Posts Tagged ‘endorsements’
» posted on Monday, November 5th, 2012 at 7:32 pm by Editor
On election eve, Iowa Freedom Report offers you our official endorsement for the Presidency in 2012. Iowans concerned about the runaway growth in government at all levels have but one option this year, to elect Governor Gary Johnson as President and Judge Jim Gray as Vice President.
Governor Gary Johnson ably served his constituents for eight years as New Mexico’s Governor and left his comfortable retirement to serve the freedom movement as Presidential candidate. Despite serving as nominally a Republican, Johnson always governed as a libertarian and in so doing, advanced the movement in the public square in a way that no one else has done. While Dr. Ron Paul is better known as a advocate for liberty, it is Johnson who actually has experience implementing our ideas. Johnson’s time in office proved conclusively that the principles of liberty, realistically applied, do indeed result in economic growth and political popularity. Johnson’s term in New Mexico saw greater job growth than the term of any other former executive in the race for President – including (and especially) better known contenders Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Tim Pawlenty.
Some in the movement have criticized Johnson’s moderation and the handful of his policy proposals that defy libertarian orthodoxy, but let’s be honest, who would have done better given the situation. Johnson’s entrance into politics itself was a long shot. Big government Republicans in New Mexico tried to dissuade his gubernatorial campaign. Democrats held a 2-to-1 registration advantage and held the governorship with a popular incumbent. The state’s mainstream press eviscerated him when he proposed medical freedom and school choice. His own officials in the administration worked to undermine him (Johnson once fired his entire Racing and Gaming Board when they went behind his back on a casino deal Johnson promised to veto.)
In response, Johnson didn’t merely hold the line against big government, he built a firewall against it by vetoing 750 bills and used the line-item veto (allowed under New Mexico’s constitution) hundreds of times, saving taxpayers millions. Unable to cut wide swaths out of state government, Johnson applied his managerial experience to operations, using an attrition strategy to reduce the state payroll by 1,000 employees without even having to directly fire any worker. Awarded the name “Governor Veto” or “Governor No,” Johnson moved New Mexico forward. By expanding the role of the private sector in provision of infrastructure New Mexico under Johnson added hundreds of miles of paved roads without any increase in budgets. So much for “but who will build the roads!?” right? The budget was balanced all eight years but never once did taxes go up.
Compared to this record, what alternatives could there possibly be? There are some in the last few years who have attached themselves to our movement and have returned, like a dog to its vomit, to the Republican candidates and expect us to do the same. Mitt Romney is not perfect, they’ll say, but we must beat the black guy, err, ah, the Democrat, because he’s sooo bad! And also black. But there is no pro-freedom case for Romney at all. In four years as Governor, Mitt Romney dramatically expanded the role of government in the private lives of individuals and “Taxachusetts” wasn’t exactly Galt’s Gulch when Romney took over. As Governor, Romney introduced a costly and intrusive health care plan that Obama would later adopt nearly verbatim on a national scale. As a candidate, Romney talks spending cuts but his only specifics have been on what he’ll increase – military spending, drone strikes, and Medicare expenses. The Romney/Ryan budget borrows heavily from South Park’s Underpants Gnomes, essentially boiling down to “cut taxes/increase spending>???>balanced budgets.”
Regarding Mr. Obama, there were some in our movement who talked themselves into a false hope that Obama would be better, at least on civil liberties, than Bush era Republicans. But Obama doubled down on every thing bad about the Bush years. Promising to close the Gitmo prison, Obama instead signed legislation allowing him to send anyone he wants there without trial. Obama also took it upon himself to create a secret “kill list” of those persons he claims authority to execute at will. Even being an American citizen doesn’t excuse you from the list, as Obama’s drones killed a 16 year old American boy in Yemen. Asked to defend this, Obama’s spokesman could only answer, “he should have had better parents.” On domestic issues, Obama seems to think that he himself should act as our parent – Obamacare, bailouts, literally laughing off the idea of individual liberties – he has been an unmitigated disaster for liberty.
Now if you’re reading this site, you probably don’t need convincing that the Obama/Romney status quo is not working for America, so what of your alternatives? Most years, there are at least two national candidates promoting slightly differing versions of the limited government message – the Libertarian Party candidate and the Constitution Party candidate. This year however, while the Libertarians have Johnson, the Constitution Party standard bearer is former Independent, Democrat, and Republican Congressman Virgil Goode. Goode is an unrepentant advocate of foreign wars, not only voting for the initial invasion of Iraq but invoking the worst right-wing talking points in advocating for supplemental financing. Whereas the 2008 nominee Chuck Baldwin was a defender of a separation of powers, Goode has supported federal overreaches such as the ban on online card playing and raiding state-licensed medical clinics. Goode is better than some alternatives and the Constitution Party has advanced some admirable principles, but Goode cannot even live up to the standards of his party and does not deserve your vote.
