My two favorite targets: Yepsen and Obama

Yepsen = Lazy

Des Moines Register columnist David Yepsen has a column in today’s paper about the state borrowing money to repair state and local highways, levees, and water treatment plants that were damaged by the floods. He argues that Iowa shouldn’t wait to fix these things. I agree, except for the part about borrowing the money to do it.

Now we all have read David’s articles about getting our states financial house in order, you know the ones that starts with, “pour yourself another cup of coffee.” What he wrote today shows how lazy he has become as a reporter. Iowa has about $600 million in its rainy day fund, but Yepsen ignores that and instead reads directly from Mike Gronstal’s playbook. There is a reason why we can’t use the Rainy Day fund, it’s because it doesn’t really exist it has already been accounted for. People need to know and understand this and political reporters like Yepsen are needed to pick the scab so that Iowans have a better understanding about the financial condition of our state.

Obama visits Cedar Rapids today.

Like always I’m sure he will give an moving speech, but while he is here for the photo op ask yourself did Senator Obama, a Senator from the heartland, and leader of his entire party do all he could to help the people of Iowa? Oh that’s right, he was too busy giving speeches in Berlin…

Words are not enough.

Since none of you probably saw this on CBS...

Here is a view inside the McCain campaign.

Gone Fishing

Sorry, it's just way too nice out today so I'm taking the day off.

Heck, if Congress can go on a month long vacation without providing aid to Iowa flood victims, I think its ok for a little blogger like me to take a sunny day off here and there. I call it the Braley/Boz/Loebsack suck it up plan.

Deal with it. While you can't do anything that would harm me, you can kick the bums out and elect some people who actually get

More on Portman

My good friend Chris Cillizza did a nice write up on Rob Portman today as he goes through the pros and cons of each potential VP pick.

Latham sets the tone

Congressman Latham has a new radio ad on the airways talking about $4 a gallon gasoline and the unwillingness of the Democrat controlled Congress to do anything about it. It’s a good ad that puts the ANWR debate into perspective.

Latham has also been very vocal in calling out the Democrats for wanting to go on their August vacation period before passing the emergency flood aid.

I’m sure the liberal wacko’s running Becky Greenwald’s campaign will say “look he’s scared” and fabricate stories of Tom Latham’s demise. What is really going on is that Latham has a pile of money at his disposal and is going to set the agenda for his re-election campaign. Face it, we know it looks like a Democrat year and Latham and King are the only big targets for them here in Iowa.

Latham was smart to get out of the gate quick and set the tone for his re-election campaign. He’s not just going to have a shock and awe air war; he has also assembled a very nice campaign staff to work on the ground.

Monday Grab Bag

Greetings, like most of you I’m a little groggy on Monday Mornings. Sorry for the delay.

Yepsen thinks Culver should shake it up.

While it may seem that only Iowa Republicans have internal issues, the Democrats, and especially Chet Culver have some big obstacles in their way in the 2010 elections. It’s not because of stiff Republican competition yet, it’s because Chet Culver and the State House and Senate Democrats don’t really get a long, and they have expanded the size of Government so quickly and by such an amount that clever accounting tricks will not allow them to kick the can down the road.

Yepsen, seems to think a staff change can fix things, I don’t, but I know an election will.

Steve Deace’s Cat

When not talking about politics, he’s talking about the new Batman movie. So when I found this picture I thought of him. Sorry dude. It’s just too funny. And is this really your cat?

Scheffler & Lehman on Iowa Press

The Real Sporer has a good write up on this. I just wanted to add my 2 cents. First I think both did a nice job. And while Phyllis Kelly and Steve Roberts are long time leaders of our party, the time has come to pass the baton. Both Scheffler and Lehman are more articulate than the two that they replace have been. That’s a good thing folks; we need all hands on deck to right our ship.

McCain-Portman 2008

While Novak was wrong on his prediction of McCain announcing his VP last week, I’ll go out on a very shot limb and say it will happen this week. Why? The Olympics start on Saturday and last for a few weeks, then its time for the Obama love fest convention. The time is now.

Who’s the pick? Rob Portman from Ohio.

McCain has to win through the Electoral College so his nominee has to deliver a key state. There is none more key than Ohio. Romney could help in a number of areas and he has really pushed for the spot, but I think the McCain campaign has welcomed the speculation, but will go with a guy who can deliver a bunch of electoral votes, that guy is Portman. Get to know him.

Are there other implications for Obama’s World Tour?

While the news media ooos and ahhhhs over Barack Obama’s overseas trip and speech in Berlin, I’m left wondering if Obama’s campaign trip might have implications that his campaign, the media, and the US State Department have yet to consider.

We all know that Obama didn’t go on his world tour to spread “hope” to the rest of the world, he went because he needed to beef up his foreign policy credentials. He went because it will help him become the next President of the United States.

So here’s what I’m worried about. What happens when a candidate for Prime Minister or President of another country wants to have a campaign event in America? Does Obama’s world tour set a precedent that the United States will have to honor?

Now I don’t have any problems with what Obama said in his speech in Berlin yesterday, but would a foreign candidate use the same caution in a campaign speech here in America. I know it’s an extreme example, but what if that candidate was in the mold of Hugo Chavez? A candidate like that could probably score more political points in his country by coming to American and slamming us, rather than giving a speech without flammatory content. Is this a road that we really want to travel down?

Our State Department doesn’t recognize or enter into negations with some regimes around the world because doing so would elevate their status in the world. Look at how long it took for the US to allow Yasser Arafat to participate in official diplomatic proceedings.

I also have a difficult time seeing Obama in a foreign country speaking on behalf of American, when he isn’t elected or appointed by the people to do so. Heck, we don’t see Nancy Pelosi giving these types of speeches when she travels overseas.

I just find this troubling on a number of levels.

Show me the Money!

I was listening to WHO the other day when a top of the hour news report came on by Jim Boyd. One of the items he was reporting on was Governor Culver’s trip to D.C. to ask for assistance. The report featured a Culver proudly saying he had requested 1.2 billion dollars. The weird thing is I almost expected the Big Lug to say that billion with a “B”. Anyway, I didn’t really think much more about it till I read today’s article in the Register stating that the American Red Cross thinks Culver’s number is inflated, not by a little bit, but by 50% or so.

Now, I’m all for Iowa getting its fair share, but I don’t think it is right to fleece the American taxpayer for more than we need.

So how did Culver come up with his number; by using the number of request for assistance that has been submitted. On the other hand the American Red Cross actually does a visual assessment, reported that 12,302 homes in Iowa had some type of flood-related damage, and that another 704 were damaged by tornadoes. Culver’s number was 32,000.

On the surface Iowa’s flood recovery seems to be going smoothly, but with every passing day flood victims are going to become more and more anxious. Culver’s actions put Iowa flood victims are at risk. People need assistance and they need it quickly. Now I imagine that Congress will need to reexamine the request, or they simply might use the numbers from the Red Cross.

