Hatch Opposes His Own Earmarks in Omnibus Bill; Obama, Democrats, Bennett, Hatch All Fail Utah (Update)

Senate Democrats ruined last Christmas by passing Obamacare. This Christmas, they want to push the country into further oblivion by passing a last-minute, $1.1T, 1924-page (link to actual text), massive pork-barrel-laden Ominbus bill with 6600 earmarks, to make up for dereliction of duty in not passing a budget.¹ The bill if passed and signed by Obama (as widely expected if passed), would violate Obama's election promises to keep government transparent with C-SPAN coverage, fight wasteful spending, and not vote for earmarks.

Senate Democrats overwhelmingly support the spending. A few RINOs have voiced support including Bob Bennett who is on his last month as Utah's Senator and is ending his reign by showing his true, liberal Democratic colors: (The Hill.com, emphasis mine)

“That’s my intention,” said retiring Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) when asked
if he would support the package.

Bennett said earmarks in the bill might give some of his GOP colleagues reason to hesitate but wouldn’t affect his vote.

“It will be tough for some, but not for me,” he said.

After still not listening to Utah's desire for us to actually follow the Constitution and decimate the deficit, all I can say to Bennett that since I can do no more to get you any sooner out of office, may God hold you accountable for the country and the lives you are destroying.

Hatch meanwhile is doing the doublespeak. While is denouncing the Omnibus on Fox News² his own earmark requests have been stuffed into the bill. That's the problem, and he hasn't owned up to it either. As I reported in my last blog entry: Hatch Proposes UTOPIA Bailout Earmark for 2 Towns, Hatch proposed a $1M bailout earmark for helping with the UTOPIA buildout for Perry City and Tremonton in a $132B appropriations bill which had yet to be voted on: S. 3606.

The proposed $1.1T Omnibus takes S. 3606 and adopts it in full or modified form (so sorry, like anybody else in Congress I haven't had time to read it all) and combines it with the other pending appropriation bills Congress has failed to address. If you compare p. 55 of S. 3606 which authorizes the money to p. 63 of the Omnibus, they read exactly the same: both grant the continuation of the $18M in grant money (the grant money was separately earmarked on p. 76 of Senate report 111-221).

I've only had time to identify these two earmarks by Hatch in this bill. The real question--and I honestly don't know (probably no one does as of this moment)--is just how many earmarks of the hundreds Hatch has proposed for FY 2011 are in this awful Omnibus? And when will Hatch be honest to the people of Utah about his role in earmarking and contributions to the deficit?

Obama has failed. Democrats have been derelict--as well as proposing thousands of earmarks themselves--Bennett has converted to the Democratic Party, and Hatch is saying one thing and doing another. Utah: we've got a big problem on our hands. It's time to raise the alarm that Scrooge is about to steal another Christmas.

++++ Update 12/16 8am:

(h/t) Political Cornflakes Hatch has apparently stripped out his [other] earmark requests in the Omnibus due to his moratorium support (TPM). Still remains viable for Perry and Tremonton to get the money Hatch asked for.

More importantly Hatch's website has been scrubbed of his earmark requests. I half suspected this might happen so I downloaded copies before and am happy to repost the documents or email any interested parties. Naughty, naughty Hatch. Trying to cover up your wrongdoings before it gets out of the blogosphere into broadcast media.

At least Hatch is shrewd enough not to ignore lowly blogger Nacilbupera.

¹ Not to mention lame-duck Democrats attempt at passing a START treaty, a federal land grab, and a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and others I am missing...

² While the denunciations are good, they're probably more aimed at kicking off his 2012 re-election bid than to seriously attack spending. Case in point: Hatch's vote today to extend unfunded unemployment benefits and pork spending for a weak 2-year deferment of tax increases.

Hatch: Leading the Charge Against Kagan?

Some time ago I realized that simply being a voter was an insufficient enough participation level for me to consider myself a defender of the Constitution. That is a fundamental reason why I created Nacilbupera.

Likewise, with the regard to the nomination of Elena Kagan, it is insufficient enough for me to have my two Senators--Hatch and Bennett--simply verbally oppose the nomination of yet another Constitiution-ripper-upper. I need action. Every legal action possible. And with a scheduled July 13th vote in Committee, time is drawning short.

Judiciary Committee veteran Hatch must be found "Leading the Charge" (as the title of my autographed Hatch biography states he does) of a massive filibuster of this nominee Kagan whose ideology would veer from the strict power granted the Federal Government by "We the People." Hatch's judicial nominee opinions seem to carry a large amount of weight in the Senate. If Hatch is unwilling to use the power we the citizens of Utah have vested in him to defend our Constitution, then then time is ripe in 2012 to find another more willing to do so.

Senators Hatch and Bennett: will accept your duty as vested you by the People of the State of Utah and Lead the Charge? Or, Senator Hatch, must we find another to Lead the Charge as we found Mike Lee to replace Bob Bennett?

No Bailout for Bob Bennett in Utah Convention (Update 4)

In keeping with polls showing Utah's 3-term incumbent Senator Bob Bennett waning in support, GOP delegates at the state convention voted for Tim Bridgewater first, Mike Lee second, leaving Bob Bennett with a mere 27% percent of the vote in round two, thus stopping Bennett's advancement to a third round (2nd round results here).

Cherilyn Eagar polled a strong fourth in the first round of voting, but according to GOP convention rules, only the top 3 move on to a second round. Eagar and her supporters are strongly anti-Bennett and lean Bridgewater as evidenced by Bridgewater's removal of Lee from the top spot in the first round (first round results here). Eagar made no endorsement of either candidate.

During the convention, blogger/twitterer Frank Staheli pointed out an error in the online article by the Salt Lake Tribune incorrectly saying that Bennett had survived the second round to run against Lee.

In the third and final round, Bridgewater gained a lot of Bennett votes to advance his lead over Mike Lee by a 15-point margin (third round results here). As Bridgewater fell short of the 60% needed to avoid a primary, there will be a statewide runoff GOP primary to determine the nominee. Whatever the outcome, Bennett will not appear on the November ballot in Utah.

The ousting of Bennett is sure to send shock wave around the national politcal news as the removal of the incumbent Senator over his earmarking, vote for TARP, support of Wyden-Bennett healthcare, and violation of 2-term commitment was a major priority for teaparty and 9/12 grassroots organizations. It will also likely cause senior Senator Hatch--in office since 1977--to ponder retirement as teaparty groups begin planning his defeat as well in 2012.

Additionally, during the convention popular Governor Herbert coasted to an easy GOP November ballot place with over 70% of the vote in a sole round of voting.