Some among us have despaired of any of the actual choices and are electing to write in Congressman Paul. Let me try to explain why that is a bad idea. Now, recall that IFR endorsed Congressman Paul before the Iowa Straw Poll and reiterated our support before the caucuses, so this the advice of a friend. Casting a write in ballot achieves nothing. Just 2% of the vote for Johnson will place the Libertarian Party on the ballot in 2014 and give them major party status. It is an investment in a better future, or at least in a stronger outlet for protest votes when freedom candidates lose future Republican and Democrat primaries. For those who believe that Paul’s supporters must be good Republicans but have enough integrity to shun Romney, consider this – if Libertarians have to spend their limited time and money getting on the ballot in 2014, they will have that much less time and money to help Ron Paul Republican candidates in their local races and conventions. We can’t state this strongly enough – not voting for the movement’s best standard bearer will weaken the movement as a whole.
As the Libertarian Party nominee, Governor Gary Johnson is the best choice to carry the cause of peace, responsible government, and individual liberty in 2012. For the last few months, Johnson’s has been the only voice challenging entitlements, challenging the wars, and providing an alternative. The stronger we make our alternative tomorrow, the more our agenda must be reckoned with. Look at Johnson’s record. See what he has done and then listen to what he says. You will be proud to give him your vote for liberty in this election.
» posted on Monday, June 4th, 2012 at 8:10 pm by Editor
Just a quick reminder, primary elections are tomorrow, Tuesday, June 5. While Libertarians and the Constitution Party nominate by convention and we don’t know of any worthy Freedom Democrats in Iowa, there are several excellent Republican candidates scattered throughout the ballots statewide. On Friday, wrote our primary primer and included our endorsed candidates – Will Johnson in SD-50, Kevin Wolfswinkel in HD-1, Josh Davenport in HD-2, Tom Shaw in HD-10, Tony Seliquini in HD-36, Matt DeVries in HD-37, as well as recommended candidate Jake Highfill in HD-39.
Today, we’ll throw out a few more last minute recommendations. These are not “endorsements” per se, but if you remember our endorsement policy, a “recommendation” is our way of saying, “well, this guy is probably better than the other guy, you might want to look into him.” We use it when there is no clear liberty candidate in the race, when we have reservations about someone, or when we just don’t know enough about him/her to endorse.
Iowa Senate District 6 – Matthew Ung
With a primary challenge to an incumbent lawmaker in Chris Rant’s district, Ung has marked himself as a rising star in the Iowa GOP. He says a lot of the right things and has a lot of the right endorsements (Kim Pearson, Iowa Gun Owners, ect.) while the incumbent is a run of the mill mainstream Republican. He tries to base his ideas on the Constitution, but tends to have a bit of the rose colored glasses syndrome towards his party and could get lost in the weeds bashing gays instead of fighting government encroachment when he gets to Des Moines, but based on what we know, we’d rather have him there than return Ron Jorgensen. IFR doesn’t usually have much coverage in the desert that is western Iowa, so maybe our readers in Steve King Country could enlighten us as to Ung’s credibility.
Iowa House District 81 – Rick McClure
No website, no twitter, no facebook page, no money raised – IFR sincerely hopes Mr. McClure has been more active door knocking in Ottumwa than he has been knocking out blog posts and web ads because we just heard about him minutes ago and he sounds great. McClure is an Air Force veteran and John Deere worker who is politically independent and was inspired to get involved by Dr. Ron Paul’s campaign. Straight party voting is the reason he joined the GOP. “Voting straight party at the ballot box is as irresponsible and lazy as casting a straight party vote on any bill up in Des Moines,” McClure told his hometown paper when asked why he joined the GOP. Sounds like the kind of man we need in the State House. We’re keeping this a “recommends” only because we haven’t had time to properly vet him. Networking, people.
U.S. Congress District 1 – Rod Blum
Much of the freedom movement in northeast Iowa has been all atwitter – and all over twitter – about Mr. Blum for several months now. But under the surface, there is a lot of uncertainty. We’ve held off writing anything at all about Blum until election night eve out of fear of stirring things up one way or the other. Go to Blum’s issue page and there’s virtually nothing to disagree with. But this wasn’t always the case. Blum is no new face on the scene, as a columnist for the Dubuque Telegraph Herald, Blum has been carrying the water for big-government Republicans for a long, long time. During the Bush administration, Blum proudly declared that he “doesn’t know what all my rights are” and that it was a moral imperative to invade random Middle Eastern countries. While we encourage people to move from fascism to freedom in their thinking, one should always be wary of a politician who comes to you and says, “oh, dude, it’s totally different now!” right before an election.
We at IFR have a bit of a personal issue with this. You see, your editor was on the front lines of recruiting Bob Barr to run for President in 2008, to the point where leading Libertarians (including past national staff members of the LP) fingered him as “the guy who got Barr into the race” because no one wants to be the one holding that bag. How did Bob Barr repay us (including us personally)? By endorsing Space Cadet Gingrich and abandoning the LP to prostrate himself on the pro-war, pro-big government altar of the GOP. You’ll currently see him cheering whenever Mitt Romney shows up to campaign in Georgia. Let’s hope Blum’s fortuitously-timed conversion is genuine because one person who hasn’t changed is Ben Lange, Blum’s opponent. Lange is again looking for a way to return to the center of power, this time (thank God) minus the whole “Congress-should-decide-if-you-can-build-a-church-or-not” issue that attracted so much of Bruce Rastetter’s money to the 2010 race. We were Lange’s harshest critic back then when we had a real dog in the fight. Click his name at the bottom of the post, it all still applies.
