EckerNet.Com

It’s very encouraging to see that conservatism is not dead in Minnesota. One of the Republicans that voted for this God awful transportation bill last week was denied endorsement by her BPOU this weekend. It’s good to see that conservatives are finally holding Republicans accountable.

Our minority representation in the House and Senate leaves no room for error. We need to hold our members together to prevent the DFL from forcing an insane number of taxes upon us, like they tried last session. Granted we’re all on the same team, but when some members choose not to move the ball in the same direction, they need a little “coaching”.

It’s encouraging to see that conservatives are finally starting to hold the necessary feet to the fire, rather than just mumble about an 80:20 rule. It almost makes me sorry that our BPOU convention is going to be relatively boring by comparison. We got four solid conservatives running for endorsement for two seats. In fact, pretty much all of CD2’s Republicans are looking fairly solid. In fact I have my staff researching if it would be possible for CD2 to just becomes it’s own state.

However there are half a dozen Republicans that still need either “coaching” or “encouragement” :

• Rep. Kathy Tinglestad (651/296-5369 & 763/421-2000, rep.kathy.tingelstad@house.mn) - She supported the Transportation Bill, but reportedly was going to vote to override the veto. However, I imagine the heat she received at her BPOU convention is going to have some sort of impact, as it should. Perhaps she can be turned around.
• Rep. Ron Erhardt (651/296-4363 & 952/927-9437, rep.ron.erhardt@house.mn) - Supported the bill and was reportedly going to vote to override. However, he has been quoted as “I do not want to be the deciding vote”….sounds like a little convincing could be in order.
• Rep. Jim Abeler (651/296-1729 & 612/245-3745, rep.jim.abeler@house.mn) - He voted to oppose the bill and has been supportive of a veto. That’s the good news, but reportedly he’s “squishy” when it comes to what he WILL support.
• Rep. Neil Peterson (651/296-7803 & 952/941-1822, rep.neil.peterson@house.mn) - Voted for the bill and wants to override the veto. Compares himself to John Wayne, and says we’ll “thank him in the morning”. Yeah right….let him know what you think of that.
• Rep. Bud Heidegerken (651/296-4317 & 800/339-6071 rep.bud.heidegerken@house.mn) - For some reason thinks he is untouchable in his district and is therefore able to do whatever he wants…including voting for this bill and an override. Perhaps he needs to be reminded what his job is and that nobody is untouchable.
• Rep. Dean Urdahl (651/296- 4344 & 800/920-5861, rep.dean.urdahl@house.mn) - Apparently will vote for an override but might be salvageable for future tax increases.
• Rep. Rod Hamilton (651/296-5373 & 800/735-2463, rep.rod.hamilton@house.mn) - Voted for the bill but has indicated he’s not certain he’ll vote to override. Needs some “encouragement” to help him see the light.

To help you help them decide, it might help to inform them that opposing this bill isn’t even a partisan position, it’s the majority decision according to a recent poll.

Here’s the deal….our precinct caucus data is crazy complicated, so here’s a fair warning. Everyone that got elected a delegate/alternate, you damn well better show up at the BPOU convention, because we’re jumping through hoops to get you seated properly and get the necessary details to you.

Failure to show up and/or failure to not make a fuss about ANYTHING, will result in your being beaten to death with a frozen tuna.* And I am specifically asking the executive committee to set aside part of our budget as bail money. Thanks. Oh and I need to draw cash to buy a frozen tuna…..the receipt is in the mail.

* I honestly have no idea why a frozen tuna…it just seemed a particularly senseless and humbling object to be beaten to death with.

Perhaps you’ve heard about the horrible bus accident out by the town of Marshall, MN in which four children died after a driver of a van ran a stop sign and rolled a frigging bus. Of course, the driver of the van walked away (they always do). The story started to get a little more juicy as it was revealed that the driver didn’t have a license and had already been charged in 2006 with driving without a license.

