Thad McCotter: Dark Horse ? Trustworthy? Announcement Video – You decide….

I’m only beginning to find out about this gentleman’s historical track record.  Like Sharon, I’m a little more than leery at this point toward any “johnny come lately” because I have a big question for the McCotters of the world.  Simply put, “where have you been”?   When the enemy of our Republic was charging our position, where was your advocacy/support then?  It is one thing to rally ideas toward the formulation of new battle lines and strategy now the breech has occurred, but where were you when the assault began.  I looked to the left of me, I looked to the right of me, and your bruised and bloodied face was not visible.  Yet now you request my trust.

No matter how eloquent or attractive your message, I now stand quietly at the rear of the room having just dismounted my horse.   I am unclean, gaunt, bloodied, weary, tired and of serious short temper.   My soul shows the battle scars from ferocious hand to hand combat, and as I stitch the open wounds without anesthetic the annoyance from each penetrating needle point is fueling my animosity toward those who avoided the muck and filth of combat.   I call them the “Highgrounders”.  

There is a tempered rage building within me as I re-evaluate the necessary next steps and listen intently to the voices of those who previously chose avoidance.  Standing safely on a Hill watching the slaughter of my valiant friends while determining a differing path does not provide you with any great nobility.   Indeed the merit of my ear is more apt to lend itself to one as filthy as my mirrored image;  And tread ye cautiously dear sir, as one who would question the method of our Republics’ defense, yet seek protective comfort from the manner in which we provide it. …./SD

A friend in ideology, Mr. Jack Daniels, sum it up thusly:

Jack Daniels:   Since I was a child, I learned and read about the uniqueness of the American Experience, the exceptionalism and greatness that was America. I believed it, I loved it, and I argued about it and defended it to friends and family and strangers at home and abroad. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The Mayflower Compact; these sacred documents are what made the USA unique and great. Not in and of themselves, but because they embodied the uniqueness of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, acknowledging our Creator and His intricate value of man, and the inalienable freedom that is given by our loving Creator. No other document like it exists in ANY country in the world founded by man, past or present. A nation born, established and prospered as a result of a covenant made with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not by God’s edict, but by man’s understanding that a covenant with God, was to be the blueprint, inspired by God’s word, to her survival, freedom and prosperity.

I believed that the words, “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”, meant exactly THAT.

With great and profound sadness, sadness remnant of the great prophets of old who foresaw the destruction and straying of Israel and wept bitterly for her, my belief in her is faltering. In the present state of affairs, the ultimate and inevitable direction she is going, I struggle to believe in the strength of the USA, not the ideal of America, but rather the fortitude of her people defending these ideals, and this realization sickens me to the very core of my being, I cannot express to you how much.

I once believed what Ronald Reagan believed, that the USA was a light, a beacon to ALL the nations of the world! I believed that if the USA failed, the world failed. My beloved nation is collapsing.

I see corrupt lawyers, judges, revisionists, liberals, gays, feminists, educators atheists, pantheists and public officials slowly and systematically destroy, alter and rewrite history and the constitution, and the ‘people’ stood by and let it happen, intoxicated with entertainment, self-absorbed interest, lethargic and apathy induced hedonism.

Since 2009, daily, I read how conservative blogs, websites and news media lamenting about her downfall, the destruction of the Great Republic, only to simply be content with complaining, blaming and ‘we the people’ doing very little in practical terms to rescue this Great Republic; a few gatherings, a grassroots movement, yes, but the fortitude to rise against the tyranny as a single group of people, being of one mind, compelled by righteous indignation to uphold the people’s prerogative to swiftly remove the usurpers? No!

Conservatives bite and gnaw at each other’s ankles, never truly united, divided by ideological nuances, wanting, needing and pandering for the approval of the enemy to be seen as tolerant, righteous, while selling their soul, compromising their integrity, compromising their values, only to be fed another day of their gluttonous want. I see people claim to be conservative but reject God – how can this be? This is an oxymoron. The very essence of conservatives is faith in Family, Country AND God. To hope in one while rejecting the most significant part; God, is suicide on a national level. We have historical evidence in abundance to this testament. Secular societies have ALWAYS failed. The rejection of God as a nation has left her to utter ruin.

God bless America; while America allows more ‘legal’ abortions than those Jews who were executed under Hitler during the same time frame, more than the number of people Stalin murdered. 47 million innocent lives and the number is growing daily!

God bless America; while America allows a minority group of sexual deviants to manipulate, distort, coerce and ultimately legalizing deviant behaviors, behaviors that previously were considered criminal based on the commandments of the Almighty and living God.

God bless America; the same America that has taken the official stand of rejecting God in all public arenas, schools, universities and public office while allowing an ancient pagan moon-god and his followers now sit high in the place once reserved for the one true God.

God bless America; but I see for the first time in her long history we stand against God’s own nation, Israel. Do we not understand the curse ordained by God Himself to those nations who oppose Israel?

I see those who hate this Great Republic, destroy her from within; poison the minds of the young, the naïve, and the downtrodden. I see these same people who hate America, worm their way in like emotional and intellectual vampires, making use of deceit, guilt and fear, using shallow and superficial flattery to pollute the ideals and beliefs that the people once firmly held to and never doubted.

I see these parasites, these polluters and destroyers of souls employ the oldest tactic of Satan to undermine God’s authority; doubt. Doubt the validity of the sacred covenant, doubt the greatness of the republic, and doubt her ability and goodness to lead the world. The enemy has used this ancient tactic in a modern setting; lawyers, judges, academics and legal analysts, fraught and purchased with silver and gold from the coffers of evil and vile men where Satan himself provides from the shadows. I see the enemy use greed, depravity, rebellion and lawlessness to bankrupt a nation, morally, spiritually and economically. Future generations cannot even hope to climb out of the financial abyss created by those whose plan it was to bring America to her knees; and the people sleep, and indulge in every form of depravity and pleasure, never concerned about anyone but themselves, and once again, the fires of Nero burn and the Christian, again, is the scapegoat.