So here’s our bottom line on Blum: in the words of Stewie Griffin, “huzzah for the lesser of two evils!”
And in other news. . .
While it is quite unfortunate that State Representative Kim Pearson declined to run for re-election, she’s not getting out of politics completely. After a few days of rumors following Kim Lehman’s decision not to see reelection, Pearson made it official – she will run for the position of Republican National Committeewoman. Each state and territory is represented on the Republican National Committee by one man and one woman. Iowa’s committeepersons will be chosen at the state Republican convention on June 16. Pearson will compete with two announced statists, with other nominations possibly to come from the floor. If you’re reading this site, you already know what we’ll be doing but for what it’s worth, Iowa Freedom Report hereby gives Representative Pearson our full endorsement.
After you vote tomorrow (assuming you have a candidate on the ballot worth the trip to the polls), be sure to catch Governor Gary Johnson on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. While Stewart is essentially a Democrat Party spokesman (perhaps the only credible one they have), lately his monologues have been leaning toward liberty and he is clearly respectful of our position and engages it in good faith so he’s certain to give Johnson a fair shake. With a lot of disillusioned young voters up for grabs in the election, this could be Johnson’s breakout moment. If you’ve been too busy with Republican caucus politics to think ahead to November, let this be your introduction to the man who proved that the moderate application of libertarianism to government is not only possible, but can be wildly successful and popular.
one Comment | filed under Uncategorized | tags: 1st District, Ben Lange, endorsements, Gary Johnson, Jake Highfill, Josh Davenport, Kevin Wolfswinkel, Kim Pearson, Matt DeVries, Matthew Ung, Republican Party, Rick McClure, Rod Blum, Tom Shaw, Tony Seliquini, Will Johnson
» posted on Friday, June 1st, 2012 at 4:15 pm by Editor
Iowa Freedom Report is back from our month-long Vegas hangover just in time for updates and endorsements in next week’s primary elections. The success of the Ron Paul campaign in organizing the state unfortunately didn’t result in a caucus night victory, but it did leave in it wake a number of globally thinking-locally acting candidates seeking lower office. Unlike in 2008 and 2010 when freedom candidates were restricted to deep-blue districts where mainstream Republicans offered little resistance, many of our people are poised to break through the glass ceiling and join Jason Schultz and Kent Sorenson in the Iowa Legislature’s de facto liberty caucus. Here’s a look at some of those candidates with contested races on Tuesday’s ballot. Consider them all to be “endorsed” unless otherwise noted.
Iowa Senate District 50 – Will Johnson
Johnson is a well known leader in the freedom movement from his 2010 Congressional campaign and his status as a former columnist at IFR. He just has the sad misfortune of living in Democrat controlled Dubuque. Our sources inform us that in a rare turn of events, Johnson is actually the establishment favorite in this primary as Senate Republicans see him as the only chance to put this seat in play. Johnson for his part is avoiding typical Republican talking points like “Democrats are bad” and “Obama is a secret Muslim communist atheist!!!” to focus on nonpartisan issues like the proliferation of red light cameras in Dubuque. His efforts on civil liberties have earned him a reputation around town as “the camera man” and his elevated profile and crossover appeal should carry the day over traditional Republican John Hulsizer Jr. The one drawback is that Johnson’s fundraising has been far less than you’d expect from someone with his resume. Although Hulsizer didn’t raise enough to require a filing (ie, less than $750), we’ll need to get Johnson some help before the fall.
Iowa House District 1 – Kevin Wolfswinkel
House District 1 in the far northwest corner of Iowa represents an unique pick-up opportunity brought about by redistricting. Freshman Representative Jeff Smith represented the old district 1 but lost half his former constituents to the new lines. Smith generally towed the party line in his only term, including siding with the National Rifle Association when that august organization launched an all-out effort to derail proposed “Constitutional-carry” firearms legislation. Wolfswinkel has a background working with Campaign for Liberty as well as a local effort aimed at tax reductions. He was an easy choice to be a prime recipient of Iowa Freedom Fund’s support. The money race has been about even in this one, and it could go either way on Tuesday so anyone with friends and family in that area, call in your favors now.
Iowa House District 2 – Josh Davenport
Spencer Pastor Josh Davenport first came to our attention last fall when he came out for Dr. Paul around the time of Paul’s visit to Clay County. At the time Davenport had slowly moved to liberty going through the nanny statism of the Huckabee campaign to the tea party and finally arriving in the liberty camp. Davenport is a late entry into the House race, but don’t underestimate his chances with a background as minister and a former co-chair of the county GOP. The establishment candidate is former legislative staffer Megan Hess, who had a head start and backing from the NRA (which you’d have to assume means she’ll oppose Constitutional-carry) but Davenport has done well with fundraising and has lined up the freedom movement behind him, including newly elected State Central Committee member Kris Theissen. The district leans Republican, but the Democrats have a strong candidate, so Davenport will need our help if he gets through on Tuesday.