Now today comes this further information :

Authorities have confirmed that the the driver of the van that struck the school bus that killed 4 students on Tuesday is an illegal alien.

Officials at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement are checking to see where she came from and how long she’s been in Minnesota. FOX 9 has also learned that the name she gave to police, Alainiss Morales, is an alias.

At this point, it’s probably worth reminding you that in 2006 she was charged with driving without a license. Let me repeat that…police had her in custody two years ago. She’s here illegally. Why is she still here?? Just killin’ kids doing jobs Americans won’t kill do? Another bangup job by our dysfunctional immigration system.

Anyone think it’s a coincidence that not too long ago the nearby Jenny-O plant was raided and hundreds of illegals were apprehended (and promptly released)?

Anyone still think illegal immigration is a victimless crime?? Tell that to the families of the families of these four children. Families who now belong to an all too large fraternity, whose only membership requirement is to have a family members life taken by an illegal alien.

Still think sanctuary cities are a good idea?? Tell me exactly what city was a sanctuary to these children?

Anyone think our federal government is likely to do ANYTHING differently?? No, they are too busy playing games with the border fence rather than be serious about their constitutional duties.

…or it could be the ultimate successful test.

With deadly attacks against U.S. targets increasing around Baghdad, anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr raised the possibility Wednesday that he may not renew a six-month cease-fire widely credited for helping slash violence.

The cease-fire is due to expire Saturday, and there were fears, especially among minority Sunni Arabs, that the re-emergence of al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia could return Iraq to where it was just a year ago — with sectarian death squads prowling the streets of a country on the brink of civil war.

A surge of violence would also make it all the more difficult for Iraq’s Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds to reach agreements on sharing power and wealth, and greatly complicate the debate in the United States on whether and how quickly to withdraw troops.

Obviously this could turn out pretty bad, as the media obviously tries to spin it above. On the other hand, conditions and resources are quite a bit different than they were a year ago. Obviously there are a number of factors that will have to play out.

Obviously, the first one to be address is how strong are Iraqi security forces? To their credit, they’ve had the chance to build an infrastructure to work within, something they didn’t have much of a year ago. US forces are still available as well, and that may well become the trump card. But it depends on how those US troops are being seen at this point

Also at stake is whether the Iraqis have grown used to the normalcy and if they will turn on the Mahdi Army to retain the peace they once had. Also as we’ve seen from past events, many of those that would have been forming those sectarian death squads have given up on that approach and have since rejoined Iraqi society. Will they go back to their old ways, or stick it out?

After all, the rabid drop in violence since the beginning of the cease fire, says quite a bit. Granted the surge played a large role as well, but I have no doubt that the Iraqi people will put two and two together and make the collective decision to return to violence or embrace peaceful reconstruction.

However, it is also probably worth considering the motive for such a move by Al-Sadr. It’s clear that he is rabidly being sidelined, and this ceasefire threat appears as a ploy to retain his relevance. However, it also poses the danger of potentially alienating himself from the Iraqi public, for many of the same reasons that Al Qaeda has been. My guess is he wouldn’t risk that unless he knew that if he didn’t do it now, he would no longer have the resources to do it. Once again, time may indeed be on our side.

Of course it also means we get to listen to the Democrats bitch about a withdrawl again.

The Rankings Are As Follows:

• Triple “I Whine Like A Child” A : 5
• Dan S : 3
• NightWriter : 3
• Mall Diva : 3
• jroosh : 2
• Harvey : 2
• Bogus Doug : 2
• Aelfheld : 2
• Sola-Man : 2
• Bobby_B : 2
• Drunkguy : 2
• Lloyd :2
• kingdavid : 1
• tommy g : 1
• spurringirl : 1

For this contest you get to make up your own answers!! That’s right…just pretend you’re a real life journalist and just make shit up. Post answers in the comments. They will be judged on creativity, plausibility and humor.

