Reed Sets his Sights on Loebsack in Iowa’s 2nd CD
- Friday, November 6, 2009, 4:33
- Iowa, News Center, Top Story
- 1,230 views
- 77 comments
In 2008, Christopher Reed entered the race for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate just months before the primary. Reed surprised many when he defeated Cedar Rapids businessman Steve Rathje and former state legislator George Eichhorn in the GOP primary. Reed wasn’t as fortunate in his race against Senator Tom Harkin, where he received just over 37 percent of the vote.
Now, Reed is running for Congress in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District. Instead of being the last candidate to enter the race, he is the first official candidate to emerge as a potential challenger to Congressman Dave Loebsack. Like in his U.S. Senate race, Reed is expected to be involved in another three-way primary. One of his potential primary opponents is Steve Rathje, who also ran for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in 2008. The other candidate is Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who won the Republican nomination for the 2nd Congressional District seat last year.
TheIowaRepublican.com attended Reed’s campaign announcement in Ottumwa yesterday and asked the candidate what he had learned from his previous campaign and what he plans to do differently in this congressional race. Reed acknowledged that in 2008, it was him against the world. He noted that he traveled to all 99 counties mostly alone, but this time, he already has a team of volunteers in place to support his campaign. He also admitted that his website was professionally built for this campaign, whereas Reed himself designed his 2008 website.
The newly announced candidate also admitted that he learned a lot from his last campaign. He said, “Last time, I took the race personally. This time, it’s about the people. So the vitriol and the remarks are not going to be there this time because there is too much at stake. This campaign has to be about defeating Dave Loebsack and what he votes for in Washington.”
When asked to size up how he would do against a primary field that would include Rathje and Miller-Meeks, Reed said, “I’m confident that, at the end of the day, people are going to select me as they did in 2008 to carry their message. Now having said that, the more competition in a primary, the better product voters will actually get. Primaries force the people to pick the best person, and that’s what we need. It will allow the voters a chance to vet out the candidates to find out what the candidates are really about, not what they are just saying that they are about, or pretending to be about. With me, you get what you get. I’ll never stray from where I stand, and I will always answer questions directly.”
When asked what separates him from the other potential candidates, Reed said, “I have the vim, vigor, and drive to get this done. I am a conservative. I don’t go around saying I’m a conservative, because I truly am, that’s one huge difference. I think at the end of the day, the voters’ only chance to defeat Dave Loebsack is with me. We should have beat his last year as a freshman. We can’t fall short again. It’s too important. We don’t need to defeat him. We must defeat him.”
Campaign flyers handed out at the event state that Reed supports term limits for all federally elected officials in Washington. When asked how many terms he planned on serving, Reed said, “I have not put a finger on how many terms right now, but I have no desire to be a career politician. I believe the founding fathers of this country did not have career politicians in mind when they set up our system of government up. I believe it is for the individual who goes to serve, get things done, and then turn it over to someone else. Career politicians get out of touch with Iowans, and that gets us in trouble.”
When asked about Congressman Loebsack, Reed said, “The current health care bill which Loebsack supports is a pathway to bankrupting our country. This year’s Congress has already spent more money than all the previous Congresses combined. It’s not sustainable.”
The GOP hopeful also blasted Loebsack for being out-of-step with everyday Iowans. he said, “Cap and Trade would be destructive to Iowa businesses. We already have record unemployment rates. We don’t need more legislation that would take more jobs away from Iowa. We need common sense in Washington that will take care of Iowans who need jobs. There are too many Iowans today who have to worry about if they are going to have a job tomorrow morning. Cap and trade will almost ensure that they don’t.”
Read also accused Congressman Loebsack of not listening to his constituents. “At his town hall meetings, in the face of thousands of Iowans who spoke out against the health care bill, Dave Loebsack is still trotting forward the liberal health care bill. He is not listening to Iowans, the people who voted him into office. We need someone in Washington who will take care of Iowa,” said Reed.
He also said that Congressman Loebsack has been “non-existent” in flood relief efforts. “Loebsack shows up, but 18 months after the flood, we still have people living in FEMA trailers. It’s been over a year past the time that they were promised to be back in their homes.”
