Wednesday, February 03, 2010


In order of my preference:

1.  Adrian;

2.  Downey;

3.  Brenner.

(Prepared January 31, 2010 and set up to autopost February 3, 2010 @ 0300)


At 7:15 AM, February 03, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tough night for the Tea Party crew. Adam A. finishes 5th and Talmidge Brenner 3rd. Did any of their endorsed candidates win?

At 9:23 AM, February 03, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

I think they claim Venvertloh. Interesting how they seem to stake out positions against older folks.

At 9:55 AM, February 03, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...


What positions against older folks? Not wanting to argue, I am just curious, please explain.

At 10:32 AM, February 03, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everybody is claiming to represent the tea party ... Adam was maybe the best fit, but not much experience. Proft probably split the tea party vote with Adam, (though Adam was close to Brady in Adams county). Perhaps if there was just one, their combined 23% would have carried the day.

But this is Illinois after all. Listening to Giannoulias after the election, even he sounded like a tea party candidate. He heard the voters' message ... hope and change (and blame Bush).

At 12:39 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


When two different TP'ers told me Nichols was in his 60's and had nothing new to offer, I took it as a clue. Maybe, having a few silver hairs, I'm just over sensitive to that kind of thing.


At 4:41 PM, February 03, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's your take on the low turnout of Adams County democrats?

At 5:08 PM, February 03, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Thanks for the info regarding age. I like the idea of a grass roots movement that brings more people to the political process, such as the QTP. However, when the leaders of a "movement" start acting as if they are the movement and are king makers, when they have yet to back a full slate of winning candidates, I have reservations. We shall see what happens.

At 5:09 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger Rocky Cola said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 7:21 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


Thanks for info. TP had an oh-fer. Good to know.


At 7:25 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

We had no local races. In our hearts, I think a lot of us wanted to shuffle and redeal. I don't think we have outshown the GOP in a Gub. Primary since 1976 and that's back when our Governor ran with the President.

As Larry Ehmen is fond of saying, it's a fact that there's just more Double RR's than Double DD's (Those are primary ballots, not cup sizes.)


At 8:18 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger TOOKIE said...

I see the center leaning left still wants to bang on the TP . Let me tell you there are ILGOP folks who in 8 days got a wake up . Just a beginning run with yet another full room last night .

Like Saban states often , it's a process . ULM was part of a process .

At 9:05 PM, February 03, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Sorry I couldn't return your call tonight--family thing.

You have the same problem the Rad Left had in '69-about '73. Look at your conditional endorsement.

You were doing fine with just fiscal conservatism but now it's "Love me, love my dog."

History's been written. Ignore it at your peril. That's not some kind of lefty thing. It's just about painting with too broad a brush.

Back in the late 60's a guy would go to an anti-war rally and find out he had to sign the gay rights pledge too. Next rally, he rearranged his sock drawer at home.

We'll talk soon. TYFCB

At 5:43 AM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The internet has changed a lot of the mechanics of how "movements" work. But the tea party as I see it, is not a political party, but a concept of the individual versus the collective.

If anyone is the founder of the concept, it is Rick Santelli. His stand was against the moral hazard of the continuous bailouts, and the redistribution of wealth through the housing scams.

Glenn Beck has done a pretty good job of detailing the old progressive movement (sort of the opposite of the tea party idea), and the dangers we are facing with the insane DC parabolic spending. He slams progressives in both parties.

But the root of the problem is corruption at every level. People get in office or "organize" so they can forcefully take from someone with less power.

The Democrats have been eager to label the "Tea Party" as kooks, Nazis, skinheads, losers ... but it is more the voice of protest from the majority tired of the "organized crime" that has taken over our government.

"Power to the People" :)

At 7:53 AM, February 04, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


They are having a convention, arguing about who is in charge and even quibbling now about whether their original pure motives are being upheld.

Democrats and Republicans have that kind of problems. Al Queada, The Weather Underground and Posse Commitatus almost never do. Give or take a crazy billionaire, it sounds like a nascent third party to me.


