Illinois’ route of President Obama Executive Order 15302 – requirement of project labor agreements on contracts on public works – just took a turn for the worse.  As reported to us by State Sen. Kyle McCarter on Facebook last night:

Kyle McCarter.com, State Senator, 51st District of IL

SB 2987 forces contractors bidding on public works projects to sign a PLA (Project Labor Agreement), raising the cost of roads & schools by up to 18%. Why would we raise our cost and build fewer schools & fewer miles of roads when we are cutting services to balance the budget? I am going to defend the 84% of workers who are non-union, vote NO, and help put them back to work.

Yesterday at 4:11pm

The result of the vote?

Kyle McCarter.com, State Senator, 51st District of IL

SB 2987 passes 33 yes, 26 no. Not only is Illinois not a “right to work” state, it is a “forced to join the union” state. This is not the way to turn our state around and put our families back to work. One more blackeye for Illinois. Sad day.\

Yesterday at 4:20pm

I have to agree with State Sen. Kyle McCarter.  Of course, if you have been my posts for the last few weeks, it seems I have been stuck on one issue – Project Labor Agreements, and in particular, US Rep. Shimkus’ (R-IL 19th CD) continual support of such PLAs.  To read more about the damage that PLAs do, please read here.

I swear (unless something comes up), I will not say another word about PLAs for awhile.  As I said above, Rep. Shimkus has a problem with PLAs.   He’s heard it from local business owners and he’s heard it from local conservative bloggers here and elsewhere.  I put it to Rep. Shimkus right now.  Jeff Flake (R-AZ) added an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2012 Military Construction, Veteran Affairs, and Related Appropriations Act that would effectively bar PLAs mandated by President Obama’s Executive Order 15302.  This amendment is applauded by the Associated Builders and Contractors amongst other related pro-business groups. The appropriations bill with Flake’s amendment is scheduled for debate in the House in June.

In addition, there is a provision within the appropriations bill that requires contractors to use E-verify to ensure all their workers are legal citizens.

So the question is how will Rep. Shimkus vote when this appropriations bill comes up in front of the House in June?  You have to know that the Democrats will try to amend the E-Verify and anti-PLA provisions out of the bill.  If the Democrats try to amend out the E-Verify portion of the appropriations bill, I’m sure Rep. Shimkus will vote against it – he does have a good track record regarding illegal immigration.  But, will Rep. Shimkus vote with his Democrat friends across the aisle (again) and continue his support of PLAs?

On a side note, I’ve been told via a friend by phone, passing on a message from “someone high up in the GOP” that I need to “stop these articles about Rep. Shimkus now“.  Furthermore, a Rep. Shimkus surrogate via Twitter has told another conservative blogger that Rep. Shimkus has”heard us loud and clear” and to basically cease and desist (I have a copy of the Twitter and Twitter DM conversation).

If we have been “heard loud and clear” by Rep. Shimkus regarding PLAs, the real test will be June when this appropriations bill comes up for a vote in front of the full House.  Rep. Shimkus, we will be watching how you vote….closely.  One last thing, a “not voting/present” on the amendment or the bill at large will be counted as supporting the Democrats’ position on PLAs; we will settle for nothing less than a clear vote against PLAs.  No easy way out.  Show the conservatives that have consistently backed you that you have “heard us loud and clear”, then and only then will be be silent.

P.S. Govtrack.us is a God send.

Crossposted at Downstate Illinois Advocate

I’ve been walking precincts and helping get candidates elected since I was knee high to a ballot box.  I was doing door to door pollster work before I was even in high school.  I guess politics has always been in my blood.
1996.  John Shimkus was running for Congress.  I met him and was impressed by him.  Good conservative.  Anytime someone would point out what was wrong with Washington, DC in general or Congress in particular, I would gladly point to John Shimkus as an example of what was right in DC.  That was then, this is now.

2011.  Rep. Shimkus was just elected to his 8th term as Representative for the 19th Congressional District in Illinois (which includes 3 terms as 20th Congressional Representative prior to 2000 Census/redistricting).  That is 8 terms despite pledging to serve only 12 years (6 terms).  Personally, I’m torn on term limits, but if you pledge you only intend to run/serve x amount of years, you had better live up to it.  At this point, I sadly cannot point to Shimkus as someone that is an example of what is right in DC.

Rep. Shimkus has passed into the realm of being part of the establishment GOP.  In September, 2009 (but actually August as it was widely known in our area), Rep. Shimkus endorsed Mark Kirk for US Senate.  There is nothing new to sitting Congressmen endorsing candidates, but what was really shady about this whole ordeal was endorsing so early – before petitions were due to be turned in.  The establishment had selected their Senate candidate – primary voters be damned.  Why does it matter?  Because by selecting their (GOP establishment) candidate, the money and support dried up quickly for other challengers, thereby clearing the field for the “preferred” candidate.

Mark Kirk had his issues as well with conservatives – he supports supporting gay marriage, is pro-choice, and voted for cap-and-trade, for example.  When asked about this in a meeting we had with Shimkus, we were assured that when Shimkus had given a tour of Wood River oil refineries to Mark Kirk, “[Kirk] had hopefully changed his mind” regarding cap-and-trade.  All three of the issues I outlined here are complete opposites of Shimkus’ positions over the years.  But establishment do as establishment do.