So, here we are, dying, invaded by the enemy within, holding to a lie, while rejecting truth, the very source of truth that breathed life into the exceptionalism of America, Almighty God. We have cut our own throat.

Is she not worth saving, not worth fighting for?

The single man of God weeps and implores the people to return to God. Weep, weep for her sins, weep for her shame and when you have finished weeping, stand and FIGHT so that your nation can be healed, restored and be the righteous light to the nations once again.

FIGHT all you people of the Great Republic; FIGHT all of you who once have known the Great Republic. If you love her, FIGHT. FIGHT for her honor, she has been defiled by evil and wicked men, who have sullied her like a common prostitute, only to be discarded after the violations on her has been complete. FIGHT so that America is not fallen, so that America is not lost. She is worth it.


About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

102 Responses to Thad McCotter: Dark Horse ? Trustworthy? Announcement Video – You decide….

  1. G8rMom7 says:

    I still prefer Sarah, but putting him up next to Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich and many of the others, I would pick McCotter over them.

    It seems like right now it’s either RINO’s or the other extreme in the Republican Party of Ron Paul. I fully admit if given the choice I would pick Ron Paul over any RINO. But I’ve given my opinion on this ad nauseum. So I’ll leave it at that.

    I doubt McCotter has much of a chance, but I give him props for trying and infusing a little bit of dry wit into the process.

      • SD,
        I am with you 100% on this. I could have written this myself, although not as eloquently, and word for word I AGREE!!!!!
        I too have been sick inside watching what has been happening in America. I see the evil and how it lurks in the corner and how he works through mans weaknesses. I deplore anyone who takes a pathetic weak stand more than those who stand for what they are even when they are doing the work of the evil one and don’t recognize it.
        You have to know your adversary or you will loose every time!
        Now here is where I get angry! Our “leaders” (church included very strongly) have led US astray! They should put a weight around their necks and jump in the river! I don’t have to “past” that judgement because it is clearly stated that way in the bible for US (the children) the followers. I am sick and tired of the weak leaders and that is why we must demand more of them!!!! Here we state our differences on the possible candidates and we deal with the “gray” issues. And a lot of US wait for that “Leader” to come and save US from OURSELVES. Yet we start complaining when we don’t like this or that about them.
        The way I see it is this…. We need a “LEADER” with a mission to reestablish what our Founding Fathers wanted for US in the first place. The absolute strongest country in the world remembering our Covenant with our Creator. A man (or woman) destined to lead this great nation because they were called to do it. That is what I said “Called” by God to fulfill a mission/path ordained by God. And we may never even know it except we will recognize the SPIRIT inside them. The SPIRIT recognizes itself. Isn’t that what we are doing here, looking for that Spirit?
        So I will wait to see if and when that “SPIRIT” shows itself (I have my eyes/ears/heart wide open) and I will stand with them solidly! Trust in the Spirit and watch with your lamp full of oil lest you be caught off-guard.
        Now what does your “Spirit” tell you? Will you recognize it? I pray that I will.
        Yes America is dying just the way every other great society has done and it is always the same. It happens from with-in ourselves blinded by the very things stated by JACK DANIELS himself. Weakness from our own sin, even omission of.
        There is a time for everything and I fear (and at the same time yearn) what lies ahead but at least there will be a fight.
        When GB was president and I saw what happen on 9/11 I was immidiately engulfed by a vision of what GB was going to do and at what cost to himself. The jist of it was that he was going to create, and galvanize, a great division in the USA. This was going to be a point where people had to make a choice between good and evil, recognizing (and making a choice) that evil does exist no matter if you stick your head in the sand or not. That we got away from recognizing the “evil” in our lives. By making this choice it changes how we look at everything in life. Good and evil. Everyday choices that we make and how it pertains to our daily lives. This is one of the reasons I detest “gray” issues because there is no “gray”. It is either good or evil. If you are one of those who don’t believe in abortion, but think it is okay for those who do, in America, then you are a fool. Blind in your own weaknesses. If you make a covenant with God, then you better keep it!!! Abortion is killing the innocent that we are suppose to protect! Look what has happen to the Democrat (party of death) party since they have sided with the right to kill. So you are GOD and you have the Divine Power to make the choice on who lives and dies? That by which God has given you have the right to take away? Oh we are smater now and know better, more enlightened. FOOLS! At judgement day what will GOD say, “oh I understand, you had to kill that unborn life that I gave (all life comes from God) because it was rape or incest and you didn’t trust in my Judgement that something good could come from something bad (“See I make all things right again”) and your wisdom is greater than mine, Okay I understand come into My house and oh by the way could you please judge the rest of these people for me cause your wisdom is greater that Mine”.
        I don’t care if you agree with me or not. I don’t want to force you ar anybody else into my way of thinking. I just am going to continue to try and bring the evil into the Light because the two cannot exist together and Light will always cover the darkness. Funny how this works out even in nature which is our Creator’s idea huh?
        I am struggling, as are the rest of those who seek, to fulfill the will of God in there lives and am a great sinner. We must recognize the evil in our world to be able to win the fight we are in!!!

  2. Overall his positions on “most” issues align modestly well amid those of personal importance to me. Modestly well means better than Romney, Huntsman, Pawlenty, but to the left of Bachmann (who I no longer trust).

    Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
    Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
    Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
    Voted YES on $40B for green public schools. (May 2009)
    Voted YES on $40B for green public schools. (May 2009)
    Voted NO on additional $10.2B for federal education & HHS projects. (Nov 2007)
    Voted YES on $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers program. (Jul 2009)
    Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013. (Jun 2008)
    Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)
    Voted YES on $23B instead of $4.9B for waterway infrastructure. (Nov 2007)
    Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)
    Rated 62% by NTU, indicating “Satisfactory” on tax votes. (Dec 2003)

    His geographic ideology, and voting record, reflects a keen alignment with labor unions. Not good for me.
    His immigration stance since 2003 however, is good.
    His fiscal discipline is mixed, as noted, with favorable spending votes cast to assist labor unions. This probably has more to do with his need for re-election from a Michigan congressional district than anything else. However, it also reflects a need for a job over principled position.

