Thinking in Print – Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print – Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print – Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print – Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print – Cogito Ergo Blogito
I received the following from the Gibbons campaign about an hour ago. General Gibbons has announced he is dropping out of the race for financial reasons. I was honored to meet Bill several times on his campaign and he graciously spent time with many of the ConserVOLiance bloggers and activists in Middle and West Tennessee. General Gibbons brought a real grassroots presence to the race and his campaign issues, particularly those on crime and public safety, added an element to the discussion that was unique to his campaign. His voice and his ideas will be missed. I hope the other candidates and the eventual nominee will seek out General Gibbons for his insight and wisdom as they move forward in the race.
Thanks, Bill, for all you did for Tennessee and Tennesseans!
Today, I am withdrawing from the race for governor for one reason and one reason only, and that is lack of sufficient campaign funds to go forward.
For over a year, we have had a specific campaign plan which called for a budget of $2.5 million – substantially less than what one other campaign will spend and at least slightly less than what two others will probably spend. Our initial goal was to have at least $1.0 million of that by the end of 2009. We fell significantly short of that goal. We then set a goal of having at least $1 million by April 1 of this year. It is obvious at this point that we will not achieve that. Our balance on hand has gone down rather than up since our last disclosure in early February. We have no reasonable prospect of paying for any media campaign, a necessity for success in this race.
I had hoped to achieve our financial needs by convincing enough people that this campaign was an opportunity to invest in a movement to tackle the big challenges our state faces of reducing our crime rate, improving our schools, and creating a better climate for more good paying jobs. Those are challenges that are especially critical to my home community of Memphis. My primary responsibility was to successfully convince enough people to make that investment. To the extent we failed, it was my failure.
Since State Senator Jim Kyle and I have both withdrawn from the race, we have no candidate from my own community of Memphis and Shelby County or who understands personally its unique needs and opportunities. We have crime driven by gang activity and drug trafficking which cries out for changes in our state sentencing laws. We have one of the largest urban school systems in the nation with the urgent need for reform. The University of Memphis is a unique urban research university which is being overlooked by state government and deserves its own independent governing board. And state government needs to end its neglect of the University of Tennessee Center for Health Sciences and The MED. I hope the other candidates of both parties will work to learn more about the community I love.
I thank the hundreds of people who did join me in this effort. Many are old friends. Others are new friends I made during the course of the campaign. I will be forever indebted to their support and friendship.
Although raising money has proved most difficult, an extremely heartening aspect of this experience has been the willingness of people across the state who care about its future to give their support and their time to my candidacy. They have reinforced my own faith in the political process.
I commend the campaign staff. I could not have asked for a more talented group of individuals. And I thank my family for their support and tolerance of the many hours I spent on the campaign trail. Frankly, one plus to ending the campaign is that I will be able to spend more time with my wife Julia who has been unable to participate because she is a federal judge.
I’m looking forward to continuing my service as district attorney in Shelby County, our state’s largest jurisdiction. I’m honored to serve with many dedicated public servants. I’ll go to work every day determined to make my community an even better place in which to live. And I will continue to push aggressively for needed changes at the state level in our criminal justice system.
A statewide campaign in Tennessee is not for the faint-hearted. It is both physically and emotionally demanding. I wish the other candidates of both parties well in the coming months. I urge them to focus on the real challenges our state faces and to be bold in proposing ways to meet those challenges.
Mike Turner caught me. I’m tired of running and I just give up. I’m publicly admitting that I’m a R.A.C.I.S.T. – I’m a Republican Against Crazy Ignorant Stupid Twits!
As reported in the City Paper and in a TN GOP presser today, Turner, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, (I’d call him Representative Turner but I don’t think anyone wants his views to be representative of theirs) put his big big ol’ Democratic foot in his big ol’ Democratic mouth yesterday when at a press conference he said:
“‘We’ve got a lot of bills on states’ rights here, state sovereignty and all that,’ he added. ‘We went through that fight once before. All of a sudden, we have a black man elected president and everybody wants to start acting like something’s wrong with our country. I didn’t agree with a lot of things George Bush did, but I wasn’t ready to secede from the union.’
“Asked to elaborate afterward, Turner said, ‘I think some of the people who are against Obama are just against Obama because he’s African-American.’”