Recently, Shimkus made some headlines with his support of Project Labor Agreements and his less than tactful way of handling being called out on his votes.  But it goes deeper.  After the dust-up surrounding his support of PLAs, another article appeared detailing some relationships Shimkus has had with some former George Ryan people – including a IL GOP State Central Committeewoman/Madison County Chairwoman/Deputy Chief of Staff who testified against George Ryan after being granted immunity as detailed on the The Immoderate Blog and later, Illinois Review:

The situation with now former GOP State Central Committeeman Criag Pesek has been in the news recently, but he is in the 3rd CD. Somehow it just makes more sense when the news is about Chicago or Cook County politics and operatives than when one hears of situations in southern Illinois. I was shocked when I first heard that John Shimkus employed a lady who worked as the campaign finance director for George Ryan and testified against him after being granted immunity. $107,499.96 is a nice chunk of change to be paid by the taxpayers for this lady’s services in 2010. Did I neglect to mention that she is also a member of the Illinois GOP State Central Committee?

It is very disappointing to learn that not only does Congressman Shimkus employ this former Ryan operative (why would one who did nothing wrong require immunity?) but two or three other former Ryan people as well. I say two or three because one of them may now be employed by the state GOP instead. In 2009, the four former Ryan employees on Shimkus’ staff brought home nearly $450,000 between them. It is a further disappointment, unless the numbers at Legistorm.com are incorrect, that in 2010 Shimkus earned fifth place in staff salaries for Illinois’ congressional delegation with $1,167,833. I suppose it costs a lot to hire and maintain Ryan’s former employees. Shimkus’ staff salaries were only exceeded by those of Schakowsky, Davis, Rush, and Gutierrez.

Going further down the rabbit hole, Shimkus was once the head of the House Page Board and badly mishandled Mark Foley’s involvement with young pages (Shimkus knew about the inappropriate emails, ordered Foley to cease  contact, but failed to notify his colleagues).

Over the last few years, there has been an increasing displeasure about Rep. Shimkus within his district – some justified, other reasons not as justified.  What has been the alternative?  Vote Democrat?  I think not, but there has been no viable GOP alternative.  Since the PLA fiasco a few weeks ago, there has been an vocal opposition to Shimkus beginning to rise within his district – especially from the Tea Parties, but more recently from both political and financial supporters of the Congressman.  One supporter even crashed the Effingham County Lincoln Day Dinner to distribute fliers about Shimkus’ PLA problem and to hold up a sign in protest of Shimkus during his speech.  I believe the protester would have been more vocal had the Congressman not had brought his teenage son with him.  Believe it or not, there is civility in protesting.
The question remains, what shall Republicans do about Shimkus?  The answer at this point of time is simple and complicated at the same time.  The simple answer – especially with redistricting taking place – is to primary Rep. Shimkus with a GOP candidate.  The complicated answer is who should (or could) primary against a sitting Congressman with just over $1.1 million in the campaign reserve?

My answer is State Senator Kyle McCarter (DISCLOSURE: before Shimkus’ people read this and go off and call McCarter, McCarter has no idea that I am writing this).  McCarter has proven himself to be a strong conservative in Springfield who at times has butted heads with the IL GOP leadership – and doesn’t give two hoots about their displeasure.  I’m not sure if McCarter has the campaign cash to go up against Shimkus, but he definitely has name recognition needed and the support of conservatives.  In addition, upon talking with a Metro East Tea Party this afternoon, they are gung-ho about challenging Shimkus with McCarter in a primary.

Another possible choice would be Jason Plummer, former Lt. Governor candidate.  He has the name recognition and the cash, but he is still relatively unknown politically since running for Lt. Gov. did not give him a chance to really argue the issues.  A definite wild card if he entered the race against Shimkus, I am not sure if he could pull it off, but crazier things have happened.

In my humble opinion, if Shimkus is to be primaried, now is the time.  The hard part is finding a candidate who is willing to go up against a well funded, establishment favorite, veteran campaigner like Shimkus.  However, given the public’s mood towards incumbents and an increasing frustration with the GOP establishment in DC blocking real spending cuts, Shimkus could be vulnerable.  The redistricted map of Illinois should be out toward the end of the month or early June, so we’ll have to see how the boundaries are drawn to see whether the redrawing of the lines helps or hurts Shimkus if a primary race were to occur.  Stay tuned ladies and gentlemen…

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

I was approached by two members of the Effingham Tea Party Steering Committee today and they asked me if I had seen the article on Yahoo! about the Effingham Tea Party we held on April 15th.  I said no, and they said I really needed to check it out….so I did.  Talk about phoning it in!

First, the “contributor” gets the name of our town – Effingham – wrong by stating he lived 15 minutes from “Effington”.  And here’s where I KNOW the “contributor” did not attend our rally but is merely writing his article through pure conjecture (emphasis added):

Living 15 minutes away from Effington Ill., I decided to go to the Effingham Tea Party rally. It was outside the Old Effingham County Courthouse that hundreds of regular people, young and old, chanted their slogans of anti-government and anti deficit.

Matt Chef, the “contributor”, must have attended a different rally than what we held since WE MOVED THE RALLY TO THE OLD RURAL KING BUILDING AT THE MALL!!  So needless to say, there wasn’t anybody waxing poetic about the government or deficits at the Old Courthouse.

