« September 2007 | Main | November 2007 »
Doug's post inspired one of our readers to send this as an indication of his handy work here in NH:
Alas, I never got past intermediate stick figures in Art class....
And then I was sent an additional verbal commentary from the NH National Committeeman, Sean Mahoney (who did NOT send the above). Click here to listen.
Scary thought....even before Halloween! Or after the election.....




It remains as shocking today as when I first learned that when our National Guard and Reserve members are activated for deployment their families are often forced into the additional sacrifice of trying to maintain their daily routines but on the significantly lower income of military pay. Increased heating cost, emergency repairs for homes or autos - handling such issues alone, absent the support of a deployed spouse is one thing. Attempting to manage on significantly less income because the spouse is fulfilling their military service obligation to our country is a sacrifice our service families should not have to make. It is unconscionable that no form of relief exists except for private donations through private charitable organizations such as the CHAPLAIN EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND.
The CHAPLAIN EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND (CERF) was created to provide quick, temporary financial help for military members and their families facing financial need. The CHAPLAIN EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND is managed by volunteer trustees, all New Hampshire Army or Air National Guard Chaplains. Because it is administered directly by the Chaplains, expenses are minimal (stationary, stamps, annual filing fees) allowing at least 99.5% of all monies received to go directly to families for emergency assistance for items such as rent, mortgage, home heating fuel, utilities, etc. CERF is a private, not for profit fund registered with the IRS as Tax-Exempt under 501c3 (ID# 02-0445602). Again, CERF operates with minimal overhead – no trustee or administrative salaries, no dedicated offices, no places for donations to be diverted from their intended purpose..To assist CERF’s necessary mission, members of Major Waldron’s Sportsmen’s Association and of the Pioneer Sportsmen Club (Barrington and Dunbarton, NH, respectively) are joining together to host a fund-raiser on Veteran’s Day weekend (hence, Task Force 11-11). Both organizations enjoy in their respective membership many veterans as well as current Reserve and Guard people, and both associations believe there is no more important effort at hand than to send a strong message in support of our own troops and their families. ALL proceeds go to CERF and, again, at least 99.5% of the funds CERF receives end up in the hands of the service families who need our help. We are asking for you to show your support for them by supporting CERF..The Pease-based 157th Air Refueling Wing is a most visible reminder of the commitment of the New Hampshire Guard to all Americans. Their mission is ongoing and they provide refueling operations in the North Atlantic corridor servicing the fighter wings engaged in fly-over security for Boston, New York City and the northeast. They help keep your airspace safe. Additionally, the 157th’s ground security element has experienced multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Check it out! Skip will be joining me from 8:50-9:00 am on 99.7 wntk morning show that I'm co-hosting this week. If you're out of range, go to wntk.com for a live stream of the broadcast.
We'll be talking about the educational system.
...
I was wondering when the “Bush Caused the Wildfires” mantra would start. I just didn’t think it would start in my Granite State of New Hampshire and that it would come out of the mouth of former New Hampshire Governor and current Democratic Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen, who is normally very disciplined and not prone to saying silly things.Speaking to an audience of committee members and elected officials, Shaheen and Buckey discussed their qualifications for the Senate and their stance on global warming, the economy, and the health care system.
Buckey said he would focus on decreasing America’s dependence on petroleum and increasing research on renewable energy technologies. He said it’s an issue that’s vital to both national security and the economy.
“If we don’t take action, we are going to lose control of America’s future,” Buckey said. “Ten years from now, do we want to be importing solar-powered systems and other technologies from elsewhere or do we want to be building them here?”
Shaheen agreed with many of Buckey’s points, but criticized the Bush administration on everything from the war in Iraq to health care. Shaheen also blamed Bush for the wildfires in California.
“Those wildfires are the direct result of the failure of this administration to do something about global warming,” she said.
This is a pretty remarkable and irresponsible statement on Shaheen’s part, for as even the MSM has acknowledged by now: “Authorities in Southern California said they believe two of the fires that recently ravaged the area were intentionally started.”