Really, Mike? You think the 10th Amendment and the Bill of Rights are synonymous with secession? You SERIOUSLY think that? You believe that people who oppose Obama are racists? To quote your Party’s leader in the US House, “Are you serious? Are you SERIOUS?” Based on what, Mike? Any facts to go with that irresponsible allegation? There’s a simple way to tell. It’s really easy, Mike. Just produce “some of the people” you reference so it can be verified that they indeed are both “against Obama” and that it’s “because he’s African-American.” I can tell you that there are a host of intelligent, thoughtful, principled, rational and patriotic people who are against Obama and his agenda. I can produce them by the thousands. Just visit any Tea Party, Mike. Except those folks only fulfill half your description because they are “against Obama” based on his policies not his pigment. It’s his methods not his melanin. But unless you can produce more than your own allegations, perhaps you should just keep your ignorance to yourself.
But that doesn’t fit with standard Democratic battle strategy so you actually publicly made one of the saddest and most ignorant comments I’ve heard from a politician in any party in years. Tell me you were just frustrated and misspoke, Mike. Tell me you just blurted out the first stupid thing that entered your mind and that you regret it. Tell me you understand how ignorant and foolish you realize your remarks publicly reveal you to be. Tell me it was only by accident that you slandered, libeled and tarred millions of Americans with your bile, ignorance, bitterness and hatred. Perhaps there’s an explanation that tells me it was all just a “youthful exuberance” or some other dalliance that should be overlooked. Better yet … tell all of Tennessee. They are watching, Mike, and wondering what sort of man says such things.
I don’t think there’s an explanation possible, Mike. And I don’t know there’s a fix. How can you work with me when you hold such a low opinion of me? And how can I work with you given your revelation of how much integrity you lack? But what do I know? I’m just a R.A.C.I.S.T.. But the Crazy, Ignorant, Stupid, Twits I oppose now have you as their poster-boy. I suppose we’ll see which of us pays the worse price for our views.
Let me say from the outset that I’m a fan of Mae Beavers. I appreciate her service in the Senate. I applaud her fights for Tennesseans there. I admire her commitment to sound principles. But it is precisely my appreciation of such things which are the foundation for my inability to support her current decision to jump back in the TN Senate District 17 race after dropping out of the race for Wilson County Mayor. Mae is a Conservative, but this decision is not.
As Conservatives, we believe in both individual liberty and individual responsibility. We believe that a man should be free to do what he chooses with his life and property. We also believe in the natural and obvious implication of such freedom; that a man must, therefore, also be willing to accept the consequences – for good or for ill – of exercising that freedom. The two go hand in hand. For Conservatives, it would be difficult to overestimate the importance of liberty and responsibility. They are at the core of everything we do.
Before Mae announced she was running for Wilson County Mayor, she had options. Any decision concerning what to do about remaining the Senator from District 17 was hers alone. Mae admits many people encouraged her to run for Wilson County Mayor and that such encouragement was influential in her decision not to run for Mayor. But no one forced her to make that decision. She took counsel of her family, her God, her advisors, her constituents and her self and, ultimately, she alone made the decision not to seek re-election to the Senate. She alone had the freedom to make that choice for her life.
Once made, announced and implemented, other people took into account her choice and made their own decisions. Susan Lynn chose to run for Mae’s available seat and as many as 10 candidates may run for Lynn’s seat from TN House District 57. Money was spent, momentous decisions were made that impact individuals, families, voters, the TN GOP and perhaps even Americans beyond the borders of Tennessee. While Lynn and any others who made decisions about their candidacy must also accept responsibility for their choices, the entire chain of events was set in motion by Mae Beavers’ decision. No one I have spoken with has suggested that Susan Lynn would ever have considered a primary challenge of Mae. There is no hint of the notion that anyone was considering a primary challenge of Lynn. The political scene played out the way it did because of what Mae Beavers did with her freedom and for no other reason.
But what about responsibility for the consequences of our decisions? What happens when, despite our best efforts to synthesize the information we have and turn it into to best decision possible, the inevitable happens and we make what we come to see is the wrong choice? It is precisely here that, at least in theory, Conservatives separate themselves from the rest of the population. Liberals and Progressives make excuses. I didn’t know this or that fact when I made my decision so I can’t be held accountable for it. I can’t be held responsible for my failure because I tried my best! The situation changed after I made my decision and if I had known then what I know now I wouldn’t have made my original choice. Excuses! Liberals are never responsible, they are only victims who cannot be expected to pay the price for their exercise of their freedom. Conservatives know better. Mae knows better. We choose to be responsible.