Oh, but it gets better (emphasis added):

After the rally had ended, the movie “Atlas Shrugged” was played at a nearby village square mall. Many of the tea party protesters went to go see the film, but I did not. I was collecting my thoughts about the rally. I did not really enjoy it, but at the same time, I did not dislike the whole idea around it. I had talked with several people and had many interesting discussions.

It was AT THE SAME MALL WE WERE AT!!

Furthermore, phoning it in allowed Mr. Chef to miss what the Tea Party is all about, but that doesn’t stop Mr. Chef from op-eding about the Tea Parties at large:

I was interested by the fact that there are fewer tea party rallies each year. Is the movement losing its attraction?

Fewer Tea Parties?  If he had actually been to Effingham’s rallies, he would know that we only hold 2 a year to begin with.  Generalized statements about the Tea Parties at large does not facts make.  My experience with the Tea Parties is that the movement has not weakened.  I will grant that people are tired after recent election cycle, but that’s the same natural lull in activity that all political movements experience, so the Tea Parties are not any different.

Last but not least, Mr. Chef expounds about his ideas of what could change the Tea Parties for the better, again, totally lost on him is what the Tea Parties actually are:

I think that if the tea party movement wants to thrive it needs to organize itself and put a lone person into the spotlight as, perhaps not their leader, but a spokesman.

In one simple word….NO.  The one great thing about the Tea Parties is they are all independent of each other and answer only to themselves.  Most of the Tea Partiers I run into (including myself) can’t stand groups like Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Express, or Tea Party [fill in the blank here for some group name indicating a national organization].  To tell us to find a spokesman and organize into a national organization misses the beauty of the Tea Parties.  Our disorganized, autonomous nature has prevented the major parties from taking over or destroying the Tea Parties.

So why would I get so bent out of shape about an article that on the surface is a glowing review of the Tea Parties and our rally in particular?  Because I would rather take bad press by someone who was there than good press by somebody that wasn’t there and still miss the entire point of who and what the Tea Parties are.  Matt Chef should understand that with journalism comes responsibility.  You cannot just make something up and write about it.  Ask several NY Times journalists who have been fired for doing just that.  There was even a good movie about a journalist who made it all up and was fired when he was called out for doing so called Shattered Glass about Stephen Glass, a reporter for the The New Republic.

Cross-posted at Downstate Illinois Advocate

Scary article in the Decatur-Herald (Decatur, Illinois) today – “Counties struggle to find candidates for local boards”.  This article made me sad, and livid at the same time.

There are those of us like Coldwarrior, Loren Heal and others that are relentless at recruiting not only Precinct Committeemen, but also people to run for public office.  Myself, I was just elected to the Effingham City Council.

When I read an article like the one linked above, I can only shake my head.  We concentrate so much on federal and state issues that we neglect our local offices.  Don’t get me wrong, there are those that are very into watchdogging their local boards like Kirk Allen in Edgar County Illinois who just exposed possible misappropriation of funds and improper training of 911 dispatchers by the Edgar County Board.

The local offices, whether it’s town council, township trustees, school board, or even park district board, are some of the most important to pay attention to and recruit candidates for.  Some of these districts like the school and park districts are special taxing districts that could have more power over your property taxes than other local government offices.  We MUST recruit conservatives to run for these positions.

I hear people talk about time requirements and having an unwillingness to put themselves out there in front of the public, but it’s all an excuse why not to get involved.  It’s the same excuse we hear from people who are long term Precinct Committeemen, but are more interested in attending once a month meetings to say they are a part of something than rather actually doing something like walk precincts, walk parades, or sit at the GOP County Fair booth for a few hours one week.  For someone that just got done student teaching, is a co-coordinator of a local Tea Party, works full-time, has two kids and a mortgage to worry about, I don’t want to hear about not having time.  I don’t have the time (or patience) to hear about others not having the time!  It’s one thing to sit on the sideline and yell at the ref making calls, but it’s quite another to step up and volunteer to be the ref getting yelled at.  We can all be armchair Presidents, Representatives, Senators, or even County Board members, but you must be willing to step up and run.  Your communities need you!!!

So start recruiting your friends or family to run.  Consider running for local office yourself.  If your county is like mine, then in 2012 all the county board seats are up for re-election, plus township supervisors and trustees, State’s Attorney, and other County offices (not to mention Precinct Committeeman seats).  We all want to take our country back at the top of the government food chain, but we can take steps to take our communities back at the bottom of the government food chain where – quite honestly – government has more impact on our daily lives than anything that goes on in Washington DC or our state capitols.

Will you run for office the next election cycle?  Or will there be nobody to vote for?

Last night, I attended a legislative forum/meet and greet with our area state representatives and state senators (we have 3 a piece for our little gerrymandered county of 34,000).  Also in attendance was our Republican Congressman, John Shimkus of the 19th Illinois Congressional.  The evening started out decent enough – light appetizers, drinks, and idle chitchat.  After the social, the invited attendees gave brief speeches about issues facing Washington DC and Springfield.  One has no idea how bad off Illinois is under Gov. Quinn and the Democrats in Springfield until you hear our state reps and senators explain how Emperor Quinn, King Madigan, and Prince Cullerton refuse to do anything but spend.  But that’s for another post…

After the briefs speeches, the floor was open to questions from the audience.  Since it was a Chamber of Commerce event, 98% of those in the room were businessmen and women, and/or their spouses.  Questions ranged from Obamacare’s tax provisions to government spending in DC and Springfield.  However, one particular question rattled Congressman Shimkus really….really bad.