Question : Finish this letter…or alternately write Jessica’s response

Previous contests

John the farmer was in the fertilized egg business. He had several hundred young layers (hens), called “pullets”, and ten roosters, whose job it was to fertilize the eggs.

The farmer kept records and any rooster that didn’t perform went into the soup pot and was replaced. That took an awful
lot of his time, so he bought a set of tiny bells and attached them to his roosters. Each bell had a different tone so John
could tell from a distance, which rooster was performing. Now he could sit on the porch and fill out an efficiency report simply by listening to the bells.

The farmer’s favorite rooster was old Butch, a very fine specimen he was, too. But on this particular morning John noticed old Butch’s bell hadn’t rung at all! John went toinvestigate.

The other roosters were chasing pullets, bells-a-ringing. The pullets, hearing the roosters coming, would run for cover.

But to Farmer John’s amazement, old Butch had his bell in his beak, so it couldn’t ring. He’d sneak up on a pullet, do his job and walk on to the next one. John was so proud of old Butch, he entered him in the Renfrew County Fair and he became an overnight sensation among the judges.

The result…The judges not only awarded old Butch the No Bell Piece Prize but they also awarded him the Pullet surprise as well.

Clearly old Butch was a politician in the making: who else but a politician could figure out how to win two of the most highly coveted awards on our planet by being the best at sneaking up on the populace and screwing them when they weren’t paying attention.

Vote carefully…the bells are not always audible

[H/T Dave L.]

If you listen to the Democrats, Iraq is quite simply a bottomless hellhole without a chance of success. They used to cite the 18 benchmarks are proof that Iraq was a failed experiment and we should pull out. Meanwhile, as I pointed out a year ago, if you apply equivalent benchmarks towards our government, we score significantly less than Iraq does. Well recently the surge, despite claims by Democrats everywhere, has had enough of an impact that the Iraqi government has made a number of significant improvements and met quite a few of the remaining benchmarks.

So let’s revisit the issue shall we? Let’s see how the Iraqis have improved…and if our government has improved it’s score at all.

Goal: Ensuring political groups do not undermine security forces

Last year : Iraq failed, and so did we.

Today : It’s still a work in progress for Iraq. And with Democrats constantly claiming the surge is failed and doing everything to undermine support for our troops both domestically and abroad, it’s fairly safe to say it’s a work in progress for us too.

Goal: Reconciliation with former Baathists

Last year : Iraq failed, as did we.

Today : Actually the combination of the new election laws and the amnesty moves this into the plus category for Iraq. Our progress has been considerably less admirable. The hatred between Republicans and Democrats is still as strong as ever. If you doubt that, just read the vicious bile directed towards Nancy Reagan upon news that she fell and potentially broke a hip.

Goal: Reducing the level of sectarian violence and eliminating militia control of local security

Last year : We passed, Iraq failed

Today : Well BushCo’s brownshirt have yet to make their first appearance and time is running out. Meanwhile, in Iraq I’m tempted to be optimistic here but I’ll refrain. It’s still largely a work in progress. Granted violence in Baghdad is down 80% and the militia’s are losing control. However, if the Mahdi Army had not renewed their cease fire recently things could have been significantly different lately. So this is a VERY tentative fail….in reality it’s a pass, but only because cooler heads are prevailing for now. Only when cooler heads are no longer required could I really count this is a true Pass.

Goal: Provide Iraqi commanders with authority to go after insurgents and militia, whether Sunni or Shia, without political intervention

Last year : We failed, Iraq failed

Today : With the failure to renew FISA we definitely fail. And part of the reason the Mahdi cease fire was in question, was because government forces have been going after Shia militia members. At this point it’s likely that the commanders don’t receive any more interference than they might in most other areas of the world. I’ll give them a pass here.