As readers no doubt know, Shaheen is running against Sen. John Sununu, whom you can contribute to through the Rightroots contribution interface HERE.
UPDATE: More than a few readers have e-mailed to say that Gov. Shaheen’s gaffe is the consequence of a major party going loopy–otherwise smart, rational people start saying loopy things just to win their approval. Sigh. I suppose so.
This, of course, follows a similar pattern demonstrated by none other than Bill Clinton. Remember when he blamed "right wing talk radio" (Rush Limbaugh- Clinton's number one detractor) for the OKC bombing? Long a New Hampshire version of the "triangulator" Bill Clinton, it is no surprise that Ms. Shaheen would choose this path of thoughtless demagoguery as she seeks to curry favor with the left wing loons of her party.
Those following the career of Jeanne Shaheen know that this wouldn't be the first time Ms. Shaheen said or did something loopy in the process of seeking approval. Let's review one incident in particular...
As we experience near drought conditions this summer here in NH, it is refreshing to recall Gov. Shaheen’s famous canoe trip with Al Gore- you remember that, don’t you? Billions of gallons of North Country water was released to safely accommodate Shaheen and Gore for a photo-op. Hopefully this river excursion will be remembered often, should she decide to run for the Senate. Perhaps some intrepid reporter, recalling her and Al’s voyage, will ask the Gov.’s opinion of the denial of water to Klamath Falls farmers due to the Endangered Species Act’s protection of the Suckerfish. …
My neighbour, Adair, is director of the Connecticut River Joint Commission and, when Mr Gore and New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen, decided to stage a canoeing photo-op on the river, Adair and her pals at the CRJC mulled it over and thought they'd do their guests a favour. The water looked a little low - much of America is undergoing a severe drought at the moment - so they asked the electric company to open the floodgates of the Wilder dam, to make sure Al's canoe didn't run aground. As usual, the photo-op lasted just long enough for the press to get their photos, at which point Al stopped pretending to be a canoeist and got out of the river. It then emerged that 4 billion gallons of water had been released in order to ensure that Mr Environmentalist could float his boat. Vermont's natural resources director, a Democrat, grumbled, `They won't release water for the fish when we ask them to, but somehow they find themselves able to release it for a politician.'.The Gore office then did their usual trick of keeping the story alive by quibbling. It wasn't 4 billion gallons, or 180,000 gallons per second, they said. It was 'only' 97 million gallons, or 'just' 27,000 per second. The electric company, whose statements have been almost as unreliable as Mr Gore's, countered with their own figure: half a billion gallons. While the VicePresident, his obliging dam owners and the press were arguing about precisely how much water he'd wasted, Bill Clinton declared drought emergencies in five midAtlantic states..Most other politicians could have got away with it, but Mr Gore is not a man who can afford to blow even a mere 97 million gallons. He's been the most enthusiastic proponent, for example, of Federal toilet regulations, which restrict the amount of water you can use to flush and which has led to a roaring trade in toilet smuggling from Canada. Big Brother is watching your big cistern because on the environment, we were told, the Vice-President knew best. It wasn't long before the American press were producing statistics, in this parched summer, showing that an average homeowner would have to water his lawn 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for 75 years to use as much water as Mr Gore did on the Connecticut. It would certainly seem to be at odds with his book Earth in the Balance in which he quotes approvingly the 12th-century Sri Lankan king, Parakrama Bahu: `Let not a single drop of water that falls on the land go into the sea without serving the people.'.Unlike Mr Gore's earlier stumbles claiming to be a dirt-poor Tennessee farmer and inventor of the Internet -'Floodgate' (as it's known) would also seem to be illegal: `It would have cost New Englanders up to $7 million to use the same amount of water that was used to float Vice-President Gore's boat,' said Steve Duprey, chairman of New Hampshire's Republican party, announcing that he was asking the Federal Elections Commission to investigate this `illegal campaign contribution'.
If you want the Executive Sumary for this post, try this:
"I'd be ticked," Madore said. "They're telling you what to do with your kid."
No, not the teachers - the School Board. I still cannot believe the chutzpah!