Iowa House District 10 – Tom Shaw
Representative Shaw is the rare incumbent legislator who didn’t support Ron Paul when he had the chance but who’s record in office is so exemplary that he still warrants our full support. Shaw, a Republican In Name Only in the truest sense of the term, complied an impressive pro-liberty record in his first term voting along with freedom legislators Kim Pearson and Glenn Massie. While Pearson and Massie unfortunately took themselves out by declining to seek re-election, the Republican establishment is looking to help Shaw go the same way. They’ve put up former U of I student body president Maison Bleam in the primary. Bleam is the scion of a prominent Republican family in Calhoun county which is new to Shaw’s district and is a former staffer to Congressman Steve King. Shaw should be favored, but if you live in Humboldt, Pochantas, Calhoun, or Webster counties don’t take it for granted, make sure you vote for Shaw on Tuesday.
Iowa House District 36 – Tony Seliquini
This race has flown far under the radar despite its location in Polk County, perhaps because the district leans Democrat. Still, freedom candidate Tony Seliquini is in the midst of a contested 3-way primary for the chance to be an underdog in November. Seliquini is an Army vet with a wide range of civilian experience and campaign experience volunteering for Dr. Paul and numerous local candidates. He faces Jeff Ibbotson, who is employed in Homeland Security which alone should give any one pause and Larry Steele who didn’t raise enough money to trigger the filing requirement with the state. Seliquini is looking for last-minute volunteers to phone bank over the weekend, so if you have some free time, contact him at the website listed above.
Iowa House District 37 – Matt DeVries
As an somewhat well-known candidate in a brand new, heavily Republican district, Matt DeVries represents the best chance to put a pro-freedom candidate in the state legislature in 2012. A rising star in our movement, DeVries’s political career got off to a rocky start in 2011 when he lost a convention race to run in the special Senate election that was eventually won by Jack Whitver. Still, DeVries’s exposure in that race may give him an advantage in name recognition, an advantage desperately needed as 5 big-government Republicans saw the same opportunity we did leading to a crowded primary. If no candidate gets 35% on Tuesday, the race will go to convention where freedom voters should have an advantage as Romney and Santorum supporters largely boycotted the caucus-to-convention process for reasons that have never been fully explained. DeVries has put an emphasis on reenforcing government marriage (for straights only) and normally anyone who considers teh gayz as the major threat facing our state demonstrates that they lack the critical thinking necessary in an office, Murray Rothbard did say that everyone gets on deviation, so DeVries has our full support.
Iowa House District 39 – Jake Highfill
The HD-39 primary has been an interesting one to say the least. Iowa City blogger John Deeth calls it the WTF primary and we’d be hard pressed to give the Erik Helland-Jake Highfill match-up a better moniker. In his two terms in the House, Helland is still best known for his drunk driving convention. Despite lots of money and lots of establishment support, this Kerry Burt Republican seems ripe for a primary challenge in a safe Republican seat. Stepping up to the challenge is Ron Paul Republican Jake Highfill, a recent U of I grad. Unfortunately for both him and the movement, Highfill has stirred up unneeded controversy with both accusations against his opponent and Obama-style “evolution” on key issues. First, in a he-said/he-said debate Highfill claimed Helland offered him a job to get him out of the primary. Helland counters that he was only steering Highfill to a more suitable entry into politics, not making any offers himself. Then Highfill reversed course on his previous public stands for liberty. In a January interview for a story on Paul’s young supporters, Highfill took the proper stand saying he would never vote for Mitt Romney. Then last week he told The Iowa Republican, neoconservativism’s blog of record that he’d be the “first in line” to cast his vote for the Massachusetts fascist. Highfill also seems to have backed off his previous support for extending government marriage to same-sex couples. Given an excellent opportunity to educate the public about freedom of contract or to help the GOP reverse their losses among the creative class, Highfill took the easy way out and told TIR he’d support only straight government marriage. Sadly, Highfill sounds like a young man who’s heart is in the right place but whose pro-liberty ideology is not fully set. He’s worth a vote over Helland but it would be hard to place a lot of hope in his chances. With all the questions marks surrounding Highfill’s true beliefs, call this one a “recommends”.
We’ve heard stirrings about other potentially good candidates, but haven’t had the chance to vet them in light of their past involvement in the movement (any one can say good things in an election race, and everyone does, we look at actions), so pass along any others you know who are worthy of our support in either the comments or tweet to us @IAFreedomReport. We’ll be spending more time on legislative candidates between now and November, including some good ones who aren’t contested next week.
