Two nights ago, in a candidate forum, a question was asked, “Term Limits. In one word, yes or no, do you support an amendment?” The candidates were then asked to raise their hands. All Senate candidates raised their hands except one: Cherilyn Eagar.

If I had been given the opportunity to speak to that subject, I would first have said that a sound bite on term limits would yield a response I could not give, and for good reason. We live in a sound bite world and that is partly to blame for the term “politician” because we are reduced to statements that bring applause but which, in practice, will bring poor outcomes, and sometimes worse than what we presently have.

My position on term limits is this:
I oppose a term limit amendment because it will give us unintended consequences that will be worse. I support other remedies that will be easier to accomplish and more quickly and which will strike at the core of the problem: follow the money.

I am as concerned as others with the difficulty in removing elected officials from office that cannot be removed. First, let’s analyze the results that are in from states that already have adopted term limits. Here are the results: musical chairs and cronyism with runaway bureaucracies in state agencies. We can expect no less at the federal level if we act to impose a term limit amendment. The fourth branch of government – agencies and departments not enumerated in Article I Section 8 of the constitution are a major part of what is going wrong.

Furthermore, the desire for a term limit amendment is something I have weighed heavily over the years. I must ask, “What is the reason we all desire to have an elected official’s term limited?” For me, it is because we have a 90% incumbency rate. In effect, we have the Incumbent Party. In 2010, there is a strong “kick the bums out” sentiment. As a grassroots candidate, this cuts deeply into my own reasons for running and getting to Washington to change things up.

What is going wrong? In my view, Washington is run by federal agencies and bureaucracies whose wheels keep on spinning from one administration to the next. It didn’t matter whether it was America 2000, Goals 2000 or No Child Left Behind, they were all federal proposals over education, and I agree with Reagan that the Department of Education ought to be dismantled.

It is also run by lobbyists seeking favors from the government for their pet projects or to protect their corporation from federal regulation. This in turn creates the need for campaign contributions and back room deals, realized in pork earmarks, dropped into bills and unread, sometimes by the thousands.

A cut-back and phase out of those agencies, especially those which are duplicated at the state level would solve the problem of an encroaching federal government. Ending over-regulation of the private market and the current merging of private enterprise with government would also go a long way to solving not only the problem of incumbency and the back room deals and paybacks between elected officials and campaign donations, it would also reduce the demographic in D.C. that controls inside the Beltway: lobbyists. Corporations routinely fund both sides of the aisle, hedging their bets, a source of corruption. For example, Energy Solutions funded Bob Bennett about $50,000 last summer then a week later turned around and funded Harry Reid. That is wrong and that is part of the reason why incumbents are so difficult to remove. That will only stop when our elected officials begin to limit their powers to Article I Section 8 of the constitution and allow the free market to work, along with giving the states their states’ rights.

An additional problem is that of seniority. Seniority is to the Senate as tenure is to the teacher. There must be a way to stop the authority of a senior senator being automatically perked or placed in leadership roles.

That can easily be resolved with a rule to have up and down elections for committee chairs and leadership. A committee chair position could be rotated randomly, as the chair’s role is to be the facilitator of the meeting and does not require expertise by virtue of longevity. I prefer the election option.

Finally, follow the money. I support transparency and earmark reform. If we put earmarks through a committee hearing process, separate them out from the bills individually for review, and if they are scrutinized as to their constitutional standing, and if an open and fair bidding process is followed for private contracts, then much of what we are frustrated about with incumbency will disappear.

The bottom line for me is that we take action that will not have unintended consequences. The popularity of the “term limit” response is going to cause more damage than it intends to create.

If we happen to elect an official that we like, the voters should have the opportunity to keep that person in. As for myself, I would prefer to serve only two terms. If I can’t get accomplished what I would hope to in 12 years, I should pass the baton to another candidate. It is up to the voters to be informed and to exercise their right to limit the terms of their representatives: at the ballot box. But to be required to answer this question in one word is precisely what gives us the wrong kinds of elected officials: those who are willing to get behind a sound bite and who haven’t thought it through deeply enough.

Faithfully,

Cherilyn Eagar
U.S. Senate 2010

_______________________________________________________________

Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate - Principles for a Change

Fiscal Restraint
Limited Government
Free Market Solutions
Energy Independence
Strong National Defense

… not only abroad and along our borders, but within our communities and our families.

Principled. Passionate. Persuasive. Prepared.

