Archive for RINOS
[AP News] Apparently dePressed
Posted by: | Comments
Below we find the words of the AP.
SIOUX CITY, Iowa (AP) – Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is raising more speculation about a possible presidential bid with a stop in Iowa during her national book-signing tour.
The Iowa caucuses have traditionally tried to launch the presidential nominating political; season .
Palin’s book – signing tour has been carefully controlled, and she has not spoken to reporters at most events .
Still, her appearance in Iowa is seen as significant.
Veteran Republican activist Tim Albrechtt says politicians don’t just happen to stop in Iowa and Palin must know that her visit is probably seen as a signal she is more than likely considering a run.
Another possible RINO Republican contender, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, also has visited the state recently.
Copyright 2009 The Associated [De]Press[ed]. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
So the AP media can copyright the previous and obvious 6 sentences?
They are also delusional.
Hudson Tea Party set for April 15th
Posted by: | CommentsKudos to my neighbors Stan & Mary Wekkin for organizing a Tea Party rally in North Hudson next Wednesday. The rally is set to take place at Mudds & Sudds from 4-6 p.m.
“This is our opportunity to remind the government that they work for us; we pay their salaries.” said Stan Wekkin
“Many of us have learned the hard way that debt catches up to you. When will our elected officials understand that?” asked Mary Wekkin
All area residents are invited to participate. The Wekkins have stated that this is a non-partisan event and if you are inclined to bring a sign please respect their wishes and make the sign non-partisan reflecting your feelings about taxes, spending and debt.
Future Tea Party rallies are being scheduled for Independence Day, Labor Day and Election Day.
We Like Mavericks – Don’t We?
Posted by: | CommentsI’ve always thought this blog liked mavericks! I thought those contributing here speaking for liberty, independence and free speech liked them too. I thought this blog espoused individual thought and action, and wanted individuals to be held accountable and responsible. Did I somehow read the signals wrong here?
The American Heritage Dictionary says a maverick is:
- one that refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group;
- someone who exhibits great independence in thought and action;
It would seem to me a maverick is exactly what this blog has asked for, yet now, with having one running for President of the United States, all I’m seeing here now is him being labeled as a RINO. Well, ok, so what if he is? Is it more important that he be a die hard lock-in-step Republican or be his own person? Given the bashing out here about the Republican Party, I’d think the latter is what has been asked for. That being said, would you rather Senator McCain run as an Independent? At this point, it wouldn’t much matter.
Sen. McCain over the years has on occasion tried to reach across the isle to show bipartisanship in moving an item forward. His 1995 efforts with Sen. Feingold to regulate campaign finance spending at the federal level and to force the disclosure of donations of soft money was fair and worthwhile. As much as some here make use of the Open Record Requests, tell me how much worthwhile information would you have access to when trying to trace the funding behind candidates without the McCain/Feingold Bill. Probably not anything worth spending time digging into.
Some here think the McCain/Feingold Bill was a restriction on free-speech, but was it really? The Bill didn’t stop your speech it just tried to make you more accountable for it. And this blog likes accountability, doesn’t it? I think all mavericks do.
Whether you liked the McCain/Feingold Bill or not, let’s keep in mind it didn’t raise taxes and it didn’t create another social program having a bottomless pit to pour money into.
Another concern constantly posted here is how far both of the major political parties have gone astray from the Constitution. I’m not going to argue that point in this post, but I will say that between the two major Presidential candidates, the so-called ‘maverick’ is the only one I’ve heard make any statements like the speech given at Wake Forest University giving his judicial philosophy. You won’t hear the presidential spokesman for the group-think crowd make a speech like this. (Full text of this speech is listed in the page link.)
As far as maverick’s go, I really like this candidate’s selection in a tag-team member. She seems to be very much an outside maverick too. From the early reports, what’s there not to like? She goes against the grain, holds people accountable and has strong integrity. This notion of her being a risky pick because of her being a heart beat away and not capable of doing the job is pretty lame, especially when the guy on the other team in the first position has even less executive experience. And just how bad has it been when the backup has been pressed into service? (Let’s see, there was Johnson and Ford and …..???)
Yes, I’m pretty sure it’s time we get behind these mavericks. The country says it wants change, but the party preaching it to us are the ones least likely to deliver it. Of all the definitions for ‘maverick’ found in the dictionary, the McCain/Palin team may be just the ones to fit this one:
an electro-optically guided U.S. air-to-ground tactical missile for destroying tanks and other hardened targets at ranges up to 15 mi. (24 km).
If you’re not for ‘maverick’s’, then I’m left to conclude you’d rather believe in the group-think approach used by the other side.
Hudson Area Library Foundation (HALF) Rinos of the Day
Posted by: | Comments
Here they come. You know them. They are the same people that put the Vote Yes signs in their yards during school referendums. They can’t get enough of your money. Yes, it’s the “Hudson Area Library Foundation” AKA “Enemies of the Common Taxpayer”. Here’s their letter to the editor- See Letter
Do you see how they carefully tell you that they are going to “save” you money? Why, they could have spent $12 Million, but since they are looking out for your best interest they’re only going to spend $9.5 Million! What a deal!
Again, guess which one is the average taxpayer and which one is Jeff Zais, Hollis Grubb, Bye Barsness and Susie Gilbert.
