On the 26th of Oct 2005, President Ahmadinejad said "God willing, soon there will be a world without the Americans and the Zionists”. Several months later his favorite Imam said that Iran was authorized to use nuclear weapons against its enemies even though they don’t have them (we think).

.

Now it is very clear to me that this is an entirely different threat than we have ever faced before and must act accordingly. His belief that the 12th Imam will come out of the well in Quom will encourage him to aid proxies to plant nuclear weapons in US and European cities once he has them. Old fashion deterrence does not work with terrorists.
.
Today with Western economic and covert assistance, the Iranian people can remove the current leadership and take their country back. It won’t be nice but they will be out of the WMD business like Iraq is today. If we continue to let Russia and China be enablers, we will have to kick off the covert action by a very short (48 hours) massive (2500 aim points) air campaign aimed at their nuclear facilities, Air Defense, Navy, Air Force, Shahab 3s and Command and Control. The Iranian people would be told that the military was the target and not the people who we would assist in helping them take their country back. We must have a massive Information Operations campaign to support this action. Now I can lay out the details of this air campaign later but suffice it to say that the IAF recently conducted a very successful air strike in Syria without Stealth aircraft and the numbers we possess. I would rather not do it but it may be our last ditch maneuver.
.
I am not worried about the Iranian retaliation because their leadership and military will be in a survival mode with chaos around them. Just as the Arab Street did not rise up when we did OEF and OIF, they will not during this action because it will be dominated by the Iranian people’s desires for freedom. Tyrants understand when we go for the juggler. If Syria and Hezbollah carry out offensive operations they will be crushed even though there may be a lot of causalities on both sides like TET. This fight is a better solution than nuclear weapons in our cities. We are either in denial or hope nothing will happen and neither is a strategy. This is an existential threat and appeasement like WWII will only get us 200 million killed versus the 60 million in WWII.

Posted by Doug at 9:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 7:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

..

• Rudy the Supply-Sider
• Fred Thompson on National Security
• Mitt Romney on a Winnipesaukee White House
• Asking Mitt to Explain his 1994 Dissing of Ronald Reagan
• Rudy: Applying Conservative Principles to Governing
• Chicken Wings with McCain
• Fred Thompson on Being in NH
• Fred Thompson's First Visit as "Candidate" Fred
• Mitt Discovers Life
• Mitt Answers Reporter Questions on Illegal Immigration
• McCain on "No Child Left Behind"
• McCain on Truman's Decision
• Why You, Rudy?
• Rudy: "Radical Islam" is our Enemy
• Rudy Defends Tax Cut Claims
• Bill Richardson on Chronic Disease
• Gov. Richardson on Illegal Immigration
• Rudy talks about the MOST important issue (the war)
• Hillary on Homeland Security
• The Face of America (Hillary)
• Rudy on Energy Independence
• Was Rudy's NYC a Sanctuary City? "No," says the Mayor
• Obama on "Undocumented" Workers
• Obama on Defense Matters
• Anatomy of a "Town Hall" Meeting; McCain
• McCain, Social Security, and the Ostrich Girl
• Mitt on Abortion
• Joe Biden on Health Care
• Joe knows... (Biden)
• Joe Biden on NH Primary
• Rudy Rocks NH
• McCain on NH Primary

Posted by Doug at 9:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From FOXNews:

Study: Canadian Beer Drinkers Threaten Planet 

The government-commissioned study says the old, inefficient "beer fridges" that one in three Canadian households use to store their Molson and Labatt's contribute significantly to global warming by guzzling gas- and coal-fired electricity.

Significantly, eh?  Somehow, I really tend to doubt the use of that word.  For instance, what is the population of Canada? How many families does that entail?  And do they really drink all that much beer?  C'mon!

"People need to understand the impact of their lifestyles," British environmental consultant Joanna Yarrow tells New Scientist magazine. "Clearly the environmental implications of having a frivolous luxury like a beer fridge are not hitting home. This research helps inform people — let's hope it has an effect."

The only effect is probably "Hey, stick yer nose somewhere else!".  IMHO, it is this arrogant manner of the eco-nuts that drives the rest of us crazy.  Most of us understand "the impact", we just don't care. 

And why?  We generally disbelieve that the major impact of global warming is manmade.  Simple!

I also look at it this way - this dame is a teetotalor to boot - or wrinkles her nose up into the air (and yes, a bit of hyperbole and stereotyping here) at all this....wellll....beer! How can that compare to a rare Chardonnay?  Ugh!

The other problem right off the bat is the word "frivolous".  If 1 in 3 have them, and beer is really being held in that sufficiently high esteem, sounds like a commodity rather than a luxury.  And if it is that important that people willingly pay the extra costs for running such appliances, who is she to say that they are wrong?  Monkeying with popular culture just because you don't like it is absolutely the playing field of busybodies ("I don't think you should be doing that!).  They remind me of the jr high snobs...

The problem is that the beer fridges are mostly decades-old machines that began their second careers as beverage dispensers when Canadians upgraded to more energy-efficient models to store whatever Canadians eat besides doughnuts and poutine.

Is this the Brit-Canadian version of Democrats getting vaccinations before going to a NASCAR race?  How intolerant!

University of Alberta researcher Denise Young, who led the study, suggests that provincial authorities hold beer-fridge buy-backs or round-ups to eliminate the threat — methods that Americans use to get guns off the streets.

That's right - beer, guns, and fridges - let's get them off the streets...sorry, out of the garages!

Now, all that said, I don't drink alcohol.  If someone else wants to, in moderation, fine.  But this story? Hey lady, wanna beer? 

Posted by Skip at 5:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

I had three reasons not to watch the CNN/YouTube GOP Debate last night:

1) The debates aren't really debates. Debating requires two or more
people to exchange and refute ideas in a dialogue. What we have mostly
been watching are candidates giving sound bites, one after the other,
in front of a crazy backdrop of lights and TV network logos.

2) After seeing all the ridiculous antics in the first YouTube debate,
I was ready for somebody in a Chewbacca suit to ask a question about
the candidates' positions on gender neutrality.

3) A couple of the candidates aren't even well-known in their own
districts; they certainly aren't going to become president. Sorry
Hunter, Gravel.

But I ended up watching it anyways.

Why?

Posted by Dave at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It's not about right or wrong, but how we treat soldiers

I am a pilot (first officer) for Continental Airlines and just recently had an event happen during one of my flights that I felt should be shared. I just had the honor and privilege of flying a fallen soldier flight on Flight 15 from Newark to Honolulu last Wednesday, Nov. 21. I had heard about these fallen soldier flights and knew we did them but I had no idea how intense and emotional it would be when and if it was my turn. Add to the intensity was the fact that one brother was escorting his deceased brother back home. They were from the little island of Pago Pago, and the young man that was killed was just doing the sergeant major a favor when he went on the patrol he was killed on. He was supposed to just be the driver for the top sergeant. I know they probably left their little island paradise to see the world, and likely the only way they could afford to, so they signed up. I'm guessing they still would have done so had they truly suspected the outcome, the perception of immortality as a young man is very powerful as I recall.

.

The deceased soldier, a sergeant, was escorted by his real brother and active duty army specialist 5, and also a fellow Afghanistan campaign veteran. The young man was killed in Afghanistan when he stepped on an IED, probably sometime close to Veterans Day. His remains were non-viewable. The boys were on their way back home to an island wide and well deserved hero's welcome.

.

Captain Mike Montgomery, also a veteran, and I saluted the casket aboard our 767-400 for the 11-hour flight. The ceremony happened at gate C138 and in front of the huge windows of terminal C. There was standing room only in the windows and three people deep as we rode the cargo carrier up the 15 feet to bring the soldier aboard. We rode up the carrier elevator at "present arms" and held the salute until the casket was in the hold. The ceremony of bringing the body aboard was a significant and sobering event for me. I felt pride, honor and a deep sadness at the same time as I reflected on all the guys I knew personally who were killed in this war, the last one, and the one before that. Eleven hours later, my landing in Honolulu was the best I have ever done in the 767-400. I think the airplane knew we had extra precious cargo aboard as well.

.

Continental reserved a seat in first class for Specialist 5 Mike and I know our flight attendants treated him extremely well during our flight. As soon as we got there, all the passengers remained seated so Mike could be the first off to escort his brother to the next flight. It was amazing to see the cooperation of the 240 other passengers. I escorted Mike down the ramp when we got to Honolulu so he could be there for the transfer of his brother. As I walked Mike down the stairs and out on the ramp in Honolulu I had no idea the cargo hold was even open yet. It was after dark when we arrived so the ramp was illuminated with soft light from the ramp lights, not bright but not dark either. We walked maybe 40 feet off to the side near the nose of the airplane so we would be out of the way of the ramp guys doing their thing. A ramp guy walked up to take over as escort so I shook Mike's hand and thanked him for his service, and asked him to please extend the condolences of my crew and Continental Airlines to his family. I turned around to return to the aircraft and it wasn't until then that I was confronted with the flag covered coffin for the 40-foot walk back under the plane to the stairs. The cargo bay is painted white and the cargo bay lights were bright and completely lit up the flag covered casket that was centered in the bay and open door. I took a mental snapshot thinking this is a picture that America needs to see but even if I had a camera I don't think I could have taken it out of respect for this dead hero, or his brother standing a very lonely 30 feet behind me. In spite of an 80 degree balmy night and wearing my uniform jacket, I felt a chill. All I could do was salute with a tear in my eye and continue on my way as I walked to the stairs. That picture is indelibly imprinted in my brain for the rest of my time. I will never forget the significance of that sight and event.

.

In those short moments, I realized just how lucky I am to have lived to the ripe old age of 51 after 20 years of my own active duty service and it continues to reinforce in me the need to thank the young men and women who volunteer to step into harm's way for me every single day. It's certainly not about whether the war is right or wrong, but how we treat those who volunteer to keep us free, in spite of knowing the potential price.

L. D. Jeffries

West Ossipee

Posted by Doug at 5:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sorry, gotta say it.

Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter - nice guys, good guys.  Love Tancredo on the illegal immigration stance (not so much on some other things).  Duncan Hunter is a stand up kinda guy - it is unfortunate that his campaign just hasn't caught on.

Ron Paul - you've just been added to the list.  My number one issue is Islamofacists and you talk as if the Pacific and Atlantic oceans will still provide safety for us; that if we pick up and leave, our problems with Muslims will just go away.  Mark my words, if we do not WIN, we will LOSE big time (and leaving and saying we won doesn't mean we did). Yes, your supporters are rock solid and want you to win, but they tick off the rest of us....including me.  That is as much a reason for me as any.

Posted by Skip at 9:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

                                     

Eh, not so much.  I was not all that impressed with the Dem version, and given that it is CNN (just listen to this exchange from a former guest on MTNP, Hugh Hewitt during his show and a CNN guy involved with this here.

My intention is not to really live blog this debate - instead, I'm just going to comment on how things are going (candidates, YouTubes, the talking heads, et al) as I feel led instead of trying to record).

Update: Okey, ok, so I fibbed...the YouTubes - no so bad.  And I seem to have started to live blogging it (at least half way). 

So now it starts! 

Oh gosh, a singing troubador...cute song, but his point is?  All the candidates are chuckling as fun is poked at all of them....no question...that's the intro??  OK, not bad as an intro -  better than the talking heads / moderators!

Q - to Rudy from a New Yawker on Sanctuary City - decent answer.  Anderson throws it to Romney who tries to shred Rudy, and Rudy is firing back.  AND IN THIS CORNER - they are going to go at it!  I love it!  Romney is actually trying to mix it up.  Rudy's button just got pushed "holier than thou attitude" back to Romney.

This I expected from Rudy - I'm not taking any crap from anyone.  I am a bit surprised that Romney is continuing to fire back - rolling with the fight with just a bit of the canned responses.

Lively!

More after the jump!

Q - Will you vote for amnesty in any form?

Thompson - we get to invite who comes into our house - is deliberately raking both Rudy and Romney on Sanctuary "Areas".   Rudy has a credible answer.  Anderson swings it to McCain - who says he won't but then tips into the defense that he never proposed amnesty (groans from the crowd).  Sorry, the rest of his answer I do not agree with him.  Tancredo - great to hear others trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo.  He does not agree that Americans won't do the jobs - they just won't do the job at the wages illegals will accept (and I agree with that sentiment).  And Hunter gives his stock answer.

Q - Huck and illegals for college.  Points out that military has to pay twice what illegals would have to pay for the bill that Huck supported that would give illegals.  Boy, twisting.  Basic argument that why hold the children responsible for their parents illegal activity.  Sorry, as a Baptist Minister, he should know better (...and the sins of the fathers will continue for seven generations...).  Romney - Huck is talking like a liberal, spending other peoples' money. Huck says he worked to put himself, it hard, and that we are a better 

Romney - we are not punishing the children.  There is only so much money to go around - should we give it to legal citizens or to illegals.

I have to hand it to Romney - he wins this round! 

Q - Ron Paul - goes after his supporters and conspiracy theories....I check out.

Q - question on spending.

They all are answering well.....McCain, Romney, Rudy.  All with different ways - a target rich environment!

Q - Rs once stood for limited government.  Spending is way up.  Top 3 programs that you'd reduce

Thompson - his plan for the biggest entitlement - SS.  OMB has a list of 100 programs that are the worst - he'd kill them all.  SS-reform with indexing, add private accounts.  Do Medicare too.

Paul - he claims that unlike the others Ed, Energy, DHHS, change foreign policy by bringing troops home.

Huck - Replace IRS with FairTax.  Redo DHHS and restructure it.

Q - for McCain.  Support eliminating income tax for the FairTax? 

No. Need a simpler tax.   He is taking on Ron Paul and the Paulites are booing.  McCain mentions that the troops that he just met want to win.

Ron - then why did I raise the most money from the military.  He is not an isolationist but is a non-interventionalists.

You know, Ron Paul just doesn't get it....and his supporters are rude to boot whenever anyone seemingly "disses" their guy.  Haven't they realized yet that they have really turned off the blog folks already and that this behavior does not sit well with the public at large?

McCain does a good job standing up for people like me who realize that we are in the fight of our lives with those that want us dead.  McCain understands, better than anyone else, we have to actively fight these folks with everything we have - and not just militarily.  In riding the bus with "Wings" McCain, you can tell that he is the real deal on this subject - and I will stand with him on this issue to the gates of hell and to the Pearly Gates.

He ripped Paul up and down - good for him. 

Q-Grover Nordquist to all.  Will you promise to veto all taxes as long as you are President?

Tancredo - yes   Huck - yes  Romney - yes  Rudy - yes  Fred - yes, but will not pledge  McCain - yes, but will not pledge.  Paul - I think he said yes.  Hunter - yes except due to national emergency

Q-farm subsidies - who will elminate them?

Romney - he supports the subsidies - new biofuel techs, we need our food supply here (national security to not rely on other nations) and we compete against others with high level of subsidies.

Rudy - agrees with Romney 

Both were well spoken - it shows that our guys can agree when it comes to some issues, especially that could be tied back to national security.

Q- what to do to keep toys lead-free, and get toys made back in the US again.

Tancredo, Hunter - they are basically cheating.  Protectionism being used. 

HAH!  Fred's YouTube going out to a commercial (quoted Huck and Mitt saying non-conservative things)....Cooper Anderson stopped and asked Fred "what's up with that"...the reply was "it's their words.  It did force Romney to apologize - "I was wrong; Reagan was right".  Huck said that taxes could sometimes be good, but then had a lame quip about if you're getting kicked in the rear, you're still out in front.

I have the feeling that this was a setup once CNN saw the commercial and just used it as an excuse for gotcha time instead of commercial time.  

Once again, however, we see how the Internet is changing ALL the rules - no more hiding, no more equivicating, no more lying - you will be caught.  I actually feel sorry for these "transitional" folks - these "old" guys, unless they have been consistently on the same path, will be at a huge disadvantage for the near to mid time future.  For the "new" folks just starting out will understand the new rules.

McCain-Feingold wants to merely regulate the money in politics and I do hand it to McCain for doing the philosophically right thing for asking a 527/outside group to stop running ads on his behalf.  Yet, the better regulator over time I believe, will not be the attempt to take money out of the process but will be the New Media and the never-forget capability of the Internet of blogs, YouTubes, MP3s, and the like, patrolling who said what and when.  And with millions of us out there, I believe it will be a far more effective governor on political speech than anything else and keeping everyone honest. He may believe he was doing the right thing - I believe we on the 'Net will supercede that bill and make it irrelevant.  As as conservative, I really dislike this law but with watching this election cycle, and knowing that people are scrutinizing EVERYTHING - that is the body politic protecting the body politic.

Missed a couple of questions, but that's OK. 

Rudy's 30 second commercial....it was great...I loved the ending.

Q-from a Muslim asking what they'd do

Rudy gave a good answer.

Once again, McCain approves of the Surge and that we have to fight them.  Closes again with "Let them win".

Hunter - I will never apologize for the United States of America. 

Q-Waterboarding?

Romney - KSM gave up info with waterboarding (inference).

McCain - taking Mitt to task for inflicking that kind of torture on anyone.   

Q-long term stay in the Middle East? 

Fred is saying that we have to stay as long as needed.  We are making progress and too many are invested in defeat; he is invested in victory.

Paul - best to give Iraq their country back.  Sadr is in charge in the South and the Kurds in the North.  We have to take care of America first.

McCain - taking on Paul again....we never lost militarily!  Points out that Viet Nam did not want to follow us home - read the OBL, Zarwarhiri, et al - they will follow us home.  

Paul - he believe they will come ONLY because we are in their country.

Tancredo - basically say Paul is nuts to believe that if we leave, they will leave us alone.

Q - for Rudy - using 9/11 to propel him into the White House - defend against it.

Look at my whole record, including all that happened before 9/11 happened (like in Haiti) as a prosecutor and as Mayor. 

oooo 

Missed a few.... 

oooo

The Brig. General - this was a plant by CNN, IMHO.  While I respect and thank him for his service, I take umbrage that he didn't get an answer.  While Cooper Anderson badgered Romney about an answer, the others DID give an answer.  Sorry General, you GOT answers.  To say that you DIDN'T does you and your agenda, to allow gays serve in the Military, no good.

oooo

I'm done. 

