Quick Links to Posts By Category

,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, May 25, 2008

No Green for Greenies!

We have come to expect idiocy from liberals and socialists (they can't help it - it's in their DNA), but far too many Republicans and RINOs have jumped on the asinine "green" bandwagon. It's high time Conservatives fight back by hitting the greenie weenie politicians where it hurts - in their campaign coffers.

When these shameless, self-promoting charlatans come and call looking for campaign donations let them know that they cannot expect any contribution until they publicly denounce CO2 abatement policies, bio-fuel mandates and subsidies, CAFE standards, the Sierra Club, windfall profit taxes, the Global Warming scam, etc. and start promoting policies that encourage and aid the increase of domestic oil production, nuclear energy use, etc.

While not quite a full "throw them under the bus" campaign (yet), a widespread movement of cutting off the funding for politicians that promote and enable the socialist green anti-capitalism agenda (and that's exactly what it is) might encourage RINOs like Coleman, Pawlenty, and McCain to get back with the Conservative program to save their own political hides.

Greenie politicians are largely responsible for the current energy "crisis", and the trend does not look good if these clowns are allowed to continue making policy. I heard an economist on the radio on Friday state that there is no free-market reason that gasoline should cost the consumer more than about a dollar per gallon, and that government policy is far more to blame than OPEC or the petroleum futures market for the current price of gasoline and diesel. Having to burn a C-note and then some to fill-up the ride just before hearing this really highlighted that action, not just complaining or lip-service, is needed.

I put this "no Green for Greenies" policy into practice Friday evening when I received a shakedown call from "Our Independent Senator" Norm Coleman's campaign. The fundraiser got downright testy when I explained my new campaign donation policy to him. He really got steamed when I suggested that if Norm doesn't shape up I may end up figuratively throwing him under the bus and encouraging as many others as I possibly can to do the same.

After giving this a lot of thought, I have concluded that it may be possible (and advisable) to throw some Republicans and RINOs under the bus in order to advance the Conservative agenda in the long run with minimal to no short term downside. I know this is heresy to some of my Conservative colleagues but, if such a movement is executed in the proper manner, their fears of handing over power to the dark side may be unfounded. More on this in a later post...

It's high time we Conservatives start fighting back before there is nothing left to fight for.

Labels: , ,

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm really excited to be represented by Senator Franken for the next 6 years. I just know that with his conservative representation gas will go back down to $1 a gallon. Just like gas did when conservatives "cleaned house" in 2006.

5/27/2008 10:21 AM  
Blogger Right Hook said...

Anonymous -

How much have gas prices climbed since Democrats took control of Congress? In matters related to the price of gasoline, has Coleman voted differently than Franken would?

Coleman is a lot better than Franken, but still has done a lot of damage to the Conservative cause. How do you propose to correct his rapid leftward drift?

5/27/2008 11:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to http://www.twincitiesgasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx gas in Nov 2006 was somewhere less then $2.25 a gallon, now it is $3.85 a gallon.

Enough said.


Also, if there is a chance a Republican or a DFL candidate would chance represent conservatives, I'd bet heavily on the Republican. Also I'd rather have a GOP Senator Majority leader than Senator Reid. I suspect Senator Reid isn't doing the best job representing conservatives either, and electing Franken isn't going to help make him more conservative.

I'm not sure there is a need to correct Senator Coleman's "leftward drift." I'm not sure on a statewide level Minnesotan's will elect a more conservative Senator. I'd rather be represented by someone on our side then someone on the other, disagree or not.

5/28/2008 7:34 AM  
Blogger Right Hook said...

My point on the gas prices was to highlight the meaningless of the "how much has the price risen since Bush took office" argument by using the timeframe of Democrat control of Congress as a metric. During this timeframe (as well as his whole term) Senator Coleman has been a de-facto Democrat on many votes that have had a bearing on gas prices.

There are obviously multiple causes for the gas price spike, but greenie opposition to expanded exploration and drilling and the push of ethanol has been a significant contributor.

We're in agreement as far as preferring a Republican represent us rather than a Democrat. However, the closer the said Republican is to a Democrat the less relevant he or she becomes, other than the party headcount to determine the Senate leadership. If the Senate leadership has been determined to be Democrat a Republican/RINO doesn't do the us in the opposition much good if he or she votes with the dark side far too often.

Greenies and RINOs have done as much damage as liberal tax hikes as green mandates have many of the same negative characteristics and effects of a massive tax hike, growth of government, and erosion of liberty. Someone whacked out enough to enthusiastically vote for Franken isn't going to jump to the Coleman camp just because Norm is hugging trees anyway.

We break on agreement as far as correcting Coleman's leftward drift goes. It is a dangerous trend and needs to be corrected, especially when the Democrats are in control of the Senate as we need all of the Conservative opposition that can be mustered. Unless something totally unexpected occurs and a Conservative ends up with the GOP endorsement (slim to no chance of this) I will hold my nose and vote for Coleman this fall. But until election day I intend to put as much pressure as possible through whatever means at my disposal to drive home the message that we voted for a Republican, not a Democrat Lite.

Watch in the near future (there's this pesky thing known as "work" that is consuming far too much of my time lately) for a post the expands on the points I brought up in my original post as well as exploring some of those you did in your commentary.

Thanks for checking out our blog and participating in the discussion. Please consider picking a handle other than "Anoymous" as it would be a shame for someone with thoughtful commentary to be confused with some of the morons that choose that go by that handle.

5/28/2008 8:20 AM  
Blogger G-Man said...

Kudo's Nymo #2 (and Hook).

The key question for this election is "are you better off today than you were two years ago -- before Democrats took control of the U.S. Congress and the Minnesota state legislature?"

Before Democrats took the reigns of government, gas prices were more reasonable, the economy was stronger, job growth was stronger, and fewer people had trouble paying their mortgages.

With more anti-drill Eco Wacko libs in office, gas prices will continue to climb. There's plenty of crude available for the taking, but the nuts we've got in office would rather let China drill of our shores than American oil companies.

These same nuts promise to raise taxes on the "rich" – those who own small businesses, who invest in big business, and those who buy the goods and services that the rest of us produce. These are the folks who directly or indirectly hire and fire the American work force. Now two prominent Democrat presidential candidates promise to "take corporate profits". Is there any wonder that companies big and small and tightening their belts and investing less in today's economy?

As Nymo #2 aptly reminded us of gas prices in 2006, it is easy to make the case that Big Gov liberals are bad for personal freedom and personal prosperity. So where are the Republican leaders in this discourse??

I have long promoted voting for the most conservative candidate on the ballot and believe that forfeiting the election to Democrats only encourages more liberalism in both parties. Senator Coleman's move to the left and Senator McCain's unexpected rise to the nomination is evidence to this phenomenon. Still, my active support will be limited to those who earn it.

I refuse to donate time and money to candidates like Coleman and McCain – and I let them know why. Meanwhile, I will focus my energies on more conservative candidates like Lori Grivna and Ed Matthews. The key is to let it be known who conservatives support (through volunteer time, donations, and public discourse) then see who wins in November.

If Coleman and McCain think they can win without our help, then let them sink or swim in the water of their choosing. Nationally, Republicans have lost three Congressional elections by putting up less moderate candidates. There's a lesson here.

[Note: I'm trying something new. "Nymo" is my nickname for anyone commenting anonymously – without giving some kind of pen name. Pen names are handy for it makes the discourse easier. For those who don't use one, I prefer "Nymo" to the impersonal "anonymous".]

5/28/2008 8:04 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

 

MOB Logo

Powered by Blogger