For more information and/or to donate, go to
http://www.eagar4senate.com/

Authorized and Paid for By Friends of Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate

Senate candidate strikes at problems with school board

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, March 8, 2010.  Cherilyn Eagar is taking an hour away from her campaign for U.S. Senate to testify at the Alpine School District Board Meeting regarding a controversial and offensive Leftist political slogan and website that has parents in one of the most conservative counties in the United States reeling.  Eagar, a mother of seven, grandmother of ten and a former teacher, will add her voice to those of concerned parents in the Alpine School District who will be there to protest.  The Board convenes at the District Office, 575 North 100 East in American Fork, on Tuesday, March 9, at 6:00 p.m.  A public rally, organized by UtahsRepublic.com, will be held outside the office at 5:30 p.m.  To voice a comment if you cannot attend that meeting, simply call the District at 801-610-8400.

Eagar believes the administration has exposed its students to opinions many find offensive.  Earlier this year, the District’s official website was linked to “America: Republic or Democracy?” an article by William P. Meyers, a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from California.

“The District either completely failed to do its due diligence before directing school children to an outspoken socialist politician or it is complicit with the increasingly politically-driven ’social justice’ curriculum in public schools all over this nation,” says Eagar.  Meyers has been a member of the International Workers of the World (a labor union with Communist Party ties) and Earth First (a longtime eco-terrorism suspect).  He supports universal health care, legalization of marijuana, population control and gay marriage.

Eagar is well acquainted with education programs that subject students to material parents may find objectionable or that violate parents’ educational rights.  “I initiated, funded and provided attorney Matt Hilton with background information to construct the first state Family Education Rights to Privacy Act over 15 years ago here in Utah.  The express purpose of this legislation was to protect children and parents from an educational system that has immersed itself in social and psychological engineering.  What has happened in the Alpine School District is unacceptable and inexcusable and also violation of Utah regulations.  I suspect that if parents take a deeper look they will discover more, that the entire curriculum is infused with environmentalism, globalism and Leftist ideology.”

The link was quickly removed, and the District issued a statement claiming, “It was accidentally linked there.  Our board of education was not aware it was there, the superintendent was not aware . . . It wasn’t supposed to be there.  It doesn’t belong on our Web site.  We don’t endorse what this man teaches or believes.”

A more serious problem has yet to be settled to parents’ satisfaction:  The District office wall has a 30-foot long display which includes the statement, “Enculturating the young in a social and political democracy.”  Webster defines ‘enculturate’ as ‘to cause to adapt to the prevailing cultural patterns of one’s society [or to] socialize.’  Eagar sees this as factually incorrect and outside the school’s purpose.

“Parents send their children to school to learn basic skills such as reading, writing and math,” says Eagar, “They don’t send their children to be ‘adapted’ into a culture, especially one so fundamentally opposed to the community’s conservative standards and values.”

In 1994, Eagar discovered that the Utah Education Code stipulated that the mission of Utah schools was to train students to be global citizens in a participatory democracy.  “Our Founders did not establish a democracy.  They established a republic.  In fact, they despised democracy.  I advocated for a correction, and Representative LaVarr Christensen eventually did make that change.  He also included the requirement that Utah’s school children be taught civics and constitutional principles as the Founders viewed it.”

“It is time for parents to speak out and hold educators accountable.  This is just one of many subtle and deliberate campaigns to mold the views and values of students away from those of their parents.  The entire public education system has been increasingly immersed in this kind of social justice propaganda through outcome-based curriculum, multiculturalism, globalism and environmentalism, and it has been increasingly so for many years now,” said Eagar, echoing the worries of many parents.

“Concerned parents should ask:  Who is running Alpine School District?  What are their political views?  What are the goals of the curriculum?  And who are the people who wrote the curriculum, and what are their political views?  Follow the money and you will find the corruption.”

In over 30 years of conservative advocacy, Cherilyn Eagar, a business owner and former teacher, has extensively researched education policy and spoken to national audiences on education reform.  She served as a parent advisor to Brigham Young University’s Academic Freedom Committee, helped found two family-advocacy organizations and served on the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Utah Committee.  She co-authored the first state Family Education Rights to Privacy Act and led a successful grassroots effort to prohibit school-based health clinics, contraceptive distribution and condom demonstrations in classrooms.  During the 2008 Utah legislative session, Eagar provided extensive research to Senator Margaret Dayton to successfully prohibit new funding for another controversial globalist-environmentalist-social justice curriculum known as the International Baccalaureate.  Cherilyn Eagar is proud to support this effort by parents in Alpine School District to retain control over their children’s education.

_______________________________________________________________

Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate - Principles for a Change

Fiscal Restraint
Limited Government
Free Market Solutions
Energy Independence
Strong National Defense

… not only abroad and along our borders, but within our communities and our families.

Principled. Passionate. Persuasive. Prepared.

