Topic category: Government/Politics
It's Ovide Lamontagne Time in New Hampshire
The Obamacare debacle and the sell-outs by Senator Ben Nelson (D. Nebraska) and Congressman Bart Stupak (D. Michigan) emphasize the urgent need for trustworthy candidates to be nominated. Voters need to know who is a principled person who will stand up to political pressure instead of sell out or surrender. The most reliable indicators are a candidate's character and record.
New Hampshire Republicans will have the opportunity to give the New Hampshire voters an opportunity to send a stalwart conservative to the United States Senate, Ovide Lamontagne.
Fergus Cullen, a freelance columnist for the New Hampshire Union Leader and a former chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party, explained what kind of person Lamontagne is in "is Lamontagne too good for politics?" (http://ovide2010.com/wp-content/themes/2010_Theme/images/20091113081304.pdf):
"Ask anyone who knows Ovide Lamontagne personally and you'll hear the same thing over and over: He's a good man. Some add a backhanded caveat: Too good a person for politics.
"It's a political paradox. We lament that politics attracts a disproportionate number of scoundrels and half-wits and not enough selfless community leaders of deep character. Then when good people step into the public square, some dismiss them with the observation: Nice guys finish last.
"Lamontagne formally declared his candidacy for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate..., and being the good man in politics isn't the only paradox he brings to the campaign. Another is how someone identified as a strong conservative puts so much time, talent and treasure into social service organizations not thought of as conservative causes.
"Lamontagne is the model of the compassionate conservative. He's been a leader in Easter Seals, Catholic Charities, Court Appointed Special Advocates, the boy Scouts and the list goes on. Whenever a Manchester nonprofit has a capital campaign to fund, they want Ovide on the committee. nonprofit leaders describe him as an invaluable connector and catalyst."
Cullen proceeded to explain that how Lamontagne's personal life explains his charitable efforts:
"These causes are a more personal commitment for Ovide and his wife, Bettie, than many may be aware. After getting married at age 21--the Lammontagnes recently celebrated their 30th anniversary--the couple adopted their first child through Catholic Charities. Two years later, they were approached privately on behalf of a young woman who was pregnant, and in time they adopted a second baby.
"In between, a foster child came into their lives. The infant was placed in the Lamontagnes' care after spending several weeks in the hospital during which his natural parents proved unable to care for the baby themselves. At first the boy seemed healthy, but after several months it became apparent he was not developing normally. He was physically and mentally disabled and prone to self-abuse behavior. The Lamontagnes raised the boy as foster parents until he was 6. He never learned to talk and requires 23-hour care, which he receives today as an adult in a community setting. The Lamontagnes have continued as his educational and legal guardians."
By building up treasure in heaven, Lamontagne passed up the opportunity to be able to self-finance his campaign.
"Lamontagne's commitment to nonprofit work has contributed to another paradox. At least two of his opponents for the nomination are millionaires expected to self-finance their campaigns. Had Lamontagne, 52, not chosen, to conduct his npersonal affairs so much like a nonprofit himself over the span of his accomplished legal career at a prominent firm, giving away literally years of billable hours to nonprofits and being a generous donor to countless causes, Lamontagne would probably be in a position to self-finance his campaign, too.
"'Making money was never something that motivated me,' Lamontagne says. 'I'm more interested in the service I do. I told the firm (Devine Millimet), "You have to let me do public service or else I will sudffocate."'
"So instead of getting rich and moving to a big house in Bedford, the Lamontagnes live in the same house in the modest Manchester neighborhood he grew up in. His parents, who raised eight children, live literally next door. The neighborhood has changed over the decades--...violence on Haywood and Wilson Streets occurred a few block away--but the Lamontagne family stayed within St. Anthony's parish. His children attended the same parochial school, including Trinity High, that he did. A person who is conservative in such ways in his personal life can be counted on to stay that way in public office."
Can a person who "can be counted on to stay that way in public office" be elected?
That will be up to the New Hampshire Republicans and, as Cullen explained, Lamontagne is an insurgent, not an incumbent or even an establishment candidate.