Posted by Skip at 8:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"How anyone can ignore the situation on the ground is beyond me."

Thanks for giving the blogging community this opportunity again, sir. I remain very much interested in the concept of a “Lincoln-Douglas” style debate between the nominees of the two Parties as proposed by Newt Gingrich. Two points. First, are you in favor in such a concept? And second, take a moment and give us how you would envision such a debate with Hillary Clinton. Describe how it might go…

Posted by Doug at 5:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

                                      
I saw this story first at Lucianne.com

Side Tangent;  I really love that site - all news (not that I avoid opinion) on lots of different stuff! Frankly, it's one of the Internet's version of "drinking from the fire hose"!  I highly recommend it.

Back to the story: 

College students at Montclair State University are all talking about a new requirement that will require students to have a cell phone.

CBS 2 HD has learned more on this required feature that is forcing students to dig into their wallets.

At Montclair State, there is no excuse for being out of touch.

Right.  I can see making a laptop mandatory.  With today's wired / wireless world with content all but being digital, I can see the need.  Heck, I've been connected for over 20 years, one or another, here in the hinterlands of NH. 

YAT (Yet Another Tangent:)I remember when working for DEC in the early '80s - I was always told that when you left, you'd feel all alone and separated because of the digital connectedness that was almost singularly part of the environment there.....take away, email, VTX, and VAXnotes, and the company would have shut down in 3 days.  Too bad upper management never got the fact that DEC had moved from being a hardware company to a software one years before its demise....sigh...

That's right.

The cost: $420 a year for a base plan which is bundled into the tuition bill.

"What it does is allow students to have an extra pair or group of people watching over them when they're going from one location to another," Montclair Police Department Chief Paul Cell said.

"It makes me feel comfortable," MSU freshman Ricky Bodtmann said. "I guess if people want to feel safe."

Whether you like it or not.  Not only that, but they will be making a profit on this as well.  It used to be, back in the Stone Age, I had to rent my landline in the dorm from BU...and they profited from it.  Now, the 'Grok College Student's Dad reports that the landlines are kaput, but that you HAVE to rent the minifridge/microwave unit from BU. 

Always another way to find a revenue stream, eh?  

There are various phone and call plan options, but the bottom line is you have to pick one. That could be a problem for someone with their own cell phone and their own monthly bill.

"If you're mobile accessing the campus from anywhere with some device that's attached to your hip, the truth of the matter is, you're also avoiding a lot of costs," said Ed Chapel, Montclair State vice president of information technology.

Sure, so much for competing in the open marketplace, right? And Mr. Chapel should know better than to speak that crapola.  Kids have got laptops and cell phones and Crackberries - the mode in which they access the campus 'net should not depend on a single mandatory device that is only obtainable from the campus money mavens - especially at a publicly funded one! 

I like what this guy had to say (and I have reformatted it just a tad, with emphasis):

Successful business marketing, as taught at Montclair State University:

Garner a captive audience, establish a monopoly on sale of the product, fix the price, require the purchase as a condition of attendance at school, collect the use fees even if the product isn't used. And, just to be on the cutting edge of contemporary sales, promote the product as a defense against terrorism, a hedge against campus violence.

"Frankly, I think it's a scam," says Gennaro Esposito, 20, a senior.

He is talking about how the public university's officials require students to purchase a cell phone and an accompanying service from them.  Through them actually. The service is Sprint/Nextel, with added gizmos provided by Rave Wireless, a company specializing in attracting a college audience.  At $552 a year with only limited use off-campus. Limited -- 50 minutes a month.

"I never use it," says Christine Kadets, a junior. "I leave it home. It would cost me more money to get out of my family plan."

Of course, some low-income students might not have to pay for the phones. In those cases, you have to pay for them -- through taxes for financial aid.

"It might be a good idea, but it should be voluntary," says Nicole Van Voorhis, a 22-year-old senior.

As Rush says "Young skulls full of mush" but these kids have got the wherewithal to know when they're being ripped off (or the taxpayers of NJ).  Now I have no problem with Rave Wireless, a for profit company trying to make said profit.  The problem I have is making it mandatory by a tax funded entity.  Remember I talked about landlines above?  Believe me, I wrote that BEFORE I saw this: 

Karen Pennington, the university vice president for student affairs, said the school got into the cell phone business for a variety of reasons. One was the collapse of a market for land phones in dorms, because many students had their own cell phones.

Right....such spin!  Again - landlines are fixed, sunk costs - and used to be quite profitable.  And they got caught flatfooted with a change in technology.  Universities could demand a premium for them as there could be no competition with the outside-the-dormroom world.  Cell phones offered no such hiding place for profit gathering....

"If we took the phones out of the dorms, then students would have no way to communicate in an emergency," she says.

What a crock!  Or, what a crock???  They still make payphones - put one in at every floor if you are that concerned with that safety need.  Or, just reiterating what you just said - since everybody's got one, somebody will have one handy, right?  Go ahead - I dare Ms. Pennington to come up with a scenario in which a cell phone would not work but a landline would (other than a single cell phone situation and the battery dies - then I can think of a scenario where the wall mounted landline cannot be reached to counter it). 

Another was the desire to provide cutting edge communication tools to students. The next step after the now-accepted practice of requiring students to buy laptop computers.

The phones Montclair students must purchase -- there is no requirement to use them, says Pennington -- do have all sorts of features just ordinary phones don't have:

• You can be alerted when the campus shuttle bus is about to arrive at a stop so you don't have to wait outside in the cold.
• You can push a button right there in class to tell your prof you don't understand a concept -- that's called instant polling.
• You can keep up with your assignments through a feature known as "Blackboard" that holds your syllabus and messages from faculty members.
• And, of course, the safety features.
• Instant warnings if something bad is happening on campus. At other schools -- Kean and Princeton, for example -- students can register their cell phones and e-mails and receive instant alerts in case of trouble.

For free.

No, it's not free - you paid for it (or a taxpayer did).  And consider this - a cell phone nowadays is merely a computer with a transciever builtin.  Whatever that phone is doing was created by a programmer....which means the same signals from their mandatory phone could be duplicated by a programmer with another one.....

Hey, a new market place idea - just reverse engineer it, set it up on iTunes, and sell to to kids that already have their own phones.  Then sue the University to open access their 'Net to all students.

After all, Verizon is going to do the same thing! 

But this new phone has a built-in GPS device that can track you, say, if you're walking from a classroom building to your car at night. If you don't arrive at your car at a prescribed time, the campus police are notified and they come looking for you.

Note: this was mandated a while ago for 911 calls (to be GPS aware)....this has been around for a while and is not a big technical deal anymore..... 

That GPS function troubles Esposito, as aspiring lawyer. "Somehow, I don't think I would want people to know where I am all the time," he says.

Some students rave about the phone. Ron Chicken, a junior and president of the Student Government Association, says, "It's great -- I love it.

"It really goes far in creating a sense of community at the college," says Chicken. "And it has so many features."

But even Chicken says he believes the program should be voluntary.

This like the politican chuckleheads in California.  What do you hear out there?  Stop driving the pollution creating cars?  So, they did....and gas tax revenues dropped.  Now, they want to have folks GPS their cars so they can collect the taxes based on mileage.

It's bad enough that I use a EZ-Pass RFID to pay the tolls - it also allows government to see where's I've been.  But to give them access to all the places I'm at?  At the present moment, I'm replaying all of the spy/ SF / action movies in my head where the tracking device is found by a character and thrown into a truck going the other way....Problem is, I have to pay for that tracking unit in the first place!!!

Pennington says making it voluntary would defeat the academic "polling" features of the system and create a problem with dorm students who have no phones at all.

And strip away a source of profit too!  I just cannot wait for some CS / EE student to hack open the interface and plug it in with an iPhone, or set up a Java app on another phone type..... And didn't the article say that, just like the Miranda Act "and one will be provided to you at no charge".  Such sophistry!

Posted by Skip at 8:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Often time, I hear stories of staffers putting their own agenda ahead of what they have agreed to do.  You hear little of efforts to put anything US in a good light from the Foggy Bottom aspect.  Time after time, all I hear is " well, we can't do that because...."

It also sheds a greater light on a larger problem - we in the general public do not work just to support them; rather, their purpose is to work for the good for US (the real US, that make up the United States).  While there are some that always try to do the right thing, many in Government's bowels (and not just at Foggy Bottom) are Liberal Democrats that will snif "hey, we know what we're doing....we're the professionals!"  Thus, the impression of not recognizing that WE have elected the leaders, and that they should be supporting those leaders instead of fighting those policies at every turn.  And then they complain when we find out (as recently seen at Foggy Bottom) they are not acting in accordance of that rule of thumb and not acting like professionals.... 

Doug just did a post on McCain - and points out that sticking to his guns is an admirable trait (even when I REALLY disagree with him - and yes, there are things on which I really do agree a lot with).

I went to school at BU, and learned the hard way that a number of NYC denizens take no prisoners at all in a debate or in a confrontation....the "in your face, plain and simple" style of conversing can be rude.....but effective.  Well, I like this from Rudy:

Republican Rudy Giuliani said Monday the reputation of the United States has suffered globally not so much because of arrogant actions but for lack of salesmanship about benefits of democracy.

I'm not sure that I totally agree about the arrogance part - unless he is talking about State folks - they can be arrogant!  But to the point, there are times that an engineer will appreciate a good salesman....and I haven't heard about many in State lately.  And that to me, is the whole point of State - promoting our values, our way of life, and the benefits that have accrued to us because of the adherence to the Rule of Law, Private Property, and One Man-One Vote.  Bunches of others (like a mostly non-corrupt government, for which I give thanks!).

Look I realize that our culture-mongers - think Hollywood and Academic snivelers - are often those that get the attention and the press.  Our pop culture doesn't help either.  Yet, a good salesman, when armed with a great product, should be able to sell the heck out of it.

But I like Rudy's point - my take is "if they were doing their job well, Rudy wouldn't have to be talking about the State Department!" 

Anyways....

(H/T: Lucianne.com)

If he is elected president, he said, he would seek ambassadors who would work hard to sell U.S. strengths to foreigners, not just explain those distant nations to Washington.

I just read another piece (drat, I wish I remember who and where!!!) about American Empire; I hear it all the time from the Nutty Professor in our part of the woods - if you believed him, you'd think we had a Monarchy in place and the rest of us were mere serfs - this from a guy who lives from the public educational trough here in NH.

Side tangent: ever notice that it is only those on the Left (and yes, the Nutty Professor wants the UN to run the world and has said that a nation's sovereignty should not be absolute) that complain and call the US an Empire?  And when confronted, they talk about "oh no, it's not an a real empire like the Brits had, or the other Western European countries' colonies, but economically and culturally, the US wants to control the world!"

As far as Empire building is concerned (using the real definition of empire building of invading, taking, and holding onto someone else's land for ever), I've always liked Colin Powell's retort:

We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years and we’ve done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in, and otherwise we have returned home to seek our own, you know, to seek our own lives in peace, to live our own lives in peace.

On the subject of promoting America abroad, Giuliani spoke of the benefits at a "Politics and Eggs" breakfast sponsored by the New England Council and the New Hampshire Political Library.

"These are beautiful things, almost like gifts given to us by God, the wonderful resources of our country, the great system that our framers created that was ingenious," Giuliani said.

Ingenious?  Try Genius!  It is the BEST system yet devised and why shouldn't we market it!  The combination of capitalism and democracy has lifted more people out of poverty and despotism than any other system in history.  And I have a real hard time with anyone saying that it cannot work.  While it came semi-naturally to we rebels from the Crown here in the New World, it does seem that in the rest of the Anglosphere have adapted well - and non-Anglosphere (e.g., Germany and Japan for starters) has worked well indeed! 

He added: `We've got to have a State Department that gets that, that understands that, that we've got a reputation that needs to be defended and protected. We are a country of good motives, of good people, of great accomplishments. We don't want to force 'em on anybody in the world; we'd like to share it with them. That's what diplomacy is about. It's about sharing who we are with others and getting them to understand us better and understand our motives, because we don't have bad motives."

And they won't be shared well when State is concerned with the status quo and not upsetting other people - I remember back during Reagan days when State was not happy about putting Pershings around the globe...or the "harsh" rhetoric about "take down this wall".  Plain and simple, and none of this nuance crap when it isn't needed.   

Nonetheless, he conceded problems in the Middle East and the war in Iraq may be partially to blame on the United States, saying, "We didn't know enough about that culture in advance. We assumed things that might come out of our knowledge of Western culture or even other Asian cultures or Asian cultures that we'd become familiar with, like Japan and China."

What I said is true, but so is this. We do need to know the culture, and we can be insular as well.  But that does not obviate the need to be well spoken about what we are about and how it can help other.

For instance, just look around and tell me how many benevolent dictators you see in the world (and that includes "democratically elected" ones that have turned into despots like Mgambe and Chavez) that have done as well by their citizenry as we have done by ours.

At another point, he said: "Maybe sometimes we're too short; maybe sometimes we are too arrogant. Everybody has good points and bad points. One of the great things about Americans are we are very productive, we are very logical, we're terrific problem solvers, and sometimes we're too impatient."

He said those problems could be overcome with diplomacy that better understands foreign cultures.

Posted by Skip at 12:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Dave at 12:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A new Massachusetts policy makes it clear that State Troopers should not enforce federal immigration laws, but troopers may ask a person's immigration status during traffic stops and other matters if it is relevant to a criminal investigation.

.

The policy places written restrictions on troopers' dealings with federal immigration authorities - a source of contention for Governor Deval Patrick's administration in recent months. Just after taking office In January, Patrick rescinded predecessor Mitt Romney's decision to let State Police officers arrest illegal immigrants, only to face complaints that individual troopers continued to target them in Western Massachusetts.

.

State officials said yesterday that while the policy is similar to current practice, they wanted to make sure it was uniform across the Commonwealth.

Posted by Doug at 9:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 8:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

1. Which candidate would you most like to see as the nominee?
2. Which candidate do you think is most likely to capture the GOP nomination?
3. Which of the candidates do you believe is the most conservative?
4. Who do you believe would be the MOST electable candidate in 2008?
5. Who do you believe would be the LEAST electable candidate in 2008?
6. Which candidate do you trust the most to be tough on illegal immigration?
7. Which candidate do you trust the most to be fiscally conservative?
8. Which candidate do you trust the most on foreign policy issues?

A) Fred Thompson
B) John McCain
C) Mike Huckabee
D) Mitt Romney
E) Rudy Giuliani

Posted by Doug at 5:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

It's been a little while since I did anything on the "different" side of jets (like jet powered VW bugs, street luges, and the like).  Well, this is not all that strange, but couldn't resist....
 

SR-71 Blackbird

This was the premier spy plane of the US for years.  Conceived of by Kelly Johnson of the famous Lockheed Skunk Works division and first flown in 1964, it was a MACH 3 capable craft.  When I saw this over at DefenseTech, I thought I'd share:

One day, high above Arizona, we were monitoring the radio traffic of all the mortal airplanes below us. First, a Cessna pilot asked the air traffic controllers to check his ground speed. ‘Ninety knots,’ ATC replied. A twin Bonanza soon made the same request. ‘One-twenty on the ground,’ was the reply. To our surprise, a navy F-18 came over the radio with a ground speed check. I knew exactly what he was doing. Of course, he had a ground speed indicator in his cockpit, but he wanted to let all the bug-smashers in the valley know what real speed was. ‘Dusty 52, we show you at 620 on the ground,’ ATC responded.

The situation was too ripe. I heard the click of Walter’s mike button in the rear seat. In his most innocent voice, Walter startled the controller by asking for a ground speed check from 81,000 feet, clearly above controlled airspace. In a cool, professional voice, the controller replied, ‘Aspen 20, I show you at 1,982 knots on the ground.’ We did not hear another transmission on that frequency all the way to the coast.

Heh!  More Speed!

Posted by Skip at 8:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

....

Posted by Doug at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

And we thank them very much!

To play (or "stream") a clip now, just click on it.  To download it to your PC, right click on it and tell the process where to save the file for you.
 

        Hour 1

Coming!

Coming

SchlubCam:

With just Doug and I in the studio this week, with no in-studio guests, I didn't turn it on.  Try next week!

Posted by Skip at 10:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yup, former Senator John Edwards!

No, the 'Grok has not gone over to the Dark Side.  Rather, we actually have a plan:

• We want to know what the Dems are doing
• Doug and I believe that this may be last Prez cycle that will have true retail politics (with so many states moving up their primary / caucus events, NH may finally lose the First in the Nation status)
• And yes, it does tend to upset some of the local Dems (but not all!) who really do believe that we are part of the core of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!

So, I went!  This time, just a quick jaunt north to Meredith at Hart's Turkey Farm (which is actually a great restaurant that has REALLY good turkey dinners all year long). 

The crowd was different than some of the Repub ones that we've covered lately - a tad older, a tad more willing to shout out questions, and much more willing to respond back to the speaker.  When they asked questions, they did sound madder than those at the Repub events - or are they more "into" the moment?  BDS?  Certainly, there was more emotion shown by these event-goers than on my side of the fence.  

Unlike almost all of the other candidates that host these events, there was no buildup (even though he was a bit late) to his entrance - no special theme song, no heads up from the campaign staff, nothing.  As you can see from my rough notes (after the jump), I actually missed his entrace - he just appeared out of no-where (actually, coming in from the kitchen next to the meeting room).  Certainly caught the local lady doing the introducing flat footed. 

My impression (and remember my bias - I'm a card carrying member of the VRWC!)?

He is well spoken and got right into a cadence quickly (for a multi-millionaire trial lawyer, one should not expect anything less). Certainly, he was never at a loss for words!  I did notice that when he was asked a question, there was a bit more of a tendancy to zero in on the questioner a bit more than I have seen other candidates do.  When he was honking on the big corporations, he certainly got more animated.