KNRS US Senate Straw Poll Results (Corrected)

Today after 7 rounds of single-candidate-elimination online voting stretching over the past month, the KNRS straw poll winner was named: Cherilyn Eagar with almost 54% of the vote over runner-up Mike Lee.

Of unknown influence was KNRS' Bob Lonsberry, the major Utah conservative talk show host, endorsement this week of Bridgewater with a note that he had very much grown to respect Ms. Eagar and had concerns about Lee's inability to get out of debt as LDS church leaders counsel while grossing $600K last year.

In the rounds leading up to this announcement, in an April 23rd editorial to the Deseret News, Greg A. Henderson of Alpine, UT, noted that Bennett had not been able to get a seat in the top three candidates and that Lee had a substantial lead over second place Eagar and third place Bridgewater.

We draw a couple of noteworthy observations from this poll. First, Lee who has polled well over a long period of time seems to have taken a measureable downturn of support over the last week due at least in part to his late filing / personal finance revelations. Just how much remains to be seen but the turncoat endorsement by respected blogger Holly On The Hill from Lee to Bridgewater is having huge reverberations. Second, supporters of Eagar and Bridgewater seem to have the other as their second choices so that if one drops out there could be enough support to propel the other over strong Lee support in the convention: it took the Bridgewater supporters in the straw poll to push Eagar past Lee's first choice advantage.

What the poll really doesn't show is how Bennett supporters will vote if Bennett is knocked out because Bennett supporters are more likely aligned with the KSL viewpoint rather than KNRS viewpoint and were less likely to be represented in the straw poll. We feel Bennett's media attack on Lee's Libertarian-ish national defense stances signals to them also to vote for someone other than Lee.

All said, this should be a convention to be remembered tomorrow. If we were to predict an outcome it would be a primary runoff between two of the following: Eagar, Bridgewater, and Lee although we feel it's anybody's guess as to who actually comes out on top. We don't place too much confidence in the Dan Jones poll of delegates because the landscape seems to have changed in the weeks since the poll with (in our opinion) particularly Eagar and Bridgewater catching up with Lee. While we hope Eagar does well as she has been the most stalwart to principle, but we'd also like to find places for service for Bridgewater and Lee while sending Bennett back to private life with a heartful thanks for his service to our great state.

The Stop Bennett War (Update)

The fiscally conservative Club for Growth has eyed picking off Bailout Bob Bennett for some time and has now put their resources behind it as well. They included their anti-Bennett targeting on the front page of their website (CFG article permalink here):

Jessica Taylor at the Politico reports Club for Growth is "buying everything that Fox News in Utah will let us buy." While we personally haven't seen the commerical(s) air, we might not be watching during airtimes that they are buying as the advertising is extremely targeted (Utah market). Here's the ad:



Club for Growth also started a website: http://www.stopbobbennett.com/ which encourages us to attend our caucus meetings on March 23rd and to vote for delegates who will:

1. Stay at the convention and vote in all ballot rounds for United States Senate,
2. Support only fiscally conservative challengers to Senator Bob Bennett, and
3. Not at any time cast a vote at convention for Senator Bob Bennett.

As not only having committed to attending our caucus, but also now a declared candidate for state delegate in our precinct, we unhesitatingly signed this petition and publicly commit to our precinct our unabated efforts to defeat Bailout Bob--which efforts the reader can examine for themselves going through the "Bennett" tags on Nacilbupera.

On Facebook, the Club for Growth started the "Stop Bob Bennett" group on Tuesday and a few minutes ago posted its announcement that its fans now outnumber Bob Bennetts:

STOP BOB BENNETT fans now outnumber Bennett fans! 1492 to 1489. It took just 5 days. Keep sharing and inviting your friends. We need to outnumber them on March 23rd at your caucus.

Nacilbupera predicted back in August that Bennett would not be elected Senator because we felt the mood overwhelmingly against him and that mood hasn't changed. We also predict that if state delegates are true to the words from their lips, Bennett will be defeated at the May 8th convention (rather than a primary).

+++ Update 3/11:

GOP Chair Dave Hansen rebukes CFG efforts. (Politico)

Utah's GOP Senators Support PAYGO

Maybe it's because it's an election year. Maybe it's because Bennett realizes that frankly, we've had it with his "demonsheep Conservatism" and passing off of principles for compromise...and Hatch knows he's next up to bat in 2012.

But whatever the reason, Bennett and Hatch were numbered among 19 lowly GOP senators who voted in support of Jim Bunning's (R-KY) brave stance in correctly pointing out that a $10B proposition to extend unemployment benefits (read: welfare subsidies now as these folks are long-term unemployed) should be paid for by the recently-passed PAYGO provisions. Brian Darling of the Foundry at Heritage.org summed it up this way:

Basically, liberals in Congress love the idea of PAYGO, yet they refuse to enforce the statutory requirements that all new spending be offset. They do this by designating all new spending as an “Emergency Designation.” This is feel good politics at its worst, because the left can claim they are for PAYGO, yet PAYGO has yet to restrain any spending. Furthermore, the vote on PAYGO in the House helped pave the way for a $1.9 trillion increase in the debt limit. Therefore one can argue that PAYGO actually increased spending in the Congress.

Although we have been quite critical of Bennett on this blog (and quite justifiably so!) we do need to praise our elected officials when they do the right thing--and in this case, so it was. There are 79 Senators out there including every single Democrat and Obama who signed the bill who still has yet to get the teaparty message about reigning in spending.

URA Endorses Eagar, Philpot, & Herbert; Shear "Demonsheep"

The Utah Republican Assembly (URA) held their endorsement convention yesterday in Orem. The URA is the Utah branch of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA) self- described as "nation’s oldest and largest conservative Republican grassroots volunteer organization." It is a group Nacilbupera much admires and one bound to conservative principles, but one we have yet to claim membership.

The Daily Herald covered the the event noting the comment by Brian Halladay about "demonsheep": those professing conservative values but failing to act so. Maybe Brian saw this great Fiorina campaign video (for the record we advocate DeVore not Fiorina) but which is hilarious especially towards the end when the demon sheep is seen crawling on all fours:



Laughter aside and to Brian's point: could one of those demon sheep POSSIBLY be self-labeled "Utah's Conservative Choice" Bailout Bob Bennett? Interesting enough Bennett himself is beginning to back down from that label replacing that label in his website header with "The Fight is Now"--alluding to the fact that although he won't publicly admit it Bailout Bob, a veteran campaigner himself, knows his political life is on the line! In fact, the only places we could now find "Utah's Conservative Choice" is when you actually go in to his website to make a donation:




...and on some of his ubiquitous internet advertising:

Morgan Philpot won the endorsement for the privilege to defeat Matheson II in the 2nd District while Governor Gary Herbert won an endorsement in what should be a solid victory against Democratic tax-raiser Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon.