The primary in the 2nd Congressional District will be very interesting in 2010. Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks excited many Republican activists across the district in 2008. Miller-Meeks was able to squeak out a 200 vote victory over Peter Teahen in the primary that year. Reed, a more established social conservative, might cut into the wide spread support Miller-Meeks enjoyed in the rural parts of the district.
About the Author
Craig Robinson has written 452 stories on this site.
Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses. In that capacity, Robinson planned and organized the largest political event in 2007, the Iowa Straw Poll, in Ames, Iowa. Robinson also organized the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa, and was later dispatched to Nevada to help with the caucuses there. Robinson cut his teeth in Iowa politics during the 2000 caucus campaign of businessman Steve Forbes and has been involved with most major campaigns in the state since then. His extensive political background and rolodex give him a unique perspective from which to monitor the political pulse of Iowa.
77 Comments on “Reed Sets his Sights on Loebsack in Iowa’s 2nd CD”
Write a Comment
Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Nice guy, but I’m voting Miller-Meeks.
As Mr. Reed says, there is too much at stake – and MMM is still the best candidate to win in CD2.
There is solid support from the 2008 campaign for her to run and it’s growing.
here is the inside story: the linn county central committee is currently run by the bible thumping wing of our party and have all their focus on getting Christian Fong elected lieutenant governor.
Steve Rathje and Dr Meeks are not bowing down to religious issues of those in charge and will not get support from the linn county leadership. i heard that Steve is not interested in running becuase of this. Reed will get support because of his religious views while the fiscal conservative will push for Meeks.
the problem is if Meeks wins we will get another shot at running beating the nutty professor dave loebsack, but she will have to fight the democrat attacks as well as the religious republican attacks… so we have a chance to get a doctor elected when health care is such a huge issue, but the zealots wont support her because she wont come out for a ban on abortion,gay marriage and such ….
Chris Reed is one of the worst possible candidates we could offer up. He isn’t well spoken, and I don’t get the impression that he is very smart. He is our version of Joe Biden.
Did you see his televised debate with Harkin (as moderated by David Yepsen)? I think he poorly articulated his points, relied mostly on rhetoric and not specific examples “I want to fix Washington”, and then accused Harkin (a Navy veteran like Reed) of being a traitor for his position on Iraq troop withdraw.
I like Miller-Meeks. She’s a great candidate and an incredible example for our children. She is incredibly intelligent (she was awesome in her televised debate with Loebsack last year) was raised poor but put herself through school by joining the military, served 24 years as an officer, became a medical doctor and raised 2 children.
Well, I am of the thought that the name calling and whisper campaigns have got to stop. We should be able to sort out the best candidate in a reasonable fashion, hopefully setting a new trend for the party.
I personally support Miller-Meeks because I strongly believe she can win in CD2. Let’s make this against Loebsack – he has to go – HE should be our “target”.
> Well, I am of the thought that the name calling and whisper campaigns have got to stop.
Fair enough, and point taken. Take out my first paragraph and everything else I said is fair and true. I’m sure Chris Reed is a nice man, and he appears to have a very nice family. I don’t think he would do a very good job representing the 2 CD.
Thanks Jeff. I’m just tired of the drama and want to take the high road. We’ve already got ppl like Deace (last night egging Chris Reed into the mud … ) calling MMM’s stance on issues identical to Loebsack’s which is beyond rediculous.
Just looking at the candidate’s qualifications and backgrounds….it’s really no contest… Miller-Meeks is the best candidate for the GOP nomination in IA-2…..its really no contest.
Reed…he’s a nice guy..but he’s woefully unprepared to serve in Congress. The 2008 Senate campaign was a clear demonstration of that. He demonstrated a lack and depth of knowledge on issues. He spent more time complaining about RPI than he did about building a campaign organization.
Rathje….you have a person who spent 2 1/2 years running for the GOP nomination for US Senate in 2008..and could only manage to place 3rd??? Sorry..but Rathje is going to need more than Facebook postings every 5 minutes to convince people to vote for him.
Miller-Meeks fired up 2nd District Republicans like no other candidate did in 2008…she’s stayed heavily involved in the district since then… She kept Loebsack constantly on the defensive in 2008..and he won’t have a Presidential campaign to fall back on in 2010…
For the 2nd District….the clear choice is Miller-Meeks.
“…she wont come out for a ban on abortion,gay marriage and such ….” — Lobo
Why won’t she?