At 8:12 AM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think that the ultimate fate of the Tea Party as a political party per se depends on how the Republicans look nationwide in 2011. If Obama looks to be cruising for a re-election and the Republican brand is not selling at the national level, then the non-RNC conservative leaders in the media (Hannity, Beck, FoxNews in general really, and maybe Limbaugh) and your odd billionaire here and there will back them as a third party- and they will be led by Sarah Palin. It won't be the grass roots local Tea Party folks running that op, it will their brand being shanghaied by the ultra-conservative wing of the republican party.

At 10:17 AM, February 04, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

I'd go a step further. I think the brand will be Shang'd anyhow. They've already morphed from a fiscal restraint activist group to a whole bunch of "values" positions. I thought they really had a chance to take off as a neo-Norquist group but not as a neo-Dixiecrat group.


At 10:29 AM, February 04, 2010, Blogger TOOKIE said...

Remember Tony ,

The movement is new and very early . I think it will end more Neo-Grover than neo- "insert evangelical " , people are new to the political process .

When is the last time in Quincy you have seen a room full of people from every social economic back ground watching and cheering a Primary ?

Steve McQueen can get a 100 people to attend a Tea function , yet Kyle is hard pressed to get 5 to a YR event . Hell the YP's are hard pressed to get people and they are funded by GREDF and U of Il extension .

Early movements get early set backs , knowing these folks they will just bear their teeth and keep going . I see a very large change happening .

I being the Uber-Libertian find econ values more important than the social issues . If Government worked properly we would not have that conversation .

Adam A for a relative unknown made a name and left a mark . Add Brady , Adam , and Proft votes up you can clearly see the conservatives are speaking . I have a sneaky feeling Adam will be around for a long time .

I see the Dixiecrats are already cracking and want open war with the progressive factions in the Dem party . I think we have a re-shuffle in effect that will be great to watch .

The American people on both sides of center are getting fed up . I see the Dem ranks suffering the same fate as the Repubs , there will be blood letting across the board .

At 11:27 AM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think they would have been able to build a broad enough coalition just on fiscal restraint though. You can't win conservative elections without getting the cultural conservatives in your corner on a national level. Thats why if Scott Brown ever wanted to go national he'd have to do some acrobats Mitt Romney style in terms of his abortion stance. It's also why John McCain had to put his country second to add Sarah Palin to his ticket. If the Tea Party would have been a viable national force just based on fiscal and monetary issues then Ron Paul would have been going toe to toe with McCain and not Mike Huckabee.

At 11:45 AM, February 04, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


Actually, I agree with most of what you said. But "early" parties who make bad decisions tend not survive. There wouldn't be a GOP if the Whiggies hadn't done serial declinations to adopt some core principles.

Fighting out-of-control spending was a righteous basis. The "I'm more righteous and patriotic than you" crap chases folks away or, at least, chills their participation. Looks to me like the wrong fork in road was taken.

But, you're right that it is too early to tell.

BTW, I really admire Grover.

At 11:56 AM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Beware the Kingmakers,they are only concerned with their own self importance.
Friendly Observer

At 2:42 PM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We are still a two party system ... last I heard even Palin agreed it was not time to start another party.

Of course Democrats advocate for a split of the overwhelming conservative majority, but most Republicans are just tired of sell out RINO's and corruption.

A conservative takeover (or take back) of the Republican party seems more likely than a new party ... like the "progressive" far left managed to take over the Democrats, inserting nuts like Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

At 3:37 PM, February 04, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


Judging by that response, my impression is that discussion of the TP's broadening its positional requirements (to be a preferred candidate or a true believer)working against it establishing a real neo-Norquist impact simply ruffled your hair as it went over your head.

Do appreciate your stopping by, though.

At 4:48 PM, February 04, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You really think the average tea party guy ... that hates big corrupt gov' spending trillions we don't have, is really thinking about the "neo-Norquist impact"

That is just hilarious. Wouldn't Norquist be more RINO than tea party?