My outlook is that government functions for the people and not the other way around. Lincoln had it right in his Gettysburg address "...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." Too often, we find ourselves in the situation where we, the people, end up having to fight our government because there are those in government believe they know better than we and wish us to behave the way they wish us to (and mostly, Democratic Liberals). This is a real basic reason to change the law to yank the ability to change tax policy away from politicians (think FairTax).
They have forgotten that they, elected and appointed officials and all they that make government work, should all serve at the pleasure of the taxpayers and citizens.
Instead, we get this (bold emphasis is mine):
Parents in Connecticut might be the ones getting the report cards if a proposed plan makes the grade at a Manchester public school district.
Steven Edwards, a Republican member of the Manchester (CT) Board of Education who’s up for re-election Nov. 6, wants parents to be evaluated on a handful of what he says are objective measures — including whether their children have done the homework and eaten a good breakfast.
"I tried to design something modest [measuring] things that virtually everybody would agree parents should do to help their kids," Edwards said. "We don't have our staff making any subjective evaluations."
The idea has angered parents, and the local PTA vows to fight the plan.
"People are going to be extremely offended by it," said Jackie Madore, president of the Manchester Parent Teacher Association Town Council. "I don't feel the report cards on parental skills is the way to go. ... It's going to be the parents against the Board of Education, basically."
I'd be ticked too! We get this (and this) about 11 year olds and birth control in Portland, ME, I continued to see the slow march towards government over the people.
Now, both Doug and I have been rough on the Republicans here in NH for not acting like Republicans of yore and adhering to our core ideals of low taxes (letting people keep more of their hard earned money) and smaller government (larger government generally means a diminishing degree of freedom).
Yet, here's this "Republican" advocating that government not only not serve the people, but it has the authority to not just grade the kids, but the parents as well. Where does he get the idea that schools have the liberty or the authority to do this?
Edwards says parents aren't properly preparing their kids for school. He's proposed evaluations on whether parents get their children to class on time, ensure their kids have completed their homework each night and attend the twice-yearly parent-teacher conferences about the children’s report cards and academic progress.
The other two categories — which Edwards admitted are more a matter of interpretation — would give parents a positive or negative grade depending on whether their children seem to have been fed an adequate breakfast and are appropriately dressed for the weather.
Look, I realize that the prime indicator of a child's success in school is not the $/student that is spent, or the high tech gizmos that are used (or not), or the strength of the teachers' union, but the involvement of the parents. Slacker parents are not helpful (and having owned a private day care, I know of which I speak). There were times that I just wanted to scream at some of them (like the parents that sent their kids in with sugar cookies for breakfast!!!). The difference is that I could just tell them that I no longer wanted their business.
Anyways, THIS "bright idea" is a prime example of the "bright ideas" that I am so un-enamored of (doubleplusungood)! Like it or not, unless there is actual abuse (and let's not start on defining that downward here), it is not the purview of public school officials, elected or otherwise, to be grading parents.
The answer to this guy? If a conservative is running against this guy, let me know and I'll send a donation. Primary this boob out if possible, yank his butt in the general election. I know that most of the time I try to write on a "higher plane", but this tomfoolery has earned all the scorn that can be mustered.
Edwards said he'd like to see teachers and school administrators give the parents a pass or fail check — not in a printed report card like their children get, but during the biannual parent-teacher conferences.
You know, if there was ever a reason for pulling your kids out of the government monopoly, this would be it on the sheer grounds of overstepping the role of government.
"To sit down in November and in March for 15 or 20 minutes with your child's teacher isn't enough," said Madore, who has a daughter in fifth grade and two sons in high school. "You need more teachers, administrators and Board of Education members reaching out to parents."
She said the draft she's seen of the policy had parents receiving scores in each of the categories, not just checkmarks.
The Connecticut board of education hasn't taken an official position on the subject, and ultimately such decisions are up to local school officials. But the head of policy services at the state level said he’d like to see energies focused elsewhere.
“The issue of grading parents is very difficult,” said Vincent Mustaro of the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE). “I would rather see local boards of education work with parents in terms of what their role is and assisting their child rather than grading them. I don’t know what that achieves.”