And that is part of my problem: 

Given that he is a good trial lawyer (and let's give him his due - like it or not, he's good at it), I cannot be sure if the emotion he shows is real or is it a function of his training and vocation?  His job was to convince people of his view point by any means possible - and that, at times, takes acting.  Not that no other politicians can act too, but it does leave a question in my mind - deep down belief or political point?

I didn't record all of his speech and missed the first question - but FWIW, here's what I got. 

Click here to listen (about 30 minutes)

Considering how far away I was (Note to JE campaign staff - the MSM is not happy over THIS event!), it recorded fairly well (Edirol R-09 by Roland - I LOVE it!) 

=======================

Rough notes: 

11/25/07 John Edwards at Hart's Turkey Farm (how appropriate for a political event)

2:00 Pretty poor press arrangements. For those that know Hart's, we are in the room next to the bar, and it is basically a long narrow room. The end of the room has an American flag with an "open" area with chairs surrounding it....about 10 chairs long and few across. The press area is 1/2 way down and consists only of about one row of chairs wide - for tripods. Not very good at all and no special seating for dead tree reporters. No WiFi at all. I sat in the chair for the tripod area and was asked to move back a row. I noticed that they only had an extension cord running to the middle of the room, so I connected my surge strip to it. And yes, the campaign staff never bothered to return to put one in – their only response was to put in the “sound box” from which the camera crews could get a sound feed. The crews and reporters looked at the single strip and were miffed. No riser for the cameras, no tables for laptops.

2:10 and the room is starting to fill up. Mostly much older people are coming in....again, NH casual dress as with the Fred Thompson event

2:20 Took a few shots. The place is really starting to fill up at this point in time. The young campaign staff seems to be a tad disorganized with getting people into the seats and keeping the 'press area" clear - kinda amusing as no press has shown up with the vaunted "tripods".

People are talking....I have been recognized by a few people, as I heard a couple of disparaging remarks concerning "that guy" and "that Republican". Hey, at least I try to treat the Cookie Lady with respect when in person (but not her ideas that her group is espousing. Hey, where is she? Or do they only show up with their wares at Republican events?). All in day's work....ha!

I did ask about a Press Avail - there should be one outside after the meeting.

2:25 - the room is now officially packed. I'd get up and take a few more shots, but I'm not sure that I'd get my seat back. Folks are lined up and down the walls and every seat is taken. While the idea of selecting smaller rooms to make sure that is seems that there is overwhelming support for a candidate is great PR, it does make for warm rooms (especially with the winter clothing on).

It's always amusing to watch the campaign staffers with cell phones attached to their ears - just like our Pat, with two going at the same time and they'd be texting on a third if they could. Sounds like Edwards is running about ten minutes late.

Dang, with an older crowd around me, they are pretty much quiet. The campaign did have thick booklets to hand out to every one that tells what Edwards stances and plans are. I do have to say that a lot of them are being read. The staff is also handing out Edwards campaign signs to wave for during the event.

2:31 - they just brount in the sound box for the camcorders....good thing that I had brought in my surge outlet. However, these guys are not thinking too straight as they are not taping anything down and two people have already tripped over the wires (say, in two minutes). I love it - the "tripods are setting up in front....wonder if they are the campaign cameras?

Just met Kate, the press secretary....she said that there would not be a press avail as Edwards is running late. Drat!

Now the rest of the press is coming in with laptops, and boy are they upset in that they do not have a place to sit other than the floor. One lady is absolutely spitting mad – I wish I had asked who she was with to see the write up later!

2:41 John Edwards just came in No announcement, people are now standing. Didn't catch the name of the lady from Meredith who is intro'ing John....she noticed the size of the crowd and made a crack "and you thought that this was a Republican stronghold!". Evironment, healthcare, poverty - he's a leader in all areas. Not the typical American story - he will be the leader that will fight to get the country back. And then Edwards took over.

Remembers coming 2004 and remarks that there were far fewer attendees back then (gets a small laugh from the crowd).

Hope you had a good Thanksgiving. Elizabeth and kids are doing great...started in on a Xmas tree the day after.

Now know when the NH primary is!

Bashing Bush example - we need a President that will know about the middle class pressures and how to help. What Edwards would do:

• Use the oil reserve to release price pressure
• Low income heating program - that should be expanded because of the troubles today that people are facing
• Expand the winterizing program

All things that Bush should be doing to drive down short term cost of heating. We need to find out if the pil companies are gouging (large applause). We know they control the whole process - Justice should be investigating. We need to stop subsiding these huge oil company profits.

This is a bigger problem - big corps - oil, drug, insurance, energy - all of these at the same time see their profits are historic highs. It is because they know how to influence and corrupt the democracy that sways the process against common people. He was against Part D of Medicare - mentioning that the lobbyists wrote the law. He wants to kill the drug ads on TV. He says that the drug companies spend twice on ads as on R&D to drive up demand for the most expensive drugs.

Why don't we have Universal Healthcare (“UH”) in this country, that we so desperately need (only 1 person clapped at this point, then 2 other jointed, half heartedly).

Edwards says that if we traded corporate supporting Republicans with corporate supporting Dems, nothing will change. The corps will not give power away....we have to take it away.

Look at Blackwater – it is lawless in Iraq.. He claims that it was because they gave hundreds of thousands to Bush and Cheney. It is the same with with (wait for it – I've been expecting that word!) Haliburton with no bid contracts

He mentions that global warming is a big crisis – lots of clapping this time – the power and oil corps are in the way and want things to remain the same. They will fight attempts to change the status quo as they have much to lose.

He related that he watch something on PBS on WW II and the American people. We went over and defeated Germans and then we went over and defeated Japan. We, as Americans, are just as good now as they were then. Twenty generations came before us – the promise is that their children would have it better than they did. That is the great moral test of our generation....we will but we have to be ready for this fight. Most of our problems would take care of themselves, tax and trade problems, if the people interest came first. BUT, corp profits come first. So we have to do something about it.

Lobbyists – he is against them.

He is very much for public financing for campaigns to get the money out of the process.

He is ready to take up the fight against the oil and drug companies.....big applause

Makes the claim that he has been fighting them all his life - 20 years in the courtroom.....and that he beat them over and over again.

2:57 Oops - the flag fell partially down.,....staffers now finally fixing it a couple minutes after the “stars” drooped down. Duct taped with string to the ceiling. Gotta love duct tape.

Curious – no John Edwards sign up front.....just signs that the staffers passed out before the event started. Funny – at no time did they ever get waved for the cameras – did the event attendees merely assume that they were souvenirs or did the staffers forget to tell them to wave them?

===========

Q&A Time

Warren Clark from Meredith – The lobbyist talk is great stuff but all the US Reps and Senators got into office only because they got money from the lobbyists...how will you do it?

The Bully Pulpit is the biggest weapon the President has. The President has to use to to make the public believe that the entire process is corrupt and only then will the politicians follow. Great American Presidents have always made their case to the public, convinced them of something, and then the Congress reacts to it in order to stay elected.

Menden <missed last name> from  Laconia <asked in a cranky way> - Universal Healthcare - when will you support single payer UH supported by our taxes and paid by the government?

His plan - gives every one a choice of private or public plan.  3-4% overhead in public delivered health care (up to 40% in private).  He wanders a bit, brings up a story of another person asking the same question - like they have in Canada!  A lady then said NOT like Canada. 

He's not really answering the question and is wandering....he just wants everyone covered....even admits that he is not being clear

Boon Porter from Sandwich - What is your view on Pakistan, the most dangerous country facing America right now?

Problem – we have an unstable leader that has promised lots of reforms to his people but has not followed through on them, radicals are present, the Bomb, the on-going struggle with India over Kashmir, and state of emergency that was declared. Problem – say he's deposed and the radicals take over. Lots of risk. Mentioned AQ Khan spreading that nuclear knowledge.

He believes that the US can stop world wide proliferation in an ad hoc way. Sooner or later, the info will spread.

Long term – we have to rid the world of nuclear weapons (but he doesn't not say how!)

• Pakistan – here are solutions that Edwards would solve the problem
• The NW area of Pakistan is where AQ is - that has to be under control
• Pakistan has to hold elections
• We have to support the reformers
• We have to make sure that their nukes are safe and not fall into the hands of those that shouldn't have them

We've given about $10 billion to Pakistan and gotten little in return. We have to use the aid and reform the way that we are supplying it. We have little expertise in State Dept on Pakistan; it is frightening to see how little expertise the US has about Pakistan.

We have to join with a number of countries to deal with the Pakistanis and Mushareef diplomatically.

Michelle in <missed it> - Getting stability in Iraq is more than just withdrawing troops. What would you do to stabilize it?

There has to be compromise between Sunni and Shia. Now we may diverge - how to do it? Bush's argument, which is ridiculous, is that we should continue to pour money and men in and things will just get better.

Edwards will pull 40 to 50K combat troops out now and then continue to pull combat troops out. Then start intensive diplomatic to get them (Sunni and Shia) to agree.

Now, we have to bring in Iranians and Syrians, which have been mostly ignored. Iran has a vested interest in keeping Iraq stable to keep from 1 million refugees from pouring in....ditto with Syria. Add in Turkey and other countries in the area as they all have a need to keep the region stable.

We probably need quick reaction forces to stay, so we will have to keep a presence in the region.

Afghanistan is getting worse as Taliban is getting reassembling and getting worse.

<I stopped to snap off a few pictures>

Bill Keatsmen from Plymouth. One of your main points is strengthening the middle class. Are you better off than you were - I don't think so. He feels that he as been abused. How would you do so?

If you look at history in context – as it used to be before depression, there were very few real rich...after that, we had FDR and then a lot of people did well. Now we've gone back back to where the rich are getting richer faster and the middle class is struggling. Government is doing the bidding of the rich and corporations.

• We need Universal Healthcare to drive down healthcare costs,
• We need to get our kids to get to college. He mentioned his “College for everyone" idea which would have government pay for anyone going to college at a state college or community college if they just work 10 hours/ week That way, they will not amass that much debt.
• There has to be tax relief, make it easier to save by matching it.
• Mentioning subprime and the predators....mentions the 38 homes in a single area that were foreclosed on
• (Note: he didn't mention that they were in NO and did NOT mention his connection to the firm that did it – Fortress). We have to go after the predators with new laws!
• He would highly regulate Payday loans companies.

Help with everything it seems...it has to be shared prosperity.

He is not poor now, but talks about his Dad asking for $50 bucks to get his Mom and him home from the hospital to a two room house.

He says he has lived the American dream. He wants every kid to have that chance again. They won't all be wildly successful but they ought to have the chance. But that ideal is withering in America.

Sharon Lawring (sp?) - she is making calls - the older folks are worried about Social Security. They want SS for their children too - what's your plan?

He is against privatizing - biggest applause of the event. He is against raising the age or lowering benefits.

He wants to raise the cap on income, where the current cap is at $97K. Wall streeters should be paying their fair share.

(Note: I've not heard of this before – this idea from Edwards is kinda weird). He wants a tax buffer zone from between $97 - $200K; they would not pay any additional SS tax (basically, no change from today). Anyone over that $200K would then start paying the SS tax. He makes the observation that one is not wealthy at $100K

Note: I think he shocked the crowd – a very load zone.

Shouted from the audience (sounded kinda mad) – I don't make close to $100K - why have the buffer zone - make it graduated! Edwards says that he's not heard of that suggestion before (graduated during the buffer zone)

Q - cannot hear. long question or set up? Times when vets because of the nature, they couldn;'t meet the operational status for certain medals.

He will do something about that.

Q-fair trade

American trade has been a disaster. NAFTA, CAFTA! In '93 - Dem Pres, Dem House, Dem Senate. UH got killed. Corps were for NAFTA....it costs the US millions of jobs. Simple answer why - corps wanted one and not the other. We need to make our democracy work for all of us.

More pix:

Posted by Skip at 8:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Skill in achieving a result is a practiced art. An American leader must clearly picture the desired result and then each day exercise discipline and determination to be certain he or she is moving toward it.

A Proposed Illegal Immigration Solution

by Vern Wuensche

.

The first step in solving our illegal immigration problem is to require a tamperproof biometric ID to be obtained by all immigrants within say, one year.   Anyone discovered not having one after that time would be immediately deported. 

.

The second step is to strictly and universally enforce a penalty of say, $50,000 per violation on all employers who knowingly hired anyone without a proper ID after the one year period.  The result would be that there would soon be no demand for foreign workers.  Those coming here after one year would be self identified as being up to no good. Those not yet discovered to lack an ID would not be able to use free government services, as doing so would cause them to be identified and immediately deported.  One thing the government should not to is to selectively enforce the law as it did earlier in the year at Iowa’s meat packing plants.  Enforcement should be against all or against none.

.

The first result would be that employers would probably not object to this system because since they would all be under the same rule they would be at no competitive disadvantage with their direct competition.  Increased costs would simply be passed on to the purchasers of their products.

.

The second result would be that illegal immigrants already living here would also not object as these workers would undoubtedly see a strong increase in their earnings.  This would come about because with the elimination of the new supply of illegal immigrants they would now have little competition for their highly demanded work skills.

.

Some will say that these illegal immigrants with this system would still be living in the shadows.  However, where they receive free health care, free education, have the ability to obtain a license to drive a car, and have the ability to often vote illegally, they definitely are not living in the shadows.  Most of them would be satisfied in retaining their present status with their increased earnings.  I have learned of instances where illegal immigrants were taking steps toward becoming citizens and when they discovered they would be less likely to avoid the tax man they chose instead to remain in the shadows as it was the better choice.  For many of them living in the shadows is an economic decision.

.
Those illegal immigrants already here who have obtained an ID should be allowed to remain but with no amnesty of any sort promised or implied.  Since this is the point of greatest disagreement among Americans we should kick this can down the road. Time should pass until these immigrants have more fully assimilated in learning English and participating in our culture so that Americans at such a time can more easily reach a consensus on how to handle them.

.

Border security should be controlled by the sheriff in each border county as they best know the terrain and crossing points in their county.  They should be assisted by more border patrol agents and the National Guard as required.  Technology should be used extensively together with sections of wall being built and added as each section proves cost effective.  Or the alternative of using a technological fence or in some combination with a wall should be implemented.

.
To solve the problem of seasonal workers demanded by American business the government of Mexico should be required to set up something akin to an employment agency where American companies would contract with them for certified-to-be-safe (American verified), bonded workers who are no security threat who would return to Mexico after the contract was over.  Failure to return would result in the forfeiture of the say, $10,000 to $20,000 bond.  The forfeited funds could be used for providing more security at the border.

.

This plan should solve most objections.  For conservatives there would be no amnesty and the border would be more secure as the right authorities controlling our border would now have the staff to handle a smaller number of violators and a fence as it was effective would be built.  Immigrants already here would be happy because of their increased financial status. And employers now could have an adequate supply of immigrant workers without any government bureaucracy at what would be an evolving market rate for their services.

Posted by Doug at 8:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, same thing exists in politicalese. Democrats (as with homosexuals absconding with the word "Gay" or atheists attempting to take the word "Bright" for themselves) are trying to now own the phrase "common good"; there can't be anything but trouble for rest of us (or perhaps, them).

In this article in the Wall Street Journal, the Democratic Prez candidates can't even agree what it means:

At stake is the notion of "common good," which many Democrats are embracing as a new framework for expressing their vision of broader opportunity and equality.

They see it as an effective way to talk about economic fairness -- and reduce the Republicans' big advantage in the linguistic arms race.

Right, let's just add one more word to the pile that Democrats already abuse like:

• Progressive = Liberal (but being smart about it....or is that smart-a** about it?)
  
• Invest = spend your money my way
  
• Social Justice = I have no idea what this means anymore, but it generally isn't good for most middle class white guys trying to take care of our families - no matter what we do or say, we're the guilty party.
• Income Inequity = You're earning way more than me, so let's take it away from you because we all know you cheated us out of our fair share (see below) to get it.  This assumes that income is a fixed pie universe to work; problem is, we all know that the pie is always expanding.  But hey, who needs facts in politics!
  
• Fair Share = once again, I dunno (see Social Justice, above)....  My question:  how come only Liberals get to decide what is fair (and they sqawk that I generally don't play fair)?

So now, we not only have to listen to them, we need a translator to figure out what they mean when their mouths flap!  Why can't they just be straight forward, use plain language and just  really say what they mean (oh, sorry....that would be like George Bush and we can't have that can we?).

Oh, that's right - McGovern DID try that philosophy ("I will raise your taxes") and lost - not just big time, but HUGE time!

So, they take another tack and try to confrustrate us all - sounds good, must be good, right? Mmmm, not so fast:

For much of the last decade or so, many Democrats complain, conservative strategists have been running rhetorical circles around Democrats with focus-grouped phrases such as "death tax" and "ownership society" that buttress Republicans' probusiness, free-market views. Meanwhile, Democrats' populist-style attacks on big business during the last two presidential elections -- for instance, by Al Gore and John Kerry -- have come across to many voters as shrill and outmoded.

Especially with this study, it seems that Democrats, no longer the Republicans, are now the party of big money.  This is like John Edwards with the gazillion square foot house posing as a middle classer (all the while his wife is angry at the across the street neighbor for failing to keep up his property, making their property worth less....egads, he's a Republican too!).

Based on ancient philosophy and Roman Catholic social teaching, "common good" is becoming a poll-tested mainstay of Democratic rhetoric. Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are using the phrase frequently in stump speeches and position papers.

You mean that the Democrats are finally finding religion?  Does that mean now that they will start to adhere (at least those that profess to be Catholics) to their Church's teachings?  Can we expect them to reject pro-choice stances and be against abortions, as the Roman Catholic Church teaches?

Naw, didn't think so.....this is political opportunism at its worst. Look, I'm not Catholic; I'm an Evangelical Christian.  My contention is that you really cannot pick and choose what part of a religion's doctrine you will or will not support, especially one like this.  But I am absolutely not in favor of picking and choosing for the mere sake of political persuasion.

One little problem: No one agrees on exactly what it means, potentially compromising its effectiveness as a rallying cry for the Democratic Party.