It is understood by the wise that few, if any, plans come off without a hitch. The military famously notes that no plan of battle survives the first shot. Once Mae’s campaign for County Mayor got underway, something – I don’t know what it was, changed. Mae has referenced requests from her Senate constituents that she not leave the Senate and prayer as being the agents of her decision to abandon her run for County Mayor. She has chosen to suspend her campaign for Mayor and seek re-election to the Senate instead. Here is where the Conservative notion of personal responsibility for one’s actions intersects the discussion. I contend that Mae’s Conservative principles permit her to leave her Senate seat for the Mayor’s race. They permit her to also choose to abandon her race for Mayor. But they do not permit her to return to a Senate re-election bid because there are consequences to her previous actions for which Mae Beavers, and only Mae Beavers, must be held accountable.
Mae told Ralph Bristol on the radio the other day that people know her and they know that “When I say something, I mean it!” Susan Lynn and the GOP candidates for Susan’s House seat know that about Mae, too. They trusted her assertion that she wasn’t running for the Senate. They trusted that Mae’s word was good and that she would honor it. They expected Mae to be responsible for her own decisions. That’s what Conservatives do. But Mae didn’t. Her choice to once again run for Senate has thrown the lives and fortunes of men and women just as fine as Mae into turmoil and uncertainty. Mae has suggested Representative Lynn follow the Beavers’ strategy and drop her Senate bid, run for re-election to the House and do to the fine men and women seeking the TN House 57 seat what Mae is doing to Susan. To her credit, citing the obvious ethical problems of such a choice, Representative Lynn has declined to do that. She understands the Conservative notions of freedom and responsibility.
With only a couple of weeks left before the filing deadline, there remains time for Mae to stand up and accept responsibility for her actions. As a Conservative, she has two choices. She can leave the Mayor’s race and not seek re-election to the Senate or she can take up her race for County Mayor again. Either choice is honorable and require only Mae to pay for her actions and choices. But as a Conservative, abandoning the Mayor’s race for a Senate re-election bid is not an option. Not for a Conservative.
I said at the outset that I admire Mae Beavers. But my admiration for her does not mean I don’t know right from wrong. It does not mean I don’t recognize making others responsible for a bad decision when I see it. It does not mean that I should not call out bad behavior.
Please, Mae. Do not do this. Run for Mayor or step down from the Senate. But don’t give in to the temptation to abandon your Conservative principles because it seems the fastest way to political success. You are better than that. You are a Conservative. Time to act like one!
I know it is standard Democratic practice to take the money and liberty of others to line their own pockets. I wasn’t aware that practice extended to web design. However, if you have no problem with the first step, the second would seem to follow easily. What am I talking about? Seems Representative Davis’ campaign couldn’t find a good enough theme for his website or a design firm good enough to build one for him. So he took one from someone else. No word on whether his actions will be called a “technological crisis communication enhancement initiative” or not …
Conventional wisdom dictates the campaign with the most money and the most experienced staff outperforms the underfunded and inexperienced campaign. But anything can happen in a campaign and often does. A couple of days, let alone weeks or months can be a political eternity when it comes to having to live with the consequences of choices made by campaigns. Which is why campaigns like money and experience. It helps cut down the number of opportunities to gaffe your way into a concession speech instead of a victory speech.
But it doesn’t always work out like that. Consider these two campaigns. One is in California, one in Pennsylvania. One is a US Senate race, one a US House race. One candidate has lots of money and political experience and the other is running her first race on a shoestring budget. Both of them put out web videos. One of them is excellent and the other … well, not so much …
On September 12th, 2009 a crowd estimated at 500,000 to 2,000,000 gathered in the nation’s capitol to make their wishes known to Congress. They wanted irresponsible spending stopped. They wanted an end to unconstitutional legislation. They were ignored. Everyone I spoke to who took part in that rally labeled it one of the most personally inspiring events of their lifetime. Unfortunately, they hadn’t gone to Washington for a “mountain top” experience. They went to effect political change. At the time, it was all people could talk about. Today, just a few months later, I hear next to nothing about it.
By contrast, in the middle part of the last decade, a small number of wealthy men quietly flipped the state and federal delegations of one state from Republican to Democrat and did it without leaving home. Tim Gill and a few others dropped $10 million dollars into a couple of consecutive election cycles in Colorado. They, too, wanted to effect political change. No doubt many questioned their sanity and tactics. Those who ignored them did so to their detriment. Today, years later, I still hear about what is known as “the Colorado model”. Not because it moves men’s hearts; but because it changed a state.
The bottom line is “giving” is more effective than “going” – at least in politics.
