel.

In this new national campaign, Judicial Watch asks Americans take a stand on this illegal immigration crisis:

The cost of illegal immigration is a burden on every taxpaying citizen. That’s why Judicial Watch fights hard to hold politicians accountable when they violate and undermine immigration law. Take a stand. Sign this petition and tell your state governor to enforce our federal immigration laws.

The objective of our television campaign is to educate the public and encourage citizens to petition their government in support of the rule of law. Here’s what our petition states (If you’d like to sign off on these principles, then please click here and join our cause!):

• Whereas, the subject of illegal immigration enforcement in America is a matter of preeminent importance to each and every local, state and federal taxpayer;
• Whereas, it’s a fact that illegal immigration touches our lives in many ways, and without a doubt, a portion of the true costs of illegal immigration is in the local, state, and federal taxes we pay;
• Whereas, a majority of Americans agree that the reason we have illegal immigration is that past federal, state and local enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate;”
• Whereas, a modest estimate of the total net cost to American taxpayers each year is $113 BILLION;
• Therefore, I, the undersigned taxpayer, call upon you to pledge that you will do everything in your power to uphold the rule of law and obey and enforce all laws against illegal immigration.

Politicians in Washington and in the states want to ignore the illegal immigration crisis while asking taxpayers to foot the bill. Judicial Watch wants the rule of law enforced and we know millions of Americans share our views. Our new television spots are designed to educate and motivate Americans to take a stand against politicians who simply refuse to enforce or even obey the laws against illegal immigration. As I’ve said many times: Every state is now a border state.

The American people cannot sit on the sidelines while politicians continue to allow the illegal immigration crisis to spiral even further out of control. Now is the time for the rule of law to be applied to the illegal immigration problem. If you agree with me, then please click here, sign our petition, and make your voice heard and help us get the word out about the effort. As someone else in Washington is saying these days, “we can’t wait any longer…”

Obama won 67 percent of Hispanic voters in 2008 but many of those voters have become disillusioned during the past three years. Unemployment among Hispanics tops 11 percent and many Latinos are losing their homes. Others criticize the number of deportations under Obama’s presidency and the lack of progress on a comprehensive immigration plan.

“I am willing to support him, but I would like him to keep his word on all the promises he made,” said Marcos Mata, 17, a Las Vegas high school senior who will vote for the first time next year. “Not just on immigration. But I don’t know if I see any improvement. The jobs act, it’s a good idea but he should have been doing that a long time ago.”

Recent Gallup polling showed Obama with a 49 percent job approval rating among Hispanics, compared with about 60 percent in the beginning of 2011. Hispanic voters could prove pivotal next year, especially in fast-growing and contested states such as Florida, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado.

Obama has said his jobs agenda would help Hispanics in the construction industry and provide tax breaks for small businesses. On immigration, he has targeted violent criminals for deportation and urged Congress to create a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Obama also has sought support for legislation that would provide a route to legal status for college students and members of the military brought to the country as children.

Republicans sense an opening and have courted Hispanic voters through Spanish-language radio and television ads, criticizing Obama’s handling of the economy.

Crossroads GPS, a Republican political organization tied to strategist Karl Rove, ran a Spanish-language ad in five states last summer called “Despertarse,” or “Wake up,” depicting a young mother pacing her home early in the morning, worried about the economy and her children.

President George W. Bush was supported by 44 percent of Hispanic voters in 2004 but that level slipped for the 2008 GOP nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain. Party officials promote the success of prominent Hispanic Republicans, including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, and Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, but some worry that a harsh tone on immigration could undermine their efforts.

Read more here.

Remember the summer of 2009, when the Obama administration tried to push through a cap and trade bill?  It passed the U.S. House, and it’s been sitting in the U.S. Senate ever since, where I expect it will stay.   In short, it failed to pass muster with federal leaders who perhaps recognized that its passage would be both detrimental to our limping economy and to their political futures if they supported it.