Heh! (adopted / stolen from Glen Reynolds of Instapundit fame, who is wont to say to indicate amusing derision!). That's right, let's agree on something to bash the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy - and then fail to agree on what it is:

Mr. Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, is using it in progressive fashion, to refer to leveling the economic playing field and backing strong unions and universal health care. Sen. Obama of Illinois uses it in a more centrist sense, to mean shared duties and responsibilities, not only among classes but between the two parties. Sen. Clinton of New York uses it in both ways.

Good luck with that.  While there may be things, small things, that lie in between the parties philosophically, there are many that are not.  When one party proposes that which is anathema to the other, there may well be no way to compromise.

Personal example - I am totally against free universal health care (it will be neither free or universal and not amount of gum-beating can change that economic fact), totally against allowing illegal immigrants have benefits that should be going to our legal residents, and am totally against pulling our troops out of Iraq (they claim to be able to end the war simply by pulling the troops out; they remain silent of the fact that it takes TWO sides to end a war and one of them has to admit to defeat).

So, where is the common ground? 

The phrase first began to surface on the political scene in 2003 and 2004 as economic inequality and the Iraq invasion helped galvanize fears among progressives that traditional American values were being swamped by a rising tide of selfishness. Seeking a framework for voicing their opposing view, religious progressives turned to the concept of the common good, an ancient idea with roots in Aristotle and Augustine.

Let's talk about "selfishness" - is it the proper role of government to combat selfishness? Is it proper for Liberals to harness the power of government (e.g., taxation and enforcement) to force people to share? Is this an extension of Political Correctness that we must all think the same?  I'm all for people sharing - but on a VOLUNTARY basis.

And I think this totally shows the moral bankruptness of the Liberals and the enlightedness of Conservatives:  actions of kindness and sharing are best when they are based on individual choice and action (Conservatives).  When coerced by government (at the behest of Liberals) ,it is no longer charity by definition.  And as Dr. Arthur C. Brooks ("Who Really Cares - The Surprising Truth of Compassionate Conservatism", More on Dr. Arthur C. Brooks here and here) discovered, government raising taxes to do more "good works" results in less volunteerism and giving by individuals.

So, is that what you want?  Is that what they really want? 

Once again, Liberals going for what sounds good and not what actually does good!

Nailing down exactly what the common good means is proving to be a slippery task. Some liberals behind the original common-good initiative believe the movement's agenda should include specifics like universal health care, affordable broadband access, more public-works jobs, stronger union protections, fairer global-trade rules and tax rules that favor workers over investors.

That is generally the approach that former Sen. Edwards takes. "Universal health care, ending poverty, tax fairness, strong unions, a cleaner environment, better schools -- all of these important policies are [part of] the common good," said campaign spokeswoman Colleen Murray. It also involves "taking on the narrow interests that care more about what's good for them than what's good for America," she adds.

Other campaigns have taken the idea in different directions. "Barack Obama uses the phrase 'common good' to express his fundamental belief that all Americans want to get beyond the divisive politics of the last seven years and come together as one country," said spokeswoman Jen Psaki. "He is running for president because he believes that America needs a president who has the ability to unite this country around a common purpose."

In the 2008 campaign, Mrs. Clinton has used the theme in both senses.

At a candidate forum on CNN over the summer, a questioner asked how her common-good theme plays out on specific issues like taxes, gun control, health care and energy. It "requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground," Mrs. Clinton responded. But if necessary, she added, that "means something has to be taken away from some people."

A senior adviser to Mrs. Clinton says she views the common good primarily as a way to answer the "on your own" tendencies of Bush administration economic policies, which have helped a few do well, and left the majority standing in place. "She's drawn a sharp contrast between the Bush administration's extreme sense of individualism, versus some investment in the common good," the adviser said.

All this frustrates many liberal activists who initially embraced the phrase as a forceful way for Democrats to express moral outrage over the failure of conservative policies.

Alright, so let's run all of these things through the prism of the word "freedom" as defined by Skip, shall we? And let's keep it simple - my definition is easy to understand: freedom is defined by the choices I can make.  The more I am allowed to make choices for myself, the more freedom I have.  When my choices are constrained by others, the less freedom I have. 

• Universal Healthcare - All I have to say is that John Edwards will REQUIRE me to see a doctor and say "Britain" and "Canada".  It will require me to change my life style over time so as not to be a "drag" on the system.  Less freedom (more and more over time - you can take that to the bank!)
  

• Affordable broadband access - WHY is this a function of government?  Nice to have, but this is commerce, plain and simple.  Yes, those without it are at a disadvantage Internet-wise, but if this is valuable to you, MOVE! This will cause me to lose some of my private property that otherwise would be mine to control (yes, money).  Less freedom.
  

• More public works jobs - The WPA back in the 1930s did Public Works and did employ millions.   But ask yourself - where did the government get the money to pay for them?  Be honest, now.  And this set the stage for more policies by FDR, which all historians, was the beginning of really big government in America and started the walk towards socialism - hardly the ideals of our Founding Fathers.  Less freedom
  

• Stronger union protections - in no way does this enhance my freedom.  It only diminishes mine, as unions ordinarily will drive costs up. One only has to look at the UAW and what it has done to the Big Three (ok, Medium Three) for their cost basis and how they are slumping.  Also, look at what the UAW has done to its own membership - they are one third the size of what they used to be during the height of the American car industry.

As opposed to the American car industry run by foreign auto makers.  Less freedom.

• Fairer global trade rules -The real simple answer is not more rules but allow more effective use of capitalism.  Since its beginning, capitalism has raised the living standard of the common folks at a skyrocketing pace since the Industrial Revolution compared to time immemorial.  In other countries, it is their governments corruption, their failure to grow reasonable infrastructures, and ignoring the fundamentals of capitialism underpinnings - the Rule of Law, respect for Intellectual and Private Property (of all types), and free trad among interested parties that prevents their citizens from realizing their full potential.

That said, this decreases my choices of goods, as "fairer" by Democrat definitions from the candidates, will mean more regulation and higher tariffs on imported goods, and higher domestic costing products due to protectionism.  Less freedom.

• Tax rules favoring workers over investors -Frankly, this is where my heartburn starts - the very fact that politicians know and use the fact that behavior can be mandated by tax policy drives me nuts.  We all need to pay taxes, as we do need government.  But why do I need Nanny Staters to tell me what is better for me and make it cost more to do othewise? 
  

Once again, that said, the economy needs both investors that can provide the  knowledge and the capital to make things happen and the workers that can actually do the work.  Tax policy should be for revenue generation - not behavior modification.  Again, less freedom.

• Ending poverty -  This is not going to happen.  Period.  We will always have the poor - the problem is that we in this country keep redefining poverty upward.  Except for the mentally ill and socially / self-destructive individuals among us, we have extremely little poor.  And if you want to fight that, consider that the UN defines the abject poor in the world as subsisting on $1-$2/day.  Remember, it was not that long ago that a study showed that many of our poor owned cars, microwaves, multiple TVs, and so on. Want real poor?  Go to Bangledesh or sub-Saharan Africa; that's the true definition of poor.  We have spent over $6 trillion in fighting the war on poverty - poverty will never go away.  Yet, Liberals will demand more and more be done without counting the cost.  Less Freedom.
  

• Tax fairness - the present system is highly regressive at the high end.  From the National Taxpayers Union:

Note: we are now at the tipping point where the bottom 51% of the population, that pay basically no income tax, have enough votes to take anything they want from the actual producers in society (aided, abetted, and encouraged by mostly politicians on the Left).  Is it a good thing when more than half of a society's citizens no longer have a vested interest in how government actually is run vs that same half expecting to be taken care of?

Note: get two teachers in most districts married to each other, and they hit the top 5% in a lot of cases.  Or just one Congressman (who voted their way into that bracket with our money).

Less freedom because the rich keep defining down what rich is.

• Cleaner environment - this is  one of the few things that I can agree with.  However, I truly wish that the phrase "cost/benefit ratio" was used more in government.  I also disagree that government should collect a carbon tax - can someone tell me how me giving more money to the bureaucrats is going to result in a cleaner environment commisserate with the money I give?  Neutral

• Better schools - the simple answer is that we all benefit.  In reality, the teachers unions (think NEA) actually control education here in the US without any real choice among all but the rich (and just look where most rich politicians send their kids!).  Just spending more money on schools will result in one thing - higher paid teachers and administrators.  Does that automatically mean higher academic achievement by students?  Study after study has shown the answer to be "no". 
  

Unless the Dems are willing to support vouchers which will allow for competition, getting better schools under Democratic rule will not happen - and the Dems are too much beholden to the NEA for that to happen.  More money means more taxes - Less freedom (with me predicting no better results).

• "taking on the narrow interests that care more about what's good for them than what's good for America" - Lets see, strengthening unions (about 12% membership overall - that's a minority and about 35% in government - still a minority - what does that say for narrow interests?  The Democratic party, it could be argued, is nothing more that a patchquilt of special interests that sometimes agree with each other.  Special interests, by definition, are minority interests.

This is neutral from the standpoint that the Dems would have to vote against themselves.  The reality is Less Freedom, as the Dems will reward those special, narrow interests that get them elected - simple political calculus.

• all Americans want to get beyond the divisive politics of the last seven years and come together as one country - Ha! heard that already when the Dems swept to power in the House and Senate....with all of the campaign rhetoric, one would have thought a political Uptopia was about to take place in DC, thanks to Pelosi and Reid.  Has it actually happened?  Er, no - this is too silly to rate!
  

• Mrs. Clinton - "the Bush administration's extreme sense of individualism, versus some investment in the common good,".  It has not been an extreme sense of individualism, and I only have to point out that even Mrs. Clinton has pointed out that "American cannot afford all of my ideas" - so much for self-imposed limitation of "some investment".  But if she gets in, she's already up to $178 Billion in new spending.  Less Freedom
  

• Mrs. Clinton again - It "requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground",  "means something has to be taken away from some people." Do I even have to comment on this (er, I actually did - here!).  Less Freedom
  

Well, let me go tally up the score....umm, common good, eh?  America is about freedom and the Bill of Rights was written to prevent busybodies from infringing on the rest of us.  It seems that this fundamental principle of this Republic has been forgotten by the Democrats. 

Too often for Democrats, "the first thing that gets compromised is the moral ground," says Mr. Lakoff, the Berkeley linguist. "They don't realize that the moral ground is their major strength."

Once again, he's way off base - what is so moral about forcibly reducing someone else's freedom and private property to simply give it to another?

I'd vote for Ron Paul without a second thought before I'd vote for one of these folks.....Yikes! 

Posted by Skip at 8:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...........

Posted by Dave at 7:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 7:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Today, we had Liz Mair on the show and we discussed Hillary's free trade leanings (she doesn't, especially when compared to what Bill did when he was Prez) that she wrote about in her article in NRO.  We ended up chatting about China, and the real problems that we have experienced lately with goods from that country.  We basically concluded that while many may be jumping up and down for better government regulation and testing, we agreed that over the long haul, consumers will avoid products from China just because of the problems with pet foods, lead paint (and use of lead in general) and toxic plastics in childrens toys.  This will do more harm to their economy than any regulation we could put into place quickly, and with no retribution (i.e., what's the retribution by a country when people just won't buy your products vs the US establishing trade barriers?)

Well, shortly after the show, I found this article on Treehugger: 

Brand China is so in the toilet over leaded toys made for export that the Chinese Government is starting to take action against pirates in the toy supply chain. The other interesting aspect of his story is that it points to the lack of US coverage, so far, of evidence that voluntary standards don't help when China is the supplier.

[snip]

China has banned more than 750 toy makers from exporting in the last two months as Beijing bends to western pressure to stem a flood of dangerous goods, according to a European Commission report.

A further 690 companies in the southern province of Guangzhou alone were ordered to renovate factories and improve product quality within a fixed period after Beijing investigated more than 3,000 manufacturers in September and October.

00000 

This is why I believe that American (and other) consumers will basically say "Thanks, but no thanks".  Cheap is one thing - dangerous is another.

The Chinese economy is about to learn a long hard lesson about American consumers and that concerns a word that plays little in China right now - trust. 

Posted by Skip at 7:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rudy Giuliani in Laconia 11/24/07 (GG photo)

Funded in part by a foundation set up by one of the very liberal founders of Ben and Jerry's ice cream, the cookie she gave me was rather good. The ideas - not so much...they try to portray a picture that the Military budget should be cut a lot in order to fund social services. Maybe we'll have her on MTNP as well. as her pie chart on the cookie is wrong....most of the Federal budget is already set for social services......

..

Giuliani does disproportionately well among young voters compared with other leading Republican candidates 

Posted by Doug at 10:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

        

Rep. Slaughter - “Today, there are already over 3 million undergraduates who have seen their birth control costs rise, in some schools soaring as high as 50 dollars. For low income women, the increase in price means deciding between feeding their families and buying contraception.

Oy vas mir!

Well, as Rudy Giuliani put it so well, we have to get government out of the health care payment industry  and return back to market solutions.  So when I saw this, I just smiled....

In Boston, Nikki Bruce, a senior at Tufts, said the price of her NuvaRing, once an $8-a-month investment at the campus health clinic, had soared to more than $50. Ms. Bruce said she investigated and found that her health insurance policy would require a co-payment of $45 for the product.

Ms. Bruce, who is also a member of a Tufts student group, Vox, that advocates for reproductive rights, said she thought about switching to another method of birth control, something less expensive. She talked to her mother, she said. In the end though, she worried that her body might have a difficult time adjusting to new hormones.

A search led her to a nearby Planned Parenthood Clinic — off campus — where she said she now buys her NuvaRing for $27.

In true consumer based shopping - she took the time, did some research, did some price comparisons, and found that the market could supply her need at a lower cost.

Admittedly, PP may be tax payer subsidized for the NovaRing - I'm not taking the time to find out.  The thrust here is that if pushed, consumers will look out for their best own interest when it is their own money that has to be used (as opposed to another party paying for it).

Market forces win out..... 

Posted by Skip at 8:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

.

....

                   ..Pat Hynes                                Skip Murphy                          Doug Lambert

• We'll review Fred's visit to Laconia Friday.
• Liz Mair of LizMair.com drops in to see if we can sort out the anti-Mormon "push-poll" phone calls "scandal" once and for all. Who did it? Liz also had a piece in NRO this week about Hillary Clinton & free trade. Is it Clinton versus Clinton on this one? We'll also talk about the so-called "youth vote". Does Rudy win it? Will it matter? Is Mitt Romney going to suffer a "Willie Horton moment"? In the name of gender politics?
• Theodora Blanchfield is the associate editor of Campaigns & Elections magazine. They featured GraniteGrok in their October issue in a section reporting on which blogs to watch during the campaign cycle. (Click here and go to page S-4 S-5)  Theodora will discuss blog & other new media and the role they play in today's political campaigns. We'll also look at how activists are also using the new media to connect with people. Does all of this make for strange bedfellows as we see new alliances made up of those who would have been in conflict in an earlier era?
• Randal O'Toole, AKA the "Anti-Planner", is author of The Best Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future. He checks in to tell us why, contary to what you might think, when government plans, it oft goes awry. We'll ask about such programs like the "Main Street Program" that I alluded to in this post, and we'll talk one of our favorite subjects here on the 'Grok- highway and transportation planning. We'll throw in some talk about wasteful public transportation projects as well, and we'll find out how much time, effort, and gas tax money is wasted on non- highway spending.
• Rhode Island lays off state workers to save money due to a budget deficit of some $450 million? What are we going to do here in NH about ours?
• Will you do as Ray Burton admonishes and call the Governor & state legislature & ask to have gas taxes increased? I didn't think so...

Posted by Doug at 12:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It has been w while in coming but Fred finally came to the Lakes Region of NH to the Laconia VFW Hall.  While there was not a lot of advanced notice, a reasonably good sized crowd showed up.  As we saw with a couple of Rudy's events, neither Doug or I recognized a lot of people that arrived - a sign that Fred is attracting yet a different kind of crowd than some of the others.

He talked well and quickly during his opening remarks and certainly knew what he wanted to say. Speaking off the cuff, he did well in painting the pictures in the telling of his anecdotes, gesticulating widely. No hesitation at ALL and is quite smooth.

You know, I've read and heard other folks talking about Fred's laconic laid back style and the seemingly lack of fire in the belly attitude.  While I cannot speak to that sentiment personally, I can definately say that there was no evidence of that here today.  While this was a short stop consisting of a small amount of time for opening remarks and only 3 questions from the crowd, he seemed upbeat in a serious type of way (no, he was not bouncing around the stage) as he brought his defense and strength message to this bastion of veterans.

Look, I was quite disappointed that the time between the "Ask Fred" event (of which the 'Grok was blessed by being chosen as one of 6 blogs nationwide to participate - see the questions here and the compiliation here) and his answers.  Further, I thought that the lack of being in NH often kinda let folks go off the cliff as far as expectations were concerned ("hey, where's Fred?").   This did not, his chances help.

That said, if he does come often and shows the same type of command of details and the speaking presence he did today, who knows?  Maybe some of that "uncampaign sparkle and mystery" may return to the Fredster. 

Anyways, as always in covering these events, my rough Notes and a few more pics follow.

Crowd slowly coming in...

  ... and a few more

2:45: Just met Kevin Conroy - he had been with the Rudy campaign and is now is with Fred with the shift partially due to business and partially personal.  I wish him well as he is a nice guy and always watched out for the 'Grok and MTNP whenever anything happened with Rudy.

The place is starting to fill up. You can tell the campaign workers - suits without ties, adjusting little things here and there over and over. The regular folks - well, for most it is a day off and the dress is NH casual - mostly jeans, sweaters, and thick coats (fall / winter has arrived with a vengence here in central NH - temps are now in the 20s and we had snow for a white (kinda) Thanksgiving cover with a few mounds of white here and there still visible).

2:50: Not a lot of folks here yet but it has gone from a mere handful of folks about 20 minutes ago to 3/4's full and more filling in.  Spent the time talking with a number of folks that I had not met before. 