These two stories from the past, one success – one failure, illuminate what’s at stake in the present. Let’s assume 1,000,000 people marched on Washington, DC last September spending 48-72 hours and $500 each to do so. Simple math reveals a pool of 48,000,000 to 72,000,000 man hours and a whopping $500,000,000 in cash. That’s enough to put 1 to 1.5 million man hours into phone banking, envelope stuffing, and door knocking to go along with $10,000,000.00 in giving to candidates in each state in the Union! In a single election cycle, in all 50 states, we can duplicate activity proven in one state to produce the political change we want.
I’m not saying marching on DC is a bad thing. In fact, I believe the 9-12 March helped solidify the national legitimacy of our political opposition to the agenda of those who would steal away our Liberty. It brought us together in a needed way. But it failed to put Government in its place.
There are already calls to return to DC in 2010 in even bigger numbers and to gather for a variety of causes. In this election year, I think that’s a mistake. Take the $500 you would spend and the hours you would invest and spend and invest them at home. Find and support – with your time, talent and treasure – candidates and organizations that represent you. Not only will that produce the political success we went to Washington to accomplish, it will produce the “band of brothers” relationships we’ll treasure for years as well.
Cross posted from 2010 is the year to “give”, not “go” at Raising It Right. Raising It Right is a new website helping Liberty loving candidates, organizations and merchants to fund raise online. If you head a group or are running for office and are interested in online fund raising, please consider allowing Raising It Right to help.
As a general rule, Conservatives and those folks who tend to fall in the “Right of Center” category aren’t known for participation in or endorsement of pornography. Just the opposite, in fact. Much of the beating the Right takes, sometimes even from within its own ranks, is from those who see no harm in a little skin or engaging in a bit of “adult” behavior. It’s a shame all those uptight Christians are messing up the good thing the Right has going on, don’t ya’ know …
So why the fascination with the Tiger Woods? I get it that Fox News has to have something for Nancy Grace and Geraldo to blather on about endlessly. But Sean Hannity? Rush Limbaugh? Here in Nashville it’s Phil Valentine and Michael DelGiorno. Who knows how many other hosts, columnists and pundits are hanging on the story as if it were relevant to the lives of Americans. It’s not.
The only people impacted by what Tiger Woods has done are his wife, family, sponsors and fans. Moral failings on the part of political and social leaders are relevant to the day-to-day existence of Americans. If a politician cannot be trusted to keep his promise in the most important of personal relationships, how can he be trusted with the personal relationship that exists between politician and constituent? If a social leader such as a preacher or a teacher cannot be trusted to honor vows made to remain faithful to their spouse, what of the vows, overt and implied, to those they promised to serve?
I expect the response will sound something like, “Well, it’s news!” Really? Says who? The MSM? Don’t we routinely criticize the MSM for failing to follow up on important stories like ClimateGate, the crisis that H1N1 isn’t, the true grassroots nature of the Tea Parties, ACORN and so many more? If the MSM is so out of step with us why appeal to the ones driving this story, agreeing it is worthy of our time? Are we now adopting the standards of CBS, ABC and NBC? The longer we roll around in bed (almost literally in this case) with the MSM using the premise of newsworthiness to do so, the more cover we give them when they ignore stories they should cover. The more we perpetuate the conversation and validate it, the more credibility we bestow on the MSM for being able to pick the right stories to report on. Instead, we should be voicing our displeasure with the MSM that, once again, they distract us from what is really important by focusing on fluff.
Tiger Woods cannot do a single thing that impacts my life. He does not vote on legislation that limits my individual or economic Liberty. I do not look to him for advice or guidance on how to live my life or conduct my affairs (no pun intended). I’d listen to him about backswings but there are others I can listen to if he’s not available. My favorite golf gear will have a celebrity endorser tomorrow if a sponsor drops Tiger today. I’m out nothing and my life is neither better or worse because of his behavior.
Unless I’m free to use Tiger’s misfortune to engage in endless talk about things I’d never talk about on the radio, around the water cooler or at home. Things like: male conquests of multiple partners; what these women were doing that lured him from his home; these women were attractive with large breasts; there must be pictures online! This is what radio hosts, writers and pundits who focus on politics are talking to their audiences about.
Why? Are there not enough excesses going on in Copenhagen that may destroy the world’s Economy? Have the Senators in DC taken a break from their efforts to destroy the US Economy? As I mentioned, I expect breathless, interminable discussion of Tiger and his affairs from Nancy Grace and Geraldo. But why from political commentators? Why indulge in discussing, dissecting and deriding an athlete’s sex life?. And with all the attention being showered on these women, how long before one of them sells salacious secrets to a tabloid? How long before one gets a reality series? How long before one or more of them actually poses for Hustler or Playboy? Are we not responsible for prolonging the discussion and creating new stories and opportunities?
