To the Editor:

Who sincerely believes GOP Congressional primary candidate Reid Ribble gave up his Lake Winnebago lakeside home in Sherwood and moved into a flophouse apartment complex next to a De Pere quarry?  According to Calumet County online records, he has owned his half-million dollar home for at least the past ten years, and that property is more than four miles away from the nearest inch of the 8th Congressional District.   (Given that these pesky details are available to the public online, I’m curious why the establishment media hasn’t picked up on this?)

I recall Wisconsin Republicans howling at Hillary Clinton for carpetbagging her way into New York in 2000.  However, the GOP Establishment is strangely silent on this current abuse. I guess the sauce isn’t as good on this gander.

Unfortunately for the genuine conservative residents of the 8th Congressional District, the bigger issue is whether Ribble’s carpetbagging belies his past support of amnesty for illegal aliens and the continued migration of cheap labor for the benefit of his industry donors.

Frankly, with his $9,000 property tax bill, he should try lowering ruinous state taxes by running for a state office or even dogcatcher, but stick to his own district.

Brian Heyer
Greenville, Wis.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

In the last two days, RLC-endorsed candidate Terri McCormick has been attacked at the FoxPolitics, Try2Focus, RhymesWithClown, and “Wisconsin Truth Project” blogs for her vote on the Taxpayer Bill of Rights.

Rather than telling the entire truth about why McCormick voted against TABOR, each of these “conservative bloggers” (who are supporting Republican Party establishment-backed candidates for Congress) hope to mislead their readers to believe Terri McCormick voted against TABOR because she doesn’t care about taxpayers.

I asked McCormick the real reason she voted against TABOR.  The answer:

“TABOR was to taxpayers protection what the “Patriot Act” is to constitutional protections. I voted against TABOR because it was a sham.  It was so watered down by the Republican leadership and the dealmakers that it was meaningless to any real spending cuts.”

”I wrote an amendment — several of them as a matter of fact — on that vote because it was such a sham.  The main Amendment I created was to create Zero Based Budgeting so the spending that TABOR did not restrain would actually be restrained.  The leadership voted against my Amendment.”

The full truth is this: Terri McCormick took a principled vote to oppose TABOR (in opposition to the Republican Party leadership) because of backroom deals to appease the Democrats and hurt the taxpayers.

It sounds like we have a genuine Tea Party candidate in Terri McCormick.

That’s why Terri McCormick has been endorsed by Change the Congress in 2010, RightMarch, the American Liberty Coalition, and the Republican Liberty Caucus.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

Should Paul Ryan run for President?

Increasingly our Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan has become a national media darling. Representative Ryan is consistently being promoted on social media networks and by the Republican Party of Wisconsin and the nationwide “free market” group Americans for Prosperity.

The fact of the matter is that Congressman Ryan voted with George W. Bush 94% of the time. That’s why Ryan’s 2007 Republican Liberty Caucus Liberty Index score, which ranks members of Congress on their voting record from a constitutional perspective, was 91% on economic issues but only 56% on social issues. In 2006, his score on the Liberty Index was 66% on economic issues and 67% on social issues.  He has scored better on the Liberty Index; his 2008 score, for example, was 88 both on social and economic issues — an impressive score.

It appears that when Paul Ryan’s party is doing the spending, raising debt limits, and acting unconstitutionally… Ryan goes with the flow.

Congressman Ryan’s actual record leaves much to be desired.

The issue Ryan is most known for is his interest in cutting the deficit and balancing the budget.

But why did the Congressman vote to bail out the auto industry, to pass the Medicare package to the tune of $400 billion, and to nationalize education via No Child Left Behind?

Paul Ryan on Bailouts and Government Stimuli
-Voted YES on TARP (2008)
-Voted YES on Economic Stimulus HR 5140 (2008)
-Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
-Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

Paul Ryan on Entitlement Programs
-Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
-Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)
-Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)
-Voted YES on Head Start Act (2007)

Paul Ryan on Education
Rep. Ryan went along with the Bush Administration in supporting more federal involvement in education. This is contrary to the traditional Republican position, which included support for abolition of the Department of Education and decreasing federal involvement in education.

-Voted YES on No Child Left Behind Act (2001)

Paul Ryan on Civil Liberties
-Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005)
-Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
-Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)

Paul Ryan on War and Intervention Abroad
-Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)
-Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)
-Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
-Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)

Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid.

According to Michelle Malkin in 2009, “[Paul Ryan] gave one of the most hysterical speeches in the rush to pass TARP last fall; voted for the auto bailout; and voted with the Barney Frank-Nancy Pelosi AIG bonus-bashing stampede. Milwaukee blogger Nick Schweitzer wrote: ‘He ought to be apologizing for his previous votes, not pretending he was being responsible the entire time, but I don’t see one bit of regret for what he did previously. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to let him get away with it’.”