The questions posed that set Congressman Shimkus off was the subject of PLAs or Project Labor Agreements.  As stated by the questioner – a local area contractor, one of the first executive orders of President Obama was to require PLAs for contracted federal work.  When the questioner pushed Shimkus about his vote against House Amendment 147 to HR 1 which would have blocked the federal government from requiring PLAs, Shimkus got just a little bent out of shape.

Shimkus stated that he felt that the questioner was essentially ambushing him at a public event, stated that he had met with the questioner for an hour over that issue and stated that he felt like he was being attacked.  From there, Shimkus admonished the questioner several times for asking the question, then dodged around the entire PLA issue altogether ultimately stated the motion failed on a tie vote anway.  Another guest, Dom Durbin (who has had his own recent unpleasant run-in with unions in Springfield, Illinois) sitting at the questioner’s table, tried handing Shimkus a copy of a PLA which apparently Shimkus had agreed to actually read a PLA at some point during their previous meeting.

As I sat in the audience, I was very uncomfortable with the way Shimkus handled himself.  At one point, he looked at the questioner and said that we live in a democratic society, and if he didn’t like it, “that’s why we have primaries” and “you’re more than welcome to come at me”.  Shimkus also touted his 88% rating with the Chamber and that “I would have 100%, except probably for that vote”.  Basically what it boils down to is Shimkus got called out for betraying his conservative credentials…and the questioner never got at the other questionable Shimkus no vote on House Amendment 169 to HR 1, which if I understand it correctly, would have done away with prevailing wage requirements for contractors doing business with the federal government.

There is an understory to all of this as well.  Recently, it came to my attention that there is a group here in my area trying to unionize the construction workers in the area.  This group goes by a very innocuous name – “A Better Effingham”.  The flier they have been distributing looks harmless enough and never really mentions “union” but it is implied all the same within the flier itself (emphasis actually on the flier, not added by me):

“If you are a construction worker in this area, this is approximately what your wages should be $24.40 per. hour.”

“You should have good healthcare for you and your family.”

“You should have a decent pension so you can retire with dignity.”

“You should have better job security on the job.”

“You should have better safety on the job, so you can return home and be with family at the end of the day.”

Sounds ok, right?  I mean, who doesn’t want most of those things?  But if you go to their Facebook page, you’ll see numerous links to various labor union groups in the Midwest and Illinois.

So between this local development, the US economy, Illinois’ anti-business stances, and Shimkus’ PLA votes, the questioner – a construction contractor – is more than a little on edge regarding his business.  Shimkus took the contractor’s question as a public ambush and reacted horribly to being confronted about his votes.  I don’t fault the contractor for doing what he did.  It seems our side gets bent out of shape very quickly when we hold their feet to the fire, but we elected our people to do a job and for those that claim conservative principles (like Shimkus), we expect them to vote those conservative principles.  Otherwise, they shouldn’t get shocked or blow a gasket when they get called out on the mat for voting opposite their convictions.

While reading Politico the yesterday, I was surprised to find an article about a schism that has taken place within the Coffee Party USA camp founded by Annabel Park.  And here I thought the Astroturf USA’s cup had run dry; guess I was wrong.  You can view the schism article here.  It is today’s article about yesterday’s article that just made me shake my head and confirmed my belief that the progressives still don’t understand what has made the Tea Party what it is today.  However, what really caught my eye were some of the responses by Eric Byler to the airing of Astroturf USA’s dirty laundry:

1) There is a lack of actual democracy within the organization. In a democratic organization, one person does not have the power to dissolve Boards, Interim or not. In a democratic organization, all votes (and all people) count equally. This is not the case within the CPM. We have had multiple experiences of having completed a task that we were asked to do, and then having all our work undone, because the founder of the Coffee Party did not approve of the outcome. It is our understanding that this experience is not limited to members of the Interim Board.

Here is one of the biggest differences between the Tea Party and Astroturf USA – a overseeing managing board.  Don’t get me wrong, there are groups running around the country who appear on Fox News that try to say they are part of some national Tea Party organization, but in no way shape or form does any of those self-appointing national groups control or dictate to the individual Tea Parties what to do or say.  Each local Tea Party is autonomous from other groups, but are connected via common principles.

2) There is a lack of actual civility toward the Interim Board, as well as toward the Managing Director, David Overcash. We have been sent emails from our founder calling us timid bureaucrats, sexist jerks, out of touch with the people, fearful, intimidated, unable to understand the historic importance of the moment…etc.…

Again with the hierarchy.  In Byler’s first point and in his second point, Astroturf USA shows how orders seem to come down from on high.  How does that reflect democracy in his first point?  In addition, we have two references in Byler’s first two points here about “the founder”.  The Tea Parties sprang up from the grassroots.  As a Tea Party leader in Central Illinois, I never once have received a call or email from some corporate office or some national board with marching orders let alone with marching orders from “the founder”.  The other Tea Party leaders in my area and outside my area have not received those calls or emails either.  Not sure what about the Astroturf USA is of historic importance other than its epic failure.  The Tea Party is historic because of it’s autonomous and decentralized nature allowed it to effect an election and helped drive the national discourse on government while serving as a defense against further government encroachment into our lives and our pocketbooks.  The Astroturf USA was founded after the Tea Parties started taking off and was founded in response to our advances onto the national scene (to the lament of the MSM), into the national psyche (to the lament of progressives), and into the national parties (to the lament of the establishment and leadership) and failed to capture the “independent” voter or the citizens who feel our current direction has strayed from the 6 purposes of government spelled out in the Preamble to the Constitution.