IMHO, I believe, a polite way of saying "what a jerky idea! THIS will not win government education any points".
The Manchester school district is also against the idea.
"The way Mr. Edwards has presented it, I'm opposed to it," said Manchester superintendent Kathleen Ouellette. "There are other types of assessments at schools that are not as intrusive. There’s a lot we already do, anyway. This can be very intimidating and will probably anger some parents if it's not administered in a sensitive way."
Not intimidating....try RUDE and OVERBEARING and OUT OF LINE! Actually, this may not be all that intimidating. In fact, it may make some of the PARENT intimidating! Remember: mother bear, bear cubs. Insulting Mom doesn't make for a great day.
Ouellette said she'd rather see a more positive parental outreach approach, one that doesn't alienate already over-stressed mothers and fathers.
Manchester isn't the first school district to consider issuing report cards to parents. Chicago tried it — and failed. So did a district in Lebanon, Pa., which wound up broadening the concept into a larger program to get parents more involved.
Edwards, who has been talking about implementing the reverse report cards for the past year, said his policy isn't nearly as far-reaching as Chicago's — which graded moms and dads on things like how much quality time they spent with their children. His plan, he said, aims to help parents who need it the most.
Ugh! And how did Chicago do this - have the kids spy on their parents?
"This becomes a way of identifying who needs extra help and using resources to reach out to these parents," he said. "It's not meant to be punitive in any way."
Edwards, who's running for a third term on the board, denied that he's pushing grading parents as an election-year issue to win votes. Feedback, he added, has been across the spectrum, with principals and parents generally opposed and teachers mostly in favor.
I'll go out there on a limb....teachers would be - after all, they have to deal with the ramifications of bad parents. Yet I repeat, it is not the role of government to proactively go in, as a matter of policy, and tell parents how to parent. If the parents ask for it, by all means, help them! Get them the information and techniques they may need.
But it has to be at the request of the parents and not the other way around.
"I'd be ticked," Madore said. "They're telling you what to do with your kid."
(H/T: Lucianne.com)
Heh!
I blogged about the brouhaha when Senate Majority Leader Reid falsely accused Rush Limbaugh of slandering the troops. Well, Rush's reaction was appropriate, rightous indignation, especially when 41 Senators, our government, wrote "an official government Letter" in an attempt to persuade his syndication company to ditch him.
His response - eBay the Letter. Thus, turning a lemon into 4 million gallons of lemonade for the Marine Corp - Law Enforcement Foundation.
Well, another attempt at pure partisanship has just happened here in NH is along the same lines (and Doug blogged it here). Jeanne Sheheen is making the claim:
“These Wildfires Are A Direct Result Of This Administration's Failure To Do Something About Global Warming.”
You know, lots of stupid things get said and done as one tries to get elected - Doug points out her boneheaded attempt with Mr. Global Warming himself - Al Gore.
Well, Fergus Cullen, the Chair of the NH Republicans is repeating that lesson of liberals not getting it right:
Jeanne Shaheen should be ashamed of herself for politicizing such a historic catastrophe. Here in New Hampshire we have had our share of natural disasters in recent years, specifically flooding. It is an act of hyper-partisanship to blame President Bush for accidents and arson-driven natural disasters.
This is not the time for finding partisan blame. The victims of this tragedy in California deserve better than political rhetoric. They need our help. New Hampshire Republicans encourage New Hampshire residents to keep the people affected by the California wildfires, and the brave first responders who are fighting them, in your thoughts and prayers.
If you would like to take further action, we encourage you to support the American Red Cross in their disaster relief efforts, you can contribute at www.redcross.org.
On this, I will agree with Doug and Fergus. I have to wonder if Shaheen got some bad advice to go negative so quickly on this topic. I realize that this is the season to bash Bush, but even as people are still out of their homes (and some of my co-workers in San Diego were evacuated and are just returning to their homes), this goes over like a lead ballon.
Plus...
...in a way, continuing that ill fated and ill advised canoe ride with AlGore and making this slam from that aspect shows an ignorance that one has to comtemplate as we choose a person for Senator.