Goal: Increasing the number of Iraqi security forces units capable of operating independently

Last year : We failed, and so did the Iraqis

Today : Yeah, we still fail (I’m noticing a trend here), for the same reasons we failed last year. Iraqi on the other hand has increased their forces considerably. Most of the country has been handed over to Iraqi forces and elsewhere Iraqi forces are operating with mostly minimal American assistance. We’re even starting to draw down our number of forces. I’ll give them a pass here.

Goal: Disarming militias

Last year : We failed, as did Iraq

Today : Homeland Security Department still a clusterfuck wrapped in red tape, big fail for us. Militias in Iraq have been reduced in effectiveness but they haven’t been disarmed, most notably the Mahdi army. Fair for both.

Goal: Raising Iraqi brigades to support operations in Baghdad

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed.

Today : Same results. In fact Iraq has made further progress, we have….well we’ve talked about it alot.

Goal: Establishing joint US-Iraq security stations in neighbourhoods across Baghdad

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed

Today : Same results. How’s that fence coming?? Latest excuse is….[shakes magic 8-Ball]….environmentalists.

Goal: Amnesty for insurgents

Last year : Iraq failed, so did we

Today : Iraq has passed an amnesty, so they come out with a big pass here. I’m tempted to give us a fail since there has been rumbling of an amnesty for us, but it hasn’t come to fruition so I’ll give us both a pass.

Goal: Election reform

Last year : We both failed

Today : Iraq passed new election reform laws. We have done absolutely nothing….and Florida has proven they still can’t get this whole election thing right.

Goal: Political support for Baghdad security plan

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed

Today : Iraq still passes. Meanwhile, San Fransisco and Toledo have kicked out the Marines….I repeat….kicked out the Marines. I award us no points and may God have mercy on Medea Benjamin’s soul.

Goal: To deny Baghdad as a safe haven for al-Qaida and insurgents regardless of religion

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed

Today : Same results. We still have sanctuary cities aplenty.

Goal: Ensuring that the Iraqi security forces are providing even-handed enforcement of the law

Last year : We passed, Iraq failed

Today : Same results. So far sanity has prevailed here at home. Over in Iraq, this is a pretty subjective benchmark so I’ll lean towards the side of caution and give Iraq a fail.

Goal: Fairly allocating and spending $10 billion in Iraqi revenues for reconstruction

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed

Today : Same results. Iraq is improving even more. We still have spending issues. Earmarks still out of control. Entitlements are ready to bankrupt us. Oh joy!

Goal: Introducing laws that would allow autonomous regions

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed.

Today : Same results. Iraq has actually made further progress with their elections reform. Meanwhile, Congress continues to do absolutely nothing, leaving states to figure out things for themselves.

Goal: Constitutional review and reform

Last year : Iraq passed, we failed

Today : Same results for the same reasons.

Goal: Protect minority political rights in the Iraqi legislature

Last year : We both passed

Today : Same results for the same reason.

Goal: Passing an oil law

Last year : Both failed

Today : Well we still haven’t drilled, built a refinery or a nuclear plant. So that’s a big F for us. Iraq….well, they haven’t officially passed an oil law. However, they have passed a national budget evenly distributed and most of that money came from oil sales. So one could claim they accomplished this benchmark in spirit, but I’ll still hold out for the fine print and give this a tentative fail.

Ok so granted, I’m not comparing apples to apples, but each country faces it’s own issues. Nevertheless, Iraq comes out with a 13, and we come across with a 4. Both countries improved, from our past scores of 8 and 3 respectively. Perhaps this is the reason we’re hearing alot less about the failure of the surge from Reid and Pelosi. Could it be that their failure to accomplish anything of substance is glaringly obvious, while the so called failed surge has no basis in reality?

It really is all about you isn’t it?

“For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country”

- Michelle Obama, wife of Barack Obama, presidential candidate

Unless your adult life started about 30 seconds ago, I take a high degree of offense to that.  There is virtually an endless list of items that should serve as reason to be proud.  I mean even the defeat of communism doesn’t rank on your own personal list??  Unless as a socialist you see that as a bad thing??