3) There are no clear lines of authority in the Coffee Party. In a democratic organization, decisions made by the majority cannot simply be overridden or delayed, or undercut by one person.

Once again, we hear rumblings of being told what to do by a “majority”.  It’s a movement, not a political party, and not a government – “majority rules” does not apply.  The various Tea Parties in Illinois do not get together and then vote to do x, y, and z.  We will from time to time get together, as we recently did, to share ideas and network, but nobody leaves the meetings saying that since the majority wanted to do this, we have to do that as well.  The Tea Party is focused on common principles, but the diversity among the groups has allowed for each to stay autonomous and has for the most part prevented the Tea Party movement from being co-oped by either of the major parties or fringe elements.  Last year’s primaries should show that anyone that doesn’t adhere to Tea Party goals will be replaced by someone who will….right ex. Sen. Bennett (and soon to be ex-Sen. Lugar)?

4) There is a proliferation of groups and people that are empowered to do the same work, without coordination, or even knowledge of each other. If the results from one group empowered to complete a task are not acceptable to Annabel, their work is discarded, and another group or person is given the responsibility, ad infinitum….

Astroturf USA is a progressive movement/organization, and they are complaining that they are being told what to do and that a higher power is dictating to them what they can or cannot do?  These are the same people that adhere to a philosophy centered around the principles of a higher authority telling them what to do, how much to earn, and what they can or cannot do.  No complaints about individual mandates from the federal government to buy health insurance though.  So it’s ok when the Dear Leader uses the full force of the federal government to dictate their lives for them it’s ok, but when the Coffee Maker does it, it’s not?  The world of the progressive must be something akin to Alice in Wonderland – up is down, left is right, east is west, contradictions and double standards be damned.  It’s a mad, mad world.

5) Projects are authorized and positions offered and filled with no knowledge of the Interim Board.This creates a situation where the Board is/may be responsible for assisting actions or funding projects that were never even discussed by/or put on the agenda of the Interim Board. This is fair neither to the Board nor the projects.

More central authority complaints, however funding is an issue.  Most of the Tea Parties in Illinois do not have rich donors backing their local groups.  Sorry MSM, no checks from News Corp or any other corporations.   Many have funded their rallies out of pocket.  Some try to do fundraising to cover costs of their rallies, meetings, etc., but no Tea Party group I have run into here in Illinois has much in the way of funds period.  I believe this too is what makes the Tea Party movement special.  We get things done without support of major donors and help campaigns in ways the state parties can’t or refuse to do.  Just ask newly minted IL Reps. Joe Walsh and Bobby Schilling and newly minted IL State Sen. Sam McCain the influence and effect the Tea Parties have had.  And none of these things were done with or without approval of some kind of Interim Board, managing board, or “the founder”.

6) The result of this pattern of organizational chaos has been to limit the effectiveness of our organization, as well as having led to the burn-out and departure of numerous earnest and hard- working individuals, many of whose names and contributions are not even known to those who joined us later. The lack of organizational coherence has limited our ability to work collectively, and taken much of the joy and camaraderie out of the work.

And here lies the problem with Astroturf USA – the mentality of the collective.  The Tea Party is based on the power of the individual to change his or her township, city, party, state, etc.  Our decentralized nature is our strength not our weakness, but the progressive mind cannot wrap itself around such concepts.  Taking pride in what we can do as individuals promotes the camaraderie with other individuals as we share our experiences and work towards common goals – a government that is limited, fiscally responsible and utilizes the free market capitalist ideas that once made this country the envy of the world.  Progressives have made a cottage industry out of destroying American exceptionalism and this is why Astroturf USA has failed to gain traction – not because of the ego of “the founder” or some schism in leadership.

The groundswell that took place after Rick Santelli’s rant that one fine morning is still going and still growing.  I, like many others, were sitting on the couch watching that rant as it happened.  I remember my girlfriend and I looking at each other and saying that Santelli is absolutely correct, let’s do a Tea Party rally.  It fantastic that someone like Annabel Park can wake up one morning and be so frustrated at seeing the progressive world begin to topple and start a group and then try to foist that movement onto the main stage as the alternative to the Tea Party only to fail.  Remember the old adage, “you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink”?  A fake movement supporting a failed ideology is doomed from the get go.  Haven’t heard much from the No Labels people lately either have you.  People are looking at their federal government and how it is affected their lives.  They see their schools failing, their taxes rising, companies being bought and bailed out at the taxpayer expense, the national debt exploding, their jobs leaving and America being the butt of jokes around the world.  They wonder what went wrong.  They’re tired of compassionate conservatives and those who promised hope and change.  The Tea Party is made up of individuals who have come together to fight further erosion of our republic and to turn back the tide of progressivism restore confidence in ourselves and in our American exceptionalism.  To do nothing is to admit that our grand experiment has failed.  Astroturf USA was created to shore up the cracks in the progressive intent to further degrade our republic and way of life.  They’re goal was to buttress progressivism against the relentless attack of the rising conservative wave who wants to cling to their money, guns and religion – the horror!  The self appointed enlightened ones seem to be a bit dim when it comes to what America is feeling right now.  To establish a movement/organization such as Astroturf USA based on progressive ideas, “the founder” and her followers fail to understand that more people right now identify themselves as conservative AND as independent and that the Tea Party, not Astroturf USA, is the home for them.  Long live the Tea Parties, long live conservatism, long live America.