My take is that while the world is warming up, it is due to natural cycles (one only has to review actual history to know that the Earth has warmed and cooled over the epochs all by itself without the need for humans to do so). Whether or not we are adding to it and making it worse really is under discussion, and there is no "consensus" - no matter those that call we who disagree "deniers" as if it were a curse worse than death.
Like I care!
Here's just two points that have to be considered:
To blame the California fires and the devastation they caused on a natural process that has raised, perhaps, a degree and a half over the last 100 years on an Administration that has been there just 6 years is inane from a scientific, rational basis. As NRO pointed out, what about the fires in 2003 and earlier?
This was done strictly as a partisan poke....nothing rational at all in this (as I am rapidly learning).
.
.
Last year, the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights declared that international human rights law requires all nations to adopt strict gun control laws. These “minimum” provisions are much more restrictive than any of those on the books anywhere in the U.S. and would almost certainly violate the Second Amendment of our Constitution.
Throughout modern history, the forced disarmament of people by its government has often been accompanied or followed by that government’s commission of often massive human rights abuses. In fact, no genocide in the 20th century occurred when the victim population still possessed small arms, legally or illegally, with which to defend themselves..So now the UN wants to disarm civilians? Where was the UN when the massacres in Rwanda occurred? What did the UN do to protect the victims of ethnic massacres in Bosnia? Disarming civilians under the guise of international human rights law will only lead to more such genocides by ensuring that civilians can never defend themselves! It would be funny if it weren’t so perverse.
Since I'm substitute co-hosting the wntk morning show this week on 99.7 FM (wntk.com for live steam), I asked Doug to join me starting at 6:15 am Tues. to discuss various subjects including Prez politics, the toll issue, blogging in general, the loss of the NH advantage and possibly other subjects as time allows.
Since it's talk radio, please feel free to call in on the toll free line 888-299-3151.
We should have alot of fun not to mention, I'm sure, an interesting discussion on some important issues that affect all of us. Lady Radio signing off...
.
.
looking at the latest NHGOP signs plastered along roads after the toll increase (for verification that these are the work of the Republican State Committee, view a close-up shot), I'm stumped on which of the two frauds being perpetrated here is more egregious..The fact that the toll increase garnered the support of two Republican Executive Counciliors (including one, who, now realizing he just ruined the state elephant's theme song against Lynch, is pretending to claim that he has no idea why he voted the way he did and wants a do-over)?.Or the fact that the signs, by their design, color, and font, are meant to trick unsuspecting folks into thinking that "higher taxes" is Lynch's new campaign motto?.Both deceptions rely on the ignorance of potential voters in order to be effective.
Congress had the power to specifically outlaw “waterboarding” and they didn’t do it. Why? Because they know that in some cases it works. That’s not to say it’s always an effective technique. In fact, most experts say that it’s not.But in some cases it might be, and to declare it “torture” takes away the option, which in some cases might be the best way to get information. But of course the Democrats, and some Republicans, don’t want to do it directly, because then they might actually have to answer to people in case something horrible happens in the future and it turns out that our intelligence services didn’t have all the tools at their disposal to stop it.
Folks, this quote by our buddy Lindsey Graham pretty much sums up a good bit of our problem in fighting the war on terror:
I am convinced as an individual senator, as a military lawyer for 25 years, that waterboarding … does violate the Geneva Convention, does violate our war crimes statute, and is clearly illegal,” Graham told “Face the Nation.”
The first problem - Graham’s a lawyer. We need to keep the lawyers as far away as possible from deciding how best to fight this war, especially as it pertains to illegal combatants and terrorists. And that’s what people like KSM and many of those at Gitmo are - terrorists.
I agree. Dress them in ladies underwear. Let them get frightened by snapping, snarling German Shepherds, too. Flush their Korans down the toilet. Stuff their heads in the toilet, for all I care. Just get the information...
.
.
.


[I]t is said that if the Republican Party wants to be competitive in California in presidential politics, it must nominate a pro-choice candidate, of which there is only one -- Rudy Giuliani. This is almost certainly true. It certainly is irrational because pro-choice Californians have next to nothing to fear -- just as pro-life Californians have next to nothing to hope for -- from a right-to-life President. The practical consequences of such a President concerning abortion would not differ significantly from Giuliani's consequences. Here is why..Abortion policy is almost entirely in the custody of the U.S. Supreme Court, and will remain so unless or until the court decides to restore moral federalism regarding the issue.
in 2007 we have, by any reasonable historical standard, a fine Republican field: One of the great big-city mayors of the last century; a former governor of extraordinary executive talent; a war hero, highly principled and deeply schooled in national security; and a former senator with impeccable conservative credentials.
I was talking with TMEW about the San Diego fires (I have co-workers in that area - some were under mandatory evacuation. Fortunately, they have all been able to return to their homes, and had homes to return to). My question to her was "Gee, I wonder who [what nation] is going to offer to assist us?" thinking that the answer would be, as usual "no one".
Very few times do I see other nations, even our closes allies and friends, offer the kind of assistance that we offer to them. Even to our "enemies', we are generally quick and with lots to offer. Even today, I've not heard of any of them offer anything (at least, anything I have seen in the MSM).
Until this over at StopTheACLU:
Iraqi Army in Besmaya collected a donation for the San Diego, Calif., fire victims
Iraqi men that are risking their lives everyday and barely have the money to feed their own families are donating to the fire victims of San Diego.
Where is the MSM?
From OpFor, via memeorandum featured posts.
We hear so much of what goes on in Iraq, unless of course it is good news. Then the silence is deafening.
What we do not hear is the generosity of the Iraqi’s towards Americans, their gratitude, their acts of incredible kindness.
Thanks to OPFOR for making sure this story gets some attention.
It may not be much - it might be hardly a pittance in our eyes. I bet that it is not for them. Here's what I found over at OpFor (a milblog I read every day):
Iraqi Army Col. Abbass, the commander of the complex, presented a gift of $1,000 to U.S. Army Col. Darel Maxfield, Besmaya Range Complex officer in charge, Multi-National Security Transition Command Iraq, to send to the fire victims in California.
The money was collected from Iraqi officers and enlisted soldiers in Besmaya. In a speech given during the presentation, Col. Abbass stated that he and the Iraqi soldiers were connected with the American people in many ways, and they will not forget the help that the American government has given the Iraqi people. Abbass was honored to participate by sending a simple fund of $1,000 to the American people in San Diego, to lower the suffering felt by the tragedy.
Often, however, that is the best thanks. And often, that's all we Americans want to hear - a heartfelt thanks.
From this Dad of a now discharged Iraq deployed Marine - thank you. We appreciate it.
..
.
.
.
..Pat Hynes Skip Murphy Doug Lambert
.
,

I attended both forums on the Dover Tax Cap initiative. In the first one moderated by Councilor David Scott, he laid out the ground rules and how it was an information gathering event for citizens paneled by: himself, three Dover city employees and four guests from Franklin and Laconia (including two mayors), who had experience of a tax cap in their communities. It was therefore balanced with those from the private sector who pay taxes to government and those from municipal government who increase their ranks and compensation through tax hikes and whose earnings are the result of taxes. Two of the first people to break the ground rules and start the ball rolling toward mild anarchy were the tax and spend liberals Betsey Andrews Parker and Mr. Glenn Grasso himself, who felt that they should grandstand rather than ask questions. And no cap opponents asked a question of the Dover staff. The audience was packed with Dover city union employees, some of whom also threw their rhetorical weight around with great melodrama, and warnings of doom, generating far more heat than light..The second, calmer forum, run by unlimited spending advocate Mayor Scott Myers had six panelists all from state agencies and local government; people whose compensation increases and whose jobs are more secure when taxes go up not down. This is objectivity he says, not stacking the deck to achieve a desired outcome. There were no private sector representatives and no one who'd personally experienced first-hand a tax cap…how helpful. He then coached the panelists how to respond when he felt the need..On the same day that Foster's ran its editorial against the tax cap, the Union Leader editorialized in favor of it. On Thursday, Foster’s editor publishes an unhinged, "infuriated" diatribe playin