It's the Numbers

A candidate was running for office. He had all of the issues down pat. A good conservative, with a proper world view on Natural Law.

A consultant told him. You can't win did you see the numbers? The numbers? Said the candidate. What do you mean? You are way too conservative for this race. The numbers all say the you are all ready in the hole 12% percent before you even begin. The Democrats out number the Republicans in your race by 12%. The polls also show that the voters in your race are moderates. You have no chance.

The candidate was stunned. How can this be? Reagan always won in this District. The candidate then thought, I know Regan must have won because Tax Relief, Gun Rights, and Pro Life supporters backed him in this district.

The consultant didn't know what to say. How could he tell the candidate that those advocacy groups have supported the Democrat in this race ever since Reagan retired as President? It didn't make sense. How do I explain this?

The Consultant decided to tell the truth. The truth is, that when Reagan was President, many of those groups were hungry, and idealistic. They were in politics for the issues. Then the money started coming in from people who believed in their cause.

It worked, Reagan got their issues to the fore front of the American Conscience, and more money came, in bigger amounts per donor than before, because they were effective advocacy groups. There is nothing wrong with this, they were doing a good job, and deserved to be rewarded accordingly.

But something happened along the way. Many of the founders of these advocacy groups retired, and turned the organizations over to others, who were not there during the early years. Most businesses are not run as well, by the people who take them over from the founder. They usually don't have the same motivations, that got them into the business, that their predecessor did. These newbies had gotten used to a certain level of income. Also if the groups funding dropped and they lost influence in the system, they would be the ones who destroyed the firm. They would be losers.

So they took the lazy approach. What are the registration numbers? The numbers show Democrat? Well lets find a Democrat who will vote on my issue, and get him in there. What about the other issues? To heck with that. I am responsible for keeping a prominent firm in my industry alive, and I am not going to take the chances that my founder took, on guys with bad registration numbers like Reagan. My founder had nothing to lose, I do.

So that is how you end up with Conservative organizations you could trust, when Reagan was President, supporting Liberals. It is about MY issue advocacy firm and nothing else. They can vote for tax relief, and vote against gun rights, and right to life. They can vote for a right to life, and vote against tax relief, and gun rights. They can vote for gun rights and vote against tax relief, and a right to life. These groups believe there will never be another Ronald Reagan, who was right on all of those issues. Besides many of the largest donors for these firms didn't like Reagan. He was a bit too small town for them.

One thing we can thank a system like this for, is there will probably be a new major party in Iowa come November 3rd. The odds are pretty good, that to be in that party you will have to be for tax relief, a right to life, and gun rights. One or two out of three will not count. Otherwise you wouldn't have any need for the new party. The other two will give you the single issue you are looking for.

The Convention and Varnum Revenge

There is quite a debate going on right now over the possibility of a State Constitutional Convention, and the Judge Retention Vote. The two are interrelated, but it is leading to some interesting voting trends the year.

I voted FOR the Convention because I believe it will be a vehicle that will lead to some permanent solutions, to problems we are having in this state. I also voted no on EVERY judge on the ballot. But, not out of the Varnum Revenge that the Pro Retention, and Judiciary Ruling Class claims.

I have been voting every judge out for a number of years now. If I had a relative who was a judge. I would vote that relative out, simply to get them back to earning an honest living. All joking aside. The best way to keep our system clean is to Term Limit everyone. The judge retention vote is how the judges are term limited. I believe in giving We the People more power, by letting their duly elected Governor choose whether any sitting judge should be reappointed. Which of course we do need to change that selection process, since it truly does not serve We the People. A Convention is a good way to change that process.

The Judge retention vote, is the beginning battle, in whether we are going to follow the US Constitution or not. It is Un Constitutional for people to take titles of Nobility in this country. Since anyone with a legal degree, becomes an Esquire, we are talking about a Judicial Branch that is seeking to institute a ruling, or aristocratic class of people, our ancestors left their homelands to get away from.

To my Non Interventionist friends. Since I probably do not need to take my shoes off, to count the number of countries in this world that are Republics based on the Rule of Natural Law. For us to not stand up for that principle World Wide, is simply not who we are. Who will stick up for current legal immigrants who have come here for the same reasons that our founders did? Immigrants from Iraq, Afghanistan, China, North Korea, Viet Nam, come to mind off hand.

