Such irony - the woman that wants the country to ante up so that she wouldn't have to pay for her healthcare is reneging on paying her bill:

Clinton didn't pay health insurance bills

Among the debts reported this month by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, the $292,000 in unpaid health insurance premiums for her campaign staff stands out.

Ok, but people can get behind, right?

“Sometimes invoices are not paid immediately because we need additional information for our records, or to verify expenses,” Carson said in a statement e-mailed to Politico. “Sometimes invoices arrive at the very end of the month at the cutoff of the reporting period, which means that we are required to report them as a debt on the current FEC report, even where they are paid in regular course during the next month.”

Right!  Businesses run into "cross ups" all the time.  So, what's the big deal?

But the unpaid bills to Aetna were at least two months old, according to FEC filings.

They show the campaign ended last year owing Aetna more than $213,000 for “employee benefits.”

During the first two months of the year, the campaign did not pay down any of that debt. In fact, it accrued another $16,000 in unpaid bills last month, and it finished the month owing Aetna $229,000.

Oops!  Look, this has got to be a function of campaigns, right?

But Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, did not report any unpaid bills to insurance providers at the end of February. And the only insurance-related debt reported by Obama, an Illinois senator, was $908 to AIG American International Group for “insurance.”

Their campaigns also reported substantially less debt overall than Clinton’s, which owed $8.7 million at the end of February. Obama owed $625,000 and McCain $4.3 million, though most of his debt was from a bank loan, and only $1.3 million was in the form of unpaid bills to a dozen vendors.

Guess not!  Is this kinda like combat air landings and avoiding snipers, Mrs. Clinton? 

 

 

Posted by Skip at 8:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Powerline's John Hindraker had this to say about Pat:

The Washington Times contrasts John McCain's good relationships with conservative bloggers with the rocky reception he's gotten on talk radio:

Even as talk radio was brutalizing Sen. John McCain in the Republican presidential primaries, conservative bloggers reached a respectful truce with the Arizona senator over touchy issues and gave him what the campaign called a "tremendous positive psychological" boost.

As the Times notes, McCain's outreach to the bloggers has been effective because it featured McCain himself conducting frequent conference calls which he has opened up to questions. We've reported on a number of them. To me, the most significant thing about our contacts with McCain has not been the elucidation of his policy positions, although the calls have been a reminder that McCain is, by any reasonable definition, a conservative. What has been most effective is the candidate himself: his humor, his evident sincerity, especially when talking about security issues, and the frankness of our exchanges with him.

Patrick Hynes, who coordinates internet outreach for the McCain campaign, has done a good job. In the campaign's dark days last summer, there were several staff layoffs; each time, I wondered whether Patrick had survived. Luckily, perhaps, for McCain's campaign, he did.

I disagree with John - BECAUSE of Pat, McCain's blogger con-calls are the best.  If Pat can deal with me (and we HAVE had our, shall we say, discussions),  the credit should be his.  Reaching out to bloggers and trying to mold the message is like herding cats (being chased by dogs) - it ain't easy.

Congratulations Pat! 

Posted by Skip at 8:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, we were a battleground as the First in the Nation Primary - campaigning was non-stop.  Well, both the Dems and the GOP has declared New Hampshire to be a swing state, so here we go again!  

We'll be having NH candidates in the area for all of the races so just as we did for the Prez candidates that we covered, we're going to do the same thing all over again.

Last week, Jeb Bradley who is running to retake the Congressional seat (NH-1) dropped by the Gilford Republican Town Committee (disclosure - I'm the Chair) for a quick speech and an extended Q&A at our meeting last week.  Jeb is an affable guy and deserves a good look-see.  

Here's the Video! 

(cross posted at GilfordGOP and noticed at Belknap County Republican Committee)

Posted by Skip at 4:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

You know, this is fun....like the first time you discovered a whole new area of life that you didn't know about and it fascinated you.  And like we do with MTNP, wanting to see just a little bit more.

That's how I feel about some of the bloggers that I met this weekend!  Instead of the normal set of sites that I read everyday (and have been for a while), it's time to try something new.  Think of it this way: instead of always eating at an Italian place all the time just because you like that style of cooking, a friend invites you out and you end up at a Chinese place...

...and love it!  Can't eat just one (thing)!

So, this from the Louisiana Conservative. Now, I disagree with his opening remarks about John McCain.  I've met the man in the flesh and find him an interesting character.  Yes, I disagree with some of his policies (some very much big time, like McCain/Feingold and McCain/Kennedy), but on others, I'll stand there right with him (Iraq, honoring our vets, American Exceptionalism).

But he's not the point of this post - this is:

Folks, I agree at some point we need to stand up for our values, our freedom, the United States Constitution within our own party, and I agree that John McCain is over the line, but the answer can not be to sit around watching the news, complaining about what’s happening, the solution is to rise up out of your seats, get out and vote. Regardless of who the President is, we can still stop them from by giving them a congress that’s willing to stand up for America for once, at least, once in a while, rather than continue to give these folks a pass as they assault us with their cruel and unjust bills, leaving America ripe for a depression, and our doors open for antagonist.

There are a lot of conservatives out there that are about to sit on their thumbs in the next election.  Jeff brings up a great point - do not ignore the "down ticket" folks just because the #1 slot is not "your "guy".  Remember:

Freedom will not last if we continue to expect government to solve every one of our problems. I know you hear this every election cycle, each election is the most important but the most important election will always be the current one.

I agree with Jeff - go vote.  Next time, if you do not like the candidate, go out and get your own!  WORK for that person, or set of people.  Draw up your criteria and look for like minded people.

I will be. 

And yes, McCain was not my first choice, and yes, he can drive me nuts too.  But when I consider, even faintly, about NOT voting, I remember this from a local Letter to the Editor talking about all three candidates in an analogy of the Seven Dwarves:

Grumpy, Sleazy, and Dopey

I'll take Grumpy - John McCain - over the other two in a heartbeat!  Why?  Sleazy is not going to promote greater freedom for individuals - there are no principles that she has that I can agree with.  When I listen to the third on foreign policy, that's about the only word that comes to mind.

Posted by Skip at 2:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

As I said in this post, I spent this past weekend with other bloggers of like mind - free markets, limited government, enhancing choices (and thus expanding our freedom).  Well, since we were from all over the country, there were a lot of stories about how our elected officials sometimes believe that holding onto power is heads and tails over serving the public needs and wants (you know the type, those that somehow that get the notion into their DNA that THEY know best and watch out if you are one that wish to disabuse them of that notion!).

Well, from Michigan, here's another sorry tale of elected officials acting badly when someone wants to hold them accountable within the legal structure.  Both RedState and Publius Forum picked up on the story about the Michigan Speaker of the House (a Democrat) Andy Dillon using union thugs to harass citizens trying to use the legal ways to protest (hey, aren't Dems all about "protest as patriotic - such hypocrites!):

Yeah, I know - is this seemingly like the Democratic brouhaha going on if their Delegates to the Democratic Convention?  Once again, I just don't seem to get it - the rules are made, you show disdain and disobey the rules, and you get upset?  The claim is that

Look, GraniteGrok does a lot of local, state, AND national news on politics.  But these are two great examples as to why we quote the late Tip O'Neil on Meet The New Press: all politics is local.  Yet, this shows that while the names and the places may not be the same, or even be far, far away, we ALL have to deal with this nonsense.  That's why, we're going to start shining a flashlight when we see stupidity being reported in the blogosphere.  After all, it CAN and DOES happen here too!

And like the flip side of a coin, if we hear of someone in another place that wants to effect change according to the principles I enumerated above, we're going to show a little bit of blog love their way.  

With that in mind, check out Chris Hackett, running to unseat a very liberal guy in Pennsylvania.  A conservative:

Chris Hackett, unlike his opponent, knows how tax cuts and tax hikes, spending cuts and spending hikes, and regulation and deregulation affect small businesses.  We need people with real world experience in Washington.  We need people like Chris Hackett in Washington.

 

 

Posted by Skip at 1:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When the news broke that Manchester Mayor Giunta decided NOT to make a run for governor, I noted that it was a real bummer, and wondered whether the Republicans could find another candidate that might stand a chance against a still-popular Governor Lynch. That the Granite State GOP once again finds itself in this situation-- without a credible candidate for governor with a chance of beating the Democrat-- is indicative of the ongoing problems faced by the once dominant party. In November of '06, following the electoral drubbing that saw Democrats gain full power in NH, I wrote

...the GOP at the state level here in NH is completely destroyed. And it didn't just happen yesterday. No, the "Grand 'Ole Party" has become a caricature of its former self since the departure of the last dominant Republican governor, Steve Merrill, a decade ago. Quickly exiting the stage without grooming a successor has left the NH Repubs rudderless ever since.

Add to the mix a large number of R.I.N.O.'s (Republicans In Name Only) and a rich Republican able to purchase the governor's title for a single term (Craig Benson) while alienating both legislative branches controlled by his fellow party members- and the stage was set. Instead of working to solve the state's education funding mess once and for all while they controlled the entire state government, the GOP set to fighting against one another. Meanwhile, the Dems laid low, grooming their guy, the present governor Lynch- or, as I call him, Governor Do-Nuthin'. Once he got in the door, he ruffled few feathers and watched the Republicans continue to tear each other up.

And what did the local GOP reps do? They worked their rear ends off in the primary to oust the conservative state senator who wore out his welcome... and then sat back, not wishing to make too many waves, hoping that the voters would do what they've done for the last 100 years- elect Republicans. I guess it didn't work out too well.

Maybe if they would have been promoting and advocating REAL solutions based on their platform of smaller government and strong family values, that great mass of "undecideds" and "independents" would have had reason to cast a Republican ballot. But no, they've tried to play it "safe"- don't take on a "popular" Democratic governor, never highlighting the differences between them and the liberal party and its standardbearers.

Not much appears to have changed in the year and a half since I posted those words. Here at the county level, where Republicans still hold a majority, they have demonstrated a penchant for closed-door government and an unwillingness to reduce spending or the size of government when given a chance. What we find is that, in addition to being the minority party at the state level, many elected Republicans find themselves at odds with the conservative activist base at the grass roots. When Republican politicians say they believe in values of less government, less regulation, and more openness, NOBODY BELIEVES THEM! With a demoralized core, the party remains unable to build a credible "farm team" or the structure necessary for the mechanics of an organized state-wide campaign against the well-financed, motivated Democrats.

 

Quick-- name a rising star among Republicans. You can't, can you? Unfortunately when you look across the GOP landscape, nobody stands out from the pack. Other than Mayor Giunta, where are the leaders? Which Republican in the state is charging ahead on a mission to promote and implement the key issues that define us as Republicans? Even if there was, would the current crop of Party stalwarts even bother to support such a candidate?

So what's a party lost in the wilderness with no ready savior at hand to do? Why reach back to the glory days of old, by golly! When I first saw the name of former Gov. Merrill as someone NH GOPers were now looking towards for a gubernatorial run against Lynch, it only added to my gloom following the Giunta announcement: We really ARE that desperate on the state level as a party, aren't we? 

If you needed any more evidence, check out the list of potential candidates as speculated by Wally Edge at PolitickerNH. Barring a couple of interesting but doubtful names, it's weak at best.

Hopefully we'll fare better when it comes to House races. From what I'm hearing locally, there are some new people expressing interest. It's going to take a lot of new, dedicated blood to turn the NH Republican Party around. What happened to our once grand Party didn't happen overnight, and the fix won't either. Hopefully, we can build some "new talent" that will pay off down the road. In the meantime, Steve Merrill?

 

Posted by Doug at 6:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Thanks to our friend Blue Star Mother Sue Peterson, who wore his POW/MIA bracelet, the story of missing soldier Matt Maupin was known to us. Last April 9th, we noted the third year of his capture with a short letter written by Sue asking readers to remember Matt and his parents in their anxious time of waiting.

Sadly, Sue passed along a note this evening pointing us to this story reporting that Matt's Dad Keith

said at a news conference in suburban Cincinnati that an Army general told him DNA testing had identified the remains of his son, Sgt. Keith Matthew Maupin, or "Matt" as he was commonly known.

We agree with Sue who writes,

May God bless the Maupins and give them peace knowing that Matt dwells in the house of the Lord forever!

 

Posted by Doug at 9:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It is being reported by Reuters that Catholics are no longer the world's number one religion.

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Islam has overtaken Roman Catholicism as the biggest single religious denomination in the world, the Vatican said on Sunday.

Monsignor Vittorio Formenti, who compiled the Vatican's newly-released 2008 yearbook of statistics, said Muslims made up 19.2 percent of the world's population and Catholics 17.4 percent.

"For the first time in history we are no longer at the top: the Muslims have overtaken us," Formenti told Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano in an interview, saying the data referred to 2006.

It then goes on to finger the reason:

...while the number of Catholics as a proportion of the world's population was fairly stable, the percentage of Muslims was growing because of higher birth rates.

Hmm. The other thing I learned in the news today is that this guy is a Catholic priest:

 

Yeah, I didn't believe it, either, until I went to the website of St Sabina and discovered, surprisingly, this "priest" and his "church" are indeed Catholic. And this "church" was the site of Barack Obama's racist, bigoted, hate-mongering pastor "Rev" Wright's re-entry into the public eye after a week in hiding.

Barack Obama’s former pastor, who canceled several public events after an uproar over his incendiary comments, surprised a Chicago congregation by attending an event to celebrate poet Maya Angelou’s birthday.

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright got a raucous standing ovation when he entered Saint Sabina church on the South Side on Friday night, video from WBBM-TV showed. Members yelled “Hallelujah!” as Wright embraced the Rev. Michael Pfleger, Saint Sabina’s pastor.

I've been a Catholic all my life, and I've never encountered a "priest" like Pastor Pflegler. If I had, there would be one less person calling himself a Catholic in the world. Thankfully, I always have gone to normal, REAL Catholic Churches where the LOVE of God is preached, not the HATRED of fellow man, as is apparently the norm in "black" "churches", including ones that claim to be Catholic. I've long known black racism existed. I had no idea it had risen to the level that it has even corrupted their "churches." God help them-- especially the children, for whom this will perpetuate such garbage for yet another generation... (much like radical Islam)

[H/T Michelle Malkin]

Posted by Doug at 4:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Today is NH Gold Star Mothers' Day.

During the First World War, in May 1918, President Woodrow Wilson approved the suggestion of the Women's Committee of National Defenses recommending that American women should wear a black band on the upper left arm adorned with a gold star. Each star representing a family member who had given his or her life for their country. President Woodrow Wilson first used the term "Gold Star Mother" in his Letter to the Women's Committee. Grace D. Seibold, who lost her son, 1st Lieutenant George Seibold, in France, is recognized as the first “Gold Star” mother.

The mothers of New Hampshire’s fallen heroes have made the ultimate sacrifice for human freedom, and we owe them the most profound debt of gratitude.  More than anyone, they bear the deep emotional burden and loss of those who have laid down their lives for the cause of liberty.  New Hampshire owes these dignified and graceful mothers of freedom our deepest admiration and our promise that the sacrifice of their children will never be forgotten. 

The official legislation creating NH Gold Star Mothers' Day provides that the Governor shall "urge the citizens of the state to observe this day with appropriate events."

And that is certainly the case this year. First, earlier this week we saw the official unveiling of NH Gold Star license plates in a special ceremony in Concord. In a moving event, NH Gold Star Mothers received their plates, reminding them that the Granite State honors them, their sacrifice, and the memory of their children who died in service to our Country.

NH Gold Star Mothers License Plates

Slideshow of NH Gold Star Moms receiving their special license plates.

Today at noon, NH's own Gold Star Mothers Chapter becomes a reality as its first slate of officers gets inducted at a ceremony at the New Hampshire National Guard Armory in Manchester. Also happening today, the NH Gold Star Mothers Memorial Association (not affiliated with NHGSM) will break ground for its memorial statue in Manchester's Stanton Plaza.

While certainly no amount of memorials and ceremonies can bring back those who have been lost, at least for those left behind, especially the Mothers, there is solace in the fact that NH's citizens have not forgotten...[UPDATE: Our buddy, 2nd CD candidate Grant Bosse attended both events and has pictures posted at his blog here.]

Posted by Doug at 9:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

THIS has been more fun and better than I thought.  Bloggers, by nature, have opinions...and if you haven't noticed, they want to express them.  To everyone.  Including other bloggers!

After a day of long travel (first flight canceled the night before, missed the second because of slow traffic, waiting for the third, missed the bus from Midway to O'Hare because the third flight was late...ugh!), made it here.  

Blogger-ville!  Everyone was ready to talk and if you walked up to someone, they were more than happy to talk with you!  In fact, not willing - wanting!

Well, as with all confabs of this type, we did have a speaker - John Fund of the Wall Street Journal.  Now, I was a bit skeptical about this - I do have a certain level of mistrust of MSM reporters and commenters, and to be honest, I had not read much of his material before.  I was very pleasantly surprised.  In fact, shocked!

I'm not going to go into all the nitty-gritties, but he did talk a little about a paradigm shift... 

 

No secret here that the folks gathered together are on the right side of the blogosphere, for free markets, and open/transparent/more limited government.  From that perspective, we certainly talked  about what we all do as bloggers and activists back in our home states.  What John said, however, will color, perhaps, all that I write about going forward.  No, not just this Post, but all posts from here on forward.

He said that the struggle between the Right and the Left is not left and right; it is not about the Republicans and Democrats.  It is not about the messages of the extremes either. It is not Conservative vs. Liberal.  That is merely the horizontal plane (the X axis for the mathematically inclined).  The answers lie on, and the struggle will be over, the vertical axis (the Y axis for those of you thinking Cartesian coordinates).

Will we have legislation and leaders that will lead us towards a life that has more Freedom in our choices, or will we have less.  Will we as adults have our lifestyles limited because someone believes that we are not grown up adults and therefore cannot be allowed to make rational decisions that run counter to someone else's notion of "that's not good for you"?  Will we as parents have the authority and responsibility to raise our kids or will government be allowed continue to march forward in monopolizing their time within government strictures (first is was first grade, then part time kindergarten, then full time, and now mandatory pre-school).

Do we make the decision of what is the proper role of government, or will it be allowed to make the decisions for us (and relieve us of that responsibility)?

Will we demand that our government protect us when we are attacked in these things?  Will it defend our rights or will it be allowed to encroach upon those rights?

Or allow others to effectively take those rights from us because they do not or will not protect those rights (remember, the main responsibility of the State is to protect its citizens from attack), including the most basic - the Freedom of Speech?

Or will they, as in this case, do nothing?  After all, no one has the right to not be offended.  We may not like what is said, but ALWAYS put yourself in the place that what you say may be inoffensive, but what if this happened to you?

Skip, this is all theoretical, right?  No, there are dramatic examples of where this can, will, and has happened.  Doug posted the link to the FITNA movie here. Over a million hits, worldwide from different sites, have been registered.

And then, this from ABC: 

Wilders posted his film on the Internet after local distributors declined to release it. His film entitled, "Fitna," which translates to "Discord" in Arabic, suggests the Quran promotes violence and acts of terrorism. The 10-minute film shows various verses of the Quran followed by a montage of violent photos and video ranging from the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center to photos of the Shiite ritual of self-flagellation.

Wilders concludes the film with a graphic, saying it is up to "Muslims themselves to tear out the hateful verses of the Quran. Muslims want you to make way for Islam, but Islam does not make way for you." Wilders urges his audience to "stop Islamization, defend our freedom."

So far, the protests over the film have been largely over legal issues. European news reports say Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard will sue Wilders for using his copyrighted image of the prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. News reports also say Dutch rapper Salah Edin is seeking legal recourse for his picture appearing in the film mistaking him for the man who murdered Dutch film director Theo van Gogh.

Small protests over the controversial film have sprouted in the Muslim world but have remained nonviolent.

Not so fast on the nonviolent part....

I watched it.  The majority of the film is mere video of Muslims slamming into the Twin Towers (we've all seen that video many times), the blowing up of the Madrid trains (we've all seen that video many times), the blowing up of the London subway (we've all seen that video many times), and the protests of Muslims over lots of stuff (we've all seen that video many times, mostly over some criticism of Islam).

Many Muslims have now again said that Islam has been attacked.  I disagree.  However, once again, we see not reasonable dialog concerning this (or even just crowds), but this:

Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders' controversial film linking the Koran with extremism and terrorism was removed from a British Internet site Friday, after the site said staff had been threatened.

Millions saw the 16-minute film before LiveLeak removed it, and the film was condemned by many, including U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a 57-member bloc of Islamic states.

"Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill-informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, LiveLeak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers," the site LiveLeak.com said in a statement.

"This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else. We would like to thank the thousands of people, from all backgrounds and religions, who gave us their support. They realized LiveLeak.com is a vehicle for many opinions and not just for the support of one," the site added.

"Perhaps there is still hope that this situation may produce a discussion that could benefit and educate all of us as to how we can accept one another's culture. We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high," the site said.

Violence.  Or the threat thereof.  A silencing of voices by a culture that cannot tolerate criticism. 

A loss of Freedom.  A step towards tyranny, as once free speech is taken away by force, or the threat of force, freedom is diminished.  A positive Y value as been devalued.

From our early American history, the shout rang out:

My own State's Motto is "Live Free or Die".

Or will we continue upon the path of appeasement? We are adults.  We are supposed to make decisions.  And bear those consequences.  For once, this IS for our children.

How will you decide upon that Y axis - decisions that always lead towards increasing Freedom, or decisions that lead away from it?

You choice... 

 

Posted by Skip at 11:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

"I'm lovin it!" Just saw this e-blast to Hillary supporters from hubby Bill:

Dear XXXXXXX,

Here's the most important thing you need to know about this race: it's neck-and-neck.

Only 130 delegates separate Hillary from Senator Obama -- and that's not counting Florida and Michigan. The difference in popular vote is less than 1 percent, and millions of voters have yet to make their voices heard. This election should be about their choice.

But now we're hearing people -- elected officials, party members, and Obama campaign surrogates -- call for Hillary to pull out.

With the race this close, it sure doesn't make sense to me that she'd leave now -- does it make sense to you?

There's no better way to tell Hillary that you support her staying in than to make a contribution to her campaign -- and no better time to contribute than right now. If you've never donated online before, now is the time to do it. Even as little as $5 can make a difference.

We're facing a big deadline on Monday. Our opponents and the media will scrutinize our fundraising reports and look for any sign of weakness. By making a contribution today, you can help make sure we show nothing but strength.

Contribute $5 by our midnight Monday deadline to help us show our strength.

I know that Hillary never forgets exactly why she is running. Her commitment to the people of this country never wavers.

At this critical moment, all of us supporting Hillary must make sure we are just as focused as she is. With all the talk of the state of the race, all the people telling her she should just give up, you and I must make sure she has everything she needs to stay in this race.

With our big fundraising deadline coming up midnight Monday, we need to show the critics and the doubters that this campaign is running full steam ahead with the determination to win.

Contribute $5 now to help us reach our $3 million goal by midnight Monday.

My family isn't big on quitting. Hillary's in this race to win, and she's in it thanks to you.

Sincerely,
Bill Clinton

Go get 'em!

Here's hoping she NEVER quits. At least till August!

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

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

As usual, this week's broadcast version of GraniteGrok and AnkleBitingPundits brings an array of items and guests for your consideration-- ALL STARTING AT 9AM! As always, thanks to the technical wizardry and analytical skills of Skip (and a few prayers because this week, Doug will give it a whirl, as Skip's in the Windy City), if you are beyond the broadcast area of Newstalk 1490 WEMJ, simply click here for instructions on how to connect and listen on the Internet via livestream. (Podcasts here)

• Our friend and fellow local blogger Chan aka DCE of the Weekend Pundit joins Doug in studio for host duties as Skip is in the Windy City and Pat enjoys his family before travelling with John McCain on the "Service to America" tour.

• Skip will check in live from Chicago, where he is representing New Hampshire and GraniteGrok at Samsphere 2008.  Samsphere is a new media forum, hosted by the Sam Adams Alliance, where bloggers and e-activists from across the country can gather together to network and share ideas. Samsphere will be specifically geared toward bloggers and e-activists who focus on local and state-level politics, and who are dedicated to the principles of individual freedom and limited government. He may show up with a surprise guest, so stay tuned.

• Charlie Arlinghaus of the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy wrote an excellent (as always) op-ed this week in the Union Leader about open government and online accessibility, one of our favorite topics around here.   We'll also discuss the state's budget woes and the new study he has authored revealing the fact that "In each of the last four months, state revenues have fallen further and further behind the amount needed for the state budget. Revenues will end the year at least $91 million behind the budget – and even higher if business taxes also deteriorate. The two year budget shortfall will be between $205 and $258 million." Yikes! 

• MTNP fave Jen Rubin contributes to the American Spectator, Human Events, Commentary Magazine.com's Contentions blog, along with a host of other excellent magazines, websites, and news organizations. We'll discuss the Team McCain Bloggers' Conference Call outlining the upcoming "Service to America" tour. We'll explore Democratic tax hikes on "the rich". Of course, what they mean by "rich" which might surprise you-- or not. And how could we NOT talk about Hillary's risk of life and limb during her now infamous Bosnia photo-op trip? Al Gore? It's not ruled out... Howard who? Is Jen enjoying the Dem slugfest as much as we are? How liberal is Barack Obama, anyway?

• "All politics is local." Long-time Gilford resident and recent Selectman runner-up John Goodhue drops by to follow up on recent local happenings. We'll discuss options for the Town Administrator position and the related Finance Director position, and what, if anything different might be possible. As a member of the town Conservation Committee, we'll get John's thoughts on the work of the new Energy Committee thus far (Chan and I bost serve as members) and whether he agrees with Chan and I that the police department should be commended for their choice of replacing certain cars with smaller, more fuel efficient models. Time permitting, we'll find out the gang's thoughts on the Liberty Hill coal tar cleanup brouhaha.

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... The best radio (in our humble opinions) anywhere...

 

Posted by Doug at 8:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Earlier today I participated in a Bloggers' Conference Call with senior members of Senator McCain's campaign team in which they outlined his upcoming "Service to America" tour, or as our friend Pat Hynes called it, McCain's "bio tour." As reported by Hugh Hewitt,  

McCain Senior Advisor Steve Schmidt outlined next week's "Service to America" tour.  Senator McCain will be making speeches from McCain Field in Mississippi, Episcopal High School in Alexandria, Virginia, Annapolis, Maryland, Jacksonville and Pensacola, Florida.  Each stop will underscore some aspect of the senator's life story, as well as the McCain family's many-generation commitment to the country's safety.

At the Jacksonville stop, the GOP nominee will call for a significant increase in the size of the Army and Marine Corps.

At the Episcopal High School, McCain will discuss the important role of teachers that inspire, reflecting on a teacher he still recalls to this day. In other words, Senator McCain will be offering a variety of speeches on different topics at or near locations that have direct ties. This will be part of the campaign's effort to provide a sense of the varied influences on his life combined with a flavor of family history that will help introduce him to the country at large. Why not? As the two Democrats continue to duke it out, he has nothing but time on his hands to make his case for the presidency. This is accompanied by the new TV ad as posted below.

All in all, it makes for an upbeat, positive look at a man who could be president-- a refreshing contrast from the sniping Democrats. Hardly the stuff of harsh rhetoric and partisan jabs that supposedly turn folks off. Enter Howard Dean-- you remember him, right? Yep- the current DNC Chair that at one time was almost relevant to someone. THAT Howard Dean. Said the DNC Chair in a press release,

“The American people have been waiting for a president who understands the challenges they face, not another out of touch Bush Republican who promises four more years of the same failed leadership. John McCain can try to reintroduce himself to the country, but he can’t change the fact that he cast aside his principles to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with President Bush for the last seven years. While we honor McCain’s military service, the fact is Americans want a real leader who offers real solutions, not a blatant opportunist who doesn’t understand the economy and is promising to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years.”

"Opportunist?" I'd say Mr. Dean ought to know one, given he stares at one in the mirror each time he shaves, except his characterization of McCain as such is so far off base proves he apparently knows not the correct definition. McCain might be many things, but "opportunist?" Not a chance. His record proves it. Given the "opportunity" of favorable treatment and possible early release from Hanoi Hilton, McCain passed, choosing to stay with his fellow men.

That story is but just one example of the dedication to doing what's right, no matter that it might not be what's easiest. As to the 100 years of war, well, go to this post for the whole story, as we were there when McCain used the reference. Indeed, Mr. Dean should just crawl back under the rock from which he has suddenly emerged. Please...

 

Posted by Doug at 6:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

McCain's first national campaign ad sets the stage for his upcoming "Service to America" tour.

Obama and Hillary simply pale in comparison...

 

 

 

Posted by Doug at 5:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

• Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

• Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

• Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

• Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

• In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

• People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government. 

[snip] 

In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other people's money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.

Posted by Skip at 1:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Regular readers might recall that on March 20th, we had our day at the Supreme Court for oral arguments in our ongoing Right to Know lawsuit against the Belknap County Convention et al.

Tom argued that the Belknap County Convention unlawfully met behind closed doors and a county employee unlawfully refused to produce documents to which we were entitled per NH's Right-to-Know laws. Our problem involves the procedure by which they appointed a new Sheriff to replace the resigned previous occupant, duly elected by the voters of Belknap County. We contend that it must be open and transparent, as it involves a Constitutional officer, and they contend the position is that of an employee, entitled to the privacy privileges granted in 91-A provisions. [Read the detail as submitted in our brief here and more follow-up here.]

Following the session, I wrote that

In my opinion, the Honorable Supreme Court Justices seemed to have a full grasp of the importance of openness in government, noting it has a duty to choose more, not less whenever possible. While Tom answered their questions based on the foundation of our case, the opposing attorney representing the County Convention ALSO seemingly answered the Justices' pointed questions based on the foundation of our case. Like a cat batting around a ball of yarn, the four Justices of the Supreme Court asked question after question of our opponent, to which he really had no good answers. When he did, he basically affirmated OUR points...

You don't have to just take my word for it, as you can now watch the proceedings for yourself by clicking here for the video (or here for audio only). This service and use of technology is much appreciated!

Tell us what you think in the comments box below.

 

Posted by Doug at 10:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Check out this new video from the Netherlands-- home of the cartoon jihad.

Keep your eyes on the media in the next few days, as this is liable to upset members of the "religion of peace." You know what? It upsets me too, albeit for completely different reasons...

Let this serve as a reminder why we mustn't let down our guard, nor buy into the Democrat mantra that we can end the war simply by withdrawal and retreat. It is a new world war with the added twist of religious fanaticism. Participation is NOT optional...

[H/T Michelle Malkin]

 

Posted by Doug at 3:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

 

 

 

Have you ever seen a bigger pair? 

[H/T The Swamp]

 

Posted by Doug at 2:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

 

 

The Sam Adams Alliance is holding Samsphere 2008 in Chicago this weekend, and GraniteGrok / GilfordGrok got invited!  This is where conservative bloggers and activists (national, state level) type folks are getting together to talk shop, talk shop, talk shop (oh, and talk some more):

Samsphere is a new media forum, hosted by the Sam Adams Alliance, where bloggers and e-activists from across the country can gather together to network and share ideas. Samsphere will be specifically geared toward bloggers and e-activists who focus on local and state-level politics, and who are dedicated to the principles of individual freedom and limited government.

I certainly think that with GraniteGrok, GilfordGrok, and our radio show, Meet The New Press, we'll fit in just fine!  I am really looking forward to talking with others that have embraced the new media and using the new media to not just opine but to get things happening!

Speaking of getting things to happen, I'm hoping to snag someone Friday nite and be on MTNP Saturday morning for a quick chat before the talking starts for real!

Why Samsphere?  Well, the Liberal Left had their confab (and our "rivals" here in NH, Blue Hampshire went) with quite a bit of secrecy. 

The Sam Adams folks?  Well, let's just say that when they talk about open and transparent government (and less intrusive and limited government, too) and free markets,  you know WE ARE THERE!  And if you're talking about being open and having the discussion, one should be, er....open about it!

The Liberals - not so much.  But you knew that, didn't cha?

Folks that are coming?  See after the jump, and yes, unlike the Lefties, we'll be blogging during the breaks! 

Here's the blogger list - most are new to me, so this should be fun!

 

Erick Erickson          RedState                                      * National
Allen Fuller             Flat Creek Management                 * National
John Fund              Wall Street Journal                        * National
Brad Jones             Face the State                              * National
Jenn Sierra             Fort Hard Knox                             * National
Erik Telford             Americans for Prosperity                * National
E.M. Zanotti            American Princess                         * National
Bill Smith               ARRA News Service                         * Arkansas
Ben DeGrow            Mount Virtus                                 * Colorado
Mark Johnson         ILGOPnet                                     * Illinois
Doug Welch            Stix                                             * Illinois
Bob Weeks             Wichita Liberty                              * Kansas
Earl Glynn               Kansas Meadowlark                       * Kansas
Jeff Blanco              Louisiana Conservative                  * Louisiana
Lance Dutson          Maine Web Report                         * Maine
Jack McHugh           Mackinac Center                            * Michigan
Chet Zarko             Outside Lansing                             * Michigan
Jim Hoft                 Gateway Pundit                              * Missouri
Craig Sprout            Montana Politics                            * Montana
Chuck Muth             Muth’s Truths                                * Nevada
Skip Murphy             Granite Grok                                * New Hampshire
Mario Burgos            Mario Burgos                                * New Mexico
Maggie Thurber        Thurber’s Thoughts                       * Ohio
Chris Arps                Oklahoma Political News Service     * Oklahoma
Trent Siebert            Tennessee Policy Institute             * Tennessee
Leslie Carbone         Leslie Carbone                             * Virginia
Don Ward *             Sound Politics                               * Washington
Fred Dooley             Real Debate Wisconsin                  * Wisconsin
Tristen Cramer         Haemet                                       * Wyoming
Chad Everson           Grizzly Groundswell                       * Minnesota
Steve Sibson            Sibby Online                                * South Dakota

Posted by Skip at 8:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Unfortunately, we just received the following note. Can the Republicans find a new candidate with a chance against Gov. Lynch?    

Mayor Frank Guinta Sticks With Manchester; Suspends Gubernatorial Efforts for 2008

March 26, 2008, Manchester, NH - Despite months of significant encouragement and pledges of support, Mayor Frank Guinta today announced his continued dedication to the city of Manchester and his decision to suspend gubernatorial exploration efforts. 

Citing a deep commitment to the residents, businesses and taxpayers of Manchester, Mayor Guinta stated he would not run for Governor at this time. "I feel very fortunate and challenged by the many opportunities to be a leader in New Hampshire.  We have a great state.  The fact that Manchester is heading into uncertain fiscal and economic times necessitates steady leadership and a mayor willing to make tough decisions. This has been weighing heavily on my mind and it's clear I must commit all of my efforts to fulfill the promise I made to hold the line on spending, to run Manchester's government more efficiently, to support public safety, and to continue to encourage economic growth in our great city. People need a strong leader at City Hall and I am prepared and committed to continue in this role," continued Mayor Guinta.

"With the outpouring of such amazing support, I have truly been humbled by this experience.  There's no doubt that our message of low taxes, low spending, efficient government and the protection of the New Hampshire Advantage is one that can win," continued Mayor Guinta.  "My supporters are incredible believers in keeping New Hampshire special.  I thank them for their persistent support."

"This is the most admirable thing he's done yet, " said Mayor Guinta's wife Morgan, "Although I know he'd be an exceptional leader for the State, Manchester needs him.  I couldn't be prouder."

As one of the leading tax-fighters in the State, Mayor Guinta will continue to work on preserving New Hampshire's unique advantage, speak to groups state-wide on issues important to all New Hampshire residents, and maintain his Granite State Leadership PAC.

 

Posted by Doug at 2:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Q: "Do you think Gore's going to run?"

Bill Clinton: "Someone's got to fizzle. If someone fizzles, then, yeah, he could enter the race."

That's what was reported on the New York Post's Page Six column last June. Here on the 'Grok, we wrote extensively about Al Gore as one of the non-candidate candidates in the "un-campaign campaign" in full swing at the time. Of him, I wrote

As I have noted here, here, and here, there is a very good chance that AlGore could toss his hat into the '08 presidential ring. He's a movie star. He'a an author. He's a credible candidate, with a sizeable number of people believing he won the 2000 election. My guess is that he could potentially regain nearly every one of the voters who cast a ballot for him in that race. With global warming as the cause du jour, and the attendant hysteria continuing with no end in sight, an AlGore cast as the hero ready to save the day could very well be a shoo-in for the White House.

While I was wrong about Gore jumping in during the primary, as the Democratic race carries on, ruling him out altogether is still not possible. With both of that Party's candidates rapidly losing their luster as they exchange pot shots in the prolonged campaign, re-opening old racial divides in the process, and no clear winner seemingly possible by convention time, there is still a chance that Al Gore could end up the winner. Writing at TCPalm.com, Mark Tomasik reports on a recent conversation he had with a Florida Democratic "superdelegate":

U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney, whose district includes much of Martin and St. Lucie counties, is hoping he won't have to attend the Democratic Party national convention in Denver in August.

If he does go, that will mean the Democrats still haven't decided a nominee for the presidential election. And if neither Sen. Hillary Clinton nor Sen. Barack Obama has clinched the nomination by August, Mahoney says we may see a brokered convention, meaning the nominee could emerge from a negotiated settlement.

 

"If it (the nomination process) goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket," Mahoney said.

A compromise candidate could be someone such as former vice president Al Gore, Mahoney said last week during a meeting with this news organization's editorial board.

If either Clinton or Obama suggested to a deadlocked convention a ticket of Gore-Clinton or Gore-Obama, the Democratic Party would accept it, Mahoney said.

As a Republican, I'm not sure I want to see this. More and more, I am viewing November with guarded optimism, taking comfort in the growing reality that with each passing day, neither of the two Democratic candidates looks like they will appeal to enough Americans to win the election. The fresh face of a late entry Al Gore might be another story. But then again, he too is in a race against time, thanks to the growing scientific evidence making its way into the media seemingly putting the lie to global warming orthodoxy. 

Pass the popcorn! 

After all, "Someone's got to fizzle." Heh!

.

<================================================>

 

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

A story in The Politico reports the Democrats are poised to use a reference made by Senator John McCain at a NH town hall meeting against him in the general campaign:

John McCain is scheduled to deliver a major foreign policy speech Wednesday in Los Angeles, one with a heavy Iraq focus, but chances are, Democrats won’t be listening. They’ve already distilled his views into an easy-to-remember formulation: 100 years of war.

It is a reference to an offhand remark made by McCain in January about the possible duration of the U.S. presence in Iraq, a comment that Democrats now portray as the equivalent of the McCain Doctrine.

Though it’s not exactly an accurate representation of McCain’s views, Democratic strategists view the “100 years” remark as the linchpin of an effort to turn McCain's national security credentials against him by framing the Vietnam War hero as a warmonger who envisions an American presence in Iraq without end.

Both Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama began citing McCain’s remark in Democratic debates not long after he made it, and their campaigns have stepped up the focus in recent weeks.

Did you get that? Even though everyone knows the simple one line sound bite is "not exactly an accurate representation of McCain's views," to the Democrats, that doesn't matter. Why let the truth interfere when there's a political opponent to destroy?

Fortunately, the GraniteGrok team was on the scene when the episode in question took place, and we caught it all on film. It was actually part of a fairly lengthy exchange with one of the members of the audience, which we Youtubed at the time to show the essence of NH's primary and to show how, unlike Democrats, McCain doesn't shirk from unscripted, freewheeling debate. Here is the video, which runs a little over six minutes in length. It provides the context in which his "100 years" remark was made. View it for yourself in total before you buy the latest talking points from the propagandameisters in the respective Democrat campaigns...

 

Posted by Doug at 5:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"I did not inhale..."

 

"Actually, I invented the Internet."

 

"I am not a crook!"

 

"Read my lips. NO NEW TAXES!"

 

"If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead."

 

"The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another;"

 

"I remember landing under sniper fire."

 

Oh how I'm enjoying the ongoing Democrat primary!

 

 

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

Yep. I'm man enough to admit when I made a boo-boo. Last Monday, in a post entitled "Rogues Gallery" I put forth 3 examples of the types of words and rhetoric being expressed by prominent Democrats associated with the presidential campaigns of Hillary and Obama. In the post, I showed former campaign associates Billy Shaheen, Geraldine Ferraro, and the now infamous Pastor Wright and printed some of the words that got them in trouble. I included a pic of a box of popcorn indicating my delight in watching the ongoing Democratic Party infighting. In the case of Geraldine Ferraro, perhaps I could have picked someone more deserving of the title of "rogue". Let me explain...

Recall the offending words used by Ms. Ferraro about Senator Obama that got her jettisoned from the Clinton campaign:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she continued. "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

At the time the story broke, I said to a friend, "Heh. That's the same thing Rush Limbaugh said about that black quarterback that got him fired from his stint as an ESPN football commentator." Of course, looking back, most agree Rush was right-- and, once you think about it, Ms. Ferraro is right here, too. Stripped away of the platitudes of hope, change,inclusiveness, and the celebrity of his black skin color, Barack Obama is a whole lot of nothing, which is ALL he'd be if he had been born white.

The headline in the DailyBreeze.com newspaper (CA) says it all:

Geraldine Ferraro resents being lumped in with the Reverend Wright in Obama speech

I can say I honestly don't blame her. As reported in the story,

 

Former vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro said today that she objected to the comparison Sen. Barack Obama drew between her and his former pastor in his speech on race relations Tuesday.

In the speech, Obama sought to place the inflammatory remarks of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in a broader context, in part by placing them on a continuum with Ferraro's recent remark to the Daily Breeze that Obama is "lucky" to be black.

"To equate what I said with what this racist bigot has said from the pulpit is unbelievable," Ferraro said today. "He gave a very good speech on race relations, but he did not address the fact that this man is up there spewing hatred."

Nothing there to disagree with. The story further reported

Ferraro said she had "no clue" why Obama would include her in his speech, and said Obama's association with Wright raises serious questions about his judgment.

"What this man is doing is he is spewing that stuff out to young people, and to younger people than Obama, and putting it in their heads that it's OK to say `Goddamn America' and it's OK to beat up on white people," she said. "You don't preach that from the pulpit."

Ferraro also said she could not understand why Obama had called out his own white grandmother for using racial stereotypes that had made him cringe.

"I could not believe that," she said. "That's my mother's generation."

Bingo. Geraldine Ferraro nails each and every point that I've been hearing from everyone I've heard comment on the matter. Hers was the exact sentiment heard 'round the Easter dinner table where I was yesterday, and I'd imagine it was much the same at many other gatherings across the US as well. As I noted at the start, I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong on something. Lumping Geraldine Ferraro with Wright and Shaheen was a mistake. On this one, she's head and shoulders above those two clowns, and I'm happy to say so. I'm just not happy about the latest revelations of the state of BLACK racism here in America.

Posted by Doug at 1:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

..

Jeanne Shaheen & a couple of friends...

Oh that Jeannie, there she goes again! Despite the fact that at one time she claimed to support the President's action and responses to the September 11 attacks, and the Iraq war that followed, as we all know, she now wants to end the war and bring the troops home. Being a Democrat in the Clinton mold by changing her "core beliefs" depending on what will curry the most favor at a given moment, this is certainly no surprise. Given the rabid antiwar peaceniks that make up a good chunk of the Democratic Party base here in the Granite State, what other position could she possibly take? By playing it safe on this, she has avoided any serious primary challenge in her quest for the US Senate seat presently held by John E. Sununu. In Democrat circles, this is a smart move.

As reported by our friends at PolitickerNH.com, in an article the Valley News, a spokesman for Mrs. Billy Shaheen stated

"When it comes to the war in Iraq, John Sununu is taking a page from George Bush and John McCain," said communications director Kate Bedingfield.  "Sununu continues to support the Bush-McCain agenda in Iraq while ignoring both the advice of military officials and the facts on the ground.

Like the time she blamed President Bush for the wildfires in California, this is pure hogwash. Which military officials? What facts on the ground? Maybe she should read more of Major Luedeke's Dragon Soup writings from Iraq to get some real facts from the ground about the progress that's being made. Maybe she should click here to watch the video interview I did with Senator Sununu nearly a year ago to find out where he stands on the war. While generally supportive, I would not say that his level of enthusiasm comes close to some like Senator McCain. No, Shaheen has no basis for the above characterization other than it's what the DNC talking points have been over and over again practically since the war's inception. Ms. Bedingfield went on:

 

New Hampshire families see through the rhetoric and they want a leader who will stand up and demand a new direction to help bring our troops home as quickly and safely as possible.  That is exactly what they'll get from Jeanne Shaheen."

Poor Jeanne- she really botched the timing on this one! While her mouthpiece was telling the media she'll bring our troops home ASAP, our number one enemy-- Osama bin Laden-- was telling the Arab media something too. Reports CNN:

CNN -- Al-Jazeera broadcast on Thursday an audiotape on which a voice identified as Osama bin Laden declares "Iraq is the perfect base to set up the jihad to liberate Palestine."

The voice calls for the people of neighboring countries "to do their best in supporting their mujahedeen brothers in Iraq."

"My speech to you is about the siege of Gaza and the way to liberate it," he said.

"The Gaza siege is a direct result of Annapolis," he adds, apparently referring to the site of November's summit in Annapolis, Maryland, where Israeli and Palestinian leadership agreed to work toward a two-state solution.

The voice also calls on "Muslims in the neighboring countries" to support the "mujahedeen in Iraq."

Does this mean anything at all to Mrs. Shaheen? Does she recall a place called Somalia, and what happened there? Does she not know that America's cut and run from that situation has been a rallying cry for jihadists the world over ever since? My guess is she does, but doesn't care. Like her mentors Bill and Hillary Clinton, Jeanne Shaheen will say and do whatever it takes to win an election-- even if it does give aid and comfort to our enemies.

