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)

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Surprise! Mike Lee Drops Out of Lonsberry Debate (Updated x2)

Giving no explanation, U.S. Senate candidate Mike Lee unexpectedly dropped out of a scheduled debate with fellow candidate Cherilyn Eagar on The Bob Lonsberry Show (KNRS 105.7 FM), Utah's premier Conservative Talk Radio Show. Below is today's excerpt dealing with the unexpected exit.



We feel this last-minute exit will not portend well for Lee whose Constitutional assertions are already being questioned by his actions as he has been endorsed by GOP elites and illegal-immigrant-advocates Shurtleff and Armey rather than Conservative, teaparty grassroots organizations.

Shunning a debate is typically an anathema to the candidate who refuses. Consider what happened to Coakley in Massachusetts after she initially brushed off a debate with Brown because she thought she was so far ahead. We doubt Utahns like their candidates closeted; indeed our experience shows us they enjoy engaging and listening to their candidates' ideas--and even more so in a hot political climate such as we have now before us. Utahns want brave, bold leadership; not hide-under-a-rock abdication.

By his withdrawal from the debates, Lee demonstrates a weakness we had not previously noted. Perhaps Lee's entry into the race so late lead to campaign disarray and contributed to this misstep.

+++ Update 3/4:
Nacilbupera's post captured the attention of veteran UPI newspaperman Glen Warchol of the Salt Lake Tribune in his post tonight "Staying Right with the Far Right". (We're honored, Glen!)In his post, Glen reveals a phone call to Lee yielded what we deem the first official "official" explanation as to why Lee declined the debate: Lee wanted all candidates to be represented at the debate.
Lee's answer, of course prompts a pair of followup questions: (1) Why did Lee not insist prior to agreeing to the debate with Eagar that all candidates be represented? That is, what prompted this sudden change of heart? (2) Why does Lee communicate through the Left-leaning Tribune and not directly to Conservative media including: his would-be generous host Bob Lonsberry, an email or comment to Nacilbupera, or even through a public announcement on his website? Conservatives await further elucidation...

+++ Update 3/5:

  • Cherilyn posted her feelings on the Lee duck at Redstate.com today; her response was funny. She claimed "Lee had a sudden attack of the vapors and backed out" and chided him: “to stand up like a man and debate me.”
  • Campaign spokesman Dan Hauser claimed on Twitter that Lee had debated Eagar (he's referring to the Utah County Republican Women event) while dodging our question of why Lee withdrew. Maybe Dan should "stand up like a man" and answer Nacilbupera's questions, too!

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why this is an issue? Maybe Mike had an event scheduled.

And if I remember correctly, hasn't Mike already participated in like 5 debates already with her and the other candidates? Isn't there many more scheduled? How is he dodging anything?

And you use endorsements of a small number of his. But what about Carl Wimmer? What about John Dougall? What about Craig Frank? Mark Madsen? What about Erick Erickson of RedState.com? So maybe, just maybe, Mike's message of adhering to the Constitution has a broad appeal instead of any other reason?

Boyle Smith Wedding said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

WOW! That is alot of stong statements without even speaking with Lee. It would be nice to see some sentament of "Hope all is well for Lee and his family".

At least get a statement form Lee before you bolw a gasket. No journalism here, move on.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Reid, why do you refer to yourself as "we" instead of "I"?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, this is a whole lot of jumping to conclusions for someone who has already attended countless panels/debates with Eager and other candidates in the past.

Does this mean if Eager, or any other candidate, ever has ANY scheduling conflict or other problem that causes them to cancel anything campaign related that they are dodging the event and too weak to hold their own?

Of course not. Just stupid.

Jim said...

See Glenn Beck's book "Arguing With Idiots", for an idea as to how things develop. Then, maybe check Mike Lee's schedule to see if there wasn't some kind of conflict that may have taken precedence over this meaningless "debate". Then, freak out make strong, illogical statements.

nacilbupera said...

A1: Mike Lee released no public statement giving any reason for his withdrawal. Mike agreed to this debate which would be unique to the "candidate forums" (to use Lee's own words in describing the previous interactions of the candidates). The event was agreed to, advertised, and Lee withdrew on short notice--those are the facts.

We're sure Lee is off doing some replacement activity, but this does not excuse his actions. Will Mike Lee have an "event scheduled" when it comes time to vote on an important issue? He is dodging the voters.

All the candidates have had Conservative INDIVIDUALS endorse them as you point out but Lee needs to explain why he actively sought out non-so-Conservative folks to endorse him.

nacilbupera said...

A2: We hope all is well for Lee and his family.

If there is a medical or emergency reasons for not fulfilling one's obligations, most campaigns will state so. Mike Lee did not.

If you know something, please let us know so we can send our wishes to him and his campaign; otherwise we have wished him will but feel he has been negligent in duty.

Anonymous said...

Mike was double booked and had to prioritize.
Mike is a wonderful candidate and will serve Utah Proudly. We need constitutional scholars who understand the founding fathers will to be in the Senate representing Utah.
I will vote for Mike.

Brad Caldwell said...

Mike is one of the sharpest conservative minds I know. If you are not voting for him I think you are missing out on a tremendous opportunity to put real conservative leadership in the Senate.

nacilbupera said...

A4:

Have you given Eagar a fair shake? We note you aren't even spelling her name correctly.

See our comments to A2: most campaigns will release a statement if there is good reason for withdrawal.

"Coutless panels/debates"? Really? Mr. Lee has been in this race for just under two months. See our comments to A1: using Mr. Lee's own words there have been no formal debates, just several (not countless) "candidate forums."