    On my freedom continuium I would place him around a 10 – 11.5 range so far. Somewhere between Gingrich and Bachmann…. [the moderates fertile ground of concession]

    Obama – 4 (stable)
    Romney and Huntsman – 7 / 8 (relatively stable)
    Pawlenty – 9 (stable)
    Gingrich – 10 (and unstable)
    Bachmann – 12 (and trending downward)
    West – 12 (and trending downward)
    Cain – 13 (and trending downward)
    Perry – 13 (uncertainty still being determined)
    Palin – 15 (unchanged)
    Paul – 17.5 / 18 (relatively unchanged, but unstable)

    • stellap says:

      “His fiscal discipline is mixed, as noted, with favorable spending votes cast to assist labor unions. This probably has more to do with his need for re-election from a Michigan congressional district than anything else. However, it also reflects a need for a job over principled position.”

      Yes, and if he had taken the “principled position” – assuming that he indeed was taking a position based on his need for reelection – we would have another Sander Levin in his seat instead of Thad McCotter.

      • tnwahm says:

        Thus the problem with politics. We all agree that the federal budget is out of control, but when it comes to where we cut the spending, we balk if it affects us. My BIL posted an article on FB about Republicans possibly not sending fed funds to Joplin w/o cuts in another area. His response was along the lines of “Are you kidding?” I consider him a fellow conservative. I consciously made the choice to not engage because I didn’t want to get into it wih him, ~family dynamics~ but it reminded me of the difficulty of cutting the size of government.

    • I think you are missing my point. You are arguing that “electability is more important than principle”. If that was the case then we should consider the most popular and completely ignore Sarah Palin, who, according to all reasonable discussions has the toughest “electability” issue. Am I interpreting your intention correctly?

      • stellap says:

        If he stood against the UAW members in his district on principle (which he would never do), McCotter would have lost to a Michigan Dem. What I meant to say, and I do believe, is that pragmatism is sometimes the better choice, if losing the big picture is the alternative. For instance, our founding fathers took a pragmatic course when they ignored the issue of slavery in order to create the US constitution.

        • stellap says:

          The question of prohibiting the African slave-trade by a provision in the national Constitution caused much and warm debate in the convention that framed that instrument. A compromise was agreed to by the insertion of a clause (art. I., sec. 9, clause 1) in the Constitution, as follows: “The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax, or duty, may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.”

          • “[The Convention] thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.” – James Madison, Records of the Constitutional Convention, Aug. 25, 1787

            “It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.” – John Jay, letter to R. Lushington, March 15, 1786

            “It were doubtless to be wished, that the power of prohibiting the importation of slaves had not been postponed until the year 1808, or rather that it had been suffered to have immediate operation. But it is not difficult to account, either for this restriction on the general government, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed. It ought to be considered as a great point gained in favor of humanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate forever, within these States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided the barbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive a considerable discouragement from the federal government, and may be totally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continue the unnatural traffic, in the prohibitory example which has been given by so great a majority of the Union. Happy would it be for the unfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them of being redeemed from the oppressions of their European brethren!” – James Madison, Federalist Paper No. 42

            • stellap says:

              All true – but the Constitution was passed based upon a compromise regarding slavery. That is a fact.

  3. GruntOfMonteCristo says:

    I have to go with G-Mom on this. SD, no criticism intended, but shouldn’t we focus on Thad’s voting record and words alone at this point in doing our vetting? There are many, many cowards and sideline sitters out there, but is it really helpful to direct our anger at those, like Sarah and Thad, who are in the fight but choose their own time in using their precious and limted resources against a thuggish adversary who will probably crush them? I liken this post to the brutal criticism that many conservatives have leveled at Sarah for resigning her position as Gov in AK, and I reject it. She was choosing her battles, and God bless her for that. The most dirty and hardened soldiers are forced to cut their losses in particular battles so that the war may be won. Can what she did be legitimately described any other way? I say that any “quitter” label forced upon her for that brilliant move is misapplied. But back to Thad. Do you really think that he has been sitting on the sidelines in Michigan, with his district adjoining Detroit all these years with his hardcore conservative record and outspokenness without picking up any bloody noses? I welcome him to the fight, especially given the lousy odds he faces, like Gatormom points out. But I do NOT criticize you, SD, for the frustration and weariness you’re expressing. I’ve no doubt it’s genuine and well-earned.

    • GOMC, I’m all for looking at his voting record to determine his ideological slant. And you can most certainly criticize my apprehension as “unfounded”. Heck, you can criticize my position all day every day, I take no issue with that which is in front of me. What I am fearful of, and violently in opposition to, is that which I cannot see or is intentionally placed behind me.

      I have said numerous times, and I’ll say it again: I would rather have an enemy I know than a friend I cannot trust. That is NOT a talking point… I MEAN IT. I SERIOUSLY MEAN IT. Having been burned numerous times by self-interested pretenses I look at all of these candidates with an eye that now says “prove it”.

  4. GruntOfMonteCristo says:

    I have commented before on the “Sundance Circle-of-Trust Method,” which I wholly support and endorse. We are surrounded by corruption, and we need to be hard on our prospective leaders in a way that most Americans don’t have the stomach for. I’m with you on that. Keep it up, Pard!