The most interesting and contested fight--indeed what might be a presage to the state GOP convention in May--Cherilyn Eagar won 64% of the vote after a third round of balloting to garnish the endorsement, defeating Mike Lee in the final round. This was huge for the campaign because unlike an unscientific Doug Wright poll last month from supporters publicly confessing voting multiple times for their candidates and voters from outside the state, these folks are political activists many of whom will be delegates at the state convention. Additionally, the URA voting was patterned after the GOP convention--unlike straw polling or even primary elections where all the candidates compete once with each other. Finally, we note in 2008 the URA endorsement helped Jason Chaffetz get elected.

What does this important endorsement mean?
Nacilbupera feels that this cements much of the hard work that has been going on for months at the Eagar campaign and really helps point out that the race is between Eagar and Lee with Eagar continuing to hold her lead. The choice is laid between an articulate, unencumbered, principles-tried-and-tested Eagar and a principle-professor lawyerspeak Lee who is entangled with Energy Solutions but just might be as--or at least close to as--Constitutionally-minded as Eagar; though questionably so as he has chased endorsements from the political establishment who themselves are not so Constitutionally minded. At this point, Nacilbupera feels that Williams and Bridgewater are probably not going to receive the coveted Bailout Bob Knockout Award though they each have good things we could say about their professed positions; nevertheless, it wouldn't surprise us either if Bennett were knocked out before even a Williams or Bridgewater. Yes, Burnsfans wherever you are, your Bailout Bob candidate is that bad. Now go be happy and eat some Bennettporkburgers from all that taxpayer money he's spending to buy your vote.

+++ Updates 2/21:

• Our sources tell us Eagar nearly walked away from a four-way ticket with an endorsement in the first round, garnishing 55% of the vote, Lee 32% and Bridgewater 9%. Gubernatorial and house races were decided earlier due to smaller fields of opponents.
  
• The Daily Herald article cited on this is the lead print headline on the Sunday paper which has the largest circulation of any day of the week.
  
• Blogger No Sheeples Here has a fanastic photoshop today of the great Demonsheep himself, BO

Treason by Earmark and Debt

We're not sure exactly when it happened, but somewhere along the past several months reducing our massive Federal debt has supplanted terrorism as being our top national priority in Nacilbupera's mind. Perhaps we feel that Al-Qaeda terrorists are using our economy to wreak destruction upon our country. Perhaps we want to vomit when Obama proposed higher taxes while claiming we have had our taxes cut. Perhaps we feel Obama's proposed budget deficit of $1.5T--more than tripling the worst "W" year--is a act of treason in itself.

Life under Hyperinflation
Nacilbupera was a financial clerk in Argentina during 1989 when that country experienced hyperinflation: it totalled 5000% that year and was devastating. Imagine prices on chalkboards at the grocery store that could change (increase) while you were shopping. Imagine losing in a single day over 60% of your currency's value vs. the world. Imagine 1-day and 1-week Certificates of Deposits (CD's). Imagine unannounced, prolonged bank closures and then when they open having a maximum withdrawal of $100 per account. Imagine having to fly out of the country to obtain currency because there simply isn't enough printed. Imagine no one paying a bill until the hour it was due because were you pay a week before, you would be paying significantly more. Imagine holding a new 10,000 denomination bill in your hand and realizing you really had US$20. In hyperinflation, these are no mirages but rather realities. Hyperinflation has a huge negative impact on productivity and output: it would be similar to having to file your taxes every day.

The bottom line is that with an unmanageable Federal debt and huge spike in the money supply as we monetize our national debt, as a country we are risking future hyperinflation. Surely, the road to hyperinflation is a treasonous one! Although earmarks account for a small portion of the debt, they frequently contain frivolous, if not scandalous wastes of money and point to corruption in the elected officials that proposed them.

Utahns on Earmarks
KNRS radio talk show host Bob Lonsberry really spelled out the problem for us in Utah on his radio show today; so much so that we made the following clip:



Meanwhile, Matt Canham over at the Salt Lake Tribune had an article today on this same subject of earmarks. While all four of Bennett's contenders are anti-earmark, Canham confirmed what Nacilbupera has seen from Cherilyn Eagar's position: not only a die-hard stance against them, but an unabashed critic of those who involuntarily seek treasonous acts by proposing such out-of-control earmark spending.

Eagar is the only Senate candidate who has attacked Bennett directly on the issue, calling him "addicted to earmarks." She has said big spending bills loaded with thousands of pet projects "smacks of cronyism and corruption."

Canham further cited Eagar as saying that earmarks "must show a legitimate federal tie-in"--a position Nacilbupera feels is dead-on correct.

The time has come for us to make a stand. Be like Lonsberry and call out treason when you see it. It doesn't matter if someone is a grandson of a Mormon prophet; evil is evil. The prophets have told us to "get out of debt" and they didn't mean for everyone to get out of debt except for Bailout Bob's pet projects and the rest of the massive Federal socialistic bureaucracy.

Seeking a Voice in the Illinois Senate Seat (Update)

Both the Democratic and Republican primaries in Illinois a week ago produced candidates unacceptable to Nacilbupera's principles. As a lifelong Republican, Nacilbupera has tried in our mind every conceivable flip flop of what do to with this unacceptable outcome. Do we remain loyal to party or to principle? Might it send a strong message to the President and to Congress to elect a GOP Senator from the seat formerly held by Obama? By adding an "R" to the Senate numbers might just the GOP be able to take back the Senate in 2010?

Although Don Lowery did not pull out victory, that he garnished a full 9% of the vote when polling just 2% two weeks prior (Chicago Tribune) is a testament to the last-minute momentum he was gaining as voters began to get to know him and support him. With citizenship outside of Illinois and unable to vote for Lowery, we were proud to have supported this great Judge.

So began our reasoning for what to do in this race. Our first decision was easy: despite being Republican, we would not financially contribute nor endorse the GOP primary elected candidate Kirk. The next question we really struggled with: do we remain silent and let Kirk fight his own battle or do we oppose and support someone else?

Silence is not a great option for a blogger like Nacilbupera who likes to speak the truth and get it all out. Besides--even though we have said "silence...conveys nothing about our opinion" which we hold true as there are many, many issues we wish to speak out on but don't find the time to--we felt the need to provide our opinion on this particular race as we have already been vocal. So the truth is Nacilbupera finds both Kirk and Giannoulias revolting as choices for Senator and felt as many do in Illinois without a voice.

We found a couple of solid choices for a principled candidates we like: Conservative Libertarian Mike Labno and Conservative Independent Mike Niecestro. Were we to live in Illinois our vote in November would go to one of these candidates or someone like them.

