This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.


The Savage Republican



Local Attractions

Favorite Links

Remember, Being a Savage Republican is not where you are from, but what you believe.


Previous Posts

Archives


Friday, February 08, 2008

Too slothful, too ignorant, too complacent to be inconvenienced to vote

The caucuses are over in MN. The whining started before the straw poll votes on all the Post-It Notes were even tallied.
Calls for a Presidential Primary were rampant, especially from the DFL . And why these rising voices against being "disenfranchised"? Because people were "inconvenienced".
Here are some comments from the Prairie Pravda story linked above with my thoughts:
"
Unfortunately, my voice could not be heard in the caucus last night. I showed up at the precinct to find that I had to sit through an hour meeting and THEN vote. Well, this just didn't suit my schedule (due to a prior commitment) and I had to leave. -mollymay" "Just didn't fit my schedule". A splendid reason to abolish a grassroots system of political involvement from people in your very neighborhood. Maybe you could let your local party leaders know your schedule in advance so the whole state could be run for your convenience. Please get back to us when your schedule permits.
"
The Republican caucus system is ALREADY not for everyone ... an evening caucus at a set time already favors (a) those who aren't going to have to hire a babysitter in order to go (b) those with no other obligations in the evening. A primary that is open all day enables everyone to find a time to go and vote.-spmerrill" Let me see if I have this straight- here is a date certain at a time certain that is set months ahead. And there are some people who "aren't going to hire a babysitter" seems like a choice to me. These people chose not to hire a babysitter. Good for them. A choice. And if they chose to bring their children, I didn't see, I didn't post, I wasn't asked to post and I wouldn't post a "No Children Allowed" sign. What's the problem here? I saw plenty of children at our caucuses. And "those with no other obligations in the evening"? Again, how important is it for you to get to your caucus? Seems like spmerrill made a choice. And the caucus was number three in importance. Also seems that spmerrill was looking for the wrong caucus. Spmerrill is right about the fact that the Republican caucus system is ALREADY not for everyone- Whiny snivelers like spmerrill: the DFL caucuses are for you. Go there and whine.
"
I was denied the right to partiapate(sic) because I work nights and am unable to attend the caucuses without getting a blemish on my work record-busyboybill" Dear victim busyboybill you whiney sniveler or sniveling whiner (we believe in diversity, pick a title you like)- don't know how to break this to you, but you do not a right to caucus. Plus you are exactly what we've come to expect from a public education. You did have a right to choose which was more important to you: attend a caucus or get a blemish on your work record. You chose what worked for you. You chose that job. That night job. With no blemishes (according to you). If night work proves a disadvantage to you, get another job. But quit sniveling while you whine. Go to the little whiney girls caucus: the DFL. Meanwhile, shaddup!
"
Primaries are a much more democratic way to select. Many people are either intimidated by caucuses, or unable to attend.-Biddie" Ah Biddie, you sniveling whiner. So, you prefer something other than YOUR neighbors getting together and discussing what's important to YOUR neighbors. It's better to have a primary with a slick run media campaign with sound bites that don't really and never did inform voters? What on earth is more democratic that the people that live on each side of you meet to discuss and vote on issues important to them? True grassroots politics going ground-up is less democratic? The reason someone is "unable to attend" is because they are in a coma, trying to extricate themselves from a flaming car wreck, in prison, dead (not an excuse not to vote for a Democrat however) or they choose not to attend. And what do you mean they're "intimidated"? Intimidated by sitting on their butts and listening and putting a mark on a small paper ballot? That intimidates them? Yikes! These people must be miserable with the thought of drowning in a shower or in a hard rainstorm. Ah, but wait: when we finally have a Universal Health Care system with all the panache' and success of the Canadian health care system, delivered by the candidates at your DFL caucus, all those phobias can finally be addressed. In the meantime, they still need to stop sniveling while they whine. And you: stop whining while you snivel. Get over to your next intimidating DFL caucus. Hope you "feel" like you're able to attend. And I hope that you don't "feel" intimidated.
Reading these snivelings from these whiners (or whining from these snivelers) goes to prove that we need "reasonable" controls on voting and caucus attending.
I will not be shocked when these little whiney girls want to have a law passed where they can get decaf soy milk lattes after 6:00 p.m if they attend their non-intimidating, mandated provided child care at their conveniently scheduled , fragrance free, affirmative action cleared, empowering, non-judgmental, bio-diverse, non-speciism, PETA, AFSCME,NEA approved, non-peanut snack provided caucuses that has a reduced carbon footprint.
In the meantime, let the adults attend to the business of caucuses.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

The Dangers of having Software and Time

So the theory floated that week and today is that Romney is losing because of some great conspiracy between McCain and Huckabee to use Huckabee to split the conservative vote.

A look at super Tuesday victories should put that to rest, Huckabee won conservative states, Romney did not.
But lets put the theory to a test - I looked at all the 2004 red states.
Throwing out Arkansas and Arizona because of home field advantage for Huckabee and McCain (didn't have to throw out any Romney because his home field is blue).

So I took a look at the rest:
In every red state that Huckabee won, Romney came in third.
How about red McCain states? Nope same result Romney in third.
In the few red states that Romney won, Huckabee came in second in each.

So who is hurting who?

It appears that the longer Romney stays in - the more he insure a McCain victory.
Add that to Fred work in S.C. and it looks like one group is doing there best to get McCain elected.

McCain has the Main Stream Media - Romney has money and the alternative media and yet Huckabee keeps beating them both. Maybe this grassroots thing really works.

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Precinct caucuses

Here in Scott County, MN (the fastest growing county in MN) we caucused . We caucus below the county level by state Senate Districts (ours being Senate District 35). In my city, savage, we have seven caucus districts. We had well over 300 attendees, many first time.
The big thing was the Presidential Preference Poll. I had to explain a few times that the preferential poll is non-binding and is only a snapshot. Here is the breakdown:
Huckabee 62
Keyes 1
McCain 64
Paul 44
Thompson 1
Uncommitted 1
Romney 181
Romney out polled all other candidates combined 181-173.
I was quite pleasantly surprised.
That being said, I had the opportunity to talk to my Republican "Mom" as she was leaving. I told her that basically I/we were facing the same dilemma as Republicans that Republicans will face in November. I support Romney because he's not McCain. He's certainly a decent man, but not near the conservative I'd want. But, he's the lesser of two evils.
And in November I'll have that same bad choice again: speed toward the cliff at a Barack Obama/Paul Wellstone 192 mph or slow down to a Norm Coleman/Tim Pawlenty 137 mph.
P.S. Just heard NARN say that someone is a recovering Fred Head. Same here. My only excitement is stopping McCain.
And I don't ever want to hear again "Vote For Me. It Will Be Worse With The Other Guy" as a campaign slogan. Sounds like 2006 redux again for me as a conservative.
But, I promise I will vote on November 4th.
Go listen to Bill Bennett tomorrow morning on AM1280 The Patriot. He'll give cogent analysis.

Another reflection

Chad the elder has a very interesting post.

http://www.fraterslibertas.com/2008/02/between-lose-and-hard-case.html

While I don't agree completely with his over premise (that McCain is the only one who can win), I think he has a point with this:
- Romney is a good man with many fine qualities. But if I'm going to sign up for a sacrificial defeat of Goldwater-like proportions, I want it to be with a man of Goldwater-like convictions. With the prospects of a McCain nomination looming ever closer, a number of pundits are suddenly touting Romney as some kind of conservative standard bearer. Yet most of them kept their distance from Romney for all these months hoping for a real conservative to support. Why? Because they doubt if this latest incarnation of Romney is the real deal. There can be a certain nobility and honor in defeat, but not by going down with The Mitt.


That is one of the reason I am supporting Huckabee - He has a proven track record on key issue to me: Life, 2nd Amendment, States Rights and he has not changed his story.

You can disagree with his vision, but a least it is a consistent vision.

I will take pride that I stood for life and honor.