I know a lot of people where impressed by the way that Culver handled the floods when they were occurring, but that’s the easy part. Look at how the country rallied around President Bush after 9-11. Culver and our members of Congress will be judged not by their initial response, but by how quickly they can return life back to normal for the flood victims.

If people are frustrated in November it will not be good for incumbents.

Putting our words into action

I’ll be the first to admit, the internal struggles within the Republican Party is frustrating, and something that I don’t enjoy writing about. So today we are going to address this topic in a different way, putting your money where your mouth is.

Yesterday, I received a press release noting that the Iowa House Republicans hold a slim lead in cash-on-hand over their Democrat opponents.

“During the reporting period, ending on July 14^th, Republicans running for the Iowa House had $1,177,107 cash on hand compared to the Democrat candidates having banked $1,164,602. Republicans in leadership positions out raised the Democrat leaders by nearly two to one and reported twice as much cash on hand.

The candidates running under the Republican banner this year are the most qualified, aggressive, and effective campaigners that I’ve ever worked with,” said Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha. “They’re fundraising hard, knocking on doors, and doing all the things it takes to win their elections.”

This is a good sign. Despite the doom and gloom that keep hearing our Republican candidates have kept their heads down and kept working their tails off.

So here is today’s exercise in how we can all get along under the “Big Tent” of the Republican Party of Iowa. If you’re a social conservative its time to man/woman up and put your money where your mouth is. There are two rock solid social conservatives who have the opportunity to change what party controls the Iowa House. These are two candidates who will carry the water when it comes to the social issues.

The first is former State Rep. Danny Carroll who is sunning against Eric Palmer; the second is Jamie Johnson who is running against McKinley Bailey in HD 9.

Danny Carroll has $33,447.55 cash on hand for his campaign. Eric Palmer has $42,680.20. Put your money where your mouth is and help Danny reduce that gap by making a contribution to his campaign.

Jamie Johnson is a rock solid conservative, he has $17,797.28 cash on hand to McKinley Bailey’s $31,470.91, only a difference of around $13k. This is a seat that we Republican’s have held for years, and Jamie is working his tail off to win it back. Tell Jamie to keep up the good work my sending him a contribution to his campaign.

Folks, these are not presidential or congressional campaigns, any contribution you can make to their efforts will make a difference.

For our fiscally conservative friends who tell us they don’t want to support cultural warriors like Carroll and Johnson, I have a couple candidates for you to put your money where your mouth is. Now, I’m not saying these candidates are not socially conservative, but these are two candidates who are uniquely qualified to serve in the Iowa House based on their professional backgrounds.

The first is Dr. Stephen Richards from Algona who is running against Delores Mertz. Richards has $14,983.15 cash on hand to Mertz’ $28,049.29. Richards who is a physician and has a military background is a great candidate to run against Mertz. You can help Dr. Richards close the gap by sending a contribution to the following address:

Citizens for Richards
404 E. Kennedy Street
Algona, IA 50511

The second is Ross Paustian from Scott County who is running against Elesha Gayman. Paustian has and agricultural background compared to Gayman’s background of being a field staffer for Obama. Paustian has $24,588.27 cash on hand to Gayman’s $16,225.09. Sure he has the COH advantage, but I know 99.9% of you are bandwagon supporters so jump on and help seal the deal.

You know what to do, so go do it.

An Interesting Nugget

Mitt Romney’s Commonwealth PAC here in Iowa, you know the one that made tons of contributions to our legislative candidates in 2004 and 2006, still has a pretty healthy Cash on Hand number with over $436,000.00 in the bank. It will be interesting to watch and see what he does with it. So VP nominee or not, Mitt is well positioned.

D E A C E

People either love him or hate him, but one has to admit that in a very short time Steve Deace and his radio program on WHO Radio in Des Moines has become a political force here in Iowa. We shouldn’t be surprised, this is a guy who took down a potential gubernatorial candidate in 2002 with an interview on a sports station.

Anyway, Deace has devoted a lot of time on his program to discussing the internal struggles of the GOP. Yesterday, I emailed him during his show as he was discussing one of my posts. I wanted to try and expand on my line of thinking.

The following is what I sent Deace, and his response in bold. He asked if I would consider posting this on my blog, which I agreed to do as he has given Krusty Konservative a shout out on a number of occasions.

Below is the email, which he sent back to me during his show.

Steve,

I read your blog post today and I think it is very well done, and something that I agree with.

I'm pleased that you read my blog, and I'm always thrilled when people like you help promote it. I think we both agree that people are intellectually lazy. Face it most people don't open the pantry and figure out what they can make for dinner, they instead they debate between McDonald and Burger King. The same laziness has taken over the political process. Do most people really know who our candidates are and what they stand for? Heck the majority of people don't even vote.

In my recent posts I've been focusing on the role of the Party. It’s not something that's easy to explain for some reason.

That's because to too many people, the Party is a like a church. On this I agree with Yepsen, but for a different reason. Yepsen sees any social/moral issues as the party overstepping its role. I see folks expecting the Party to be a tool of righteousness, which is a role reserved for the church, as incorrect. The GOP can't make people or society better, only the church (Christ) can. But any party or organization Christians of any stripe belong to must -- and I repeat MUST -- reinforce what the church is trying to accomplish and convey. Otherwise a house divided against itself cannot stand. This is why so many social conservatives blur the lines between the two, because it's a very fine line indeed and easy to cross. Particularly in a culture like ours that is infested with a weak, watered down, and ineffective church. At that point people like me get frustrated and look for a substitute, and they want the party to do what the church was intended to.

I think it is absolutely critical that the Republican Party stand for certain core principles. The candidates that run under the Republican brand also must support these core principles as well.

Couldn't agree more, which is why I don't understand people like your poster in the replies section who said we need to support all Republicans. Really? So if Hillary wants to be a Republican tomorrow without changing any of her core convictions we're okay with that? Bernie Sanders? Barney Frank? If it's only about being Republicans, then why believe anything? Then why even have a platform? Why even call yourselves Republicans? Why not call yourselves the Free Agents? Maybe the Ink Blots is catchier? And I keep hearing this 80-20 or 51-49 ratio theory in terms of agreement. Fine. Then how come people only float those to the so-cons? How come nobody asks the Log Cabin Guys to just plug their noses and vote for Huckabee? How come it's always the social conservatives that have to compromise and accept the pragmatic paradigm?

It is also important to find a mechanism in which the part can reach out and get people to vote for their candidates. I think you do that with the fiscal issues. And while every social conservative I know is rock solid on fiscal issues, we always seem to get bogged down on the social issues, which prevents the Party from reaching out to the masses on the fiscal issues.