    I just had a little heartburn with your focus on candidates’ timing, or lateness to the fight, and it seemed counterproductive to me unless it was truly a reflection of the cowardice or untrustworthiness or weasel-factor of the candidate. We’ll see on McCotter. I don’t know him well enough to defend him on that point, but if you’re making a backhanded reference at Palin, I’d take issue with that. I think I was mis-reading your angle. If your point in asking them to “prove it,” is all about integrity, and I’m sure it is, then you-dah-MAN. No argument here.

    • “Lateness to the fight” does not equivocate to “Lateness to the election”. There is a big difference. Sarah Palin is not in the election (yet) but has been staunchly “in the fight” defending our Republic since she entered the scene. You do not have to be running for president to be in the fight, you do however have to be visibly “out there” pushing back.

      That is what I mean by “johnny come latelys”. No-one has fought harder than Palin, at great personal and professional sacrifice, too. But, so was Jim DeMint, and Mike Pence, fighting hard before it was popular to fight.

      That is what I mean. When all the SHIT hit the fan where was McCotter? I know where Palin, DeMint, Pence, and even Bachmann and Santorum were… I could see them. That is my point.

      Romney was testing the winds sipping cocktails, Huntsman was loving on Obama, Gingrich was at Tiffanys, Pawlenty was peeking out from behind the lamp in the corner.

      • stellap says:

        How much did you know about Sarah Palin before 2008? How much you know is directly related to the amount of media coverage any person receives.

      • stellap says:

        How much do you know about Candice Miller (another congresswoman from Michigan)? She is a fine conservative. I would support her for a senate run against Debbie Stabenow, and I have written to her to tell her so.

        The point is, why would you know about Candice Miller unless you are from Michigan (she was also our Secretary of State), unless she gets national coverage. Same is true for McCotter.

        • Wait a cotton pickin minute…… Jim DeMint is from South Carolina, he holds no Senate leadership position but I saw him fighting, and he reached out to me for help…. I had no clue who Mike Pence was, I’m not from Indiana, he held no leadership position, but he got out there and started fighting hard.

          If you are reasonably asking me to believe that the Media created Mike Pence, Jim DeMint, or Michele Bachmann, I seriously beg to differ.. Not buying it for a minute.

          DeMint put his ass on the line and formed his own Senatorial Election Team outside of the Republican Establishment. He put his name and reputation on the line and stood firmly against the advancement of Obama’s master planning. Pence did the same. So did a number of other conservative warriors: Chris Christie, Bob McConnell, Jan Brewer, et al. They took the fight to the left. It had nothing to do with the media creating them.

          • stellap says:

            So, what do you know about Candice Miller? Because you know nothing about her means that she has done nothing?

            How much did you know about Sarah Palin before 2008? Because you knew nothing means that she did nothing?

            • Err, note how you completely disregard my response to you and continue the Candice Miller talking points. I have already answered that false narrative in the reply above.

              I’m asking a question here. Where has McCotter been? and in 2009/2010 what was he doing? Because he certainly wasn’t visible in the fight that I could see. I’m not talking about Candice Miller and I could care less about Candice Miller – She ain’t running for President. McCotter is.

              So I ask once more. What was McCotter doing when patriotic conservatives were engaged in the fight against liberalism in 2009 and beyond? When they were staking their reputations and credibility on the line being attacked by media and leftists, where was McCotter? Simple enough question?

              You appear so ready to duck that question as if to say “trust me, he was doing something grand or altruistic”. So what was he doing that merits him being on the same line of trustworthy consideration as the Palins’, DeMints, Pences’ ?

              • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

                SD, still not sure how you answered the “false narrative” in the above comment. I don’t think you did, and I think Pat is hammering you for that reason. You claim that because you haven’t seen Thad in the fight, he was sipping cocktails like Mittens. Pat is just asking how the hell you know that. Candice Miller is irrelevant. Her point is that you WOULDN’T know if you haven’t been paying attention to his district. Even if he did NOTHING on the national stage besides looking out for the interests of his district, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t fighting the good fight. That kinda IS the job of a Congressional Rep, right? Besides, the guy is an R from Detroit. I’m guessing his life is no picnic. I have to agree with Pat that you haven’t made your point yet about whether he was gainfully occupied in “2009 and beyond.” But more interesting to me is how you can logically conclude that his being MIA at that time (if he was) equates to his being untrustworthy.

                Don’t get me wrong. NO politician in this day and age deserves our trust out of the gate. You’re dead right about that. I’m just saying MAAAAAYBE of all the CongressRats out there, THIS guy might deserve a 2nd look.

    • tnwahm says:

      I don’t think SD is making a backhanded reference at Sarah Palin. I don’t think he’s talking about entering the presidential race, I think he’s referencing the FIGHT for FREEDOM in general. Going to back to the HellCare Fight and the 2010 elections. Who was fighting the regime then, not just now that we are entering the presidential season.

      • Yes, Yes, Yes A million times Yes. Thank YOU.

        • tnwahm says:

          I was typing my response when you were typing yours. Sometimes I get interrupted in the middle of a comment so it takes me awhile.

      • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

        Thanks Wahm, and thanks Sundance for clarifying. I DID misread SD about the “where have you been?” question. I DID think you were talking about being late to the campaign. I realize now that you meant late to the fight, and I’m glad, because I was worried you were starting to get impatient with others, like Sarah, who hadn’t thrown their hats in the ring yet. Many people ARE getting impatient, but I was hoping you weren’t one of them. Glad you’re not.

        But has McCotter really been absent from the fight all these years? You say you haven’t seen him fighting. That’s fine. But like Pat said, you’re not from Michigan. You apparently don’t watch Red Eye. But you DO watch Capitol Hill, so if you say he hasn’t made a difference, then I believe you. But if you say that you can’t trust Thaddeus McCotter to be a legitimate conservative, then I say there is NO ONE in public office today that you CAN trust. That makes Sarah the only one left. Or some other undisclosed citizen candidate.

        • stellap says:

          Sarah isn’t in public office. She took herself out.

          • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

            Absolutely! That’s what I meant to imply by saying there was no one in public office. Sarah is not in public office, so she’s in the “other” category. Like some other citizen candidate, like her, would be.

            So, Pat, in the VERY unlikely event that Thad proves himself to be another Reagan, do you think SD is going to owe us both a couple of bottles of good Asti or something?

            • stellap says:

              Some good dry bubbly would be nice! Maybe Prosecco instead of Asti.

              • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

                Don’t like the sweet stuff, huh? That’s ok. Prosecco it is. Now all we have to do is get Thad elected and convince SD to buy it for us. Piece of cake! ;)

  5. G8rMom7 says:

    I just wanted to say I like having Sundance as my mistrusting cousin. :-) I’m happy to go back and forth and I am under no illusions that we will all agree on everything…just like I’m not so naive to think I will find the perfect candidate. I am totally motivated by making sure we aren’t choosing between a Left-Wing Socialist Narcissist and a Middle-of-the-Road Spineless Appeasing-to-the-Media Republican. If those are our choices, we are TOAST as a country.

    • stellap says:

      Here, here! I’m on your team.

    • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

      Amen to that, GM! :)

    • GracieD says:

      Amen G8rMom! I appreciate all of the different viewpoints here. It makes me think, carefully about what is and is not good for our Country. I know next to nothing about McCotter. I say “welcome to the fight of your life”! He and all of the candidates will have to go through this twice, once in the Primaries, once in the General, all the while being beaten about the head and shoulers by our “esteemed” media. The only candidate so far, who has shown that they can handle it is Sarah. The only one I honestly trust right now is Sarah. I want to trust LTC West, but he is in my “trust but verify” category. How sad is it that you can no longer take a person at their word? I must confess to having simlar thoughts to what SD posted. I often wonder where in the heck these people who claim to love America have been. I guess they are just waking up. I am glad to have more folks on our side, but at the same time, I feel like I will be looking over my shoulder to be sure I don’t get stabbed in the back.

      • stellap says:

        I’ve said it before, but I’ll repeat it here: One reason why you wonder where in the heck these people who claim to love American have been is because they get little or no publicity outside of their own districts. There are almost seven hundred men and women in Congress, many of them good people. How much do you know about the majority of them?

        ADD: Before 2008, how much did you know about Sarah?

        • GracieD says:

          Being from Louisiana-where politics is a blood sport-I have a basic knowledge about quite a few of the Congresscritters. I have a more in depth knowledge of som tham I do of the others. Jim DeMint, I know of through David Vitter, Mike Pence, I know of because some of my in-laws live in his district. Bob McConnell, I know of because I have relatives in Richmond, Alexandria, and Arlington, VA. I have knowledge of Allen West that goes back to 2001, when a relative of mine worked with him in the Military.
          I had heard of McCotter, but have not done much research on his record. You make a good point upthread about his having to be re-elected to do any good. You are right about that. If he does not vote the way his District wants him to on the issus that are important to them, he will not be there for long. That is the purpose of the House members, to vote as their constituents want them to.

          • If he does not vote the way his District wants him to on the issus that are important to them, he will not be there for long. That is the purpose of the House members, to vote as their constituents want them to.

            Here lies the dillema, if you have to change who you are to win congressional votes or compromise wht you believe in then you risk your soul. If you are a strong leader then lead. If you cannot get elected in your district then move to where you have a fighting chance to make a difference. If you don’t value your priciples than what do you have? This is why America is in the trouble she is in the first place. Stop compromising your principles. If you play with dirt you get dirty it is that simple. This is also the reason we have to demand more from our leaders. Heck if we don’t demand it we won’t ever get it.
            It is a vicious circle.

  6. stellap says:

    Interesting comment on’s thread about McCotter:

    “McCotter is my rep here in Michigan, and I think well of him. Yes, a smarty pants. Yes, subdued and sobering like Lincoln; morose even. Shrewd. You may recall him sitting next to Paul Ryan et al at the States of the Union. Definitely understands Michigan. Speaks with bigger words than he needs to at times but it’s seriously how his brain works…not about ego or making others feel stupid. He was the ONLY higher level government official who spoke at the local Tea Party event who really understood the Tea Party movement was/is not about him or his colleagues but about us. I hope he gains traction b/c he will bring the conversation to a higher level and connect the dots for people in a way others have failed to do.”

    • tnwahm says:

      I agree that I want lots of conservatives in the primary. Competition is a good thing. I heard him on Hannitty’s show Friday with Fred and Jerri Thompson, guest hosting. I was very impressed. I also really like his five core principles. If his record backs up the words that I’ve heard the last couple of days, he should be someone that I could fully support. You have asked how much we knew about Sarah Palin before 2008. I admit, I hadn’t heard of her, but the more I heard about her and researched her, I have found that she’s been consistent thru her whole career. If Thad is as consistent, then he has nothing to “worry” about.

  7. stellap says:

    What amazes me is that any good people ever run for office. Considering the anal exam they get from the press and the harassment of their spouses and children, it is an absolute wonder.

    • GracieD says:

      Amen! You could not pay me to run for public office. I have seen first hand the damage that can be done to one’s family.

    • G8rMom7 says:

      +10000000000…I could not agree more. My nephew one time talked of getting into politics and I remember back then discouraging him. Now I feel guilty about doing that. At least at the time, he was young enough that he didn’t have too much baggage…probably would have been a good time actually…plus, he’s a conservative. But me?

      I am sure that all my antics in college would be front and center. I wasn’t even that bad, but I’m sure I would be made to look like the sluttiest drunk in the world.

    • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

      Ummm. All I know is that me and the DW just got back from the restaurant where our daughter was tending bar, drinking obscene shots, hanging out with assorted local characters and embarrasing ourselves. The fact that we were still in our church clothes did not improve our image, especially with the way my dear wife was carrying on. I think we fall into Tilda’s category of never being able to run for HOA dog catcher or anything else. On the plus side, I think Gatormom and Tilda and their DHs sound like the kind of people we’d like to hang out with. 8)

  8. GruntOfMonteCristo says:

    SD, I apologize for not answering your challenge very well. You want to know where he’s been. I can’t answer that satisfactorily. I know he was doing his district’s business well, writing a book entitled “Seize Freedom,” (which alone should make him rate a little higher on your “freedom scale, eh?) and kicking the liberals butts on every appearance I saw make on the tube. Not good enough, I know. But I’m not trying to PROVE anything. Just say he deserves a chance.

  9. GruntOfMonteCristo says:

    Also, and I say this very respectfully, as someone who would be your friend, the kind of friend who would watch your six as WELL AS caution you against internal enemies, please be careful about demanding proof. It puts you in bad company. The devil demands proof. Kevin DuJan demanded that you give him proof that you were sacrificing as much as he claimed HE was. He was a f**king liar, but EVEN IF HE WEREN’T, he had no right to demand proof of your sacrifices. We all need to judge and be skeptical. Be careful of demanding proof.

  10. Stella and GOMC. I apologize for lacking in clarity. You appear to be stating that unless I was specifically following the internal interests within a Michigan Congressional district I would not be aware of what Thad McCotter was doing. To support this you provide an example of an unknown candidate “Candice Miller”. I don’t know exactly what that example is supposed to mean in the context of a National Presidential race. Candice Miller is not running for POTUS. Thad McCotter is.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but you lend the opinion that because the media was not covering McCotter in 2009 his advocacy, or lack thereof, was irrelevent. Not sure exactly what that implies, but ok. I presented an example of two representatives with similiar congressional tenure, one in the house, and one in the Senate. Mike Pence and Jim DeMint respectively.

    Both Pence and DeMint could have shyed away from the confrontation with Obama and his radical agenda. They did not. They jumped the safety of the wall, and took the fight to the left. In doing so with open and highly visible actions they engaged the enemy (so to speak). In short they choose to push back, and they put themselves, their reputations, and their money where their mouths were. It was their action that led to their visibility. Same goes for Sarah Palin. It was her action, her behavior, her call to arms that led to her visibility.

    The “Media”, in all its forms, did not ‘create’ Jim DeMint, Mike Pence or Sarah Palin. Neither did the media create Jan Brewer, Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, or Bob McConnell. They became visible through the media because of their action and their refusal to just shut up and sit down.

    This is the basis for my question about Thad McCotter. During this time the above mentioned patriots were engaging the Obama agenda, what was McCotter doing?

    It makes no sense to say that the media was not covering him, ergo we do not know what he was doing. The media was likewise not covering Palin, DeMint, Pence, Brewer, Jindal, Christie or Paul Ryan, et al UNTIL they began engaging, and pushing back against, the agenda.

    You dismiss this fact, and repeatedly state:

    So, what do you know about Candice Miller? Because you know nothing about her means that she has done nothing?

    How much did you know about Sarah Palin before 2008? Because you knew nothing means that she did nothing?

    These repeat questions do not answer the question I am posing. I am not saying Thad McCotter has done nothing. I am asking what HAS he done?

    GOMC falsely states “You claim that because you haven’t seen Thad in the fight, he was sipping cocktails like Mittens”. *Whiskey*Tango*Foxtrot* Where did I say that? Go back and look at all my comments, this is not present because it was not stated. Again, I ask the question what has he done? I did, by implication, lend consideration to the fact he has done little, if anything, during this timeframe because he is unknown and he is not a high profile candidate that was engaged in the fight. Indeed it can reasonably be argued that if he found the Obama agenda of such distaste he would have been as widely known as Pence, DeMint or others.

    The fact he is unknown supports the asumption that he did little if anything visibly, in front of the public, to show contempt for the errosion of liberty, freedom, and self reliance. Had he been so principly upset about the radicali shift toward socialistic ideology within our Republic, one would think he would have been standing shoulder to shoulder with Palin, Bachmann, DeMint, Pence, Paul Ryan, et al… as they engaged and challenged the administration.

    While Sarah Palin was putting her reputation on the line advocating for Nicky Haley, Marco Rubio, Christine O’Donnell, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry she was also fighting for Meg Whittman and advocating for the Tea Party while simultaneously pointing out the flaws and hidden agenda in Obama’s ideology. Jim DeMint was working to support Ken Buck, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell while simultaneously threatening to veto substancial portions of Harry Reids Obama agenda, AND fight the establishment Republicans at the same time. I could go on with Paul Ryan, Mike Pence and others but I think you get my overall point.

    What was Thad doing?

    I never said Thad was sipping cocktails.

    I said Romney was sitting safely on the sidelines. Newt was at Tiffanys, Huntsman was loving Obama, and Pawlenty was hiding behind the lamp in the corner.

    Perhaps Thad McCotter was doing something equally as valuable, albeit invisible, I simply do not know, I am asking the first question first.

    • stellap says:

      Okay, I’ll drop Candice Miller from the discussion, since you don’t know who she is. What about Sarah Palin? What did you know about her before McCain selected her as his running mate in 2008? And, by the way, she isn’t a politician now, she’s a private citizen who gets the media attention she does because most of them hate her and hope to find flaws or gaffes. The fact is that she wouldn’t be in the position she is if McCain hadn’t tapped her for the VP spot in 2008.

      • AFinch says:

        Isn’t the more relevant question what were these people doing before we knew them? I did not know Sarah Palin before 2008 but I now know that she was taking largely the same positions in the 15 years before that as she has taken in the three years since. I think what we’re all trying to determine here is whether the actions McCotter has taken during the time he’s been in public office consistent with the small government, fiscal conservative image he is promoting now.

      • How is Sarah Palin, Candice Miller, or Glenn Johnson relevent to the question:

        What has McCotter done ? What was McCotter doing ?

        • stellap says:

          Nothing. It is relevant to the point:

          Why didn’t I hear about him? If I didn’t know he was proving himself as a worthy conservative, then obviously he wasn’t doing it. I heard about Jim DeMint and Mike Pence and Michelle Bachmann, so it is obvious that they were in the fight, but I didn’t hear about Thad McCotter, so he wasn’t.

          • Did I ever say that?

            • stellap says:

              You certainly implied it. Do you disagree with it? Have I completely misunderstood you?

              • Yeah I disagree with it. Go back and re-read every comment, and the original text of the thread. I’m not saying McCotter did nothing, nor am I saying McCotter did anything.

                I don’t friggin know.

                I’m just asking a question.

                A question no one will answer.

              • I said this up thread.

                “Perhaps Thad McCotter was doing something equally as valuable, albeit invisible, I simply do not know, I am asking the first question first.”

              • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

                You were doing more than just asking a question, Grumpy Ol’ Bear. :) Go back and read your original post. You were lumping TM in with the WORST of the Decepticons. More than just an implication, I think. When you do that to someone who people love, expect a little pushback. But again, sorry about not answering your question adequately. It’s the 4th! We gots food to prep! We’ll do our research tomorrahs! :)

        • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

          Your title is “Thaddeus McCotter….,” but you describe all “the McCotters of the world” as “Highgrounders” and you include, in that description, all that is worst in the sideliners and parasites who are not bloodied by battle. In your comments, you mention Bachman and (yechh) Romney by name. How is that not lumping? But it doesn’t matter, SD. We’re bruising ourselves over nits. I think you were hard on him. You disagree. It’s ok. Let’s drop this. I’m with you Bear! Let’s go knock some OTHER heads.

    • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

      SD, I think you’ve made your point well, and I don’t think we disagree on anything substantial. I like your focus on comparing Thad to Pence and DeMint as comparibles in Congress. But consider this: Wiki says this about DeMint’s district: “The district is considered the most Republican in the state.” Mike Pence, likewise if from my home state, from Columbus IN, and a district where he is NOT THREATENED. Do you get it? NOT THREATENED. That’s why SOME reps can kick ass, and some can not. Because kicking ass can shorten your career before you get a chance to make a difference. Does that count for nothing?

      • stellap says:

        You said it better than I did.

      • GOMC, I understand what you are saying. But I do not feel understood.

        Was McCotter ideologically aghast at the radical Obama agenda? Was McCotter opposed to the agenda? (remember he supported major parts of the spending bit)
        If he was “aghast” then why was he not visible?

        You share a view that HIS constituents are more apt to be Obama supporters so therefore he could not express his opposition. Am I correct?

        • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

          Not quite. You’re legit in wanting to know if he was “with us,” and you’re right that he wasn’t as visible as some of his fellow conservatives. But you’ve got some folks here who are testifying on his behalf. I saw him week after week on the tube speaking out firmly against Obama Hellcare and all the other crap that was going on. We weren’t watching the same shows. We can’t always see everything. That’s why we’re trying to give you our input. :) We’re saying WE’VE SEEN him. He’s not been invisible. He’s been fighting. He’s been speaking before the House. His votes have been consistently hard-core and brave, especially considering his district. But my point is that our Reps are not given equal power and equal bully pulpit by their constituents and their colleagues. Committee chairs in Congress are a frikkin’ High School popularity contest joke. So, I’m just not sure Thad has always had the POWER to fight as much as Pence or DeMint, and I’m not sure we should hold that against him. Sometimes we have to judge on potential rather than results. But you could be right to mistrust him. I’m still doing my research, too. :)

  11. AFinch says:

    He was proposing a tax deduction for pets.

    He also was an early critic of Obamacare and he demanded an apology from Obama for his “the police acted stupidly” comment.

    I’m not prepared to say he was a sideline sitter, but his pro-union votes are very, very troubling to me. Those were not votes for his constituents–those were special interest votes.

    • stellap says:

      Who do you think his constituents are Finch? Lots of them are UAW members, or have family members and friends who are UAW members. I think his votes were “pro-Detroit”, and “pro auto industry” rather than pro-union. I’m sure you would be surprised to know that even very conservative people here in Detroit look at it that way. McCotter knows this.

      • AFinch says:

        Saying that constituents are UAW members does not mean that they support continued propping up of the UAW does it? Would some of those UAW members like to see the union lose some of its power if it meant more jobs? We saw all kinds of reports from the 2009 and 2010 elections where unions would bus in protesters who individually said they were voting for the candidate they were protesting. I don’t accept that just because they are UAW members they support everything that favors the UAW.

        Calling these votes pro-Detroit or pro-auto industry does not explain his vote to uphold the PLA rules–which require public works projects ACROSS THE COUNTRY to be awarded to union shops. Nor does it explain his card check vote–which also has national implications. It only partially explains his union pension bailout vote.

  12. AFinch says:

    He also voted for the 2008 mortgage bailout.

    Looks like Doug Powers and Michelle Malkin have differing views on McCotter.

    • stellap says:

      Well, I guess you won’t be supporting McCotter, then.

      I hope he doesn’t make it to the general. Things could be awkward for you.

      • AFinch says:

        Yep. Raising questions about his past record and indicating I have reservations about supporting him in the primary is exactly the same as saying I won’t support him in the general.

        • stellap says:

          I’ll vote for the person running against Obama. Like Rush has said, it could be Elmer Fudd. There is no perfect candidate today – not even Sarah – but they are all better than Obama. That’s where I stand.

  13. tnwahm says:

    I would submit that Palin’s record as governor of Alaska shows what she would do in at “national office” We look at Mitten’s record in MA to see what he would do as POTUS. As I said previously, I didn’t know Palin until 2008, but in researching her record, she has been consistent throughout it. If Thad has the same consistent recoord, then I will defend him as well.