Congressman Ryan: if you don’t like debt, stop voting for debt.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

There is a group of “conservative bloggers” who really don’t like Terri McCormick. Everytime she says anything, they work together to jump all over her with attacks.

But the group of “conservative bloggers” do not have the best interests of the 8th Congressional district at heart.

The worst of the bunch is Todd Lohenry, who has attacked Terri McCormick’s website for not getting enough traffic and then went on to question her credentials when they are spelled out at the same website he criticized. Maybe Lohenry needs a reading lesson.

In actuality, Mr. Lohenry is compensated for his smear tactics. That’s right — he’s a paid gun. Lohenry acknowledges it himself:

Do you actually believe that Mr. Lohenry’s bitterness over John Gard’s 2006 loss has nothing to do with his continued coverage of Terri McCormick’s campaign in 2010? Get real.

Mr. Lohenry likes to present himself as a conservative, but he’s actually a Republican Party hack who works to support the most establishment Big Government Republican Party candidates — you know, the same candidates who have failed to get elected to federal office in the state of Wisconsin time and time again.

Todd Lohenry is a paid off political hack who makes money off of the Republican Party.

His opinions as an “independent blogger” should always be called into question because his opinions are shaped by the dollars that he receives from his consulting and positions within the Republican Party of Wisconsin hierarchy of yes-men.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

Ron Johnson, candidate for U.S. Senate in Wisconsin, claims he is a Tea Party candidate.

But why did it take Mr. Johnson until mid-June, after he received the endorsement of the Republican Party establishment, to put up his issue position statements at his website?

Perhaps the Republican establishment had to craft the perfect issue position statements for him.

Unfortunately for Mr. Johnson, his issue position statement includes meddling in the affairs of law-abiding American citizens — something the Republican Liberty Caucus is vocal in its opposition to. Says Mr. Johnson’s website,

“Ron also supports REAL ID, requiring employers to verify the Social Security numbers of potential employees. Ron supports providing law enforcement the necessary tools, such as the Patriot Act, to protect our country.”

Ron Johnson wants to empower the federal government to snoop in the lives of ordinary private citizens, tap phone lines, and spy on Wisconsinites.

That’s not a respectable Republican position, which is another reason why the Republican Liberty Caucus is vocal in its support of Dave Westlake for U.S. Senate.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

Where is Wisconsin’s Lee Sherman Dreyfus of the 21st Century?

After serving in the U.S. Navy during World War II and completing his graduate studies, Lee Sherman Dreyfus continued to communicate with, and inspire, many people while teaching and managing student radio and television stations at Wayne State University (Michigan) and the University of Wisconsin.

By the time he became Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Dreyfus had mastered the art of public speaking. His skills as an orator and educator combined with the signature red vest he wore to identify himself to students as he walked the campus during the challenging Vietnam era earned him the designation of the students’ Chancellor.

As Dreyfus campaigned for Governor in 1978, it was his ability to communicate that drove his underestimated, underfunded and unorthodox team to victory. He dismissed the traditional political strategies of allying with interest groups and pursuing large contributions. Instead he hopped onto his transformed school bus with the rag-tag band, taking his message to every corner of Wisconsin to let the people decide.

Dreyfus came out of nowhere to win the Republican Party nomination for Governor in September, 1978.  The Republican Party worked to defeat Dreyfus, but he ultimately won the Republican primary and then was elected Governor.  Lee Sherman Dreyfus served as Wisconsin Governor from 1979 to 1983.

Dreyfus believed government’s role should be limited to only three things: “defending our shores, delivering our mail and staying the hell out of our lives.”  He was a fiscal conservative who worked to downsize government intervention in Wisconsin’s economy.  At the same time, he was a social moderate — believing “there are some questions the government has no business asking.”  In 1982, Governor Dreyfus signed the nation’s first civil rights legislation barring discrimination for gays and lesbians in jobs and housing.

He later served as Interim State Superintendent of Public Instruction and on the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, before his death in 2008.

Lee Sherman Dreyfus wasn’t concerned about political parties or special interest groups. His focus was on people and on the policies that would improve their lives.

Wisconsin desperately needs a leader like Lee S. Dreyfus in 2010.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

by Aaron Biterman

Emily Mills provides a commentary on “Dissent Within the Ranks” but comes to remarkably different conclusions than me about the state of the Republican Party in Wisconsin. That’s to be expected since Ms. Mills and I come from opposite ideological perspectives.

Mills cites Dick Leinenkugel’s quick exit from the U.S. Senate race and a former College Republican Chair’s exit from the GOP as flags that the Republican Party needs to run away from the Tea Party.

Tea Party of Hope

I couldn’t disagree more. In fact, I believe the Tea Party — a movement of independent thinkers with core values which correspond to our nation’s Founding principles — offers the primary hope for Republicans in Wisconsin to succeed.