Why would you not want to hold a candidate accountible for their actions?

ALL A: POSTINGS: Perhaps because advantaging yourself of our generosity in allowing Anonymous postings you are hiding your identity as a Lee staffer. That is the disadvantage of Anonymous postings and why we are shutting them down as of tomorrow. We caution readers to be weary of such postings.

nacilbupera said...

A3: Here's why we use the first person plural: About Nacilbupera

nacilbupera said...

ANON 8:00 am: Please provide evidence of your assertion. What is this other event so important he couldn't use the microphone of Utah's #1 Conservative Radio Show to keep his word? Why is his campaign so disorganized he can't keep his scheduling right? Are you working for the Lee campaign so as to know something the public can't know about Mr. Lee's schedule?

nacilbupera said...

BRAD CALDWELL:

You have earned our respect with your comment.

We agree that Lee has a great Conservative mind. If we had 99 copies of Lee in the Senate we would be a much better country.

Should Lee not make it to the Senate he surely, as the other candidates (excepting perhaps Bennett) will have other great opportunities to serve our country.

Anonymous said...

All that taking Anonymous comments out does is make the conversation more private. So I have to make some bulls**t account to make a statement. Who the hell are you anyways? I looked at your provile and soo no idenity. So my name is Jason. I hope that helps!

Brad Caldwell said...

Sometimes people use anonymous simply because they cannot remember their google account login and password!

Jeremy said...

My understanding is that Mike had another commitment and had to prioritize one over the other. It seems that people are making a bigger deal out of this than necessary. I would bet that every single Senate candidate has this happen multiple times during this election cycle. Hopefully the debate can be rescheduled, as I think it's a good idea for people to hear all the candidates.

Tim said...

Sorry missing out on a Lonsberry debate is not missing out on much. Bob is not very good at finding fact. He is more interested in pointing out his agenda. If you agree with him good for you otherwise it is a waste. I have better things to do with my time as well.

DK001 said...

Mike/staff picked the date, last Wednesday, per the request of Bob Lonsberry. Cherilyn and Team said ok, what ever will work for Mike. Just last Tuesday Mike made the call to cancel with no explanation or reason and refused to give one when asked.

...And this morning we find out via his website and phone calls, that he had no conflict with his schedule.

Mike is running scared. He can't face Eagar in a debate one on one. I guess he would have to explain his proposals for 3-4 Constitutional Amendments, sending illegals back to serve their sentences, possible conflicts of interest with Energy Solutions, his stand on Free Trade, and his lack of experience... Just to name a few issues...

You Guys can make all the excuses you want but you can't undo the damage you've done.

nacilbupera said...

Brad Caldwell:

We really debated over the issue with Anonymous comments. A few people are unrestrained and spread gossip, slander, and propaganda. We don't want to stifle dissent but wouldn't shed any tears if the G/S/P were to disappear.

Most any blog nowadays has some form of restriction; many use comment moderation which we don't want to use unless we have to. With comment moderation, the reader can't tell the bias of the administrator in rejecting comments; also there is a delay in comment posting between times when the administrator can get to moderating.

We'll see how it works with Anonymous turned off and perhaps people will value the ability to comment on Nacilbupera so much they'll actually remember their password!

nacilbupera said...

JEREMY:

"My understanding is that Mike had another commitment and had to prioritize one over the other."
--> Nacilbupera tweeted Mike Lee campaign manager Dan Hauser to get to the bottom of the reasons and has yet to hear back. Bob Lonsberry today said he vetted this argument and found it to be false.

"It seems that people are making a bigger deal out of this than necessary."
--> To Nacilbupera, the US Senate race is like the Las Vegas Bowl of politics. You don't just call a day ahead of time and say you're not going to make the game without explanation.

"I would bet that every single Senate candidate has this happen multiple times during this election cycle."
--> Every single candidate cancels at the last minute and gives no reason? Could you name one other example? In our Coakley example, she just didn't even agree in the first place.

"Hopefully the debate can be rescheduled, as I think it's a good idea for people to hear all the candidates."
-->You're on the right track, here!

Jason The said...

I've always found it strange when some blogger gets on a high horse hand-wringing over anonymous comments. We've allowed them since 2005, and ya know what? Never hurt a thing. It's the internet. If you're that thin skinned, you shouldn't be playing on it. That said, those who won't put their own name on their comments -- barring those who may have professional or personal concerns for doing so -- also exhibit their own special kind of weakness. Neither side, those blocking to so they don't hear what they don't want to hear, and those who leave their name off of their words out of lack of conviction, really garners much respect from me.

As for "not allowing propaganda," man, if that's your goal, you're going to have to stop allowing the posts here too. :)

To the point of the original post, I don't see the controversy. I've been a frequent critic of Lee, and he warrants much more for his band wagon jumping, and low bar for information contrasted with his rhetoric, but to make such a big deal out of canceling a debate is pretty transparently desperate to attack a candidate.

It happens in campaigns. Suck it up.

nacilbupera said...

Jason The:

We can't remember from your blog if you use a form of "comment moderation"; we're trying to avoid doing that by changing things up. Maybe it's not right; we will continuously evaluate.

Your posts usually crack me up and you got me again today, especially with: "if that's your goal, you're going to have to stop allowing the posts here too. :)"

Grandma Cathy said...

All we as voters are asking for is some honesty. If he had a scheduling problem just say. I don't think that is too much to ask of our candidates running for U.S. Senate. Be upfront and honest. I have not seen that so far in Mr. Lee.