For more information and/or to donate, go to
http://www.eagar4senate.com/

Authorized and Paid for By Friends of Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate

Mike Lee cancels debate hosted by Lonsberry
Cherilyn Eagar challenges him to man up and show what he’s got

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, March 5, 2010.  Yesterday morning should’ve been a banner day for the Eagar or Lee senate campaigns, with one camp boasting of a clear victory in a one-on-one debate on KNRS talk radio.  This much-anticipated clash of titans, to be hosted by Bob Lonsberry, was cancelled when Mike Lee withdrew without explanation.

Lee and Eagar were invited to debate on Utah’s top conservative talk radio show, a challenge readily accepted by both.  Eagar went so far as to accommodate Lee’s schedule for March 4 during the 8:00 a.m. segment.  On Tuesday, March 2, Lee had a sudden attack of the vapors and backed out.

Eagar and Lee are the challengers most often given the best chance to unseat 3-term incumbent Bob Bennett.  Neither, however, is yet viewed as certain to win, so this face-to-face was a key moment: With hundreds of political junkies listening, it was a perfect chance for one to draw supporters away from the other and to win still-undecided voters.

In announcing the event-that-wasn’t, Lonsberry said, “I thought these two, head to head, side by side, would be useful.”  Lonsberry, like Eagar, accommodated Lee’s choice of date.  “And, then . . . the Mike Lee campaign withdrew.  Why withdraw?  Well, not really an answer.   And, one answer that was given may have been for an event that, actually, upon verification, wasn’t taking place.  So, he just decided not to come.  And, you know, so, we said to Mrs. Eagar, ‘The other guy backed out’.”  Stating that he is not a fan of either contender, Lonsberry added, “I’m typically not impressed by a fellow who runs away from a fight, and I find, typically, the fellow who says, ‘I don’t want to fight,’ is not the one who would’ve won the fight.  You know what I mean?”  He also made a point of Lee’s refusal to reschedule.

“If Mike Lee was serious about winning this election,” said one caller, “he’d want every opportunity to get his message out . . . If he was unprepared, he shouldn’t be running.”

Another caller wondered if Lee was like the “high school kid who trained for wrestling, gets down on the mat, looks up and realizes he has to wrestle a girl . . . ‘Now, what?  What if she beats me?’ . . . instead of getting out there and fighting a good fight and doing the best he can, whether she wins or loses, he knows he fought the best fight.  Why not try?  He doesn’t want to try, he just kinda’ gives up.”

It is apparent that the Lee campaign does not want a live debate in a public forum such as the Bob Lonsberry Show.  What is Mr. Lee hiding?  Why pull out of a wonderful opportunity for the voters to hear him and see what his supporters have been raving about?

Cherilyn Eagar’s challenge to Mike Lee remains open.  She is ready to debate Lee live on Lonsberry’s show.  “I ask Mr. Lee to join me,” she said, “to stand up like a man and debate me.”

_______________________________________________________________

Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate - Principles for a Change

Fiscal Restraint
Limited Government
Free Market Solutions
Energy Independence
Strong National Defense

… not only abroad and along our borders, but within our communities and our families.

Principled. Passionate. Persuasive. Prepared.

For more information and/or to donate, go to
http://www.eagar4senate.com/

Authorized and Paid for By Friends of Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate

Senate candidate declares, again, she will not be part of “politics as usual”

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, March 1, 2010.  Since her entry last June into the race for Utah’s senate seat, Cherilyn Eagar has warned that backroom deals are part of the “politics as usual” that has brought the United States to the terrible state they are now in.  She has declared, repeatedly, that she will have no part of them.

That didn’t stop one Washington, DC, advocacy group from asking her to join one by signing a pledge:  That she will support any candidate except Senator Bob Bennett; that, if she is voted out of the race, she throw her support at convention and in a primary to a candidate that has signed the same pledge; that she will encourage her delegates and friends to join her in this support.

Eagar has refused to sign, on principle and for practical reasons.  First, “This is exactly the type of dirty dealing that has ruined American politics,” says the longtime conservative activist, “Any group can endorse any politician in any race, but this is goes far beyond an endorsement.  It’s an attempt by an outside group to manipulate a Utah election.”

Second, Eagar refuses to participate in a heavy-handed, group attack on Senator Bennett, saying, “This race is not about Bob Bennett, it’s about electing the candidate best able to represent Utah’s people and Utah’s needs.  This kind of attack could easily backfire, creating a sympathy vote for Senator Bennett, and producing exactly the result the instigators don’t want.”

Third, it is premature to sign a pledge to support a candidate when the filing deadline is weeks away, and, as everyone saw last week, more candidates might still join the race.

Finally, it is totally unreasonable to sign a written pledge to support a candidate until it is known who else will sign.  She states firmly, “I will not pledge myself to support some unnamed and unknown candidate, if it means I may be committing myself and the people who have placed their trust in me to support someone we don’t want to see elected.”