Fast forward to 2010.   New Mexico has decided to go it alone and unilaterally pass its own Cap and Trade program, making it the only state in the country to ignore the federal decision on this issue.  More specifically, NM Governor Bill Richardson and his lame-duck administration have decided to use administrative process alone to force through Cap and Trade, and even bypass our state legislature.

This is the second time the Richardson administration has ignored the legislative process to force through rules that cripple our state’s energy industries.  I’ve decided to do something about it.

To stop this abuse of executive authority, I filed a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on Monday, April 12^th to stop the Governor and his crew.  The legal action requests a temporary restraining order against the administration, allowing the state legislature to consider the regulation in January 2011.

Following the federal failure to pass Cap and Trade, most states began to see the wisdom of re-evaluating cap and trade regulations.  Some involved in the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) are even backing out, largely because of the anticipated costs.  Arizona, citing the recession, has pulled out of the cap and trade emissions program involving several Western states and Canadian provinces. Utah is following suit: in February the state House voted to urge the governor to withdraw from the WCI.

In New Mexico, our current administration, which includes Lt. Governor Diane Denish, is fighting against the national will.  Our leaders continue to push through potentially unlawful and inane regulations that threaten to completely destroy our state’s fragile economy, despite the fact that the oil and gas, utility and extractive industries are the economic back-bone of our state.  Putting an end to this kind of madness is the reason I filed my restraining order and one of the reasons I’m running for Governor of New Mexico.

First, they forced through a regulation called the “pit rule” that has already forced many small oil and gas producers to move operations across state lines into Texas or Colorado.  A boon for surrounding states, but detrimental to our state. New Mexico’s treasury is currently feeling the effects of the pit rule. In the past, the state could depend on oil and gas royalties to keep the big spending going.  Now, those rigs have moved elsewhere, and citizens are finally feeling the financial impact of unnecessary special interest environmental regulations.

Second, an environmental group has called for a cap on greenhouse gas emissions. The Governor-appointed Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) is currently running a public hearing charade around the state on this petition.  It is a charade because the EIB chairman is a lobbyist for one of the very environmental groups seeking the petition.   Talk about conflict of interest.

The third blow to our energy industry now comes from yet another government agency.   In March, the state’s Environment Department (NMED) published proposed regulations that could establish an emissions cap and trade program without ever being subjected to legislative review and approval.   That’s right, whether voters like it or not, and whether our elected legislators like it or not, the Richardson/Denish Administration will still force through Cap and Trade.

With a decision due in June, the timing of this regulation does not give the citizens of New Mexico and interested groups enough time to consider such broad and sweeping regulations that will drastically affect the state’s economy. Keep in mind that Governor Richardson’s term ends on December 31. Obviously the clock is ticking on the Richardson/Denish administration to leave some environmental legacy on the state, at any cost.

Are you angry yet?  I am, and I’m just getting started.

On Monday when I showed up at the First Judicial District Court in Santa Fe to file the petition, the first judge refused to sign it.   The second judge also refused to sign it, but has granted a hearing scheduled for next week.

When people ask me, “isn’t this a political stunt?”  My straightforward answer is “yes.”  If that’s what it takes to bring attention to this issue, I’m okay with that. This injunction and this action is to stop a potential train wreck and the dictatorial abuse of administrative rule-making that circumvents the state’s legislative process.

We don’t allow it on a national level.  We didn’t allow it before 2003.  We shouldn’t allow it to happen here and now, either.

Richardson quietly slipped out of the national spotlight and most Americans forgot about New Mexico’s corrupt Governor.  Most don’t realize that prosecution for the scandal was quietly discontinued when the Obama team drained the investigator’s budget resource, leaving them unable to pursue prosecution.  The case is still pending and will likely remain that way.

Now back in New Mexico in his final year as Governor, the behavior of a man who was an inconvenient nuisance to the Obama team has revealed itself to be nearly cataclysmic to my state’s future.