Remember, get out and vote Tuesday! (You can change your registration at the polls if needed and change back on Wednesday.)
post a comment | filed under Uncategorized | tags: endorsements, Erik Hellend, Jake Highfill, Jeff Smith, John Hulsizer Jr., Josh Davenport, Kevin Wolfswinkel, Maison Bleam, Matt DeVries, Megas Hess, Republican Party, Tom Shaw, Tony Seliquini, Will Johnson
» posted on Sunday, April 22nd, 2012 at 7:45 pm by Editor
Iowa Freedom Fund is proud to add another freedom candidate to our list of supported candidates. This Saturday, Iowa Freedom Fund made a donation to Kevin Wolfswinkel, a Republican running for State House in HD-1. Wolfswinkel has a reputation as a tax-fighter, having started a taxpayer’s organization in his native Osceola County to hold local officials to account. He was active in both the 2008 and 2012 Ron Paul for President campaigns and was an early leader of the Campaign for Liberty in Iowa. Wolfswinkel is also active in his local Farm Bureau, so he’s on top of the agriculture issues so vital to a rural district like HD-1. The race is a primary against the incumbent, however with the newly-drawn districts most of the voters will be new to both candidates so there is a strong chance for the movement to score the upset and put a good constitutionalist in the state house.
Learn more about Kevin at his website here.
Wolfswinkel is the third candidate to receive support from Iowa Freedom Fund. Previous supported candidates are Jason Schulz for HD-18 and Kim Pearson in HD-30 (returned with a nice note when she dropped out.)
Iowa Freedom Fund was Iowa’s first PAC dedicated solely to the principles of limited government, individual liberty, and peace. Iowa Freedom Fund is the only independent, grassroots, transpartisan PAC advocating for “less government, not more.” Help us help candidates like Kevin and find more like him by donating by check to:
Iowa Freedom Fund; 301 Lincoln St.; Parkersburg, IA 50665
Online soon at www.IowaFreedomFundPAC.com
» posted on Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012 at 1:43 pm by Editor
National figures in politics and foreign policy have weighed in with last minutes endorsements for Ron Paul over the past week, directing their remarks to Iowa voters.
CIA veteran Michael Scheuer, who headed the unit charged with tracking down Osama bin Laden under the Clinton and Bush administrations, posted his endorsement on his website on December 31. Scheuer made clear what he called “Iowa’s Choice” between Ron Paul or more bankruptcy and more deaths:
“only the gentleman from Texas speaks for the Founder’s non-interventionist vision of America’s role in world affairs and for plain common sense. In the Founders’ non-interventionist design for U.S. foreign policy that is championed by Dr. Paul, Iowans will find a proven road to the maintenance of America’s sovereignty, independence, peace, and prosperity. In the realm of common sense, Dr. Paul beats his fellow candidates, the Obamaites, and the media hands down. Dr. Paul challenges the interventionists in both parties on their plans for spreading secular democracy — and causing wars thereby — on historical grounds that are irrefutable because they are just good commonsense.”
Former Republican and current Libertarian candidate for President Governor Gary Johnson also urged his remaining Iowa supporters to caucus for Paul. We at IFR have covered Johnson’s efforts since 2010 and have been granted unprecedented access to his campaign. Right on all the issues, unfortunately Johnson’s aborted GOP efforts proved that the party simply doesn’t have enough supporters of smaller government to sustain more than one candidate with that message.
Closer to home, Paul picked up two prominent crossover Democrats recently as well. Francis Thicke, the organic farmer from libertarian hotbed Fairfield, posted on his facebook page that he will join the “Republican for a Day” movement in order to “keep Ron Paul’s voice for peace in the presidential debates as long as possible, so he can refute the warmongering rhetoric of the other Repbulican candidates.” Thanks to Bleeding Heartland for the tip. Plenty of small government supporters backed Thicke in 2010 for his vision of agriculture as a series of small, family owned enterprises in contrast to the taxpayer-subsidized corporate farming advocated by Secretary Northey, so its nice to see him return the favor.
Two former Democratic State Representatives also came out for Paul. Joel Brown, who represented suburban Des Moines during the 1990’s spoke about his support for Paul on the Fallon Forum on December 22, citing the toll on the republic taken by years of war and overspending. Fallon himself, who long has urged his followers to crossover in the caucuses offered a blanket endorsement for the “less extreme” candidates, whom he identifies as Dr. Paul, Jon Huntsman, Buddy Roemer, and Fred Karger. Of those, only Paul and Karger have campaigned in Iowa.
That is independents, Libertarians, and Democrats coming together around one candidate. Be sure to join us at the caucuses tonight, we’ll be a pretty big and diverse group!
» posted on Thursday, December 29th, 2011 at 12:04 am by Editor
Wednesday night in Des Moines, Congressman Ron Paul held a “Rally for Veterans” but it was a veteran of the Iowa Legislature who provided the biggest shock and awe of the caucus season. Freedom Senator Kent Sorenson (R-Indianola) announced at the rally that he is leaving Michele Bachmann’s floundering campaign to join frontrunner Ron Paul. Iowa Freedom Report had heard rumors of an impending switch dating back to September, but Sorenson said he had made up his mind just this week.
For Sorenson, the endorsement of Ron Paul is both an ideological reunion and a recognition of political reality. A statement released to the media read:
But the fact is, there is a clear top tier in the race for the Republican nomination for President, both here in Iowa and nationally. Ron Paul is easily the most conservative of this group. . .