The Tea Party has inspired tens of thousands of disgruntled Americans to get off their couches and participate in the ugly game of politics with the hope of booting out the incumbent politicians that have deeply damaged our country.

Unfortunately, Wisconsin Republicans are not taking advantage of this unique opportunity, as evidenced by the recent coronations of candidates in competitive primaries at the Statewide Republican Convention.

At the Convention, the party elevated Scott Walker to be the gubernatorial nominee and Ron Johnson to be the U.S. Senate nominee. These candidates now will gain hundreds of thousands of dollars designated for Republican Party-building activities to defeat other Republican candidates — in this case, Mark Neumann and Dave Westlake. What a disgusting use of donor funds. Republican Party of Wisconsin donors did NOT intend to have their money re-directed to defeat a fellow Republican candidate!

GOP Endorsement Process Slaps Tea Party in the Face

The party endorsement process is a pathetic disservice to Wisconsin voters.

There should be no party nominating process at all. Voters should be allowed to choose the Republican nominee without party influence and candidates should never be given extra resources from any party to win their primaries.

After all, isn’t any free and fair election about voter choice, and how can voters make a real decision when party resources are being directed to one candidate to the disadvantage of another candidate?

I cannot think of a bigger slap to the face of the Tea Party than what the Republican Party of Wisconsin just did in picking the candidates they believe the Tea Party should support. Please don’t be surprised when Tea Party activists and voters pick the candidates NOT selected by the State Republican Party.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin Still Missing Core Message

In her article, Mills notes that the Republican Party has “nearly perfected the art of closing file and staying on message” for decades. She must be watching a different Republican Party than I’ve been observing. What I saw was a Republican Party that won elections but had disgusting principles that allowed for bailouts, Keynesian economics, and endless foreign intervention.

The Republican Party establishment apparently agrees with Ms. Mills that the message of the party was on point for decades because they invited Karl Rove to be their featured speaker at the Convention.

Mr. Rove is heralded as a brilliant and infallible strategist — a knight in shining armor who has come to rescue Wisconsin Republicans with a message of … and that’s where you lose me. The message.

The Republican Party used to advocate for the principles of free enterprise, individual liberty, and less government intrusion.

These are the principles the Tea Party stands behind and the principles that were firmly rejected by the Republican Party of Wisconsin when they nominated their candidates at a clubby Convention of insiders.

During the Bush years (a terrible time for our country), the Republican Party advocated bailing out private enterprise on the taxpayer dime, invading foreign countries pre-emptively (a wholly unAmerican idea), and further increasing the size and scope of agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services.

I wasn’t at the Republican Party of Wisconsin Convention, but I imagine Karl Rove received a standing ovation, gave a speech promoting his own brilliance, and then worked the crowd to sell his book. Karl Rove is neither brilliant nor is he someone Wisconsin Republicans should look to for guidance. His strategy failed our country and failed our party. George W. Bush governed as a neoconservative, a bankrupt philosophy focused on elitism and government intervention. And paved the way for Barack Obama.

It’s time to return to the core principles of our nation, which means Wisconsin Republicans should reject the Big Government message of insiders like Karl Rove and dump the insider gaming of Party Conventions choosing candidates at the expense of voters.

Ms. Mills doesn’t believe the Republican Party should embrace the Tea Party. If recent Party Establishment choices at the Republican Party of Wisconsin Convention are any indicator, the Party hierarchy agrees with Ms. Mills.

Regardless of the mistakes the Republican Party Establishment continues to make, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin will continue to advocate for our nation’s founding principles.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Aaron Biterman is a Wisconsin native. He is Vice Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

by Aaron Biterman

Origins of the Movement

I have been active in libertarian circles for more than a decade, so when Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign raised more than $6 million in one day for our Presidential candidate, I was jumping for joy. That was in December, 2007, and was in conjunction with a nationwide “Tea Party” protest of Big Government. At our local event in Georgetown, Ron Paul supporters hosted our own fundraising event in which we wrote “Income Tax”, “Federal Reserve”, and “Invasion of Iraq” on boxes and tossed them out the 2nd story window of the event venue onto the streets of Georgetown.

The “Tea Party” was a nationwide event organized by Ron Paul supporters. Therefore the original concept of the Tea Party was libertarian — in favor of individual liberties (including personal freedoms and the ability to make any choice that does not harm another), limited government, and free markets.

The summer after the MoneyBomb fundraising success, in 2008, I participated in a Revolution March with Ron Paul supporters in DC (that’s me, with the Ron Paul, below right).  The march was quite massive, likely with between 7,500 and 10,000 participants from all across the country. It ended with a concert in front of the nation’s capital which lasted all day.