Well, VFW Commander Dan Kenny making an announcment that Fred will be in around 3:30pm
 

3:38 Well, this was supposed to start at 3pm and he's not here. Talked with a few people in the meantime - Joe McCormack who is the Belknap County Chair for Fred as well as a few others with the campaign

3:40 He just walked in and Dave Kenney, NH Vets for Fred chair is now introducing him. He is emphasising the call of duty and the honesty. He goes on about that Fred will tell the truth.

Fred:  Glad to be back. Mentions that he really only likes only 2 types of states - low tax and no tax states. Tennessee has no income tax but does have a sales tax, thus he say "one down and one to go".  We have a lot to be thankful for - especially for the brave folks that are serving in the military and we have a large obligation to them. He is emphasising the need for a strong defense. Relating his experience on Senate committees dealing with defense and intelligence and talking with the folks that are responsible for it and ifor intelligence.

Note: Big surprise - talking defense at a VFW!  TMEW and I talked about this event just a little bit ago.  She's not a political animal like Doug and I but has been going to the events with me - I AM thankful for a patient wife.  She actually has enjoyed seeing the different candidates, but the single issue event today had her wishing to hear about more topics.  Well, you can always saunter over to the Fred site here.

He's talking about the heroes he's met at different events, the Congressional Medal of Honor winner that introduced himand the folks in the Vets hospitals.

"Without the brave, there would be no land of the free."

A bit of a dig at the Dems in DC: Our 20 year olds coming back from Afghanistan and Iraq have a better idea of what we need for security than that 30 year vet in Congress."

His #1 issue - if our government cannot keep us safe, nothing else matters. That is our #1 obligation. We are the freest nation on the planet  - that's why we are the target.

Soviets were the threat in years gone by but the strategy of MAD kept things in check. Not true any more as now there is a multiplicity of threats: AQ, rogue nations (NK, Syria, Iran). There is weaponry in the world that we didn't know about before, and the delivery mechanisms are new. Bio-warfare - we could be under attack and not even know it. We are not doing all that we can do to protect ourselves.

He is laying some of the blame on the Press, stating that they are not reporting at all well the successes that we are having. If it is good news, the NYT reports it on Page 19....you know what page it would be on if it were bad news...

Starts a riff that we do not have enough men under arms -  soldiers, Marines and our equipment is tired. Inteelligence didn't know what was really going on. We have to do things better.

 
We have tried to get by on the cheap on this.  We do earmarks really well but have not fully funded our military even to historic levels for quite sometime. Historically that has been at 5% of GDP, now at 4-4.5% and heading downward. We need to have 1 million in uniform. We still have the traditional types of enemies - we are seen worldwide as being weak and divided. We have to make sure that the world understands taht we are strong and united.

The numbers are important, and the money is important. 4.5% is needed at a minimum....and we need the will to do it. Historically, the will of the people is at least as important as our military might. The world is watching to see if we are weak. We are steeped in the tradition of honor and a  tradition of duty and being the leader of the free world. We didn't ask for it:

"we don't always go looking for the bear in the woods, but sometimes the bera comes looking for us".

The more we can stabilize the world, the we will be.  He's hitting on all cylinders right now....emphasising that we need to be strong -> "Peace via strength".

We have to take care of our military when they come home - mentions Walter Reed. They know their appreciation of what is needed and has to happen.

He talks about the fact that he can step up and can communicate to the folks

Q&A time

Early talked about the Soviet Union. Yet Congress still spends on the F22 - will you cut that and spend it on Vets needs instead?

He will cut those programs that we do not need. Don't make those based on Boeing and Lockheed or someones' district. You have to proof that the need is not needed. For instance, Russia is now rebuilding and consolidating power and spending oil money (on its military). And the Russians are approving of "that man" (meaning Putin). Europe is only spending 1% of their GDP on defense .... they'd have to depend on us and we have no one to turn to except ourselves.

Mentions the latest cyberattack as a way of demonstrating new forms of warfare (for a background of the attack on the former Soviet vassal state of Estonia, try here). Our satellites are at risk (Chinese showed that they could punch out their own, thus they can do it to ours). We have a lot of vulnerablities and it will cost us more - we may not be able to have everything else (non-military) we want.

We can talk priorities, but defense has to come first is the jist of what he is talking about.

We treat AQ person like a criminal - they learn more about us than we do about them via the discovery process...

We are a nation of short memory. It it was a low tech attack on 9/11 - we have to learn from our history. We CAN hand off a better future to the next generation.

Deregulation and environmentalism (I couldn't quite hear the question)

He introduced a bill with Levin D-Michigan, based on the fact that we have regulation upon regulation upon regulation that is not based on any cost/benefit analsysis. How much do we have to pay for it - it may sound good, get a headline, but did it pan out?

We are stifling our business - a lot of costs are based on regulation but price is set by global needs. We are less competitive.

Big concern is whether global warming will be very harmful in the future. Are we as humans responsbile? We have to be concerned with it but there are a lot of questions about it - we have to be modest (example: the new stem cell technique - we thought that only embryonic stem cells would be helpful and this new technique, which might be a winner, wasn't even thought about it). We are arrogant if we think we have all the right answers at any given time. To what extent is this a cyclical event (warming and cooling) and to what extent is it man made a problem? We don't know all the answers. we need cleaner air anyways, and have done so with air and water problems. Before we make major decisions, we have to understand that this is a global issue before we adversly affect our economy (which is a bit fragile). If China and India do nothing, and we do a lot, our effort will be miniscule.

Pakistan - what do we need to be doing?

Interesting and dangerous part of the world. He met with Mushareef when Mushareef first took power. Takes a swipe at Bush "don't trust what I see in someone's eyes". We have two competing interests: Rule of Law - Mushareef is hurting himeself by jailing lots of his own people. #2 - nuclear state - A. Q. Khan sold nuclear secrets - mentioned Libiya. Pakistan is a high tech land but also have a great capability for destruction. There are those in that govt that are our enemies and are friends of the Taliban. Mushareef has a hard row to hoe. The ordinary Pakistani is not in love with us.

We need to hope that the govt doesn't fall into the hand of the radicals and he goes back to the Rule of Law and have free elections.

Posted by Skip at 6:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

State workers get layoff notices amid budget cuts

Governor Carcieri executed the first step in a sweeping plan to cut state jobs yesterday, telling dozens of state workers they were out of a job and notifying hundreds more that they may be laid off in the coming months.

continuing effort to plug a budget hole that may run as high as $450 million next year.

By one calculation the hole will approach $200 million. But when the planned off-budget spending increases are added in, the total shortfall will be $800 Million.

Posted by Doug at 1:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As you well know, Members of Congress have voted themselves sufficient pay raises to be be in the top 5% of all income earners in the US (that boundary is about $145,000/year).   Even though most of them are quite wealthy on their own, they generally give the reason that they have to support two houses and other type balderdash on that paltry amount. 

Tangent Alert: I find it less-than-curious that the Democratic leaders wish to reduce "income inequality" that they say is a looming crisis in the county.  Well, why not lead from the front, lead by example?  You voted yourselves to make your selves rich, if you truly believe that being rich is wrong, you've got over 500 of the richest people in America already regularly meeting in one building - start there!

After all, the House of Representatives here in NH recieve a stipend of $100 and travel mileage.  Period.  There are still some things here in NH that allow me to state that we are a "frugal" state (the word is actually in our Constitution) but I have to wonder how much that will last given the Dems have taken over (and in their first budget owning the House, the Senate, the Executive Council, the Governorship, is up 17%). 

Anyways, what I really wanted to talk about was this that I saw over at DefenseTech:

Well, this brand spanking new $70 million C-40 (just came as a Thanksgiving - early Christmas present - either to the Air Force that has to maintain / fly it, or to the Congress, who will use it for their junkets.

With exquisite timing, Boeing chooses a travel weekend that could go down in the annals of airborne horror to deliver a top-of-the-line Boeing Business Jet that will be assigned to Congress -- those folks who have charged billions in air travel taxes over the decades and left us with 1930s blind-landing technology. The jet took off from Seattle this morning for its base at Scott AFB in Illinois.

The C-40C, jam-packed with 40 seats by luxury-jet specialists at Greenpoint Technologies, is the third and last of a batch ordered in 2005. They will be operated by the USAF reserve to carry Congressional delegations around the world.

I've done more than my share of riding on "Guppies" - I can tell you beyond the shadow of a doubt that I have NEVER had the chance to ride in a 737 (the civilian version of the C-40) that had just 40 seats ("normal specs" here): 

The 737-700 was launched by Southwest Airlines in 1993 and entered service in 1998. It replaced the 737-300 in Boeing's lineup, and its direct competitor is the A319. It typically seats 132 passengers in a two class cabin or 149 in all economy configuration. An executive conversion is offered as the BBJ1.

Did you really think that most of these folks believe that they have to travel coach?  Naw, didn't think so.  For many, this will be as close as traveling CEO style that they will ever get - and do it at our expense.  Not only do they get nice seats, but a bunch of extras too!  Specifics of the C-40C (the military variant for these junket loving legislators) is here:

The cabin area is equipped with a crew rest area, distinguished visitor compartment with sleep accommodations, two galleys and business class seating with worktables.

The C-40B is designed to be an "office in the sky" for senior military and government leaders. Communications are paramount aboard the C-40B which provides broadband data/video transmit and receive capability as well as clear and secure voice and data communication. It gives combatant commanders the ability to conduct business anywhere around the world using on-board Internet and local area network connections, improved telephones, satellites, television monitors, and facsimile and copy machines. The C-40B also has a computer-based passenger data system.

Yes, fine for me but not for thee?  Dealing with the TSA?  Not for me!  Why should they have to listen to the latest yammerings from the TSA?  After all, the TSA has decided that since they cannot find the test explosives, on the busiest travel week of the year, they've decided to further the notion of the encroaching Nanny-State and tell us that we have to make their job easier by not having so much clutter in our carry-ons....after all, we don't know how to "pack neatly"

Hey, maybe Heather Mills is right - the rich ARE snobs!

Posted by Skip at 12:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 6:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...who has blessed us, our families and friends, and this Nation.  Even as there are those that believe that our Nation is stumbling and will never achieve their version of utopia (and never cease to kvetch to the rest of us), we have much to be thankful for in this country.  We are financially the richest nation on the planet, we are militarily the most powerful nation in the world, we are the largest economy ever seen in history.  We can come and go as we wish.  Our nation is yet the melting pot of the world where many races and nationalities have shown that we can live in harmony with each other - not the norm at any time or any other place.

But more importantly, we have the most free media anywhere that allows us to speak our minds and to criticize our leaders and neighbors, we have the freedom of speech that allows us to spread those thoughts to anyone what will listen, and the freedom to associate with others of like mind.  We can freely choose our leaders - and get rid of them freely too!

We also posses the freedom of religion to praise our God without fearing for our families or ourselves.  I am thankful for this country that believes that our rights emanate from God and not from the whims of men. 

No, we are not a perfect nation - and I hope and pray that God is not done with us yet, that we will become better still. I have reservations that we will ever become the Utopia that some feel we must be before stopping their kvetching, but compared to almost any other nation on Earth, there is much to count as blessings.  We ARE the shining beacon of light in a world that often time has no light at all. 

And I believe it is because God has blessed this nation.

And for that, I give thanks... 

The true meaning of Thanksgiving; truly giving heartfelt thanks to God.

Take a moment, close your eyes, and remember the maxim by which they lived - giving thanks for anything requires a contrite, open, and willing heart and acknowledged that there is a Higher Power than themselves that, even as half the Pilgrims had died of illness and starvation, would look out for them and would bless them. 

They certainly did...will we?

Posted by Skip at 11:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In honor of the holiday, here is George Washington's magnificent first Thanksgiving proclamation.

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor— and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

 

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be— That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks—for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation—for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war—for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed—for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted—for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions— to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually—to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed—to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord—To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us—and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

(Signed) G. Washington

(H/T: Phi Beta Cons) 

Posted by Skip at 11:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Signing the Mayflower Compact

.

The Mayflower Compact has always been one of my personal favorite American documents. I always like to read it around Thanksgiving. It is a short and simple statement that life should be ordered by mutually-agreed to laws. Written by rational, thinking, and consummately civilized persons, The Mayflower Compact is universally considered to be the first basis in the New World for written law: 

“In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.”

It was signed by 41 of the Mayflower’s 102 passengers. Contrast the words of the Pilgrim settlers, half of whom died in the first New England winter, with those being spouted by partisans of the current movement to erase the mere mention of God from any area of public and government life. I am sure that many such persons and groups, led by the ACLU, cannot have much stomach for the fact that our forebears came to this land “for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith.” It really flies in the face of their arguments in favor of removing “under God” in our Pledge and “In God We Trust” from our money.

.

One Compact signer, Edward Winslow eventually became one of the Pilgrim leaders. He served as the governor of the Plymouth colony on three different occasions. His wife, Elizabeth (Barker) Winslow, died soon after their arrival. He then married, in May 1621, Mrs Susannah White, the mother of Peregrine White, the first white child born in New England. This marriage was the first in the New England colonies.

Winslow is also noted for writing one of the few known personal accounts of the first Thanksgiving. From a document known as “Mourt's Relation” he writes,

“Our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together after we had gathered the fruits of our labor. They four in one day killed as much fowl as, with a little help beside, served the company almost a week. At which time, amongst other recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which we brought to the plantation and bestowed on our governor, and upon the captain and others. And although it be not always so plentiful as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.”

Posted by Doug at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I don't travel all that much anymore, but I used to - was a Premier Exec in United's frequent flier program for years.  Now, I may not be the brightest bulb in the lot, but this is one thing I would never have tried to make it easier in the cabin:

Family's Laptop Missing From Checked Luggage

Ugh!  For me, this is akin to sneaking a ride in the nose wheel of the jet - never to be tried!  Now, I realize that I may have a tad more experience in riding in planes and bringing stuff with me (too  much too often) but what thinking person would ever think of putting something both expensive and BREAKABLE in a suitcase or duffel bag?  And then letting it be stuffed in the bottom of a plane, often with lots of other suitcases on top of it with handling not to be described with the words 'white kid gloves" in the same sentence?

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) ― Each day this holiday weekend more than 100,000 people will travel through Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and most of them will check baggage.

Most people expect their stuff to make it safely to the destination but for one Minnesota family that didn't happen. Somewhere between check-in at MSP and luggage pickup on the other end their brand new laptop disappeared.

For the Dillons of Edina, Minn. it was supposed to be the perfect vacation for this family of seven. When you travel with five kids it's usually easier to check as much luggage as possible.

"My carry on bag wasn't big enough," said 14-year-old Samantha Dillon. So she checked her new laptop in her suitcase. When she got to San Diego it was gone.

Now, this is a young teenager - I'll cut her some slack...but what about her Dad or Mom?  Egad, a laptop is generally a valued item - WHY would they allow her to put it in th bag? My carry-on bag IS my computer bag and when I have to use the RJs, I know it doesn't fit either overhead or under the seat in front of me.....I carry a sleeve to make sure that breakable electronics stay with ME! 

Note to infrequent travelers - look out the window just after you have boarded and just WATCH how your luggage is treated!  You quickly will adopt new attitudes towards packing..... 

"I thought someone might have stolen it at the airport maybe," she said.

In her suitcase was a notice from the Transportation Safety Administration. Agents had opened her bag and searched it so Samantha's father immediately called them.

"They basically said we'll send you a claim form and a check for lost and found at the airport," said Tom Dillon. The Dillons filed a claim and got a notice back that their claim was denied.

A TSA spokesperson said that MSP International uses surveillance cameras to watch screeners check the checked luggage. After viewing the tape the TSA denied the claim.

Posted by Skip at 5:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...................

Yes Alec. What is the date of NH's first in the Nation presidential primary for the 2008 election?

Posted by Doug at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

• Fred Thompson visits Skip's Gun & Sport Shop 1:00 pm EST at Skip's Gun & Sport Shop- 837 Lake Street Bristol, NH 

• Meet Fred Thompson at the Laconia VFW Hall 3:00 pm EST VFW Laconia Post 1670 143 Court Street Laconia, NH 03246
  

Posted by Doug at 10:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

  +     +      = 

In 1995, Newt Gringrich and President Clinton played a "game of chicken" concerning the funding of the government; both fundamentally lost .  While Clinton lost the funding, Newt lost the PR war; in politics, the latter was more damaging.   

Well, history does have a way of repeating itself, and this time it is the Democrats that are leading the way, this time assuming the mantle of Newt.  They hold the purse strings, as did Newt over a decade ago.  And President Bush is the alter Clinton in this scenario.  Yet, a large fundamental difference is going ignored - this is about troops in a war zone with lives at stack while before it was merely bureacrats staying home.

Trust me, Americans know the difference.  Supporting the troops does not equal supporting bureacrats (who did get their pay et al after the kerfuffle was over).  Americans, when it all comes down to it, will not stand for troops being used as pawns. 

the attempt by the Democrats to shut down the Iraq War is now going to the next level - the question is going to be "who is going to win this game of chicken"?  So far, the Dems are 0 for 41 in getting President Bush to change his mind and yank the troops home.  Frankly, this shows that this Democratic are the acting out the role of the definition of insanity as defined by Einstein - doing the same thing over and over again expecting the outcome to differ.

So what's making up the game?  Money and retreat!  The Dems, lead by Murtha (and I agree with my son, the former Marine, that Murtha should be an ex-Marine) and Obey are stating:

• We'll give you $50 Billion for the troops
• You have to bring the troops home - just give up and break your promise.

The Dems seem to forget that Bush does say what he means and means what he says - he has stated that while he is President, he will see this through.  The Dems, beholden to their MoveOn.org uber-Lefty base during a Presidential Primary, think that they can beat this Texan cowboy at Texas Hold'em.  Trouble is - he ain't bluffin'.

The Dems refuse to acknowledge all of the good things that the Surge has brought - the violence has crashed statistically, Baghdad is returning to normal, ex-pats are moving back, and Al Queda is on the run.  Pushed out of Baghdad, they subsequently were pushed out of Anbar and Diyala provinces.  They didn't help their own cause with their their ham fisted ways (killing the tribal chieftains and sheiks doesn't help) of demanding a way of Wahabist living that the Sunnis did not want.