Like all true conservatives, I wholeheartedly agree with Ron Paul that government is too big, and both parties share in the blame. We agree that it is immoral to print money and pass on mounds of debt to the next generation. We agree that life begins at conception and must be protected. We both believe that the Second Amendment must be defended unwaveringly, and that there are too many wars being fought with no end in sight and no obvious path to a defined victory.
Of course, as a state legislator, I recognize that Dr. Paul’s strong views on the 10th Amendment will enable me to fight for what I believe in right in my own backyard instead of having to constantly wait on one-size-fits-all “solutions” from Washington, D.C.
Sorenson’s endorsement should be a huge boost to Paul, perhaps not so much because of the man himself, but because it highlights how the race has now become between just 2 men – Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. No other candidates have the combination of organizational structure, money, and the broad base of support needed to wage a national campaign. Bachmann, Santorum, and Huntsman are all waging single state campaigns and praying for a miracle. Newt Gingrich is popular on cable news, but as he found out in Virginia, Sean Hannity is not going to go out and collect ballot access signatures for you. Rick Perry can’t overcome his missteps as a candidate no matter how much money his Super PACs throw into advertising.
Sorenson also realizes the scorched earth war on the freedom movement set to be unleashed should Paul come out victorious next week. By supporting Bachmann, he kept one foot in the establishment and one in the freedom movement. If the GOP could succeed in driving out the Paulites (a dubious proposition), no doubt they will come after Sorenson next. Had he stayed with Bachmann, its possible that his freedom base wouldn’t be so enthusiastic about his upcoming re-election campaign.
As it is right now, its a great night in Iowa. We’re killing to fatted calf and welcoming back our wayward son. Viva la r3VOLution!
» posted on Tuesday, December 27th, 2011 at 9:22 pm by Editor
At Iowa Freedom Report, we have an extremely conservative endorsement policy. With two pro-freedom candidates running for the Republican Presidential nomination, we have maintained a strict neutrality giving favorable coverage to both Congressman Ron Paul and Governor Gary Johnson. However, tomorrow, December 28 the “worst-kept secret” in politics will come true – Governor Gary Johnson will announce that he is ending his Republican bid to seek the nomination of the Libertarian Party. With Johnson out of the running for now, we strongly support Dr. Ron Paul in next week’s Iowa caucuses.
In 30 years in Congress, Dr. Paul has compiled an unprecedented voting record. With his strict adherence to his oath of office to defend the Constitution, Paul’s votes have set him apart from both Democrats and his fellow Republicans. By standing alone for liberty, sometimes on the losing end of 434-1 votes, Paul has well earned his title as “the one exception to the gang of 535 on Capitol Hill.” Not swayed by the silly machinations of party politics, Paul votes on principle whether it is “conservative” like opposing tax increases or “liberal” like opposing the drug war. Perhaps this should not be so surprising as Paul is well versed in the philosophy of liberty, in particular the great Austrian economists like von Mises and Hayek. In the long arc of Paul’s career, he learned from an aging Hayek while a young man, associated with Murray Rothbard as an adult, then introduced a new generation of students to these same great thinkers.
Of all the votes Paul has taken during his lonely watch as a sentry for freedom, perhaps none was more important than his “no” to the Iraq War. With the Wilsonians and globalists in firm command of the Republican Party, all lofty conservative goals are now sacrificed to one aim – a constant state of global welfare and global warfare. By daring to challenge the party orthodoxy, Paul re-opened the debate over the proper reach of American foreign policy and introduced truly republican (with a small “r”) ideas into the mainstream for the first time since Robert Taft’s bid was undone by the Rockefeller Republicans’ race-baiting chicanery at the 1952 GOP convention. The pre-r3volution Republican Party had become so sick and twisted that one GOP contender would actually tell an Ames debate audience that the US should be proud of installing one of the 20th century’s worst dictators because it brought “40 years of freedom.” The people who think this way are now flummoxed as Paul’s principled stance for life in the foreign policy realm has only served to catapult him to ever greater poll numbers, proving that our ideas and not their militarist bluster are the true soul of this great nation.
By operating above the banal traditions of blind partisanship, Ron Paul has united under the libertarian banner a coalition diverse in race, religion, age, sexual orientation, and prior allegiance. Riding this wave of enthusiasm, victory for Paul in the nomination contest is no longer out of the question. Many leading Iowa Republicans, citing Paul’s excellent organization helmed ably by Dr. Drew Ivers, have already conceded our caucuses to him and in the process are putting the word out to the national media that they would be wise to ignore our state. We at IFR are far from overconfident and we urge you to make your best efforts for the good doctor between now and caucus night. Even more important, attend a caucus training session near you to network with other local Paul supporters in order to elect each other as delegates to your county and later sate GOP conventions as we will need all the help we can get to beat back the onslaught of attacks our movement is likely to face from the Republican establishment. For those who still prefer Governor Johnson, we urge you to at least donate one night and cast a ballot for Paul. There will be ample time to support Johnson in the general election. Should Ron Paul come up short in the Republican race, more votes for him now will only strengthen the case later that a significant voting bloc is unrepresented in an Obama-Romney race.