Thanks, Carolyn. I, too, am tired of this circular firing squad. The RATS are the targets.
My position on the race for governor is that any one of our guys is preferable to Culver; therefore, I will be supporting whichever one is the most likely to take out Culver.
Remember, Deace is not a Republican–never supports Republicans (except for a few in a primary) and even voted for Obama. Why would anyone listen to him? I know, it’s like looking at a car wreck but Hannity is on 98.3 at the same time with substantive issues and not the same thing over and over.
Hopefully, Reed is his own person and not tap dancing to Deace’s tune. It’s a path to no where.
As one former moderate Republican state legislator said, Rod Roberts is the man who can get the job done. He is well respected, not despised by the Dems and comes down on the right side of ALL the issues.
To that, I will add he’s announced his candidacy and is out doing the grueling work of campaigning, not resting on his laurels while the fat cats write their checks.
Oh, and since it’s not about issues anymore, Trish Roberts would make a great first lady. Rod and Trish are a stately looking couple.
Agreed, Peggy, the Roberts are great people. We have a great bunch from which to choose. We are blessed.
Reed is a HORRIBLE candidate, YES HORRIBLE. Does he not understand what he is going up against? Reed barely raised $57 000 in his Senate campaign. Miller-Meeks raised over $375 000 in a Congressional campaign. That alone she tell you the ability of a candidate. Second, the district is +7 Democratic PVI, how is Reed’s ultra-conservative, right-wing ideas gone to go over with sound minded, independent voters? Seriously, does anyone in their right mind think Reed has a chance? The second district is a moderate-liberal district and a values, conservative will NOT WIN! That is a fact. Anyone who thinks otherwise knows nothing about politics. That being said, Dr. Miller-Meeks is the only candidate that provides Republicans a shot at winning.
The comments that Dr. Miller-Meeks does not have support in Linn County are bogus. I think we are forgetting that Dr. Miller-Meeks won a primary against Peter Teahen who was the godson of Linn County. Teahen was liked by all of Linn County and somehow Dr. Miller-Meeks won the primary. If Peter Teahen could not beat Dr. Miller-Meeks when she had no money, name recognition, or little support in Linn County how can Reed win? The answer is that he cannot.
Reed does not know how to write, or for that fact, write a press release. The press release he wrote was ridiculous. Poor grammar, poor writing style, left out key press release features, and lastly was a joke in all regards. It was literal joke. I know a number of members of the press who literally shook their head in despair when they saw Chris Reed’s campaign press release.
Reed might be a nice guy, but being just a nice guy does not win you a heavily Democratic district. You have to have intelligence about the issue, a genuine but politically understanding personality, and actually have qualifications to being a Congressperson. What has Reed done the qualifies him to be a candidate? Running a horrible Senate campaign is not qualification. If fact, it should disqualify him.
> “…she wont come out for a ban on abortion,gay marriage and such ….” — Lobo
> Why won’t she? — Peggy
Actually, she did come out on this. She holds the same position on abortion that our last 2 Republican presidents held; which is that abortion should be illegal except in the cases of rape, incest, or if the mother’s life is in danger.
Roberts was the only GOV candidate that took the time to attend our Fall Fund rasier (because we charged and wanted to limit speakers)… He was there during the social hour and I talked to him while he “made the rounds”… Seems like a very nice guy and we really appreciated his taking the time to attend.
iamthatguy,
Let me get this straight. An American is disqualified to run for office if he can’t rake in big political contributions and his press releases have typos, but an American who thinks a viable, unborn baby isn’t worth representing is fully qualified?
The state already has requirements in place for those seeking office, i.e. age, residency and mental competency. You don’t get to decide who’s qualified to run for office other than your one shot in the voting booth.
Peggy..
The public wants a candidate who appears at the bare minimum to be competent. Reed has demonstrated that he doesn’t have a basic depth of knowledge on issues. His campaign in 2008 was an embarrassment. Harkin was ripe for the picking…and Reed couldn’t do ANYTHING to capitalize on it…he couldn’t fundraise..couldn’t put together a campaign organization…NOTHING.
Miller-Meeks is unquestionably pro-life…but she’s not going to pander herself to any organization or anyone to prove how “pure” her positions are.
