The Meaning of Endorsements

This afternoon former themostsearched-endorsed Utah Senate candidate Cherilyn Eagar herself in turn endorsed current Senate candidate Tim Bridgewater (Deseret News).

Somewhere along the years, I deprecated endorsements of political candidates: that is, in casting my own vote I enjoy doing my own vetting process rather than subserviating to someone else's opinion. Nevertheless endorsements serve as interesting windows acutely into the endorser and as anchored starting points into political vetting.

As the race between Bridgewater and Lee enters its final days of maturation, Eagar's endorsement is hardly a starting vetting place for me; and as Eagar leaned toward Bridgewater during post-campaign remarks the endorsement came as little surprise. Thus for me, Eagar's endorsement does nothing to clear nor cloud my own analysis of this race. I hope to soon finalize my own thoughts on this race.

On Presidential Endorsements

Lately, I have been in preponderance that our President should decline to be leader of their respective political party. One of the things that appealed to voters voting for President Obama was his campaign communiques that he was "post-partisan." Obama has failed miserably on that account as acutely exampled in the ramming through of Obamacare in a most partisan way. I feel our Presidents should not be actively endorsing candidates A to Z of their respective parties, instead working on leading the country in solving the limited breadth of problems they are responsible to do.

In his 1792 farewell address Washington warned us on the dangers of political parties:

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the
spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and
countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful
despotism.

In my vision of "What would Washington do?" it would be exactly this on their first day in office: renounce being head of the Party. The Chief Executive, as our Supreme Court, should be above partisanship and the politicking of endorsement; and being the leader of a private political party does nothing to speak of representing the interests of ALL AMERICANS. While Washington might advocate the complete abolition of political parties, Executive declination of the leadership role while remaining part of the party would be a tremendous step in the right direction.

++++ Update 6/10:
It looks like Bennett is jumping on the endorse-Bridgewater bandwagon (SL Tribune). That is one endorsement I'd like to see Bridgewater decline but of course he won't because it is and has been politics as usual for Bridgewater.

The Bridgewater Buyout (Clarification & Update)

During her take-down-the-house rousing address at Saturday's GOP convention, Cherilyn Eagar fired up the crowd with this promise, one of many sweet melodies sung to the delagates' ears:

"My vote cannot be bought, sold, traded, or gambled away in a Senatorial backroom deal."

Just minutes after this promise to the delegates--not a new promise, rather one Eagar had oft repeated during the campaign trail--she would learn of the decision of the delegates not to advance her to the second round and would end up being tested on that promise. In an interview with conservative talk show host Bob Lonsberry during the last half hour of the show today(archived in full at KNRS) she stunned the audience with the revelation of a proposed backroom deal by Tim Bridgewater.

UtahsRepresentatives.com who has done a great job in collecting and revealing sundry information over the past many weeks on Bridgewater's business dealings had the best political analysis today on the incident including a video excerpt and transcript (he earned our follow). UtahsRepresentatives points out that Bridgewater offered to pay for Eagar's campaign debts in exchange for being a spokesperson for his campaign (in our own mind, we are thinking that this must have been phrased something like offering a her a job.)

In the Lonsberry interview, Eagar emphasized that the deal wasn't a bribe but that she must have realized that her principles had been put to test:

"I realized that I just had to do what I felt was--what I had promised my campaign I would do and in my heart I knew was best."

UtahsRepresentatives concluded:

"These kinds of backroom deals are what’s wrong with politics. That shows a lot of integrity on Cherilyn Eagar’s part for not taking the bribe."

We find UtahRepresentatives' conclusion most interesting. Even though Eagar had done her best to communicate the appropriateness of the offer and specifically ruled it out being a bribe, UR obviously felt it was. Bribes are high on the frustration list and thus watchlist of the folks because of their rampant-ness and destructiveness in perpetuating evil. Gator-aid, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, and even Utah's own Matheson Gavelgate affair have recently frustrated the folks to no end, wanting nothing but merit and integrity instead of votes and positions purchased with money.

This "Bridgewater Buyout" incident--all within legal bounds, yet smacking as a stealthy buyout of a poorer person's vote--has the potential to negatively influence some in the primary election against Bridgewater. Lonsberry, who openly endorsed Bridgewater before the convention did not have time to give his opinion on the show as to any influence that the revelation may have made in his endorsement. He did seem eager (overused pun) to prod the incident out of Eagar while she seemed to back away from the issue. We suppose you'll have to listen to Lonsberry tomorrow to find out what he thinks (wow! what a plug! Can I get free dinner with Bob tomorrow night for that plug? j/k).

As for ourselves, it is weighing pretty heavily as another Bridgewater turnoff, because it creates fear in us that Bridgewater, if elected, will end up backroom-door-dealing like too many others in the Senate.

++++ Update & Clarification 5/13:
We had some great comments to this post which have aided in a decision to formally clarify. After this incident began to take root in the blogosphere, Eagar released a clarification statement (thank you Arc) really denying any possibility of any wrongdoing on the part of the Bridgewater campaign. Our mood on this has significantly improved where we are no longer concerned about the incident (note strikethrough above) and a clarification is due. We don't regret the story as the collective buzz on this issue prompted further appropriate public action on the part of Eagar and commend her for so doing. We felt we gave the facts as they presented themselves at the time a fair representation as well as our opinion at the time. Furthermore, we feel it a very important part of the political process to discuss our concerns and as we pointed out backroom-door-dealing and anti-corruption is high on the list of ourselves and many others out there.