Dr. Paul has said many times that an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped. January 3, 2012 is our time, the time for peace and liberty to be heard across the nation and it all starts right down your street. We’ll see you on caucus night!
» posted on Friday, August 12th, 2011 at 9:31 pm by Editor
With the Ames Straw Poll hours from opening, we at Iowa Freedom Report have decided to endorse for the event. It should come as no surprise but, we urge Iowans to join us in voting for Ron Paul on Saturday in Ames.
For regular followers of this site the reasons to support Paul as are obvious as they are numerous. Paul’s 30-some year voting record in the House is unmatched, perhaps in history, but certainly in this field. Ron Paul alone is a consistent pro-life candidate who will end our nation’s wars of aggression in short order and annually introduces meaningful legislation to return the abortion issue to the states where it can be fought successfully. Ron Paul did not start the freedom movement, but he has lead it farther than the generations who came before us could have ever dreamed and injected our ideas into the national debate as no one has since the days of the founding fathers themselves. We need to do our movement proud and do right by our national grassroots by giving Dr. Paul the best possible showing in Ames. The media and the Republican Party love to spend months hyping their straw polls only to dismiss them as soon as we win. Let’s show them a victory that no one can ignore!
Regarding our endorsement policy going forward to the caucuses themselves, so long as there remains two solid, consistent freedom candidates in the race we will cover both of them favorable and not make an endorsement. We recognize Governor Johnson’s rare record of achievement and activism on behalf of liberty and it is not difficult to understand how someone could make him their first rather than second choice. With the caucus to convention process, Johnson can make an important contribution to the movement in our state by bringing new voters in and adding to our numbers in the delegate counts which can significantly influence the Republican platform and party for the better. Certainly, there is a lot of overlap between the two’s supporters, but the Paul/Johnson venn diagram does include outliers who will support one but not the other. As long as both turn out their people on caucus night and get them through as delegates, it will be good to have all of us pulling on the rope.
On Saturday however, Governor Johnson is effectively not in the race. His campaign made the foolish decision not to buy into the Straw Poll. Instead of introducing himself to ten thousand Iowa voters, Johnson will be off riding his bike. The campaign did announce Johnson’s participation in the Leadville 100 race, but curiously neglected to mention how many caucus-goers he would get to address in exchange for the race’s entry fee. The overall strategy is a sound one – focus the campaigns limited resources where they expect to do the best, New Hampshire. For it to work, however, Johnson needs to beat expectations in the first vote, ours. Since he’s not competing, there is not need for our movement to compete on his behalf. We don’t hold it against anyone who stays loyal to Johnson tomorrow, but we support Paul.
Now as to predictions, a look around the blogosphere shows that the idea of a Ron Paul victory is not far-fetched. Craig Robinson at TIR predicted as much the other day. Our friends at Caffeinated Thoughts both predict Paul, Bachmann, and Pawlenty on the medal stand with Paul fan Dustin Krutsinger having the good doctor in first and not-Paul fan Shane VanderHart putting him third with both acknowledging their order could be off. From our viewpoint, it looks like a two horse race between our candidate and Bachmann of the establishment. Those picking Paul first usually cite his more frequent visits to the state and larger organization, but the forget that the establishment didn’t get to be the establishment by not knowing when to show up for events. Bachmann has an edge we can’t yet overcome with our internet superiority, and that is Fox News. There is a large audience out there that may not have the time or desire to be political activists, but they can take direction well. If they come out for Bachmann its her win. I think that’s what will happen. Bachmann wins, Paul “wins the silver,” and the Republican Party of Iowa breathes a sigh of relief that they don’t have to scrap their most popular fundraiser for fear of it turning into a freedom event year after year.
Third place and down is a little harder to judge, and I think they will trailer the leaders by a significant amount. Romney will do better than people think because the small number of supporters he has under age 80 would never miss an opportunity to give the GOP $30. I still think Pawlenty edges him out. You don’t spend that much money and hire that much field staff to get nothing out of it – Pawlenty third, Romeny fourth. The former Senator for Pennsylvania is a bit of a wild card. He has spent the most time in Iowa out of any candidate and he’s staked out a principled (if repulsive) position as the most anti-life of all the candidates. Still, I’d put him in fifth. He polls dead even with Johnson (not that debate sponsors would tell you that), so even if all his people come out, that’s not a lot of folks. Mr. Bailout, Herman Cain is a bit of a wild card as well. He is at his best when speaking in generalities to a live audience, which is exactly what the event is designed for. If there are a lot of undecideds by the time he speaks, he could get a boost. I’m guess there won’t be, 6th for him. Below that, it doesn’t really matter – Rick Perry will get more write-ins that some expect as he’s had an organized campaign here for some time, ditto Sarah Palin, McCotter and Huntsman and Gingrich may get a few votes, one or two people might write in our friend Fred Karger but his base is not the type that would spend money to vote in a GOP event. Anyone writing in Johnson, sign up with this editor so he can put you to work on the campaign and then go vote for Ron Paul please.
