The Revolt Continues
By Mitch Berg
The District 49B GOP continued the revolt againt the Sturdevant Republicans.
After denying endorsement to RINO Kathy Tingelstad last month, the district GOP endorsed an actual conservative.
Cimenski was voted the nominee over two other prospective candidates in our House District’s nominating convention this morning. In an impassioned nomination speech, he vowed to embrace the core conservative principles of the GOP which were abandoned by the likes of Rep. Tingelstad, who herself was in the audience. In fact, Tingelstad received verbal daggers from all three prospective nominees for her vote to override Governor Tim Pawlenty’s veto of the Transportation bill. There is no question that the citizens in 49B are still smarting from that vote.
In continuing his speech, Cimenski talked of returning public service to the grassroots level.
I don’t believe in this idea that you have to choose a Republican candidate to endorse who’s so-called “more electable”, even if they’re not most in line with the platform. This is what has happened to our party the past eight years, and look where we are now.
And you can’t go wrong in a room full of conservatives if you occasionally invoke the philosophy of our finest President
If I may borrow a quote from Ronald Reagan and put a Minnesota twist on it: We don’t have a $935 million deficit because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a $935 million dollar deficit because we spend too much.
Brad notes that the DFL is going to fight like hell to pick up this district – and if they do, they’ll consider it a validation of the idea that Republicans should go back to the bad old days, before 1998, where the part stuffered from Stockholm Syndrome and were largely only DFLers with better suits.
So it’s time to fight like hell right back.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:07 am
Tech note: there is an unmatched ’em /’ tag in the artcle, just before the “I don’t believe in this idea that you have to choose a” line. I think it is the source of the runaway italics (at least on Windows XP/Firefox 2.0.0.13).
March 31st, 2008 at 7:38 am
Yep. Got it. They dont’ always show up in my editor’s “preview” view.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:54 am
Center Right candidates not allowed even though we claim to be Center Right bloggers. You HAVE to realize how silly you look when you post things like this while claiming to be Center Right. Fricken Hillarious. More satire and Shot in the Onion!
March 31st, 2008 at 10:55 am
I have not heard about how Bud Heidgerkin or Rod Hamilton fared in their local endorsement conventions. Any news there?
March 31st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
I am a little confused and I don’t mean this as a snark, but it seems that all the grumblings are about this increase in taxes and how those six politicians aren’t true conservatives. But does that mean the GOP is not the party of fiscal responsibility but no new taxes?
I say this because I have not seen any analytical discussions about the economic trade-offs for taxation vs. bonding. It would be interesting to see such an analysis because the state of our current credit markets would indicate the that interest rates on the state bonding bill would be significantly higher than in the past.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
But does that mean the GOP is not the party of fiscal responsibility but no new taxes?
I think the biggest issue was there was so much wasteful spending before the transportation bill. If we were so short of money in the transportation area, why couldn’t we have found something to cut back and then divert that money to bridges and roads?