Here's why this happening: about half of the people in the party don't believe the Bible is true and the other half does, and among the half that doesn't about half of those folks are indifferent and don't care one way or the other while the half actively looks to thwart the ones who have Biblical convictions. This creates gridlock, especially since those folks often find themselves in positions of leadership and use their leadership posts to thwart people like me. For a long, long time we took it. But after 2006 it became obvious to many of us that selling out your core principles only leads to losing in the end, so you might as go ahead and fight for them. The other dynamic is that the party's most loyal voting base is motivated by issues the party doesn't want/like to advance. That's not a long-term recipe for success. And I respectfully don't accept the notion you can't convert people on social issues. Almost 40% of the people at Iowa Right to Life are Democrats. Over 60% of Iowans would vote for a marriage amendment. But do we run on these issues? Do we try to advance them? I go and talk to people all the time that don't agree with me, and sometimes -- lo and behold -- when I have reason, data, and the courage of my convictions I can persuade a few to my side every now and then.

So what needs to be done?

The party needs to answer the question why do you want to win elections? Do you want to elections to stay in power and cash the check, or to advance an ideological agenda? People like me want to advance an agenda and then go home to our families to die in peace and wait for the Lord's return. The other side wants to perpetually stay in power, cash the check, feel important, and pad their resumes that they can't take with them to the grave. The party is in this position because it didn't advance the agenda that those that put them there wanted them to -- plain and simple. And this always happens to an apparatus like a political party, by the way. You're always just one generation away from rigor mortis. The Democrats went through this in the 1980s and now it's the GOP's turn. And the GOP will either embrace the generation changover that is occurring in the country or it will go the way of the Whigs from whence it came. This is history repeating itself. It's the 1850s all over again, with the social activists realizing after 1849 that the party was never going to truly oppose slavery, instead offering them an at best a state-by-state solution to calling Negroes property and not people. The activists left and started the Republican Party. Don't think that outcome can't repeat itself in this day and age. People like me, particularly my upcoming generation, are just not as interested in the esprit de corps and relationship-driven politics our parents were. Either advance the agenda the platform stands for or don't waste our time. It's that simple. Now, if you don't want us around just say so, change your platform accordingly, and we'll go do our own thing. Good luck trying to win without us. Maybe you can, I don't know, but I've got a sneaking suspicion that John McCain is about to find out.

The Social Conservatives need to realize that we have won.

Brother, we haven't won. We just had two Republican governors (Willard and Arnold) fail to uphold the rule of law in their states and establish sodomy marriage in their states. We had a Senate Majority Leader in Stew Iverson who refused to hold his caucus accountable on the oldest social institution in the history of humanity -- the marriage amendment. There are so many other examples of this two-faced politics I could cite if you want them, but in the end you don't win until you advance the agenda you believe in.

(I was speaking about the internal power struggle within the Iowa Republican Party)

There is a reason Giuliani stayed away from Iowa in the caucus. There is also a reason why a candidate like Huckabee struck lightning here in Iowa. It’s because Iowa is dominated by social conservatives. Now I'm not saying that Social Conservatives can relax and take it easy, they need to remain active. But Social Conservatives need to be engaged in the fiscal conservative issues like they are on the social issues.

On this I agree, but in the end you can't have low regulation, reasonable taxation, and small government without socially sound policy and Biblical morality in place. You can't stop illegal immigration by killing off one-sixth of your next generation's workforce through infanticide. You can't shrink the social safety net without preserving the family. And on and on. God is in charge down here, not us, and we simply will not prosper long-term trying to conduct society contrary to His law. Many, many Republicans/conservatives believe this. The real question is does the Republican Party. Does it want David Yepsen to write nice columns about them, or does it want to win elections? It won't be able to do both.

Does any of this make sense? I get frustrated even writing this.

Anyway, thanks for letting me vent a bit, and thanks for reading.

Likewise :-)

HK

Here is an interesting take from HawkeyeGOP on the same issue.

John Edwards = Schmuck

Apparently John Edwards was caught spending some time with his mistress so he could introduce himself to his love child. What a fraud. Krusty Kudos to all you Iowans who supported him in the caucuses…

We need to unite our fractured party.

I knew as I typed the words “big tent” yesterday I was asking for a bunch of comments and messages in my inbox. If you were to come up to me on the street and ask me if I was a big tent Republican I’d probably give you weird look and tell you no.

If asked what type of Republican I am, I would tell you that I’m pro-life and pro-traditional marriage. I’m a fiscal conservative who believes in less regulation and lower-flatter and simpler taxes. I also believe that America has a role to play in the world. I’m a Hawk who firmly believes in peace through strength. I’m also an advocate of a limited federal government. Our current policies are incrementally creating a socialist nanny state that I don’t want any part of. Simply put I’m a Republican because I believe that every citizen of this country has the personal responsibility to make this a better nation.

When talking about the “big tent” I’m referring to every member/activist of Republican Party in Iowa. I look at party politics much like a business. Our good friends at Casey’s don’t just sell their delicious pizza to those who make $40,000 or more per year, they sell them to anyone who wants one. The same approach must be used in party politics. We need encourage as many people as possible to identify themselves as Republicans. It’s counterproductive for the Republican Party to be exclusive because its sole purpose is to win elections, which means we need more people to vote for our Republican candidates than vote for Democrat candidates.

Where we as activists must be diligent is in properly vetting our Republican candidates. This is also where the platform comes in. We as party activists (voters) have every right to demand that our candidates support the core issues that make up our Republican platform. So if a candidate has a history of not supporting the core issues of our party we need to confront them and inquire why they hold those particular positions or what caused them to change their positions.

The current squabbles within the Republican Party in Iowa are symbolic of the problems we as a party face, but it is important to understand that the election of Steve Scheffler and Kim Lehman and National Committee people are not the root cause of the problem. The problem stems from a heavy dose of Bush fatigue, coupled with an a$$ kickin in November of 2006, with a dollop of contentious caucus campaigns.

Just read the comment section of this blog. Some Romney supporters still feel the need to call Mike Huckabee a Christian socialist months after his campaign has ended. On the other hand, many Huckabee supporters still call Romney a flip flopper. And the only thing that most people can agree on is that Ron Paul is a freak and John McCain sucks. I can’t believe that that we as Iowa Republicans went through the entire caucus exercise and were unable to physically grow our party. How pathetic.

Why is it impossible for supporters of Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, and John McCain to unite around our Republican nominee? I’m not satisfied 100% with our nominee, but John McCain is a much better than 4 years of Barack Obama and his liberal agenda.

It is the mission of the Republican Party to attract as many people as possible to be active Republicans. It’s about winning elections folks, which is something we have not done in a long, long time. Where the “big tent” philosophy isn’t welcomed is when it comes to our candidates. Our Republican candidates are the products which the voters buy off the shelves, but it is important that those products contain the same common ingredients. It is the Republican Party’s responsibility to get as many people as possible to purchase their products.

It is now time to unite under the banner of the Republican Party and do what we can to elect our Republican candidates.

Pup Tent or Big Tent? You decied.

Another day, another story about the internal struggle within the Republican Party of Iowa.

In today’s episode Tom Beaumont from the Des Moines Register writes about what a couple of the Republican Party of Iowa’s largest donors have to think about the rightward drift of the GOP here in Iowa.