See you in Ames!
» posted on Thursday, June 9th, 2011 at 7:28 pm by Editor
It didn’t take long for the latest evidence of Ron Paul’s viability in Iowa to hit the news that establishment Republicans were out with an attack. Shortly after controversial pro-liberty House freshman Kim Pearson, The Iowa Republican was out with a hit piece on Pearson and another on both Paul supporting legislators designed to drive a wedge between Dr. Paul and social conservatives who might look to him instead of a neoconservative candidate. Now, Iowa Freedom Report columnist Will Johnson takes to the keyboard in their defense:
n a recent hit piece by TheIowaRepublican assertions were made that Kim Pearson’s endorsement of Ron Paul was contradictory. The accusation was that Ron’s statements didn’t jive with Kim’s record. This could not be further from the truth. All of the statements used were not understood as the author of the article (Craig Robinson) seemed to misunderstand the roles of Federal and State government. So, for TIR, Craig, and all of his reader’s sake I have decided to break it down classroom style.
Ok guys, time for a history lesson. As well as a “Government 101″ class. Kevin, and Craig there are.. in fact.. two Constitutions. One is the Federal Constitution and one is the State. The federal Constitution binds the federal government from enacting certain laws and the 10th amendment clearly states the difference between State and Federal. If we were meant to be ruled from afar by edicts from a forbidden city then there would be no use for a State Constitution. There was another country that was ruled entirely from a forbidden city by a highly centralized government. I”ll give you a hint, we owe them a lot of money.
So.. knowing that there is a State Constitution with an important role should help us realize that when someone says “I Constitutionally agree…” with something it is important to understand exactly which Constitution they are referring to. If someone is a U.S. Congressman in the House of Representatives the person is most likely referring to the FEDERAL Constitution. Further evidence that Ron Paul was referring to the Federal Constitution would be the simple fact that most Iowans do not know the Iowa Constitution so it would be far fetched to expect a Texas Congressman to.
Now that we have settled the issue of the “Constitutional agreement” statement let’s move forward to looking at voting records on the varying issues. It would serve us well to remember that when someone votes to LIMIT the Federal Governments role in abrogating a State’s right (anyone remember Roe vs. Wade which showed federal overstep at it’s finest) the limiting vote is meant to reserve the decision for the STATE. This does not imply favoratism toward whichever issue just happened to be voted down, it simply reaffirms the proper delegation of authority as to the Federal or State arena.
Tenth Amendment (Federal Constitution)
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Iowa’s State Constitution http://www.limitedgovernment.org/publications/IAConstitution.pdf
Iowa’s Motto: “Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain.”
» posted on Wednesday, June 8th, 2011 at 11:08 am by Editor
Its been a noteworthy week for the two freedom candidates challenging the GOP statist-quo in the Iowa Caucuses. One the heals of another million dollar moneybomb, Dr. Ron Paul announced he’d earned the endorsement of State Representative Kim Pearson. Just a freshman, Pearson has already been making a name for herself as an uncompromising advocate for limited government in the statehouse. While top Republican donors were pouring money into the coffers of her Democrat opponent in 2010, the freedom movement rallied around her. Pearson was endorsed by Dr. Paul, Dr. Drew Ivers, and Iowa Freedom Report and rode a strong grassroots campaign to an upset victory in the Des Moines exurbs.
In returning the favor to the good doctor, Pearson noted:
“Ron Paul’s principled and courageous positions in defense of the Constitution are an inspiration. His understanding of the problems America faces and his limited-government solutions make him the statesman we need to lead America out of our moral and financial crisis. He is the only Presidential candidate with the experience, integrity and tenacity to do what needs to be done in Washington.”
Governor Gary Johnson’s week hasn’t been going as well. CNN and WMUR New Hampshire decided last week that the two-term governor was not welcome at their debate. Organizers are claiming that because Johnson is starting in the traditional place of small-state governors – low poll numbers – he is not qualified to participate. However, it is hard to ignore the ideological implications of the exclusion given that CNN has not included Johnson in the polls they supposedly are using as criteria and they have invited big-government Republicans with equivalent poll results as Johnson.
In protest, the Daily Iowan has fired back at CNN and WMUR in an article titled “CNN Hurts Debate by Excluding Johnson.” Says the author:
CNN’s exclusion of Johnson, I suspect, is based in “journalistic discretion.” The same kind of “discretion” that inflated Donald Trump’s sham candidacy: a flashy, celebrity-style approach to politics that ranks spectacle over substance. . .
CNN’s snubbing of Johnson amounts to a disturbing new role for the network: that of political gatekeeper. When media networks focus exclusively on high-profile candidates, they reinforce the presence of those candidates in the mind of the American public. It would be difficult to argue that Johnson should be given equal coverage to the front-runners, but inclusion in debates — a medium for his message — should be taken for granted.
The snub was so egregious that even Fox News – which certainly has no credibility on the debate-inclusion-fairness issue – took up the Governor’s cause. There is still time for freedom movement supporters, even if they are backing Paul over Johnson in this cycle, to let their demands for fairness be heard. Contact debate organizers here: