The MTNP Podcast page is (gratefully) brought to you by:

And we thank them very much!

Meet The New Press
Radio at the speed of the Blogosphere!
 
(A radio show by bloggers about the goings on in blogosphere)
WEMJ 1490 Saturdays 9am-11am (EDT)
Streaming Live!

        Click here for the Meet The New Press photo gallery

Meet The New Press Podcasts

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 here                                                Hour 2 - here

     Hour 1

            Agenda - what's coming up, American Solutions, Stella and Allison Scammon, SEIU "I'm a
                    Healthcare Voter". Why is it  news that Repubs don't go to the  Morgan State college?

            Gold Star Mom event tomorrow.

            Stella Scammon - running for NH National Committeewoman.  Anecdote about hosting
                    President Bush, the job of National Committeewoman, advocating for the NH Primary,
                    when / where is the vote and who votes.  Part 1     Part 2

            Allison Scammon -  DC trip for the Families United, meeting the President; trip to
                    Arlington for laying of the wreath; the story of a Mom, her son, and his Dad;  bad
                    mouthing by the SEIU.
 

       Hour 2 

           William calls in to ask about NY Gov. Spitzer giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens

           Stella Scammon - Pitch for being elected NH Committeewoman to the RNC

           Allison Scammon talks about SEIU miscreant behavior in  DC; Skip adds in on local SEIU
                    presidents connections with the USA Communist party and how they apparently have
                    deceived people to sign their "I'm a Healthcare voter" petitions.

            Another plug for Saturday's American Solutions up at the Vo-Tech.  Tech stuff discussion
                    here.

            David Testerman is running for Franklin ward 2 seat and hosting Gov. Huckabee party

            Pat and Skip discuss Congressman Hodes breaking campaigning laws (a second time, so it
                    seems) and the Democrats having problems with Hsu money (Did Buckly send the
                    money to the Food Bank as promised?).

            Pres campaigns getting local - discussion Laconia Activist Judy Reever signs up with Obama
                    and Skip and Pat discuss personalities.

            Dem Prez debate - Pat notices that no Dem candidate will stand up for Israel while Skip
                    noticed that they, after swearing to uphold the law upon gaining the Presidency,
                    would break it by backing up Sanctuary mayors.

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

SchlubCam:

                Interview with Vern Wuensche, Presidential Candidate '08    Part 1   Part 2   Part 3
                Interview with Brian "Cosmo" of NH Presidential Watch:       Part 1   Part 2

Breaks:     Before Show time
                Gentle Advice on speaking into the mic
                Force vs Peaceniks in the Middle East
                Break
                Discussion on Newt's American Solutions

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

SchlubCam:

                Breaks:  Here, here, here, here, here, here and here
                Interview with Rev. Jeff Owen, Senior Pastor of Faith Community Bible Church
                        Part 1   Part 2   Part 3

 Technical problems at the studio did not allow me to get the podcasts done in a timely fashion.  A loyal listener HAS supplied us with a copy of the show, and that will get done.

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

     Hour 1  

           Agenda

           Discussion - Ramifications of Episcopalian Bishop Gene Robinson (of NH) announcing his
                    gay civil union and causes worldwide Anglican angst.  Judy joins and adds her post
                    and the reaction to it.  Part 1   Part 2

           Jeb Bradley - interview former Congressman from NH District 1 who is trying to regain his
                    seat from Carol Shea-Porter (D)

           Discussion - Doug is trying to figure out NH's "Power Players"
 

     Hour 2 

           Judy Reever (D-Laconia)wants an income tax in NH - discussion how the Democrats have
                    spent beyond NH's ability (or they just don't care - they're all  retired!)

           Healthcare - from Pat's potato chips to a "Fat Tax" to stark difference between Republican
                    (free market) and Democratic (socialism) solutions to healthcare.  Chan from
                    Weekend Pundit calls in.

           John Stephen - former head of NH Health and Human Services is running for Congress in
                    the first District (there will be a primary race).

            Presidential campaigning - Gov. Cellucci returns to discuss Rudy Giuliani's tax proposals.

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

SchlubCam:

Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

Hourly clips will be available later on this week.

Yup, this page is WACKED right now.  Due to the crash of  GraniteGrok on Yahoo servers, we've lost some data....we are working as hard as we can to get it back.  All intervening weeks, best as possible, will be put as soon as possible!

Week of 07/14/07

                                        Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

      Hour 1   

          Intro - 7/14/07 - Pat is back!  Dan McGuire is our special guest (Murphy's Taproom,
                 Republican Liberty Caucus,  NH Reagan Network, Granite State Taxpayers,
                Coalition of NH Taxpayers, and lots more!).
                Webcam - not live but will post the video here later.
                Special Election in Hookset won by Dave Boutin (R) where Dan McGuire assisted,

         Discussion - Doug's Hillary Press Pass on the Mic - the 'Grok goes to the Bill and Hillary
                        event in Manchester.
                Barack event mentioned.
                The advantages of the NH Retail Politic reality.
                Differences between campaigns, Repubs and Dems - issues and details vs issues and
                        emotions.  Hillary's oratorical style.
                We want the campaigners to come on in!
                Pat's Barack story (funny!).
                President Bush's lack of ability of communication and leadership on a consistent basis.
                Comparison between Barack, Rudy, Hillary, Huckabee for speaking styles.

         Dan starts a discussion on Pat's political activities as a political blogger. 

         Interview - Dan McGuire - political start in life was upset by taxes, MassCare, bad government
                causes poverty,  Republican activities, Free State Project,  NH Republican Liberty
                Alliance, discussion of the Republican Party platform (big tent and numbers vs
                principles and platform support)  and the NH Reagan network. 

      Hour 2     

        Interview - more with  Dan McGuire
                Republican Party Platform (big tent vs principles), "quality" of Republicans via
                        measurements,
               Pat's question - Party platform calls for no money for those that support partial birth
                        abortion - how will this affect Rudy?  Skip - accountability to the platform with
                        consequences. 

         Senator Talent - Supporting Mitt Romney's run for President.
                        The more people hear about Romney, the polls go up.
                        Need change in DC - Romney will do it as he embraces the Republican principles                                 and can energize the base and attract the center in the general election.
                        Change agent discussion.
                        Wants to replace the UN with a more relevant organization
                        Mitt will veto to cut spending - history in MA was turning a deficit into a surplus in a
                                Democratic state
                        Look at the debates - Mitt can communicate
                        Democratic base "oomph" vs seemingly Republicans' apathy
                        MassCare - how does that play against Dems universal healthcare

          Dan - web sites, playing Bridge (card game)

          Presidential - Democrats - the 'Grok is seeing all the campaigns, Repub and Dems, to bring
                        a focus on the retail politics. Who has the greater enthusiasm (D or R)?
                        Differences between Dem or Repub supporters, emotional vs details, and why.            
          Email  - One person's thoughts on "why the difference between Dem & Repub supporters

          Discussion - the MTNP crew discusses the Pope's remarks this week.  A layman's dicussion of
                        the differing theologies between Roman Catholics and Evangelical Christians.

Week of 07/07/07

                                        Hour 1 here                                                Hour 2 - here

      Hour 1  

           Intro - 7/7/07 - lucky days! The better half-wives!  Discussion about singer / congressman
                     Sono Bono, show agenda, Live Earth, GraniteGrok's association with Science Fiction
                     author Robert Heinlein, the 'Grok talks about National Geographic's climate report,
                     Prius at 100mph, Doug stakes claim that Al Gore starts his Presidential campaign
                     today,

           Interview - Harvey Lee of Endless Energy on wind power / windmills and generating electricity

           Interview - Brittany Hamilton - Laconia High convocation speech kerfuffle with the peace
                    activist

           The Doug and Tom Tardiff Right To Know lawsuit against the Belknap County Convention.
                     Part 1     Part 2

      Hour 2  

           Interview - Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies
                     Center for Immigration Studies purpose, Attrition through Enforcement, role of
                     special interest groups, blogosphere impact on the Kennedy-McCain bill,
                     enforcement tools not being used, illegals as a protected class of people,
                     enforcement moving from Feds to states and counties and cities,

            Discussion - Doug's YouTube's Barak Obama's visit to Laconia, blog impacts on campaigns

Posted by Skip at 11:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (20)

My post about the Mike Gravel ad got the attention of Greg Chase - the gentleman that I mentioned that is putting his money where his support is!  I read through his comment that he left on his post and then emailed him back.

Here at the 'Grok, we  never back down from a potential debate (with a grin on face - why should we?  We're right!)

Anyways, I've decided to bring the comment forward, and then comment on it.  Greg will then have his  chance to comment back, and we'll see where it goes! 

And yes, I am not always going to give extensive answers - I want the debate!

Thanks for your blog entry.  Those are my ads so let me stab at responding.

People hear a lot about oil but often don't know basic facts about it: the process of refining, US production, consumption, imports, etc.    The Oil ad you refer to aims to lay out some of that basic information, and make the assertion that if we want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil a good way to do it is a fuel tax.

Almost every politician says they'd like to get off foreign oil. No debate there. When asked to quantify how much they want to get off foreign oil, i.e. what they are going to do about it, things either go silent or get excessively vague.

Well, I'm not going silent, nor get vague.  Frankly, I think that your general premise is wrong, and here's why.

You, of all people being a trader, understand far better than most that price is determined not only by demand but also by supply. Also, what can happen to pricing when artifacts to the market are introduced by government.

By inserting government into the process of price setting by artificially raising the price of gas by increased taxes, you may well lower the demand as you espouse.  However, I am probably on safe ground by saying that the price at the pump will turn out to be inelastic (we just don't know what that pricing point is yet). Yes, the price per barrel skyrocketed to the $100 per; that really did not get reflected fully at the pump.  Indeed, price went up about 60% per barrel but only 30% at the pump.  If the entire run up had appeared at the pump, coupled with much higher taxes, our prices will approach that of Europe - which HAS raised the cost of gas by high taxes.  Even with that,  I note that their usage of foreign oil hasn't really backed down all that much. 

I'm willing to bet that brunt of Gravel's tax raise will be on the backs of those least able to adjust for that spike - the poor and the working stiffs of America.  Thus, forcing economic choices that otherwise would not be present will most likely trickle upward in a negative fashion, as those folks (with lower amounts of disposable dollars) start to account for that artifically induced price increase and making the  tradeoffs - more for gas and less for other consumables as their incomes really are rather inelastic.

Oil should not be seen as just oil - economies need energy and oil is a great transport mechanism for that. 

Huckabee is a great example. He's got a whole page devoted to the topic on his site: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=21 .  He decries the problem quite effectively (I wish I could write as well as whatever staffer put that page together), but then falls flat on a solution.  He talks about knocking heads, pouring federal money at the problem, hoping or regulating that the private sector will pony up research dollars as well, forcing the federal government to purchase alternative energies, etc.    This seems like a mildly souped-up version of what we already do.

If you remove the mention of Abortion and Christian values from Huckabee, you'd have a hard time figuring out his utterances from those of John Edwards.  Populist sayings appeal to those that don't think things through.  And if you notice, I think that the use of government to mandate behavior doesn't much differ betweent the two either....or the other Dems.

Most people accept that our collective dependence on oil has the negative externalities of environmental damage and/or reduced national security.  Options I see at the federal level to address energy independence:

1. Fund public research
2. Fund private research
3. Give tax breaks to chosen activities (drilling for fossil fuels domestically, hybrid car incentives, solar panel incentives, etc.)
4. Rhetoric: Nice talk about alternatives.  We've done this for 30 years.
5. Regulate: Haggle with Detroit about fuel economy standards, mandate certain fractions of power come from certain sources, etc.
6. Tax the thing you want to discourage.
7. Bury head in the sand.

I think 6 is by far the "free-est" market solution.  It simply encodes the externalities into the price of oil products.  Nothing we do is technically free market with our federal tax burden.<br><br>

Democrats using Government to regulate the rest of us is not new.  In fact, it seems to be the only way that they can control things - it certainly seems to be that their attempts to persuade in the actual marketplace are either non-existent or have been deemed so silly that the marketplace dismisses them out of hand. 

While you may label Number 6 as the "free-est", by definition it is NOT Free Market economics - any economist would agree that taxation is NOT part of a free market.  What you advocate for is for  people using the levers of government to make people obey what they think are good ideas (it is how laws get done - and laws pertain to government and not corporations or the market).  That was where I had the problem with the ad. 

Look, Free Market by all known definitions exclude government interference.  That's why I excoriated the ad - it claims the mantle of the free market and yet 6 of your seven ideas are useless without the force of government (and the force it brings in enforcing laws and regulations):

1. Fund public research

2. Fund private research

3. Give tax breaks to chosen activities (drilling for fossil fuels domestically, hybrid car incentives, solar panel incentives, etc.)

Look, any industrialized / developed economy such as ours requires energy.  Price is set not only by demand, but also by supply.  We artificially (again, by those that believe that "nice views" are more important) limit where we can get at our own supplies.  ANWR, Gulf coast oil, heck - look at Cape Wind! Democrats just seem to restrict things, and not let the grow by the choice of the people.

I call these people that do so busybodies and Nanny-Staters. 

Get government out of the way and let the Free Market go.  Capitalism works far better and far nimbler than the government behemoth.

4. Rhetoric: Nice talk about alternatives.  We've done this for 30 years.

5. Regulate: Haggle with Detroit about fuel economy standards, mandate certain fractions of power come from certain sources, etc.

"Haggle"?  Ha! 

The "not talked about result" is that these new CAFE standards that the Dems pushed through will result in more deaths.  With your physics degrees, you have to agree that lighter cars, even with exotic composites, will be more dangerous when these lighter cars tangle with 18 wheelers and other trucks.  And in many situations, more cars will be on the road - if a family is larger than 3 or 4, it will need 2 cars to transport them all - whereas an SUV will do the trick.

And (twinkle in eye) - moving snow with the plow on my Suburban in 4 wheel drive is far easier than if this 50 year old back had to use a shovel! 

Look, if the marketplace wanted high mileage cars, they would be here already.  Companies exist to fill demand (and therefore make profits) - if there was a huge demand, those vehicles would already be in mass productions.  Instead 

6. Tax the thing you want to discourage.

THIS bothers me the most!  It assumes that the person that thinks that what needs to be discouraged is wrong to all people!  It assumes the worst of society: "I know better than you and I will limit your choice and freedom because I DO know better what you need than you do".

Hubris, short and sweet (and yes, this brings out the libertarian in me that I never realized I had)!

This country was built around the concept of freedom - and when we are silly enough to limit those choices of the kind you talk about, we all lose freedoms outside of the actual area of discussion (spillover always occurs). 

7. Bury head in the sand.

The view that a revenue-neutral fuel tax will cripple the economy is bogus.  Don't forget, our current tax code taxes the heck out of labor.  I'd say labor is a pretty integral part of the economy.  Matter of fact, labor is more indispensable than energy.

I have heard lots of proponents of carbon based taxes - not once have I heard of the taxes that would be removed from the marketplace.  NO tax is ever neutral - someone will be gored (hmm - no, I won't go there) while someone benefits.  I highly doubt that income taxes (which is THE tax on labor for the vast majority of us) would be cut to account for your tax.

I'm not a Dem, and to answer your question I don't think you're stupid, but I do wonder what specifically you would support doing, if anything, about our dependence on foreign oil?

Increase supply - let our companies drill in more places (e.g., like off Florida and California that keep that from happening).  Make it easier to construct more refineries to distribute risk and capacity.  And WHY do we have to have so many boutique gasoline formulations that always seem to bollix up the marketplace during switch-over times? IF the new technologies work on the shale oil deposits in the Colorado areas, open them up - some pundits believe that the amount there could rival if not exceed that of the Saudi reserves.

A discussion of taxation would follow a similar arc.  I find it odd that you suggest people who think their taxes are too low should just write a bigger check to the IRS.  By similar logic anyone who thinks consumption of foreign oil is a severe national problem should drive around a moped and call it a day.

And you find that odd...why?  If one really believes that they are undertaxed, why not just send in a check?  Why is it that just because they feel that way, why should others get hit with that problem?  There is NOTHING that stops them in mailing it in and assuaging their guilt / sense of indebtedness.  But WHY does it have to be a collective effort based on government dictates? 

And yes, I do believe that those who believe that the foreign oil should be doing concrete things in their own lives first, and then persuade the rest of us in the marketplace of ideas.  If valid and sufficient arguments are presented, then they will persuade the rest of us of the brightness of their ideas and will follow suit.  Frankly, Al Gore, and all of the other celebrities who say the words but then don't walk the talk in their personal lives are

hypocrites.

There is truth in the phrase "lead by example".  Isn't that better than using the full might of the Federal Government to coerce behavior?

Telling me to figuratively wear a hair shirt and shiver in the cold and bake in the heat and then jump into the private jet to fly thousands of miles just to do that all over again smacks of pure "Do as I say (but I won't)".

I've tried to match the tone of your post.  Please don't take my response the wrong way. I do sincerely appreciate the entry and respect your views.  These issues seem quite challenging to me, but not to be ignored.

Posted by Skip at 11:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In this race, our most important consideration is electing the candidate most likely to bring American victory in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the greater war on Islamic extremists in general, and keep America's enemies and rivals in check. John McCain is that man. None of the Democrats approaches McCain's experience and vision on that subject.

Posted by Doug at 10:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

That is, poor performing ones.  Much has been written about corporations whose results (and stocks) have tanked, yet their CEOs keep getting pay and incentive raises. Now, we have yet another Republican acting just like his corporate bretheren:

DERRY (AP) – A Salem lawmaker is behind a proposal to raise the pay for New Hampshire legislators, currently the lowest-paid in the country.

Republican Rep. Anthony DiFruscia is the prime sponsor of a proposed constitutional amendment that would raise state legislators pay from $100 a year plus mileage to $100 a week plus mileage. Constitutional amendments must win three-fifths support in the House and Senate to go before voters. Two-thirds of voters must approve for an amendment to take effect.

Right!  Doug posts up Charlie Arlinghaus's article on our impending revenue shortfall (my take on it at the end of this post). So tell me, with NH "losing" $75 million for the budget, WHY should our "managers" get raises?  

I thought the mantra was supposed to be "pay for performance" - this certainly shows that negative performance is not an obstacle! 

DiFruscia said he thinks more money would make it easier for working people to serve in the Legislature.

I rather doubt that $100 / week is going to be the ticket to have more working people run for the Legislature.  At $5,200/year/Representative and the high cost of living in our state, that amount won't keep a family going for long. That, times 424 Reps in the house is an additional $2.2 million per year to the deficit.

I'd love to serve, but being a working stiff, I have no way to be able to do so.  I am the breadwinner of my family - unless we wish to go homeless, seeing the inside of the House is not going to happen on a day to day basis.

Unless of course, that family wants to go on Public Assistance of any / all kinds.  Letting the general public pay your way as you make their laws?  yourself on the public dime - no.  And THAT brings up a huge philosophical problem for me..... why should people on the public dole be able to influence and vote on bills that could have an impact on my taxes that may well benefit them in one way or another?  I have a real fundamental problem with this scenario....

Opponents say low pay for lawmakers reinforces New Hampshire’s traditional emphasis on volunteer service.

“Instead of some fat cat thinking, you know, ‘OK, this is a career,’ it’s not a career (in New Hampshire),” said Rep. Gene Charron, R-Chester. “It’s got to be a love for your state.”

The model of citizen-politician is still alive here in NH; go, serve, and return to your regular life.  I believe that politics should not be a profession - go, be an employee or employer, or homemaker, do what you think is right, and then step aside.   Yes, it does limit who can serve - or does it?

NCSL staffer Tim Story said a study his organization did three years ago found that New Hampshire’s lawmakers are the oldest in the country. More than 60 percent of House members are over 60, while only 15.8 percent of New Hampshire’s overall population is that old, according to information from the House clerk’s office and the U.S. Census. Forty-seven percent of House members are retirees, 3 percent are homemakers and 1.5 percent are students, the clerk’s office said; that means less than half of House members have full- or part-time jobs.

House Clerk Karen Wadsworth said lawyers, teachers and school administrators make up a substantial portion of the legislative body, but many others own small businesses. One lawmaker is a waiter.

Huh?  Teachers and School Administrators serving in the Legislature?  What saith the NEA about this?  Heck, what about taxpayers (this IS news to me!)?

Last I knew, Teachers (as opposed to Professors at the college level) work during the day - and pretty much during the time that the Legislature was in session.  So how do they get to "not teach"?  How do I get such a job?  Ditto for the school admins!
 
I haven't been able to find the actual dates of each annual session (beginning and end) but I just looked at the calendar for the House - while there are journals and calendars for the summer months, there's plenty of time during the school year where one would think that they should be doing their job (and at tax payer expense) and doing Legislative business.  Ditto for the roll calls.

Or is this a way to get paid for being an NH Representatitive?

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It's just about time to caucus in Iowa.  It's almost time to vote here in NH.  THIS is a long video (17 min) by Fred doing a "final talk" (?) to Iowans.

Wonder if he'll do one for us?

.

.

. 

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

Thanks to global warming, this is turning out to be among the snowiest Decembers in history (at least back to 1880-something when they started keeping official records).  And we are expecting more again tomorrow (6"?  9"?).

Snow, snow, snow....I'm already getting tired of raking my roof! 

Thus, thanks to Gary, a lifelong Scouter (currently troop leader and unstoppable hiker), a glance backwards at some of the glory that is the White Mountains here in NH. And NO SNOW!

Simply green...wonderful! 

Posted by Skip at 5:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Revenue on Track for $75 Million Shortfall

By Charles M. Arlinghaus

Projecting year-end totals.

Three Categories of Revenue

Medicaid Enhancement

General Taxes

Business taxes

Audit Revenue

(1) For the purposes of this analysis, Medicaid enhancement revenue is comprised of the line items for “Net Medicaid Enhancement Revenue” and “Recoveries” from the state revenue reports. The reports and estimates are available at http://admin.state.nh.us/accounting/reports.asp.

.

(2) Through November, the state had received $94.8 million. The budget had projected $95.8 million. For the remaining seven months of the year, we are budgeted to receive another $9.3 million, largely from the “recoveries” line-item which is slightly ahead of expectations.
. 
(3) This data is based on a report provided to the author by the Dept. of Revenue Administration.

.

(4) First quarter collections have been an average 19.9% of the final total for the last seven years. Collections of $118.5M then predict a total of $594.8M, $44.2 less than budgeted.

.

(5) In FY2006, October receipts were $38.4 million, probably because of audit revenues, and the five-month total through November was 28.7% of the final total compared to a seven year average of 26.6%.

.

Posted by Doug at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I grew up around Boston and went to school / lived in there during the 70's.  During that time, as the late 60's radicalism started to abate, one thing kept appearing in the news:

Seabrook

For those outside of the New England area, that is the nuclear power station that was built in Seabrook, NH.  Given the projections of the time, it was needed as the New England area was importing most of its electrical power from outside the area.  While Plymouth Station also was nuclear, my memories are of the protests of the Clamshell Alliance (a hodge-podge, often raggedy clad, mixture of early environmentalists and hippies) ready at the drop of a hat to go protest the building of the two reactors at Seabrook.  Or, stand in front of a judge with reams of paper to slow the process down.

Fast forward 30 years, and once again, I see the rounding up of the same mentality, this time, down Texas way:

Texas anti-nuclear activists are rallying their forces to challenge the so-called nuclear renaissance that could see the state become home to the country's first new nuclear power plant project in nearly 30 years.

On Friday a coalition of groups said it will intervene in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of NRG Energy's application to build two new reactors in Matagorda County, next to the existing South Texas Project nuclear plant.

The commission filed notice this week that a 60-day public comment period is now open for groups to intervene in the review for the joint construction and operation permit.

Austin-based officials with the Sierra Club, Public Citizen and the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition said they don't yet know if they will intervene in the review separately or under one name. But they don't plan on sitting on their hands.

"We need to draw a line in the sand here in Texas and create a new nuclear resistance movement to say no to the nuclear regurgitation," said Karen Hadden, director of SEED.

Sure.  The problem is, I don't see a whole lot of ability, country wide, to increase the supply of electricity easily and quickly and at no cost to the environment.  One only has to look back at California a few years ago and remember how crippling the the blackouts were to the economy and to life in general.  Lots of people, deprived of their air conditioners and other modern conveniences were not impressed (or in Maine, for that matter).

Yes, I know that the Enron market manipulators played their roles in that fiasco - and I am glad that those that were found guilty are paying the price.  However, in watching things around the country, and locally, I see often see self-righteous environmentalists decrying "how could you even THINK of something like this"?  Yet, what do they offer in return?

Er, not much.....

The quickest way to alleviate the system problem, other than a changing of the weather pattern, was the addition of natural gas turbine generators. Yet, those were lambasted by the environmentalists as being polluters - not only noisy but emitted a lot of pollutants - read CO2.

All we hear, however, is the usual platitudes of conservation (of which we can do, but effective only to a point), and use of renewable resources.  Hydrogen, they say!  Solar, they say!  Wind is free!

Yet, with all that, the energy density of those proposals, never mind the economics, just aren't there yet. And to have a growing economy, more energy has to be found and made available.  I will be truthful - I have no mind to regress back to even the early 19th century - and I am certainly not enamored of what want - a return back to the "simple life" of the romanticized "noble savage" age.  To those to whom that notion tickles your fancy, be my guest; just don't expect me to join you.  Or legislate me to either.

And I detect, with no small amount of irony that while some say wind, other say not here.  The largest hypocrisy is in MA where the Cape Wind project to be located in Nantucket sound is being shot down by none other than Senators Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry (it's all about the view, it's all about safety in the shipping lanes, it's all about fishing, it's all about them not wanting to navigate their sailing yachts among the windmills).

Even here in the Lakes Region of NH, our Select Board Chair, Alice Boucher, shot down a suggestion by Doug to locate a couple of windmills atop the local mountain ridge that is in the Town on aesthetic reasons to generate clean energy (personally, I like the idea of pristine white windmills turning in the breeze).

Anyways, let's not forget about why nuclear is getting a push - it really absolutely can solve one of the environmentalists bugaboos (worthy of an Oscar, dontcha know):

NRG spokesman David Knox said building new nuclear plants like the one his company is planning will be major steps toward battling global warming.

"Nuclear is clean, safe and secure and will be critical to help meet rising electrical demand without contributing to global climate change," Knox said.

And it is safe.  While Three Mile Island will never be forgotten, even with human bungling, containment system worked.  Yes, in Russia, not so much (and there, we can blame bad design, shoddy workmanship, and just plain stupidity and carelessness).  However, compare that to just this year with all of the deaths in coal mines here in the US and abroad (especially China, which has had a horrific death rate in their mines).   

Just look if the anti-nuke folks in Texas would look at this! 

The environmental groups are challenging the project on several fronts in addition to the long-standing complaints about the dangers of storing nuclear waste indefinitely and the role it may play in nuclear weapons proliferation.

You know, one of the most laughable parts of this is the scenario of us having to protect future generations from our waste storage AS IF FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL BE ABSOLUTE MORONS!  I just keep raising my eyebrows everytime I see an article of how we might signal to our successors (as if civilization completely disappeared and things went back to the Stone age) "please, don't go there, you'll get hurt".  I find both precepts rather silly, to be honest. 

This too: 

The groups point to the industry's last round of construction in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when projects regularly ran over budget and schedule, as proof new projects will also be costly.

Er, remember back 30 years....it was not the construction costs that made things prohibitive (remember, Seabrook was supposed to have TWO reactors - the second one was shelved due to cost overruns).

Rather, the Clamshell Alliance used one legal gambit after another to lengthen the production schedule and drove up the cost.  And that was reproduced over and over again across the country.  And as a slap against Hollywood (who only claims to mirror society - what dribble!),  the move "China Syndrome" didn't help.  Even back then, liberals knew the power of information warfare.

Neil Carman, director of the clean air program for the Sierra Club in Texas, said the state's environmental community hasn't addressed nuclear energy for many years. In Texas organizers spent a lot of time and effort in the past two years fighting TXU's plans to build nearly a dozen new coal-fired power plants.

Law of Unintended Consequences - you argue against one thing and you got another.  Looking backward, and against the backdrop of CO2-induced global warming, which will be better?

Or do you want us all sitting by the dim light of whale oil, keeping warm by releasing the CO2 of lots of wood stoves?  Remember, it gets chilly up here in the Northland....Remember, the folks in CA weren't all that keen about living the simple life.

Frankly, like the present Iraq war, I see this as just one more opportunity for the aging hippies to come out to relive their glory days once again?  I'll laugh like a fool if their electrical wheelchairs that will allow them protest in the first place grind to a halt with nowhere to recharge! 

Life can be simplified by saying that there are always tradeoffs.  When you make something a scare commodity, everyone will get dinged.  This will be especially true if that commodity is electricity.  That is especially true of your ideology is one that does not allow for tradeoffs.  Even as a real political conservative, nothing will ever be as I want. 

The adult thing to do is to weigh alternatives.  For me, it seems that a mix of energy producing technologies will be needed.  Before you brand me a right wing nutcase on this issue (and yes, that monniker may stick on other issues, fer sure!), know that I live in a passive solar hour.  I had an active solar house when I lived in MA.  And I just got a quote for a TAP (Thermosiphoning Air Panel for solar space heating - I LOVED them back in my old house!).  I am excited about the PV breakthroughs that may be just around the corner that will provide energy at or even below existing prices by wrapping my house in the new materials. 

Good things will come....but we've been waiting a long time for them too and I'm not ready to hold my breath.

Remember, I do like the electrons that allow me to do this!

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

....

• Clay McCuistion is the "blog wrangler" at the Concord Monitor's blogsNH. We'll find out what that really means, and what blogsNH is all about.
• National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru checks in to defend my favorite magazine's endorsement of Mitt Romney. He'll try to convince us why we're wrong to fear & loathe Mitt Romney. The Union Leader's going with McCain-- why does NR have such a problem with that? Mitt on stem cells. What's left of Obama when the "vapor" is removed?
• Joe McCormack was very active in local & state politics many years back when I first became interested in the game. For the last several years, we haven't heard much from Joe. Then Fred Thompson showed up on the scene, and Joe came out of "retirement" to support his candidacy. We'll find out what it is about the Tennesee politician turned actor turned presidential candidate that dragged Joe back into the arena.
• Former MA Governor & Canadian ambassador A. Paul Celluci once again joins the gang to chat up Rudy Giuliani. We'll ask him whether he agrees with me that Rudy got a bum rap and was set up by Drudge and others with regards to the mistriss/budget flap. Can the campaign recover the ground it has lost since the now-debunked allegations surfaced? What are the campaign's expectations from Iowa & New Hampshire? We'll also talk about Rudy's new national TV ad entitled "Freedom", and what the Bhutto murder means for the Terrorists' War on Us (Rudy's words) and its impact, if any, on the campaign.
• Has Jeanne Shaheen's luster worn away? This week brought polling numbers that show the Republican incumbent John E. Sununu in the lead. The left is worried. Is NH's local version of the Clinton machine-- the Shaheen team-- going to find a rough road ahead? We can only hope...
• Etc. Check back for updates & new links.

Posted by Doug at 12:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

....

.

What could be causing such a dramatic turnaround in New Hampshire, where all previous polls had shown Shaheen comfortably ahead? TPM Election central spells is out:

Sununu's upsurge could be happening for any number of reasons - or this poll could just be an outlier - but there is one particular possibility: That the recent attacks from Jeanne's husband Billy, against Barack Obama's teenage drug use, might have taken a toll on her Senate campaign.

Sometimes candidates (or, in this case, spouses of candidates) will do really stupid things, and the campaign will change dramatically. This reminds me of the 2005 New York City mayor's race, in which Ferrer started out with comfortable leads. The turning point in the campaign was when, in March of 2005, Ferrer made a colossal error involving comments over Amadou Diallo. He pissed off what should have been his general election base, and came across as a flip-flopping panderer. In one fell swoop, polls moved 20 points in favor of Bloomberg overnight and a seemingly certain victory turned into a crushing defeat.

I wonder if that is what we are seeing in New Hampshire now, too. Billy's Shaheen's attacks against Obama could be doing serious damage to his wife's standing among New Hampshire Independents, among whom Obama leads. Even apart from hurting Shaheen in a key voting block, this is the sort of incident that could make her look like another crass politician by engaging in vicious, racially-tinted character attacks through a surrogate. That won't help her among anyone.

I won't be holding my breath for the Shaheen gang to change from this, their normal procedure anytime soon. Why would they veer off the trajectory that has kept them at the top of the Granite State's Democratic heap for all these years now? Make no mistake about it, with the gutter politics of her partner/ spouse, and the attack dog instincts of her campaign manager, former NH Dem Party Chair Kathleen Sullivan, Jeanne Shaheen's NH political machine has no rivals.

"But Doug-- Billy said he was sorry. That he made a mistake, and all that. And he has paid the price. Surely they won't make that mistake again!" Sure thing. It was all a misunderstanding, with absolutely no malice intended, right? Or just maybe, taking one for the team, he got exactly the result he was looking for all along. That's what Tom Curry, writing at MSNBC seems to imply:

Was Shaheen’s commentary truly a blunder? Had the incident helped Obama or created an opening for John Edwards? Or might it turn out to hurt Obama and thus help Clinton?

Have they no shame? Again, notes Curry

On Thursday Shaheen said in a written statement, “I made a mistake and in light of what happened, I have made the personal decision that I will step down as the Co-Chair of the Hillary for President campaign.”

But it is difficult to imagine a strategist as canny as Shaheen is making a thoughtless “mistake.” A deliberate “mistake” — maybe.

He said in his statement that his comments “were in no way authorized by Senator Clinton or the Clinton campaign.” They need not have been to be effective.

Why would anyone think that these same tactics won't be employed right here in the Granite State- the Shaheen's home turf? These people have proved that they, just like other politicians of their ilk, will say anything it takes to smear or slime their opponents, true, or not-- and, miraculously, get away with it. Does anyone really believe President Bush caused the recent California wildfires? Does Jeanne Shaheen? She must, because that's what she said. Is this the kind of Senator we need to be sending to Washington? Don't we have enough of this type down there already? Say what you will about Senator Sununu, but he generally picks his words carefully, and is seemingly reliable when it comes to speaking the truth.

Oh, and let's not forget another matter involving Mr. & Mrs. Shaheen that caught the 'Grok's attention. As was reported in a September '06 posting, they facilitated a US tour by a certain personality that many believed shouldn't have taken place. Remarking on then Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's decision to withold state police escorts for former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami's visit, I wrote

The other question I have about the visit by the former leader of a card-carrying member of the Axis of Evil is who invited this guy in the first place? Upon hearing the answer, I was at once both surprised, and not surprised at all. The September 7th Granite Status column by John DiStaso in the Union Leader (NH) answered my question:

Romney won't give Massachusetts State Police protection to Mohammed Khatami on Sunday when the former Iranian president speaks at the John F. Kennedy School of Government's Institute of Politics in Boston.

.

Wonder what the institute director thinks of that?

.

"She thinks they're making more out of this than there needs to be," said Bill Shaheen, husband of director Jeanne Shaheen, our former governor.

.

"If we stand for freedom of speech, we stand for freedom of speech," said Bill. "Let him speak and let people ask him questions."

.

Shaheen said his spouse was deeply involved in the "invitation process" for Khatami and is organizing the controversial event.

.

At Harvard, he said, "They like controversial figures to come and speak. What's wrong with hearing what they have to say? I just don't see the big deal."

The Shaheens are "players" in Democrat party politics. They are, in my mind, representative of what could be described as "mainstream" Democrats. Not seeing "the big deal" about allowing a member of the leadership of our stated enemy in the new world war a platform from which to espouse his views is exactly why, as bad as the Republicans can be, we cannot allow the Democrats to gain the levers of power in the upcoming election.

Way back in 1997, writing in National Review, Justin Maiona fingered Shaheen's formula for success in NH, a heavily Republican leaning state at the time:

By patronizing the Right, legislating to the left, and proclaiming herself a centrist, Jeanne Shaheen is doing to the Republican majority in New Hampshire what Bill Clinton is doing to the Republican leadership in Washington: steamrolling them with a smile and handshake.

Perhaps this time around, the mixture of Clintonian triangulation and slime will be Shaheen's undoing... Those on the left are starting to worry. This is just the break NH Republicans have needed. I promise I will do my level best to make sure as many voters as possible know the full picture of what Jeanne Shaheen brings to the table. Keep those rubber boots handy-- the slime might get deep before it's all over!

.

Shaheen team returning to campaign HQ at the end of a day's work...

.

Posted by Doug at 2:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

..

.

...... 

• Exchange w/McCain on war
• McCain on Illegal Immigration
• Hillary talks Guns
• 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 8:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by BobM at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

was one of the most innovative science fiction series ever produced for American television, an ambitious attempt to build upon the cyberpunk movement in science fiction literature.

one of the most innovative fictional candidates ever produced for an American campaign in an ambitious attempt to build upon the conservative movement in the Republican Party?

Posted by Doug at 10:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I certainly agree with this statement, as all around us, we see our politicians and society increasingly trying to protect us from ourselves and from the statement "Decisions and actions have consequences".

If you want freedom, you have to assume personal responsibility for yourself.  If you make bad decisions, it's your own fault.

- Dr. Ron Paul, 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate 

No, this is NOT an endorsement of Ron Paul!  That said, I do agree with some of what he says (and just plain shake my head slowly at the rest).  And this is one of those times.

(H/T: Tom) 

Posted by Skip at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

From Dictionary.com 

Free Market:

• An economic system in which prices and wages are determined by unrestricted competition between businesses, without government regulation or fear of monopolies.
• An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions. 
• The production and exchange of goods and services without interference from the government or from monopolies.
  

There is a 20-something here in NH, Gregory Chase,  that is supporting Mike Gravel, Democrat, for President.  Smart guy: two physics degrees from Harvard, a financial quant that used to be a trader and now owns his own trading firm.  Lots of money; successful.  And is using his own money to support his candidate totally separate from the official campaign.  So, he's just started to run newspaper and TV ads here in NH.

I glanced at one in the local paper. It included the following text (emphasis and "white space" added by me):

The path is clear but we need strong leadership. Most candidates pay lip service to alternative energy and only talk about the big government solution: alternative energy subsidies. Subsidies put legislators and regulators in the position of playing favorites with technologies, individuals, and  companies.

Taxing carbon in general and gasoline in particular, on the other hand, is the free market solution to our oil woes.

A higher gas tax doesn’t mean bigger government. We can cut other taxes in parallel.

We need the price at the pump to match the true cost to our country of relying on foreign oil. The burgeoning alternative energy sector would become a massive export driver. A serious gas tax will end our dependence on foreign oil while improving the economy, the environment, and our nation’s security.

Advocating for government to step in with larger taxes is antithesis of the free market.  To say that adding taxes is the FREE MARKET SOLUTION?  What is this guy thinking - "I'll just use my own definition and the rubes in "Cow Hampsha" will just believe this"?

And who in their right mind would ever think that a Democrat would be willing to institute a new tax and be tied to getting rid of others??? 

A SERIOUS GAS TAX (code for "this will knock yer sox off"?)  will end our dependence on foreign oil by the simple reason that if the current level of taxes are raised just to that of Europe (where the price of gas is much higher SOLELY due to rapacious taxation levels) would problem knock our economy to a standstill.  No economy means less energy needs, thus no oil needs (or, at least much of it).  Solves the problem but at what price?

Look, run your platform - but stop redefining definitions.  I have had enough of that as we've lost the word "gay" and "invest" or any other word used as a euphemism to make something sound nicer than what it really is.

No wonder Gravel has no popular support....do all Dems think we are this stupid?

He also ran another ad decrying the fact that Warren Buffet pays a lesser tax rate than his secretary:

Why did the 3rd richest man in the world pay a lower effective tax rate than his own secretary in 2006? You may be surprised to know that the reason is not tax loopholes.

The root of the inequity is that the majority of wealthy people's income is classified as long-term capital gains which are taxed federally at 15%. Going to work and receiving a paycheck, on the other hand, is classified as earned income and is taxed at rates up to 35%.

Our wealthiest citizens and their money managers endeavor to treat even their earned income as long term capital gains, cheating other taxpayers. Debates are raging in Washington as Democrats and Republicans alike are scared to take a firm stand on this issue because their campaign coffers are filled largely from wealthy donors.

I blogged this before here. I can tell you with almost certainty that the Democrat response to this is NOT to lower the secretary's tax rate to match that of Buffet's - naw, that would take money away from the government, right?  No, they will want to knee jerk and raise the taxes of those that are productive in society.

Frankly, this class warfare infuriates me.  These folks are not cheating the system - Congress makes the laws, the IRS tries to interpret them, and the rest of us spend time and money trying to comply in ways that MINIMIZE how much taxes we pay.  I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that I bet Mr. Chase has a good accountant that helps him to avoid paying anymore tax than absolutely necessary.

I really wish these kinds of guys would just put their money where their checkbook is with respect to taxes - if you believe you are undertaxed, just write the check and send it in.  Go ahead, conduct a press conference if you'd like - we will all politely clap and say thank you. 

Posted by Skip at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

I challenge any real conservative to review Mr. Wuensche's positions on the issues and find something you disagree with. His main issue is the judicial system and its impact on small businesses. He has a simple process of getting things done. Says Vern:

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.

Want some foreign policy advice with those granite countertops? How about an immigration reform plan with your vanity mirrors?

.

Building contractor Vern Wuensche is the only kitchen and bath renovation guy on the New Hampshire Presidential Primary ballot. It’s a distinction he plays up whenever he lobbies potential voters at independently owned barber shops, hardware stores, retail outlets and coffee shops.

.

“The 25 million small business owners in this country really have no voice. We produce 80 percent of the jobs, but nobody really listens to us,” says the 62-year-old Texas native. “Contractors who do kitchens are the best listeners in the world.”

 “I’m hoping to show that small business owners and regular guys can do reasonably well despite only having meager resources.”

Posted by Doug at 10:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"American foreign policy needs to change its tone and attitude, open up, and reach out," Huckabee said. "The Bush administration's arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. My administration will recognize that the United States' main fight today does not pit us against the world but pits the world against the terrorists."

Regarding the conduct of Huckabee in the White House, there is a lot we do not know. Like another governor from the same state, Bill Clinton, Huckabee has little experience in foreign affairs. Nonetheless, last week he dropped a bomb in an article he published in Foreign Affairs, where all the other candidates have contributed articles. He wrote of "urgent concerns" regarding Iran's nuclear program and its support for militants, saying that he does not discard the military option. But he was critical of the Bush foreign policy, which he described as "arrogant bunker mentality."

In the Iranian context, his policy is being interpreted as a change, calling for bringing to the table non-military options as well. Huckabee is of the opinion that relations with Iran deteriorated following Bush's "axis of evil" speech.

In many points his message on Iran is more akin to that of the Democrats: there is a need for dialogue with Iran, and more diplomacy is needed. He quoted the Chinese strategist Sun Tzu, who authored The Art of War 2,500 years ago: "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."

.

Huckabee has vowed that "Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons on my watch," but that does not assuage Israeli observers who are not too pleased with his stance.

Posted by Doug at 8:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

UPDATE: Well, THAT was quick.  The 'Grok has just obtained an email that was sent out by John Thomas concerning his legislation:

The bills regarding RTK are out and published on the state web sight [sic]. They are, HB1408, HB1272, and another one which may or may not have an impact, HB1444. The reason why HB1444 may be of interest is the issue of process in filling a vacant county elected position. It's the interview and selection process that will have 91A concerns. My county chair and I put the bill in because of frustration over what the legislature has not done nor have the courts As a result all the self proclaimed experts, especially the editors and critics, all have their own ideas as to the process. Maybe by forcing a 28A issue we can get it done once and for all. Would you pass this on to the rest of the commission please?

 

Thanks.

 

JT

JT stands for John Thomas.

And no, it is not over the frustration of what the Courts and Legislation has or has not done - it is all about some State Reps not wanting to do things in public.  The flashlights are on and the result is predictible.

Remember Monty Python -> "Runaway!  Runaway!"

Well, I don't know what House Bills 1408 and 1272 are, but if Mr. Thomas thinks they are part of the mix, I guess we'll have to figure it out.  And what 28A is as well.

If any of you have some spare time (and I am working today) and can look them up and give me a quick clue to the intent with respect to RTK, let me know!  

Also, one thing that I did not emphasis is the cost of the foolish change - BIG BUCKS! 

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Secretary of State and the New Hampshire Municipal Association state this bill may increase state and local expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2008 and each year thereafter. The New Hampshire Association of Counties states this bill may decrease county expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2008 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on state, county, and local revenue.

The Association of Counties - no increase...BUT OF COURSE!  THEY DON'T PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL SPECIAL ELECTIONS! Why the heck would they care???

"this bill may increase state and local expenditures by an indeterminable amount" - what a crock!  I'll find out what the Town Clerk estimates for Gilford - a town of 7,400.  I'll extrapolate for Belknap County.  Then do it across the State.

Example:  If it costs $5,000 in Gilford (which is a reasonable guess), imagine what it would cost County or State wide!!

All because some State Reps don't want to vote the peoples' business in public. 

More later on......sheesh.... 

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

As regular readers of the 'Grok now, my blogging partner Doug is embroiled in a lawsuit against the "County Convention".  In brief, they sued that when a constitutional officer (e.g., Sheriff) must be replaced, it should be done in public session and not with secret ballots.  That suit are now before the Supreme Court (having to do with the question of is the Sheriff a constitutionally elected officer or an employee with certain rights to privacy).

Note: Here in NH, each county has a "Convention" that is made up of all of its elected representatives to NH House.  They oversee the county level budget and organizations.

Anyways, the County Registrar of Deeds became vacant and it looked like the whole Sheriff mess might happen again.  Fortunately, the Convention decided to do all of its interviewing and deliberations in public session - WELL DONE!

However, one of the State Reps, John Thomas (who had voted to keep the process in non-public [read: closed door] session, had said a couple of statements saying that he had filed legislation to "clean up the process".

Great, just great.  Instead of standing up as elected officials and sometimes doing the right thing (that could lead to "hard" or difficult decisions being made in public) when needed, he has legislation that really bollixes things up (IMHO).

While I am normally in favor of more people voting rather than less, it seems that he wants to make it possible for elected officials sidestep the public eye (or should that be glare?) for those hard decisions:

2 Vacancies; County Officers. Amend RSA 661:9, I to read as follows:

I. If a vacancy occurs in the office of county sheriff, county attorney, register of deeds, or county treasurer, the members of the county convention shall [fill the vacancy for the unexpired term by majority vote] request the governor and council to declare that there shall be a special election to fill the vacancy following the provisions of RSA 655:81 and RSA 655:82.

Get that, NH taxpayers?  Instead of having the Convention vote, he's going to cost you money to have a special election, county wide, so as not to put politicians on the spot.  Sure, no more problems with Right To Know laws, no wondering if things will be done in open or closed door sessions.  In fact, the solons will be totally off the hook. 

The entire change to the RSA (which is what we call laws here in NH) after the jump

The word "shirk" comes to mind....so does "passing the buck, no matter the cost".

HB 1444-FN-LOCAL – AS INTRODUCED

2008 SESSION

08-2211

03/09

HOUSE BILL 1444-FN-LOCAL

AN ACT relative to vacancies in county offices.

SPONSORS: Rep. Nedeau, Belk 3; Rep. J. Thomas, Belk 5

COMMITTEE: Municipal and County Government

ANALYSIS

This bill requires a special election to fill vacancies in certain county offices.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

08-2211

03/09

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eight

AN ACT relative to vacancies in county offices.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Nominations for Special State Elections; County Officers Added. Amend the section heading and introductory paragraph of RSA 655:81 to read as follows:

655:81 Nomination of [U.S.] United States Representative, Executive Councilor, State Senator, [and] Representative to the General Court, and County Officer. The nomination of candidates for the [U.S.] United States House of Representatives or for the executive council or for the state senate or for representative to the general court or for county officer for special elections shall be accomplished through the holding of special election primaries. The filing of candidates for such primaries and all other matters connected with such primaries shall be the same as for primaries before a state general election except that:

2 Vacancies; County Officers. Amend RSA 661:9, I to read as follows:

I. If a vacancy occurs in the office of county sheriff, county attorney, register of deeds, or county treasurer, the members of the county convention shall [fill the vacancy for the unexpired term by majority vote] request the governor and council to declare that there shall be a special election to fill the vacancy following the provisions of RSA 655:81 and RSA 655:82.

3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.

LBAO

08-2211

11/28/07

HB 1444-FN-LOCAL - FISCAL NOTE

AN ACT relative to vacancies in county offices.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Secretary of State and the New Hampshire Municipal Association state this bill may increase state and local expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2008 and each year thereafter. The New Hampshire Association of Counties states this bill may decrease county expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2008 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on state, county, and local revenue.

METHODOLOGY:

The Secretary of State, the New Hampshire Municipal Association, and the New Hampshire Association of Counties indicate this bill will require a special election be held when a vacancy occurs in a county office instead of the county convention holding an election. The Secretary of State is not able to determine the number of vacancies that would occur during a term, thus not able to determine the increase in expenditures associated with a special election. For each special election, state expenditures related to the cost of printing ballots for a countywide special election could range from thousands to tens of thousands of dollars.

The New Hampshire Municipal Association states conducting a special election will increase local expenditures. Municipalities within a county having to hold a special election would incur costs associated with running an election, such as voting booth rentals, room rentals, and paying voting officials.

The New Hampshire Association of Counties states the change from filling a vacant elected county position using a special election under state election laws versus an election by the county convention may reduce county expenditures for those few times an elected county seat is vacated and needs to be filled.

Posted by Skip at 8:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It has been a long year.  With both Doug and I active in politics at the local level, starting this blog back in June/July '06, and Meet The New Press, it has been an exciting year as we have tried to watch the latest version of Presidential politics here in NH - one of the two Ground Zero of the Dems and Repubs version of blood sport (the other being, of course, Iowa). We've tried to take the tack of going to as many political events that have been fairly local to our area for what seems forever now - on both sides of the aisle.

And I'm tired.  Travel to the event, set up, ask reasonable questions, process the audio or video, and then try to put up decent posts.  Then add in the never stopping series of debates (what's the count up to now, somewhere in the thousands?) and trying to comment on those - whew...

I was emailing with someone from the other side of the political aisle who has actually come out for a candidate and is actively working on that campaign here in NH.

You know, sometimes there are things that just cross all boundaries - he wrote:

Boy will it be nice to get the primary over. The whole thing is just endless. Ughhh. Doesn't matter what party or who you support this thing has just dragged on forever it seems.

Ha!  And the above - from a long time, hard core political junkie.

Foreever....a year seems so long ago.  It has been fun, and I heave learned a lot of what it really takes to be successful (or not) at the retail politics level just by watching the candidates and their staffs. It is a marathon - at constant sprint speed.

Oh, my response?

Primary?  Yeah, us too!  I think that we've all but event'ed ourselves out.   Lucky you - at least you've picked someone.  I'm still trying to figure out who - Rudy, McCain, or Fred.  The latter is closest to me philosophically, I like McCain (personally, having been invited on the bus, he REALLY is a great guy - I'd certainly go to a bar to talk with him and have a beer....and I don't drink!), and Rudy has a lot of executive experience that counts and will do very well in debates....I like the ideas!.

So, electability comes into it....who can win the nomination, who can win the general, and who can win NH.

I'm not happy with Romney....so, do I vote against Romney and for someone who can beat him (McCain or Rudy), or long shot Fred to beat him?

Or vote what I believe in (Fred)?

Maybe, just maybe, if he now gets it into high or overdrive gear (and his Iowa campaigning seems to be bearing this out with 4-5 stops per day), Fred was right - work it at the right time...

No, I haven't yet figured out who yet...still Rudy, McCain, or Fred.  But with only two weeks left, it's gotta be soon.... 

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

BAGHDAD – An altar boy eagerly rings a bell to celebrate Christmas at the conclusion of mass held at the St. John’s Chaldean Church in Doura. After receiving the sacrament, the congregation’s children were treated to a visit by Santa Claus. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Kirk Luedeke, 4IBCT, 1ID)

BAGHDAD – Two young Christian girls pray during Christmas Morning mass at the St. George’s East Assyrian Church in Doura, Dec. 25. The church was heavily damaged by two vehicle borne explosive devices in Aug. 2004 but three years later, more than 300 worshippers filled the sanctuary to celebrate the holiday. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Kirk Luedeke, 4IBCT, 1ID)
.

BAGHDAD – Local Muslim tribal leaders attend Christmas Morning mass at the St. George’s East Assyrian Church in Doura, Dec. 25. Since the security situation in south Baghdad has dramatically improved, Muslim leaders and citizens have reached out to their Christian neighbors, urging them to return and help rebuild their churches and lives. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Kirk Luedeke, 4IBCT, 1ID)

.

.

BAGHDAD – A Christian woman from receives Communion from Chaldean Catholic Auxiliary Bishop Shlemon Warduni during Christmas Morning mass at the St. John’s Church in Doura. The Church opened its doors again Nov. 15 after closing them in May due to the Al Qaeda and extremist threat in southern Baghdad. Chaldean Christians in the area have attended services regularly since then. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Kirk Luedeke, 4IBCT, 1ID)

.
 

Posted by Major Kirk at 2:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

We here at the 'Grok wish all our readers a very Merry Christmas.  Though the words are over 2,000 year old, they ring as true today as the actual event did back then in Bethleham.  We wish you peace on Earth and Good will towards men no matter your circumstance or location.

The retelling itself? Christmas and Easter - a birth for a death - part of the basic tenants of the Christian faith. A birth for a life that was all at once perfect, blameless, and without sin; one that fully filled all of the Old Testament Law of God - the unkeepable standard of holiness.  This Baby knowingly offered himself as the ultimate atonement for our sinful lives (for who among us can claim to have never broken God's Laws?).

While we celebrate His life at this time of the year, we Christians look forward to the fulfillment of His Promise - eternal life through the Greatest Gift the world has ever known - His life for ours. 

John 1:1

¹In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was with God in the beginning.     ³Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. ⁴In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

Luke 2

¹In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. ²(This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) ³And everyone went to his own town to register.

    ⁴So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. ⁵He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. ⁶While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, ⁷and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

The Shepherds and the Angels

    ⁸And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. ⁹An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. ¹⁰But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. ¹¹Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ^[a] the Lord. ¹²This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger."

    ¹³Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,
    ¹⁴"Glory to God in the highest,
      and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests."

    ¹⁵When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let's go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about."

    ¹⁶So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger. ¹⁷When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, ¹⁸and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. ¹⁹But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. ²⁰The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they had heard and seen, which were just as they had been told.

John 3

¹⁶"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,^[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. ¹⁸Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

John 14

⁶Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 

John 19 

²⁸Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty." ²⁹A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. ³⁰When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Matthew 28

⁵The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. ⁶He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. ⁷Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

A promise fulfilled that we might live! 

(H/T: Bible.com)

Posted by Skip at 12:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

You know, there are signs that our elected leaders (glad that I'm no longer living in my home state of MA) should recognize and then realize that they've been in the bubble too long.  In this case, John "Lurch" Kerry wants to use the power of the Senate all because of a TV program ???

As the comedian says, "Here's yer sign..."

John Kerry has been pressuring cable companies and the NFL to reach an agreement so that more people could see Saturday's possibly history-making game between the undefeated New England Patriots and the New York Giants.

Kerry asked football Commissioner Roger Goodell today to move the game to NBC – and threatened Senate hearings if he does not.

“Under the unfortunate circumstance that this matter remains unresolved, leaving 60 percent of households across the country – including thousands in Massachusetts – without access to Saturday’s game, I will ask the Senate Commerce Committee to hold hearings on how the emergence of premium sports channels are impacting the consumer,” he wrote to Goodell today in a letter released by his office.

The Massachusetts Democrat added that he would “consider what legislative measures may be necessary to ensure that consumers are more than bystanders in this process.”

I suppose that would come under Americans' right to life, liberty, and the seeing important NFL games. It might indeed be crummy that the NFL is seeking to make more money by pushing more games to their own NFL premium channel. But Congress has no business trying to tell the NFL and cable companies what they should and should not carry. There is way too much of that already and laws should not be passed on the basis of one football game, no matter how historic.

Of course, John Kerry is not the first one to realize the possibilities of getting involved in sports-related issues. I'm sure we'll see all sorts of congressional hearings based on the Mitchell report. Whatever gripes you might have with professional sports in this country, the solution is not for congressional hearings and some sort of law geared towards showing voters how these congressmen can demagogue on sports.

Betsy is right.  I am quite sure that our Founding Fathers never thought of the Senate getting all in a bunch over an NFL broadcast - it IS private property (even anti-trust issues aside).  Ditto with steroids - let baseball police that issue.  If you are all that concerned, make steroids illegal for all and then let the law enforcement types deal with it - not the Senate. I expect more out of our politicians in that they should be more concerned with the world at large

Like Nancy Pelosi going to Syria.....er, never mind.... 

(H/T: Betsy's Page)

Posted by Skip at 6:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yes, it is Christmas Day, but TMEW is still fast asleep and the Boomerang son is still in dreaming status as well.  Seeing that I have to keep quiet for a while, I figured I'd surf.

Yikes!  Over at Instapundit:

I'M WATCHING MIKE HUCKABEE ON KUDLOW RIGHT NOW, and he's holding forth on "overpaid CEOs."

What about governors? "Mike Huckabee's $35,000 in speaking fees from stem cell researcher Novo Nordisk is getting attention. As is his overall speaking fee policy. I'm still scratching my head at the $138,500 for fifteen speeches Huckabee collected last year." The more I learn, the less I like him.

UPDATE: Reader Ken Kemper emails:

I saw a portion of that while at the gym, and found his comments on the "overpaid executive" a tad frightening. He wants the boards of (presumably) all corporations to rein in and control the pay of these CEOs, and if the boards do not then as President he will push for congress to pass laws to do so. But only as a last resort.

So he's playing the populist "no CEO should cash out for millions while the poor schlub working the factory floor loses his retirement" shtick, and he's not afraid to campaign as a BIG government type who as president will want laws overturning free-market principles?

Tell me again why any conservative is listening to him?

Beats me. But the more he talks, the fewer will do so, I suspect.

OhMyGoodness!  Let's see, both slick talkers (a preacher and a lawyer), both taking the plight of the "little guy" over The Man - not a bad thing, but at the expense of principle?  Being a Dem, I expect it from Edwards (and heard him say it at his campaign event here locally) - it fits.  

I guess the time has passed when Republicans are going to use government to take things away from us....

Great, that reminds me - now, who does he sound like? 

Posted by Skip at 6:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

PHOTO (by author): Christmas trees are alight just outside the 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division Tactical Operations Center (TOC) on Forward Operating Base Falcon, Baghdad in 2007.

A light shines in the darkness

60 Minutes airs…60 days after the fact, but just about right

Christmas Eve- Baghdad 2007

Posted by Major Kirk at 11:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

....

.......

The day of the CNN/YouTube debate, Matt Drudge, handmaiden of  Mitt Romney’s campaign, raised the issue that became known as "Shag Fund." The claim was that Rudy Giuliani had improperly hid expenses for visiting his then girlfriend. Well, it turns out that it just wasn’t true. Powerline and Captain’s Quarters have the details. Total exoneration from the New York Times.

.

In other words, Drudge pushed a bogus story at a time that was quite opportune for the Romney campaign.

Giuliani's Office Shifted Money Around? Yes. To Hide Hamptons Trips? Unlikely.

The headlines have dogged Rudolph W. Giuliani's presidential campaign for weeks. "Security costs for trysts draw attention," said one.

.

The articles questioned whether, as mayor, Mr. Giuliani tried to hide his visits to Judith Nathan in the Hamptons by burying the associated security costs in the budgets of obscure mayoral agencies like the Loft Board.

.

The answer is not likely, according to a review of the city records originally cited as the basis for the assertion.

I cannot help but feel I've been totally hosed by the media in this instance--- both the old media... AND THE NEW!!!

Posted by Doug at 11:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | 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

Intro 

Interview - Michael Brady of the Majority Accountability Project

Gilford High F.I.R.S.T Robotics team members and mentors talk about the rigor of the competition, learning to compete with constraints (just like the real world!), and hands on application of book learning.

      Hour 2

Intro 

Interview - Ron Silver - rooting for Rudy!   And let's us in on why!

Interview - NH Deputy Attorney General Orville "Bud" Fitch talks about the recent push polling here in NH  Part 1  Part 2

Interview - The MTNP talk with Pat's relatives who drop in (Pat Wood - a prominent Dem in the area [but a nice guy!!] and his brother-in-law Chris - a Huckabee supporter)

 

SchlubCam:

                   GHS F.I.R.S.T Robotics Team:    Intro    Part 1    Break     Part 2   Part 3  Leaving

                   Pat Wood's (Hynsie's Father-in-Law) Inauguration Memory  

                   Chris (Hynsie's Brother-in-Law) and the Gang Talk Politics    Part 1     Part 2

Posted by Skip at 10:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

L.A. Times and sleight-of-hand reporting

60 Minutes gets into the act

End of Part 2.

Read Part 3-- click here.

Read part 1-- click here.

Posted by Major Kirk at 9:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

As a POW, my captors would tie my arms behind my back and then loop the rope around my neck and ankles so that my head was pulled down between my knees. I was often left like that throughout the night.

.

One night a guard came into my cell. He put his finger to his lips signaling for me to be quiet, and then loosened my ropes to relieve my pain. The next morning, when his shift ended, the guard returned and retightened the ropes, never saying a word to me.

.

A month or so later, on Christmas Day, I was standing in the dirt courtyard when I saw that same guard approach me. He walked up and stood silently next to me, not looking or smiling at me. After a few moments had passed, he rather nonchalantly used his sandaled foot to draw a cross in the dirt. We stood wordlessly looking at the cross, remembering the true light of Christmas, even in the darkness of a Vietnamese prison camp. After a minute or two, he rubbed it out and walked away.

.

That guard was my Good Samaritan. I will never forget that man and I will never forget that moment. And I will never forget that, no matter where you are, no matter how difficult the circumstances, there will always be someone who will pick you up and carry you.

.

May you and your family have a blessed Christmas and Happy Holidays,

John McCain

Posted by Doug at 1:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 1:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

....

• Michael Brady of the Majority Accountability Project (MAP) checks in with the latest on our (sigh) congresswoman Carol Shea Porter and her counterpart, fellow Democrat Paul Hodes. Soren Dayton, writing at Red State reported

according to the Second Quarter Statement of Disbursements of the House, her Congressional office disbursed $5,000 to the New Hampshire Democratic State Committee (NHDSC). According to the FEC filings of the NHDSC, that was for "Access To The Voter File Maintained By The New Hampshire Democratic State Committee." The NHDSC "makes a profit" off the list according to an AP story.

In other words, a Democrat member of Congress is using government funds to provide "profit" to a state Democratic Party.

Mike will discuss that (more here), along with Hode's virtual Mt Washington earmark, as well as the recent anti- troop votes cast by NH's dastardly Democratic duo...

• Mike Andrews & members of the Gilford High School robotics team drop by the studio to talk about what they are doing & why they are presently raising funds. It's good to see some of the good that's happening in our public schools. I wish there had been something like this when I was in school... This should be great fun-- and quite a crowd in our little studio!
• According to the Wikipedia, Ron Silver, a well-known Hollywood movie actor,

was a Democrat for many years, has recently been an outspoken supporter for President George W. Bush, citing the September 11, 2001 attacks and the Democrats' policies regarding terrorism as his reasons for becoming an independent. He spoke at the United States 2004 Republican National Convention and has staunchly continued to support the President. Silver was appointed Chairman for the Millennium Committee by New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

As he is the same Ron Silver that Rush Limbaugh often quoted as saying "those planes are ours, now" during the Clinton inauguration, we'll find out what brought him first to George W. Bush as a supporter and now to Rudy Giuliani. On October 7, 2005, Silver was nominated by President Bush to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace. Following September 11, 2001, he came to believe that we can't just sit idly by.

"Rudy had a tremendous impact as Mayor of New York City, a place I am proud to call home," said Silver, a native New Yorker. "His record of accomplishment is extraordinary and his vision will serve America well. He is committed to keeping our nation on the offense in the Terrorists’ War on Us, and I am proud to support him."

This will be an interesting interview, for sure. Mr. Silver clearly demonstrates that not every movie star is a moonbat, as one might assume...

• Orville "Bud" Fitch- Deputy NH AG will bring us up to date with developments in the New Hampshire Attorney General’s investigation into potentially illegal political phone calls here in New Hampshire. This one's sure to be newsworthy...
• Etcetera...