I’ll just cut to the point, Diane Crookam-Johnson from Oskaloosa is concerned that the party will focus too much of its effort on the social issues. Gary Kirke from West Des Moines, say’s it’s the economy stupid. It is clear that Crookham-Johnson is not going to give any additional funds to the party in this cycle and will probably continue to hold out until a Chair of her liking is elected. That’s here right as a donor. Kirke on the other hand is not going to make any brash decisions but is watching the situation.

It will probably surprise you to hear me say that the SCC and those in leadership positions need to listen to these donors. Now I’m not saying I support their positions on each and every issue, but the Iowa GOP can’t rob Peter to pay Paul when it comes to in building a political party.

So what does it mean? It means social conservatives and fiscal conservatives need to find a way to coexist. It’s not a foreign concept since the two main factions of the Republican Party have worked side by side since 1980. Social conservatives need to realize that they can not win elections only on abortion, gay marriage, and cloning. Those issues can help you win elections, and motivate a certain segment of the electorate. On the other hand, fiscal conservatives need to realize that the super majority of social conservatives are fiscal conservatives, it’s just not as big of a priority to them as the social issues are. Simply put, one can't live (win) without the other.

If the two work together we can win elections, if they don’t work together we can’t win anything.

I find it hard to believe that it’s the GOP with the internal bickering and not the Democrats. The GOP has just two main factions while the Dems have multiple factions, just look at their state central committee.

In addition to their district representation, they have statewide representation for the following groups.

Affirmative Action
American Indian
Blacks
Latino
Gay/Lesbian
Veterans

The Dems have many more factions to keep happy than the GOP, but they use these groups to organize, and unfortunately the Iowa GOP doesn’t have anything like this. Shouldn’t the GOP be organizing Blacks, Latinos, Veterans, American Indians, Farmers, Business Professionals, and Pro-Family folks? Sure some campaigns do this work, but shouldn’t it be an ongoing process of the party?

The one thing all Republicans should agree on is pocketbook issues. These issues should be the canopy of our big tent, and social conservatives need to be the main pole supporting the center of the canopy. The problem the GOP is having is we don’t have any of the side polls which has created a lot of stress between he canopy and the main pole.

I’m never a fan of the term “big tent ” but you need one to win elections. As a party we like to reminisce about Regan Democrats, but currently our party seems to be against building a winning coalition. To be successful we need to talk about those pocket book issues. Just look at what Mike Huckabee did here in Iowa. Sure he had the support of the social conservatives, but he also spent a lot of time talking about the struggles of the average American. He called for tax simplification, and tax relief. Those who thought he was a one trick pony were mistaken. He built a winning coalition in Iowa by getting social conservatives and people concerned about the economy and jobs to work side by side.

The Iowa GOP needs to strive to do the same, because if they do those donors like Crookham-Johnson and Kirke will feel included, not excluded. Then we can really start talking about winning some elections.

Krusty Konservative at RightOnline Konference

Approximately 500 conservatives looking to educate themselves about blogs and social networking are at RightOnline in Austin this weekend, 10 minutes from the Daily Kos' Netroots Nation conference. This is no coincidence, according to the WaPo, and I have to agree. Cosponsoring groups include Chicago's Sam Adams Alliance, the Leadership Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Heritage Foundation, and the Media Research Center.

Kicking off the day with the panel "Winning in a Web 2.0 World" were David All, a superstar in his own right with experience on and off capitol hill with new media and public relations; Rob Bluey, formerly of Human Events and now director of new media at Heritage Foundation; and David Almacy, former new media director at the Bush White House.

Other panels on Friday's schedule: "Blogging 101: Getting Started with Free & Paid Sites," "Total Reputation Management: Protecting Your Online Identity," "New Media and the Conservative Movement," and "Understanding and Critiquing Old Media."

Listen long enough—say, more than 10 minutes in most political circles—and you'll hear grumblings about the left's advantage with new media. The conference attendees I met today were, for the most part, average citizens who aren't satisfied with being passive grumblers. They want to learn what they can do to promote conservative ideas online, either in their communities as grassroots activists or at non-profits as employees and volunteers. While I don't see any conservative counterpart to the left's Daily Kos and MoveOn, our future is bright because conservatives comprehend the muscle of the Internet. Today my fellow conference attendees and I discussed different methods of harnessing its power for the good of the movement.

While a lot of the sites and suggestions were things I'm familiar with—YouTube, MeetUp, Facebook, MySpace—I'd like to highlight a few new methods of online communication.

• According to David All, Twitter will replace e-mail and text messages. Twitter is a free social networking and micro-blogging service that lets users send updates, limited to 140 characters, to other users.
• Eyeblast is the new YouTube—at least for conservatives. The brainchild of the Media Research Center, it's one-stop shopping for video uploads. Add your video to Eyeblast and you can quickly send (blast) it to Facebook, YouTube, etc. Like YouTube, groups can have channels (examples are Move American Forward and the Heritage Foundation). Unlike YouTube, your video has a chance of being featured on Eyeblast's homepage.
• Ning: Create your own social network for anything.
• Qik and Yahoo! Live: video upload sites.
• If your group has the resources and wants to spread the word about anything from a political campaign to a local petition, consider Google ads, which run on the right-hand column of any page when a Google search contains a key word of your choosing.

§ Wikipedia entry maintenance is a never-ending job but David All points out many people take its entries for fact—it's worth your time to contribute to pages relevant to your causes.

If you have the chance to attend a conference like this, don't delay! The networking capabilities are endless and the future is bright—remember, a few conservative heads open to new technology are better than all the MoveOn zombies in Texas this weekend.

SCC Preview

Tonight the Republican State Central Committee will meet in Des Moines. With the recent fireworks on the radio and an establishment vs. activist showdown at last week’s convention, everyone is expecting the fireworks to continue.

Be prepared to be disappointed.

I’m told the conservative leaning SCC has no intent to oust current RPI Chair Stew Iverson. Also remember that it was Scheffler and the ICA clan that voted Iverson into power. If it wasn’t for those ICA controlled votes Iverson wouldn’t be there. So if you are one that doesn’t like what’s going on at RPI or who the chairman is, they share some of the blame as well.

My friend, Leslie over at Flyover Country, brought up some grumblings about RPI Treasurer Gopal Krishna. All of the drama before, during, and after the convention centered around him. I think it is safe to say he is probably the instigator. Flyover makes the following point, “The Treasurer has the ability to either make things work smoothly, or he can gum up the process more than any other single figure in the party.”

They are absolutely spot on. I think the Committee as a whole is ready to move on, but that will be difficult if the Treasurer isn’t a team player. This is what people need to be on the look out for, and Mr. Krishna has a disruptive history with RPI. He was asked to leave in 2000 when he was the Co-Chair of the party.

While the focus last weekend was on Scheffler and the Committeeman and Committeewoman races, a trained eye saw the re-emergence of Gopal Krishna. It is he who can continue to cause problems within the party, not Scheffler, Lehman or other SCC members. And don’t be surprised if he doesn’t make a move to be the next chairman either.

Culver Names Flood Recovery Commision the Spanish worrd for River

So I’m walking around the Capitol a few minutes ago wondering why there are no free ice cream sundaes on a nice summer day like today like there are in April during the legislative session. Anyway, I then spot a sign for Culver’s new commission to deal with the recent floods. It’s called Rebuild Iowa Office, or RIO.

Really they thought it would be a good idea to use the Spanish word for river as the name of this group? Talk about poor taste.

Obama tells IDP to get lost, Yepsen’s still Lazy

Today in David Yepsen’s column he discusses the recent polling trends that shows Obama opening up a 10 point lead here in Iowa over John McCain. Once again, Yepsen proves how worthless and lazy he is.

If the Democrat primary taught us anything, it was that these polls are inaccurate, especially when dealing with Obama. Primary after primary the major news networks were unable to call the race because their exit polls didn’t match how people were actually voting. These reporters where shocked that someone might say one thing to a pollster and vote a different way.

Face it there were people who said they were supporting Obama who didn’t way when it came time to cast that vote. The same is going to happen in the general election. So is Iowa a battleground state? Yes, is Obama leading McCain? Sure, but it’s not in the bank.

There is also a pissing match in Iowa between the Obama Campaign and the Iowa Democrat Party who run their coordinated campaign. Obama doesn’t want any part of it.

It’s a big blow to IDP

Print em

Form everything I’ve seen in the last few weeks I think McCain is going to tab Romney as his running mate. It’s a gut feeling more than anything, but when you listen to McCain and certain states he brings up on the stump, like Michigan, I too can see the value in putting Romney on the ticket.

While I’m one of those guys who would like to see a new conservative face on the ticket, preferably from the south, I think McCain and his team is looking for a known entity. Romney also clearly wants the job as his people have done a tremendous job in raising his name every single time this issue is raised.

With Romney, McCain gets a running mate who is younger, has strong connections to states like Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, and Utah, is a proven fundraiser, and most importantly has shown the ability to stay on message, an important trait in a VP nominee.

Our good friend Chris Cillizza has already written about the positive attributes Romney would bring to the ticket, so I thought I’d focus on a few different issues in regards to a McCain/Romney ticket

• The economy is going to be the biggest issues in this election. Adding Romney to the ticket trumps anyone the Obama campaign could put as their VP in terms of a candidate who understands how to get America moving again.

• It seems that traditional political thinking is upside down this year so I think Romney’s Mormon religion is a plus. While his religion will help the McCain/Romney ticket in states like Utah and Nevada which have large Mormon populations, Romney was able to attract a lot of Catholics when campaigning here in Iowa, just look at the counties he won. The Catholic vote in the past two presidential campaigns has been highly sought after so don’t be surprised if this is a factor. Additionally, adding a Mormon to the ticket will increase the chatter on the candidate’s faith. It will be hard to bring up Mitt’s Mormonism without talking about Obama’s religious background.

• The Olympics. Maybe I’m nuts but as the entire world focuses on the Summer Olympics McCain would be smart to tab Romney who’s most noticeable achievement was his turnaround of the Salt Lake City games. While what he did in 2002 was remarkable, our economy needs turnaround.
  
  
• The one question that remains is how the addition of Romney would affect the 2012 nominating calendar which will be approved at the National Convention. The easy answer is that he would support Iowa’s status as First in the Nation since he invested a lot here and did well. But if he is looking at a 2012 run if the McCain/Romney ticket isn’t successful, he might not back Iowa since Huckabee was so strong here. Face it, Iowa and New Hampshire didn’t treat him too well so he might be more sympathetic to states like Michigan over Iowa and New Hampshire.

Anyway, my money is on Mitt.

So, Maybe the Part About Barry Wearing a Dress is Accurate…

I thought I was sensitive, but then I read about the reaction to The New Yorker kover featuring Barry and wife, and I realized that Barack Obama and his supporters have the emotional maturity of a bunch of 3rd grade girls.

It’s kalled satire people. The whole point of it is to point out absurdity. The New Yorker is not actually kalling him a Muslim or his wife a militant feminazi. They’re making fun of the people who do think that. What’s he going to do when someone actually kriticizes him for real?

How would he like to be Pres. Bush? There are political kartoons about him all the time saying outrageous things, like that he’s ambivalent about, or is even happy about, our soldiers dying at war. Basically, he’s made out to be a murderer on a daily basis (which I think is totally unfair), and you don’t see him whining.

Some advice for Barry: get some thicker skin or go home. You’re playing with the big boys now, and you probably don’t want to be seen as a whiner.

Oops, too late.

Republican Convention Wrap Up

Coronation or Convention? If you think I’m referring to the victories of the social conservatives at the state convention you are mistaken. I’m referring to the fact that King was everywhere doing everything.

We all know that Congressman King would never miss a convention. While some people think it’s something to show your face at and escape, King was camped out there morning, noon, and night which is nothing new for our favorite congressman.

King hosted a pancake breakfast before the convention started on Saturday morning at Hy-Vee Hall, addressed the crowed early in the morning, introduced 2^nd CD candidate Mariannette Miller-Meeks, spoke at the lunch, and was involved with every aspect of the convention, even the junior delegates.

The reason King is loved by the activists is because he shows them that he cares. He talks to them, he motivates them, and he hangs out with them. What the media and the Democrats don’t understand about King is that he has earned his rock star status by his work ethic, not just his conservative convictions. If King ever decides to run for statewide office, he will be a force to be reckoned with.

King’s presence probably was highlighted by Senator Grassley being stuck in an airport and Congressman Latham not being able to change his plans when the convention was rescheduled.

Convention Chaos: Sometimes it’s the littlest of things that can cause the hiccups. Apparently there were no chairs put out for Audubon and Winnebago counties, and some counties didn’t have enough chairs to seat their delegation. I really don’t understand how these things happen. What resulted were some confusing votes on the convention rules. Not a good way to start off the morning.

Committeeman and Committeewoman Election: To some of us, this was going to be the most interesting part of the day. It became clear after the Deace radio program that Scheffler and Lehman were the frontrunners. The two of them combined to make a tremendous team that would be hard to beat in a convention that was dominated by social conservatives, and both easily won. Both Scheffler and Lehman also gave better speeches than there opponents, which is important in convention races.

Roberts didn’t do himself any favors by going on Deace’s program on Friday night. While delegates were driving in from around the state, you have to think that some of them would be listening to Deace’s program. Roberts came off as old, tired, and incoherent. Roberts’ speech at the convention was very similar. To me, it was sad to see it end for Roberts in such a manner. Roberts has been an entrenched part of the Republican Party for decades. Near the end of his time allotment Roberts began to round into form. He was gracious, and thankful for the opportunity to serve his party. While I might not always agree with Roberts, he is the epitome of a statesman. Both Lehman and Scheffler would be well served to learn from Roberts’ example.

As you all know Sandy Greiner was my pick for Committeewoman. Her race was no doubt an uphill battler when running against a ticket of social conservative activist that work for the Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowa Right to life. If you know Sandy, you know that she will continue to work her tail off for our Republican candidates.

Did you know Huckabee rhymes with Nominee? Mike Huckabee attended the convention on behalf of the McCain campaign. Like always, he delivered, and the convention delegates responded. Huckabee encouraged the convention delegates to unite behind John McCain because the alternative is Barack Obama and the liberal judges he would appoint.

There is no doubt, Mike Huckabee will run for president again, and in Iowa, he will come in as the frontrunner to win the Iowa caucuses. There is no doubt that the Republican Party in Iowa and nationally is adrift. But, for the few minutes that Huckabee spoke, you could see the light at the end of the tunnel. Huckabee has a way of breaking down the traditional partisan barriers by being able to communicate with Joe and Betty Mainstreet. He is also able promote his conservative convictions in a way that doesn’t scare or turn off people who might not be motivated by the social issues. Iowa Republicans need to take a page from Huckabee and learn how to campaign on traditional values in today’s highly partisan political environment in a kinder, gentler way.

The problem with McCain surrogates is that they often times remind us that we are not really excited about our nominee. It’s not typical to be more excited about seeing a surrogate than the nominee, but that was the feeling in Hall B on Saturday morning.

Vaudt and Northey: Iowa Republicans are blessed to have 2 great statewide officials in Nothey and Vaudt. Both are extremely competent in their positions and great communicators on the issues they deal with day in and day out. Vaudt is the only elected official in Iowa (both Democrat and Republican) with a sense of style. These two have become Republican Rock Stars.

Mariannette Miller-Meeks: It was interesting that Miller-Meeks spoke in the morning before lunch, while the other non-incumbents spoke after lunch. Miller-Meeks continued to show the differences between her and the other candidates at the convention. The most noticeable part of the Miller-Meeks campaign was their ambulance parked in the corner of the convention hall as their base of operation.

When speaking to the convention delegates Miller-Meeks was the only candidate not to use the podium, and instead opted for the wireless mic that allowed her to move to the front of the stage, which showcased her speaking abilities. The Miller-Meeks team also was the only campaign that made it seem like a convention. They had the 2^nd district delegates armed with placards when she spoke, which was a nice touch. Miller-Meeks was introduced by Congressman King which sent a good message to social conservatives who made up the majority of the convention delegates.

It’s easy to see why people think Miller-Meeks has a chance in this political environment; she’s different from any other candidate Republicans have ever put up against a sitting congressman.

Chris Reed: Some say people just are not excited about Chris Reed, but that wasn’t the case at the convention. Reed was the only statewide candidate to speak to the convention delegates on Saturday and you could feel the difference in the room when Reed took the stage and talked about providing some real change in Washington DC by sending 34 year incumbent Tom Harkin back home. Don’t worry folks; he’s not coming back to Iowa. Heck this race is like a 2 for 1. Defeat Harkin, and I’m sure his wife gives up her seat on the Board of Regents since it will be too costly to travel to the meetings from the Bahamas, unless Conoco Phillips will let her use the corporate jet.

David Hartsuch: Out of all of our challenger candidates, Hartsuch is the one who needs to make up the most ground. He didn’t have any signage and told the audience that he made his formal announcement that he was running on Friday. It was also clear that Hartsuch is basing his campaign around energy costs and energy independence rather than the social issues that have made him a champion of the social conservatives. While he is a long shot, with escalating gas prices and the Democrats reluctance to do any thing about it who knows, it could be a hostile environment for incumbents this fall, and Hartsuch could pull an upset.

Kim Schmett: For me Schmett was the surprise of the convention. When he started his speech I wasn’t too impressed. He asked for a moment of silence for Boswell as he is dealing with some serious health issues, but then unveiled a video “debate” between him and Boswell which was absolutely hilarious. If they send it to me I’ll post it right away. Krusty Kudos to the Schmett team for thinking outside the box on their campaign.

ICA Domination: The Iowa Christian Alliance once again was the only organization to work the convention in terms of getting their people elected as delegates, electors, and to the nominating committee. For all those people who complain about it, you have one option: out- work them. The biggest win they had was the election of Steve Scheffler and Kim Lehman to serve as National Committeeman and Committeewoman. If you wanted to give the ICA a score, it would have to be 96 out of 100. They only had a couple of people beat their slate to serve on the nominating committee, and the At-Large slate was approved except for Gopal Krishna who was removed for John Ortega. Ortega nominated Roberts.

Why ICA should be Worried: While victorious, there is some serious rumblings from some delegates that they didn’t like how ICA operated throughout the convention process. As I said above, the only way to beat them is to out-work them, but they made some enemies this time around. Also Scheffler and Lehman now have to prove that the delegates were correct in electing them. It’s going to be a tough row to hoe for them in my opinion. They are now “the party” and not ICA and IRL officials; this role is something they will need to adapt to quickly.

What’s next? Special Election to fill Scheffler’s Seat on the SCC: The drama never ends. Roberts serves through the National Convention so maybe the special election will not be for a while, I don’t know. However with the addition of Kim Lehman to the State Central Committee is seems as if ICA controls at least 10 of the 17 votes on the committee if not more. So will they try to add to their majority or will the so called “country clubbers” strike back?

Sparks fly hours before Republican State Convention

I had been planning a preview of the State Convention for today all week, but after listening to Steve Deace’s radio program yesterday I had to throw away what I had prepared and start over.

Yesterday Deace spent two hours with State Party Chair Stewart Iverson, Polk County Chair Ted Sporer, Iowa Right to Life Leader and Candidate for National Committeewoman Kim Lehman, and Iowa Christian Alliance President and Candidate for National Committeeman Steve Scheffler. All I can say it’s a good thing WHO’s radio studios are nice and spacious because that a lot of people with big egos in the same room at the same time. If you missed it you can listen to the show here.

Anyway, it’s always a good day when Krusty Konservative gets a shout out over the 50,000 watts of WHO Radio. They were discussing my post about the National Committeeman race between Steve Scheffler and Steve Roberts, and more specifically my characterization of Roberts being the Establishment candidate, and Scheffler the being the Activist candidate, which I believe is not an insult or slight to either man, just simply the truth.

I know some of my readers have pointed out that Scheffler is the longest serving member of the State Central Committee, and thus part of the establishment, but that’s not what I’m getting at. Scheffler is probably the most connected Republican activist in the state. Love him or hate him, but Steve has worked for what he has and that is a following of the most conservative Republican activists in the state, which is why I characterize him as the Activist candidate.

Now is either Steve running for National Committeeman perfect? No, but both have served the Republican Party well for a number of years.

My problem with Roberts is he’s not a very good cheerleader. In January of this year his quote to the Des Moines Register was, “We'll be lucky with anything we get this year.” He was talking about the state of Republican politics in the state. 11 months before the election it seemed as if he was throwing in the towel.