Eagar adds, “For over thirty years, I have watched politicians.  This is just the latest backroom deal by Washington insiders, and no good will come of it.  The people of Utah deserve better.  I’m on record stating that I have no professional conflicts of interest and that my vote will not be bought, sold, traded or gambled away.  That is my pledge to the people of Utah.”

_______________________________________________________________

Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate - Principles for a Change

Fiscal Restraint
Limited Government
Free Market Solutions
Energy Independence
Strong National Defense

… not only abroad and along our borders, but within our communities and our families.

Principled. Passionate. Persuasive. Prepared.

For more information and/or to donate, go to
http://www.eagar4senate.com/

Authorized and Paid for By Friends of Cherilyn Eagar for U.S. Senate

Is “41 is the new “60″ because Scott Brown was sworn in as the junior Republican Senator of Massachusetts?

60 was the number of votes needed to pass substantive (excluding some budgetary) legislation and to bust up any filibuster attempt in the Senate.  60 seats is how many the Democrat Caucus held in the Senate.  60 is the number of votes the Democrats had to pass health care - but didn’t.  60 is the number of votes they had to pass the Employee Free Choice (HA!) Act - and they didn’t.  60 is the number of votes they need to confirm a Supreme Court justice which brings me to my first point.

According to ABC.com, there are 2 Supreme Court justices that are considering retirement or that ABC thinks may retire sometime in the near future.  So which is more important now, 41 or 60?  My belief is 41.  I know that Justice Sotomoyer was confirmed by a larger margin than the 60 votes, but her vote really did not upset the balance of power on the court.  I still disagree with her confirmation because of many of her stances and association with groups like La Raza.  However, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens retire, it will be extremely difficult for President Obama to replace the 2 justices, especially Ginsburg, with truly liberal judges.  Therefore, the ideological leanings of the court could change which could have a large impact on cases heard in front of the Supreme Court.  It is also possible that the 5-4 splits that have been taking place over the last few years could go 6-3.  It will be interesting to see if the GOP can stay together long enough to filibuster any judge nominee they deem too liberal - good ole 41.

But then again….

Maybe 1 is the new 60.  It will only take one GOP defector to break their own filibuster or vote with the other side of the aisle to pass something.  I am definitely pointing the finger at Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, Dick Lugar, and George Voinovich who don’t hold to the conservative side on all the issues or are self proclaimed “mavericks”.

Maybe 51 is the new 60.  The Democrats have been talking about the “nuclear option” in regards to health care reform.  The plan calls for passing a somewhat reduced version of health care reform as a piece of budgetary legislation, but that would require scrapping what they passed and going back to the drawing board.  it’s not impossible to do, and I wouldn’t rule it out.  This move would basically be political suicide, but the Democrats would still love to be able to hang their hat on health care reform and also hand President Obama some kind of victory within his first 2 years of office.

Finally, maybe 0 is the new 60.  What President Obama can’t get passed through Congress, he’ll use the bureaucratic process at various government agencies to get the job done anyway.  For instance, he might be able to get Card Check without having a Congressional vote via the National Labor Relations Board if Craig Becker gets through the Senate confirmation (he used to be a lawyer for SEIU and AFL-CIO).  President Obama has already leveled the threat against Congress to use the EPA to enact Cap and Trade with or without Congressional help.  What’s stopping him for using other agencies or his multitude of czars to enact other policies that Congress for the most part has had or would not have a say in enacting?  Then there is the backlash facing several incumbent Democrat Senators that are up for re-election.  Many Senators once though “safe” are trailing badly in the polls or their approval ratings are below the magic 50%.  If the Democrats and especially President Obama feel that all is lost in the Senate, they may not object to Congress being sidelined by government policy wonks and unelected government agents.

Whichever number you think is the new 60, the fallout from Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts is the equivalent to whacking a beehive with a stick.  What ensues is mass hysteria as the once mostly peaceful and ordered world of the Senate has been turned upside down.  While we hail Scott Brown has the stop gap against the Democrats railroading legislation through, we should not lose sight that Brown is not as conservative as people think.  We should keep a close eye on him, especially as critical votes on a myriad of issues are set to present themselves in front of the Senate this year.  So which number will it be - 41, 1, 51, or 0?  Only time will tell.

Cross-posted at www.downstateiladvocate.com

Great Scott! * **

Things in Washington seem to be changing by the hour!

Ever since Scott Brown won the Massachusetts special election last month, Harry Reid and his Democrat cohorts have been gaming the system, trying to rush through Big Labor’s President Obama’s controversial nominations like Patricia Smith (as the Department of Labor’s solicitor) and Craig Becker before Brown could be seated.

Now, Scott plans to try and stop Reid in his tracks, saying he wants to be sworn in immediately, not next week and Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick appears ready to certify Brown as early as tomorrow at 9:30 am.