There you have it! It all starts at 9AM EST Saturday. Tune in if you're in Central NH at NewsTalk 1490AM WEMJ or live on the 'Net here... It might be Christmas time, but the politicians and the busybodies never stop-- so neither will we!

Posted by Doug at 8:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

.

"He was speaking figuratively, not literally," Eric Fehrnstrom, spokesman for the Romney campaign, said of the candidate.

...

Posted by Doug at 10:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Tequila Christmas Cake Ingredients:

1 cup of water
1 tsp baking soda
1 cup of sugar
1 tsp salt
1 cup of brown sugar
Lemon juice
4 large eggs
Nuts
1 bottle tequila
2 cups of dried fruit

.

Sample the tequila to check quality.
Take a large bowl, check the tequila again.
To be sure it is of the highest quality, pour one
level cup and drink.
Repeat.
Turn on the electric mixer.
Beat one cup of butter in a large fluffy bowl.
Add one teaspoon of sugar.
Beat again.
At this point it's best to make sure the tequila is
still OK.
Try another cup... just in case.
Turn off the mixer thingy.
Break 2 leggs and add to the bowl and chuck in the
cup of dried fruit.
Pick the fruit up off floor.
Mix on the turner.
If the fried druit gets stuck in the beaterers just
pry it loose with a drewscriver.
Sample the le quita to check for tonsisticity.
Next, sift two cups of salt, or something.
Check the tequila.
Now shift the lemon juice and strain your nuts.
Add one table.
Add a spoon of sugar, or somefink, whatever you can
find.
Greash the oven.
Turn the cake tin 360 degrees and try not to fall
over.
Don't forget to beat off the turner.
Finally, throw the bowl through the window.
Finish the tequila and wipe counter with the cat.
CHERRY MISTMAS!

.

Posted by Doug at 7:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Time has named Vladimir Putin as their Man of the Year and of course you know he has named his successor. We knew the puppet show was going on, we just didn't know who the puppet was. And my nominee for man of the year would have been one David Petraeus. I think he clearly deserved it because of his success.

Indeed. Once again, McCain is right there, advocating for our US military. Say what you will, but his outspoken support for the troops and their quest for victory is unflappable. Knowing firsthand the Senator's knowledge and obvious experience in the military arena, I can attest that his sentiment regarding Petraus isn't some BS statement designed to impress potential voters...

Oh, and his understanding of the Russians, as reported in Goldfarb's post is spot-on, too:

Putin is going to cause us a lot of difficulties...I don't think it's going to be a return to the cold war, they don't have the population...anything that would bring around the kind of military might that they once had, even with the petrodollars....but they are trying to reassert the Russian empire...and they are going to be a thorn in our side.

Yep. This is the kind of insight that is important to me as I go about the business of picking the next Commander-In-Chief. That's why McCain remains on the short list of who I might choose on primary day, January 8th.

Posted by Doug at 8:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mr. Relevant, Senator "The dumb go to Iraq" Kerry tries to call a kettle black:

Kerry: Bush administration ‘increasingly irrelevant’ on climate

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) slammed the Bush administration on Wednesday for its reluctance to take bold action on climate change, but the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee added that the White House does not represent the view of the American people on the issue.

Kerry, who just returned from the climate negotiations in Bali, Indonesia, at which he represented Congress, criticized the Bush administration for standing in the way of a stronger agreement on the issue. The senator stated, however, that the opportunities of this White House to stand in the way of action are dwindling.

The problem is, what is it that we have to do?  After all, does it have to be that ONLY those countries that have signed onto the Kyoto accord are actively and successfully reigning in their emissions?

Er, not so much:

The Kyoto treaty was agreed upon in late 1997 and countries started signing and ratifying it in 1998.  A list of countries and their carbon dioxide emissions due to consumption of fossil fuels is available from the U.S. government.  If we look at that data and compare 2004 (latest year for which data is available) to 1997 (last year before the Kyoto treaty was signed), we find the following.

• Emissions worldwide increased 18.0%.
• Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1%.
• Emissions from non-signers increased 10.0%.
• Emissions from the U.S. increased 6.6%.

In fact, emissions from the U.S. grew slower than those of over 75% of the countries that signed Kyoto.  Below are the growth rates of carbon dioxide emissions, from 1997 to 2004, for a few selected countries, all Kyoto signers.  (Remember, the comparative number for the U.S. is 6.6%.)

 

Maldives, 252%        Sudan, 142%       China, 55%     Luxembourg, 43%    

Iran, 39%.               Iceland, 29%       Norway, 24%    Russia, 16%     

Italy, 16%                Finland, 15%       Mexico, 11%    Japan, 11%   

Canada, 8.8%  

World and U.S. opinion seems to revolve around who signed Kyoto rather than actual carbon dioxide emissions.  Once again, stated intent trumps actual results. 

Get that?  The US expands its emissions by 6.6%, pretty much better than all other industrial nations, and John Kerry thinks that we have to sign a treaty?  Is that really relevant?  Hey, is his partner in crime, Al Gore, reading these too?  Back to the story:

The senator related the story of a delegate from Papua New Guinea who told the U.S. to get out of the way if it was not willing to lead.

Kinda looks like we already are! 

Just watch when all the grandiose words come home to roost and the it is time when the rubber meets the road - the howling starts:

Germany has attacked European Commission proposals to cut car C02 emissions limits, saying they unfairly hit the country's auto industry. The measures are intended to curb global warming.

Under the plans, automobile manufacturers would have to reduce carbon emissions produced by their fleets of passenger cars to an average of 120 grams per kilometer by 2012. Currently, new cars emit some 160 grams on average. Should they not comply to the guidelines, automakers are to face steep fines. 

With several commissioners dissenting, the European Commission -- the EU's executive arm -- agreed on a four-year phase-in period from 2012 for the fines.

"This will send a strong signal to the world about the determination of the European Union to take bold measures on climate change," EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said at a press conference.

Germany says the plan will not be effective

The proposed legislation enraged Germany and its carmakers. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the EU was making policy "at the expense of Germany."

Government spokesman Thomas Steg said the measures were biased against German companies, which tend to make bigger and more powerful vehicles.

"Whatever motive led a majority of commissioners to decide this, we consider the solution to be wrong, we consider the solution to be very harmful and will do everything to force changes," he said.

EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso hailed the new measures, which still need the backing of EU states and the European parliament. "This proposal demonstrates that the European Union is committed to being a world leader in cutting CO2 emissions and the development of a low carbon economy," he said.

Women must stop admiring men who drive sports cars if they want to join the fight against global warming, the Government's chief scientist has urged.

Professor Sir David King said governments could only do so much to control greenhouse gas emissions and it was time for a cultural change among the British public.

And he singled out women who find supercar drivers "sexy", adding that they should divert their affections to men who live more environmentally-friendly lives.

[snip]

"As soon as you come to the individual, however, they will buy a Ferrari, not because it is cheap to run or has low carbon dioxide emissions, but because young women think it is sexy to see men driving Ferraris. That is the area where a culture change is needed."

Al Gore says global warming is a planetary emergency. It is difficult to see how this can be so when record low temperatures are being set all over the world.

• In 2007, hundreds of people died, not from global warming, but from cold weather hazards.
• Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years
  
• Antarctica is getting colder.
• Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The 2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. 
• South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since the year 1918.
• Unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007. Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever.
• Last January, $1.42 billion worth of California produce was lost to a devastating five-day freeze.
• In April, a killing freeze destroyed 95 percent of South Carolina's peach crop, and 90 percent of North Carolina's apple harvest.
• At Charlotte, N.C., a record low temperature of 21 degrees Fahrenheit on April 8 was the coldest ever recorded for April, breaking a record set in 1923.
• On June 8, Denver recorded a new low of 31 degrees Fahrenheit. Denver's temperature records extend back to 1872.
• On Dec. 7, St. Cloud, Minn., set a new record low of minus 15 degrees Fahrenheit. On the same date, record low temperatures were also recorded in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
• On Dec. 4, in Seoul, Korea, the temperature was a record minus 5 degrees Celsius.
• Nov. 24, in Meacham, Ore., the minimum temperature was 12 degrees Fahrenheit colder than the previous record low set in 1952.
• The Canadian government warns that this winter is likely to be the coldest in 15 years.

Fossil fuels don't seem so awful when you're in the cold and dark....If you think any of the preceding facts can falsify global warming, you're hopelessly naive. Nothing creates cognitive dissonance in the mind of a true believer. In 2005, a Canadian Greenpeace representative explained “global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter.” In other words, all weather variations are evidence for global warming. I can't make this stuff up.

Posted by Skip at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yup, they're at it again!

Nursing home company says delay is costing investors millions

A national nursing home chain wants the state Health Care Authority to decide immediately whether it will approve the company's sale, saying the delay is costing investors millions.

Toledo, Ohio-based Manor Care Inc. filed a motion Monday asking the authority to reinstate its earlier approval of West Virginia's portion of The Carlyle Group's $6.3 billion buyout of the company.

The authority decided to reconsider it's initial approval based on concerns raised by the Service Employees International Union, one of two unions that represent Manor Care employees at five of its seven West Virginia facilities.

At a hearing on Friday, the union questioned whether patient care and nurse staffing levels would be harmed by the deal.

But Manor Care representatives said the union didn't raise any issues that could block the transfer to The Carlyle Group, a private equity firm.

"Quick approval from West Virginia is essential,'' said Stephen L. Guillard, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Manor Care, in a statement. "Based on the failure of SEIU to raise any legitimate legal issues during the six-hour hearing on Friday, we believe there are no grounds to maintain the stay.''

Manor Care says the delay is costing investors -- including West Virginia's pension fund -- more than $1 million a day.

The SEIU said Monday that slowing down the process is the right way to ensure that any questions about changes to patient care and staffing levels are adequately addressed.

Given what I have seen (and will further report on), the SEIU is not doing this on the idea of "it's for the patients" (just as the NEA is not always altruistic when it says "it's for the children").  This is ALL about power.  In this case, it is District 1199 catching the grief.

Look, during their formative years, the unions did good work in getting better conditions and wages for its members.  For the SEIU, that seems to be passe as they are now, like most major unions, more interested in politics and changing the national scene rather than just the works.  

In this case, I bet it is that the case that with the Carlyle Group coming in, the SEIU knows that this  wretched, capitalistic private equity firm is going to make sure that a profit is to be made - anathema to the union leaders.  In this case, it may well cost union jobs - and the union is not going to cede any power to the new owners at all. 

Carlyle's acquisition of Manor Care was announced last summer and has been reviewed by more than 30 states. Guillard said Manor Care was notified Monday that the Pennsylvania Department of Health has approved the deal.

It also has been approved by shareholders and the Securities and Exchange Commission and the companies hope it will close by the end of the year.

You know, this is like the nuclear industry back in the 1970s - if you cannot defeat them financially head on, tie them up in regulation, politics, and the court system.  Make it hurt in order

Pension fund (and the public employee retirees that depend upon it) are just pawns in the game.  The SEIU certainly doesn't seem to care about them....no surprise. 

It's all about the money - SEIU money:

What is really going on here is that the SEIU has been able to persuade only about 1,000 of the HCA Manor Care's 60,000 employees to pay union dues.

Membership is down; way down in union-land.  This is nothing more than a failure of the union to use free market principles in persuading people that their self interest is best served by the union.  Faced with such a failure, they have resorted to strong arm tactics to get what they want.

Nothing less than a power grab.

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

Babel Pontifical College (seminary) which became Coalition Outpost Amanche in March '07 but is now known as COP Blackfoot

Christians of Iraq

Where are all the people?

The L.A. Times takes an interest

End of Part 1.

[Part 2 here]

Posted by Major Kirk at 10:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 8:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Obesity this, obesity that....it's a flippin' epidemic in the City of the Bridge!

Right.....

It seems that Gavin Newsom of San Fran it planning on hitching up with Mike Bloomberg of NYC....no, NOT THAT WAY!  It seems that like Hizzoner Bloomberg (the Nanny Mayor who believes that adults had to be saved from themselves by banning trans-fats), Mayor Newsom believes that we should have choices - just less of them.

From SFGate.Com:

After banning plastic bags from chain grocery stores and bottled water from City Hall, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has set his sights on soda - working up a plan to charge a new city fee to big retailers of sugar drinks.

"The bottom line is that there is a direct nexus between high-fructose corn syrup drinks like colas and Big Gulps and obesity among schoolkids," Newsom said Friday.

• Yes - blimpo (over some period of time)

• No - anorexia (given the illogical extreme)

So, let's limit choice by increasing prices, as this new 'fee" will just be passed onto consumers.  Yet, one still has to ask - is this the proper use of local government?  Isn't it all about preserving the peace, providing for sound education systems, fire safety, garbage collection, and the like.

Oops - forgot!  This is San Francisco! 

The idea of taxing soda to combat obesity - which is being touted as the first in the nation - has been roiling around in health circles for some time, including backing from the American Medical Association. 

I have to admit, that the Huckabee / Chuck Norris commercial was a stitch - well done, well timed, and a good idea to build on the cult status that Norris has with the military ("when Chuck does a pushup, he doesn't go up - he pushes the earth down").  I crack up every time I read yet another one of those lists (unlike John Kerry, I know our armed forces members are bright, quick, witty, and sometimes, a bit too much free time on their hands......free time + wit = wicked funny at times!).

Well, here's Fred's answer to it.....I like the Ground Zero part!

.

. 

(H/T: RightWingNews) 

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

Posted by Major Kirk at 8:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I previously blogged about Huckabee's turn around on the Arkansas version of the DREAM act.  I did not know about this.  Michelle Malkin's column in the Detroit News has more:

Breakout GOP candidate Mike Huckabee, the soft-on-border control former governor of Arkansas, scored a jaw-dropping endorsement Tuesday from Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project. Despite a long gubernatorial record opposing employer sanctions and pushing tax-subsidized illegal alien education benefits, Huckabee won Gilchrist's support by unveiling a last-minute, tough-sounding homeland security plan.

I was a bit confused when his immigration plan, especially when I read that it was basically Mark Krikorian (a former guest of Meet The New Press).  Yet, this flip flop, once again, is as big as any of which Romney is accused: 

Just two years ago, Huckabee appeared before the open-borders Hispanic group, The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), preaching an open-door policy. According to the Arkansas News Bureau, Huckabee also criticized state legislation requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and enhanced reporting of illegal aliens as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life -- not to mention "inflammatory," "race-baiting" and "demagoguery."

Just last year, Huckabee lambasted opponents of the bipartisan shamnesty bill providing a mass pardon to illegal aliens as "driven by racism or nativism." He called strict immigration enforcement -- the kind he now supports -- "sheer folly" in his campaign-timed book released earlier this year. He actively invited the Mexican government to establish a consulate in Arkansas -- giving its office a $1 per year special office space rate -- so that its foreign officials could start dispensing security-undermining matricula consular ID cards to illegal aliens for banking and employment purposes. And he's not only for government in-state illegal alien discounts, he's for expanding them far beyond what the federal DREAM Act proposed.

Not once do I see Rule of Law mentioned.... to flip this late in the campaign?  Ha!

Yes, Rudy and McCain have had similar stances in the past concerning my #2 issue.  And they still need to be watched.  However, what Huck has done is pure pandering to conservatives like me.  At least McCain has apologized for being wrong on the border issue.

Posted by Skip at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Again, one of my criteria for anything, as I get older and wiser, is to judge things by either my acquisition of choice, or the deletion of choice - and that for me is a good, simple definition of freedom.  If I get to choice, I have freedom.  If someone or something does not allow me choice, I have lost a bit of my freedom.

Especially with this outcome:

NHS Threat to halt care for cancer patient 

A WOMAN will be denied free National Health Service treatment for breast cancer if she seeks to improve her chances by paying privately for an additional drug.

Imagine that - the ultimate in freedom and choice - to purchase a legal medicinal to help prolong her life.  And a governmental agency will not allow her to spend her own money 

Colette Mills, a former nurse, has been told that if she attempts to top up her treatment privately, she will have to foot the entire £10,000 bill for her drugs and care. The bizarre threat stems from the refusal by the government to let patients pay for additional drugs that are not prescribed on the NHS.

That's right - our way or the highway.  Never mind that government is there to serve the people that employ them.  Never mind that some have made better decisions and thus have more to spend than others - well...well, that just isn't "fair" is it.  After all, we the government, have the right to say what you can spend your money on, right (sounds like John Edwards - we will garnish your wages via the IRS to make sure you buy health insurance or RomneyCare in MA where you get fined if you don't buy healthcare insurance). 

Ministers say it is unfair on patients who cannot afford such top-up drugs and that it will create a two-tier NHS. It is thought thousands of patients suffer as a result of the policy.

Right.  Basically, the mantra is "we will all suffer universally together"....gee, isnt' that what they said...

...about Communism? 

[snip]

With many “wonder drugs” in the pipeline that the NHS is unlikely to fund, her predicament is likely to be shared by increasing numbers of patients who could afford additional life-extending drugs but not the cost of their entire care.

And this is what will happen in the US.  With a market based system, scarse resources will be regulated via personal choices based on cost and need.  With a government based system, all that will happen is that drugs that could save lives will be off-limits....have to be fair about this, ya know... 

Some doctors support her case. Professor Karol Sikora, medical director of CancerPartners UK, a private cancer company, said: “This is unfair to taxpayers who are entitled to NHS care. If this patient wishes to pay for another drug, that should be her choice. The patient should be invoiced by the NHS for the extra treatment, with a mark-up to cover the hospital’s costs.” The government is opposed to the so-called “co-payments” because they would lead to patients in the same NHS ward receiving different drugs based solely on their ability to pay. But doctors say this already happens where private and NHS patients are treated at the same NHS unit.

[snip]

The Department of Health said: “Co-payments would risk creating a two-tier health service and be in direct contravention with the principles and values of the NHS.”

After all, we know best for all of you...and we can't let mere people get in the way of our mission now, can we?

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” today that he wept with relief when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormon church, announced a 1978 revelation that the priesthood would no longer be denied to persons of African descent.

Romney’s eyes appeared to fill with tears as he discussed the emotional subject during a high-stakes appearance...

.

[snip]

.

“I was anxious to see a change in my church,” said the Republican presidential candidate, appearing for the full hour just two weeks ahead of the crucial Iowa caucuses.

.

“I can remember when I heard about the change being made. I was driving home from — I think it was law school, but I was driving home — going through the Fresh Pond rotary in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I heard it on the radio and I pulled over and literally wept.

.

“Even to this day, it’s emotional,” Romney went on.

In answer to questions about whether he would sign an assault weapons ban, Romney said: "Just as the president said, he would have, he would have signed that bill if it came to his desk, and so would have I. And, and, and yet I also was pleased to have the support of the NRA when I ran for governor. I sought it, I seek it now. I'd love to have their support."

Later in the interview, he added the following:

"I just talked about, about guns. I told you what my position was, and what I, what I did as governor; the fact that I received the endorsement of the NRA."

The problem?

He was never endorsed by the NRA, and didn't have their official support during his 2002 gubernatorial campaign. The NRA declined to endorse in that race, as was acknowledged by Romney's spokesman this morning.

Oops. This guy will say anything that fits the moment-- true or not. I really want to win next November. There is NO WAY he is going to get the job done for the Republicans in the face of a determined opposition. To them, Mitt Romney is so much low hanging fruit, waiting to get picked. I know I'm not alone in this sentiment. Lord help us if he wins the GOP nomination...

Posted by Doug at 7:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a lot of folks who run for President; many we thankfully will never, ever hear of.  Some, after actually hearing about them, I wish were still in the first category. 

Not Verne!

No, I don't believe that he will place, win, or draw in NH Republican Primary. An independent with little money, the odds are stacked against him.  Yet, if someone were to have a chance and make a run and be taken seriously, NH would be the place to try it.  Yes, money is the mother's milk of politics, and Vern (like the others) has little to spare.  Yet, his IDEAS and stances make good conservative sense. 

The 'Grok has grown to like Vern, not just as a candidate, but also as a person.  Thus, when Vern sent this along, I've decided to post it as an example of ordinary folks thinking large - and making sense at the same time! 

Small business has several lobbying groups such as NFIB and NASE which do admirable work in lobbying Congress and legislatures on matter important to small business. They serve as a necessary DEFENSE in preventing major assaults against our businesses. But we still need officeholders on OFFENSE in order to improve our situation.

So in order to play OFFENSE we must elect more of our own to Congress, the U. S. Senate and yes, the Presidency.  Who can better make decisions than small business owners.  No one.   And of course one should include in this group the employees of small business owners who have seen first hand how a business works at the basic level of taking care of customers.  Would not it be nice if our national government took care of us as customers?

Most small business owners will say that it is virtually impossible to leave their businesses to get involved in politics. Which is of course true. But at some point in a business owner's life it may be doable. Maybe the point when they are nearing retirement age or a point when they want to leave their business. At that point they would of course have the accumulated experience of many years in business and would be a much needed improvement over those currently holding government offices. With decision making we see every day-that very often displays a complete lack of common sense-it would take very little to do better.

One of my purposes in running for President has been to make this scenario seem more plausible and real to small business owners. I believe my thirty-two years of running a small construction company is a fairly typical background that most small business owners have. We all learn to accomplish a great deal with shoe leather and a small amount of money. When the American public can see that one of us can compete equally with those who have millions in the bank and have had free national media for a year we will all be more empowered. Consequently a larger number of us may run for public office and began a trend which will improve our government at all levels.

I am spending twenty-two days in your state between now and January eighth making direct contact with voters. In campaigning full time over the last ten months I have outlasted two governors and two Senators who decided to quit the race, as well as fourteen candidates such as Newt Gingrich, Bill Frist, George Pataki, and Condeleesa Rice who decided not to run, and of course the hundreds of non serious