Many will argue that a Republican vote for a Labno or Niecestro would be "throwing away your vote." First of all, Nacilbupera has learned to never let anyone demean your voting choice when you have thoughtfully and prayerfully (being so inclined) done your best to seek out someone to represent your state, your country, and uphold the Constitution. Second, not only is such a statement demeaning, but it is oft used as intimidation by a candidate who is threatened: that is, if likeminded people all "threw their vote away" they would quite probably overtake the leader and thus end up not throwing their vote away. The bottom line is that no one can dictate anyone else's vote, so to my friends in Illinois: go vote your conscience.

One of the big arguments that will arise this election will be for us Republicans to unite behind Kirk because with Kirk we can gain the majority in the Senate. Honestly, if that is the goal rather than the means to the goal, then go right ahead and Kirkify yourself. Yet it seems to Nacilbupera that the reason why we can sometimes get congressional majorities but never hold on to them is because we aren't true to principles. We claim as Republicans we are for smaller government and then go and pass Medicare Part D and institute the unconstitutional "No Child Left Behind" program. This does nearly irreparable damage to our image and all the independent voters start looking at the Democratic party. The long term best option for the growth of the Republican Party is to find Congress members who hold to principles including our party platform and most importantly our Constitution. Voting for Kirk who proved his stripes last year by voting for Cap n Tax might be a short victory for the GOP but in the long term will do greater damage to our party. Don't forget the "Obama Obsession" my fellow Republicans: how quickly that sweet taste of victory turned sour for the Democrats who elected a candidate doing irreparable damage to his own party.

Were it to come down to this, Nacilbupera would rather us lose a potential GOP majority but stay true to principles so that after Illinois saw the permeating corruption continue under Giannoulias, the Land of Lincoln too might unshackle themselves like Massachusetts and throw off the chains of corruption in 2016.

As more primaries come onto view in the coming weeks and months: let Illinois be a signal to GOP that Nacilbupera has revolted and will not support candidates like Kirk even if it means costing the GOP seats and offices. We stand unabashedly for principles over partisanship.

Finally to be clear: we will apply this same standard to our own Bailout Bob Bennett. Should by some unfortunate, remote chance Bailout Bennett become the GOP nominee we have full plans to revolt as well and seek another. Fortunately, with a plethora of good candidates to choose from (and an exceptional one in Cherilyn Eagar) Nacilbupera shouldn't have to do so and will be able to vote for the Republican nominee for Utah Senate in November 2010.

+++ Update 3/27:
In lieu of Medi-geddon we have reversed our opinion about not supporting Kirk. We also note that Bailout Bennett signed the same repeal pledge although we are hoping to defeat him in Utah's May 8th convention.

How to Vent Your Political Frustrations

Nacilbupera’s father relates a story back in the day they would take sand and fill those postage-paid envelopes and mail them back to the sender, thereby causing the sender to pay the return postage.

In modern day as a Gmail user, Nacilbupera gets a sponsored advertising link at the top of the Gmail screen. Google searches your email to find terms which match advertisers who want to pay for the advertising. These past months, we have been getting a lot of “Bob Bennett for Senate” links and yet to receive a single ad from any of the others in the race (Bailout Bob got a ton load money from A to Z companies including banks he voted to bail out!)

Yet we actually find the links useful. Typically part—even betimes a majority--of the cost borne to those advertising is based on the number of clicks received. When we find ourselves particularly frustrated with Bennett, a great way to vent is only a click away! We click. Hmmm. Ten-cents goes bye-bye from the campaign coffers. We click again and again and again knowing that every click counts!

This week we also got some Martha Coakley sponsored links as well…click, click, click, click! You get the picture. We bet it’s almost as fun as mailing sand in those prepaid envelopes…and certainly as therapeutic!

Eagar bests Lee II; Both Trump Bennett II

A lesson learned for us through our tea party activism is we cannot have a strong Republic without our personal, active participation. We must push on in our efforts even sacrificing some pleasures in life and remain active in our quest for a return to Constitutional principles. Being an informed voter and voting every year or two simply will not satisfy the needs of our Republic to have a politically active, educated, and informed citizenry.

For far too many years we have allowed ourselves to lean on the stature and endorsements of others and to allow political despotism through nepotism. We remember past thoughts: Reagan was a great Conservative, therefore his vice-president must be one too. Bush was good so Bush Jr. must be good. That there leader is a Mormon so he must be against abortion/gay marriage/ripping the Constitution to shreds. Although this is a simplistic summary and our analysis has always more profound, we confess the past presence of such thoughts.

But our mentality has done a "360." Now when we look upon Bushs, Kennedys, Romneys & Reids or to localize it for Utah--Cannons, Bennetts, and Mathesons--we now look upon the dynasties with much disdain; and acutely so to the second generation who follow on the coattails of their fathers. Like watching a bad movie sequel, the second generation of politicians seem to get a electoral boost because of their genetics. Surely, our democracy is strong enough to not require nepotism. Indeed, it is a call for the opposite: it is for us the common citizen to rise to our obligation for public service.

This is not to say that because one happens to be the posterity of a famous politician one should be denied an opportunity to serve nor will Nacilbupera disqualify and exempt such from our vote and approval; nevertheless it does count as a negative mark. Truly, Bailout Bob Bennett (aka Bennett II or Bennett the bad movie sequel) should have prompted such a warning back in 1992 before elected. The problem then was it was a choice between Bennett II and Cannon III! Yikes! Is there no other patriot in Utah who isn't a re-tread?

But this is precisely how we feel about Mike Lee who announced his candidacy this week after months of intensive campaigning from Eagar and Williams who patriotically declared their candidacy early on. If you didn't know Lee before this election cycle (few did, ourselves included) he is the son of late BYU President and US Solicitor General Rex Lee. (We have to digress: at BYU we were once invited to lunch with President Lee and found him admirable!) But herein lies the problem--he's riding Daddy's coattails--and our biggest fear: will we go through all these efforts and sacrifices to replace Bennett II with a simple namechange to Lee II? We hope not. This is a fight to put in principled, Conservative candidates. Of course Lee II could turn out to be a wonderful Senator if elected--after all Mike can't help that his Dad is Rex (although he touts it). Yet based solely on the results of other political dynasties, we would have to put the odds low of Lee II sticking to principled Conservatism.

The second thing that disturbed us about Lee II is his campaign announcement. He brought together a bunch of seasoned Utah politicians to endorse him, even to the point of letting former Congressman Jim Hansen introduce him. Hansen, the former 22-year Congressman from Utah's First District? Yep. 22-year veteran Hansen was the lead hitter. So why in the world if Lee II is so adamant about amending the Constitution to put a 12-year cap on Congressional terms--why in the world would you even want Hansen to endorse you? It simply makes no sense unless--unless you are committed to old-style politics over principles. And top off the whole announcement with an endorsement from Shurtleff who is weak on immigration?

Lee II talks the talk. We share values with him. Our problem, understandably after being betrayed so many times by politicians (we're still waiting to see the healthcare debates Obama promised us on C-Span) we are skeptical of promises. And Lee II really has nothing to offer of substance: no voting record and no activism other than these Constitution speeches he's been giving for the past year: just words.

So... you say you want us to trust a political heir who gives Constitution speeches for a year and chooses as his firstmost endorser a politician who violates his principles of term limits and his crowning endorser a politician who violates his principles of being strong against illegal immigration--and you want us to trust this person as a reliable Conservative??? No. That is just too much to ask. Not when we have Cherilyn Eagar who has been a dedicated Conservative for 30 years.

We acknowledge some leftist, progressive, liberal readers to this blog so let's put Lee II in perspective: we would take Lee II day or night over Bennett II. Why? Because Bailout Burns has let us down, he has violated the Constitution by proposing Wyden-Bennett healthcare sham for starters. With Lee II, there remains if nothing else hope he will be true to principles. And that hope places him leagues above Bennett II and leagues below Cherilyn Eagar.

The Subterfuge of Bailout Bob Bennett

A subterfuge is more than a lie. Merriam-Webster defines it as "...the telling of a lie in order to...gain an end." We denounce our three-term-seeking-fourth Senator Bailout Bob Bennett Burns as using subterfuge to deceive voters into voting for him based on his promise to (1) limit his own term to twelve years and (2) fight for term limits.

The following are a sampling of articles from 18 long years ago when Bennett originally ran for office. (Note: These articles are not freely available on the web due to their age, however all can be easily examined with most Utah library cards using the Newsbank database. Please feel free to examine the articles in full if there arouses any question about the validity or context. Bold emphasis is ours.)

CAMPAIGN '92: SENATORIAL CANDIDATES ON THE ISSUES
Salt Lake Tribune, The (UT) - Thursday, October 29, 1992

Senator: If elected to the Senate, will you place a limit on the number of terms
you will seek? If so, how many?
Yes. Twelve years, two terms in the Senate and six in the House....I also support term limits...

ROLLY & WELLS ...
Salt Lake Tribune, The (UT) - Monday, April 27, 1992

BRENT WARD, in a recent joint appearance by Republican U.S. Senate candidates, promised: "I am not going to stay in the Congress for more than 12 years. Period.''
"If you're going to only serve two terms,'' said candidate Bob
Bennett, 'why don't you let me serve two terms first. You're a
young guy.''

4 UTAH SENATE CANDIDATES TRY TO STAND APART
Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Monday, July 20, 1992
Author: Bob Bernick Jr., Political Editor

Bennett said he's "seen the light'' on term limitation. He'll only stay two terms, 12 years, and supports term limitation by law.

The following excerpt demonstrates that term limits was a forefront issue back in 1992 highlighted by retiring Senator Garn who had his own self-imposed term limit problems:

Garn to Depart Senate After 18-Year Tenure
Salt Lake Tribune, The (UT) - Thursday, May 30, 1991
Author: Dan Harrie, SLTribune

"When I first ran for the Senate, I intended to only be here two terms. I have stayed one term longer than I originally intended to," said Mr. Garn, who has repeatedly co-sponsored legislation to limit senators to two consecutive terms. "If you preach over and over again that there ought to be term limitations, even though I rationalized a third term, I think you ought to practice what you preach."

Senator Bennett: we agree with former Sen. Garn. We believe you ought to practice what you preach. You preached to us and promised to us 18 years ago when we were just a mere BYU student that you would serve 2 terms--12 years. You lied. You used subterfuge to get elected and thought we were so stupid we would forget about your promise. As a devout Mormon, Nacilbupera's religion preaches to us about the importance of keeping covenants, oaths, and promises; yet through your senatorial perpetuity you have blasphemed these very values we hold dear.

We raise a title of liberty against you, your hypocrisy, and your subterfuge. We will not vote for you again, period. No convention vote, no primary vote, no general election vote. In this you have disgraced yourself, your party, and ill-represent your religious standards. We bear this witness against you.

Now you have the audacity to come to our hometown to campaign at the Provo Marriott at 730pm tomorrow for another 6 years which would put your total at 24. We don't know if we'll be there or not, but if we're not could you answer this one question:

Why do you persist on making a mockery of your own promise to limit yourself to two terms?

The Subterfuge of Bailout Bob Bennett: Part 2 The Nitty Gritty

Part 2 is going to be a detailed and lengthy response to an anonymous poster who requested more info on the sources. Read at your own peril; we are not responsible if you fall asleep...

We are dividing up the source documentation into two parts:

Part 1: Bennett talking specifically about limiting himself
Part 2: Bennett talking about his support of term limits

We will not quote the article in full for copyright reasons, but will in our citation include extraneous subject material proceeding (if any) of the issue of term limits as well as following (if any) to show we have covered the full article subtopic of term limits. Furthermore, we will do no editing or emphasizing to convey a true flavor of the article as it was intended.

PART 1 QUOTES:

• CAMPAIGN '92: SENATORIAL CANDIDATES ON THE ISSUES
  Salt Lake Tribune, The (UT) - Thursday, October 29, 1992
  SENATORIAL CANDIDATES ON THE ISSUES
  "Senator
  If elected to the Senate, will you place a limit on the number of terms you will seek? If so, how many?
  Yes. Twelve years, two terms in the Senate and six in the House.
  What is the single biggest problem facing the nation today?
  The single biggest problem facing our nation is a Congress that doesn't work. This has led to the biggest economic problem, the federal deficit. I have made Congressional reform a centerpiece of my campaign. The first bill I will introduce is a bill to reduce the size of congressional staff by at least 25%. I also support term limits, the line-item veto, and the balanced-budget amendment with a tax limitation provision, which will help with both the debt and Congressional reform. All of these measures will help change the way Congress operates and help reduce the federal deficit.
  If elected, you will have no seniority in the U.S. Senate. Even if congressional reform takes place in the near future, Utah will be left in the next few years with a Senator without clout. How do you propose to overcome that?
  The rules of the Senate give a new senator power to influence legislation in a way that many new members of the House cannot. I have worked in the Senate, I know the rules, and I can make them work for Utah. Recent history reminds us that new senators, who are willing to work hard, often have a significant impact even in their first terms. For example, Sen. Hatch led the fight against significant new labor laws during his first term. I am tenacious and work hard. I will have an impact, even as a junior senator...."