Exactly what has Illinois become?  In the immortal words of Obi-Wan in Star Wars:

Obi-Wan: Mos Eisley spaceport: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.”

Though Illinois is obviously no spaceport (though our state debt and deficit is out of this world), it seems to have become the Mos Eisley Cantina bar of the left.  To quote another movie,

K: You remember “Casablanca”, right?
J: Yeah.
K: Same thing, just no Nazis.

No Nazis, but we got us some lefties though.

Illinois has become the new California or has become the refuge for all things on the left.  We have Wisconsin Democrats who bolted a vote in the Wisconsin Assembly on reforming the unions.  Not to be outdone, Indiana Democrats also decided to come to Casa de Illinois to avoid having to cast a similar vote.  As I do my student teaching (in high school American Government among other classes), and I see these elected officials shirk their democratic duties for those who elected them to do a job, I almost feel I am lying to my students when I teach them about the basic principles of a constitutional republic.  Am I lying to them when I tell my students one of the basic tenets of our system of government is representative government, but yet those representatives in government refuse to do their jobs?  We know Illinois is a secret sanctuary state for illegal aliens (they get state benefits under Kid Care and other programs), but now we are becoming a sanctuary for all things liberal.

Last year, we saw 20,000 public sector unions march in Springfield demanding that our taxes be raised to protect their pensions and benefits (protected anyway by the Illinois Constitution).  The result?  Newly re-elected Governor Quinn raised income and business taxes. Quinn also signed a civil union bill straight out the box from his re-election.

Where I work, I have the opportunity to meet with people from all walks of life, especially those that pay dues to certain organizations called unions.  You know its bad when these union members are throwing their union brothers under the bus.  Some of them even throw the UAW under the bus – and these are the same union members that deliver the cars that UAW members made!  But it gets better (or worse) here in Illinois…

Recently, there was a bill in front of the General Assembly that would require home schooled children to be registered with the state.  The bill was tabled, but is not dead.

Then of course the Dead Fish was elected as mayor of Chicago.  And to make matters worse (or scarier), Gov. Quinn thought that he and Dead Fish would be able to “do good things”.  One can only imagine.  God help us.

A few days ago, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (daughter of King/Speaker of the Illinois House Mike Madigan) decided that she would like to release the names of all gun owners in Illinois.  This is the same Lisa Madigan that has refused to even consider joining the suit against the federal government regarding Obamacare, but that’s no surprise.

But what really took the cake and showed what the Democrats in Illinois are really made of is what transpired early this week.  My local State Representative David Reis introduced a bill that would do nothing more than reaffirm the 10th amendment to the Constitution of the United States.  In fact, as Rep. Reis says,

“This was a watered-down version compared to other states’ resolutions,” Reis said.  “And we can’t get this out of committee.”

So we can see where the Illinois Democrats sit.  I almost guarantee that if there was a bill honoring the contributions of Karl Marx to political thought and economics, the Illinois Democrats in Springfield wouldn’t hesitate to pass it.  In fact, they’d probably erect a statue somewhere in Springfield that would end up in some Illinois Democrat’s office.  On a side note, Rep. Reis has also tried to get concealed carry (Illinois is just 1 of 2 states without such a law) passed in Illinois only to be thwarted by the same protectors of liberalism that have made Illinois the destination state for lawmakers on the run.

Ladies and gentlemen, while all our eyes are on Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio and other states trying to peel back the decades old layers of liberal policies, Illinois seems to be doubling down on those same policies.  All I ask is that while many of us are cheering what is taking place in some of these other states, don’t take your eyes off Illinois.  Many of us will need your help combating the continued liberal slide into oblivion in the next few years…before the Land of Lincoln becomes the Land of the Lost.

Despite taking historic losses in the last midterm elections and being the focus of countless protests leading up to the midterms, the liberals still don’t understand what the Tea Parties are.

I enter into evidence the possibility of a “Tequila Party“.

It would seem Latino leaders are not happy with the Democrats not doing enough to push through Dream Act III and are discussing about launching their own version of the Tea Parties, Latino style.

As reported by Liz Goodwin, writing for The Lookout for Yahoo! News:

Latino leaders in Nevada and around the country are floating the idea of breaking traditional ties with the Democratic Party and creating a grass-roots independent movement tentatively called the Tequila Party. According to Delen Goldberg at the Las Vegas Sun, the leaders want to pressure the Democratic Party to deliver on Latinos’ priorities much in the same way the tea party has done with the GOP over the past few years.

