The Nacilbupera Guzzle

Whoever examines with attention the history of the dearths and famines … will find, I believe, that a dearth never has arisen from any combination among the inland dealers in corn, nor from any other cause but a real scarcity, occasioned sometimes perhaps, and in some particular places, by the waste of war, but in by far the greatest number of cases by the fault of the seasons; and that a famine has never arisen from any other cause but the violence of government attempting, by improper means, to remedy the inconveniences of a dearth. (Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations IV.5.44)

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Mike Lee's Questionable Endorsements

Recently, a reader asked our opinion of the FreedomWorks & Dick Armey's endorsement of Mike Lee. While FreedomWorks is a conservative organization, it is not one we would personally embrace due to its policy on promoting a Bush-esque "guest worker" illegal immigrant policy. Nacilbupera views a "guest worker" program as a form of amnesty: why should you be allowed to have a job if you are in violation of our immigration laws?

ALIPAC put together this video of Armey's encouragement of illegal aliens breaking the law comparing it to a misdemeanor traffic violation.

Were we to run for office, we would place Armey's endorsement as low priority; to us, it would bespeak our desperation for an endorsement were we to put it on the front page of our website as Lee has done. Sometimes you can't help who does endorse you and in such a case the candidate should be held guiltless (remember Obama denouncing Farrakhan's endorsement? Maybe this isn't a good example, but you get the picture.) Conversely, when you go soliciting endorsements from Shurleff et al as Lee did during his campaign announcement, you assume responsibility for those endorsements. We do not know if Lee solicited Armey's endorsement or not.

There remains one more responsibility candidates have: if you are endorsed by a group or person with questionable principles it is your responsibility to speak up and clarify (IE "hey Utah, we got a great endorsement from Armey; although we differ on our opinions about illegal immigration, Armey has done a great job in blah, blah, blah"). We have yet to see Lee clarify his endorsement from Armey and solicited AG Shurtleff endorsement (let us never forget Shurtleff's infamous 2006 speech to the illegals: "as the chief law enforcement of Utah I should be arresting you. [That's] not going to happen.") Therefore we conclude Mike Lee either (1) agrees with Armey and Shurtleff or (2) is too timid to speak his mind (or "wrestle a girl" as Lonsberry caller Lisa aptly expressed today.)

Either alternative is egregious. Eagar's positions are stated publicly and more profoundly than any candidate we can ever recall and her endorsements are from unquestionably reliable Conservative organizations. Indeed she is the only candidate scoring 100% on 80 Independence Caucus vetting questions. While Lee is good, we deserve better.


Craig L. said...

Are you the official Eagar campaign mudslinger?

Gerry said...

Funny you posted on another blog post the clip of Lonsberry talking about Lee, but didn't include the portion before that where he hammered Eagar about her claiming that she had gotten the "5,000 Year Leap Family Endorsement" -- claiming that one son-in-law of Cleon Skousen supporting Eagar somehow represents the whole family.

I note that she has changed the title of this news alert on her website. She seems far too eager to inflate the endorsements she has received (I mean, seriously, mentioning endorsements from a trucker, a plumber, and an egg group?) to boost credibility.

Anonymous said...

You guys sell the Guest worker program short. It is a great way to solve the illegal immigration problem and also provide low cost workers for Jobs that our children won't take. I think that if these people coming across the border were fair skinned and blue eyed you would not have near the issue.
Hasta Luego!

Brad Caldwell said...

Mike Lee is a great man who will appeal to many different groups. He is who we need in Washington. He understands the constitution, the role of a Senator and the proper role of the Supreme Court.
He will stand up for what is right and constitutional. After hearing both Mrs. Eagar and Mike Lee I am encouraging my delegate to vote for Mike at the convention.

Anonymous said...

Interesting how you seem to leave out certain pertinent facts, while chipping away at Mike Lee. I would like to see more factual comments, not just innuendos, half-truths, and downright lies. Endorsements do not a candidate make. Look to the candidate, not the "endorsements", for facts and truth about that candidate. We can not choose who the "endorsers" are, but we can choose where we stand, and let the public determine which is best, the individual, or those who "endorse."

Michelle said...

I don't understand why you spend so much effort tearing down a conservative candidate. Do you really think so badly of Lee? If this race comes down to Lee and Bennett will you not support Lee? In tearing him down you are potentially helping Bennett. I think people would much rather hear why you like Eagar so much and it would much more beneficial for Eagar and for the cause she supports. I know you don't want people to support Eagar because she isn't Mike Lee. So why DO you support her? Focus on that!

Jeremy said...