As a political neutral in this contest between Bridgewater and Lee to date, we deny posting the article with the hidden agenda of "us[ing] it for negative campaigning against Mr. Bridgewater" (Eagar statement with unclear direction). Thorough readers of this blog will find we have been critical betimes of both Bridgewater and Lee in our quest for truth. We don't intend to be overly critical of two great candidates for the Senate, we do feel it necessary to bring to light issues that concern us. During former employment as a retail manager, our security manager--a former police officer--once confided in us: "No offense to you, but I learned in this business not to trust anyone except myself." We have learned that advise is particularly apropos in today's political environment where even some of our most beloved statesmen have gone to Washington and returned home drunk with the Potomac Poison. Trust must be earned every day, every vote. We just expect of ourselves to remain civil while we debate these important issues.

Which brings us to one final item: although no one has called us out, we defensively responded to a comment to Cassandra in a mocking way and for that we apologize for violating our principle of "attempt[ing] to ride the high road of political debate". While we believe that mockery and satire are important tools in political debate, to mock a commenter as a controller of a blog really puts the commenter at an unfair disadvantage. We are a person of passion but not of persecution. Our response has been deleted and Cassandra--whomever you are--we are sorry and apologize for our comment. To our commenters: we will do better to respect you.

++++ Update #2 5/13:
Lee Davidson of the Deseret News picked up on this story today; we felt the analysis was quite reasonable & professional. That they did neglect to give UtahsRepresentatives credit for doing the hard work on the research & promotion of this story seems to point to how mass media typically ignore the volunteer media reporting work bloggers and twitters do, often long before they release their own stories. Bloggers on the other hand tend to hat-tip frequently and generously give credit. Hurrah for Bloggers! Hurrah for the First Amendment!

A Speech To Remember from Utah's GOP Convention 2010 (Update)

The press attending Saturday's Utah GOP Convention have been extremely gracious in their praise of Cherilyn Eagar's address to the delegates.

Joe Pyrah, Daily Herald political reporter, reported on his blog Sausage Grinder:

"Eagar had the best delivery. By far.... Bridgewater and Bennett got about 5 percent more each than expected, as did Eagar who probably got them all on the back of her speech."

Josh Loftin of the Salt Lake City Weekly agreed and pointed out the warm cheer comparison:

"Cherilyn Eagar gives best speech of Senate candidates. It is enough to get her through? The U.S. Senate candidates wrapped up their speeches right before noon, closing out with a fiery speech from Eagar, who is considered the fourth place candidate....

As for Eagar's speech, she opened with a story about a boy carrying a globe around with him, which she used as a metaphor for the importance of caring for the world for the future. Believe it or not, it actually worked well. After that, she launched into a string of phrases that got the crowd fired up: a second Reagan revolution, stopping illegal immigration, and so forth. She got the most enthusiastic cheers, although
not an overwhelming number of standing delegates during her ovation."

We have always enjoyed Eagar's speeches. She speaks from the heart without telepromter; it is a core strength that helps her to connect to the people whom she would represent if so entrusted by voters in the future election.

Not only was themostsearched impressed, we would have to say it's the best speech we've ever heard from Eagar. Although the video below is a bit primitive, it shows her gestures and voice inflections as they complement her words. Not being too much into clothes ourselves, we were shocked when she appeared on stage in white with the obvious symbolism it carried when joined with the message. Eagar often wears red, we have noted, perhaps symbolic of the war going on to take our country back; thus in seeing her in white for the first time was a jaw-dropper.

Lastly, we transcribed the speech (text follows video link--click on pic--below) so it is easier to follow along during the hard-to-hear times; a couple of times I guessed at the word but it the transcription has to be pretty close to the real deal.

===== Text of Cherilyn Eagar's Address to the Utah GOP Delegates, 2010 =====

Thank you. I recently heard a story about a father who loved his little boy very much. He wanted to buy him something very special. So he went to the store and he bought his son a globe. His son loved that globe he took it school, he took it to scouts, and even tried to take it to church. And then one night when the father went to tuck his son in and give him a kiss he found his son asleep with his arms fast around the globe. As the father gently picked the globe up to place it on the dresser, his son rolled over and said, “Daddy, what are you doing with my world?”

What are we doing with our children’s world?

If our children and grandchildren are to enjoy the blessings of liberty, we must stand committed to restore what Ronald Reagan called that ‘shining city on a hill.’ My friends, it is time for Republicans to start standing up and acting like Republicans again, don’t you agree? It’s time for a second Reagan revolution. Let’s start by defunding and repealing this onerous Obamacare that has been forced down our throats. Then, lets fulfill Reagan’s dream to dismantle the Department of Education…followed by his desire to withdraw from the United Nations.

It’s time for our elected officials to start living like the rest of us. Let’s end their perks, automatic pay raises, and multi-billion dollar pension plans and that’s how we’ll start balancing the budget. Its time to audit the Federal Reserve and end those backroom deals and pork earmarks from campaign [video skip] to Congress. My vote cannot be bought, sold, traded, or gambled away in a Senatorial backroom deal.

And as for the 2nd Amendment, Washington are you listening? What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not get?

Arizona understands the difference between the word documented and undocumented and so do I. Our founders [?] the beautiful tapestry with God-fearing immigrants in the land of the free, but if the brave don’t show up to protect our borders from importing poverty, crime, drugs, and terrorism that tapestry will continue to unravel. And are we all not proud to be Americans!

If Reagan were here today, I imagine he would have a tear in his eye and he would repeat his words of warning: if we ever forget we are one nation under God, then we will be one nation gone under.