Problem #1.  It’s not grassroots if national leaders spawn the movement.  When we started our Tea Parties, no GOP or conservative leaders called us up and told us what to do.  The Tea Parties were a spontaneous reaction to the end of the Bush Presidency and the Obama/Pelosi/Reid policies in early 2009.  In fact, we were sitting on our couch the day Rick Santelli did his rant; we looked at each other and said “He’s right, let’s do a Tea Party”.  Others around the nation who started Tea Parties I’m sure have similar stories.  History was written.

Robert de Posada, the former GOP operative behind this fall’s controversial “Don’t Vote” ads aimed at Latinos in Nevada and California, tells The Lookout that he has heard “rumblings” of this movement among national Latino leaders.

Again, it’s not a grassroots movement if national leaders are deciding what to do.  When Republican leaders call for increased GOTV efforts, it’s not grassroots.  Likewise, if national Latino leaders call for a Tequila Party, it’s not grassroots.  The reason the truly grassroots efforts of the Tea Parties worked and continue to work was/is because of their decentralized nature with no “national leaders” telling us what to do, how to do it, what to support, or who to support.  Sure, there are groups like Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation and others who would love to say they speak on behalf of the Tea Parties or be an umbrella organization, but the fact remains the individual Tea Parties are independent from any nationall organization or leader, and are fiercely independent – and fiercely independent of each other as well.

Goodwin continues her reporting:

The Tequila Party is still just talk for now, as no Latino leader has publicly backed the scheme. But De Posada says their silence makes sense, as they will want to be sure they have a fully formed plan before they risk angering allies in the Democratic Party. “They’d better be prepared when they come out swinging,” he says. Frank Sharry of the pro-immigration reform group America’s Voice, says he doubts the Tequila Party will ever actually get off the ground. “I do think Democrats should worry because the arguments for the Tequila party are persuasive to me…The frustration is understandable,” he says.

Problem #2.  The Tea Parties are not concerned about angering Republican allies, witnessed by high profile take downs of GOP incumbents in the primaries and the ability to get their allied candidates elected such as Rand Paul, Allen West, and others.  The Tea Parties didn’t wait until they had a “fully formed plan” before we acted.  The fact that the national leaders of the Latino movement would even be concerned about challenging their supposed allies is troubling in itself.

The Latino vote generally sways Democrat.  This is what Dream Act III is all about – not human rights, education for children of illegals or any other hogwash its proponents try to toss up.  It boils down to securing a voting bloc; nothing more, nothing less.  Besides, what will the Tequila Party do?  Vote Republican?  The same Republican party that is for the most part dead set against Dream Act III?  Sound more like astroturf to organize lobbying for amnesty than for anything else.

Problem #3.  The boat for liberal “grassroots” efforts has sailed as evidenced on November 2nd.  Democrats who voted with the liberal agenda got bounced.  Nearly all of the freshmen Democrat “Blue Dogs” got voted out November 2nd.  Yet Latino leaders think they can successfully push their liberal agenda of amnesty.

Jay Cost at the Weekly Standard (Hat tip to Dan Proft for pointing out the article) anaylyzed the Hispanic vote over the last few national elections.  Cost provides a chart outlining the Hispanic vote, and shows that the GOP did pick up Hispanic voters this last election.

Cost breaks it down that Hispanics helped the Democrats 1.8% of the vote nationwide.  Personally, I’m not so convinced that the 8% GOP pickup is a long term trend in the Hispanic demographic.  I do agree with Cost that the GOP needs to pursue the Hispanic vote (as well as the black vote) as I have explained before here.

Dream Act III is not the solution.  Amnesty, and to call the Dream Act III anything but amnesty is a farce, would not solve a single problem that previous amnesty acts promised to solve.  Amnesty and the threat by the yet to be dictated and directed Tequila Party is a political ploy aimed at threatening Democrats.  The Tea Parties aim at changing the parties and government toward free market ideas, limited government, and responsible spending.  The proposed Tequila Party is not set toward this goal but is merely political blackmail to force the hand of liberal Democrats and RINOs looking to please the New York Times Editorial Board.

Tequila Party.  Imitation is supposed to be the best form of flattery, but remember, flattery will get you no where…

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate

A group of millionaires have made headlines recently requesting Congress to raise taxes on them.  Many are Democrat donors including such leftist darlings as Ben and Jerry’s founder Ben Cohen.

These self-sacrificers say that it is vital to the economy and the nation’s financial help that Congress raise their taxes.  The first question that comes to my mind is why does it take government impetus for these millionaires to pay more taxes?  I distinctly remember George W. Bush once saying in a State of the Union address:

Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.

I don’t see these millionaires who wrote the letter to Obama asking for a tax increase voluntarily shelling money out to the IRS, but instead they have decided to be political instead of really living as “Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength“.

Since the millionaires in question are Democrats, maybe George W. Bush isn’t the best example to use.  Perhaps we should let one of their own – JFK – explain to them what lower taxes means as JFK did to the Economic Club of New York in 1962:

The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1963.

I’m not talking about a “quickie” or a temporary tax cut, which would be more appropriate if a recession were imminent. Nor am I talking about giving the economy a mere shot in the arm, to ease some temporary complaint. I am talking about the accumulated evidence of the last five years that our present tax system, developed as it was, in good part, during World War II to restrain growth, exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incenitives [sic] for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking. In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government’s most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.