The Surge has worked and the reconciliation has begun and is picking up steam as it rolls down the tracks.  The Dems look silly as they continue to yammer about not being able to win militarily.  Their insistence of top down reconciliation and progress looks plain stupid in light of the grass roots level of reconciliation that has happened at the tribal levels.  

Things do not go as planned in war time.  This refusal to acknowledge that good things have happened, and that the civil war formented by AQ by blowing up the Golden Dome has now been broken.  Al Sadr is all but in hiding, his militia is being hunted down, AQ has all but been thrown out, the Sunni tribes are laying down their arms (if not shooting at AQ)...

My jaw can only drop when I hear Pelosi, Murtha, Reid, and Obey continue to state that we are losing - sound the RETREAT!

They continue to ignore the basic law of war - wars end ONLY when one side has successfully won and the other side has given up.  Not run away and declare "victory with honor" like we did with Viet Nam.  This time, this asymmetric war will not end just because the unloyal opposition forces a retreat - they will follow us to this shore. 

Obey and Murtha convened the rare recess-week news conference to counter Pentagon reports that the military will have to take drastic steps next month if it doesn't get the money soon.

Democrats and the Pentagon agree the military has until about March before it runs out of money.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Friday signed a memo ordering the Army to begin planning for a series of expected cutbacks, including the layoffs of as many as 100,000 civilian employees and another 100,000 civilian contractors, starting as early as January.

Already, they have set themselves up to fail once again.  The fact that they have to hold a press conference to "frame" the discussion shows a BIG OOPS time is forthcoming.  Yet, these craven politicos are content to play chicken not only with Bush, our troops, but with the American people.  They might beat Bush, somehow or some way (but they have to neutralize Mitch McConnell who has stymied the Dem leadership on bill after bill, time after time, almost leading me to quote Rush "with half my brain tied behind my back" in describing his successes). 

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Gates notified Congress on Tuesday that the Pentagon will shift $3.7 billion from the Navy and Air Force payroll budgets, plus $800 million from elsewhere in the Pentagon's base budget, in response to the stalemate with Congress.

Morrell added that when the money for Army and Marine operations runs out in February and March, the Pentagon would have to use "extraordinary measures" to provide for the survival of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. At that point, he said, money could only be used to feed them and keep them safe.

The flag to start this game of chicken was dropped by the Dems - the roar of the Administration's exhaust is now reverberating across the land - go ahead, let's see if you will keep your promise to leave our toops in danger. 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement Tuesday that Democrats will always insist that troops get what they need.

No, you aren't.  You used children in your attempt to pass bill for socialized medicine called SCHIP.  Now, you're using the troops to make political points.  You refuse to see the the progress that has taken place because of one thing:

You would have to admit that you are wrong.

War is a difficult thing - things happen for which you don't plan.  We all expected that the reconciliation that the Surge was supposed to give us was from the top down.  What HAS happened is that the Sunni Awakening in Anbar has spread from the bottom and across - just like in grass roots politics here in the States.

"If there is any delay in funding for our men and women in uniform, the responsibility will squarely lie with the president and Senate Republicans who are blocking the bill," said Pelosi, D-Calif.

No, it will not.  The Dems started this line of action and have continued it relentlessly.  But have failed over and over.  Once again, they try to blame others for their intent.  They want the troops home so badly in order to punish and mock Bush, they will risk the lives and well being of our troops.  They are the definition of the quintessential "the end justifies the means".  

Murtha said the Pentagon was issuing "irresponsible" propaganda.

"They're scaring people," he said. "They're scaring the families of the troops. . .That's the thing that's so despicable."

Despicable?  Yes, you are. 

While Newt eventually resigned the Speakership and then returned to private life, he will always be remembered as the Republican that marshalled the right forces at the right time for the Republicans to gain the leadership roles after decades in the wilderness.

Can we just shove the Dems into that wilderness now? 

Posted by Skip at 8:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

My favorite method for turkey is to cook the bird upside down . It makes the whole thing so moist-- with no basting required.

• Prep your tukey with spice and rub with butter and olive oil.
• Place quartered apples, oranges, onions, carrots and celery in the cavity. You may use just the fruit or just vegetables. This provides flavor and moisture from within, steaming all the while it cooks.
• Close cavity up and place the bird upside down in a deep turkey pan and cover. Cook in the oven for desired time depending on the size of your bird.
• Allow to rest for 20 minutes, then remove very carefully. The meat will pull off the bone (Unless it falls off on its own, as it most likely will do. Mmmm!). If you want the skin to be crispy you may flip your tukey over for the last 20 minutes-- although, this could be difficult, due to the fact the meat might fall from the bone, as noted above.

              Enjoy!

This is a great recipe for the non turkey lovers, my husband does not like turkey but enjoys this meal every year. Thanksgiving has always been a special time with our children to reflect on the many blessings in our lives.

.

.

In the Lords Prayer we ask the Lord to “give us this day our daily bread.” Every day we have food to eat is itself a blessing from the God. So take this time to thank Him for each and every day. "This is the day the Lord has made. Let us rejoice and be glad!"

Posted by Doug at 8:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

.Following up on Dave's prior post on the subject, here's a little more fuel for the fire that is the anti-Mormon push-poll phone call fiasco...

"Marshan Roth, of Fairfield, Iowa, got a call on Wednesday night. It started out like a regular poll, she says, but then asked positive questions about Sen. John McCain and delved into disparaging things about Romney. She was asked whether she knew that Mormons have 'baptized thousands of dead people' and that the Book of Mormon was more important than the Bible to Mormons. 'It was sick. It really was. It made me just furious,' says Roth, who is leaning toward backing Romney. 'If you didn't know enough about McCain, you'd think he was the white knight coming in on his charger saving the world and that Mitt Romney was tantamount to the devil.'"

"Rose Kramer was at her Dubuque, Iowa, home, waiting for the TV show 'House' to start at 8 p.m. Tuesday when a pollster called and started asking her about John McCain. After a few polite questions, the caller started saying unflattering things about Mitt Romney. Kramer, a Romney supporter, got so angry that she missed the opening of her show. 'I was still ranting at my husband,' she said."

"Rose Kramer, an Iowa voter who backs Romney, told Politics Nation the call, which she received around 8:30 p.m. on Wednesday, began with typical screening questions on whether she planned to caucus and if she had caucused before. After an initial ballot test -- on which she says Romney's name was listed last -- the pollster offered five questions about John McCain, all of which she characterized as 'glowing.' Kramer said she asked the caller whether he was working for a campaign; he said no, his was an independent research group."

Posted by Doug at 9:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

......

Executive Councilor Raymond Burton, R-Bath, who heads a committee charged with developing the plan, said unless the gas tax is raised, the state will continue to struggle to keep up with highway needs.

"A number of New Hampshire lawmakers are questioning whether to raise tolls and the state gasoline tax to compensate for a shortage of money for all of the state's road projects. During hearings on the 10 year transportation plan in the House Public Works and Highways Committee last week, increasing state revenues through taxes and tolls was discussed. Executive Councilor Ray Burton (R-Bath) has said he would like to see a 5 cent increase in the gasoline tax with 2 cents of that going to cities and town to help repair secondary roads. It is likely that Governor Craig Benson, who campaigned on the promise of no increased or new taxes, would reject a toll increase or gas tax hike." [emphasis GG]

Ray Burton is asking residents to call the governor and the legislature to ask them to raise our taxes!!!

"If people want their highway projects to move ahead, they're going to have to contact Gov. Lynch and their legislators," he said. "It all comes down to money."

Posted by Doug at 4:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Dave at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It ain't rocket science!

by Skip Murphy

There have been many out there that have consistently said that we cannot, as a nation, deport all of the illegal aliens that are here (estimates range from 12 to 20 million).

My response has always been is that we don't have to forceably round them up, clap them into buses, trains, and planes and then ship them out.  Nope, being a frugal conservative Yankee (are there many others out there like me?  Please?), just make the incentives go away and then they will go away.

By themselves.

So when I noted it here and here, I figured it was time to just sit back and watch.  Now, I am happy to report that my hyposthesis is correct:

Migrants lose jobs as hiring law nears

Employers verifying status fire hundreds, attorneys say

 Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of undocumented workers have been fired as a result of Arizona businesses reviewing the work-eligibility forms of their employees as the state's new employer-sanctions law draws near.

The fired workers couldn't provide missing information uncovered during the reviews or confessed to being in the country illegally, say attorneys involved in the reviews.

The number of firings could grow significantly once the law goes into effect Jan. 1 as employers scramble to make sure they are in compliance. Under the law, repeat violators will lose their business licenses.

The key here is that finally our politicians have made the "tough" decisions - protect our sovereignty and our lower skilled workers.  The kicker is that this action has teeth in it - if employers get caught, it will be the kiss of death.  No longer is it at a level where it can be assumed to be simply a cost of doing business.   

The law, signed by Gov. Janet Napolitano in July, is aimed at clamping down on illegal immigration in Arizona by pulling the plug on the job magnet that has drawn undocumented immigrants to the state by the tens of thousands over the past decade.

But of course, those that profit from illegal workers have their panties in a bunch....

Businesses groups, however, asked a federal judge Wednesday to toss out the law, arguing that it is unconstitutional and invites racial profiling.

Right, bring out the race card.  Tell me, what is it about either supplying false information or no information is racial profiling?  Please? 

Federal law requires employers to ask all new employees for proof that they are eligible to work in the U.S., such as a driver's license, a green card or a Social Security card. Employers are required to record the information on forms known as I-9s.

I have to supply that info; my sons have to supply that info.  If we do not, we do not work - that's the law.

This is what seems to drive most of us absolutely bonkers.  We have allowed our society to become a  lawyer driven society - a defense laywer one at that.  Everytime there is something that seems to smack of common sense, you can bet that some lawyer will pop out of the woodwork to find fault with it and go jump off the logical cliff to make a case.

Internal reviews of those forms by businesses have led to the firing of "many hundreds of workers, and perhaps thousands," said Julie Pace, a Phoenix lawyer who is performing I-9 audits for companies. She also represents business groups that filed suit against the state seeking to have the sanctions law thrown out.

I love it - she benefits no matter which way it goes - bill the companies and then recoup lawyer fees in a class suit.  And then lawyers wonder why many of us hold whale poop in higher esteem....

Employers are not allowed to directly ask whether a worker is legal, Pace said. And many illegal workers could still slip through the audits if they presented fake documents that appeared real when they were hired and they filled out the I-9 correctly. But in many instances, employers are finding that the I-9s were not filled out properly. Upon questioning, employees are admitting that they are in the country illegally, or they can't provide the missing information.

Which leads, taken to the extreme, to anarchy.  I've not known a single society where that model has worked - you?

Some economists think the sanctions law could wreak havoc on the state's economy by exacerbating labor shortages and scaring away companies from locating here.

But a new study by the Center for Immigration Studies, a research organization in Washington, D.C., that favors reductions in immigration, suggests that there are plenty of Americans who could step in to replace illegal workers.

The study estimates that there are 340,000 illegal workers in Arizona, 12 percent of the state's workforce. If all were to leave, they could be replaced by some of the 710,000 Arizonans who are currently outside the state's labor pool because they are not actively looking for work, according to the study.

The 710,000 include 196,000 teenagers and 514,000 adults with no more than a high-school education.

It used to be that teenagers DID fill those entry level jobs.  It has been shown that illegals take some of those jobs away.  Another reason is that small business owners cut back on "teenager" slots as the minimum wage goes up beyond its economic value.

This cuts out the chance for high schoolers to learn the basic skills of being employable.  I'm old enough to remember high school kids pumping the gas at the gas station.  In addition, they'd check the oil level, my tire pressures, and wash the windows.  Now, it is not economically viable for those activities to be done any more by a gas station employer.  Ditto for movie ushers - the real ones that escorted you to your seat instead of just ripping your ticket and makes sure the door hasn't been open for ripping off the theater.

"The question is, is there enough labor to replace the illegals? Yes," said Steven Camarota, the center's research director.

Dawn McLaren, a research economist at Arizona State University, doubted those findings.

She said Camarota is counting people who have made the decision not to work and therefore are not considered part of the labor pool.

Some may be students living with parents, she said. Some may be disabled. Others may be staying home with children.

"If they haven't joined the labor force thus far, they are paying for their livelihood some other way," McLaren said.

Ha!  About the only way I can think of, as far as 'some other way' is concerned, is having someone else paying it for them - Parents, Friends, or Taxpayers.  In the case of the disabled, truly disabled, society SHOULD be helping. 

Unfortunately, we have become a society where it is acceptable to sit on your duff and scam the system for your sustenance.  It is not a robust lifestyle, but if you are willing to be at the lowest level, with little or no expectations for yourself, who cares?!

Coaxing those people into the labor market would require significantly raising the often low wages paid to immigrants doing manual labor or other low-skilled jobs, she said. But that could lead to businesses closing, higher prices for consumers, and higher inflation, she added.

Basic capitalism....I notice once again that the proven idea that illegals depress wages is missing from the statement.  Americans will do the jobs once the wages rise to the level that law-abiding citizens can accept (and the true FREE market).

Posted by Skip at 7:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 9:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Simply stated, earmarks are items stuck into a spending / budget ary bill that directs money to specific companies, people, or other entities for purposes or reasons only known by the legislator creating the earmark.  Add to that definition, it is often for products or services that have NOT been requested by the department that is associated with that bill.

In other words - think PORK!

Now, some believe that it is a Representative's responsibility to "bring home the bacon" to the District.  Well, after seeing how conflated some of latest budget bills have become with pet projects costing us taxpayers lots of money.  And given that Speaker Pelosi and the other Democrats made it a campaign issue to stop the "culture of corruption", it is rather amusing (and sad) that the Dems have gone FAR beyond the Republicans during this session (and much to my chagrin, the Republicans were far from being slouches in this regards before falling out of the majority in the last election).

Well, it seems that our new freshmen Reps, Carol Shea-Porter and Paul Hodes, have learned this lesson rather well and quickly...

From JUST the latest Defense Bill, Rep. Paul Hodes had the following:

$1,500,000    Scientific Solutions, Inc   Nashua, NH   http://www.scisol.com/
                    Swimmer Detection Sonar Network (with Shea-Porter)

$3,000,000    Malden Mills   Lawrence, MA   http://www.polartec.com 
                    Fleece Insulating Liners for Extended Cold Weather Clothing System (Generation III)

$2,000,000    Vehicle Control Training, LLC   Dalton, NH   http://www.teamoneil.com/index.htm
                    Synthetic Auto Virtual Environment

$2,500,000    Multiple Recipients
                    Multi Climate Protection System

Total => $9,000,000

And Carol Shea-Porter?

$1,500,000   Scientific Solutions, Inc   Nashua, NH   http://www.scisol.com/
                   Swimmer Detection Sonar Network (with Hodes)

$2,000,000   Multiple Recipients
                   Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities

$1,500,000   Autonomous Undersea Systems Institute    Lee, NH   http://www.ausi.org
                   Autonomous Undersea Vehicle Applications Center

$2,000,000   Granite State Manufacturing   Manchester, NH   http://www.gsmai.com
                   MK2 Mod2 Anti-Submarine Warfare Training System

Total => $7,000,000

So remember folks, both of these folks have raised our taxes by $16,000,000 over and above what was asked for the the Department of Defense.

Fiscal conservatives?  Naw..... 

Posted by Skip at 8:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

...

...

...

Rerun time for Bill Clinton?

Former President Clinton did not mention NAFTA specifically on Friday, but criticized the Bush administration for not enforcing trade agreements strictly enough.

.

He blamed the north country's economic woes on Bush's "radical experiment in extremism in domestic policy," including a tax cut for the wealthy that is being paid for by borrowing money from other countries.

.

"As a result we don't enforce our trade laws anymore," he said. "Why? When's the last time you got tough on your banker?"

.

Clinton asked the audience to picture themselves marching into their bank president's office and slapping him or her.

.

"Think you'd get a loan the next day?" he said. "We're laughing, but this is serious."

"I'd rather just sort of talk to you today and not give some sort of a big whoop-de-do speech" - and proceeded to deliver, without notes, a 50-minute-long address.

Posted by Doug at 5:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I  got a tip from a campaign staffer:  
 

 Rudy Guiliani (GraniteGrok file photo)

WHO:	  Rudy Giuliani Town Hall Event

WHEN:     Saturday, November 24, 2007

WHERE:   Laconia VFW

TIME:      10:30 AM

SPEAKER: Rudy - not sure if there will be any others.

AGENDA:  Rudy will be speaking - hopefully there will be time for Q & A 

	     from the floor.  Everyone is invited to attend!

(cross posted at GilfordGOP) 

Posted by Skip at 8:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I wanted to share something with  you that happened to me yesterday....

.

I was driving to work listening to the radio station I listen to all the time when they started talking about beefs of the world. One of the announcers stated that her beef was that the troops were getting all this money to fight a war when people were starving in the US and that the military could send 18 year olds to war but why couldn't they buy a 6 pack in the states. The other announcer then said...."Yeah, so basically we can send these kids to war but not let them pop a beer to celebrate if they kill someone in a foreign country." Well lemme tell ya, that did NOT sit well with THIS MARINE MOM!

.

I waited and waited on my hour commute to work and they then said that if people have a beef to post to call them. So I did and LAMBASTED this rather large radio station for not only making derogatory comments about our boys but the fact that they USE their position to make rude comments like that! That our boys DON'T have the best equipment....that they go for weeks without showers and that in an ironic twist of fate our boys are fighting so THEY can make rude comments. I hung up rather quickly and the next thing I knew they stated on the station that they apologized for offending me and if I was still listening they wanted me to call back!!

.

SOO I did, and they talked to me for about 30 minutes on my way to work, about the troops, what they do, what they stand for, what makes them become a US Marine. It was CRAZY!! When I got to work , I emailed them a couple of pictures of Sean to put a face to the troops of this war, and they emailed back and forth with me all morning!!

.