Time To Clean House
Posted by: | CommentsThe Democrats had control of Congress for over 30 plus years in a row. What did it get us, the New Deal, welfare, warfare, and the chipping away of our liberties? So who was it then, that was responsible for finally bringing the Republican Party to a majority status a few dozen or so years ago? It was conservatives, conservative principals, and constitutionally based philosophies, that worked to present the Republican Party as a “conservative” party. It was them, my friends, who were responsible to finally give the Republicans, the ability to win the White House, the Senate, and the House.
Our current version of Republicanism has morphed into something that can only be called conservative, in name only and have abandoned the things that got them there; individual liberty, limited government, and lower taxes. In much the same way the word liberal was hijacked by the left, the right has done so with the word conservative. They have used the popularity of the word conservative to conceal their big government and big business agenda. The growth of the federal government and its intrusiveness into our lives has virtually sky-rocketed, even more so than the 1990’s, while at the supposed watch, of Republicans.
I think we can say, maybe even as eloquently as the 1980s movie Network, Im as mad as hell and Im not going to take it anymore! Conservatives have every right to be angry. But we should not be despondent. Out of the ashes, and thats where I think we are heading, a Phoenix will rise once again. Each and every year we find newer and better technological advances to get conservative and constructionist ideas disseminated out to each and every citizen. We have talk radio, direct mail, television, Youtube, and the blogosphere.
What we are short of though is good leaders. What we have in place are people whose allegiances first are to the Republican Party. Is there anyone who will challenge George H. Bush as courageously as Ronald Regan did in 1975? As courageously as Ron Paul is doing to George W. Bush today?
To take back the party we must:
- First be loyal to conservative principles and our founders constitutional ideals, not the Republican Party. Our aim is not to be compassionate or neo conservative but constitutional conservatives.
- Secondly, we need to take back the Republican Party and move the Democratic Party as far to the right as possible
- Thirdly, we need to hold everyone responsible for their conduct, not just its promises. We should not be intimidated by the lesser of two evils rationalization of transgressions against our liberties, but demand positive accomplishments in restoring our liberties and constitutional ideals. It will be demanded that candidates advance liberty in a substantial and consistent manner.
- Fourthly, we must quit providing financial support to the RNC or other GOP fundraising efforts. We instead, should pledge to give our political dollars to only conservative and constitutional organizations and principled conservative congressional candidates.
- Fifthly, we need to call for the wholesale replacement of the Republican leadership in the House and Senate. We need a new slate.
-
Finally, we need to expand our all efforts to make the views of the American people
heard through a wide variety of new conservative and constitutional organizations, media outlets, political strategies and techniques, and most importantly new leaders.
Personally, I am holding true to these principals. I resisted at first as maybe most of you still do. I fell prey to the lesser of two evils rationalization. All but one member of those running for the office of President that carry the badge of GOP, is not considered a lesser of two evils in my book. What is the difference who’s in office when the budget goes up 100% in 8 years. When you take an intelligent and analytical look at the constitutional basis for his positions along with a solid economic and philosophical explanation as to how we got into this mess, Ron Paul makes more sense and is heads above the rest of the others. Most say Dr. Ron Paul wont make it to the Presidential ballot. That may be so, but the ideals presented by him do align nicely with the tasks we have at hand listed above. He is elevating and educating the masses in the understanding of the constitution and the liberties our founders were so ardent and spirited in providing us with over 230 years ago. Those same principals will lead us back on to the correct path and we can again say we are proud of this great nation. Dr. Paul is educating and training tomorrows leaders in this way.
The same can be said of not just our national leaders, but of our state and local GOP politicians. It’s hard to rally behind smoking bans, ethanol mandates, and a host of populist compromises. The ideals of conservatism are lacking in our state GOP as well. We could start by cleaning house and following the items listed above for any political race where someone calls themselves a Republican. I would much prefer someone who hasn’t already disillusioned me by their actions. Let the revolution begin.
Quote of the Day
Posted by: | CommentsAs the presidential field narrows, Sen. Edwards will reportedly say at an afternoon news conference, I just didnt feel there would be room in the race for two white males who favor leniency for illegal aliens, who opposed Bushs tax cuts for the rich, who fight man-made global warming, who support limits on so-called free speech in political campaigns, who have worked to hinder approval of conservative judicial nominees, and who stand against the Bush administrations desire to torture terror suspects with waterboarding.
Specious Declamations
Posted by: | CommentsIn the Federalist papers, Federalist No. 10, penned by James Madison it was written:
The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations.
Why would he write this? It has been said here and many other places that it will only take a 51% majority to reach a state where the government can legally rob the rich and give to the poor, where private property can become public, where voluntary acts can become compulsory, and where the essence of individualism can be replaced with collectivism.
We see examples every day where our liberty is being stripped away under the guise of populism. Smoking bans, ethanol mandates, educational mandates, over-reaching government into private matters, CAF standards, seat belt and helmet laws, banning of trans fats, are just of the few popular liberties were we have been recently rapped. Why do the politicians advocate for them? One, theyre popular. Two, their lobbies contribute large amounts to their campaigns. And thirdly, politicians want to so much stay in power that they will vote party over principal. Damn the constituency! This is especially true of our local state politicians. As far as Im concerned, there is no longer a party of conservatism in this state. They are nothing more than the populists Madison was warning us about.
McCain and the 1st Amendment
Posted by: | CommentsThe election of a Progressive like Clinton or Obama would deprive conservatives of power. The election of a Progressive like McCain would deprive conservatives of both the government and the means to resist Progressivism. Which is the lesser evil?


The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations.