JFK continues….

For all these reasons, next year’s tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes: for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.

And continues…

In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country’s own experience with tax reduction in 1954 has borne this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.

I repeat: our practical choice is not between a tax-cut deficit and a budgetary surplus. It is between two kinds of deficits: a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy, or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, increase tax revenues, and achieve, I believe — and I believe this can be done — a budget surplus. The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness; the second reflects an investment in the future.

JFK understood it.  Eisenhower in 1954 understood it.  Lower taxes spur economic growth and overall investment which adds up to more jobs.

For all the rhetoric about Obama being the new millennium’s version of FDR, Obama is actually more like Herbert Hoover with “stimulus packages” and calls for raising taxes.  Both Obama and his Hooverite millionaires should learn from history.

When Herbert Hoover was elected to President, he instituted his own set of government stimulus packages – government sponsored projects – and raised taxes.  FDR doubled down on these ideas and helped keep high unemployment steady through the Great Depression.  The chart below shows the stock market ups and downs 1929 – 1940.

Source

Notice the stock market did not fully recover until 1954.  Now, notice below that the second market plunge 1930 – 1932 is in direct correlation to income taxes being raised.

Source

The big difference between Hoover and Obama is that Hoover did not have to contend with inflation resulting from the government printing money to buy back it’s own debt (QE1 and QE2) because the dollar was still pegged to the gold standard.

We have seen the effects of raising taxes on the “rich” has had on the US economy.  Imagine the ill effects of these Hooverite policies with QE2.  So Obama and his Patriot Millionaires want this again?  Then start writing checks to the IRS, why do you need the government to tell you to do it?  I guess money doesn’t buy you everything – including IQ.

Crosspost from Downstate Illinois Advocate

First, I would like to say that I am not defending Michael Steele in this article; I’m pushing for Erick Erickson to be RNC Chair.

Not that we got that out of the way, back to Anuzis.  The Victory program, which involved setting up call centers and identifying voters, was a mixed bag in my opinion.  Millions of voters were identified via the VIctory program which helped campaigns to funnel resources in the right direction and helped GOTV efforts as well.

However, simply calling voters is not enough.  Neither Steele or Anuzis identified the real problem – lack of GOTV efforts by precinct committeemen and county chairmen.  Anuzis, in his announcement, does bring up the issue of the GOP “ground game”:

I will be a nuts and bolts type of chairman, one who will concentrate on the fundamentals and ensure we properly develop and execute our ground game. It will be my goal to create an unprecedented organizational base, fully funded, to make more phone calls, knock on more doors, mail more material and compete on the airwaves to get our message across.

That’s great, but when states like Illinois – which has about 51% of precincts absent – Anuzis’ statement means nothing.  Of the 49% of precincts that are filled in Illinois, how many of those precinct committeemen actually got out and knocked on doors?  Not many I would gamble.  And there seems to be no pressure on the county chairmen to fill empty precincts or to weed out the precinct committeemen that don’t do anything other than show up at a meeting once a month.  Losing some close state races – Bill Brady for Illinois Governor – Anuzis discusses were partially lost due to the lack of an adequate “ground game”.

That’s Illinois, but I openly wonder if this is a problem across the other states.  The Victory program means nothing if there is nobody to knock on the doors and hand out literature.  In my home county here in Illinois, which is very Republican friendly and has an active Tea Party, the Republican party walked every precinct within the city limits.  Likewise, the Tea Party walked precincts, walked parades, and made phone calls on behalf of a Circuit Court judge.  The results?  Bill Brady won the county with 75.9% of the vote and the Judge won by over 5,000 votes – the largest margin in his 9 county area with a 58% county turnout.

In Illinois, we had a microcosm of the RINO vs conservative battle that took place in many of the primary races around the nation.  We also saw “moderates” sit on their hands as some our conservative candidates lost (Bill Brady in particular) and we now get to see these same “moderates” wringing their hands in glee at the conservative candidates’ defeats.  I’m sure there are plenty of “moderates” basking in the glory of conservative defeats around the country as well.  This turn of events worries me when someone running for RNC Chief states:

I will be a team player and work cooperatively with the NRSC, NRCC and RGA to elect more Republicans across our country. I will not take sides in the presidential primary contest but will be a reliable player that the eventual presidential nominee will be able to depend on, and work with closely and cooperatively through the presidential campaign.

Anuzis may not pick sides, but the NRSC and NRCC has a proven track record of taking sides.  The RGA’s track record is much better in my opinion.  To work “cooperatively” with NRSC and NRCC is nothing more than tacitly agreeing to them picking the winners and losers so that their candidates better fit into the mold of the squish.

We need a conservative as RNC Chair.  We need a RNC Chair that is going to put leverage on the state GOP Chairs to fill precincts – especially with committeemen that want to do something.  We need a RNC Chair that doesn’t just want wins, but quality wins with conservative candidates.  We need a RNC Chair that understands that the pendulum has swung back in the direction of conservatism.  We need a RNC Chair that will take on the Beltway mentality.  We need a RNC Chair who really knows the GOTV effort.  Anuzis does have a good point when he says our GOTV efforts are the best way to prevent being “overwhelmed by the efforts of the unions, the Obama campaign and all their allies”.

Crossposted from Downstate Illinois Advocate