• UTAH SENATE CANDIDATES TRY TO STAND APART
  Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Monday, July 20, 1992
  Author: Bob Bernick Jr., Political Editor
  "...Here's how the four see their primary races: Bob BennettPointing to Cannon's current TV advertisements, Bennett said his campaign will concentrate ``on solutions, not slogans,'' and on Bennett's emphasis on cleaning up Congress. ``Congress is the problem, the place to start. You can't fix Washington until you fix Congress. And you can't do that with slogans like `We should replace all the people back there,' '' said Bennett. Specifics? Bennett said he's ``seen the light'' on term limitation. He'll only stay two terms , 12 years, and supports term limitation by law. To help control Congress' spending, Bennett supports a line-item veto for the president. ``Joe doesn't,'' he said. ``I'd cut the congressional staff by at least 25 percent...."

• ROLLY & WELLS ...
  Salt Lake Tribune, The (UT) - Monday, April 27, 1992
  ....Robert G. Pruett III represented WE, which received $5,000 from Waste Management Inc., which has lobbied for higher fees in Utah so firms will dispose of their waste at Waste Management's California facility instead.
  Pruett says he is a Waste Management representative to resolve any legal questions about WE's acceptance of the $5,000.
  BRENT WARD, in a recent joint appearance by Republican U.S. Senate candidates, promised: ``I am not going to stay in the Congress for more than 12 years. Period.''
  ``If you're going to only serve two terms ,'' said candidate Bob Bennett , ``why don't you let me serve two terms first. You're a young guy.''
  

PART 2 QUOTES:

• U.S. SENATE
  Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Tuesday, October 20, 1992
  "...How would you balance the federal budget?
  Bob Bennett (R)
  Adopt a balanced budget amendment with a tax limitation provision. Give the president the line-item veto to control pork-barrel spending. Adopt many of the remaining provisions of the Grace Commission. Limit growth of entitlement spending to a rate lower than the growth rate of the economy. Significantly cut federal operating budgets. Adopt a pro-growth tax and regulation policy.
  Wayne Owens (D)
  I support a presidential line-item veto; balanced budget amendment; 10-year sunset review of all federal agencies except entitlement programs; eight-year term limitation for committee chairmen; cut the number of committees and committee staffs by 25 percent; split federal budgets into capital (investment) and operating budgets, balance operating budgets; cut unnecessary programs whether they provide jobs in your state or not. I don't support an arbitrary cap on entitlements or unfair entitlement reductions, like Bennett calls for.
  Do you favor or oppose term limitations? If so, at what length?
  Bob Bennett (R)
  Yes. 12 years for the House and Senate.
  Wayne Owens (D)
  No. Term limits will undermine the power of small states in Congress, increase the power of the bureaucrats and special-interest lobbyists. A better solution is eight-year limits on committee chairmanships and reform campaign financing laws to make elections more competitive...."

• ELECTION '92: U.S. SENATE
  Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Sunday, November 1, 1992
  "...Bennett has built a campaign around one word - change. And he's pushed it in innovative TV commercials for more than nine months.
  Bennett , 58, says Congress must be reformed radically before other major federal problems, like the deficit, can be solved. He's for a balanced-budget amendment, with the provision to hold down tax increases.
  He favors a line-item veto for the president. He wants to cut congressional staffs and limit the terms of House and Senate members to 12 years each.
  Bennett says anyone who is serious about reducing the federal deficit must talk about entitlement programs, like Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. While saying he won't reduce those benefits, he is willing to look at controlling their growth by linking them to the cost of living...."

• WHERE DO OWENS, BENNETT STAND?
  Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Tuesday, October 20, 1992
  Author: Bob Bernick Jr., Political Editor
  "...But it's clear Owens is going down, if indeed he ends up losing, fighting.
  To get a better handle on the issues that divide the two men, the Deseret News asked them to fill out a questionnaire.
  The men differ on health care reform; how to cut the military and how much; on term limitations for incumbent congressmen and campaign finance reform.
  Owens' campaign has revolved around one main theme: He's been an effective fighter for Utah's interests.
  Bennett has grabbed a hold of the word ``change'' - saying he is a man who can join with others and reform Congress and its fiscal mess...."
  
• CANNON, BENNETT FOCUS ON 2 DIFFERENT ISSUES
  Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT) - Thursday, September 3, 1992
  Author: Gina Howard, Staff Writer
  While not disagreeing that the deficit is an important issue, Bennett said nothing can be done until problems with Congress are solved. ``For me, the number one issue is how are we going to restructure the Congress? That's why I favor term limitation and the (presidential) line-item veto,'' he said, adding that the first bill he plans to introduce would be to cut congressional staffs by 25 percent. Bennett said 43 of the 50 states' governors have the line-item veto, and that it's time the president has that power also.
  Cannon said he has some ``reservations'' about the line-item veto and opposes term limitation. Each would require a constitutional amendment, Cannon believes.
  Both candidates agreed the growth of entitlements like Medicaid, Medicare and welfare must be slowed; that changes in the welfare program must be made on a state level; and that the nation's health-care system needs to be reformed but not by a federally mandated, national health-care plan. Both oppose a congressional pay raise.
  Cannon said Congress deserves a pay raise - when they balance the budget. Congressmen's pensions should be gradually reduced so they don't have an incentive to stay in Congress. This would also make ``them live more like normal people . . . so they feel like normal people,'' Cannon said.
  Saying he will not accept the pension if he is elected, Bennett said that being a congressmen has become a full-time profession and called for a return to part-time citizen service. ``Citizen service is something you do for your country, not for your retirement,'' he said. Cannon said he opposes a national health-care plan because it ``would only be more costly and less efficient.'' He supports tax credits for small businesses. Bennett also supports tax credits and believes that it is silly that employers own health-care policies. ``You should own the policy yourself,'' he said.

I Don't Know Cherilyn. Whatever.

Really. We're not trying to go after every radio talk show host in Utah. We have lots of great talk show hosts, including Doug Wright a fellow Republican on KSL radio--we believe Utah's largest radio station measured in listener-ship.

We typically listen to Rush Limbaugh on another station at the same time Doug Wright is so we're kind-of torn here: do we hear a Utah perspective or a national perspective? Hmmm, tough choice. Maybe we favor the national because our state is heaven compared to the problems the federal has created for itself. At any rate, we didn't catch this show until more recently so the show is a bit dated.