On the other hand you have Scheffler and his hatred of what he calls “Country Club Republicans,” meaning those stand for nothing pro gay marriage, pro abortion candidates and activists who want to see a watered down Republican Party. Scheffler had the following quote in the main stream media before the caucuses about Rudy Giuliani, “If our party nominates this guy, we will see a bloodbath at the polls like we’ve never seen before.”

So the choice really boils down to what type of Committeeman do we want? Do we want a guy who will support anyone with an “R” behind their name, or do we want a Committeeman who thinks that to win elections our candidates need be in line with our core Republican principles? I think you know where I’m at on that one.

The most important role that the Committeeman and Committeewoman are involved in is keeping Iowa’s First in the Nation Status. While Roberts has been they guy at all the meetings, I was forwarded an endorsement letter that states that it was Scheffler, not Roberts who lead the charge to for Iowans to caucus on January 3^rd, which proved to be a great call on his part.

As for the National Committeewoman race, you all know that my pick is Sandy Greiner. While Kim Lehman is a nice lady who is good on the issues, I think she would be better off to serve on the State Central Committee before representing the entire state as National Committeewoman.

Sandy Greiner is just as conservative as Lehman, but she also brings with her some great qualifications. As a legislator she has had to work with her collogues to pass legislation, our next National Committeewoman will have to work with other states if and sell them on why Iowa is the right place to start our presidential election process. She has also served as Secretary of the National Rules committee in 2004. That experience will in invaluable as that committee will deicide the 2012 nomination calendar.

Back to the fireworks

Deace’s show yesterday was entertaining and troubling all at the same time. I can only imagine the Democrats laughing as we Republicans continue to air our dirty laundry on the largest radio station in the Midwest. While I understand that Lehman and Scheffler were there to promote their candidacies for Committeeman and Committeewoman, and Sporer is there to voice his concern about the direction of the party, Iverson just got pummeled, which makes me wonder why he even did the interview, its not like Deace hides his agenda.

Iverson was called out on a number of issues. Most notably the Yepsen June 12^th article about the feud between the Grassroots Social Conservatives and people like Iverson. Iverson stated that Yepsen’s account of what transpired at the ICA meeting was false, but them who fed the misinformation to Yepsen? There was also a long discussion about Iverson’s time as Senate Majority leader and how he ran his caucus. Lehman shared a story about how the Republican led senate could not take up a bill providing a pro-life license plate.

A good State Convention is one that makes very little news, unless the nominee drops by to say hello. If our convention is anything like the two hours of Deace we are in for a long, long day. No matter what the state of the Party and the leadership in control, we must rally around our candidates and help them be successful in November, to do otherwise is to let Chet Culver and the liberal Democrats be entrenched for decades.

Obama: Americans Suck

Is this really the directions we want our country to go?

Ronald Reagan never apologized for being American, he did the opposite, he lifted the American people by saying this is the greatest country on the face of the earth.

I’ll never apologize for being an American, and I’ll never vote for a Presidential Candidate who thinks we should apologize for being an American either.

Obama – The First Castrated President?

Well if Jessie Jackson gets his way…

To me this is just reinforces my belief that Barack Obama’s campaign will go down as the biggest flop in the history of modern day campaigns.

Already this year Obama has had to deal with comments his wife made about not being proud of being an American until her husbands run for President. Obama’s mentor and confidant Rev. Wright, shows us why Michelle Obama might feel that way after the American people see first hand Wright’s anti-American sermons. Now Jessie Jackson opens his trap and spews his frustrations about Obama.

The Obama campaign likes to insinuate that the McCain campaign, or Republican’s in general, are making race an issues in this election. That couldn’t be farther from the truth, it’s the people closest to Obama, his wife, his preacher, and Jessie Jackson who keep bringing it up. It seems to me he has a Chicago problem and the more incidents like this, the more likely his campaign will self implode.

When I listen to what Jessie Jackson I think he’s calling Obama an Uncle Tom. Now don’t believe for a second that this was the first time Jessie Jackson shared his true feeling about Obama. What do you think he is saying in private amongst friends?

Obama can draw large crowds and give a rousing speech, but when it comes to debates and staying on message he is terrible. Also while the American people are frustrated about high energy costs, he remains silent but pledges to increase fuel mileage in cars in the next 18 years.

GOP National Committeeman

One of the things I’m looking forward to at this weekends Republican Convention is the race for National Committeeman. As I wrote before, my pick for the National Committeewoman is State Representative Sandy Greiner. Many people thought that Steve Roberts, the current Committeeman was going to be unopposed, but the rescheduling of the convention due to the floods exposed Steve Scheffler’s stealth campaign for the spot.

The race between Scheffler and Roberts represents the classic battle between Conservative Activism (Scheffler) vs. Moderate Establishment (Roberts). Both men have been involved in Republican politics in Iowa for decades. Robert’s cut his teeth with Governor Ray, Scheffler made his mark as a conservative activist with Pat Robertson.

Both have been communicating with delegates via mail, phone, and appearances at county central committee meetings. A loyal Krustacean forwarded me an email from Roberts yesterday, they were a little pissed that Roberts didn’t use the BCC field and exposed all of the addresses he sent his letter two. Not a good way to make friends.

Anyway, Roberts’ letter stresses his long career as Committeeman and takes the following jab at Scheffler.

“Just like most of you, I have done all of this as a volunteer, receiving no compensation, except the satisfaction of working with wonderful people across this great state on a common purpose to elect Republicans to office at all so that our principals and philosophies can be put into actual practice. For me, while various interest groups that support the Republican Party are vital to the success of the Party, the Iowa Republican Party was and is my first and only priority, because I believe as the Bible says that, “No man can serve two masters.”

The criticism is aimed at Scheffler’s involvement with the Iowa Christian Alliance, and his history of being outspoken regarding candidates that don’t line up with his beliefs.

Scheffler on the other hand is playing to his base by saying that Roberts is a squishy moderate that believes in a top down approach to party organization. The following is from Scheffler’s email.

“The past few weeks have made it very clear that the Establishment Republicans see retaining this office as crucial to having a Party structure that flows from top down. In other words, the Establishment wants all decisions to be made by them. The message is that grassroots workers are not important and that, of course, we are welcome to do the hard work, but at the same time, we should be seen but not heard. In addition, it is evident that all Establishment Republicans, which would include those who are not pro-life and see social issues as negatives for the Party, are supporting my competitor.”

As I stated above this will be one of the most interesting parts of the convention. Scheffler’s strength is that he is known by the activist in the party, he’s one of them. Robert’s on the other hand hasn’t done the traveling that Scheffler has been doing for years until lately. I’m told Robert’s is favored by the Party Leadership.

Governor Gronstal?

Since returning home I’ve had a chance to catch up on the newspaper and what I recorded while I was gone. One of the most interesting political stories in Iowa that is out there is Governor Culver’s feud with the employee unions. Last weekend Iowa Press showcased two union leaders their frustration with Governor Culver was obvious. Then I saw yesterdays milk carton story, which my friend Nathan wrote about over on Battleground Iowa.