Patrick is planning to certify the results at 9:30 a.m. Thursday, said governor’s spokesman Kyle Sullivan. “This will ensure that Senator-elect Brown’s request to receive the final paperwork by 11 a.m. tomorrow is fulfilled,” Sullivan said in a statement.

Vice President Joe Biden would have to administer the oath of office, and top Senate Democrats appeared ready this afternoon to move on Brown’s request.

“Once he gets the certificate in hand, he can be sworn in,” said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate majority leader Harry Reid. “We are working to swear him in as quickly as possible, which would be as early as tomorrow afternoon.”

There are several votes coming up within the next week that are expected to be controversial, including nominees for solicitor of labor and the US General Services Administration. A vote could come next week on whether to confirm Craig Becker, a Chicago-based union attorney who was nominated by President Obama to the National Labor Relations Board.

Votes on a major jobs bill could also come next week.

If Scott Brown is seated tomorrow, it is not a moment too soon.

Needless to say, however, union bosses are really, really mad.

The labor community is fuming over the expedited plan to seat Senator-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass) this Thursday afternoon, arguing that Democratic leadership is torpedoing one of its most important causes — the nomination of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

[snip]

“Democrats were outmaneuvered yet again,” emailed a labor source who was granted anonymity to speak freely. “I’m used to us caving, but they didn’t even [try to delay Brown's seating]. They just hit the mat.

“I love how we cave to the Republicans and won’t seat our Senator, [Al] Franken. Then we reverse cave and seat their senator. I mean forget the analogy of one is playing checkers and the other playing chess. It’s like one is playing chess while the other is sitting there picking their nose.”

As the NAM’s blog Shopfloor notes:

Caterwauling, too. There’s caterwauling.

Organized labor has elevated the importance of Becker’s nomination, logically viewing him as their man on the NLRB. This afternoon, in an e-mail to Senate staff, the SEIU declared, “This is the highest priority for organized labor…”

We note this background paragraph in Stein’s story:

An associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union since 1990 and previously counsel for the AFL-CIO, Becker was targeted immediately by GOP lawmakers for being too sympathetic to labor for a post at the NLRB. The White House urged unions not to launch a public campaign around his appointment, arguing that it would pass Congress via an “inside game,” a source working on the process told the Huffington Post. 

Was he targeted immediately? We don’t recall that. But if so, perhaps it’s because Becker wrote one of the Obama’s Administration’s first executive orders to slant federal regs toward organized labor.

Purple heads must be spinning and pea soup flying over at the SEIU right now. 

*   pun intended

** Emphasis added throughout post

———————–

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine December 23, 1776

Follow LaborUnionReport on Twitter.

Cross-posted.

Lost during the news of the IL and FL primaries was a major news leak in the state of Indiana.  Conservatives, recently sent reeling when conservative leader and congressman Mike Pence announced he would not run against Sen. Bayh, have received news that has energized the base.  Former Senator Dan Coates has decided to come out of retirement and run for the Bayh seat.

Not only is Bayh a respected conservative, but he is a respected name in Indiana politics.  There can be only two paths now - 1) Coates wins, defeating a candidate who talks moderate at home but supports the DC liberal agenda, or 2) Coates causes the democrat party to shift critical funds and resources to Indiana that could be used to protect vulnerable seats elsewhere.  More and more, the dems are being spread thin nationwide. 

Dan is a winner whenever he runs.  Bayh took the seat that Dan held only when Dan retired.  Dan went on to become ambassador to Germany under President Bush.  Dan is both a fiscal and social conservative,

News of the Coates move is here.

Want to contribute?  I tried to get contribution information, and here’s what I’ve found out.  The NRSC has nothing on Dan until he formaly announces (according to a staffer I reached).  The Indiana GOP had nothing yet, but they referred me to the Indiana Family Institute, where Dan has several friends that have just received word of the campaign (about 10:30 last night) themselves.  Word is that Dan is currently in the mode of collecting signatures needed to get him on the ballot.  Once that is accomplished, I’ll get an update as to a web page and where to send contributions.

For now, if you live in Indiana, contact your local party HQ to sign the petition to get Dan on the ballot.  As soon as that hurdle is completed (there should be no problems there), a web page and contribution link will be forthcoming.

2010 is looking better and better!

New poll confirms majority of Utah does not want Italian nuclear waste

Senate candidate Cherilyn Eagar opposes foreign imported n-waste

Since the debate on foreign importation of nuclear waste began, Cherilyn Eagar has stood absolutely against it. In a poll published yesterday by The Salt Lake Tribune, an “[o]verwhelming majority says Utah is not the right place for depleted uranium and foreign radioactive waste.” The Tribune article did not state the specific poll results, but they were as clear as the opinions of the candidates in this year’s U.S. Senate race:

Senator Bennett, on the other hand, supports EnergySolutions (ES). On December 1, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the “RID Act,” which would ban the importation of nuclear waste from foreign countries. Two days later, Bennett stalled the legislation in the Senate, effectively killing it by preventing it from coming to the floor for debate or vote. In a written statement, Bennett said, “I believe the legislation is premature.” The RID Act remains stalled in limbo.