Now that we’re having to contend with the fact that McCain is going to be the GOP nominee for President, conservatives attention has shifted to a topic which makes us less suicidal. Lately that topic has been the Vice Presidential pick by McCain and whether there is still hope for the conservative movement in the United States. Rumblings have run the gambit from Lieberman to the reanimated corpse of Ronald Reagan. But one name that gets mentioned alot is familiar to Minnesotans, our Governor Tim Pawlenty.

Ed Morrissey addresses a story in The Politico, and largely agrees that Pawlenty is a fairly likely choice. The problem I have with both is that Pawlenty doesn’t really add anything of substance to the ticket and fails to meet many of the usual criteria for picking a VP. Conventional wisdom generally says your VP should do one or more of the following:

1. Shore up issues that you are weak in
2. Come from a region/state you need to take
3. Serve as your heir apparent

First, Pawlenty essentially adds nothing to the ticket issue-wise, and suffers from many of the same weaknesses that McCain does. While he does talk a good game and has done a fairly decent job holding the MN DFL in check on taxes, he has also broken a “No New Taxes” pledge (Bush 41 anyone?) and used “user fees” to raise revenue. He’s also apparently drank the Global Warming Kool-Aid and I’m pretty sure he has Al Gore on speed-dial. On immigration, he has occasionally made encouraging rumblings which pan out to be exactly that and nothing more. About the only McCain weakness he addresses is that he has largely been very cool and calm in tragedies (35W Bridge Collapse)….although I have problems picturing him holding McCain back from another angry rant.

Secondly, the region/state issue doesn’t strike me as overly persuasive. Most of the Midwest is already GOP territory, or at least Iowa and the Dakotas are. Minnesota and Wisconsin being the holdouts. Wisconsin could very well be considered a battleground regardless of the candidate, especially if you factor out the repeated Democratic voter fraud in Wisconsin. Minnesota…heh, we voted for Mondale! And the GOP has largely lost ground at virtually every position. Only office we still hold is the Governorship, which we barely won and only because every single state resource went to that race and the DFL Lt. Gov Judi Dutcher made a huge bone-headed remark in the 11th hour of the campaign. I think it’ll be a generation or more before you can consider even a partial shade of purple.

Third, as far as the heir apparent goes….well the GOP grassroots is getting restless. We’ve put up with RINOs more often than we’ve cheered conservatives. We’re already having to swallow a McCain candidacy, is putting another center-right politician up as the next in line really going to buck up conservatives. Conservatives are only asking for something (ANYTHING!) to look forward to. They want a reason to vote FOR a candidate, rather than just against a Democrat. Would it really be too difficult to offer them that??

I think there are plenty of other (and better) options for the VP slot. At the top of my list personally, would be either Senator Jim DeMint and Rep. Marsha Blackburn.

Both are VERY solid conservatives, with Sen DeMint being especially notable as one of the few Senators can trust on the whole spectrum of issues. Both do share a downside of lack of experience. However, I consider that minimal as both the Democratic nominees have little to no experience, and the top of the GOP ticket has several decades of experience. Both of them are from the south, which keeps that region firmly in GOP control, countering inroads the Democrats have made in the south as of late.

If I had to pick between the two, I’d opt for Blackburn, for really rather unrelated reasons. The Senate is already a giant clusterfuck, can we really afford to lose a stalwart conservative like DeMint?? The House is slightly less vulnerable and Blackburn’s role hasn’t been as high profile. Plus she’s a woman, which negates some of the Democrats identity politics, if you buy into any of that. Plus how fun would it be to put the National Organization for Women (NOW) in a tight spot. After they hyperactive bitching about how voting for Obama is betraying women, if Obama is the nominee and he’s facing McCain/Blackburn, how do they reconcile their past statements?

I’ll grant you Pawlenty isn’t the worst option you could pick, but if we have to swallow the McCain pill already, can’t you toss a little red meat in??

[Crossposted at True North]