But our point doesn't seem dated. Though it is hard to follow a show without published transcripts as Utah radio shows tend to be, we have yet to uncover any newer discussions on the Senate race than found in this video we created on Doug's Sept. 15th show:

We're at a real dilemma now with one radio show host (Bob Lonsberry) that feels that Cherilyn Eagar "isn't bright" without an iota of supporting evidence and another (Doug Wright) that promotes "3 good MEN" one of whom really isn't running at all (Tim Bridgewater). We are beginning to feel like their might be some sexism going on here. Why didn't Wright say "3 good Republican candidates"? That would have abated the thoughts. But he said "3 good MEN" knowing their was a female candidate in the race he "didn't know personally." We are not accusing anyone of being sexist--after all we have had women in statewide offices including former Republican governor Olene S. Walker--and certainly there is a lack of evidence to do any sort of accusation. We also think highly enough of Wright and Lonsberry to dismiss the ideas of sexism--yet it wouldn't hurt for them to clarify their remarks either. Maybe it's a bummer having people pay close attention to what you say when you're on air.

We're not vying for endorsements from either. Wright probably endorses Bennett; Lonsberry endorses Shurtleff (or Chaffetz who isn't running at this point). But we think it important to treat the frontrunner in the race with more respect than just "whatever," "not bright," or to shirk on your responsibility as a media member by dismissing with an "I don't know her." Be fair like you preach to your audience; be Responsible Republicans yourselves.

One of the things we have learned through much research and applicable to our out-of-state like-minded readers is to study and follow your own officials. Campaign slogans such as Bennett's "Utah's Conservative Choice" can be more propaganda than descriptive--"Utah's Middleman" or "Utah's Compromiser" are more apropos in his case.

Cherilyn Eagar Ignored, Then Falsely Accused

Bob Lonsberry is a wonderful conservative talk-show host in Utah on 105.7 KNRS and Nacilbupera enjoys listening to his wisdom in regards to many local and national political topics.

Bob has endorsed Jason Chaffetz for Senate both in writing and on his radio show. Nacilbupera shares Lonsberry's admiration for Chaffetz but instead of seeing Chaffetz run in 2010 against Bennett, would love to see Chaffetz go up in 2012 against Hatch (presuming Hatch foolishly decides to run again). Additionally, Chaffetz has given no indication of running against Bennett but wisely--more of of not to be tied to one's words rather than seriously debating a run--he has not ruled out running.

In an Aug 29th straw poll (yes, straw polls aren't necessarily the most reliable but they're what we've got), both Cherilyn Eagar and Mark Shurtleff garnished more votes than the incumbent Bennett. This was a newsworthy item published throughout the state media and picked up by the political sections in the national media as well. However, on Lonsberry's very next show held on Monday, Aug. 31th, Lonsberry began the show never mentioning Cherilyn Eagar's name or the significant percentage of vote she received in the poll.

On that Monday, Lonsberry described for his listeners the 2010 Senate race in the Republican Party as between incumbent Bennett and Mark Shurtleff both of whom Lonsberry mentioned he would like to get on the air to be heard. Everyone else (including Cherilyn Eagar) got this stinging rebuke:

To be honest with you not one of them has a snowball's chance in Elko of getting anywhere near the general election. All of them in the convention and primary system will be cyphers; they will be non-entities...(archived program here).

Lonsberry further indicated that everyone outside of his estimation of the two serious contenders were doing "ego-exercise" and were "gum[ming] up the works." Pretty harsh words for citizens trying to do their patriotic duty and serve the country.

Although Lonsberry is entitled to his opinions, it seemed unfair and disingenuous to (1) omit the used of Eagar's name completely from discussion of the race and (2) omit the fact of the straw poll the broadcast-day after its occurrence. Perhaps Lonsberry was constrained by his employer not to mention Eagar's name as she has substituted for a competing talk radio show. We sent Lonsberry a nice email (click on image to read) which he never did respond to. (Lonsberry, you're still welcome to respond to our email or this post.)

Fast forward to 8am this morning when Lonsberry hosted a "Who do you back for Senate in 2010?" call-in where viewers could discuss the "prominent contest between Bennett and Shurtleff" or Jason Chaffetz, Lonsberry's pick (show archived here; discussion begins at 1:48:50). Again no mention of Cherilyn Eagar. Then came the tidalwave flood of Eagar calls into the station; sincere citizens pointing to the alignment of Eagar's values to theirs. (Interesting sideline: Eagar also compares herself ideologically to Chaffetz.)

Lonsberry, obviously dismayed by the plethora of pro-Eagar calls, began reading from an Action Alert (copy of Alert published by blogger True Politics USA) he had received the previous night from the Eagar campaign encouraging supporters to call in. Instead of acquiescing that Eagar has large and growing support in Utah, he made it seem that all the callers were from out of state since the Action Alert had mentioned 8am mountain time show topic broadcast time and if Eagar wanted in-state supporters she would have omitted the time zone in the Action Alert.

Lonsberry is flawed in his attacking Eagar's use of the words mountain time for two reasons: (1) a time zone is giving for convenience of listeners of the program who are Utah voters who may be temporarily out-of-state on business or vacation. We know all of Utah is mountain time, but it is easy to get distracted with time zones when you are out of state. (2) Lonsberry should have tracked the area codes of the callers if he felt the callers were out-of-state--after all, we only have two Utah issued area codes and Lonsberry could have screened callers with only the 801- and 435- prefixes were he to be so flooded with out-of-state calls. Indeed, Lonsberry failed to mention a single example of anyone who called in being from out-of-state.

Lonsberry also accused Eagar of being dishonest and "trying to create a false public perception" by requesting supporters to call in. Wrong! Lonsberry had multiple public announcements on his program prior to the phone-in event and all candidates could have, should have, or perhaps actually did encourage their supporters to phone in just as Eagar did. How does Lonsberry know that Action Alerts weren't also sent out by other campaigns? Lonsberry discounted the idea that perhaps Eagar supporters are more vocal because we were slided from your mention earlier and wanted to have our voice heard (for the record: Nacilbupera did not call the Lonsberry show today). Lonsberry: how were we to voice our opinion as you asked us to do without trying to "create a false impression." We could either call in or not call in. Ironically if these noble souls hadn't called in, then you could have accused Eagar of "creating a false public perception" by hiding true existing public support for a leading candidate.

The only reason Lonsberry gave for his dismissal of Cherilyn Eagar was as follows:

I just don't believe she's competent to be United States Senator...I believe this is an exercise in vanity.

Lonsberry failed to have a serious discussion of her business experience or experience as a conservative activist. He also failed to reason with the audience what it is that he feels makes her "incompetent." If you label someone, then you need to discuss the supporting facts for that label. Perhaps Lonsberry feels that prior political office is requisite; we answer give us someone with principles and integrity and they will be a thousand times better public servant than an established, polished politician.