Announcing his entry into the race last month, Mike Lee spoke about EnergySolutions, who wants to import more than 1,600 tons of foreign radioactive waste into Utah: “The Constitution stands firmly on their side in that case,” he said, adding he might support legislation to limit importation, but not prohibit it. Lee also said, “I don’t want Utah to be the world’s radioactive waste dumping ground any more than anybody else does.” However, within days, he was standing before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, urging three judges to uphold a federal district court ruling that allows ES to accept foreign waste.

Lee’s law firm, where he is a partner, is representing EnergySolutions, and Bennett has received nearly $50,000 in campaign donations from EnergySolutions and its employees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which says Utah’s junior senator has accepted more donations from the nuclear waste industry than any candidate in the nation.

EnergySolutions contacted Eagar, inviting her to tour their facility. While there, she clarified she would not be able to accept their special interest money. She says, “I’m asking Bob Bennett and Mike Lee to remove their conflicts of interest. I invite them to join the fight to outlaw foreign waste coming into the United States.”

Eagar adds, “The Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate interstate and international trade. Almost 20 years ago, Congress delegated some of that authority to eight western states through the North West Interstate Compact. Congress and NWIC made nuclear waste storage a states’ rights issue, and the State of Utah says no! It’s time EnergySolutions, Mike Lee and Bob Bennett got the message.”
_________________________________________________________

Wiley for US Senate - Nevada

Conservative Pro-Life, Pro-Gun, Statesman Mike Wiley, dubbed the “Protector of the 1^st and 2^nd Amendments” by the Reject Reid PAC on Facebook and the only US Senate candidate in the Nevada Republican Primary to be involved in the battle for freedom since 1992, issued the following communiqué to the organized and unorganized resistance to Barack Obama and his S.C.U.M. (Socialists, Communists, Utopians, Marxists).

My fellow Patriots,

I welcome you to this battle for freedom that our founding fathers knew would take place. It was inevitable that at some point, the greed of power would envelop the political structure of our Republic and we would have to employ the constitutional powers bestowed upon us by those founding fathers to regain the freedoms we have lost over the last 100 years or so.

Little by little we have moved away from the strict interpretations of the Constitution under the guise of “promoting the general welfare” of the country.

We have watched as our Federal Education System has produced poor results, providing for an electorate of ignorance. Our elected representatives do not feel this is an issue, who would guess?

We have watched as our Federal Protection System has failed while millions of illegal aliens have populated our cities, creating higher incidences of crime, poverty and moral decay. And the response from the Federal government has been to award those criminals with Health Care, Welfare and other social assistance at the expense of our own families. Even today the 2010 census will count them as citizens, instead of sending them back home.

We have watched while one of our smallest demographic classes, “Millionaires”, who make up less than 1% of the population of this country, infest our Congress at a rate of over 50%. This class of millionaires has placed their own financial well being ahead of the needs of the American people. The results of what has gone on in Congress, supports this claim.

Millionaires can buy advertising dollars which entices the media who benefits from those dollars to repeatedly cover those candidates and shut out those of common wealth. This prevents you from knowing about these candidates who may be better suited to represent you in Congress.

And so as I could spend many pages reiterating what we already know about, the deficits, the economy, the education, the state of welfare, health care and the immigration problem, we do know that the millionaires tend to become wealthier the longer they stay in office. We have seen Senators pass bills and earmarks into the hands of their husbands or wives to benefit their family estate.

Now, with all the debt and unfunded liabilities our children are saddled with a $340,000 debt bill to pay. This is not a difficult sum to half of the congress, but to 99% of the American population of legal Americans it is a financial disaster just waiting to happen.

As a radio talk show host back in 1991, I began to discover these issues after my investigation into the Savings and Loan Scandal when I saw how the Congress of the United States created the laws to allow the scandal to be funded and then their best buddies ran with the cash and who paid the bill? We did.

In 1992, I joined the United We Stand movement to establish a third way of thinking that made more sense and was more lawful than what the two established political parties were doing.

In 1993, I created a radio talk show known as the Patriot Radio Network in Florida, while Glenn Beck was in Tampa talking about traffic issues and local headaches; I was leading the rebellion that both you and Glenn have finally joined. I was the first to use the Patton music fifteen years before Mark Levin, whose radio show today is a reflection of how my show was done.