2009 Resurgence

Things went quiet for a while, until early 2009.  That’s when Rick Santelli drew attention for his remarks made regarding the Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan in February of last year — from the floor of the CME Group during pre-market hours.  Santelli accused the government of promoting bad behavior and called for a Chicago Tea Party in response. Scattered cheers, whistles and applause could be heard from some of the personnel around the floor.

I participated in my second tea party event when I was asked to speak at the Reston Tea Party (in northern Virginia) on April 15, 2009. My speech focused on an economic issue that I believe important on tax day: repealing the Sixteenth Amendment. In my speech, I discussed how I never was duped into voting for George W. Bush, but that those who did can now redeem themselves by working for liberty in 2009, 2010, and beyond. I was well-received despite the hard rain pouring down on me as I spoke. At the time of my speech, I could tell that a broad coalition of folks were attending the Tea Party, and I surely realized that not all of them would agree with me — especially on social issues. So be it.

Hijacked Tea Party?

But it’s now almost a year later, and the Tea Party seems to be transforming from a libertarian gathering to promote less intrusive government and celebrate our freedoms to a neo-con group promoting War in Iran, criticizing immigrants and div
ersity, and persecuting those with different religious views.

Rachel Maddow and Dave Weigel from The Washington Post have provided excellent coverage of this transformation from the very beginning, interviewing libertarian-leaning bloggers like Stephen Gordon and Jason Pye and even Congressman Ron Paul to gain their perspective on the Tea Party hijack. Maddow was shocked to learn that three so-called Tea Party supporters challenged the inspiration behind the Tea Party — U.S. Rep. Ron Paul — for Congress in his rural Lake Jackson/Victoria area district in Texas.

The “far left media” recently crowned Sarah Palin the new mother of the Tea Party movement. This is problematic for several reasons.

First, Palin is employed by FOX News, which has a history of propping up increased foreign intervention — including the War in Iraq. Second, Palin is closely associated with people who support increased interventionism abroad. In her most recent trip to Hong Kong, she brought a prominent media relations strategist/lobbyist named Randy Scheunemann. Third, there is a correct perception that Sarah Palin is scripted — she’s using talking points from people writing speeches for her rather than sharing what she really believes. (I’m sure she has some core beliefs, but what are they?)

Increased foreign interventionism, bigger military budgets, and sending U.S. troops to more countries abroad is the exact opposite of what the original Tea Parties were all about — so libertarians, paleo-cons, and traditional Goldwater conservatives (Constitutionalists all of them) should be rightful skeptics of the strategists who have put into motion the hijacking of the Tea Parties.

There are several national groups claiming to lead the Tea Party. These include:

* The Tea Party Express, which created a campaign called Our Country Deserves Better. Of the $1.3 million raised for their campaign from July to November, $870,000 plus of it went to a single Republican campaign firm in California.

* The Tea Party Nation, run by Judson Phillips, which organized the recent Convention in Tennessee. Libertarian-leaning groups like Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty and Eric Odom’s American Liberty Alliance decided not to participate after dealings with Phillips and his co-organizers.

* The Tea Party Patriots, which is working with FreedomWorks — headed by former U.S. Rep. Dick Armey.

Be wary of any national group trying to control local Tea Party organizations.

How Do We Proceed?

This is not the first time a libertarian concept has been adopted by others. It was libertarian economist Milton Friedman who developed the concept of school vouchers, but most of the credit was never given. The same is true of the Cato Institute, which developed the concept of Social Security privatization but is rarely credited with it. And who was it that was actively calling the War on Drugs a failure from the early 70s onward? Despite that most people recognize the failure of the War on Drugs, the Libertarian Party rarely receives credit for popularizing what is now plainly obvious: that the War on Drugs has not worked.

The original message of the Tea Party — let’s take our government back! — still rings true. It’s up to us to keep fighting to reclaim our personal and economic liberties — and that includes a humble and logical foreign policy.

I would encourage people who share the Republican Liberty Caucus commitment to limited government to attend local Tea Party meetings to get a flavor for what your local branch of the Tea Party is like. Certainly the flavor of the local Tea Party depends on who is leading it. The local Tea Party objectives should determine if it’s a good fit for you. If it isn’t, start your own Tea Party.

If more libertarian-leaning Republicans were leaders in the Tea Party movement, perhaps the Tea Party movement would have a decisively more libertarian flavor.

Overall, the credit for the Tea Party concept goes to the most innovative thinkers in politics today: libertarians and Ron Paul supporters. The current Tea Party is heading in the wrong direction, but whether it can reverse its course is up to us.

There’s never been a better time to get involved in the movement to change our government to one of, by, and for the people. I challenge you to become active in your area. Joining the Republican Liberty Caucus is a great place to start.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Aaron Biterman is a Wisconsin native. He is Vice Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.