Bottom line is that their website NOW has a spot to put pictures up of our boys so that people can SEE the fine young men and women defending us. They told me they wanted me to stay in touch about my son and that they would be in touch down the road. I'm telling ya it was crazy! I promised my son the day he deployed that I would try and reach one person at time and tell them that regardless of their opinion about this war, or this president, people would know that it is because of our boys they have a right to their freedoms. Little did I know it would be on a live , radio station in NH...haha!!! Ya never know what the day will bring ya sometimes!! ( of course Sean is gonna KILL me....haha...oh well...it wont be the first time!!) ...

.

Anyways...I wanted to pass this on so that you in turn could pass it on to your members to email a photo of their son or daughter serving during the holidays to 106.3 Frank FM. Since they will be posting photos of our loved ones on their website I thought it would be nice for as many people as wanted would be able to post them.

.

Thanks so much
Patricia Fickett

Posted by Doug at 6:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a number of ways to put a silly grin on Doug's mug....and this one will do.

"The goal of National Ammo Day is to empty the ammunition from the shelves of your local gun store, sporting goods, or hardware store and put that ammunition in the hands of law-abiding citizens."

(H/T: Op-For)

Posted by Skip at 12:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

And we thank them very much!

To play (or "stream") a clip now, just click on it.  To download it to your PC, right click on it and tell the process where to save the file for you.

        Hour 1

Coming!

Coming

SchlubCam:

                   Discussion on the impending acquisition of Verizon's landlines by FairPoint
                    Communications in NH, VT, and ME (consensus is - not so much!).  DCE from
                    WeekendPundit guest hosts and leads the discussion

Posted by Skip at 11:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Remember the TV show "Home Improvement and this guy?

Tim Allen - "Tim the Tool Man Taylor" - "MORE POWER!"

Well, I have one of these:

                                                        The 'Grok furballs 

Both like to sit/lay on the couch next to me so they can demand that I pat them while I'm surfing.

They shed. Lots.

You can literally watch the fur balls roll across the keyboard when my hot air furnace kicks in.  Some of them don't roll all the way across.

Tonight, the strange noises emanating from the first item started to get louder and stranger.

Ah!

Bright idea!

I have one of these too!  

It sucks.

It sucks good.

It sucks really wicked good!  Note: it was made for households that have furballs. Like these:

Using the short wide attachment tool (figuring that with the cross bar running the entire width, the keys would not come off), it certainly did pull some fur out of the laptop.

So, I decided to use the long attachment with the smaller opening.  Smaller opening = more suction (but with an opening on the side, so the actual full vacuum is not obtainable) and let's get even MORE fur out of it.....success!

Well, everything in moderation, including moderation.  Let's up the ante, 'cause I still see more fur!  Remove the attachment and go directly from the hose to the laptop.....

Cue the ABCs song - "Q,W,E,R,T,Y,U....now I've refastened my ABC's "

Morale of the story - if you are a laptop rejuvenator, get one of these.  It makes removing keys real quick and easy!

Remember kiddies, don't try this at home......I'm what they call a professional!

But it was kinda neat to watch the fur go round and round in the clear plastic dust holder as they really do form a tornadic flow.......made it easy to see the spinning black keys....  

Posted by Skip at 9:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

.

....

                   ..Pat Hynes                                Skip Murphy                          Doug Lambert

• Weekend Pundit's Chan Eddy drops in to co-host with the gang for today's broadcast. He'll give us an update on the FairPoint/ Verizon sale.
• Another feel-good busybody program that wastes money better than anything else it does (Laconia Main Street Program) is in for a change in 'business as usual' as its founder and chief water-carrier quits in the face of sudden demands for control and accountability by those still left handing them dough.
• Newfound teachers' contract defeated by the voters! Don't they know it's for the children?!
• Michael Brady of the Majority Accountability Project (MAP) checks in with the latest on our (sigh) congresswoman Carol Shea Porter. We'll talk about the Dems' latest war funding bill, Shea-Porter being AWOL on S-Chip, her latest mailing to constituents and a campaign funding update. You'll never guess where CSP is getting bucks from now... And, what about those earmarks?
• Theodora Blanchfield is the associate editor of Campaigns & Elections magazine. They featured GraniteGrok in their October issue in a section reporting on which blogs to watch during the campaign cycle. (Click here and go to page S-4 S-5)  Theodora will discuss blog & other new media and the role they play in today's political campaigns. We'll also look at how activists are also using the new media to connect with people. Does all of this make for strange bedfellows as we see new alliances made up of those who would have been in conflict in an earlier era?
• We'll review the latest in the fiasco that is the NHDOT. Does anybody think the trooper/highway enforcement feud will benefit motorists? Not to worry if it's costing us money, though, because our illustrious Executive Councilor, Ray Burton ("Republican") is once again calling for an increase to the gas tax. WILL SOMEONE TELL THIS GUY TO BLOW IT OUT HIS ASS, PLEASE? (Whew, I feel a little better!)

• John Hawkins of RightWingNews, Conservative Grapevine, Townhall.com, and formerly working for the Duncan Hunter campaign (John is, like our Pat Hynes, a man of many hats) joins us once again this week. We'll debate the benefits/pitfalls if Rudy Giuliani wins the GOP nod. We'll take a snapshot of where things currently stand among the candidates. We'll discuss John's latest TownHall article that asks if being married to Bill Clinton qualifies someone to be president. John finishes up with his take on this week's Democratic debate.
• Socialism. Is it here? One cannot deny a creeping expansion of the nanny state towards cradle and grave. Can it be stopped? Hell, in our town, parents are incapable, apparently, of raising their children without the helping hands of the schools, the plethora of activities by the library (baby yoga, anyone?), a variety of outside agencies, etc. Heck, Gilford residents now need the Parks & Rec Dept. to enable ski trips to a mountain right here in our very town and Red Sox baseball game tickets! Will there be an end? What happens when a society coddled as ours is becoming suddenly has to rely on themselves? (New Orleans during Katrina comes to mind)

Posted by Doug at 7:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

1) The callers didn't call random voters as if they were trying to disseminate anti-Romney sentiment. They targeted important people, such as GOP committee chairs, whom they knew wouldn't be swayed in their voting choice by a single phone call and whom they also knew would soon be on the phone with reporters.

2) Why would a pro-Romney, Utah-based, Mormon firm be hired by a rival to do any type of work, not to mention an anti-Romney job? Knowing that this is illegal, wouldn't they only use a really well trusted firm that supports them, not the person they are attacking?

3) This could be a really odd inside job aimed at making Romney the victim in a religion-bashing marketing scam, getting a quick press release out, and playing the victim card for for a while. 

"I applaud my Leadership Team for taking action against these cowardly acts. I call on all other candidates and their supporters to repudiate these attacks and join me in pledging not to engage in such despicable tactics throughout the balance of this campaign. I am outraged by the cowardly telephone calls that hide behind my name in an effort to disparage one candidate and advance the candidacy of another. I was a target of these same tactics in South Carolina in 2000 and believe the American people deserve better from those who seek the high office of the presidency."

Posted by Dave at 8:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

A co-worker that lives and works in San Diego sent these to me and I just kinda sat there in amazement in the difference a couple of months could make.

Here's the first:

The second is after the jump. 

(H/T: Karen) 

Some of my co-workers were evacuated during the recent fires....I can't imagine the feeling and looking up, seeing that, and wondering if my home and that of my neighbors were safe....

....or whether the fire would stop only at the water's edge, having no other place to go.... 

Posted by Skip at 3:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Arizona Republican (H/T: Lucianne.com):

Driver's licenses for migrants?  Not in Mexico

MEXICO CITY - The question of whether to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants ignited a national debate in the United States. But in Mexico, the largest source of U.S. immigrants, there's no question: Here, you must be a legal resident to get a driver's license.

All of Mexico's 31 states, along with Mexico City, require foreigners to present a valid visa if they want a driver's license, according to a survey of states by The Arizona Republic.

"When it comes to foreigners, we're a little more strict here," said Alejandro Ruíz, director of education at the Mexican Automobile Association.

Once again we see the fecklessness of the debate:

• oh, the poor things, we have to let the drive here.  They only want a better life
• We have to know who is here!
• Once they get them, then they will have to get insurance, obey the law, yadda, yadda, yadda

Sorry, not buying it. Once again, Los Gringos have been had over throwing away the basics of the Rule of Law - if it were not for the flap of Hillary trying to parse and have the issue both ways on licenses for NY immigrants and Gov. Spitzer's ham-fisted ways on this, most of us would just be called bigots once again for asking that our laws be followed and it would have slipped by.  Yet, the Mexican government is just as complicit in this as these chuckleheads are:

Mexico's Foreign Relations Secretariat declined to comment on the controversy this week, but the Mexican government has fought U.S. restrictions on licenses in the past.

Once again, that phrase of "Fine for me but not for thee" rears its ugly head.  I MIGHT, as Glen Reynold put it, if there was some reciprocity, but there isn't. 

And I might add... 

I have continued heartburn with the Mexican government in taking us to task when their Constitution expressly forbids me the same rights and privileges in Mexico that they want their citizens to have here:

MEXICO CITY - President Felipe Calderon decried Wednesday what he called "the growing harassment" of Mexicans in the United States and said his government will work to counter it by funding a media campaign to show migrant success stories.

Is anyone else wondering why we do not hear the fuss about what Mexico might be doing to better help their citizens IN THEIR OWN HOMES?

Mexican officials have expressed concern over a recent wave of immigration raids and a U.S. political climate perceived as anti-migrant. Calderon said U.S. presidential candidates were using migrants as "symbolic hostages" on the immigration issue.

"I am especially worried about the growing harassment and frank persecution of Mexicans in the United States in recent days," Calderon said at a meeting of the Mexican government's migrant assistance agency.

Well, let's be plain spoken - if the majority of those that cross our borders illegally are Mexican, then of course, most of the persecution from "legal" standpoint is correct - you arrest and properly prosecute them.

Doesn't Mexico do the same - of COURSE they do?  So why should they expect us to be different? 

He called on leading U.S. presidential candidates to "stop holding Mexicans in their country as symbolic hostages in their speeches and [campaign] strategies." He was apparently referring to the hard line some candidates have taken on the immigration issue, and other candidates' unwillingness to take a clear stance in the debate.

ALL of our candidates should be taking issue with this issue (sorry, couldn't resist).  This is  direct matter of maintaining border security, of sovereignty.  Without the former, one cannot have the latter.

Yet, I continue to notice that the Mexican leadership refuses to talk about the real cause of this - the failure of the Mexican government to properly care for its citizens by creating an atmosphere where business can thrive.  But hey, they don't air dirty laundry do they?  They cannot admit  that with the natural riches of their country, their citizenry, if not part of the oligarchy, are rather poor with little chance for advancement.

To bolster the image of migrants in the U.S., the Mexican government will launch "direct media campaigns aimed at showing migrant success stories and raise awareness of the many contributions" migrants make to U.S. society, he said.

Don't admit, just sweep it under the rug.  In other words, let's continue the PR charade that makes America the victimizer because it allows what Mexico will not.  It refuses to hold itself to the same standard that it wants us to adhere to. 

Calderon noted 6 million of the 11 million Mexican migrants in the United States are undocumented, and endorsed the creation of what he called the League Against Discrimination Against Mexicans in the United States.

When Calderon first became President, he did mention that Mexico had to do better.  Now, it appears that he has slunk to the low level of the previous President - Vincente Fox.  This is one policy that I wish would had been discontinued.  It helps NO one, American or Mexican, to keep this up.

Only problem is that our leadership seems to be caving into this.  This will be extremely true with the Democratic ones that cannot pick any line on the immigration issue and stick with it at all! 

Posted by Skip at 3:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Less than six years ago, the Laconia Main Street program was launched amid great hopes for revitalizing the downtown economically while preserving its past.

.

But now, short of volunteers, money and with accusations that some city officials do not support it, the program is in an uncertain place that became even more undefined on Wednesday when David Stamps, its co-founder and president, said he is stepping down from the program's Board of Directors.

Mayor Matt Lahey, Ward 3 Councilor Henry Lipman and City Manager Eileen Cabanel — say Main Street still has a future in Laconia and that the city would continue to fund it but on the condition, however, that the city has greater oversight of how public moneys are spent.

Philosophically, Lahey would like Laconia Main Street to get more into the business of economic development.

Exercising The First

by Doug Lambert

Takin’ A Dip in ‘Political Waters’

The Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary defines the noun “socialist” as “One who advocates or practices the doctrines of socialism.” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines the adjective, “socialist” as “Of, promoting, or practicing socialism.” Obviously, if one were to understand what a socialist actually is, one must first define “socialism.”

.
Before I go further, I probably should explain where I am headed with this train of thought. The June 9th edition of The Laconia Daily Sun contained an article headlined, “Stamps weighing run against Boyce.” This, of course, refers to the local NH Senate seat currently held by Republican Rob Boyce of Alton. The article states that Stamps is “testing the political waters for a potential run.” As a person who has been quietly observing Mr. Stamps’ local activities for some time now, I must admit that the thought of this person occupying a Senate seat gives me pause.

.
As a conservative, I have always believed that the free market system (capitalism), while by no means perfect, tends to provide the best path to freedom and liberty, by allowing us, as Americans, to generally reap a sizeable portion of the fruits of our labors. I have also always believed that the works and efforts of individuals, within their families, are best able to sustain a productive and quality life. A nation of self-sufficient people, aided by a limited amount of government, could not help but be great.

.
Who saved the world in WWII? America. What nation purged itself, with much bloodshed, of the scourge of slavery? America. What nation put a man on the moon? America. What nation leads the way in the battle against deadly diseases and afflictions? America. Panama Canal? America. You get the point. America has always been a “can do” place. From almost the very beginning of its existence, America has been the leader, as the rest of the world follows.

.
The same can be said, on a smaller scale, of our great State of New Hampshire. Ask anybody anywhere in our country about our State, and you will almost always hear positive responses. Low taxes. The first in the nation presidential primary. Heck, even our state motto boasts of our tendency towards independence and freedom: “Live Free or Die.” Again, you get the picture. A “Granite State” is not made of marsh mellow.

.
The aforementioned Sun article reveals Dave Stamps as “Fed up with what he describes as the lack of effective representation in Concord,” as well as having a “level of frustration” “with how Republicans are currently governing the state.” Says Stamps: “It’s about leadership. There is no leadership in Concord.” Representation, governing, and leadership- these three words make up the bulk of what troubles Mr. Stamps.

.
What would be the cure for Mr. Stamps’ frustrations? Says the Sun: “Stamps believes the area’s representatives in Concord should be doing everything possible to secure funds for their constituencies. Instead, he said, ‘no one is advocating for Laconia.’” You see folks; it’s really just about THE MONEY! Not just any money, however. Monies, which he says, we “need the state to invest in education and in health care- that’s where Laconia needs help from Concord.” Mr. Stamps describes spending state monies on highway infrastructure is “disastrous” for Laconia. Who needs good roads, anyway? How, indeed, CAN we pave roads while the children are ill educated and of such poor health?

.
In 1976, F.A. Hayek wrote “socialism has come to mean chiefly the extensive redistribution of incomes through taxation and the institutions of the welfare state.” All taxes come from someplace. All of those wonderful “grants” which we always read and hear about come from someplace. A grant, of course, is nothing more than money given to somebody or some form of entity. Mostly, it is “given” by the government- in most cases either state or local.

.
The Laconia Main Street Program. Government-run and funded daycare (“early childhood learning”). Education (public). Health care. Anti-smoking jihads. All directed by the government, and paid for with somebody’s money. This is Mr. Stamps’ world. The Sun notes that Stamps has “been a key advocate of early childhood learning.” “It’s so important to reach them while their young.” Who needs families and parents, anyway? Doesn’t it “just take a village” to raise a child? Wouldn’t it just be best to take “from each, according to his abilities and give to each, according to their needs?” Indeed, without help, we are all marsh mellows.

.
Why does a person like myself seem to fear and loathe socialism with such open disdain and contempt? Doesn’t socialism simply seek to HELP people? Won’t it work if it’s simply practiced by the RIGHT KIND OF PEOPLE?  Says F.A Hayek, “the rise of fascism and nazism was not a reaction against the socialist trends of the preceding period but a necessary outcome of those tendencies.”  Add Stalinism and Baathism to the list.

.
The reason that people don’t like to be called “socialists” is because it is always taken to mean something having negative connotations. But hey, what else would one call a person who “advocates or practices the doctrines of socialism”? How’s the water, Dave?

Doug Lambert is a Gilford businessman. He has an opinion on practically everything. His column appears every Thursday.

(originally printed in the Laconia Daily Sun on June 19th, 2003)

.

Soviets in Siberian gulag. This is what history shows is ALWAYS the end result of socialism.

Posted by Doug at 1:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

BOSTON, MA (November 15, 2007) – Boston’s Talk Station, WRKO AM 680 and Howie Carr announced today that he will return to his afternoon drive-time show on Friday, November 16.

"We are thrilled that Howie is back on WRKO," said Entercom New England Vice President and Market Manager Julie Kahn. "Howie is a one-of-a-kind talent, and I’m sure all of Howie’s listeners are looking forward to hearing him on our air again."

Carr returns to his 3 p.m. – 7 p.m. slot, where he gives his inimitable take on local and national politics and current events. Carr’s contract runs through 2012.

"I'm very happy to be reunited with my loyal listeners on WRKO. I said I'd be back on the air before Imus and now I am!"

Talk about a long vacation! Since the beginning of July, the wit and wisdom of Howie has been AWOL, and it was beginning to look like we weren't going to get to hear him ever again. As I reported in this post in July,

Searching for some more info on the matter, I found this detailed story from the Boston Phoenix. Apparently, there's a lot more than meets the eye. And it turns out, the divorce between Carr and RKO might be a rocky one. Writes Adam Reilly:

Howie Carr’s jump from WRKO-AM (680) to WTKK-FM (96.9) isn’t a done deal just yet. Carr’s new morning drive-time show is supposed to begin in October. But after the Herald reported this past Monday that Carr was poised to bolt WRKO, station spokesman George Regan released a statement hinting that WRKO might take legal steps aimed at keeping Carr from leaving — or, barring that, at making his exit as unpleasant as possible.