Cullen: "Despite the law partnership, the nonprofit board, a vast personal network, a sunny disposition and being respected and well-liked, Lamontagne has never been the establishment's candidate. He wasn't in 1992, when he turned heads by taking nearly 40 percent against an incumbent congressman in a primary. He wasn't in 1996, when he wrested the Republican gubernatorial nomination from the establishment candidate in a major upset."
Taking up the challenge requires plenty of faith AND an understanding of political reality, but the dawning of the Age of Obama and the imposition of Obamacare may have made this time Lamontagne's time to join Scott Brown in the United States Senate.
Cullen: "Lamontagne understands the political reality that winning the Republican nomination will require someone to give frontrunner Kelly Ayotte a political punch in the nose. he recognizes that some think Lamontagne, who was recently named Man of the Year by the Boy Scouts, is too much of a boy scout himself to throw that punch. He knows he has to prove he can raise money, that polls will likely always show him behind and that there is no point to winning a primary in a manner that prevents him from winning a general election."
The political reality is that now is NOT the time for Republicans to nominate a Democrat favorite. Ms. Ayotte was kept as New Hampshire's Attorney General by a Democrat governor (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-donahue/if-ayotte-runs-in-nh-its_b_216679.html), refuses to say for whom she voted in several New Hampshire gubernatorial elections, supported the confirmation of La Raza favorite Sonia Sotomayor as a United States Supreme Court Justice (because she was a federal appellate court judge), ordered New Hampshire police not to arrest persons not lawfully in America as trespassers and, as New Hampshire Attorney General, helping Democrat Governor Lynch with a $110,000,000 Kelo-like taking of public property that the NH Sup Ct declared unconstitutional and later blamed subordinates and claimed not to have given policy advice.
As New Hampshire Attorney General, Ms. Ayotte provided Republican cover for a Democrat $110,000,000 theft to balance the state budget, stopped only by judges dutifully following the law rather than remaking it to suit a political agenda.
Josh Rodgers, "High Court Rejects State's Claim To JUA Money" (January 28, 2010) (www.nhpr.org/node/29092):
"Governor Lynch says he’s disappointed by ruling that blocks lawmakers from plugging 110 million dollars from a medical malpractice insurance fund into the state budget.
"The 3-2 ruling says the state’s attempt to take the money violated policy-holders contract rights. The decision dashes claims Lynch and top Democrats have made for months: that the state could take surplus money from insurance pool because the state created the pool gave it tax exempt status. Speaking on NHPR’s the exchange, the Governor said he expected a close ruling but had been confident based on the judgement of top state officials.
"We had strong advice from the then-Attorney General and the Insurance Commissioner that the money belonged to the taxpayers of NH...."
The political reality also is that America just saw Senator Nelson, Congressman Stupak and others sell out or cave in and thereby permit Obamacare to become law and New Hampshire voters will be looking for a candidate with a remarkable and reassuring life story of faithful service.
Laura Ingraham, who recognizes true conservatives, is "very impressed" by Lamontagne.
"Ingraham Likes Ovide," December 16, 2009 (http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2009/12/ingraham_likes.php):
"Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham showered praise on atty Ovide Lamontagne (R) on her show..., giving the conservative more ammunition as he seeks to define himself as the right-wing alternative in the race.
"Lamontagne 'is the only true conservative in a very important race,' Ingraham said, introducing her guest.... 'I am very impressed so far in what I'm seeing about your views. We're interested in true conservatism.'"
Ms. Ingraham: "New Hampshire folks are fiercely independent, they don't like being dictated to by Washington, and I think they're going to end up doing what's right for conservatism in the Republican Party because they've seen what's happened in Washington, DC."
That's even more likely now than it was last December.
Lamontagne: "It's one thing to say you're conservative, it's another to say you're acting on conservativism. That is what I think people are looking for now...they are looking for authentic conservatives. People they can count on...."
That's good news for Lamontange and Lamontagne is good news for New Hampshire and America (http://ovide2010.com/).
Michael J. Gaynor
Biography - Michael J. Gaynor
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.
Gaynor's email address is firstname.lastname@example.org.