The Conservative Pirate

As he sails the political 7 seas, the pirate goes about plundering and pillaging liberal ideas and misguided thinking with humor and ruthless honesty.

Location: The Shadow Realm


Friday, November 03, 2006

A Pleasure Sailing With You

Hello dear friends,

Many have been asking where I've been over the past several months. I've been shall we say "shipwrecked" for lack of a better term. Due to several personal issues, I've been away from the politcal seas.

With this in mind, I'm making this my last post as The Conservative Pirate. Fear not, although this is my last post as the Pirate, I'll soon be back in a different form picking up from where I left off and still creating havoc for liberals whereever I go.

It has been a pleasure sailing the seas with you all and I shall return. Just like Douglas MacArthur.

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Clueless in D.C.

Is is just me or am I starting to see Congress majoring in the minors?

Case in point, congress is right now holding hearings on the constitutionality of the recent raid on Louisiana congressman William Jefferson's office. Political corruption certainly isn't a new thing inside the beltway, but what has me scratching my head is the Republican Speaker of the House, Denny Hastert, raising a fuss over this nonsensical argument over separation of powers along with other members of Congress.

Congress has much bigger concerns to deal with than who has what right to do what. We have a war in Iraq and troops to support. We have an invasion by our so-called friends from Mexico and illegal immigration running rampant with no cohesive border protection policy in sight. We have no serious energy policy to get us off our dependence of oil from countries that would rather blow us up than look at us. And Congress wants to debate why the FBI had no perceived right to search a sitting congressman's office even though they had a warrant? Give me a break!

Congressman Jefferson is currently under investigation for bribery and other charges. There's a videotape of the congressman taking a $100,000 bribe. The FBI found $90,000 in a freezer in his home. Now that's some serious cold cash. If I were a judge, I would definitely think that's enough probable cause to issue a search warrant. Rational people would also think that busting a member of congress is more important than separation of powers.

The bottom line of all this is...

First, the FBI had enough probable cause and a warrant pursuant to the 4th Amendment regarding search and seizure.

Second, Speaker Hastert and other members of Congress (especially Republicans) need to pipe down and make sure they keep their own houses in order instead of complaining about separation of powers.

Third and most important, let this search be wisdom and warning to all members of Congress that the 'culture of corruption' is non-partisan. As my late grandfather always tauight me....stupidity doesn't discriminate.

Monday, May 22, 2006

You’re Kidding Me… Right?

(A special note of thanks to for posting the article from which I’ll be quoting. God bless you for your great work.)

In the wake of last week’s primary, mainstream moderate Republicans are all giddy over Saxton’s win. In fact, some media outlets are looking forward to the battle for Mahonia Mansion.

A recent article n the Eugene Register-Guard from Thurs. May 18th written by David Steves, makes me wonder what on earth are some of these reporters and various others smoking or drinking to come up with some of these ludicrous conclusions. Take for example the headline of the aforementioned article.

“Republican Saxton Leaves Primary With A Unified Party”

Huh? That right there immediately made me suspicious. First of all, given recent blog postings by several conservative bloggers in the region, there are serious questions about whether Ron Saxton is even Republican. Then ever more deluded is the idea that the party is unified. I’ve seen no evidence of it, especially in conservative Republican circles. Many conservatives I’ve spoken to personally aren’t even considering voting for Saxton at all in November.

A combination of Mr. Saxton’s flip-flops on issues such as illegal immigration during the primary, the shabby treatment of Senator Jason Atkinson by talk radio personality Lars Larson, and the growing disdain and disgust of social conservatives feeling like they’ve stitting in the back of the political bus for years has led to a pressure cooker effect among Reagan conservatives that’s about to explode in the Oregon GOP’s face if they’re not careful.

One portion of the article that I found interesting and mildly amusing was this:

“Meanwhile, the Republican nominee, Ron Saxton, appears better positioned than any of his predecessors have in two decades to unite his party and threaten the Democrats' five-term hold on the Oregon governorship.”