I will continue to fight for our religious liberty, for our moral foundation, for our family values. And I will champion the cause of the sanctity of life for the unborn and the elderly.

I have a vision for America. It’s a vision of an America no longer a debtor nation. No longer dependent upon her enemies for her resources and energy. It’s a vision of an America that’s industrious, strong, and independent with leaders who will not apologize to the world and bow down to our enemies but will stand up proudly and say: “We are America!” And our Constitution will not be trampled by the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, or any other global tribunal.

It’s not about health care. It’s about who controls health care. It’s about who controls our banks and businesses. It’s about who controls our land, our natural resources and our jobs. It’s about who controls our lives, and liberty, our faith, family, and freedom. It’s about “We the People” and “We the People” are here today to say: NO MORE BIG GOVERNMENT!

Senator Carl Schurz once said ‘my country right or wrong; when it’s right, keep it right; when it’s wrong, set it right.’ It’s time to set this little voice broke right. As the conservative choice in this race, as a successful businesswoman I’ve effectively defended Constitutional principles and limited government for over 30 years. I know how to stand and deliver not only in the court of public opinion but also on Senate floor. It’s not about personality it’s about principles…

++++ Update 5-11:

We couldn't figure out how to turn off the autoplay from the Ustream flash embedded video so we posted a picture link to the video instead.

++++ Update 5-26:

Cherilyn posted the text of her speech on her campaign website yesterday, effectively clarifying "the couple of guesses" of my transcription as well as providing the ending which was too hard to hear over the applause:

Your decision is not about personality. It’s about principle. A
wise man once said, “It is good to be liked, but better to be trusted.” This is
what I have stood for, and this is what I will stand for as your next U.S.
Senator for the great state of Utah. I am Cherilyn Eagar and I ask for your
vote! God bless you and God bless America!

With Bennett's Defeat, The Teaparty Movement Eyes Hatch

With the GOP Senate primary race between Bridgewater and Lee in its infancy, the movement to get rid of Orrin has already well, hatched shall we say.

Never mind KNRS conservative talk show host Bob Lonsberry previously and repeatedly calling for the removal of Hatch this year, it seems like for conservative Utahns Hatch's exit can't come quick enough. And if Bennett was too old and too long in D.C. for Utahns this year, in 2012 Hatch will up Bennett's election-year age by a year with enough tenure in the Senate to lap Bennett twice and start worrying from pugatory his good friend Ted Kennedy about catching up.
SimpleUtahMormonPolitics commented in their post-Bennett defeat wrapup:

"Orrin, Thy Days are Numbered. You may also be aware that I don't care much
for Orrin Hatch as a Senator, for essentially the same reasons that I haven't
approved of Bennett's performance. A few of us spoke together after the
convention wondering whether it might be more healthy for Senator Hatch to
announce his retirement, rather than to risk suffering in two years the same
ignominy as Senator Bennett."

Voice of Deseret chimed in today with their article You're Next, Orrin: Cherilyn Eagar Has Not Yet Endorsed Either Tim Bridgewater Or Mike Lee, May Run Against Six-Term Senator Orrin Hatch In 2012 concluding:

"Orrin Hatch would be smart to decide right now that this current term will be
his last term, and walk out as an honored elder statesman. Thirty-six years will
be more than enough; it's time to turn the seat over to the next generation."

Sensing the anti-Hatch sentiment, Daily Herald political guru Joe Pyrah opined an article in which Eagar is quoted as "definitely" looking into running two years from now against Sen. Orrin Hatch. Even Jen Gulbrandsen, Eagar's daughter, tweeted a humorous reference at the closure of Saturday's convention to a possible "Eagar in 2012" run noting the musical capabilities of both:

"Eagar and Hatch should go head to head in a couple of years. They could
even have a sing off!"

With a fairly remarkable result from a complete grassroots effort in her first bid ever for public office, Cherilyn Eagar has made some friends along the way by proving true to principle and supporting the cause against Bennett. She picked up further accolades from the delegates by not avoiding endorsing Lee or Bridgewater. Here's what private commenter had to say:

"The unsung heroes for the conservative movement at the convention were Cherilyn
Eagar and her amazing supporters. Cherilyn was eliminated in the first round
and her patriotic supporters...and spread their votes to Lee and Bridgewater. They
have principle and they made history today."

Lady Logician pointed out in her blog today the anti-Bennett energy Eagar brought to the race:

"While some of the anti-Bennett energy can and should be credited to the Tea
Party movement the real Tea Party candidate was Cherilyn Eagar..."

Lady Logican is correct of course. Eagar was the only candidate to attend every major tea party in Utah including the original one on snowy day, April 15, 2009. Somewhere along the way she rallied the troops at the state capitol with the following anti-Hatch castigation:

"Senator Hatch said: 'We don’t need rookies in Congress right now. We need leaders
such as himself'…who voted to confirm two of the most liberal Supreme Court
justices [Ginsburg and Breyer]? Senator Hatch are you listening: with that kind of leadership we don’t need seniority."

Add to that list Hatch's (and Bennett's) confirmation vote just last year of radical Cass Sunstein, being 2 of only 6 GOP Senators to vote "aye" and you begin to see why Utahns want to give Hatch the hatchet on convention day 2012. (Warning to Progressives: this is a crafty play on Hatch's surname using a figure of speech: themostsearched strongly repudiates any intimation of actual physical violence.)