Personally, I support having more open borders, particularly when it comes to keeping people out for economic reasons. We need people who are willing to work in this country, and the sad reality is that too often the citizens we have here don't cut it. I'm not a fan of illegal immigration, but I think we should make more legal immigration possible.

I think that is a pretty solid argument Constitutionally as well, and would guess that's why Mike Lee accepts this endorsement. Some people just don't understand that the Federal government shouldn't be trying to solve every problem, and trying to ensure that somebody from another country cannot compete for your job is one of the things they should get out of. Let free market principles rule these decisions and everyone will be better off. End the protectionism.

nacilbupera said...

Craig L: We have endorsed Eagar and think she's the "bees knees" but act only in our own behalf and interests.
We stick to facts and relevant issues. Mudslingers falsify facts or dwell on irrelevant issues such as the number of dogs John Curtis (Provo Mayor) owns.

Gerry: Maybe Lee would hail "common man" endorsements too, from truckers, plumbers, and Good Egg Clubs. Don't ridicule the common man; for we esteem ourselves in this honorable group.

We agree the title to that news alert seemed awkward. If the Eagar campaign has corrected it, then we are pleased and no need for a clip.

Tim said...

This is a good sign that Mike is stirring up so much attention. Articles that are truthful or not. I have gone to all the candidates websites. I have spoke to all of them personally. I like them all but there is only one that is getting my attention and vote and that is Mike Lee. No the current senator is not considered a real candidate because I like many do not want him back even as a last resort. We want someone that will reduce the size of government. We want someone who knows and will follow the constitution. I like Mike!

nacilbupera said...

ANON: Illegal immigration knows no eye color nor skin color.

ANON 2: Um, did you really read the post?

MICHELLE: How oft we repeat ourselves at the request of Lee campaigners: "Lee is better than Bailout Bob Bennett." Some people are ruffled if you bring up the facts on a candidate not to your liking in certain areas. Look, Gerry just brought up the "Family Endorsement" thing which was quite germane to this discussion actually. We didn't tell her to go "focus on [Lee's] good points" and leave Eagar alone. We think part of our combined duty is to vet these candidates so no, we will vet Eagar, we will vet Lee, and we will vet Bridgewater according to the time constraints, knowledge, and the severity of the offense. If we don't vet as a party, the SL Tribune and the Democratic Party will so it's best to get whatever needs to be aired out now.
That said, Lee seems to need the most vetting: Eagar's views have been know and published. We like that; it makes her a strong candidate. Bridgewater's been through multiple campaigns and has received a fair amount of vetting as well. Lee, the relative newcomer to the race, we haven't seen in action like we have seen Bridgewater and Eagar. Frankly when Conservative grassroots such as Nacilbupera already feel they don't trust you as a candidate well enough to be comfortable due to a lack of a record, it doesn't help to back out of a debate.

One final point: don't be afraid of the truth. If Mike Lee is a great candidate, people will see that. If Lee has faults, they'll see that too--but through his faults they'll learn to trust. And this year more than ever people want to trust, not politics-as-usual. People are pretty smart. And one more time: were Nacilbupera at the GOP convention today and Lee and Bennett were the two choices, the vote goes to Lee. Were we to have a primary runoff between Lee and Bennett, the vote goes to Lee.

Anonymous said...

TO Nacil,
Thank you for posting this. I have been trying to figure out who to support in this race. On this one, I think you might be a little off though. I went to Mike's website and their I saw an endorsement from Carl Wimmer and a bunch of other conservatives. They also had a bunch of endorsements from the "common man" like you said. So, on this one, I think the argument is not that good.

Keep up the passion though and I'll keep reading

nacilbupera said...

A 6:10:

Thx for the comment. Our point isn't Lee lacks support of any common man--of course he does! Gerry was critical of Eagar for mentioning common-man endorsements yet as you point out Lee displays them as well...we're simply saying you can't have it both ways.

Lee has some great personal endorsements from Wimmer as you say and Nacilbupera's Sen Mark Madsen. Even some of the Lee supporters who comment on this blog are great Patriots as well, just perhaps on a more local level. While we praise these Conservative endorsements, we feel Lee needs to clarify the Shurtleff and Armey endorsements as we pointed out in the post.

You'll need to post future comments with an OpenID or Google Account as Nacilbupera is now closed to Blogger Anonymous comments. Hope you'll stick around!

stanard said...

Can I please point you to Mike Lee's website at:

Scroll down to "More Key Issues" The first point is "Illegal Immigration:.