Well back on topic. Sorry. To simply state that one judge is more talented than another judge smacks of elitism in itself. The basic requirement to be a judge is a fundamental faith in the word of God, and Common Sense. These two tools are all a judge needs to rule on the Constitutionality of Law. Since we are getting rulings, that either violate the Rule of Natural Law, or doesn't make any Common Sense, I would say the Judicial Branch needs to clean its own house. These Judicial Branch problems are happening, because we are not selecting Judges on merit, but on Heritage.

This election on November 2nd is only another chapter in this war on the separation of powers, the Three Branches of Government were devised to ensure that We the People lived in Freedom. The outcomes on November 2nd will only lead to further confrontation from two different World Views of what Government and our Society was intended to be.

Don't commit Varnum Revenge. Vote ALL of the judges out. Term Limit anyone who has been in their current office over four terms. Only then can we start down the path to a Government that serves We the People.

A Post from Jen Green

I have been a little flat for blogging lately. So I thought I would post this awesome blog from Jenn Green. She really gets it right.

What She Thinking
By Jen Green of WHO Radio

People keep telling me that for change, we have to get Republicans back into the statehouse. I get the same robocalls, blanket emails, and mailers you do. But you know what? That's not it. We don't need Republicans. We need heroes—heroes of conviction.

I have a little tip for all candidates running for office. I'm part of a key demographic, and I think you should want to know what I'm looking for.
I'm looking for a hero. You see, I've got lots going on in my life. I have a husband, kids, minivan, a job, and even a few pets. They all demand my attention almost a solid 18 hours a day. There's a constant pile of laundry, lunches to make, bathrooms to clean, carpools to organize, lawns to mow, meetings to attend. So, to be honest, I don't have much time to devote to politics.

That's where you come in.

I want to know that there's someone there taking care of Iowa for me. This is one of those jobs, that for now, I have to delegate to someone else. You know, like how early Americans elected a man like George Washington or John Adams, sent him to Washington, and he did his job—he duked it out (sometimes literally) and fought for the things that were right. He didn't worry about poll numbers or 24-hour media. He didn't worry about sound bites or “you tube.” He just fought first for his ideals, second for his country, and finally for his constituents.

I want a leader.

I want someone I don't have to keep an eye on. I want to trust him. No, I don't expect you to be perfect, have a perfect past, or be a choir boy. But, I do expect you to conduct yourself with integrity even when you screw up. Don't make excuses. Don't blame it on someone else. Take responsibility and accountability. Then move on and get your work done.

I want a warrior. Please listen to this very carefully: I don't want someone to work across the aisle. I don't want someone to compromise. Look where “bipartisanship” has gotten us! I'm not sending you there to be nice or make friends. I'm not sending you there to form secret handshake agreements or play give-and-take. I'm sending you there to take a stand.

I want a statesman.

I don't want someone to go there and do what he feels is right. I want him to do what IS right. And don't sit there and tell me you don't know the difference, or that there is no objective standard for what's right. That's baloney. Whether or not they were Christians, all of our country's forefathers had this in common: they believed in the Biblical principles of right and wrong. What's more, they read the Bible and believed in the One who gave it to us. They believed in good, patriotism, and liberty—all of which are ideals based on the objective principal of Truth put forth in the Bible.

So, if you want my vote, you'd better be ready to fight for what's right based on TRUTH, and I mean big "T" truth.

I know I keep using the male pronouns here, but I'm not excluding women. If you're a woman who can go to the Capitol and show these men what it means to be a statesmen, a leader, a fighter, a warrior, you go for it, girl, and I'm right there with you. I'll use whatever voice I have to send you there, if you're willing to fight.

You'll have to fight against the likes of Gronstal and even (unfortunately) those who say they are on your team. However, they instead base their moral compass on their feelings, their own agenda, or their lack of courage. Truth is often you'll have to vote against your own feelings. It may be lonely and tough sometimes, but if you represent me the way you promise, I'll always be behind you.

The way I see it anymore being a politician is a disgrace.

Politicians have made a career of compromising their public seat. My demographic doesn't want politicians anymore. We want heroes. We want statesmen. Being a statesman is an honor. It's much like being a parent. It's not a job, it's a responsibility.

And it's not a right or an entitlement. If you want a public seat, you should be willing to debate your opponent in public for that public seat. I need to see with my own two eyes that you can stand up for the issues against another person on a stage. If you won’t do that why should I assume that you will fight in front of an entire legislative body? Or in a private room full of folks trying to buy your vote?