Eagar is the antithesis of a quitter at defeat. We expect she will play some roll in 2012, though nearly the entire GOP is ready to anoint Jason Chaffetz as Senator should he decide to run. And after this race, even those who didn't support Eagar realize the importance she plays in moving opinion against incumbents by holding them accountable for their voting records. Her efforts more than anyone merit her being Utah's Senator.

How Lee lost a 15-Point Lead with Delegates in the Last Week…and how he could Rally to Win June 22

The loss 15-point loss to Bridgewater in the third round of the state convention today sent shock waves through the Lee camp. They presumed they would be the next Glenn Beck show heroes by coronating their candidate with a majority of support and maybe even avoiding a primary. Saturday’s convention shocked them about as much as Bob Bennett and the Salt Lake Tribune, the latter incorrectly publishing an article showing Bennett & Lee in the third round (h/t SimpleUtahMormonPolitics). Scratching their heads, they sit and wonder: was it the temple mailer? the Joseph Smith video? Or the Hitler video? What did us in? It actually was none of these. One thing we have learned is that Utah delegates are incredibly smart and informed and nothing gets by the vast majority of them. Following are five reasons why Lee lost and how he can yet turn it around:

Reason #1: Lee supporters incorrectly presumed and in some cases demanded support from Eagar supporters while being dismissive of Eagar (couldn't bother to spell the surname right at least?) rather than humbly seeking an opportunity to make Lee a second-choice candidate. While Lee and Eagar are the most closely aligned politically, Eagar supporters were offended by Lee’s run in the first place after a verbal understanding from Lee he wouldn’t run: that brought into question Lee’s integrity which would again be put to test on multiple occasions. When Eagar-supporter blogger Jason the Patriot opined last week "Why I would support anyone but Bob Bennett and Mike Lee" we knew Bridgewater was the candidate of preference for Eagar supporters. When it came time to debate Eagar on KNRS, Lee ducked and yes, lied (or campaign staff lied) while Bridgewater who replaced Lee a week later was a gentleman and treated Ms. Eagar like a candidate for US Senate. In the end, the lack of outreach to Eagar voters by Lee caused the majority of them to go Bridgewater. We saw this coming when in the KNRS online poll Bridgewater supporters went to Eagar showing the flip side of what we predicted in a tweet what would happen in round 2 at the convention: Eagar voters would in droves go for Bridgewater vaulting him into first place despite Lee’s first place scoring in the first round. To correct this, Lee must identify and convert Eagar supporters as a key group Lee must win over if Lee is to win. They will all vote in the primary and tend to be quite vocal and passionate. Lee must convert them early on so they in turn will get others to see the light.

Reason #2: Lee suffered under relentless “meals-on-wheels for Afghanistan” soundbites from Bennett and must come out strong in national defense. Lee is essentially a Libertarian. Fine. Not quite Utah’s cup o’ tea but we do like Libertarians. The problem is we like being safe from terrorism more than we like liberty (why else would we stand in security lines at the airport?) Sometimes as an elected official you have to bend and accept the will of the people and Utahns will not stand for failure to eradicate Islamofascism in Afghanistan. Lee could overcome this by saying (and then showing to prove it) that these get-out-of-Afghanistan views are personal, but he will make sure we do whatever it takes to destroy terrorists and keep American safe (after all, that’s an enumerated power!) This will help in recruiting would-be Bennett voters who have now all but written Lee off as anti-military.

Reason #3: Lee needs to intently confess his sins and be a man and own up to them. He needs to say: “I filed my personal disclosure late and accept full responsibility” and “I owe debt to the Federal Government and was wrong to not pay my student loans off and to get out of debt like my church counsels and am making it a priority to have them paid off by [whenever]” and “I have not been transparent in my campaign and am committing to you than I will be to you I will always be the most transparent candidate and first to release records. In fact, here’s my personal income tax statements for the past three years just to show you I want to be transparent.” Utahns have seen the arrogant side of lawyer Lee; we want to see the trailer-park kid in Lee and confessing sins is great because we want to be a people of forgiveness but we don't want an arrogant son-of-a-Solicitor for Senator.

Reason #4: One thing really bothering the folks is Lee’s young age coupled with a lack of commitment to two terms. Frankly we’re skeptical from the likes of politicians like Hatch that once Lee is in there unless he sits in a hot tub with a minor we’re gonna be Lee-land for the next 40 years. If Lee would put into writing a commitment not to serve more than 2 terms like the Constitutional term-limit amendment he proposes, we bet his poll ratings would jump 5 points just on that one simple act alone.

Reason #5: Too many conservatives moved publicly towards Bridgewater and it became a feeding frenzy. The two biggest were Holly on the Hill and Bob Lonsberry. Lee needs both of these greatly admired conservatives back in the fold but could still make it with the return of just one. How does Lee get them to return? Resolve reasons 1-4 above and you're to third base. Focus on these two first without purging the sin within and Lee will strike out. And when you do seek these it needs to be as sugar-to-bees not lashings-to-mules: the latter having already failed. And finally don't focus on the Erik Ericksons and Jim DeMints: Lee needs Utahn base support to win.

There are plenty of Bridgewater faults and much to be concerned about; the problem is that if you blog something negative of Bridgewater, the Bridgewater folks all pat you on the head and think of you as their next convert. With the Lee blog trolls, you’d better get your armor on because the blows are coming. We have much concern about Bridgewater but quite frankly it isn't worth our time bringing it up if Bridgewater is so nice and Lee is unapologetically faultless.