Just seven years ago, New Mexico was one of only a handful of states in the black, thanks to the leadership of our previous Republican Governor.  Now, we’ve got an estimated $500 million deficit this year thanks to a government that continues to loot the pockets of taxpayers.

Aside from the absurd corruption, pay-to-play scandals and shady investment deals one of the most obvious evidence of poor management is the sheer size of New Mexico’s government.  With new state agencies and 4,500 new employees, our state government has grown by more than 50% in the last 7 years costing taxpayers $250 million annually. Further, the numbers don’t even include the hundreds of exempt political appointees now drawing a government paycheck.  Those people got jobs as payback for family, favors and financial contributions. Estimates put new political appointees in the neighborhood of 450 costing taxpayers around $50 million a year.

Already I’ve accounted for more than half the budget shortfall, and I haven’t even begun to talk about the fraudulent investment schemes, pay-to-play scandals and pork projects that have nearly sunk our state.

To put it into perspective, for every 100 private sector employees there are 24 state and local government employees.  The average ratio is 12 per 100.  I can assure you, my interaction with government in this state is not twice as good as it was seven years ago.

And now, the Governor who doubled the size of government has to find a way to pay for his distends.  His answer?  Well, it isn’t cutting state employees.  And it isn’t cutting unfriendly regulations to grow small business.   Nope.  His answer is—you guessed it—NEW TAXES.  During our last legislative session, lawmakers proposed taxes on candy, cigarettes, soda and even tortillas.

All proposals died a slow death and our legislatures failed to come up with a budget.  Now, they’ve been called in to a special session that begins next week.

I am running for Governor of New Mexico to put an end to the graft, greed and waste that has run rampant in New Mexico.

The moment I am elected, I will immediately demand the resignation of every unnecessary political appointment.  I made a pledge this week to roll back the number from over 600 to 167.   I have called upon the Democratic candidate, Lt. Governor Diane Denish, to make the same pledge. The Lt. Governor has been trying to distance herself from the present administration’s defective distends, but a promise to return to a reasonable number of political positions would be a substantive statement, should she be willing to make it.   Sadly, I expect silence will be her response.

The issue of bloated government is not limited to New Mexico.  The waste here is merely a reflection of the corruption that is occurring nationally. For those among us who challenge the wisdom of Federal Stimulus dollars, look no further than the state of New Mexico for evidence of its failings.  Those dollars only fuel our inefficient government and do nothing to force our government to fix itself.

ACORN and its affiliates currently owe more than $2.3 million in long overdue back taxes to all levels of government.

It's deathly quiet at the former funeral home at 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue, New Orleans. (photo: Kevin Kane)

As of Nov. 11 the exact figure was $2,328,596.95.

ACORN owes money to the IRS, Arkansas, California, Delaware, District of Columbia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and to the cities of New York and Philadelphia.

I first uncovered ACORN’s massive tax debts last year.

A detailed list of the tax liens is available here as an Excel spreadsheet. Data was obtained from Nexis and the Pelican Institute.

The liens are grouped according to the addresses against which they were filed. In New Orleans 2609 Canal St. is functioning as ACORN’s headquarters in that city. That office was raided a few days ago by Louisiana Attorney Buddy Caldwell, whose investigators seized computers and documents.

Elsewhere in New Orleans, the old headquarters at 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue reportedly stands empty. The property, which was previously a funeral home, has been on the market for months.

French Quarter Realty is asking $835,000 for the property, which is now encumbered by $1,278,862 in tax liens, $619,271 of which is owed to the IRS. It’s unclear why the Obama administration’s tax enforcers haven’t seized the property yet. Perhaps the president is extending a courtesy to his former ally and client.

Liens were also filed against ACORN offices at 16 W. 25th St. in Baltimore, 209 W. Jackson Blvd. in Chicago, and 846 N. Broad St. in Philadelphia.