In 1994, when the Far Left Regime of Madame Hillary and her Husband Bill tried to take away our gun rights, I spoke out while other talk show hosts and politicians did nothing. On February 12, 1994, 7,500 Patriots followed me to Tallahassee, Florida, while a six hour event of speeches and demonstrations let the local politicians know that we were not giving up our guns and we were not going to tolerate any more attempts to violate our 2^nd amendment rights.

Two days later on February 14^th a Valentine’s Day massacre occurred and the Florida House and Senate capitulated removing a total of twelve bills from the floor and conference pertaining to gun control and America had won. That rally aroused the interest in several gun-owners of both major parties to ask me to run for the US Senate to provide leadership in Washington and true representation as the founding fathers had envisioned.

In order to run, I would have to give up my radio talk show job that I loved dearly and my only method of income. I was compelled to run for love of country and the will of the people. Plus, with the Far Left in power no one was safe. A Democrat led Congress and a Democrat in the White House spelled certain doom for the constitution and the wallets of the American people.

You may remember Hillary healthcare the fore-runner to Obama Care was on the table, with 5 year prison sentences if you were caught going to the wrong doctor. The nightmare we face today with Obama and his S.C.U.M., was created in the basement laboratories of Chairman Mao and Josef Stalin under the leadership of Madame Hillary in Washington D.C.

I could not let this threat go unchallenged. With less than $20,000 in donations, I captured 39 out of 67 counties and finished second out of four in the Democrat US Senate Primary in Florida, where I ran as a conservative Democrat. I forced a run off with Hillary Rodham Clinton’s brother and that was when all the fun began. You can read my book, “The Diary of Hillary’s Right Wing Conspirator” if you want to find out more about that time period in American history, the media was so obliged to forget.

Final results: We Conservatives took back the Congress around the country in 1994, but I lost my house, my marriage and one year later my radio career when the Clinton Regime had me removed from the airwaves in Boston. Was it in response to my not taking the bribe to drop out of the US Senate race the year before or was it because the Clinton’s believed that I, as a conservative Jewish talk show host in Boston, incited Neo-Nazi’s in Ponca City, Oklahoma, just a few thousand miles away to blow up the William R Murrow Federal Building in Oklahoma City, while Janet Reno and the FBI had informants in the group who just couldn’t manage preventing the building from coming down on innocent civilians?

Two weeks after I was taken off the air in Boston, I was invited to join the Republican Party. I had started out as a Libertarian in 1993, ran as a Democrat in 1994 to avoid a primary battle with the incumbent Senator from Florida; Connie Mack, who conservative Republicans wanted defeated, and in 1995 started a split in the Boston Libertarian Party when I led a pro-life revolt in the Libertarian meetings. Fighting for principles in a political party never seems to end.

Where was a pro-life, pro gun, America First Patriot to go to find a political home? Answer; the Republican Party. Two months after I joined I became the Spokesman in Massachusetts for the 1996 Buchanan for President Campaign. My last official speech in politics was made on March 3^rd 1996 during a blizzard on Lexington Green, where the “Shot heard round the world” was fired. I was warming up the crowd of frozen Patriots before Pat was to make an appearance.

As a Republican Conservative and spokesperson my first job was battling RINO’s in Massachusetts and Liberals on the TV talk circuit, who were concerned that Pat Buchanan was going to take too much of the Pro-Life Catholic and labor union vote that swells in the Democratic Party in Massachusetts, just as Scott Brown did last week.

While I was successful defending conservatism against the Liberals on TV, the campaign could not overcome the large block of RINO’s in Massachusetts nor the supposed main street conservatives in South Carolina and Bob Dole and the nation lost to another four years of Bill Clinton. Just as I could not overcome the large block of Liberals in the Democratic Party Primary in the 1994 US Senate Race, Pat could not overcome the large block of RINO’s in the Republican Party Primary.

Now some fourteen years later we have the Far Left lunatics running Washington D.C. and the Constitution is under attack. This time the financial well being of the nation is leaning over the abyss and the Marxist in the White House is the President and not the First Lady as was the case in 1993 to 2000.

Once again I find myself compelled to compete to help save my country, even though my financial well being is not strong while my patriotism is.

You see it is your fault. You Tea Partiers and 9-12ers. If you had just stayed home and sat in your recliners watching TV, I could have gone on with my life. But no, you had to pick up where I left off. You had to march on Washington demanding freedom.

I as a true Patriot and Conservative could not let you do this on your own and after seeing the crop of career politicians looking to benefit from Harry Reid’s weakness and your strength jumped into the race. Three millionaires and a couple of career politicians are trying to get you to believe that they are your candidate and the media is helping them all they can.

But I and one other conservative Patriot must campaign on dimes and quarters and watch as the media ignores our positions of constitutional strength that is until one of our opponents brings up what we had said a month earlier and then it shows up in the news.