It seems to me that big labor is responding to the Yepsen’s of the world who thought that the recent floods would ease the tensions between the Governor and the unions. Simply put these guys are pissed off over the governor’s veto of the expansion of the collective bargaining bill, and Culver has made it worse by blowing these guys off. All of this leads me to think that Chet Culver could have a primary on his hands in 2010 unless he bows down and kisses the union leaders ring.

Culver is in a tough spot politically. First, he did the right thing by vetoing the bill, but in doing so he pissed off his base. For example, how do you think the Iowa Family Policy Center folks would respond to a Republican Governor who vetoed a pro-life bill? That’s right, with a primary.

So who could the unions get to primary Culver? It’s not as hard as one might think. The conversation starts and ends with Mike Gronstal.

Do you really think a guy like Gronstal is content with being the top dawg in the Senate for the rest of his political career? His other options would be to run against Grassley or King, that can’t be appealing. He could wait for Harkin to retire or to be beaten, but that’s at least 6 years away. That leaves him with one option, to primary Chet Culver.

I think he’s game as long as the unions line up to back his play. Also Gronstal would not have to give up his Senate Seat to primary Culver.

2010 is going to be fun folks!

The Liberals are happy about $4 gas.

Sorry, the long weekend overlapped into today, so I’m a bit tardy on today’s post. Anyway I’m still trying to determine what to write. The $4 gas is on the top of my mind as it cost me a lot to travel this weekend. Think about it, if you put 35,000 miles on your car in a year it will cost you almost $5k. Ouch. So when I finally get home and realize I’m broke, I open up the laptop to find an article by Time Magazine entitled the 10 Good things about $4 gasoline.

Here are their reasons:

1. Globalized Jobs Return Home
Says Who? The reason the jobs leave in the first place is for cheap labor, reduced regulations, and a better business climate. Increased energy costs are gong to force more businesses to fold or more production over-seas. If you are one of the 500.000 or so who work for Ford and Chevy $4 gas has you very worried.

2. Sprawl Stalls
Yeah I get it, people can’t afford to build new homes, so let’s celebrate! I know some people hate “urban sprawl,” but what would the Des Moines metro be with out Jordan Creek? Also while some have poked fun at the fall of Regency Homes, it’s never funny when someone loses their job.

3. Four-Day Work Weeks
What’s the point if I can’t travel anywhere, oh that’s right, more time to balance my check book and see how much money I don’t have. Are there saving to be made with a 4 day work week? Probably, but we need businesses to be successful so in turn they can provide good wages and benefits to their workers.

4. Less Pollution
Oh so the Chinese are going to stop dumping human, industrial, and agricultural waste into their rivers and streams? I’m all for a clean environment, but I’m sick and tired of the liberals in office and in the media telling me I’m the root cause of global warming.

5. More Frugality
This one is my favorite, and I’ll be the first one to say bull$hit. One would hope folks would tighten up their spending habits, but this morning at Casey’s as I bought some of their wonderful breakfast pizza, the gal in front of me is complaining about the price of gas but bought 3 packs of cigs. Hey lady, stop the nasty habit and you might have some more coin in your pocket. I’m not blameless either, why am I complaining when I could have made breakfast at home…

6. Fewer Traffic Deaths
Whatever. While road rage might be reduced, pump rage is on the increase and so is crime. So when the local meth junkie feels the effects of $4 dollar gas I assume instead of reducing his spending, he will probably break in to my garage and steal my stuff which I could purchase back at the pawn shop, or he will just break into the local pharmacy and steal some cash and Sudafed.

7. Cheaper Insurance
Another myth, do you really think the insurance company is going to cut your rate because your driving less? I don’t because their energy costs are going up just like mine and they will simply pass it on to the consumer, something Joe & Sally American can’t do.

8. Less Traffic
I have not seen any evidence of this at all. Plus I’m sure the gas stations, casinos, and tourist attractions are thrilled that people can’t afford to drive.

9. More Cops on the Beat
In rural America that’s not a good thing. Again, if law enforcement is struggling to fuel its fleet they will either raise my taxes, or provide less service which would increase crime. There are no winners there.

10. Less Obesity
I’ll believe it when I see it. Sure people might not be eating out, but that doesn’t mean they are going to all of a sudden live a healthy lifestyle. K’mon folks.

What pisses me off about articles like this is that they have no concept of what typical American’s are like. I’m sure as bunch of Liberals all sat around a table and said, “hey, we should write a story about how great $4 gas is.” They are obviously as out of touch as the democrats in Washington are. They offer no solutions, the just tell people to grab their ankles and take it.

Krusty's Day Before the Long Weekend Kaption Kontest!

FYI, the one on the right is our esteemed lieutenant governor. This has some serious potential people. Don't let me down.

I’ll take a pass on the McCain-Romney ticket.

There has been a lot of chatter this week about Mitt Romney being on the top of McCain’s short list of potential running mates. The most obvious reason for tabbing Romney is money, and you can’t spell Romney with out a m-o-n-e & y. I’ve read some reports that think Romney alone could raise $60M for the ticket, and impressive number no doubt, but I find this line of thinking to be intellectually lazy.

I find it a little hard to believe that Romney would be able to raise that sort of money when he was unable to raise those types of dollars for his own campaign, even during the summer and fall of 2007 when he was the klear front runner for the Republican nomination. Additionally, if he kould have raised that $60M for his own kampaign he could have easily killed off McCain in the summer which would have prevented McCain from being able to regroup in New Hampshire.

Now Romney did end up kollecting over $60M in contributions to go along with his personal loans to his kampaign of $44.6M, but not everyone who gave to Romney will automatically give to a McCain-Romney ticket, and as noted in this article, many people who backed other kandidates are already kontributing to McCain anyway.

My point is whoever McCain tabs to be his running mate will help his kampaign raise money, its not as if Mitt Romney is the only guy out there that can raise money. And while nobody has mentioned it, Romney is also not going to be loaning any of his fortune to a McCain-Romney kampaign.

Even with the money factor out of the equation, Romney still has plenty of strengths. He’s not going to karry Massachusetts, but kould help McCain in states like Utah, Nevada, Michigan, and Iowa. Romney would also help McCain solidify the free-market konservatives who remain leery of McCain.

So it seems like a natural fit, and it’s obvious that Romney and his team want it badly; where else do you think this chatter is koming from? But for all of the gaps Romney can fill for McCain he still karries his own baggage, which in the end lead to his defeat in Iowa.

There are his kontributions to Planned Parenthood, the $50 deductible for an abortion under his health kare plan, his flip flops on the abortion issue from his kampaigns in Massachusetts to his presidential kampaign, and him distancing himself from Reagan-Bush when he ran for senate. Do we really need to go through all of this again? And if you don’t think the Obama will use this to drive a wedge between the Republican ticket and evangelical voters your kidding yourself.

The Republican Party needs a new face to emerge, and McCain can hand pick the person he wants. We need the excitement that comes with getting to know a new person. I like Mitt Romney, but he’s not the fresh face we need at this critical time.