Really? Given what I just mentioned in the previous paragraph, Mr. Saxton has a long way to go before anyone can announce he’s unified the Republican Party. If the more staunch conservative elements of the party can’t be convinced to support him, then Saxton has some serious Republican undervote issues to deal with and overcome. President Bush lost Oregon in 2000 by less than 7,000 votes and there were 11,000 Republicans who didn’t even turn out to vote that year. You can’t tell me that in a close race, turning out your own party base doesn’t count for something.

Republican consultant Chuck Adams, when quoted in Mr. Steves’ article, reached another fascinating but deluded conclusion:

“Saxton had several factors on his side. His closest and more socially conservative rival, Kevin Mannix, endorsed the nominee right away Tuesday night. The biggest factions of Republican-voting activists - abortion foes, anti-gay marriage activists, anti-tax groups and property-rights supporters - were behind Saxton.”

Again I would say HUH? Getting support from fiscal conservatives and property rights advocates is easy, but if Saxton was so liked by pro-lifers, then why didn’t he receive any endorsements from Oregon Right To Life or any other pro-life groups during the primary? Kevin Mannix’s endorsement was certainly the gentlemanly thing to do, but it doesn’t guarantee that Saxton will get all of Mannix’s supporters. Saxton is certainly not getting too many of Atkinson’s.

Any support from gay marriage opponents was fairly simple. All Saxton had to do was take the position of House Speaker Karen Minnis and say the people had spoken in 2004, which is the safe road and probably garnered some support from the faith community with the help of supposed pro-family advocates. However, the question of whether or not Saxton would support any kind of civil unions bill is still unanswered in spite of what he may have said in the past. (Saxton’s website’s issues page is being updated, but that’s another issue for another post.)

I do believe Mr. Adams even got in a backhanded insult when he was later quoted in the article when he said:

“Considering he's going up against a Democratic incumbent in a blue state, Adams said Saxton had the best chance to win since Dave Frohnmayer's 1990 gubernatorial bid was spoiled by an independent conservative candidate.”

(Translation: Those *&%#* religious conservatives are ruining the party and they need to be stopped or marginalized before they screw it up for Saxton.)

It may be a reach when I say that Adams like many other self-styled moderates, have a certain contempt for social conservatives, but that’s a reach I’m willing to make given personal experience and hearing the experiences of others throughout the state. It also fuels the fallacy that only a moderate can beat a liberal. All you have to do is go back to Goli Ameri’s 2004 congressional bid to discover the flaws in that theory.

To add more fuel to the fire of social conservatives is a quote in the article from Tim Nashif of the Oregon Family Council:

“Saxton's bread-and-butter issues are the economy, holding the line on taxes and squeezing more efficiency out of government services. But he's done enough with his opposition to gay marriage and support for abortion restrictions, such as parental notification, to satisfy social conservatives, said Tim Nashif, a Portland Republican strategist and head of the anti-gay marriage group, the Oregon Family Council. Nashif said he expected little pressure from social conservatives for Saxton to bring up their hot-button issues in the fall, when independent and Democratic voters would be more likely to see them as reasons to vote against him.”

Nashif, who has had some highly questionable associations and a less than sterling reputation along with more than a few turbulent relationships with many other social conservatives, is perpetuating the perception that Saxton is a pro-family candidate. It’s more like pro-family lite given we have no voting record to go by. At least Mannix and Atkinson do.

This is part of the reason why social conservatives are potentially going to stay home or vote for other candidates in protest because many feel disenfranchised and continually betrayed by party leaders including those who claim pro-life, pro-family views.

When all is said and done at the end of Election day, will we have a new governor or will Oregon be subjected to another 4 years of business as usual politics? If Mr. Saxton were smart, he’d start bridge building with social conservatives because if the election is close, those potential Republican undervotes could easily be the difference between victory and defeat. Reagan conservatives are refusing to take a back seat anymore. Please Mr. Saxton for the sake of your candidacy, work with us and not against us.

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

The Revolution Beings Today (and it won't be televised)

Although Jason Atkinson's bid to win the GOP nomination ended last night, the movement he's started has only just begun. Conservatives everywhere are starting to find a new wind in their sails and are looking to vent their frustrations and passions.

There are lingering questions that we conservatives need to answer such as do we support Saxton in order to get rid of 'Over his head' Ted? This can only be answered in the depths of one's own heart. Fortunately, that question can wait until November.

For now dear friends, the pirate will be joining a new Alliance of conservatives and starting the Oregon conservative revolution. I'll be upgrading my weapons and finding more bounty to claim in the marketplace of ideas as well as new allies along the way.

Some more moderate voices will try and pin the blame for the primary fight on us former Atkinson supporters and will continue to insist that conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, are runing the party. My response....SO!

I look forward to joining up with my new partners in crime (and a few old ones too) in taking the GOP back to its conservative roots. It's morning in Oregon again! Vive La Revolution! Vive Ronald Reagan!

Monday, May 15, 2006

The New Conservative Revolution (or Life After Atkinson)

Jason Atkinson’s campaign for governor has been something of a godsend for conservatives in Oregon. For the first time in quite a while, conservatives actually have a candidate that they can rally around and vote for as opposed to settling for someone and holding their nose while they vote for him/her.

As the primary approaches within the next 36 hours (as of this posting) I have to wonder something that many conservatives haven’t taken into consideration. What happens if Jason Atkinson doesn’t win the nomination? I know some may not want to hear this, but it is a possibility that cannot be ignored.

Senator Atkinson has said on numerous occasions that his campaign is “movement based” and that’s part of the reason why I’ve given him my support. But what happens to the conservative movement once the primary is over and Atkinson doesn’t win? Is the conservative movement going to fold up shop until 2008? I sincerely hope not. There’s too much left to do and resigning ourselves to remain in the political wilderness is not an option.

In my nearly 15 years of being politically active as a columnist and activist, I’ve often wondered about the behavior of some conservatives. It seems that we (conservatives) have this tendency to take our ball and go home when we face a defeat. If this behavior were true of all conservatives, there would be no Ronald Reagan or a Newt Gingrich proposing a “Contract With America”.

In short, the history of conservatives, at least in Oregon anyway, has mostly been outstanding on ideology, but seriously lacking in practicality. If a renewed conservative revolution is going to take place in Oregon, there must be maturity and resolve to stay in the fight for the long haul. Basically, conservatives and conservatism need to grow up.

I know what I just said was harsh, but there’s a method to my madness. In a recent conversation I had with a friend and political ally, I was informed that a mutual Christian conservative friend of ours wasn’t supporting Atkinson because they were offended by something he or his campaign had done to them. Needless to say I was utterly stunned. This is the type of thing that liberals do. Liberals are the ones often offended, that’s why political correctness is so rampant and out of control. It’s almost a liberal’s raison d’etre to be offended.

If this behavior is going to be the norm for conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, then we might as well close up shop now. Conservatives have to understand that nobody is perfect and if we expect perfection, we’re going to be constantly disappointed. There are issues I may not totally agree with Senator Atkinson on, but I still believe he’s the right man for Oregon at this crucial juncture. Unlike state Representative Jeff Kropf, I’m supporting Atkinson even though he hasn’t called me.

We have to get over ourselves. If we truly care about the future of Oregon, then we can’t go around with a selfish mindset. If we focus our efforts on things that will bring the most benefit to others, then we can say that we’ve served the cause of conservatism. Walking around with your feelings hurt isn’t going to get the job done, it makes the conservative movement look bad, and it gives moderates more to talk about at parties laughing at us while we implode.

I’m quite certain that I’m going to get some rude comments after this post, but because I love Oregon and I’m glad to be a conservative, I make these observations as wisdom and warning. Lives and the future are in the balance. Conservative should not be used as a pejorative or as a smoke screen for moderates, but it should be used as a moniker of pride. If others in the GOP have trouble with Reagan conservatives, then that’s their problem. But I’d like to be able to take a sense of accomplishment in a movement that I love very much rather than making excuses for it because of the antics of a few knuckleheads.

Oregon’s new conservative revolution starts on Wednesday, May 17th. I hope you’ll join me as I sail onward to a brighter future for conservatives and for Oregon. A generation of future leaders is at stake.