It very clearly states that the Constitution states the Federal Government must Secure our borders. That Congress has dropped the ball on Illegal Immigration.

Mike has stated we need to

Enforce the laws we already have that we ignore

Do whatever else is needed to secure the borders

Use e-verify and severely punish businesses who higher illegal immigrants.

Deny ALL welfare benefits to Illegal Immigrants

Require Illegal Immigrants to serve prison time for crimes they commit in their home country (not our cozy jails, compared to theres)

Reject Amnesty

This is pretty clear to me, and very strong. It is VERY obvious to me that the author of this article spent ZERO time researching this, as it's is VERY clear and plain on Mike Lee's website.

The author must have simply wanted to attack and make someone look bad, not be bothered with research and facts.

I support Mike Lee. Completely. He will be our next US Senator.

Boyle Smith Wedding said...

I have a great idea. Lets send all the Mexicans back to mexico, let lazy americans do the work at half the pace for twice the money so that we can finaly get rid of the rest of our manufacturing base. Manufactruing is below americans these days. Plus then we could ship all our meat to Mexico to be processed, since americans wont do it. We could also stop growing all crops that are not harvistable by big machines an buy the rest from other contries, like Mexico.

I will lose my nany, since she is not legal. Much less all she does is show up 15 min early every day, takes perfect care of my baby, and cooks lunch and cleans the house every day and she only works five hours a day for $7/hr. My mMexican nany is always happy to see me, loves her job and tells me that regularly, and greatfully thanks me every time I pay her. Very simmilar to all the reasons I fired my American roofing crew and hired all Mexicans at the same rate of pay. My income doubled even though I was paying the same /hr rate with the same number of empoylees. Since now I only make ~$10/hr, no longer roofing since residential crashed, after she leaves I can hire an American girl who will probably be late every day, wont make good food or clean the house, and will only charge $10/hr. Then I would have a good reason to quit my job and go on wellfair. That will save me money then.

This is perfect!!! Actually I may move to Mexico. I just got married down there and cannot express enough how nice the PVR region is. People are patient, respectful, and really make a great social enviroment without the waste Americans are so acustomed to. Much less, to my supprise, there are jobs in realestate and resuraunts waiting for Americans that speak some spanish. Hey, thats me!!

nacilbupera said...


Being an employer, we have found that like any ethnicity, some Mexicans are lazy and have stolen from our company; some are second to none in their work ethic and integrity: it all depends on the individual. Nacilbupera is tremendously loyal to the employee that does a great job irrespective of race or ethnicity.

What illegals need to understand is that Americans want our laws obeyed and respected. We aren't bigots--Nacilbupera is married to a refugee, speaks fluent Spanish, and has many Hispanic friends from multiple countries south of the border--but we demand that our law be enforced and obeyed.

If you aren't here legally and purchased falsified documents which support the drug runners across our borders, then don't let the door hit you on the way back to your country! Conversely, if you are here legally which it sounds like, we wish you and your family well and express our condolences about your situation. We are well aware of the plight the demise of the Utah construction industry has had on the Hispanic community in Utah who proudly perform quality jobs here. Were it not for Hispanics--and probably more specifically Mexicans--Nacilbupera would be living in a half of a house!

Finally, congrats on your wedding and thx for the comment! Nacilbupera has heard about how beautiful Puerto Vallarta is...maybe sometime you take us there to visit, OK?

nacilbupera said...


Nacilbupera is not oblivious to the position Mr. Lee has stated on his website, but glad you brought it up.

The key for us is trust. Bennett can SAY he'll serve two terms but look what happened. Far too many Conservatives we have sent to Washington have drunk the Potomac Poison and veered from their values. Mr. Lee's record gives us no reason to trust him nor to distrust him: we simply find an absence of a record.

So lacking record, we look for other things. Here's a fact or at least widely-held opinion: Mark Shurtleff is regarded as the most prominent pro-illegal-alien (GOP) advocate in Utah. Mike Lee solicited Shurtleff's endorsement. Therefore, with feel Mr. Lee owes more than a simple website statement of his immigration principles on his website: he needs to make it clear than he totally disagrees with the Shurtleff position on immigration. Lee has yet to do that in our mind.

Were Mike Lee to get elected and stick to his principles, Nacilbupera would become a strong supporter. On the other hand, were Lee to be elected and become a Shurtleff on immigration, we hope you would join us in holding him accountable.

Finally, if you want to promote Lee might we suggest that an unfounded accusation on your part as to our research and intent might not be the most convincing. Nevertheless, of you we say: a Utahn who chooses Lee as their candidate is, in our book, a Patriot.