We remain undecided in this race as we have been in our mind between any hypothetical Bridgewater/Lee matchup. Ideologically we’re with Lee, but from a human point of view we’re with Bridgewater. If Lee continues with the same stuff since January, he loses the primary and our vote. Should he evolve for the better, he just might pull off a great upset: thus the ball to victory is in Lee’s court, yet time is ticking with about 2 weeks before essentially any window of opportunity closes for him to transform and expand his base.

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.

Breaking: Eagar Campaign Website Hacked (Updated x2)

Conservative GOP U.S. Senate Candidate Cherilyn Eagar's campaign website has been hacked sometime today--just two days prior to the state's GOP convention--by an unknown person. Visits to her website at eagar4senate.com or eagarforsenate.com returned this awful hacking image:


We denounce this illegal action by the person(s) responsible as an interference with free speech and our democratic process of elections and call for an immediate investigation into this action as well as prosecution for those responsible. The move reminisces of the hacking of Sarah Palin's email account during the Presidential elections even as comparisons between Palin and Eagar have been made.

In lieu of the campaign's website, may we suggest visiting the Eagar Youtube account where we found the following inspiring new videos:

++++ Update 8:38pm:
Repeated efforts to access the website since the posting have resulted in blank pages and once a successful connection. It appears that the campaign is making progress in restoring the website as we have been unable to reproduce the hacking image. An article by the Salt Lake Tribune reports a different hacking image.

++++ Update 10:10pm:
It appears for now the Eagar website is working. We sent an email to Attorney General Shurtleff requesting updates on the investigation. The attack apparently started around 10:30am this morning. An email from the Eagar campaign said the attack came in two bouts, the second following a restoration of the website from the first with no definite "who-dunnit" to point to.

Salt Lake City Code Red Rally

themostsearched had the great honor of joining with like-minded patriots on the steps of our great state capitol in Salt Lake City in a last-minute-announced CODE RED rally against the abominable health-scare bill.

We had 200-300 Patriots gathered from all walks of life. We met a patriot (http://twitter.com/evorgsum) who made this fantastic sign (we overheard others commenting on it as well):

We exchanged thoughts and themostsearched quickly realized how likeminded and informed she was.

Another great patriot we met was Kathy (above) of Latterdaybanners.com who created this beautiful masterpiece flag just a few months ago. As way of explanation to our non-Mormon readers this flag is of particular symbolism to Mormons: 2,000 yrs ago Captain Moroni was a great military leader who when faced with a hostile takeover of his country by some people wanting to overthrow their judicial system and establish a king, tore his coat and wrote the above saying on it. Captain Moroni then further made everyone swear allegiance to the cause of freedom and a free government else be put to death. Think of Captain Moroni as a General Patton without the profanity: both were die-hard preservers of freedom and devoutly religious.

Speakers at the rally included: Jared Law of the 9/12 project, Diedre Henderson of the Jason Chaffetz campaign, Rep. Craig Frank of District #57 (Pleasant Grove), and Utah US Senate GOP candidates Mike Lee and Cherilyn Eagar. (US Senate candidate Tim Bridgewater was also present, but did not speak.) The speakers freely discussed neighboring issues such as state sovereignty and the crowd expressed opposition Bennett's reelection when solicited.

Jared Law urged us to call Governor Herbert and have him sign HB67 (sponsored by Carl Wimmer and co-sponsors including our Rep. Keith Grover): to have federal health-scare mandates passed after March 1, 2010, not apply to Utah and HB251: to have employers use E-Verify. HB67 has a growing number of states with similar legislation (see current map) across the country and is one themostsearched urges Gov. Herbert to sign. Jared also urged us to "fast and pray"--as our founding fathers did many times--that the bill be defeated.

Mike Lee quoted from James Madison's Federalist Paper #62 which was extremely appropriate considering the crypticness of an unwieldy, 2700-page health-scare bill before Congress:

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.

Cherilyn Eagar spoke exclusively on health care, talking about the American Medical Association's (AMA) support for the bill and how the AMA only represents a mere 17% of physicians. She urged us to instead support the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) and to sign the petition at http://www.takebackmedicine.com/ When themostsearched next seeks a physician, we will be looking for one that doesn't belong to the AMA and preferably belongs to the AAPS. Eagar also spoke about her father, a physician, coming home after Medicare first passed and saying: "today is the first day of the end of quality medicine in America." How true those words have turned out to be!

The protest carried over to Matheson's office a couple of miles south where, if we are not mistaken, there has been a protest going on virtually every day this week. Although we weren't able follow the protest, it seems we may have helped make an impact: Matheson formally announced his plans this afternoon to vote NO on Obamacare!

Bridgewater and Eagar Debate: Who won?

After listening now thrice to the Utah U.S. Senatorial debates on Wednesday's Lonsberry Show (debate during show's final hour), we have had enough thought and time to form our opinions. Here our our results in four areas:

1. KNOWLEDGE, ARTICULATE: Both candidates represented themselves well. We felt both candidates knew the issues well enough to speak thoroughly on the subject and neither came across like a "deer in headlights": either would measure up to the job of representing Utah knowledgeably. Result: TIE
   
   
2. PERSONALITY: Bridgewater approached the questions more like a diplomat trying to preserve good relations as a second-choice for those delegates who might not pick him as a first. Eagar was a General Patton out to defend, protect, and ready to take on the Commies once the war with the Fascists was over. These personalities are true to the personalities they exhibit elsewhere on the trail. Many would argue we need diplomats and view disagreement among allies as counter-productive. Our view is we need both though when push comes to shove, we'll keep Patton. Measuring against the 3,500 delegates whose opinions may or may not be the same as ours, the result is: TIE
   
   
3. MODERATION: We were delighted Mr. Lonsberry arranged this debate and our kudos to him. Lonsberry's lack of professional moderation came through when he digressed into addressing initial questions to Mrs. Eagar as "Ma'am" during the middle part of the debate while not equally applying the term "Sir" to Mr. Bridgewater. Mr. Lonsberry deserves some forbearance for serving in the military and having the "Sir" and "Ma'am" terms ingrained into him. We thought Eagar showed good restraint in not pointing out this relatively-minor inequality and thus garnished some points with the listeners unlike Bully Boxer of California:
   
   
   
   Lonsberry exhibited other minor biases by (1) during the debate pointing out in complimentary fashion a photo he had seen on Mr. Bridgewater's website while lacking a compliment to Mrs. Eagar (2) his interruption of Mrs. Eagar mid-sentence using the term "Ma'am" thrice to redirect her discussion of debt was distracting as well and (3) he directed a complex three-questions-in-one to Eagar but not to Bridgewater. We could find no instances of biases against Bridgewater towards Eagar. As such, Lonsberry came across moderately biased towards Bridgewater although we have no reason to believe that he actually is, doubt he meant to come across this way, and recognize the biases were relatively minor-to-moderate. The overall moderator score: NOT BAD.
   
   
4. BEST QUOTE: Many times debates are won over memorable one-liners. The winning quote in our mind was this humorous quote by Eagar nearer the conclusion of the debate:
   

   We are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s--and right now Government thinks it’s God.

So who won overall? Perhaps Eagar for the best quote, but really we'd have to pick all three: Eagar, Bridgewater, and Lonsberry all came across as genuine Patriots fighting in the cause for principled constitutionalism as the opinion of each was raised in themostsearched's mind.

Top ten reasons NOT to vote for Cherilyn Eagar (Update)

A discussion today in another forum prompted the idea for this post as well as garnishing the coveted top reason NOT to vote for Cherilyn Eagar. We have compiled a list of actual, mostly-sexist arguments made by different people over the past months why one shouldn't vote for Eagar. After the reason, we give our comment in italics which in some cases might be meant to be taken humorously. Enjoy.

TOP 10 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR CHERILYN EAGAR

(#10) She attacks other candidates on issues.

--Now Cheri, go be a good girl and give Mikey, Timmy, and Bobby a hug and tell ‘em you’re sorry and you’ll never ever say anything bad about their positions again!

(#9) She’s been engaged in undefined “very unseemly behavior.”

--How dare she! Say, btw, where's that "TheSugarBeet.com" bookmark anyhows?

(#8) She wears too much makeup.

--Don’t worry: NuSkin & Neways are picking up the tab and Bennett will teach Cherilyn how to slip them a big earmark.

(#7) She’s been married “multiple times” with “multiple divorces”

--Whoot! “Big Love” Sister!

(#6) She’s “dumb as a rock”

--Stupid Delicate Arch! Stop trying to act like so smart!

(#5) She is endorsed by an “egg club” and a plumber

--Yeah and what’s worse is the egg club doesn’t even produce Omega-3 brown eggs!

(#4) She spent time in jail for forging a bunch of voter registrations

--She bared her forearm tattoos, too, during a recent teaching moment at school!

(#3) She says you should vote for her because she is a woman

--And husbands, the wives say if you don’t vote for her, there might be a LDS missionary shortage in two decades.

(#2) A woman’s place is in the home / women don’t belong in politics

--Sorry, can’t comment. Too busy putting on the ‘ol wifebeater right now.

AND FINALLY....

(#1) A GOP website hyphenates her surname “Bacon-Eagar”

--Cherilyn’s true feminazi nature is at last revealed! Someone quick! Call Gayle Ruzicka and get the phone tree going—there’s a demonsheep about!

+++ Update 3/13:
The utgop.org website that had listed Cherilyn's surname as "Bacon-Eager" [sic] in reason #1 above has now correctly updated her surname to "Eagar." Someone got the message. Btw, no one has complained yet but to be clear in advance no negative is meant to be conveyed in the use of Ruzicka's name who is a true patriot and Nuskin/Neways who are huge employers in our county and provide a great tax revenue for our county. This is political satire, folks.

Bridgewater and Eagar to Debate; Lee not so eager

With the strange phenomenon in Utah of candidate Mike Lee running from Conservative talk radio, Bob Lonsberry of KNRS radio has lined up a debate tomorrow morning between two leading candidates, Tim Bridgewater and Cherilyn Eagar. Lonsberry discusses below:



An anonymous email to the Lonsberry program (no, it wasn't themostsearched and no, we don't know who it is either though we were in attendance at the referenced GOP delegate training meeting) is read in the above clip:

"I asked Mike Lee why he didn't show up to the debate on your radio show. He told me that he was scared to be seen as fighting amongst the candidates when the real goal was taking down Senator Bennett... He told me he's willing to debate anytime, but just not on the air."

This statement still begs the question of why Lee agreed to last week's scheduled Eagar/Lee debate in the first place if he felt this way. Did someone say "flip-flop?" It is also interesting to note the words "scared" and "fighting." We wonder if a candidate is "scared" about debating fellow conservatives, will they not also be "scared" to debate liberals and progressives or worse "scared" to stand up for principle as Bailout Bob Bennett has so often been plagued with? If a candidate immediately thinks debates are about "fighting" is that because the candidate bears animosity towards his opponents? And if indeed it is so-called "fighting," is fighting about particulars necessarily a bad thing?

themostsearched is reading Skousen's 5,000 Year Leap. In Part I under "Fundamental Principles" Skousen reveals some of the "fighting" our founders had:

On particulars, of course, they [the founders] quarreled, but when discussing
fundamental precepts and ultimate objectives they seemed practically unanimous. They even had strong criticism of one another as individual personalities, yet admired each other as laborers in the common cause... One of George Washington's most vehement critics was Dr. Benjamin Rush, and yet that Pennsylvania physician boldly supported everything for which Washington worked and fought.

But what really muddies Lee's argument is that he would be willing to debate off-air. So...if we understand correctly: Lee is "scared to be seen as fighting" on air, but not "scared to be seen as fighting" off-air. Sorry, we don't get it. Maybe someone can explain it better since obviously we're not near as smart as the good Attorney.

Mike Lee's Questionable Endorsements

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

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


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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

+++ Update 3/5:

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

The Dirt on the Cherilyn Eagar Dirt Diggers

On today's Bob Lonsberry Show, Bob became the first media outlet to publicly discuss an interesting incident a decade ago in US Senate Candidate Cherilyn Eagar's past. Briefly, it was during a time when Eagar was campaigning for Pat Buchanan in Connecticut and had, under advice from the campaign lawyer, signed off on petitions to have Buchanan be on the ballot. Apparently Eagar (and three others) inadvertently overlooked some legal procedure and which resulted in Eagar being assessed a fine of $6000. Eagar paid the fine, and things were cleared up and most anyone in Utah could probably have cared less about this situation as it seemed both in the way it happened to Eagar and her honest approach to the situation seem to if anything point to Eagar's character in appropriately handling an oversight.

That is, no one cared until someone emailed Lonsberry a copy of the CT verdict on the eve of Eagar's inaugural interview with Lonsberry yesterday. Lonsberry had both the keenness and integrity to know that someone was attempting to use him to smear Eagar and refrained from discussion on the matter during yesterday's interview. During today's broadcast he spent ample time pondering who might have sent such a letter including the thoughts of it being from one of the campaigns. themostsearched will not participate in speculation as to where it might have come from (no, it didn't come from us: themostsearched is a big enough microphone for us.)

But this incident prompted us to do our own digging on how this story no one cared about even arose in the first place and discovered some very interesting things!

The CT petition story first appeared on Cherilyn Eagar's Wikipedia page on Jan 1st of this year submitted by user "Sunpoppi". Of course, themostsearched wondered who the heck Sunpoppi was especially since the user hadn't taken advantage of creating a user page which the user can write about themselves. In further research, we found that Sunpoppi had indeed written
a fair amount about themselves during using a mobile wiki site which we republish here:

Just want to clarify that I do not know Mrs. Eagar, do not live in the State of Utah and have no affiliation with either side of this campaign. I only became aware of Mrs. Eagar after reading her letter to the editor in a Bay Area magazine in January of 2009. She was commenting on a vote that had taken place in my home state of California. Because of her letter, and her involvement in campaigning for a vote that took place outside of her home state, I was interested in finding out exactly who Cherilyn Eagar was and what she stood for. It was surprising to find that she was running for local office in her home state. Intrigued, further digging found that it was not possible to find actual publications for all of the citations for which she claimed authorship. Further research uncovered people who knew her from her time in Connecticut and from performing in a local theater group. There is no doubt that she is a very dynamic woman with many interesting stories. Although there were many so-called "stories" relayed to me, the only submissions that I have cited are those of her involvement with the Buchanan and Draschil campaigns. As such, the incidents referenced in the update of Mrs. Eagar's Wikipedia pages, are only those that can be referenced in accordance with the current Wikipedia guidelines. Feel free to let me know if there is additional information that is needed in referencing this article. Sunpoppi (talk)

Although themostsearched does not claim to know the exact magazine Sunpoppi refers to, it is quite obvious that this "vote" was none other than Proposition 8 which occurred in November 2008. Eagar--who was a huge Prop 8 supporter--had enough "mojo" to opine in MoJo magazine online in Feb 2009 on the topic of Prop 8 donors. Prop 8 has spurred a strong backlash movement to "out", pressure, and persecute donors to the cause of traditional marriage including the ironically-named hate organization Californians Against Hate (they can hate you but you can't hate them.)

As a person obviously upset at the outcome of Prop 8, Sunpoppi started digging up dirt on this Cherilyn Eagar. Sunpoppi began talking to local Bay Area actors who knew Cherilyn back in CT: "Further research uncovered people who knew her from her time in Connecticut and from performing in a local theater group." These local actors surely included some of the "Fifty percent of my NYC-based company employees were gay" Eagar referred to in the aforementioned MoJo article.

The extent of anything above gossip-level that this dirt-digger Sunpoppi could find on Eagar was the CT petitions incident and an even smaller issue on one particular Micron-comment which Sunpoppi also posted to wikipedia. That that is the best Sunpoppi could come up with in 30 years of being politically active is a testimony to Eagar's character. It represents a poor attempt by Sunpoppi to negatively impact opinion about Eagar.

There is one more footnote to this Sunpoppi character of interest. User Sunpoppi first appears in wikipedia history on Jan 1st, 2010. Interestingly, on the uber-left-wing Huffington Post there is a user "Sunpoppy" who alone was writing very critical entries on Cherilyn Eagar including Eagar's involvement in the CT petitions (posted Nov 15 2008) and the Micron-comments...posted on DECEMBER 30TH 2009...just 2 days before Sunpoppi's Wikipedia entry! This left no doubt that "Sunpoppi" of Wikipedia equalled "Sunpoppy" of Huffington Post.

You can read all of Sunpoppy of Huffington Post's comments here. Highlights from these Sunpoppy entries include:

• Slandering Eagar by claiming she had "multiple divorces" (she has been through a sole divorce) and "multiple marriages" (technically OK, since she's been married two times--but that's a pretty low standard for the term)
• Gossiped about non-specific "allegations of very unseemly behavior" (isn't gossip unseemly behavior too, Sunpoppy?)
• Insinuated identity-hiding since Eagar has had multiple surnames due to prior marriages. (What? Really???)
• Investigated her children (see also Sunpoppi Wikipedia talk)

Conclusion
To reiterate, we have no idea who sent Lonsberry the CT petition dirt neither are we trying to implicate nor exonerate Sunpoppi from doing so; it could have been anyone. But what is clear is that an anti-Proposition 8, anti-traditional marriage California radical nicknamed Sunpoppi or Sunpoppy has attempted to sway voters in our state by throwing out dirt and slandering a candidate who would uphold our Constitution and defend our lives, liberties, and freedoms. Yet Sunpoppi has failed in their quest as themostsearched has full confidence in our delegates being smart enough to see through the smoke, to know what the issues are and to remain focused on what is important: defeating Bob Bennett and electing a candidate who will uphold our Constitution including considering Cherilyn Eagar. Finally, a word of thanks to Bob Lonsberry for his roll in being first to see through the smoke.

Mike Lee's "Free Trade" vs. Cherilyn Eagar's "Fair Trade"

In the 2o1o Utah Senate race there has been a lot of questioning among those of us opposing Bailout Bob Bennett on how the candidates contrast in their political views. While there is a ton that unites them, the two leaders in the race have taken diametrically opposite views over trade during their recent Bob Lonsberry (105.7 KNRS) interviews.

themostsearched became a "free trader" during a Economics 101 course at BYU. We understood and embraced the theory we were taught: two countries each specialized in a an activity will produce greater goods through specialization and thus both can benefit from free trade of those goods.

As the years went by, the application of the theory left something to be desired. Although our markets were opening up through GATT, NAFTA, and such it didn't seem to produce the promised benefits and we seemed to be starting to lose control or sovereignty over our trade. We wondered why in the world do we grant Most Favored Nation (MFN) status (now called Permanent Normal Trade Relations) to China? To a country which runs its citizens over with tanks? To a country which puts lead and cadmium in its toys for our children to get sick and die? To a country which uses slave labor to produce its goods? To a country which has no concern for world pollution? To a country which launches daily, sophisticated computer attacks on our systems?

Our American jobs have disappeared due to free trade and as we lower tariffs we have to raise taxes to provide compensatory revenue. It puts us into agreements we don't want to be in. Somehow the theory of Free Trade has gone the way of manmade Global Warming: it just isn't what it's purported to be. We're not opposed to having some lower tariffs with our close allies, but we need to protect America first.

themostsearched has moved on from our "free trade" position: it simply doesn't work. We are a "fair trader" now. If you are going to restrict US companies from polluting with fines and penalties then why allow the companies to uproot and move to Mexico or anywhere and pollute there? We're just hurting our own selves by outsourcing our "dirty work" so we can feel good. Penalty-high tariffs are needed to prevent this from happening and we need to become as self-sufficient as we can be so in times of war, we are beholden to none. Take for example the role oil has played in our foreign policy because the Obama administration prohibits us from drilling in ANWAR, Utah, offshore, anywhere. Why not raise the tariff on foreign oil while opening up our own God-given natural resources? Now there's a job-creating plan for you America!

First from UtahPatriot the audio excerpt on the Feb 9th Lonsberry Show interview with Mike Lee. UtahPatriot has done an excellent job with the video and comments:



Cherilyn Eagar responded today during her questioning with Mike Lee which themostsearched made the following clip (sorry no fancy comments like UtahPatriot):



themostsearched praises our hopeful future Senator Eagar for her courageous and informed position on Fair Trade.

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 themostsearched 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?
themostsearched 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, themostsearched 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

In Honor of Rich Kuchinsky

We are shocked and saddened to hear about the passing of a great man, Rich Kuchinsky. themostsearched was beginning to become acquainted with this hero and regarded him as an astute patriot in the cause for freedom.

Rich was a stalwart supporter of U.S. Senate candidate Cherilyn Eagar and a former chair of the Salt Lake County Republican Party. Yet Rich kept perspective on this race as evidenced by his unexpected outburst at the Senatorial I-caucus debates held in Provo last month. At the conclusion of the debate he did a shout-out summarizing the mood of I-caucus members: "Any of these four candidates [Eagar/Williams/Bridgewater/Lee] would be better than Bennett." (Joe Pyrah of the Daily Herald also took note of this.)

In what we know of him, he would want us to push forward with our Constitutional principles and to redouble our efforts. We shall attempt to honor his name by continuing our support for Eagar who--to speak the words of Mr. Kuchinsky--is the best candidate.

Our prayers go out to his family.

+++ Update 2/10:
The Salt Lake Tribune penned a great article on the life and passing of Rich Kuchinsky. A comment by Fudgiemonkey rings applicable for comments posted to themostsearched as well:

Whoever this man was politically, he was a loved one to his family and friends. Those who see this as an opportunity to make snide political remarks need to grow and try for once in their pathetic lives to acquire some good manners.

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 themostsearched'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
themostsearched 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 themostsearched 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 themostsearched 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.

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 themostsearched 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.