Nacilbupera feels Lonsberry has pre-emptively dismissed Eagar. In the end, we Eagar supporters need to prove to Lonsberry he misjudged Eagar. We need to get her through the convention and show that she is for real. Lonsberry seems rather set in his ways but we always hope that someone we respect so much in so many other discussions will at last come to the table of reason and respect for the principles Eagar stands for and the great Senator she will be for our state. We don't need Lonsberry support to win our case with the good people of Utah, but it sure might be nice if Lonsberry were to be honest about the facts with his listeners, quit the labeling, and show some common decency for our candidate and campaign.

To Bennett and Hatch: How Dare You Call Yourselves Conservatives!

Cass Sunstein, was confirmed by the Senate late last week as the new head of the OIRA (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs), commonly known as the new "regulatory czar."

His nomination was filibustered by the Republicans, but both of our Senators--Hatch and Bennett--voted for cloture being among only six Republicans to do so. If this weren't bad enough, both Hatch and Bennett joined the Democrats in confirming him 57-40.

Nacilbupera feels betrayed. In his quest for a third term Bennett declares himself as "Utah's Conservative Choice." Yeah, right! we answer.

Since when is any of the following radical ideology promoted by Mr. Sunstein considered part of the conservative agenda?

• Giving animals "rights"
• Abolishing hunting (he recanted this in his confirmation hearing that is not his view)
• Advocates the Socialist/Communistic ideals of FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights
• Views political discussion on the Internet as a possible threat to democracy (good thing we got MSNBC and the NY Times to tell us the truth, huh Cass?)

Nacilbupera feels like challenging Bennett on his conservative position and yell out in honor of Joe Wilson: Bob Bennett You Lie! You tell us you are a conservative but you dishonor your cause with your votes. Own up to the truths of Wyden-Bennett you advocate.

My fellow Utahns and Americans, let us honor Bennett with the old chant of of the radicals Bennett confirms: Hey, hey! Ho, ho! Robert Bennett has got to go!!

Just another reason to vote for Cherilyn Eagar in 2010.

Eagar for US Senate 2010

Thank goodness the mood in Republican mood Utah has moved away from the mushy middle towards principled conservatism! Nacilbupera is committed to replacing both Bennett in 2010 and longtime-liberal-Kennedy-friend Orrin Hatch in 2012 with more principled, conservative candidates. Don't get me wrong: both of our Senators are good, honest men that have done much, but when I compare them to people like Ronald Reagan, Jason Chaffetz, or Sarah Palin I sometimes come up wanting.

Yesterday at the Utah County GOP BBQ, we had a chance to personally interact with Bennett's two top contenders: current Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Businesswoman Cherilyn Eagar. We would vote for either over Bennett but Eagar inspires us. She has decried Bennett's addiction to earmarks and his less-than-conservative Wyden-Bennett health care plan which includes government-funded abortions. She is NOT a career politician and speaks from the heart.


In the yesterday's straw poll (Nacilbupera elected not to participate) Shurtleff won, followed by Eagar and last place Bennett. As Eagar was the latest entry into the race, Nacilbupera expects her numbers to climb as the word gets out that we have a real chance for principled change (not to mention a first female US Senator from Utah--our state being an eager leader in the woman's suffrage movement including the first female state senator elected in the United States!)

Nacilbupera is committed to our local grassroots movement to right the wrongs of our GOP party which has forgotten about term limits, fiscal restraint and responsibility, and smaller not larger government. America: real change is coming and Utah is going to be part of the solution. We will not tolerate "politics as usual" but "politics for patriots."

Indeed, Nacilbupera feels there is just as much need for patriots now as during our nation's founding years who sacrificed time, money, and comfort for love of country. Although we may not be honored with bronze statues and glorious paintings, it is not the fame we seek but of preserving and restoring this back to a great nation of freedom.

Nacilbupera finished Beck's portion of "Common Sense" and highly recommends it. We agree with all the 9 principles and 12 values and have joined our 9/12 group. Perhaps the only difference we have is that we believe that we can take our Republican Party back and adhere to our party's platform through local, grassroots intervention.

Nacilbupera also predicts that Bennett will not be re-elected as Senator in 2010. We will do everything we can to support Eagar so that Bennett doesn't even make it out of our convention (if Eagar gets 60% of the vote in the convention, she can then concentrate on defeating the Democratic challenger and won't have to face a primary election against Bennett or Shurtleff.

Finally, we promise you America that although you don't know Eagar now, you will love her and what she stands for. It is then with great satisfaction that Nacilbupera endorses Cherilyn Eagar for US Senator in 2010.

Independence Day '09: The Grand Parade

(This is a first of posts on the Independence Day 2009 events)
What an awesome day we've had celebrating our country's freedoms. We started the day early staking out good seats for Provo's Freedom Festival Grand Parade, an annual event that gathered 150-200K spectators.

The parade was fantastic featuring: floats; Miss Provo & court; marching bands from the high schools across Utah County; military vets, ROTC, and active duty as well as an array of past and present combat vehicles; baby contest winners; BYU President Samuelson as well as the Cougarettes; our year-old Utah Valley University and UVU flight school, multiple Scottish bands with bagpipes in full regalia; police, fire, and public disposal depts; equestrians and llamas; Uncle Sam; LDS Elder and Sister missionaries; and perhaps our favorite: a virtual "who's who" of Utah politics.


First on the political scene was the tallest of America's Senators, 6' 6" Junior Senator Bennett walking at a brisk rate wearing a cowboy hat adding to his height, waving to the crowd. He seemed fit enough to race in the 5K and 10K Freedom Run held just before the start of the Parade. Bennett is a great asset to the conservative movement and a friend to Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.


Then came Gary Herbert, our Lt. Governor who will assume the Governorship as the Senate moves sometime this summer to confirm our current Governor Huntsman in the role of Ambassador to China. Herbert, an Orem native, will likely be an even better governor than Huntsman.



Next came Senator Hatch who has led so many valiant fights, particularly on the Judiciary Committee, on getting nominees who won't legislate from the bench on our Supreme Court.

Also in the parade were our own--the great--US Rep. Jason Chaffetz who didn't drive by close enough for a picture, our Utah County Comissioner Larry Ellertson, our retiring mayor Lewis Billings, and our Provo City Councilmembers including our own Sherrie Hall Everett. What an awesome display of patriotic power!

Before the parade was the balloon fest featuring a dozen or two balloons including this piggy bank from Bank of American Fork which looked to Nacilbupera more like the Porkulous spending bill passed the Democrats this spring complete with Obama's face on it. (Who says you can't put lipstick on a pig?)


We enjoyed the parade and want to thank all the many volunteers who helped put together the event. We are also grateful for the friendly crowd gathered from around the county who all squished together and got along just fine during the 2hr parade and few hours beforehand. We enjoyed the mood and each other.