So candidates, if you want my vote remember this: with my vote I give you my trust. With my vote, you represent my hope. With my vote, you protect the Truth. When you're willing to accept that responsibility, then, and only then, will you get my vote.

An Open Letter to the JCRCC

Dear Jackson County Republican Central Committee

Before you kick me off your committee. I resign. I should have resigned a long time ago, but for some reason, I thought things may eventually change.

So you are Kicking me off for supporting a non Republican Governor candidate. That candidate is the ONLY non republican I have been supporting. I have voted absentee this year, and openly supported every Republican who has not served or will serve over four terms in office. I believe in Term Limits. It is the biggest reason I am not supporting our nominee.

I thought the Republican party was a big tent. Obviously it is not. The very fact that there is a bylaw restricting members from openly campaigning for non party candidates indicates that. Come to think of it. Is there a bylaw? My understanding is that there is only one copy of the bylaws, and they have been under revision for three years. The one copy that we supposedly have, is never brought to the monthly meetings. The revision has been permanently on the meeting agenda every month, since someone pointed out that there really is no copy of them for anyone to refer to.

The thing I find really cowardly is you would send me a certified letter notifying me of this. One member did try to talk to me about this, but must have been told not to.

Now the rule you are talking about, I have seen in other counties rules, and you did hand out some piece of paper with it, and other non sense on it. But I don't recall a vote to adopt it by the local committee. The chairperson said, these where passed by the State Central Committee, and we had no choice but to follow them. Which if you recall I did not agree with. I don't agree with it.Also I do recall on that list that a member can be kicked off if they don't attend three meetings in a row. I have only been to one regular meeting this year (last winter), and one special convention. I should have been kicked off long ago.

I keep hearing the Republican party is a big tent. How can we be a big tent, if we do not allow for freedom of speech among our leaders? The unwritten policy of neutrality during primaries is also non sense. It is another unwritten by law, that is not written down, so it can be violated when some one in leadership wants to violate it. If the Republican Party is a big tent, our leaders should all be able to express their opinions, especially in primaries, and we should all respect each others opinion. That is the HONEST way to do it.

If you want to censure me for supporting a publisher who does NOT accept, Tobacco, Gambling, and Alcohol advertising, has some innovative new ideas to fix our state, and when Planned Parenthood dropped a SIX FIGURE check on his desk, to advertise with him, he GAVE IT BACK. Then kick me off. I don't want to be part of a party that can't seem to nominate candidates with those values.

While you are at it maybe you better talk to Lee Grassley. Who told me in front of all six members of a Media Com film crew in Cedar Rapids, and Jonathan, that he was voting for Jonathan. I guess he is a turn coat too, huh? Go to this link: http://narcisseforiowa.com/wp/?p=314, and check out the picture.

I also want to appeal to my BVP friends. I know you promised to sit this campaign out if Bob did not win. I commend you for keeping your word. But if you continue to sit this out you are only weakening your position, showing your approval of this ridiculous policy. Remember silence is consent.

Let me close in thanking the committee. I never realized I was so powerful, and influential, that little old me, not marching in lock step, with the party drum beat would draw such a reaction. When the State Central Committee censured Kim Lehman for standing up for life, I should have realized then, that I wasn't associated with any party that held the Rule of Natural Law as the Highest law of the Land.

Let's Be Consistent!!

I read Steve Deace's blog today, and was inspired to write this. Many people wonder why 40% of Evangelicals voted for Obama. I tell them it is because he was the honest one.

Think about it. He is doing everything he told us he was going to do.Then this week he again told everyone, despite his agenda is destroying his party's election season, that he was going to carry that agenda out in the next two years. Maybe he is stubborn. Humans tend some times to confuse commitment to stubbornness. He is showing me, that he is confident, that he was honest with the American people about who he was, and America was comfortable with that, because he won. I can't argue with his thought process on this. I also commend him for not changing his agenda, when it is obvious it is very unpopular.

Now before you call me a traitor. I have talked to many Viet Nam veterans, who had more admiration, for the integrity, and valor of the Viet Cong, than our South Vietnamese allies. That didn't mean they liked the enemy. They merely respected the enemies valor, and commitment.

As per Steve Deace's blog today. Staci Appel can count herself with Obama, in being honest about who she is. She is telling the absolute truth about herself. She also happens to be lying about Kent Sorenson, so I can't say she is honorable.