I am sure this is happening all over the country. New found conservatives scour our websites to learn what to say and how to say it. They practice it at night so if you ask them a question on it they will know how to answer.

Please, I beg of you for all that you have done, do not let this rebellion be led off the cliff by those who want your vote for their benefit.

One of the millionaire’s wives has already said they are prepared to move their family of six to Washington for six or maybe twelve years. They are packing up to go. Good thing they have the money to keep two homes. How many people in America could afford that? This candidate has run in 2006 and 2008 without success and now is trying again in 2010.

We have another career politician who has run for office every two years since 1998, having won a seat in the assembly, a part time office for four straight terms and then ran for office in 2006 and 2008 unsuccessfully and now is running again in 2010.

What is it with these people that must become a politician, who have no problem asking people to send them thousands every two years for them to run around the state saying vote for me, “I’m the Conservative”. If they say they believe that the private sector is so important, than why don’t they try and get a real job, instead of one the tax payers have to pay for?

Then there is the candidate with the hardhat on her head to give you the impression she knows what she is talking about with regard to the economy and such. She shut out the Ron Paul votes in the 2008 Republican convention with a stage right exit and now wants all to be forgiven for she would never do that again, like donate to Harry Reid. I voted for the job tax before I was against it, I was not pro-life then, but I am now.

Do you want to know why the Congress is populated with a bunch of Frauds? It is because you elected them. You did not pay close attention to what they have done versus what they say. Hitler and Obama were both elected as well on what they had said, not what they had done.

Actions speak louder than words. Your march to Washington spoke loud and clear to me, that you want true representation. Then vote for real people. They may not be wealthy, they may not get media coverage, but they know the truth, they know the laws and they have lived to uphold them.

Stop allowing the media that ignored your march to Washington, to ignore your candidates.

More than likely the candidates they are showcasing are their candidates, not yours.

The campaign for the US Senate seat in Nevada started off with a poll, based solely on name recognition. The media then chose to only cover those candidates with the highest poll numbers insuring that they would stay high up in the polls. The supposed conservative radio talk show hosts then only covered their favorites and forgot their duty to present all.

The newspapers and the TV cameras as usual when in attendance at campaign gatherings reported only the candidates they thought should be exposed and not all that spoke.

This was the case at the Tea Party Press conference in Las Vegas, where only the top three polling candidates were interviewed while the two grassroots candidates were ignored.

You want things to change in Washington, then change things in your hometown first. Support local media that fulfills its responsibility to report and present all views. Sorry, but if the candidate is a millionaire, the odds are that they will not threaten their own financial well being for the benefit of yours. I will give you an example. We have a millionaire who lives on Central Park West, New York for some time and was born in Nevada. He still owns land and has decided he should be the next Senator from Nevada. Why? Bored being a millionaire Wall Street Executive who donated $2,300 to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign?

Do you think he is going to upset his Wall Street buddies for main street Americans?

Who knows more about how things are, the people in your neighborhood or in the ghettos like Central Park West, NY, where they keep the rich people? Those who work for a living in your state or those that go off to Washington to work for an opportunity of a life time and retire with the best benefits, health care and wealth, politics can buy.

I can’t afford to move my family to Washington DC, so I can wake up next to the woman I love for the next six years. No, I will live alone thousands of miles away from those I love, just a train ride away from Washington D.C. for six years. That is right, six years only, to do what I know can be done to fix things in Washington and believe me, I know what to do to support and defend the Constitution, eliminate the IRS, the FED, cut spending, create jobs, arrest criminals, defend this nation and ship back illegal aliens.

If U.S. Service men and women can live in horrid conditions around this world to keep us safe from foreign enemies, then I can put up with six years of Washington DC and Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the domestic enemies of the Constitution, until I can implicate, indict and incarcerate them to the fullest extent of the law.

High blood pressure kept me out of the draft in 1972 when I was 20 years old, but the four pills a day I take to control it, will not keep me out of Washington to serve my country.

During the last depression they sent Eliot Ness to go to Chicago to clean up Chicago corruption, now this time you can send Mike Wiley to Washington to clean up Chicago corruption.

Send me to Washington and I will start accepting applications for my group of “Untouchables”.

In order to send me to Washington, you will need to send donations up to the maximum of $2,400 per election, primary and general. $30.00, $50.00, $100.00 or send what you can.

Make the Tea Party a success by electing true Patriots and not “Conservatives in Name Only”

Visit our website at www.wileyforsenate.com and research this campaign. I am confident that you will do as other 9-12ers and Tea Partiers have done and donated to this campaign.

Any donation over $30 will receive a signed copy of my book, “The Diary of Hillary’s Right Wing Conspirator”

Paid for by the Wiley for Senate Campaign