“The public wants a candidate who appears at the bare minimum to be competent.” – Hawk
Trust me, Hawk, the majority of “the public” isn’t even paying attention.
I’ve heard Chris Reed speak and was impressed. My only advice for him would be to smile more.
We have to remember that the 2 CD was represented by a moderate Republican, Jim Leach, for ~30 years. This is a liberal leaning district.
Does that mean we as Republicans should “water down” our stance? Absolutely not. It means you don’t stake your campaign on issues that the majority of your voters don’t care about. You find what’s important to 2 CD voters, and that’s what you campaign on.
Looking at the U of I’s exit polling report from 2008 (links to PDF: http://www.news-releases.uiowa.edu/2008/november/Exit Poll 2008 Topline.pdf) we can see what voters said was important to them.
The exit poll showed that voters cited the following as the most important *local* issues that need to be solved: (1) Economy and Jobs 24% — (2) Education 13% — (3) Flood Recovery 12% — (4) High Taxes 10%
As for national issues, 41% said the Economy mattered most in their presidential vote. By comparison, only 3% said gay marriage mattered to them, and only 6% said abortion mattered in their voting.
So, why don’t we do what we do best as Republicans and campaign in the 2 CD on what those voters care about MOST, which happen to be our strengths: Creating Jobs, Improving Education, Reducing Taxes, and *finally* cleaning up from the floods.
The public isn’t paying attention?? Then explain why Reed only got 37% facing Harkin last year?
Harkin got votes because people are still getting their government checks. They are still getting their tax credits. They are still getting their backs scratched. To quote despair.com “I want either less corruption or more opportunity to participate in it.” If you are already participating in and benefiting from corruption, why vote to change it?
Hawk,
Explain how Iowans can keep electing both Grassley and Harkin.
What explanation can there be other than an uninformed electorate?
Jeff-
I have to ask a question here. How does it fit in your assesment of National politics that voters in Maine voted down gay marriage while at the same time voting down a tax DECREASE and a tax payers bill of rights? I thought fiscal issues and putting money back in peoples pockets were prime issues?
> How does it fit in your assesment of National politics that voters in Maine voted down gay marriage while at the same time voting down a tax DECREASE and a tax payers bill of rights? I thought fiscal issues and putting money back in peoples pockets were prime issues?
Well, you’d have to ask Maine voters that question.
It isn’t my assessment, it is an exit polling report conducted by the U of I Political Science department IN IOWA, not Maine.
Don’t you think that in the 2nd CD that we should focus on issues that those voters actually care about?
I mean, if a politician cared a whole bunch of spaying and neutering dogs and cats, but only 6% of the voters did, then why would he want to bring it up at every campaign stop? Is it “compromising” your principles or “watering down” your message if you only focus on what voters are concerned with? I don’t think so. In fact, isn’t that a politician’s job to listen to voters and fight for their concerns?
Excellent observation, Con Thinker.
Jeff, I dont believe anyone has ever said that it is “‘compromising’ your principles or ‘watering down’ your message if you only focus on what voters are concerned with?” The allegation is that expecting me to not ask about the little* things and not vote on the unimportant* things is expecting ME to compromise MY principles.
*In this instance little and unimportant refer to such things as the fundamental structure of cilivlized society, the value of human life, the character and credibility of candidates, and anything else of material significance, since we decide where to put our vote based solely on who the people in power have told us can win.
> Excellent observation, Con Thinker.
No, it really isn’t at all. It’s apples and oranges. I provide exit polling results from the 2nd District in Iowa. He wants to compare that to a national election in Maine. Not the same at all.
Let me explain again.
> How does it fit in your assesment of National politics[...]
I didn’t provide an assessment of National politics.
> that voters in Maine voted down gay marriage while at the same time voting down a tax DECREASE and a tax payers bill of rights?
Wait, my comment was simply reporting what an exit polling results showed from the 2 CD OF IOWA, not even the entire state of Iowa.
> I thought fiscal issues and putting money back in peoples pockets were prime issues?
Me too, but I guess in MAINE, their politics are different than those of 1 congressional district in Iowa.
> Jeff, I dont believe anyone has ever said that it is “‘compromising’ your principles or ‘watering down’ your message if you only focus on what voters are concerned with?
Ah, you need to tune into Steve Deace. According to him, ff you don’t waive the anti-gay flag at every campaign stop, you are not Republican “enough”.
I don’t believe that Steve Deace has ever posted a comment on this site. I might be wrong on that though. Anyway, believe it or not I listen to Steve Deace on average 5 to 10 hours a week. I have never heard him attack anyone for not “waiving the anti-gay flag.” I have heard him attack candidates for being inconsistent in their stands. I have heard him attack elected officials for failing to use every means at their disposal to fight the Judicial Tyranny that occurred on April 3rd 2009. I have heard him attack elected officials for spreading the correct rhetoric, and then doing nothing to back up their words. That is what I have heard Steve Deace attack people for. He doesn’t like phonys, posers, back-stabbers, and other two-faced individuals. And, neither do I.
Jeff –
I would agree that a politician’s job is to fight for his or her constituents concerns. I think we just have differing idea of what those concerns are.
I know that polls and studies have show that social issues aren’t even on the radar of most voters. I only have one problem with that, the data on the ground doesn’t seem to support that. I would reiterate the case in Maine and additionally this. 31 times voters in states across America have been given the choice on doing something about gay marriage. Being presented with this choice 31 times, they have chosen that actually do care about it and in addition vote it down.
“As for national issues, 41% said the Economy mattered most in their presidential vote. By comparison, only 3% said gay marriage mattered to them, and only 6% said abortion mattered in their voting.” – Jeff
“That is what I have heard Steve Deace attack people for. He doesn’t like phonys, posers, back-stabbers, and other two-faced individuals. And, neither do I”
This is HILARIOUS statement. Deace is the epitome of a phony backstabber and also two faced. You can’t get any more two faced than to claim to be a pro-life, anti-homosexual who is a better Christian than anyone else and then turn around and vote for Obama.
You also cannot claim to be better than everyone else and then work AGAINST the very people who may be able to bring about the changes you claim you want.
This guy is leading the gullible down a primrose path. If you listen to Deace, name ONE Republican he has ever found worthy to vote for in a general election.
You do realize that following Deace guarantees perpetual control for Dims, don’t you? Anyone who is willing to surrender to Dims consistently lacks principles because they don’t care what Dims are doing to this country.
The only consistent principle of Steve Deace is to try to cripple ANY Republican who may be effective and to attempt to elevate himself at the same time.
You are also wrong about Deace posting on this website and Deace is the one who is inconsistent. He tolerates the exact same flaws in some that he criticizes in others,.
WAKE UP!!!
Jeff,
What IS an “anti-gay flag”?
DVFO -
I don’t really want to get into a conversation about Deace with you, but i just have couple of questions.
Do you work for, or are you Deace?
Do you work for WHO Radio in some fashion?
Do you just really like Deace in the Afternoon and want to give him free advertisement?
Peggy…you want to know why Iowa keeps electing Harkin and Grassley? Well calling the electorate “uninformed” isn’t the explanation.
Harkin and Grassley appeal to Iowans in their own very unique ways…in fact, its pretty indicative of Iowa’s unique political status in the country. Iowa’s not a cookie cutter state politically like a lot of states are…
Look, when a Deace lover gets on here and claims things about Deace that are just plain untrue, I’m going to speak up.
Deace is destructive to the conservative cause and it is unfathomable to believe that there are any left who are willing to follow him off a cliff.
The polling data was heavily weighted with Iowa City and Coralville precincts (13 of the 15 precincts) . How can that be representative of the 2nd CD?
The polling is also a year old. Much has changed since then. Bail outs, Iowa Supreme Court’s opinion, etc.
Guess what I am saying is 1 year down the road, that specific polling data may not be the most relevant data given the age and polling sample.
DVFO – I Don’t Care About Who Wears What TShirt. I Care How They Vote. Grassley voted to give away TAXPAYER $$$$$ to bailout banks, insurance companies, and other PRIVATE corporations. King, Grassley, Loebsack, Boswell, Braley, Harkin, and Latham all continue to vote to Fund an UnConstitutional Undeclared War known as a police action. They all voted for the Patriot Act, the most unconstitutional, largest expansion of federal government since FDR! What difference does it make what tshirt they wear. They all vote to give themselves more power, and more $$$ at my expense. Senator McKinley, Rep VanEngelenhoven, Rep Arnold, all the same way. None of them had the guts to put forward a bill that would restore my rights. Only Rep Sorenson put forward a Concealed Carry bill that passed constitutional muster last session, and there were 5 unconstitutional bills put forward on our behalf by our Republicans. Sorenson’s bill only got voted on because He personally bucked the system and demanded a vote via House Rules. The same rules the Senate has (admittedly the names and some of the wording is different) but that Senator McKinley denied existed when he was confronted on the gay marriage issue. I am sick and tired of Phonys. I am sick and tired of playing politics. I want a true leader statesman, and so do many others. The gauntlet has been thrown, the TeaParties, IGO, CFL, LUV, and other PACS are out there and growing by leaps and bounds. The country club republicans who say one thing, and do another are in for the fight of their lives. Deace is not perfect. I have problems with much of what he says and what he doesn’t say. He is childish, rude, and far to confrontational. But he is consistent. He holds our side accountable. Something that has not happened in a very long time.
@ConservativeThinker
Maine voters may have been a lot like california when they voted down gay marriage. liberals of one particular race are not in favor of gay marriage, but do support more government spending on programs they want.
“Well calling the electorate “uninformed” isn’t the explanation.”
Are you sure, Hawk?
“He is childish, rude, and far to confrontational. But he is consistent. He holds our side accountable. Something that has not happened in a very long time.”
Thanks for some honesty here. To call Deace childish is hitting the nail on the head. You’re making progress but you’re still drinking too much Deace Kool Aid.
I have really bad, bad news for you. This is not heaven. You’re not going to find perfection here on earth. You can either deal with reality or keep chasing rainbows.
I find it humorous you, too, are willing to use Sorenson as the epitome of a model legislator and would you (or Deace) be willing to look the other way if some other legislator brought Ron Paul to Iowa for a fundraiser.
Paul is not nearly pro-life enough.
Frankly, I don’t care that Sorensen is bringing him. Again, I use this as an example of the hypocrisy of Deace and his followers.
We can also talk about VP’s church which is in full fellowship with the apostate ELCA that ordains homosexuals.
Deace is not consistent and neither are you. Make a stand for the perfect person. I haven’t found them.
When you get right down to looking at this realistically, we have two political parties in this game. There are the Dimocrats and the Republican. Choose a team and fight.
Your way guarantees Dims to be in control forever.
> The polling data was heavily weighted with Iowa City and Coralville precincts (13 of the 15 precincts) . How can that be representative of the 2nd CD?
That’s a good point. It certainly doesn’t represent the entirety of the 2 CD, but Linn County makes up the majority of the population of the 2 CD.
But do you think that a CD that re-elected the moderate Jim Leach (who *did* vote for Obama and publicly supported him) 15 times, and then recently elected a democrat, is suddenly gonna swing hard to conservative principles? No, it is not going to happen.
I believe the reality of it is that the 2 CD is a district made up up a solid Democratic faction, a smaller Republican faction, and the majority are Independents that will vote for either party as long as they speak to their main concerns. When they list social issues at the bottom of their list, it would seem to me that staking a candidacy solely on social issues would be counter-productive.
Please hear that I am not saying you shouldn’t share your view on these important social issues or publicly discuss them.
If we want to put a Republican back in Washington from Iowa’s 2 CD, then we need to convince the independents in Iowa’s 2 CD, and especially Linn County, that we share their outrage over high taxes, flood relief, and will work to promote small business and create jobs in our district!
A Republican candidate should make their stance clear on social issues, but base their campaign on answering the concerns of the voters in 2 CD.
I am going to make a stand for perfection, but I do not ever expect to find it here on earth. I will not insist on perfection. I will insist on only supporting the best! If we cannot find anyone better that is as close to perfection as we will get. I will support that candidate.
I supported Ron Paul in the Caucuses. Ron Paul is as Pro-Life as they come. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.2533:
I also reject the two party system entirely. We do currently have two parties, the Republicrats and the Democans. Both vote for federal expansion. Both vote for unjust war. Both support the Federal Reserve. Both support the Department of Education. Both support limiting individual rights. Both have trampled the US Constitution and almost all elected officials in Washington DC should be removed from office.
Jeff – please explain a constitutional way for the Federal Government to address flood relief and job creation in Iowa CD2.
