Thursday, June 28, 2012

The Columbian Perpetuates the Myth of the “Deranged Veteran”

Once again, as we approach another Independence Day celebration, we see the usual slate of fireworks haters writing letters to the editor, speaking before city council demanding the long held tradition of citizens using fireworks to celebrate the day be banned within the city.

As I have previously noted, such a ban is ill-advised and unenforceable, but that doesn’t stop the haters from trumping up their yearly hyperbole of Battle Zone, Armageddon and what have you.

That we are currently in a compromise worked out with the haters a few years ago is of no consequence to them as they now demand yet another compromise, a tactic of incremental compromises until they get their way and the responsible citizens lose their tradition.

As also noted before, responsible users are who will lose out, those few pinheads who opt to buy illegal firework already banned will just continue to buy them from the Indian Reservations, setting them off at will, ban or no ban.

We have seen warnings for years of scaring pets, burning down homes, injuries to children and more hype, even though the newspaper of record, the Columbian has reported the last two years in a row that incidents from fireworks have shown a decrease each year respectively.

But that isn’t good enough for the haters who continue to demand a full ban, many being recent transplants from other regions that came here to escape those regions and now strive to recreate the very region they fled.

Such is the case with a so-called conservative blogger and recent transplant from California who labels our tradition as “Loud, Proud and Obnoxious.” The description provided is,
“I've never been in a war zone but being in a war zone was the analogy that immediately came to my mind, being encircled by the continuous sound of canon-fire and having the windows on each side of our home brightly lighted (even with the shutters closed) with flash after flash from aerial fireworks explosions.”
That’s right, he has never been in a war zone, never served a day as a matter of fact, but feels he has a right to speak of what war is like.

Of late, a new twist has been added into the fray by the haters, right out of the Vietnam Days when we came home to chants and jeers, with Television shows lining up dramatizing the dangers of Vietnam Veterans, many falsely labeling us as “deranged” and so affected by serving in the war they opposed, we were a danger to not only ourselves, but to society in general.

It didn’t help to see the likes of now senior Senator from Massachusetts, John F’in Kerry (rumored to have served briefly in Vietnam) throwing into the mix his 1971 “testimony” before Congress,
“The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence…..”
And now, we see similar claims, although not quite so strong as Kerry’s yet, coming from some who claim to be conservatives as they warn us of how fireworks trigger episodes in Veterans, primarily those of us with PTSD, which to one degree or another is just about every single one of us who stepped into harm’s way.

I went to the Vancouver City Council Meeting and testified, speaking out against using Veterans as tools to further erode people’s freedoms, saying we fought to protect and defend freedom, not be used as a means to take freedoms away.

City Council listened to an outpouring of support of our traditional use of fireworks and tabled the proposed bans for now, angering the haters greatly who cry they receive no representation for their demands.

Enter the Columbian, alternately known as either the “Hyena’s of Inkville” or “the unofficial newsletter of the Democratic Party.”

Even though the ban went down in defeat for now, they scoured Clark County and Vancouver, finding “one” veteran who claims his dislike of fireworks in their article, When fireworks stir memories of war.

Like many of the rest of us, fireworks do bother us, but we handle it. For me, the thought of people being denied any freedom based upon whether or not I like something bothers me a great deal more than the few days of boom, boom, bang, bang around the 4th of July.

The article goes on to quote 2 psychologists, neither of who indicate having served anywhere near a war zone themselves. One says,
“Most people who are veterans suffering from PTSD hate the Fourth of July. It’s highly stressful if they’re sensitive to the noise and light. Most have anxiety and panic.”
What that is based upon is unknown, but doesn’t represent a single Veteran I know.

The other states a little more realistic view with,
“What happens when the person is exposed to a loud noise or something that triggers a memory of the original event, it can make them re-experience it. Still, one shouldn’t assume that when they hear the sound they’ll be completely dysfunctional. They don’t have that level of distortion, usually. But it can be very stressful and unpleasant.”
Not considered is how stressful or unpleasant it is to know we are little more than tools for someone else’s agenda, after making our sacrifices to preserve and defend freedom and liberty.

As I have repeatedly said, I don’t care for fireworks. I don’t buy them nor do I set any off. Some make my skin crawl and others make my stomach drop to my knees, especially if I don’t realize it is about to be set off.

But fireworks alone are not what remind me of my time in Vietnam. Far from it.

Certain songs bring back memories. Seeing the so called Peace Sign reminds me of the lack of reception and negativity thrown towards us upon our return.

Hearing helicopters overhead reminds me as well.

Sudden loud noises affect me as well as does the backfiring of a car or even a 21 gun salute at a memorial service, given the squad firing the salute is often well behind or to the side of the audience and they fire with no warning.

Going to the cities display years ago brought me the worst experience I have had so far with fireworks, but no one calls for any of these or anything else that may trigger memories to be banned. No, only the fireworks the haters want banned.

They may not realize it, but when they make claims like “Most have anxiety and panic” or “it can be very stressful and unpleasant,” the logical leap from that is “the Veteran just may freak out and cause harm to himself or someone else.”

Is that far from Kerry’s words in 1971,
“The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence…..?”
We are not ticking time bombs. We are not monsters. We are people just like everybody else who saw our duty and performed it, at great sacrifice for some.

As I said above, I neither buy nor set off fireworks, so such a ban will have little effect on me personally. But stop using Veterans as tools to further your agendas. Come up with something else besides using us and trying to convince people and children we are damaged goods or that they must walk on eggshells when around us.

Shame on the Columbian for furthering this myth with their article.

Supreme Court Dishonors Veterans: Upholds Stolen Valor Act as Unconstitutional

As if the Supreme Court ruling upholding Obamacare as constitutional, mandating America citizens be forced to purchase health insurance, they slapped the honor of Veterans who have fought for and defended the freedoms and liberties of American citizens since our founding.

In yet another stunningly surprise ruling, the court ruled in a 6 to 3 decision that “the government does not have the power to punish people for making false claims regarding military service or honors.”

The government has the right to force Americans to purchase expensive health insurance or be fined, but cannot prosecute those who lie and steal the valor of honorable Veterans by falsely claiming receiving Medals of Valor awarded to Heroes for conspicuous gallantry in battle?

Free speech advocates are praising the decision, but since when does free speech give anyone a right to steal the valor of true Heroes?

We have long acknowledged that free speech has its limits, such as yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.

Justice Kennedy, writing the majority decision said,
“Content-based restrictions on speech have been permitted only for a few historic categories of speech, including incitement, obscenity, defamation, speech integral to criminal conduct, so-called ‘fightingwords,’ child pornography, fraud, true threats, and speech presenting some grave and imminent threat the Government has the power to prevent.”
Does he not see that those making such false claims of heroism, many who never served at all, is “fraud and defamation of honorable Veterans?” Many of these poseurs act contrary to honorable Veterans, calling scorn on all of us, the public believing they too are veterans.

In the particular case that brought this before the High Court, the case of Xavier Alvarez a former member of the Three Valleys Municipal Water District in Pomona, California was charged with falsely claiming to have served in the United States Armed Services and with being awarded the nation’s highest award for valor in combat, the Medal of Honor.

As my friend and former ACLU attorney Rees Lloyd said,
“Alvarez brazenly boasted publicly that he was a former Marine and Medal of Honor recipient to boost his career as a minor Democratic Party politician, and decked himself out in a fake Army (not Marine) dress uniform with a chest full of medals which he didn’t earn. He never served a day.”
Alvarez claimed his lies were “protected speech” under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Justice Kennedy also wrote,
“While the Government’s interest in protecting the integrity of the Medal of Honor is beyond question, the First Amendment requires that there be a direct causal link between the restriction imposed and the injury to be prevented. Here, that link has not been shown. The Government points to no evidence supporting its claim that the public’s general perception of military awards is diluted by false claims such as those made by respondent. And it has not shown, and cannot show, why counterspeech, such as the ridicule respondent received online and in the press, would not suffice to achieve its interest.”
Alvarez used his false claims to be elected to office, a paid office he otherwise might not have been elected to.

And if they feel “counter speech and ridicule” is enough to suffice such bogus claims, one only needs look back at how the Swiftboat Veterans and POWs for Truth were treated by Democrats and much of the public to this day over their effort to oust sweetheart traitor to all Vietnam veterans, Massachusetts Democrat Senator, John F’in Kerry in the 2004 Presidential elections, who still freely serves in the Senate instead of sitting in Leavenworth Prison where he should be.

Kerry ran on false claims of heroics in a scant 4 months service in Vietnam and came very close to being elected, in spite of his past connections to Communists and anti-American activists.

The American Legion is standing in disagreement to this decision and “calling on Congress to pass a new version of the Stolen Valor Act, one that would stand up to constitutional scrutiny.”

National Commander Fang A. Wong said,
“While we are obviously saddened and aggrieved by the overall decision in this case, we felt good about the portions of the decision which suggest that a more narrowly tailored bill, which incorporates traditional fraud elements, would be upheld. Since the vast bulk of the more notorious valor thieves engage in this to gain something of value as a result, they will not be able to claim legal immunity once a new bill is passed.”
It’s now up to Congress to pass a Stolen Valor Act that will pass Constitutional muster. Such an act has been written, H.R. 1775: Stolen Valor Act of 2011, currently languishing in Committee.

It is felt that this bill would pass the Supreme Court and uphold the honor of those of our Veterans who sacrificed gravely in combat.

Given decisions of late, we would have to see it go through the Court to know whether or not they would uphold this.

But whether it is this bill or another one written, Congress must act to stop the phonies, the poseurs who cower in fear behind heroes and then, step up and lay claim to their valor.

The honor of our Veterans is something of value, a great value worth more than just money.

That value must be protected and honored.

Supreme Court Decides for Socialism and Against the American People

Ruth Bader Ginsberg was right just days ago when she said the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare would come as a big surprise to many people. Today’s announcement that the government is free to mandate private citizens purchase health insurance or be fined by the government totally shocked well over half of the American people who have consistently called for this ‘Obamanation’ to be repealed.

Even more surprising was seeing that Chief Justice John Roberts was the swing vote in the 5 to 4 decision that just handed the government total power to just mandate whatever they desire the people to do and we must comply? Isn’t that something more along the lines of Cuba, Venezuela or the former Soviet Union?

Most telling in the decision is Justice Roberts reasoning he wrote in the majority decision of the “individual mandate requiring people to have health insurance is valid as a tax, even though it is impermissible under the Constitution's commerce clause.”

Yes, requiring us to buy health insurance is unconstitutional, but since it is a tax, it is now constitutional to tax us if we do not comply and buy health insurance.

Roberts said,
“it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress's power to tax. The federal government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. ... The federal government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance.”
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in dissent,
“To say that the Individual Mandate merely imposes a tax is not to interpret the statute but to rewrite it. Imposing a tax through judicial legislation inverts the constitutional scheme, and places the power to tax in the branch of government least accountable to the citizenry.”
However you look at it, the American people are now forced to purchase a product they may not wish to purchase, be it by legislative decree or taxation, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government holds the power to mandate what we buy!!!

Somehow missed, or deliberately ignored, is that this massive takeover of our healthcare system was sold to us as NOT A TAX!

But now suddenly, it is a tax?? While Obama and Democrats still maintain it is not a tax?

Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Gregory Conko released a statement saying in part,
“the decision to uphold the mandate as a tax is troubling, like the Court’s prior commerce clause jurisprudence. Under the so-called ‘Rational Basis Test,’ the Court has refused to question due process or equal protection violations when Congress’s reason for enacting the law might be ‘rationally related’ to a legitimate government interest. Under that test, however, Congress does not have to explain why the law was ‘rational’ as long as the Supreme Court can substitute its own rationale. Today’s decision says Congress does not need to call a regulation a tax—Congress and the President can even insist it is not a tax—if the Supreme Court can rationalize it as one: the Rational Tax Test.”

“Today’s decision gives ObamaCare a temporary reprieve. But an overwhelming majority of Americans have made clear that they do not want this health care law. Two years ago, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted that Congress had to ‘pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.’ Well, Americans have now seen what’s in ObamaCare, and they want to see it repealed and replaced.”
The Socialist Democrats are elated that the American people have just lost a piece of our freedom. Patty Murray, Socialist Democrat from Washington State sent out an email this morning labeling this an “historic day in America” and offering a “free” bumper sticker in exchange for your donation of $5 or more to reelect Socialist Democrats.

Rep. Steve Israel, DCCC Chairman sent out his own email saying,
“we can carry this momentum into November and win a [Socialist] Democratic majority to keep making progress [towards Communism].”
Obama stated,
“Whatever the politics, today’s decision was a victory for people all over this country whose laws will be more secure because of this law and the Supreme Court's decision to uphold it.”
Yes, just like out Immigration Laws are “more secure” now with Obama mandating they be ignored?

Vowing to “fight on,” Pete Sessions, NRCC Chairman says,
“I believe we have a moral responsibility to get rid of ObamaCare. I refuse to hand down an America to my kids where Washington controls their healthcare.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says,
“Today’s Supreme Court decision doesn’t mark the end of a debate. It marks a fresh start on the road to repeal. Today’s decision does not change the fact that Obamacare limits choice, increases health care costs, and makes it harder for businesses to hire. It does not change the fact that Obamacare’s mandates, tax hikes, and Medicare cuts are deeply damaging to our health care system and our economy.”
Republicans and conservatives across America are seeing this decision as a “sad day for liberty” in America and many Republican Governor’s are vowing to just ignore Obamacare.

Our only hope of restoring America to a free country lies in not just voting out ‘Il Duce’ Obama, but ridding Congress of every single Socialist Democrat sitting in office along with turncoat Republicans like Olympia Snowe who, it must be remembered “was the deciding vote to get Obamacare out of the Senate Committee. Had she voted no, we’d not be here now.”

Efforts this morning to organize an impromptu rally outside of Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler’s office in Vancouver fell short as too many have excuses to not stand.

Until people are willing to stand up and oppose the Socialist takeover, it will continue unabated. You can no longer expect someone else to fight the battles. We are all soldiers in the fight to save America.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Obama Loses in Florida. Judge Refuses to Halt Voter-Roll Purge

Florida never seems to be short when it comes to controversy, as we saw in 2000 and since, especially of late as Governor Rick Scott called for close inspection of the polls of voters in Florida and the purging of those not legally entitled to vote. With scant mistakes so far, dead people, pets, felons, illegal aliens and more have been removed.

Seeing the possibility of many now Democrat voters being caught up in Florida wanting only legally entitled voters to vote, the Obama Administration strongly opposed such action, having the ‘Justice’ Department under Eric Holder file suit in Federal Court to halt the action.

The Orlando Sentinel tells that U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle “rejected a request from the Obama administration to put an immediate stop to the state’s non-citizen voter purge program.”

The Sentinel tells us further, “The Justice Department had argued that the state’s attempt to remove 2,600 non-citizens from the voter rolls violated a federal law that prohibits the systemic removal of voters within 90 days before an election. Department attorneys also said that voters’ rights were violated because many U.S. citizens had received letters questioning their citizenship and threatening to remove them from the voting rolls.”

Hinkle did chastise Florida, though, stating, “Determining citizenship is not as easy as the state would have it. Questioning someone’s citizenship isn’t as trivial as the state would have it.”

He is correct, of course, but shouldn’t votes cast by those not legally permitted to vote enter as well? Be it just a few or hundreds of thousands, elections can be decided by scant few votes, as we saw in Florida just 12 years ago.

Do we risk those not even legally entitled to vote casting ballots and potentially determining our elections?

Just days ago I received an email in my throwaway address from former Civil Rights Activist turned Democrat Political Hack, John Lewis claiming,
“I’ve been marching and preaching and fighting for voting rights for over 50 years. Today, we’re seeing a deliberate and systematic effort on the part of Republican officials to prevent minorities, seniors, the young, and the poor from casting their ballots.”
Of course, Lewis is claiming efforts by Florida’s Governor Rick Scott and Wisconsin’s Governor Scott Walker are “trying to steal this election even before it takes place” by attempting to purge voter rolls of illegal aliens.

Joining him is ultra leftist group who is also labeling the purge effort “racist,” as Progressives label most everything they disagree with today.

The Miami Herald tells us that Judge Hinkle ruled that law prohibiting purging of voter rolls within 90 days of an election “the law does not refer to non-citizens.”

Rejecting the call of Justice Department attorney John Bert Russ to “restore the voting rights of everyone who had been purged to date, “ Hinkle said, “Leaving ineligible voters on the list is not a solution. Noncitizens should not be voting. People need to know we are running an honest election.”

Meanwhile, the State of Florida is suing “to seek access to a Department of Homeland Security database to better ascertain the citizenship status of voters,” a request the Department of Homeland Security has not been willing to comply with, stalling the effort to purge the rolls of further illegal aliens.

Judge Hinkle, a 1996 Clinton appointee also said, “The federal government and the state government ought to be working together to try to minimize the mistakes.”

That would be great, but let’s face it, Democrats have repeatedly shown they are not interested in “honest elections,” but are only interested in winning, any way they have to.

There is little doubt we will hear Democrats crying the blues should Obama lose in Florida, just as we have heard ever since their effort to steal the 2000 election in Florida was thwarted.

There is no doubt left in my mind that today’s Democrats are dangerous for our country, leading us rapidly into the deepest debt we have ever seen and desiring to dig us even further into debt, while unemployment remains high.

We must take our country back and restore her to the freedom and law-abiding nature we used to be known for.

We must fight back against the lies and deceit being used by far leftist Democrats at every level.

OMG 2012 (Obama Must Go)

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Preemptive Fearmongering on SCOTUS Obamacare Decision

Tomorrow is the big day, the United States Supreme Court will announce their decision on the lawsuits filed by several states over Barack Obama’s signature legislation rammed through by a lame duck congress, Obamacare. Or, as Democrats prefer to falsely label it, the Affordable Care Act, the one former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously said we would have to pass in order to see what was in it.

No one knows yet which way the high court will decide on whether the federal government can force citizens into buying a product they may not desire.

The pollsters have been busy, though, polling Americans on what they want to see from the Court. According to the Houston Chronicle,
“Only 10% of Americans expect Supreme Court to uphold all of ObamaCare.”

“33 percent — say they expect the court to uphold portions of the law but strike down the requirement that Americans either buy insurance or pay a fine, the poll finds.”

“18 percent believe that the court will strike down the entire law and send Congress back to the drawing board.”
Left leaning ABC News informs us of their own polling on Obamacare is “seen favorably by 59 percent of Democrats, falling sharply to 36 percent of independents and just 14 percent of Republicans. Ideological divisions are similar, with liberals nearly three times more supportive of the law than are conservatives,” right down partisan lines as expected.

ABC also tells of the overall polling, “Just 36 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll express a favorable opinion of the health care law under Supreme Court review.”

We read, “54% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care bill, while 39% are at least somewhat opposed. This includes 43% who Strongly Favor repeal and 28% who are Strongly Opposed to it,” from Rasmussen. Their polling has consistently shown over half of American citizens favor repeal of Obamacare.

Since this is Obama’s signature accomplishment so far, other than leading our country closer towards total economic collapse and knowing that over half of all voters polled want to see it repealed, at least in part, what else would we see from Democrats except efforts to demonize Republicans and the Tea Party.

Two emails received so far make such claims.

One came from Crystal King, Political Director with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee saying in part, “No matter what happens, Republicans will never stop trying to tear this landmark law to pieces-- along with the rest of President Obama’s agenda.”

Sort of soft, but nonetheless, does she not know that is exactly what over half of America wants?

Another email received came from Patrick Kennedy, son of deceased drunken womanizer Ted Kennedy. He took a much harder stand saying, “If the Court upholds the law, dangerous Tea Party extremists will go on a rampage.”

“Go on a rampage?” When was the last time you ever heard of any Tea Party rally rampaging, disrupting people, blocking traffic or causing damage to any property by vandalism or rioting?

Copies of both emails here.

I’ve never heard of one incident and when there were disruptions, it was caused by infiltrators, liberals trying to instigate or make Tea Partiers appear racist, violent or such nefarious actions we have long been falsely accused of.

Occupy Wall Street, Unions and Anarchists engage in rampages, but we of the Tea Party do not.

But that we do not act in such a manner is of no consequence to Democrats who have no compunction at telling bald faced lies to further their agenda.

Will we fight for our rights if Obamacare is upheld tomorrow? Hell Yes! Will we riot or go on any sort of “rampage?” No.

That is not us.

But leave it to Democrats to already begin lying even before it is known how the decision will go.

You can bet your bottom dollar, though. If Obamacare is overturned, it is Democrats who will be angry and after the actions and conduct seen last fall from them and their anarchist supporters, there is no telling what they may do.

But, whichever way the decision comes down, it will not be Tea Partiers acted like Bolsheviks throwing a huge tantrum.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

When the Going Gets Tough, Play the Race Card

As Capitol Hill heats up in regards to the ATF gun-running scandal, Fast and Furious, a failed operation where thousands of guns were illegally sent into the hands of Mexico’s drug lords, costing over 300 Mexican lives and the death of one U.S. Border Patrol Officer, Attorney General Eric Holder has been much less that cooperative when it comes to admitting his and the Obama Administrations role in the scandal or in supplying subpoenaed documents to Congress.

Barack Obama compounded the situation recently by invoking “Executive Privilege,” and raising more than a few eyebrows across the nation.

“Lying to Congress is a crime. We have every right to see documents to say, ‘did you know, when did you know, what did you know,’ including even the president,” says Rep. Darrell Issa, (R-Ca.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa adds, “There cannot be executive privilege over criminal cover-up or cover-up of crime.”

By all indication, Obama & Holder’s backs are up against the wall as more is discovered on this obvious cover-up, leading even foreign press to begin comparing it to the 1973 Watergate scandal that brought about the resignation in disgrace of then Republican President, Richard Nixon.

With the invoking of ‘Executive Privilege” looking like it is backfiring, what else would we expect this “post-racial” administration and Democrats to do but begin playing the race card to deflect attention away from what may be criminal activities by the Obama Administration.

The Hill tells us “Dems seek to recast Holder furor as GOP effort to suppress votes” where we read, “Democrats are seeking to portray the Republican contempt motion against Attorney General Eric Holder as an assault on minority rights.”

It doesn’t matter that the Obama Administration screwed up royally with this operation and people, including an American Border Patrol agent died or that Congresses voting to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress by stonewalling on answering with subpoenaed documents has nothing to do with voting. No, it is protect Obama, circle the wagons and play on White Guilt by misrepresenting efforts to get to the truth of the Fast & Furious scandal as an effort to suppress minority voting rights.

Almost on cue, an email was received by respected Civil Rights Activist turned Democrat Political Hack, John Lewis claiming,
“I’ve been marching and preaching and fighting for voting rights for over 50 years. Today, we’re seeing a deliberate and systematic effort on the part of Republican officials to prevent minorities, seniors, the young, and the poor from casting their ballots.”

Of course, Lewis is first claiming efforts by Florida’s Governor Rick Scott and Wisconsin’s Governor Scott Walker are “trying to steal this election even before it takes place” by attempting to purge voter rolls of illegal aliens, deceased people, felons who lost their voting rights, dogs & cats and other family pets as “racist.”

But the email ties right into the race card efforts as we read of Al Sharpton scheduling a Tuesday, June 26, 2012 press conference to discuss “the effect that placing Holder in contempt of Congress would have on his ability to protect the rights of black and Hispanic voters, homeowners and immigrants.”

That Holder and the Obama Administration just may be covering up a heinous crime is of no concern; just play whatever it takes to protect the administration, experience showing that playing the race card works best.

Nancy Pelosi (D. Ca.) chimes in with her own version of the race card saying,
“it is no accident that Republicans are pressing for a contempt vote at the same time the DOJ has ramped up efforts to stymie voter ID laws. Democrats argue the laws prevent black and Hispanic voters from casting their ballots, while the GOP says they help prevent voter fraud. They’re going after Eric Holder because he is supporting measures to overturn these voter-suppression initiatives in the states.”

Democrats, who notoriously cry “voter fraud” whenever one of theirs loses a close election depend on votes cast by illegal voters to remain in power. They have no problem demanding ID be shown to enter one of their events, or to vote in union elections, or even be able to board any aircraft for travel, but squawk at calls to ensure our Presidential election is determined by legal votes only.

Are we to believe the Justice Department will collapse and be ineffective should Eric Holder rightfully be found in contempt of congress Thursday? Was any consideration of crippling the Justice Department given as the newly installed Democrat Senate Majority unmercifully go after Bush’s Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in 2007?

There was no worry there of racial motivation, even though Mr. Gonzales is Hispanic.

No, this is just the usual circle the wagons and create controversy to deflect attention away from another Democrat scandal, just as we saw late in the Clinton Administration with the roll out of Monica Lewinsky and the GOP took the bait, going after Clinton for a sex scandal that was excused by Democrats and losing sight of the bigger picture of several scandalsinvolving the Clinton’s.

The American people must stick to our guns and not fall for this ploy. Expecting answers on a failed operation that by all indication was a deliberate attempt to undermine our constitutional rights is not racist. It is Just for congress to demand and expect answers over this despicable act.

Sunday, June 24, 2012

“Call Me A Cab.” Here’s Another Fine Mess We’re Getting Into

The 1930 Laurel & Hardy film, “Another Fine Mess” contains a funny scene where Oliver Hardy, posing as the Lord of the Manor of a mansion they have entered illegally calls to a slightly tipsy Stan Laurel, dressed in drag as the manor’s maid and says to Stan, “Call me a cab.” Stan looks him square in the eye and says, “Okay, you’re a cab.”

One of many funny moments in the film, but also shows how we have long taken for granted that if we need transportation somewhere, we just pick up the phone, call the local Taxi Cab company and very soon, a Taxi is waiting at our door to take us where requested for a small fee.

Those days are in danger of ending soon, if some in our city and the bully to our south, Portland, Oregon get their way. On June 19, 2012 I was copied the following email to some of our elected officials,
“We at Clark County Cab Svcs. along with our Portland based competitors were called to a meeting with Vancouver City staff to discuss the Taxi Ordinance on Thursday. City staff is recommending to Council to pass the taxi industry off to Portland to run and enforce via an inter-local agreement. We have a HUGE problem with this and quite frankly this may be the Straw that breaks our backs as well as a double handed slap in the face from our own city. Radio Cab and Broadway both voiced that they highly doubt Portland will be able to do this in a way that is good for Vancouver Drivers or Owners given their own enforcement issues. According to Rae Miles President of Broadway Cab, Portland can’t even handle its own enforcement issues and doesn’t understand why Portland would even agree to this given their own problems. All payments, fees and revenue from our industry will go to Portland. In addition to the money taken in for licenses and certificates the City of Vancouver will pay an additional $9000.00 to Portland for legal and enforcement that will never happen. Where is that $9000.00 coming from? Given the increase of an aging population over the next 25 years and the projections for senior transportation needs along with general growth in the community, wouldn’t it make more sense to create a program and system that works for our City by our City? The City created an Ordinance and system in haste and without any forward thinking in an effort to get one lady off of their backs who isn’t even in business anymore and we are now left to deal with the aftermath. We have suggested several times as has Broadway to create fees that would allow the program to pay for itself but fell on deaf ears and now here we are. My Business is in Vancouver Washington and the money I pay to run and have my business in Washington should stay here. Period! I'm not located in Oregon, nor do I take business from Oregon therefore I should not Pay Oregon to operate in Washington!!!!! Other options open are streamlining the ordinance or repeal it all together. City Staff doesn’t want to deal with the Taxi industry anymore and are pushing for the Portland Option.”

Shannon Stewart
Clark County Cab Svcs
Vancouver, Washington
A subsequent email copied to me on June 20, 2012, sent to city staff as well as members of the city council that goes into much greater detail regarding Portland regulating our taxi companies can be read here.

At issue is a Memorandum to be taken before City Council Workshop June 25, 2012 with the stated objective of, “Obtain City Council direction to staff regarding continuing the Vehicle for Hire Commission suspension, repealing the Vehicles for Hire Ordinance or pursuing another option.” That “other option?”

Yes, you read that right. If sources are correct, this is the “preferred option,” placing more of Vancouver under the control of Portland, Oregon. Instead of seeking a workable solution to what is largely a non-existent problem with our small local cab companies, who comply with all state regulations on their own, we see city staff favoring choking them out for the larger Portland monopoly cab companies who do not adhere to our local ordinance or pay any revenues to our city.

Unlike large megalopolis cities, we remain a fairly small community resting in a gray area between the states of Washington and Oregon, neither of whom seem to pay much notice to us other than when they want our votes or money. Portland, although just across the Columbia River, is in a different state with different laws, ordinances and a tax hungry city leadership who sees Vancouver as a source of revenue and one they do not need to serve in any way, just suck up revenues from our local economy to feed theirs.

Since we are a smaller community, we do not have set taxi stands around the city nor do we have taxi cabs freely roaming the city awaiting being flagged down by fares. That is just not the market in a smaller community, ours or any other. Yet a few years ago, our local cab companies saw their insurance rates increase to some three times the state required minimum, as would be necessary for the larger cities that do have taxi stands.

We must wonder why, given how we are always hearing from elected officials of working to improve our local economy, local cab companies are held second to Portland’s monopoly cab companies who at best maintain dual permits for Vancouver and Portland and may claim small offices in Vancouver, choking out local companies on our side of the Columbia River.

Past reviews of Portland’s regulating their taxi cabs shows the intent is more to protect cab company profits over protecting consumers. You may read more on Portland’s stand on their taxi companies from 1998 here and from 2012 here.

Given Portland’s proclivity to protect the monopoly cabs in their city, would they even give Vancouver cab companies any fair shake at all? I find it highly doubtful.

But even more importantly, why should any Vancouver, Washington business, set up to operate solely in Vancouver and Clark County have to answer to Portland, Oregon or travel to Portland just to operate within their own community?

City Council has not made any decision on this yet, but we often see them following the recommendations given them by staff. It remains to be seen just how it will be presented at the June 25, 2012 workshop.

But, given that we are not a subdivision of Portland, Oregon and are even in a completely separate and sovereign state, any recommendation of placing any Vancouver business under the control of Portland, Oregon must be defeated, if we are to remain a separate city with our own individual identity.

We need to cut the political umbilical cord to Portland, not strive to be even more dependent on a large out of state bully city who only sees across the river for untapped revenue to be taken, giving no services in return.

Laurel & Hardy gave us a laugh with the “call me a cab” line.

City staff seems more intent on giving us heartburn while we watch local business dry up.

I urge you all to review this memorandum, contact city council members and most of all, let’s rely on our own Vancouver Cab Company.

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Liberals Heckle Children For Singing "God Bless the USA"

Hecklers were saying, “The kids don’t even know what they’re singing!”

“They got something you tell them to say! It’s ridiculous! It’s sad, sad, sad. Y’all are going to burn in hell! You all burn in hell! Shame on you! Shame on you!”

“You Republicans come go to a Republican area and do that, we don’t do that here. This is ridiculous, this is sad. This is so crazy. This is sad.”

This is the level of discourse we see as Obama struggles to keep power.

Read more HERE

I guess they forgot Applauded For Burning Books and Blaming Tea Party

In what can only be equated to Hitler’s Reichstag Fire in 1933, where Hitler had the German Parliament building set on fire and made to appear as if the Communist opposition party was responsible, is now boasting of an “Award-Winning” video produced to defeat Tea Party members over a tax increase they title “Book Burning Party.”

That is was actually and leftists who burned books seem to slip right passed many as the ends justify the means in their nothing is off limits attitudes.

That it is a total lie also slides right passed them, just as Hitler’s many antics early on slide right passed an unsuspecting German citizenry until it was too late to stop him.

Of course, the “stealth ad” doesn’t mention Hitler, but when “book burning” is mentioned, what comes to mind other than the antics of the Nazi’s in the 1930’s who openly built bonfires out of any books they considered subversive.

People in America are being conditioned ever so gradually to just accept whatever government demands of them, especially when it comes to feeding the government more tax dollars. We see locally with transportation issues, campaigns claiming Granny will be left standing on a street corner if they don’t get the tax increase.

Efforts to rein in wasteful spending fall by the wayside as people fall for the rhetoric, vote the tax and end up with less money to feed their families, often eventually leading to them needing to ask for government assistance which itself leads to more tax increases.

The claim in Troy, Michigan was that the Town Library would close. It is doubtful it would have, but might have had to operate a bit leaner until the Troy City Council wised up on some of their own wasteful spending and spent the town’s tax dollars more wisely.

But they got the tax increase by borrowing the tactics of Adolf Hitler and creating a false flag operation, a hoax they now boast of doing.

A lie is a lie. But as has been said, often credited to Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler's Propaganda Minister in Nazi Germany, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”, Progressive Democrats and many leftists have long compared us conservatives to Hitler’s Nazi’s. Yet, here they are openly boasting of using Hitler’s tactics to win a tax measure in Troy, Michigan.

I am confident this tactic is not only used in Troy. We saw moves just a couple years ago calling on Progressives to infiltrate the Tea Party rallies to create mayhem, carry racists’ signs and shout out racist remarks about Barack Obama. An obvious effort to make it appear as if the Tea Party is the racist white supremacists of their lies, even though it would be they committing the racist acts.

Wake up, America. You are being led down the identical path Hitler led the Germans and the Bolsheviks led Russia just years earlier.

If Progressive’s we anywhere near a sincere as the claim, they would condemn this ad, not boast of it as the way to do things.

What next, beat up or kill a few Jews or Blacks and make that also appear to be conservatives?

Saturday, June 16, 2012

If It Isn’t “Amnesty, Immunity Or A Path To Citizenship,” What Is It?

June 15, 2012, not exactly a “day that will live in infamy,” but an ignominious day just the same as Barack Obama, apparently believing he is a King or Dictator and not an elected temporary leader, took upon himself to completely ignore the will of the American people and Congress by declaring certain illegal aliens under the age of 30 will no longer be deported.

That citizens have been opposed and congress has voted against such moves towards amnesty have been completely ignored as Obama stated,
“This is not amnesty. This is not immunity. This is not a path to citizenship. It’s not a permanent fix.”
It isn’t a “fix” at all and contrary to what he says, it is indeed amnesty and immunity. What else could it be but amnesty and immunity?

Democrats pulled this nonsense back in 1986 when Republican Ronald Reagan was president, blaming the failure on him and not accepting any responsibility themselves, even though they wrote it and passed it as Democrats held majorities in both the House and Senate.

Expected to lessen illegal immigration, it had the opposite effect as now others saw that our laws mean nothing and there would be no enforcement and eventually, if they waited it out, they too would be declared immune to our laws.

Today, they once again won out as Barack Obama made a mockery out of our laws, our constitution and the separation of powers written into it.

Within hours of making his announcement, his reelection campaign sent out an email that said in part,
“Thanks to our president, this nation's immigration policy just became more fair and more just.”

“Effective immediately, the Department of Homeland Security is taking steps to ensure that young, undocumented immigrants who were brought here as children by their parents, and who have followed the law since then, will be able to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings -- and will be allowed to apply for authorization to work in this country.”

“They're a group that we’ve come to call the ‘Dreamers’ -- and today, the country they love is telling them they should be able to dream as big as they want.”

“For years, the President has called on Congress to make common-sense fixes to our broken immigration system. They haven’t. So he did.”

By what right does he take upon himself to usurp constitutional separations and decide he can just override both Congress and the American people?

Of course, the email also includes,
“Congress still has time to pass the DREAM Act. And if they do, policies like today’s will no longer be necessary.”
If that isn’t “do as I say or else,” what is it?

This is the act of a dictator, not an elected representative of the people.

Such a dictatorial act pleases Janet Murguia, president and CEO of the Racist National Council of La Raza (the Race) who said,
“When it comes to the Hispanic community, this action is a political plus for Obama. It’s always good to be able to point to your track record and move the needle toward a promise that you made.”
Even though such a promise is contrary to our jurisprudence and constitution as well as the will of the American people? By what right to illegal aliens, here in violation of our established law by committing a criminal act of entering our country illegally, stand up and demand anything?

Obama claims that in their hearts, they are Americans. But they have no regard for American law and expect all of the benefits granted natural born and naturalized citizen, the latter enduring years and years of efforts, fulfilling requirements and living within our laws all to one day, take our oath of citizenship to be granted what we gained by birth?

It is a slap in the face of all those who struggled to meet the requirements to take that oath as these certain ones today receive a pass on violating our laws and end up being moved ahead.

Article II Section 3 of our constitution lays out some duties expected of a president saying,
“He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.”
Usurping and ignoring our laws at his whim is not what I call “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, whose state has been perhaps hit the hardest by illegal immigration and has the dubious honor of being sued by the Il Duce administration for enforcing our immigration laws, labels Il Duce’s act today as “backdoor amnesty,” adding that is complicates the enforcement of their law, SB 1070 as illegal aliens will not receive documentation, complicating Arizona’s efforts at curbing illegal immigration.

In January 2007, after Democrats took control of both houses of congress and installed as head of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, Democrat Representative from Michigan, John Conyers claimed,
“Our country has been run, far too long, by an Administration that seeks to rule in secrecy. The Bush White House has ignored our founding fathers’ separation of powers, claiming an ever increasing scope of authority in direct conflict with the constitution.”

“For the past six years Congress has been silent, watching idly as its powers are usurped.”

“No longer.”

“Today we embark on a vigorous defense of our nation, reclaiming our constitution and reasserting the authority of Congress in our tripartite system of government.”
June 15, 2012, although no longer head of that committee sees silence from Mr. Conyers over Barack Obama’s continued usurpation of Congressional Duties and Powers as he willy nilly just declares his will to be the law of the land.

Spineless Republicans, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell did not address the issue, claiming difficulty for Republicans trying to appeal to the Hispanics, who will not vote for Republicans anyway, preferring to vote for those who help them violate our laws and still receive the entitlements meant for American Citizens.

Lamar Smith, Republican Representative from Texas and now Chair of the House Judiciary Committee issued a Press Release saying,
“President Obama’s decision to grant amnesty to potentially millions of illegal immigrants is a breach of faith with the American people. It also blatantly ignores the rule of law that is the foundation of our democracy. This huge policy shift has horrible consequences for unemployed Americans looking for jobs and violates President Obama’s oath to uphold the laws of this land.”
Unlike Conyers, Smith lays out no plans to hold Il Duce Obama accountable.

Republican Representative Steve King of Iowa said he planned to file suit to halt the policy.

Presumed Republican candidate for President, Mitt Romney said the decision
“will make finding a long-term solution to the nation’s immigration issues more difficult,” adding “the plight of illegal immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children is an important matter to be considered.”
Just what we need, more fence straddling and gutless actions.

If America is to regain her greatness and return to a rule of law, the lawless dictator, Il Duce Obama and his band of Socialist Democrats MUST be voted out this November. As gutless as Romney is, he will still be an improvement over Il Duce.

My greatest fear is if we don’t oust this band of Socialists, seeing Il Duce Obama’s quest to be dictator, 2012 just might be our last free election.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

“My Employer Makes More Off My Labor Than I Do”

It seems that at just about any “progressive” protest rally, union unrest or occupy tantrums, it doesn’t take long before someone either in the crowd or on a speakers platform will state words to the effect of, “my employer make more off my labor than I do,” trying to build sympathy that they don’t receive proper wages for whatever their labor may be and whip up emotions to support demands of more.

In those crowds of envious and jealous malcontents, it is just what many desire to hear and speakers know it all too well. In the case of unions, demands follow for even more with no realization that any increases in business costs to employers must be passed along to consumers in order for their employer to remain in business and afford to pay them what they demand.

In a vicious circle, even those making the demand end up with less value for their dollar as consumer prices continue to climb.

Invariably, comparisons will be made that the laborer works hard, an undeniable fact and that while they may earn a decent wage, the employer is “raking in the dough” and enjoying large profits.

Some even claim that they end up investing in the “tools of the trade.” Mechanics, machinists, mill workers and more may end up owning over $30,000 worth of tools needed to perform their jobs and believe that to be a major investment, even though spread out over 30 or 40 years.

I can’t dispute that as I have a personal investment of some $35,000 in personal tools sitting in my own tool box, being a retired mechanic myself. But, they are mine to do with as I please and do not belong to any of my former employers.

Yes, the dealers I worked for over my adult life did indeed make more of an hour of my labor than I did. But is that really “unfair” as we so often hear today? Does that make the employer that “greedy rich guy” we so often hear of them accused of being?

So many crying out that they deserve whatever their employer has overlooks a lot. While we learn our skill and seen being hired at an existing business, most never consider what it took to establish and build that business over many years and often prior failures.

Many companies begin as an idea in someone head and years of working in garages or basements improving and perfecting that idea. Long hours late into the night, often after working a full day for another employer are put into the idea. Years of failing may result in an idea that finally works and offers others an improvement in their lives and demand builds.

Garages and basements are too small to meet the demand and a building is sought, often rented in the beginning and if the idea catches on, construction of a suitable location for manufacture is sought.

By now, the person that had the idea can longer meet the demand on their own and begins seeking to hire people with the skills needed to manufacture, sell and market the idea to consumers. Shipping and packaging enters into the equation so consumers may find the item on store shelves and receive it at their homes.

So workers are interviewed and those with the proper skills are hired, given a paycheck, benefit package or whatever the employer offers. He must also begin paying taxes and fees on his business for needed permits and licenses as well as purchase insurance on his business and employees.

If an employee isn’t as efficient in the job as thought, they will likely be let go after mistakes are made, mistakes that often the employer must pay for in recalls, lawsuits or buy backs. The employee that made the mistake only needs to seek other employment, drawing unemployment compensation during the time of unemployment, also paid for by employers in unemployment insurance.

While we workers may end up buying many tools of our trade over our working years, the employer may very likely have to invest hundreds of thousands, if not millions in equipment and tools for us to be able to practice our trade at their place of business. Be it lathes, drill presses, computers or what have you, the employer supplies those, we don’t.

They also must pay someone to maintain and repair that equipment as needed plus purchase the supplies needed to turn something into the item the dreamed of long ago and spent many years perfecting that we now build for them.

In a nutshell, it is the employer that comes up with the idea, works hard to perfect it, takes all of the risks, makes the investments and pays the necessary license, fees and taxes while many of us sit back and bitch because they expect a return on what they may invested their entire life in.

While our skill is important to us and the employer, what would we do with those skills if someone hadn’t done all of the dirty work to build a business first that we may practice our skills at?

So, who is it that is really the greedy ones? The one that came up with the idea, worked hard to perfect it, took all of the risks, made the investments and continues to pay the necessary license, fees, taxes and other expenses to keep a business running?

Or the one who comes along years later, sells themselves to the employer, asks for a paycheck and now expects an equal share without making any of the investments or taking any of the risks?

You decide.

I know there will be exceptions to this as not all business owners are decent employers, so don’t come try to tell me about your employer who screwed you over. Been there, done that, got the tee shirt.

But also don’t forget, you are free to quit and go sell your skills to someone else if your employer falls into that category.

You always have the freedom, so far, to seek a better paycheck.

What you are not entitled to is to continually demand more than the business can give. You receive a paycheck and benefits for your labors. That is what you are entitled to, provided your job performance meets the business owners’ expectations.

The next time you hear some malcontent saying, “my employer makes more off my labor than I do,” you might remind them that their employer has invested and risked far more than they are willing to and over a much longer period of time.

Monday, June 11, 2012

Here Come The Fireworks Grabbers

Here we go again, the regular hype associated with Independence Day from those who hate seeing people enjoy themselves with fireworks. To be sure, fireworks are loud and can be dangerous, if improperly handled and we have seen no shortage of pinheads over the years acting irresponsibly.

Fortunately, the pinheads have been decreasing as noted in past Columbian articles Fireworks posed fewer problems for officials in 2010 and Fourth of July fallout fairly minimal in 2011.

But that isn’t good enough as there are those who want a total and complete ban on any sort of fireworks, even the so-called “Safe and Sane” fireworks which, let’s face it, are boring as all hell and not enjoyable.

I find it quite odd that there are those who stand strongly on personal freedoms and the second amendment rights of all Americans, yet they join in the call to ban those same people from enjoying their long held freedom to celebrate our 4th of July Independence Day with fireworks, if they so choose.

How they go from “my cold, dead hands” when it comes to their gun ownership to telling others they must not celebrate our Independence Day as it was intended is beyond me.

John Adams, who was to become our second President of the newly formed Republic, wrote to his wifeon July 3, 1776, “The Second Day of July 1776 will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. . . . It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires, and Illuminations (fireworks) from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.”

Even the first stanza of our National Anthem, the Star Spangled banner says,
“Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there

Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Therein lies the basis for our use of fireworks in the 4th of July celebrations, commemorating the battles that were fought hard and where some 50,000 Patriots died or were wounded to bring a new land forth, based upon freedom and liberty.

Is it a commemoration of the costs of our freedom for a few people to use a few examples of irresponsible people to now deny others their use of fireworks, especially since the overall majority uses them responsibly?

Is it proper that they drag in Veterans, who have fought in every war since to protect people’s freedom and liberty, to now deny people their freedom and liberty as the noise might disturb the Veteran?

These same people balk when they see politicians using Veterans for photo ops in order to gain a few more votes. Yet, they now use us too to further their desire to limit other people’s freedoms?

As I laid out previously in the post 4th of July and Fireworks: Patriots, Fun Seekers and Pinheads, I had no understanding that my service meant others would have to give up freedoms to accommodate me when I returned.

We now hear of claims of toxic gases released, harmful after effects and those gases remaining in the ground for years, just lying in wait to poison a small child.

We also have heard how cow farts cause global climate change.

Studies have surfaced making such claims and signed off by some doctor of something. But let’s face it, if you look long enough on the internet you can find a study to make claims supporting your view on anything.

We hear from some council members words to the effect of, we are the 4th largest city in the state and we don’t have a fireworks ban as the others do.

I look at words like that and think, so what? Why do our city leaders constantly strive to make us carbon copies of other cities instead of striving to be Vancouver, a city unique for our own reasons, among those the preservation of our historical freedoms?

What also makes no sense is whatever ban the city council may make is unenforceable! If they cannot enforce current restrictions, how will they enforce further restrictions, even a ban?

The county has shown no desire to also ban fireworks sales and use on the 4th, so what stops Vancouver residents from driving north into the county, buying fireworks and setting them off as they please?

Another problem if they ban fireworks completely, as some opponents of any compromise now demand, is the short selling period for fireworks results in thousands of dollars of revenue received in an already revenue strapped community.

Again, these same people frequently speak out against further tax increases. Yet they are prepared to deny the city a current revenue source that the city has long depended on and is only paid by those desiring to celebrate our Independence with fireworks.

Non-profits rely on fireworks sales to fund their institutions. Where will they obtain funding once denied their main funding source and with the city not receiving revenues that could be used as well?

It just makes no sense to me that otherwise freedom supporting patriots would want to ban fireworks that have long commemorated winning our freedoms from Great Britain long before they migrated to this community.

I understand the noise may bother them, it bothers me too, but I can handle the noise and make it through the days we hear of them just fine.

Will these same people begin complaining when Air Force F-16’s take off from Portland Airbase with the roar of after burners lit? Just as with fireworks, the jet roar of the F-16’s occasionally reminds me of freedom, that our freedom came at a high price as well as how many paid that price for our freedoms.

If the noise really does both you that much, feel free to contact me and I will guide you to where inexpensive ear plugs are available for sale to the public.

But let people keep hold of their freedoms.

BPA Strives To Negate the “True Foundation of Republican Government”

The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management.” 
–Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816.

Once was the time we had a small government and the right to our property. To be sure, there were land squabbles and disputed boundaries that resulted in fights between property owners. Then the Rail Road expansion westward became well known for land grabs for right of way with the blessing of the government.

While the policy of Imminent Domain has been with us since the founding of our country, limitations were placed upon it by our Third and Fifth Amendments that prohibited the housing of Soldiers neither in peacetime without the consent of the property owner nor in wartime except in a manner prescribed by law. The Fifth Amendment ends with “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Land owners who disagreed with the amount of that “just compensation” have frequently seem their property condemned by the state and taken with much less compensation received.

In recent years, the use of imminent domain seems to have grown considerably. Our freeway system and the build-up of cold war Military Bases across the country saw much personal property being appropriated. Even later, we see localities seizing property from an individual to turn around and sell it to another private individual with the promise of building a shopping center or other entity assumed to increase revenues received by the locality through property, sales or other taxes.

Several people who wanted to avoided the encroaching of government land grabs, bought property parcels far, far outside of the limits of a city to build their homes in wide open spaces in a peaceful and quiet area.

Those people are now discovering their desire for open space and peace and quiet means little to nothing to government who now wants portions of their property to run high voltage power lines through their property, even though that agency, Bonneville Power Administration already has property right of ways elsewhere.

Efforts of redress to elected representatives from property owners seems to have fallen on deaf ears as noted in the March 14, 2012 Letter to the Editor in the Reflector, “An Open Letter Ed Orcutt,” the elected Representative for the 18th Legislative District at the time.

In part the letter states,
“[The Rural landowner] never imagined the private driveway to his home would be expanded and lengthened to travel past his home, through his beautiful gardens and landscaping for a new tower access road, enabling access 365 days a year to a government agency and its contractors.”
“He never imagined a superhighway for transients, off-roaders, and other trespassers who would be able to freely travel this new transmission corridor through the private land to which he used to own full rights.”
“The rural landowner never imagined that his elected officials (who are elected to uphold his rights) would tell a federal agency to avoid its existing transmission right-of-way on which it already owns rights to build. He never imagined his elected officials would encourage a federal agency to take his private land.”

At issue, BPA already owns right of way for transmission lines and has for some 70 years or more. As stated in another letter, this one to the local We The People, BPA already owns some 122 acres for transmission lines, but now wants to take a potential 1,273 additional acres to have a different route.

The “need” for these new transmission lines lies in the surge seen in the construction of inefficient, unreliable and overly expensive wind farms that often must rely on government subsidies to remain operational.

The matter has been a hot issue since first proposed in 2009 with every public meeting being well attended by concerned citizens to include the rural landowners who stand to lose their peace and quiet along with significant portions of their property, not to mention their health threatened by such high power transmission lines running across their property.

Citizens groups such as A Better Way For BPA have been organized to protect property rights.

Of late, we hear that a BPA PR person has announced a delay the release of the “preferred alternative” and “Draft Environmental Impact Statement,” with no indication of a date expected to release that information, leaving landowners in limbo.

Likely, the matter will end up in court, as issues like this often do. While not any guarantee of outcome and somewhat different in issue, it is promising seeing a recent Supreme Court ruling that sided with property owners over another government agency, the Environmental Protection Agency.

In the meantime, the battles continue as rural landowners continue their opposition to encroachment upon their private property rights by the BPA.

James Madison, Fourth President of the United States and hailed as the “Father of the Constitution,” said long ago, “The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to an uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government.”

That must include later government agencies who feel they may encroach upon private property at will and with impunity.

Tuesday, June 05, 2012


My, but how quickly they change their tune

Wisconsin’s Governor Walker Defeats Union Inspired Recall Effort

Expectations of a nail biting finish and close race in the Wisconsin recall effort of Republican Governor Scott Walker were quickly dashed this evening as from the first reports after the polls closed, Governor Walker jumped to a commanding lead, 22 points at one stage over Democrat rival, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Within moments of the first reports, Twitter accounts and facebook pages lit up with the exciting news of such a stunning victory for conservatives and Governor Walker, making him the first Governor to survive a recall effort.

Also surviving the union backed recall effort was Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and four state Senate seats, although one Senate seat remains too close to call in Racine County.

Kleefisch was opposed by Madison firefighter and union president Mahlon Mitchell in the first ever recall of a Lieutenant Governor. Kleefisch happily repeated an often heard chant from the fading Occupy movement heard over the fall and winter, “Now this is what democracy looks like!”

Governor Walker, speaking to an overflow crowd at the same party said, “Tonight we tell Wisconsin, we tell our country, and we tell people all across the globe that voters really do want leaders that stand up and make the tough decisions,” adding, “Tomorrow is the day after the election and tomorrow we are no longer opponents. We are one as Wisconsinites,” reminding supporters that it will take all working together to continue the improvements seen since he won the Governor’s race last year.

Throughout the day came reports and allegations of fraud from both sides, but mostly against union backed Democrats, alleging busing in of voters from out of state, confrontations at polling places as questions rose of questionable residency and an effort by Democrats to keep some polls open well passed the 8 O’clock deadline.

Unconfirmed reports came early of a robo-call calling on Democrats to stay home, their signature on the recall petition being counted as a vote cast.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said of the election outcome, “Wisconsin has given their stamp of approval to Gov. Walker’s successful reforms that balanced the budget, put people back to work and put government back on the side of the people.”

The Chicago Sun Times sees Walker’s reform efforts as a resounding success.

As can be expected, many Democrats and union supporters are not pleased, seeing all of their efforts at usurping the recovery by asking them to “pay their fair share” as well fizzle out in such a resounding loss.

Fringe leftist Ed Schultz hoped “Scott Walker could very well be indicted in the coming days,” in an MSNBC interview adding “ I think it’s awful close and there's a lot of absentee ballots yet that are still out and it’s going to be very, very close down to the wire.”

Sorry Ed, with 95% of precincts reporting, Walker remains well ahead with a comfortable 54% to 46% lead. Even King County Washington would have difficulty “discovering” enough misplaced ballots to overcome that lead, some 180,000 votes at the time of this posting.

Sensing the Wisconsin recall would also be an indicator of November’s presidential election, Seattle PI’s Joel Connelly stated, “The CNN exit poll also tested the fall presidential race: Results gave President Obama a 54-42 percent lead over Republican nominee-in-waiting Willard ‘Mitt’ Romney.”

Voters seeing Obama’s dismal economic record compared to Walker’s common sense reforms, provided Romney embraces them over the establishment GOP policies may just say different in November.

Likewise, presumed GOP Gubernatorial candidate for Washington State, Rob McKenna would be wise to reconsider his earlier distancing from Governor Walker, seeing what voters are really seeking in a candidate for Governor.

Voters in Wisconsin repudiated the status quo and rejected public union efforts to continue padding their bank accounts this evening. McKenna has expressed disagreement with Walker and stated “collective bargaining is a right.”

Even Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who instituted the “New Deal” early march towards socialism and government dependency once stated, “All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress.”

That is a view shared by the other GOP candidate for Washington State Governor, Shahram Hadian who is ready, willing and able to follow Governor Walkers example and lead our state out of the ‘Great Recession’ we remain mired in.

It’s a great day for conservatives and hard working American’s. Scott Walker’s clear victory is a message from all people tonight as we collectively have stated, “enough!”

It’s now up to you to keep the momentum growing and take our country back and restore her to the greatness she has known.

Monday, June 04, 2012

Obama Campaign Continues to Slam Romney Governor’s Term, Ignoring Obama’s Term

Not unexpected, but the New York Times has an article out New Obama Ad Continues Focus on Romney’s Term as Governor

As we saw in 2008, the media wants no part in looking at Obama’s record or past, just those who oppose him.

The Democrats ad claims,
“When Mitt Romney was governor, Massachusetts lost 40,000 manufacturing jobs. And fell to forty-seventh in job creation. Fourth from the bottom.”
Mitt Romney was the Massachusetts governor from January 2, 2003 to January 4, 2007 which is also a period when Democrats were claiming how bad everything in the country was under President George W. Bush and making all sort of wild claims of how it was so unbearable and only they could fix it.

They successfully seized all congressional power in the 2006 election and took over both houses of congress in January 2007. Although we might expect some media attention to how the Democrats have spearheaded the country’s economy, we have come to see it will not happen as they supply cover for the Democrats. So I will do what an unwilling media refuses to do.

When Democrats took both houses of congress in 2007, unemployment was at 4.6%, down from a high of 6.3% as we recovered from the Clinton recession and the attacks of September 11, 2001.

When Democrats got full control of the government and Obama was inaugurated in 2009, unemployment had grown to 7.8%, soon to exceed 10% after his “stimulus” promised to prevent unemployment from exceeding 8% was passed into law by the Democrat majorities in both the House and Senate and signed into law by Obama.

Unemployment has remained in excess of 9% for the entirety of his term, only recently dropping below 9% in some cooking of the books accounting, ignoring the U-6 unemployment figures that remain above 14%.

Also ignored is the Labor Work Force’s Participation Rate which continues to decline to all time lows, currently at 63.8%. It was 66.4% when Democrats took both houses of congress and was at 65.7% when Obama took office.

That means that during Bush’s second term, 66.4% of available workers had jobs. Today, only 63.8% of those of working age have jobs.

Tell me again where Obama and the Democrats know what they’re doing and can point fingers at Bush or Romney’s record?

Funny thing too on the mortgage meltdown Funny thing too on the mortgage meltdown that began our deep economic woes, it was Bush who tried to head it off in 2003 and sought increased regulation of Fanny Mae & Freddie Mac, only to be met by a brick wall of Democrats who said there was no problem, all was fine and he was over reaching.

Don’t forget, the “Community Reinvestment Act” that forced many banks and mortgage companies to begin making questionable mortgages was first a policy of Democrats, both Jimmy Carter and expanded by B.J. Clinton.

Once the bubble burst and the bottom fell out, what did we hear from Democrats? Why blame Bush naturally. In fact, after crying there were no problems with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and blocking Bush’s effort to rein in the two, Democrats blasted him for not doing enough to head it off.

Republicans are not without fault, but it is well past time Democrats owned up to their own malfeasance and mismanagement and were held accountable for their share of the blame.

Barack Obama and the Democrat Party have little room to point fingers at others like Romney as their record is even worse.

As Goes Wisconsin, So Will The Rest of America?

Well, tomorrows the big day in Wisconsin. Unions successfully called for and gathered signatures to form a recall of Republican Governor Scott Walker even though his measures of reform have improved the economy of the state.

As has been previously shown, West Coast States did not fare well in recent rankings for business friendliness, California remaining unchanged at dead last, Oregon slipping into the ten worst list with Washington State not far behind, also slipping a few spots.

Wisconsin on the other hand seems headed in the right direction as Wisconsin has shown a 4 point improvement, moving up to number 20 from the previous position of number 24.

But, as we have seen for some time, expecting public unions to “share the sacrifice” and “pay their fair share” is not in their cards as they launched massive protests, occupations of public buildings and generally made complete asses out of themselves.

So the recall moves ahead, ignoring their state has improved with the little tweaks favored by Governor Walker.

But, it all could blow up in their faces as it is very likely Governor Walker will be retained by voters who enjoy having jobs and keeping a little more of their paychecks.

Intrade, ‘The World’s Leading Prediction Market’ is predicting a 94.0% chance Governor Walker will win.

A win for Governor Walker and Republicans in Wisconsin tomorrow very easily could be a forecaster for Novembers Presidential election an already has some Democrat strategists nervous.

A recent article in the New York Times admits, “A Republican victory here could set off a wave of adjustments in the lineup of swing states. Even before the outcome of Tuesday’s vote is known, Democrats are warning that Wisconsin is far from a surefire win in November.”

A last minute ‘October Surprise’ fell apart quickly, dashing hopes of the left to paint Governor Walker in a bad light.

Such tactics so easily disproved only hurt those making them, as we see Governor Walker still holding a comfortable lead over Democrat rival, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Still, Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan readily admits the “the state is known for its share of ticket-splitters” indicating there may be those who will vote to retain Governor Walker and also vote in November to reelect Obama, but he also indicates “an awakening of citizens” who have suffered long enough under both Barack Obama and Democrats.

Even though the election in Wisconsin could be a precursor for the November election, it is not a guarantee for the Republicans. Governor Walker has said of the Republicans, “For them to make inroads in this state, they have to talk about what they’re going to do to take on the powerful special interests to ultimately make the tough decisions that are more about the next generation than just the next election.”

The last Republican to carry Wisconsin was Ronald Reagan in 1984, although George W. Bush came close in 2000 and 2004.

Should the likely outcome of Governor Walker retaining the governorship in Wisconsin occur, it will be no time for Republicans to feel confident about November. Let’s face it, Mitt Romney isn’t the strongest of conservatives and we still have the Ron Paul camp desperately trying to divide the right in hopes of seeing him on the ticket.

I support Governor Walker and will vote against Obama come November. But it is going to be to each of us to do our part and expose how public union special interests has not always been helpful in our economic struggle and recovery efforts.

We’ve got a country to save for future generations. It’s time to expose and stand up against these Democrat Party special interests so willing to tear our country apart.