Posted by Doug at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Squashed Debate on 54 Secret Earmarks, Added Half a Trillion Dollars in Increased Spending

Washington- Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) and the Democrat leaders of the so-called, self-proclaimed “most open Congress in history,” have closed the door on any possibility for amendments or debate on a series of appropriations bills.  As a result, 54 never before seen earmarks were stealthily placed into various appropriations bills at the expense of important funding for our troops, our veterans and hard working Americans.  These secret earmarks that Shea-Porter and the Democrats allowed into the bills never saw the light of a Congressional hearing nor were allowed to be debated on the House floor. 

.

To make matters worse, the Democrats have renewed efforts to eliminate the only tool available to prevent earmarks like these from being slipped into bills in the dead of the night. 

.

Yesterday’s Roll Call editorial shines light on this dark issue:

“Despite promises to manage the House on a more open basis than Republicans did during their 12-year rule, Democrats have been every bit as authoritarian — prohibiting any floor amendments, for instance, at more than double the rate of the previous Congress.”“Rather than limit one of the minority’s few rights to affect legislation, we suggest that Democrats expand those rights by allowing Republicans to offer amendments on the floor. …more open and democratic debate also might produce better policy and reduce partisan rancor.” (Roll Call, 11/14/07)
 

Unfortunately for the hard-working taxpayers that Shea-Porter represents, this has become an unhealthy pattern.  In the last two weeks alone, Shea-Porter and the Democrats have continued to support secret Washington earmarks stuffed into already pork-laden legislation.  The total cost of their actions is even more disturbing.  By refusing to allow debate or amendments to these bills, Shea-Porter and the Democrats have burdened American taxpayers with more than half a trillion dollars in increased spending. 

Posted by Doug at 4:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

...

Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian who died 1527 at the age of 58. He was a famous political theorist who advocated the principle of realpolitic - politics in its real sense, and how a ruler should rule a country.

.

Realpolitic might be described as the dirty side of politics. Machiavelli believed that human beings are by nature more likely to do evil things than good. Human beings are ungrateful, selfish, violent, and anti-social and have an instinct of wickedness that is always dominant in their behaviour.

[T]he Romans did what all wise rulers must: cope not only with present troubles but also with ones likely to rise in future, and assiduously forestall them. When trouble is sensed well in advance it can easily be remedied; if you wait for it to show itself any medicine will be too late because the disease will have become incurable.

As the doctors say of a wasting disease, to start with it is easy to cure but difficult to diagnose; after a time, unless it has been diagnosed and treated at the outset, it becomes easy to diagnose but difficult to cure. So it is in politics. Political disorders can be quickly healed if they are seen well in advance (and only a prudent ruler has such foresight); when, for lack of a diagnosis, they are allowed to grow in such a way that everyone can recognize them, remedies are too late.

[T]he Romans saw when troubles were coming and always took counter-measures. They never, to avoid a war, allowed them to go unchecked, because they knew that there is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others. They made up their minds to wage war with Philip and Antiochus in Greece, in order not to have to do so in Italy.

Posted by Doug at 7:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Senator John McCain in Gilford,NH (GraniteGrok file photo) 

Once again, McCain does another bloggers conference call.  Today, I not only got the chance to ask a question about John Edward's attempt to pander in extending the Family Medical Leave Act (and yes, I have had to use it in the past); I agree with Doug's assessment for Edwards being the Dope Of The Week!

I also had permission to record the entire session - you can listen to it here! 

If I get the time, I'll split out his opening remarks and then each blogger's question and answer / followup.

Posted by Skip at 12:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When it comes to helping parents take time off from work, Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards is raising the stakes.

.

The former North Carolina senator on Tuesday will propose spending $2 billion a year to help states create family leave programs that offer workers at least eight weeks of paid time off to care for a newborn or ill family member. The proposal is similar to those offered by his rivals but Edwards would put up more money — Sen. Hillary Clinton's plan calls for $1 billion a year; Sen. Barack Obama proposes $1.5 billion.

Edwards also would set a national goal of eight weeks of paid leave for all by 2014.

Five thousand years ago, Moses said, "Hitch up your camel. Pick up your shovel. Mount your ass. I will lead you to the promised land."

.
Five thousand years later, John Edwards said, "Light up a Camel. Lay down your shovel. Sit on your ass. This is the promised land."

Posted by Doug at 8:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

In addition to doing GraniteGrok and GilfordGrok (and Meet The New Press radio show), Doug and I are on our local Budget Committee.  Well, tonight, the Police Department put on a demo for Taser (as they wish to purchase some for the patrolmen in town - first purchase).

In a word - effective! 

OK, so I went overboard on the title.  One of our three Selectman did tase one of the Police Officers.  I'm putting up the short clip now....a longer one that better explains what the Bud Comm listened to in arriving at their decision will come a bit later over at GilfordGrok

Gilford Police Officer getting tased at Gilford Budget Committee

(GraniteGrok file photo)

Note: after the demo, listening to the info, the Bud Comm approved the purchase of this capital budget item. 

Cross posted at GilfordGrok

Posted by Skip at 9:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...Rhymes with?

Posted by Doug at 4:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

DC city hall bureaucrats are shaking in their federal government subsidized boots again.

Today, the Supreme Court is expected to state whether or not they will hear an appeal regarding DC's long-standing ban of personal firearms. Back in March, a DC appellate court ruled that the 1976 ban on handguns in the District was in violation of the Second Amendment.

Oddly enough, the March suit was brought forth not by a big time gun company or a conservative activist group; but by a federal worker. Dick Anthony Heller, a security guard at a federal building brought forth the lawsuit to the DC appellate court in hopes that he could gain the right to keep his firearm at his home for personal protection.

DC, which has its very own massive federal appropriation to help feed its gluttonous diet for erroneous and failed government programs, hasn't seemed to have curbed crime after almost three decades of banned firearms in the District. In fact, while the national homicide rate has fallen by 2% since the 76’ ban, DC's actually rose.

John Lott from the National Review Online writes:

The same folks who can't operate public schools believe they are also correct in their livid protection
of the gun ban. This case could be a bummer for the DC ruling class.

The USA Today reports:

Obviously, the liberal intelligentsia is about to panic, and it’s not so surprising that national media outlets reported this story onMonday with an alarmist tones in the writing.

It's also interesting to predict if the 2nd Amendment will become a reasonably important issue in 2008. I doubt voters or candidates will make an issue out of it unless another school shooting or mass murder shocks the nation.  However, I can't wait to see the laughable photo-ops as primped politicians awkwardly hold guns as if they were dirty-diapered babies to woo conservative voters.

Yes, not only did I come from a land where men can protect themselves and their families, but also a place where arena-sized discount liquor outlets flank each side of Interstate 95 on the border, there's no state income tax, and up until a few years ago, my father did yard work in overalls with no shirt on. Thank God I grew up in a quiet dead-end neighborhood.

Posted by Dave at 12:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

.

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Early momentum has been the surefire way to win modern presidential primaries: Emerge as the front-runner in Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina, then steamroll through later states to become the nominee.

.

Most of the Republican candidates are betting on this approach for 2008, but Rudy Giuliani is counting on something simpler: delegate math.

.

His plan is based on the fact that Florida and several other big states, trying to loosen the grip of the traditional early contests, are voting earlier than usual to compete for influence and attention from the candidates.

.

The shake-up might help Giuliani capture the nomination, even without the "must-win" early states.

Posted by Doug at 8:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

University of Delaware - degrees in indoctrination? 

While this story came out last week and may be one of the most egregious of the bunch, it really bears watching. This is not an isolated instance by any stretch of the imagination - at a lot of campuses, political correctness seems to overrun sanity.  And in this case, common sense...

While the professors themselves may disagree, the Academy (our institutes of higher learning) lean left.  It has been shown in multiple studies that the professors are more often Democrats than Republicans in large (sometimes overwhelming) percentages - just like a lot of MSM newsrooms.  Often, entire departments will contribute to liberal causes (and politicians) to the almost total exclusion of conservative issues (and politicians).

And while I'd rather see a more equitable split, that's their problem, not mine.  But after reading this, perhaps it is a problem for all of us: Left and Right.

And it has turned into a problem.  It is has been seen that the radical, liberal groupthink that has overtaken our colleges and universities is threatening the free exchange of ideas and views - the whole raison d'etre for its existence.  In other words, while there is much talk of freedom in the theoretical, in reality, political correctness rules the day.  Unless one talks the talk decreed by that groupthink, you are in deep sneakers.

Examples: 

Have a great GPA but disagree that corporal punishment is not necessarily wrong?  Get thrown out of school:

SYRACUSE, N.Y., January 19, 2006—A New York appeals court has determined that Le Moyne College wrongly removed graduate student Scott McConnell from its education program for endorsing corporal punishment in class.  The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) first brought McConnell’s case to public attention last year.

“This is a great day for all those who believe colleges should keep their promises to students,” said FIRE Interim President Greg Lukianoff, hailing the ruling. “Le Moyne College has learned that it cannot promise freedom and fairness but deliver repression and injustice.”

McConnell’s ordeal began with a November 2004 assignment in which he advocated, as part of an ideal classroom, an environment “based upon strong discipline and hard work” and that could include “corporal punishment.”  McConnell earned an “A-” for the paper.  But in January 2005, Education Department Chair Cathy Leogrande summarily dismissed McConnell, citing a “mismatch between [his] personal beliefs regarding teaching and learning and the Le Moyne College program goals.” At the time he was dismissed, McConnell had achieved a grade-point average of 3.78 and had received an “excellent” evaluation for his work in an actual classroom.

Read the whole thing!  And read the counter argument here.  Want to become a social worker or a teacher?  Prepare to acknowledge and embrace the notion of "dispositions" - only those that think and believe as we do are able to be what we are. 

Have other ideas or beliefs?  Be gone with you! 

Three organizations sent letters today asking the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to stop requiring the social workers it hires to have completed their education at social-work programs accredited by the Council on Social Work Education, unless the council modifies its accreditation criteria.

The three groups — the National Association of Scholars, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education — emphasized slightly different points in their letters. But in general they said that the council’s accreditation standards include ideologically skewed requirements, such as a mandate that social-work programs pursue “strategies of advocacy and social change that advance social justice.”

Such a standard forces a “progressive” ideology upon students, and it’s inappropriate — and a violation of the First Amendment — for the department to implicitly endorse the standard in its hiring criteria, the critics said. The letters said “political conservatives” and “Christians of traditional moral views” would be unable to graduate from social-work programs under those standards, unless they kept their views to themselves, and thus would be unable to get a job in the department’s Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.

So much for tolerance of other views, other beliefs.  This is rigid Leftism - you must be in lockstep with us or we will cast you out of your chosen profession.  Actually, that's wrong - this is actually academic racism based on a strictly defined belief system.

A new religion anyone?  After all, it certainly dogmatic... 

Don't think that prospective teachers are not excluded from this nonsense either:

Behind the Elimination of NCATE's "Dispositions"
K.C. Johnson, Brooklyn College—CUNY

In what amounted to a stunning reversal (Chronicle subscription required), The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education decided this last June to nullify its post-2002 requirement that dozens of Education departments around the country had to list "social justice" as a goal to "include some measure of a candidate's commitment to social justice" when evaluating the "dispositions" of their students. The organization acted only under the threat that its dispositions policy might prompt the Department of Education to revoke its ability to accredit Ed programs -- and thereby put it out of business. Here's some background on what led to the campaign of a coalition of groups, including FIRE, NAS, and ACTA, that formed to testify publicly against NCATE at its reauthorization hearings.

I first encountered the dispositions concept on 29 November 2004, when the head of the Social Studies Ed program at Brooklyn e-mailed me. The e-mail asked me to supply negative information about one of my students, Evan Goldwyn, since:

    We have some serious concerns about his disruptive and bullying behavior in the SOE classroom as well as aggressive and bullying behavior towards his professor outside the class . . . The School of Ed is trying to be more systematic in looking at what educators call "dispositions," that is behaviors necessary for being a successful teacher in the public schools. Being able to do excellent academic work, does not always translate into being a thoughtful, self reflective and effective teacher for youngsters.

Evan was a wonderful student—very smart, very hard-working, about whom my only real problem was that he occasionally didn't speak up enough in class. I e-mailed back to say this, after which point my feedback was no longer desired. (Politically, Evan struck me as centrist or perhaps center-right, but hardly a strong conservative.) I also asked a colleague, fellow NAS member Margaret King, to do some background investigation into the concept of "dispositions," since I had an article deadline at the time.

Margaret worked her way through Ed literature to note the link between the idea of "dispositions" and using Ed programs to promote "social justice." At that point, I had still never heard of NCATE, and assumed that "dispositions" was another tool brought in by Brooklyn College provost Roberta Matthews, who since her installation in 2001 has zealously redefined college personnel and curricular policies to implement her written mantra that "teaching is a political act."

And the examples could go on and on. 

But the most egregious example that has made the rounds of  blogosphere has been the University of Delaware.  It decided, in its infinite wisdom, that it would not limit itself to one particular academic area - it decided to indoctrinate ALL of its dorm students. From F.I.R.E:

NEWARK, Del., October 30, 2007—The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university’s own materials as a “treatment” for students’ incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students’ rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech.

“The University of Delaware’s residence life education program is a grave intrusion into students’ private beliefs,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. “The university has decided that it is not enough to expose its students to the values it considers important; instead, it must coerce its students into accepting those values as their own. At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional.”

The university’s views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to “sustainability” door decorations. Students living in the university’s eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a “diversity facilitation training” session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that “[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.”

The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as “When did you discover your sexual identity?” Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA’s “worst” one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having “diversity shoved down her throat.”

According to the program’s materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university’s residence halls to achieve certain “competencies” that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of “citizenship.” These competencies include: “Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society,” “Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression,” and “Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality.”

At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university’s ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an “oppressed” social group, and taking action by advocating for a “sustainable world.”

In the Office of Residence Life’s internal materials, these programs are described using the harrowing language of ideological reeducation. In documents relating to the assessment of student learning, for example, the residence hall lesson plans are referred to as “treatments.”

I used to be an RA at Boston University (aka BU) - the big dorm (at the time) at 700 Commonwealth Ave officially called Warren Towers (aka "The Zoo"; as RAs, we had an intramural team and called ourselves the ZooKeepers! ) 

NO WAY would I have ever agreed to ask questions like these: 

The Delaware Horror (Cont.)   [John Derbyshire]

Here is the latest skinny on the University of Delaware indoctrination consciousness-raising program for resident students, from Philly.com.

Readers might like to try the sample questions at the end, taken from one of the diversity training questionnaires.

1. When were you first made aware of your race?
2. When did you discover your sexual identity?
3. Who taught you a lesson in regard to some sort of diversity awareness? What was that lesson?
4. When was a time when you confronted someone regarding an issue of diversity? What was the confrontation about? If haven't, why not?
5. When was a time you felt oppressed? Who was oppressing you? How did you feel?
6. Can you think of a time when someone was offended by what you said? How did that make you feel? How do you think it made them feel? How did his/her behavior change toward you?

Having been now a few days since the story broke, the U of Del has had, shall we say, a massive public relations fiasco.  Like all things politically correct, the exercise may have started out with good intentions (er, maybe not), but it went waaay over the edge, found the cliff, and jumped off with exclaimations of joy! 

Well, in addition to the bloggers at GraniteGrok (Doug and I, with contributions from Judy, Pat, and Ed), we also have the "'Grok Stunt Man" (see the video here).  Now, we may have the "'Grok College Student" that may report on the politically correct goings on at a large New England urban university.  Hopefully sometime soon, we'll start getting some reports "on the ground" from a smart, savvy student with a biting wit.

Yup, the 60's gave rise to the rebellious Boomers - who make up the vast majority of academe.  Just as they challenged their elders during their heyday (which being the narcissistic generation we are, they never grew out of), I wonder how they feel as their orthodoxy is now challenged in turn by these "rebellious" students - ooh, dreaded conservatives!

I look forward to these reports!

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Democrats had better start dealing with this. Polls show a large majority of Americans, including Democrats, opposed to illegal immigration. They also find that most Americans favor some sort of amnesty for many illegals. Clinton apparently tried to finesse the two, while ignoring what's behind the numbers.

.

What many Democrats (and Republicans) don't "get" is that the support for amnesty is highly conditional. It rests on trust that any official pardon will be the last one. The "grand bargain" on immigration went down in flames last spring because no one believed the sales pitch — that with the amnesty would come a stop to future illegal immigration.

.

When will people know that their politicians mean business? When they hear them say "no."

Posted by Doug at 2:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

We also received some very good news from The Boston Globe poll that was released today.  Andy Smith, of the UNH Survey Center, conducted the poll and he was quoted as saying the race is “still really open”.  While the ballot indicates that Romney has 32, Rudy 20 and John 17, it doesn’t discuss the important numbers inside the numbers.

.

Of significance, only 16% of those sampled have “definitely decided” who they are voting for in the Primary.  And of those 16%, the race is a dead heat with Romney at 29%, John at 24% and Rudy at 24%.  However, the best news of the entire poll for our campaign in New Hampshire, is that since Andy Smith’s last poll at the end of September, John has increased his “definitely decided” from 10% to 24% – a 240% gain.  Romney has only increased 4 points and Rudy only 3.  This further illustrates the momentum that John has in New Hampshire and is a sign of good news to come.  It also proves what we have known all along – when John McCain meets voters, looks them in the eye, and gives them “straight talk”, they are boarding the bus for good!

Crowds at our Town Hall meetings are growing and getting much more enthusiastic, veterans are showing up at campaign events in droves, and phone calls and emails to our headquarters are keeping our volunteers overtime. 

.

You will see John in every corner of the state in the weeks ahead and we’ll need your help more than ever.  As more and more voters tune in to the race, we expect to have the same success converting undecideds into supporters.  We need to grow our local organizations and turn your friends and neighbors into supporters too.  If this conversion rate holds, we’ll be taking the lead for good on, or even earlier than, January 8 – when we EXPECT the Primary to be held.