” That is what I have heard Steve Deace attack people for. He doesn’t like phonys, posers, back-stabbers, and other two-faced individuals”
- Of course he likes them. He just likes the ones that agree with him.
“Maine voters may have been a lot like california when they voted down gay marriage. liberals of one particular race are not in favor of gay marriage, but do support more government spending on programs they want.” – LoboSolo
So what you’re saying there is that in gay marriage, we have found and issue and liberals AND conservatives can agree on and still we have republican candidates that don’t want to push it?? What sense does that make??
Wow, apparently I have some issues with grammar. Let me rephrase; What you’re saying is, on an issue that liberals AND conservatives agree on, ie gay marriage, republican candidates don’t want to push it?
Really Mr. Hawk, I have heard him attack Mike Huckabee. And he agrees with Huckabee.
bunce: Do you ever feel like you just want to go eat worms? You must not have one single thing in your life for which to be thankful.
I actually agree with you about adhering to the Constitution. I also know that the longer we continue to elect Dims, the worse and worse it’s going to get.
We need to stop the hemorrhaging and we’re going to open even bigger and bigger wounds as long as we sit along the sidelines waiting for perfect Republicans to show up.
Deace is working FOR Dims and against the very “principles’ that he, and you claim you want.
Doing it your way is digging an even deeper and deeper hole with each election cycle.
Too bad you can’t see that Deace revels in being powerful enough to be partially responsible for this hole. He loves it and he’s using you to accomplish his goal.
On what issues does Deace agree with Huckabee? Illegal immigration? Raising taxes? Controlling CEO pay?
DVFO,
Just how is Deace working for the Democrats.
Did he not support Republicans at the state level in the most recent election.
Candidates like Kent Sorenson, Chris Hagenow, and others.
And for your information he didn’t vote for Obama, he only said that to get anonymous commenters like yourself up in arms.
I listen to Deace 5 to 10 hours a week. He says 90% of the time what I would say were I given 50,000 watts of power on the Clear Channel voice of the Midwest. I don’t see anything like what you are saying. If he voted for Obama, (which I don’t believe he did, nor have I seen any evidence to the contrary) it was a protest vote. A statement that he will not support McCain. As I recall there were 12 presidential candidates on my ballot in Knoxville, four of whom were more worth supporting than McCain.
And to answer your first question. No. I don’t. This world is not my home I’m just a passing through. My treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue…
DFVO,
Why the issues that you think is all Deace cares about, abortion and gay marriage.
Remember Deace supported Huckabee during the primary.
You people are really naive. Deace DID vote for Obama. He said he did. The reason doesn’t matter–he voted for a baby-killing, America-hating, Muslim-loving Democrat who is in the process of destroying this country.
The only thing saving us is the fact that enough people in this country are now awake and they’re pitching a huge fit and scaring the daylights out of enough wacko RATS.
Bunce: You took a swing (Deace fashion) at Steve King. Do you really want to replace King with a RAT? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2380070/posts?page=4
You can either work to keep him in place or allow a RAT to replace him.
I choose to keep King.
Al, you do know that in order to stop Dims, the Republicans need to gain a majority, don’t you?
Three Republicans in the Iowa legislature will not accomplish anything!!! We need 51 in the Iowa House and 26 in the Iowa Senate.
How are you EVER going to get there is you demand perfection before you vote for one of them?
I want to stop Dims, not help them.
I would chose to replace King with someone better if I had the opportunity.
Let me restate that. I would prefer to educate and reform him in a few areas than to replace him. Hold him accountable. If he won’t change, then replace him.
Do you have anyone in mind you think will be better? Are you prepared to run in your district?
I am not prepared to run against Boswell. I am not prepared to move to Kings district to challenge him. That does not mean however that when he screws up I am not going to call him out though.
Again… I would prefer to educate and reform him in a few areas than to replace him. Hold him accountable. If he won’t change, then replace him.
DVFO,
You failed to answer my question, how is Deace working to elect Democrats when he has proven to work to elect Republicans?
Al; You have to be kidding, right? Deace has undermined far more Republicans than he’s ever helped.
You named THREE Republicans he’s helped. Should we start counting the number of those he has chosen to undermine and attempt to cripple them?
Also, has Deace ever helped a Republican in his district that he has voted for in a general election?