And it’s not just Tiger Woods. Kobe Bryant, Dennis Rodman, Madonna, Brad Pitt, Michael Jackson … on and on. We can’t get enough of the dirty details. While not pornographic in the traditional sense of the word you can see it from there. So much so that I wonder if we’ve not forgotten sound advice like “Whatever is pure, lovely and of good reputation – think on these things!” Instead, those of us traditionally seen as supporting good and decent behavior have immersed ourselves in gossip, speculation and as close as many of us are going to get to involvement with porn. Of course, when you factor in that famous rabbi’s teaching that it’s what’s in the heart that drives our behavior, perhaps we’re not so immune to pornography after all.
When discussing scientific things with a friend of mine, a scientist himself, the notion of Science as the dispassionate, neutral observer willing to fearlessly proceed wherever the evidence leads – even if it leads in a personally distasteful direction – colors his conversation. In truth, that’s probably how we all view Science. More to the point, it’s how we should view Science because it’s how Science should be. We should be able to trust its conclusions.
But what happens if the scientific community, for whatever reason, abandons its neutrality concerning the conclusion the evidence is pointing to and decides to actively promote a conclusion unsupported by the facts? It takes no great leap to imagine that, in such a scenario, some evidence would be suppressed and other evidence would be gussied up. Not with a view to finding the Truth. With a view to manipulating the conclusion.
If Science is, indeed, the dispassionate neutral observer, the best conclusion would seem to be to keep on studying and make no definitive statements. A scientific version of “We can neither confirm or deny the existence of either AGW or an imminent Ice Age.” New evidence has emerged, however, which seems to show the scientific community did just the opposite.
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
The trap my scientist friend falls into with his belief in Science as an arbiter of knowledge and Truth is not that Science sometimes comes to conclusions that are later shown to be wrong. The very quest that Science embarks on recognizes there are things we now believe that are wrong. That’s why Science exists, to ferret out the Truth.
My friend errs in trusting scientists. Human nature, as it exists in scientific leaders, political leaders, religious leaders and others engaged in the quest to improve the life and condition of their followers, is not exempt from the call and response of greed, deception, hypocrisy and hubris because their cause is noble.
As with Politics and politicians; as with Theology and theologians; so with Science and scientists. When looking for Truth, our greatest concern should not be the analysis of the conclusions being reported. It should be an analysis of the character of those doing the reporting.
The Speaker of the House actually says it is UNFAIR for people not to have health insurance and pass on costs of POSSIBLE illnesses to the rest of us and then opines it is FAIR for people not to have health insurance and pass on costs of PURPOSEFUL provision of health insurance to the rest of us. This level of ignorance is intentional.
The thoughts and opinions expressed here at Blue Collar Muse are completely and solely those of Ken Marrero, exercising his 1st Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Religion and to Petition Government for Redress of Grievances.
This is true despite the fact that my views are similar, and in many instances identical, to a large number of rational and thoughtful people, fictional and real, living and dead.
So, for the record, I and I alone am responsible for the thoughts, views and opinions shared here.
They are not to be seen, in any way imaginable, as those of my family, friends, employer, childhood imaginary companions or anyone else (Although it is true The Much Younger Trophy Wife made me say this. Seems she did some research and there was no promise in our vows, stated or implied, to the end of "in Right Wing, Bigoted, Hateful, Intolerant, Wingnut Idiocy and in Mental Health". She just wanted to be clear). They are especially not those of handlers operating from the bowels of the VRWC (As if I'd admit it if they were. There are confidentiality agreements involved after all!). Just pay no attention to that guy behind the curtain.
If you like what you read here, pat meon the back! If you disagree, kick mein the shins. But it's me, me, me - it's all about me! That seems rather appropriate, don't you think?
On September 12th, 2009 a crowd estimated at 500,000 to 2,000,000 gathered in the nation’s capitol to make their wishes known to Congress. They wanted irresponsible spending stopped. They wanted an end to unconstitutional legislation. They were ignored. Everyone I spoke to who took part in that rally labeled it one of the most personally inspiring events of their lifetime. Unfortunately, they hadn’t gone to Washington for a “mountain top” experience. They went to effect political change. At the time, it was all people could talk about. Today, just a few months later, I hear next to nothing about it.
Entries (RSS)