    As far as who I will vote for in the primary; I’m with you. If Mittens and the establishment somehow win the primary, then I will vote for him. ~I’ll be holding my nose~ I will also hold my nose and vote for Ron Paul or Newt; but when it comes to who I support in the Primary, I want the most conservative possible.

    • Sharon says:

      My vote in 2008 was against obama. It was not for McCain. My vote in 2012 will be against obama. We’re fighting two battles: one for the nation and one for conservative principles. They are the same in our hearts, but if they diverge and we don’t get a conservative candidate, then we vote against obama for the sake of the nation.

    • stellap says:

      Of course you get some idea of a candidate when they are a governor, but there is a reason why the President is rarely a former member of Congress. Members of Congress often vote in a way that won’t satisfy a purist, and are slanted towards the needs and wants of the people who elected them. I don’t know what Sarah would have done as a member of Congress, but it is likely there would be more to attack. Obama was able to dodge some of that criticism because he was an expert at voting ‘present’ and, of course, he is black. Yes, that probably makes me a racist!

      • Sharon says:

        I’ve decided that since he’s half black and half white, he’s gray. And that’s confirmed, it seems, by all his “present” votes. The black man, Martin Luther King, said that this day would come! We ARE judging him by the content of his character, not the color of skin.

    • stellap says:

      I hate to mention it again, but the fact that Sarah quit as Governor before the end of her term does say something, and she will be criticized for it. The reasons why don’t matter to a lot of people. Personally, I more or less accept her reasoning, but it would have been better for her to finish what she started. It damaged her as a potential Presidential candidate, if that is what interests her. If she is President, she can’t just quit because things aren’t working out, or people are attacking her or suing her.

      • tnwahm says:

        To me, her “quitting” as governor before her term was out speaks to her servant’s heart. She knew she would be criticized for it personally, but she did it anyway because she felt it was right for the people of Alaska. Do you really think she’ll quit as POTUS when attacked? She hasn’t quit fighting even though the Left Stream Media and Establishment Repubs have tried to destroy her personally.

        • stellap says:

          I know you love Sarah, and when we love someone, we give them the benefit of the doubt. I like her too, but I can see where quitting is a detriment to a national run for office. On Saturday, a conservative I respect otherwise referred to her as a kook. There are a lot of those people out there. It is a weak spot in her record, regardless of how we feel about it.

          She is fighting as a private citizen, and I admire that, but the fact remains that she quit.

        • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

          Sorry, Pat, I’m with you on everything else, but I agree here with Wahm that what Sarah did in AK was not “quitting” at all, and shouldn’t be held against her in consideration of national office. As Ann Coulter has argued very well, Sarah left the governorship of that state in very capable hands. Her calling was to the national stage, and she needed to end-run the endless barrage of Soros-funded legal crap that was being piled on her. Sometimes you need to avoid the swamp instead of being consumed by it. What she did was exactly right, and shouldn’t you back that up with your insight into the practical considerations that politicians face? You’ve been arguing very well about how congresscritters have to balance stances on principle (somewhat) in order not to be eliminated immediately. If you’re going to get voted out on principle, it’s got to be for a good reason, like when Santorum got booted by the idiot voters of Pennsylvania. You know this. You’ve argued this. Why do you continue to oppose Sarah’s decision on strict principle without regard for the practical necessities of her situation? She did it morally and ethically. She violated no promise. What gives? :)

          • stellap says:

            I didn’t mean to imply that I believe her reasons weren’t sufficient. It is just that you and I and Ann Coulter and Tnwahm can argue this line all that we want – it is still a weakness because there are many potential conservative voters who will use this as a reason (whether they are being honest or disingenuous) to discard her as a serious candidate. I also said that I heard someone call her a kook on Saturday. I didn’t say I agreed with it.

            ADD: To be absolutely clear, I do not think Sarah Palin is a kook. I do not think she is stupid, and I do not think she is a quitter.

            • GruntOfMonteCristo says:

              I getcha. Sorry. I mis-read you. You’re right about it being perceived as a weakness and, hence, is an actual political liability.

      • This is where I often wonder what drives SP and what “Light” she has been given? If I believe that she has been called to serve US then I will have to trust her judgement in quiting her Gov. seat. It may be that she is “Honest Sarah” and doing what is the best thing for her state at the time. I believ that is what she basically said. So I will continue to observe and see where this is headed and not make a “discerment” on it yet.

      • garnette says:

        I’ll take this from a different point of view. How many other governors over time have pretty much “quit” their jobs because they have decided they want to run for president so while they are technically still in office every move they make is not for the good of their state but for how it will look when they actually put announce that they are running for president? While they may look like they are doing their job, in reality they are either campaigning or making preparations to campaign. While others may see this as a negative, framed by asking them the right questions could change this as a positive in their eyes.

        Besides, as King Putz has shown, he spent the majority of his time in Senate, before he quit for a new position, was not focused on serving the constituents of his state but campaigning for a new position.

        Palin realized that while she could still hold the position of governor the frivolous lawsuits and media would cause such a distraction that she could not do the job she was hired to do. But, we find fault with this decision, but not when people quit because they won an election, meaning that they didn’t spend the lat few years focused on doing the job they have been paid to do.

        • Well said garnette,
          The point she did make was that she would be a lame duck if she stayed in office after what they were putting her through. Once again she said it was for the good of the state and not herself. Many can say this is an excuse but I think form my pov that it is spot on. There may be a lot of things I don’t/won’t agree on with SP about how/who she is. But so what if she is ordained (from above) to lead then that is shat I am waiting to see. God can choose whomever He deems worthy to do the job (not necessary to be a perfect person). If we are devoted to seeking and praying for a leader to lead US them God will answer our prayers accordingly. If we ask for a loaf of bread He will not give US a snake. So we pray, be vigil and watch, be active and realize this is a war of Good versus evil and our Great Country is at stake.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s