We are talking of the real America ... is Grover really how you want to try to frame the "tea party movement"?

I think it is not that ... so yeah, i guess it just ruffled my hair ... because no one is talking of anything "neo-Norquist" in my world.

If you are talking McCain ... the progressive RINO, he ain't no tea party guy, but he might support a "neo-Norquist" movement ...

Not everyone outside the Dem' party represents the Rick Santelli tea party protest. Several will try to grab the title ... and the Democrats will continue with their talking points to try to degrade the movement.

"Neo-Norquist" might be a Dem talking point ... it is not the real tea party movement.

Thanks for condescending ...

At 8:33 PM, February 04, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

The only point was that TP started as anti-tax, anti-spend. Good point, much more targeted than the GOP. Now, all of a sudden, they have a thousand "true believer" points that candidates have to sign off on. The more litmus tests you have, the more you disinvite players.

You can say "Talking Points" all you want. Ask anybody who has ever organized any community action group successfully. Simple message and stay on message.

Simple organizational point. No value judgment. "Norquist" was shorthand. Sorry if that tripped your circuits.


At 6:02 AM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I have no real experience with Norquist ... reading now I see he was part of the contract with America. Then was with Bush.

So that is a good point that just ruffled my hair. And yes, there needs to be a simple message. I like the way Schilling is doing it ... making his own contract.

Maybe you're right, there should be a national message. (I think I've even suggested something like that before, not here)

On the other hand, I don't want to see the large groundswell movement co-opted by some self appointed leaders. Norquist is not so highly esteemed by many conservatives now, and may be an example of a groundswell idea getting swallowed by the machine. That is a problem with an idea getting tied to a "leader".

I don't think Santelli is so much "anti-tax, anti-spend" as he is against the bailouts of failures. He is more pro capitalist, pro individual, less government intervention.

With blogs and the internet, I still think the mechanics have changed, and the tea party movement can be thrive from "a million points of light". (to borrow a phrase)

thanks for expounding

At 6:51 AM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sure the TP'ers value advice and scrutiny from a guy like UMR, who has benefited from a life of patronage and government waste.

At 7:21 AM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The more litmus tests you have, the more you disinvite players."

So to sum up, by abandoning the Norquist fiscal stance the tea party will inevitably shrink to the point you can drown it in a bathtub.

At 9:39 AM, February 05, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...


In the first place, simply attacking the messenger is not very skilled argumentation technique.

Further, you will look a long time in vain for any "waste" I created.

Regarding Patronage, All the scholarships and admissions to Universities I have enjoyed were earned competitively. I was not admitted to my nearly six years of military service on the basis of patronage. I was hired as an Assistant Attorney General by Republican Bill Scott and continued to assist every elected AG, Republican and Democrat, from the 70's, 80's 90's and the 21st Century. I became a public defender by appointment from a panel of judges, split evenly GOP/Dem. I worked full time for Adams County after an being elected. My first work for the city of Quincy occurred during a GOP administration and has continued on various bases through today.

Doesn't take any talent to just slap a label on somebody.

At 9:54 AM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the bio. It only furthers my point.

At 12:26 PM, February 05, 2010, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Then your point must be that public service is, perforce, waste. If that's what you believe, it would be interesting to know the experience that form that cave-dwelling belief.


At 12:54 PM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah!...darn Mr C for forgoing a higher salary in a lucrative private practice firm in order to serve his country!!! Darn him! If he were a REAL American he'd be running a personal injury law firm and suing physicians for lucrative damages. But noooooooooooooo he had to go and make sure that folks were guaranteed their right to a competent attorney. Geez.

At 1:48 PM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Um, he does have a private practice.

At 2:05 PM, February 05, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:54 PM, February 05, 2010

I submit the opposite. There is no proof he passed up a lucrative career, but chose the warm confines of the public trough for security.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home