Always love to see campaigns start on a positive note. I am still waiting for the candidate that runs on an entirely positive campaign. No negative ads. No bullying voters. No mention of an opponent's record, even. Save that for a debate.

Why can't O'Malley start his campaign with a "this is what I want to do for Maryland" ad?

I will vote for any candidate that vows to run a 100% positive campaign. Until then, I am continually inclined to think of all politicians as evils, of which I must find the lesser.

How big is the current structural defecit for fiscal year 2011 Julie?
How much stimulus money is in the current budget?
Will any of the stimulus money be available in 2011?

Julie: Hi. This particular blog entry is about one political ad. You are asking great questions that The Sun has addressed in previous coverage and will address again at the appropriate points in the campaign. Thanks for being such an avid commenter.

Ehrlich has lied about this socalled budget surplus for four years. there never was a surplus and Erhlich defrred all the tough decisions until after the elction in 2006. When he got beat, he just lied and said he has a surplus. What a phoney.

O'Malley is a failed leader:

Slots issue the state passed his slots bill how long ago and the State of Maryland is projected right now to LOSE money on slots. That's right LOSE money, why because of a poorly crafted bill. This slots "money" could be used to fill the budget gaps, build schools, etc.

If O'Malley is re-elected I guarantee the people of Maryland will see the 2nd largest tax increase in the history of the state. The 1st being when O'Malley raised taxes, sales tax, income tax, et.

Let me see if I have this correct.

The ad says "keeps spinning his own fairy tale of leaving office with a budget surplus."

Then says he "knew that almost all of the surplus would be used to plug holes"

Am I wrong to then believe THERE WAS A SURPLUS??? Or was it a fairy tale?

Can't be both now can it?

The Truth Be Told says "Ehrlich has lied about this so called budget surplus for four years. there never was a surplus"

Yet if you read the story it tells you your wrong! ""The good news for O'Malley is that Ehrlich is leaving behind more than $800 million in surplus rainy day funds"

As my handle says......

o,malley is living uin the fantasy land anybody that votes for o,malley must not care about maryland! there was a surplus when erlich left office and the numbers do not lie but o,malley does!

So are they still claiming Bob Ehrlich spent more than O'Malley? The Sun story they reference says Ehrlich's last budget was $29.6 billion (and for what it is worth, the 'surplus' dollars were counted as spending even when they were designated as spending) and the same Sun published stories talking about the state's $32.1 billion deficit with "drastic cuts" that passed just a few weeks ago. How can spending be lower than in 2006? The Sun needs to stop printing everything O'Malley writes as if it were fact. Use the figures.

I don't see how this ad is negative. It uses Ehrlich's own words to show he is misleading Marylanders about how he left office. You can't say it's negative just because you don't like the facts.

Julie: Reporters typically use "negative" to describe an ad of this kind: It is negative in that it attacks or criticizes an opponent rather than promoting the policies or ideas of the candidate who is paying for it.

In that same story, Andy Green reported that Ehrlich handed O'Malley "$5.7 billion in structural deficits over the next four fiscal years," and that figure didn't anticipate the severity of the deepest recession since the Great Depression.

In 2006, Maryland was one of 42 states reaping an unanticipated revenue windfall from the short-lived real estate bubble, as did then-Mayor O'Malley's Baltimore City. Niether Ehrlich nor O'Malley had much, if anything, to do with that.

Andy Green's November 2006 article and O'Malley's new ad both drive home the point:

Bob Ehrlich planned to spend the short-lived surplus and did nothing to stop the flood of red ink, dubbed the "structural deficit," that his own budget documents projected.

- Steve Lebowitz, Annapolis

Smart move to define your oppontent before he defines you or himself. Both were not fiscally responsible. BE spent money in 2006 to try to get re-elected.

Said for Marylanders if you re elect the Guy in there is why I left to another State.Small business don't stand a chance as matter a fact large business seem to be leaving just over the bridge to Va Marylanders better wake up and vote that guy out come November.I use to Love Maryland but O'Malley you have run many good folks away I hope you loose for Marylans sake !

I think a great campaign ad would be to announce that we are going to start enforcing the laws that decree that an employer may not hire illegal immigrants.

"Free trade and illegal immigrant are code words for easy access to slave labor".

O'Malley staffers are already scurrying down the ropes as the MOM administration takes on more water and lists to port. This is no fantasy...........

MOM is worried. MOM should be worried. MOM's tactics are coming back to haunt. There is this old Baltimore saying; What goes around, comes around.

The facts are clear, Martin O'Malley is a FAILED Governor. During the election cycle of 2006, what did then Mayor O'Malley and Gubernatorial candidate have to say about Marylands Budget? NOTHING! O'Malley was sworn in as Governor and immediately spent ALL the money (hundreds of millions dollars) that were in State reserve funds. Then in November 2007 O'Malley, under the cover "Modernizing and Competitive", O'Malley, Miller and Busch punished Marylanders with the largest tax increase in Maryland's history.

If Maryland re-elects O'Malley in 2010, he will confiscate more of your income. Maryland's working families are into the bone and grissel of there personal budget. A vote for O'Malley in 2010 is a vote for income confiscation.

Are you better off today than you were four years ago?

This whole govenors race is a Joke. both of them lie we need fresh blood. but since Owmalley is in bed with the sun paper we will never see the truth

Green's article says that Ehrlich left a $400 million dollar hole that needed to be filled when O'Malley took office....that doesn't sound like a surplus to me...