Consistency has been a strength of the Democratic Party. They present their ideas to the public on a consistent basis, and never back down from them. They have core values that are easy to understand, and they cling to them. That type of commitment endears THEIR voters to them. That is how Pete Stark, Maxine Waters, Chuck Rangel, ETC get reelected every time. Their constituents admire their consistency, because they are consistent. What else can you expect from a party whose mascot is a jack ass?

Here is an example of how Republicans are inconsistent. A friend of mine is supporting Tom Tancredo for Colorado Governor. I support Tom for Governor.

The other day, this friend posted a comment about Dan Maes the Republican nominee for Governor, essentially calling him an unpatriotic egomaniac. I was stunned. This person knew better than that. We are conservatives we don't make such statements that a Mike Castle, Lisa Murkowski, or Charlie Crist supporter would make.

There does seem to be some questions about Dan Maes.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2010/0903/With-Dan-Maes-in-Colorado-governor-race-can-GOP-just-get-along-Nope

This friend did not take being called out for inconsistency very well. I will not share the response. Haven't heard anything since. But it is a look at the fundamental problems going on in Republican circles. My friend who defended, Joe Miller, Marco Rubio, and Christine Odonnell, for the personal attacks that were made on them, committed a personal attack on Dan Maes. Very inconsistent behavior.

For Conservatism to make a come back. We Conservatives must be very, very consistent. If the Republican Party is to hold on to the large victory they will be seeing very soon. They will have to take on the responsibility, of being consistent.

The newly elected Republicans, will need to be the Republicans, the party platform tells the American people, Republicans are supposed to be. The new majority will need to show the same commitment to their agenda, that Obama and Staci Appel, and other Liberals have shown to their agenda. So far, I haven't seen a great sign of consistency on a party, or personal level among Republicans, or Conservatives. If they don't become consistent. Conservatism is over.

A Broken Pledge?

Until Thursday Night this week. I had never been to a Tea Party meeting. I enjoyed meeting people outside the World of the Two Parties, who seemed more interested in improving our government, rather than being an influential member of a political party.

The Republican's Pledge to America seemed to be a recognition of how fast the people in this meeting had gained influence by going outside the party establishment. By not playing the game, but changing the way the game was played. I was in a room with a movement that created the equivalent of the forward pass in football.

No longer was the party establishment able to grind out public discourse yard by yard. No longer will they clog up the middle, for no gain. The Tea party has thrown a screen pass around them, or went long down field on first and ten, caught them flat footed, and scored. The Pledge seemed to confirm that.

Then something happened. First District Congressional Candidate Ben Lange came in, and the group gave him some time for a speech.

Ben seems to be doing well. You can't go anywhere in Eastern Iowa with out seeing one of his signs. He is up against the Democrats sacred cow Bruce Braley, the apprentice to the Sith Lord Harkin.The man who will literally be the figure head leader, of the Democratic Party in Iowa after this election.

Ben tells us about his new ad. Which can be seen here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV-dZOxdFRk

I had not seen the ad at the time. When I got home and watched it, I was very,very impressed. There is the message. There is the spirit we need. Ben is right it isn't about Republicans and Democrats. It is about doing the right thing. At last someone gets it. Braley is on his way to the meat locker.

But hold on. During his speech. The one that Ben tells us about his new ad, he mentions that he is receiving some bad emails about it. I figure wow he really has the Democrats worried. WRONG!! The nasty emails are coming from the RNC, WHAT!! They don't like the bipartisanship expressed in the ad. Ben isn't promoting the label. ( My words.) They don't like that it isn't about Republicans and Democrats.

I am dumb founded. Didn't the leadership just Pledge to Work for America first? Who didn't get the memo about that at the RNC?

A little over a week and the Republicans have broke the Pledge. Or maybe the Pledge was designed to manipulate the Tea Party? Something about this is very fishy or my name isn't Lattimer, and it isn't. Could the RNC really have lied to America? If they haven't. Why hasn't the rest of the RNC got on board on the policy? How can the Republicans implement their pledge, when they can't get the whole team organized, to change a major philosophy for the party.

Oh I get it parties don't believe in philosophy any more. They believe in science. Money+Polling+Organization= Winning Message. The issues really don't matter. We don't need to listen to what people want. We have scientifically determined what they want to hear.

Ben Lange has shown he is listening. He has stepped up and said I can do this for you. He isn't saying you NEED me to do this for you. That is the difference between selfless service, and self service.

The RNC broke their Pledge to America by condemning Ben's message.