He is not a Republican so I don’t know why he would bother to go vote in a primary. I do think he supported Huckabee at the caucus but that hardly makes him a worker for Republicans.
Stop and think about where we would be here in Iowa if we all followed Deace. We would have THREE elected Republicans–that’s all–THREE!!!
Deace even voted for Obama.
DVFO,
Really, please start naming the candidates that he has undermined. And don’t say that he undermined McCain, McCain undermined himself with his incessant pandering and flip flops.
“Really, please start naming the candidates that he has undermined. And don’t say that he undermined McCain, McCain undermined himself ….”
- lmao.
Deace and Mickelson are infatuated with Cleon Skousen. This type of extremist nut case is fine to quote if you are running for President of the John Birch Society. This should tell everyone all they need to know about the depth of their political thinking.
What is MMM’s platform? I thought she was a liberal, her facebook said that she is a moderate. I couldn’t tell you one thing that she stands for other than she is a woman.
I see you’re back on this $h*t again! Actually, deace did go after Miller-Meeks but only after she had a realistic chance of winning. I also seem to recall “Kim” went after her and IIRC those allegations were found to be less than factual. Of course the timing of dropping those crap bombs so close to the election was merely coincidental.(yeah, right.)
Bunce, go ahead and vote 3rd party, just remember you are only helping elect the dems in the end.(Hello, NY23 anyone?) I hate to beat on the dead horse again, but there aren’t enough conservatives AND Republicans to win elections in most parts of Iowa. You therefore need to pick up independents, libertarians and the like to gain the edge.
Let’s see…. compromise and get 70-80%, hang tough on your “principles” and get jack squat. Good luck with that!!!
I’d still like to know what Miller Meeks platform because I can’t seem to find one. I did find out that she wants people to be compassionate towards each other, (hate to say it but now that sounds much like Obama’s croonies,!! and I also found that she said that ABORTION is not the only form of birth control. What pro-lifer says that? My guess is Miller Meeks is a liberal.
You guessed wrong!
Maybe we all oughta leave this to the folks of S.E. Iowa ’cause poking your beaks in where they weren’t needed or wanted worked so well in that special election there a while back!!!
MMM is anti-abortion. She holds the same stance our last 2 Republican presidents held. Here is an article talking about it. This was after Kim Lehman distributed fliers weeks before the Nov 4 election trying to smear her, which also helped to re-elect Dave Loebsack:
http://www.qctimes.com/news/local/government-and-politics/elections/article_d2846be8-1afb-5048-a5ac-16b6bcc6c17f.html
From the article:
Miller-Meeks, a physician seeking to unseat Democratic incumbent Dave Loebsack in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, is anti-abortion and condones abortion only in cases of rape, incest or if the mother’s life is in danger, said Miller-Meeks’ communications director Eric Woolson.
Her exceptions for abortion don’t square with what her church teaches on the matter. I hope she’s not still on the parish council there at St. Mary’s.
So Peggy, you’d rather have Loebsack win and continue to support abortion in ALL circumstances? THAT is hypocritical!!!
Too all the “purists” that regularly comment — my first thought is how many of you think that another purists is not pure enough?
What I do know is that this side of heaven there is no one perfect. Only once has there been a person walk this earth that was truly pure and perfect — the rest of us are flawed. Until the “purists” accept their own fallibility and accept it in others, their comments deserve to be severely discounted.
NIAGuy…
Its really simple.. these purists think that if you don’t think like them 100% of the time..you are to be cast aside..you’re “evil”…you’re worthless…
These are people that you can not reason with. And Timmy..yes..they would rather have Loebsack or any other liberal to be quite honest..that’s the really puzzling part about their logic.
Undocumented: So are you saying we shouldn’t treat people with compassion? I think we all have to admit that far too often, Republicans come across as spiteful and vindictive towards those who don’t share our moral views.
Perhaps if we all took Matthew 7:1 a little more to heart, people wouldn’t look upon our party as hateful, bigoted, etc. Hate the sin..not the sinner. Unfortunately, there are many purists in here that don’t take that to heart.
Who said anything about Dave Loebsack? Not me!
Touchy, touchy.
HawkCR1 –
All too often you are right when referencing Mathew 7:1, but I sure wouldn’t want to fall in the category described in Romans 1:32, would you?