I keep hearing that there is another guy seeking the Republican nomination to be Ohio's next US Senator, but I sure don't see evidence of him running a statewide campaign.
I also hear that this guy, whoever he is, is claiming to be a conservative's conservative. But like former Senator Mike DeWine, this guy sure has a funny sense of what it is to be conservative.
Take property rights, for example. The conservative position on property rights is that if you own your property, it's yours. But it appears that if you are Tom Ganley and people own property you want to enlarge your vast empire, you threaten the Akron city council until you get what you want.
Want another example? How about government handouts? The conservative position on unnecessary entitlements is to eliminate them. But it appears that if you are Tom Ganley and you are presented with an opportunity to take advantage of a government handout, you exploit it.
Do we really want a US Senator who thinks like this? How does one go about making the argument for less intrusive government when one has used the government to advance one's own agenda? Good for me but not for thee?
We can do better... While Rob Portman's campaign to date has resembled a beauty pageant, we know FAR more about Rob than we do Mr. Ganley.