"Hey Doug, the title says she's done it AGAIN. When was the other time?" Heh. Remember the big stink when former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami came to give a speech at Harvard? Yep- it was JEANNE SHAHEEN that was

deeply involved in the "invitation process" for Khatami and is organizing the controversial event.

Next time she shows up in your neck of the woods campaigning and actually exposes herself to unscreened questions, ask her whose side she's on...

 

Posted by Doug at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

                                                                

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                                        Hour 2

Pat was out this week - Doug and Skip talk with our guests and each other! 

Hour One

          Supreme Court - oral argument this week in front of the Justices; update on           the Doug and Tom's Right To Know suit against the Belknap County      
          Convention. 

          Discussion - Skip, Doug, Tom - Bill McLean thinks Skip & Doug are weaseling
          out of doing RTK requests concerning Evans Juris's firing.

          Tom - Laconia City Budget - what's the process and has it been followed?

          Interview - Grant Bosse - running for NH Congressional District 2 
          Representative
 

Hour Two

Dr. Paul DiMinico, Superindent of Gilford SAU and Ken Wiswell, Principal of Gilford High School join Skip and Doug and talk about No Child Left Behind ("NCLB") - the public is not happy with education, who should be setting the standards, successful teaching methodology, NECAP, US students vs international students, discipline in the schools (and parents who fight it), emphasis on the basics insted of "isms", basic fact knowledgebase vs critical thinking (chicken and egg) and lots more.

          Note: I'll be honest - we moved too fast and returned to topics and left them
            so often it would be difficult to snip out certain topics.....just listen to the
            whole thing! 

          Note - lots more on the SchlubCam, especially the discussion that happened
            after the show ended its "over the air" broadcast.
 

SchlubCam:  

                 Time with Tom - Supreme Court oral updates, spelling on road signs, Evans Juris firing
                    and resulting brouhaha, Boucher and Admin Procedure (does it HAVE to be written?),
                    Laconia Budget
 

                 NCLB - Skip and Doug talk with Dr. Paul DiMinico and Ken Wiswell (Gilford SAU
                    Superintendent and High School Principal) about LOTS to do with and around NCLB -
                    why, what's going on, and what to do next.  "Break talk" included.
 

Posted by Skip at 6:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

 

He died for our sins. He has truly risen...

 

Posted by Doug at 9:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

..

.

Like hoola hoops, mood rings, Farrah Fawcett and disco, every notable fad enjoys its halcyon days before it all comes to an end. You know the drill-- one day, everybody is on the bandwagon-- all but the losers, of course-- and then it's over, with many looking back scratching their heads wondering what the fuss was really all about.

More and more, it's turning out that the global warming hysteria that has gripped the world for the last decade or so will join the above noted curiosities that appeared on the scene with much fanfare. And holding true to the pattern, following its demise, many people will undoubtedly deny ever having participated in such silliness...

From The Australian:

Duffy: "Can you tell us about NASA's Aqua satellite, because I understand some of the data we're now getting is quite important in our understanding of how climate works?"

 

Marohasy: "That's right. The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're going to get a positive feedback. That's what the models have been indicating. What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback."

Duffy: "The climate is actually, in one way anyway, more robust than was assumed in the climate models?"

Marohasy: "That's right ... These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide."

Duffy: "From what you're saying, it sounds like the implications of this could beconsiderable ..."

Marohasy: "That's right, very much so. The policy implications are enormous. The meteorological community at the moment is really just coming to terms with the output from this NASA Aqua satellite and (climate scientist) Roy Spencer's interpretation of them. His work is published, his work is accepted, but I think people are still in shock at this point."

If Marohasy is anywhere near right about the impending collapse of the global warming paradigm, life will suddenly become a whole lot more interesting.

Whoa! Can you believe this!? When you combine this story, on top of all the previous ones with the same basic findings we've posted here at the 'Grok-- you do have to wonder. Actually, some of us never bought into the hype in the first place. What all this demonstrates is that the skeptics have been right all along. The big question is what will those who believed with the zeal of religious converts do now?

OHMYGODTHEWORLDISFREEZINGANDWE'REALLGONNADIEUNLESSAMERICAREDUCESITSSTANDARDOFLIVING!!!!!

Posted by Doug at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Tomorrow is Easter - in my mind, the most solemn, yet joyous day in the Christian calender. It is the culmination of the Old and New Testament - God's love for us.  In His absolute holiness, our sin (from the free expression of will) is anathema - holiness cannot accept any blemish of that holiness.

But in His mercy and grace, He provided a propitiation for that sin - His Son.  Fully human and fully God, living a sinless and perfect life, Jesus submitted His will to that of His Father's on Good Friday, willingly taking on our sins, and willingly paid the ultimate sacrifice for that sin as foretold in the Old Testament:

 

Today, we celebrate and give thanks for His Resurrection, the true mystery of the Christian faith.  Why?  For if he had not risen, our faith is in vain. Only in His death and subsequent Resurrection can we hope and believe in the promised eternal life outlined in His Word.

He has risen, indeed!

For God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved.   (John 3:16-17) 

 

Posted by Skip at 10:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Gilford Superintendent of Schools Dr. Paul DeMinico and HS Principal Mr. Ken Wiswell joined the MTNP crew today.  While we were supposed to talk about NCLB AND the "International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme", it turned out to be just the former (we've promised to do it again!).

Anyways, the talk centered around accountability, standardized testing (pro and con), and competition in the educational arena and in the "rest" of the world.  Frankly, I did say that the educational established tries to down play the need for competition at the same time that the world is ramping it up more.

Well, here's another case of trying to paper over the bad news - gee, another stab at redefining failure?  From Joanne Jacobs (who is rapidly becoming one of my favorite educational bloggers, emphasis mine):

Kinder, gentler ‘failure’

There will be no “underperforming” schools in Massachusetts, if education officials get their way.

To soothe the bruised egos of educators and children in lackluster schools, Massachusetts officials are now pushing for kinder, gentler euphemisms for failure.

Instead of calling these schools “underperforming,” the Board of Education is considering labeling them as “Commonwealth priority,” to avoid poisoning teacher and student morale.

Schools in the direst straits, now known as “chronically underperforming,” would get the more urgent but still vague label of “priority one.”

They must think their administrators, teachers and students aren’t very bright.

After all, we cannot harm their easily bruised sense of self-esteem, even if their results are of no esteem at all. 

Posted by Skip at 8:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yup, this is part of the "you just can't make this stuff up" department.  As a conservative, you just have to keep bringing out the popcorn, sitting in the easy chair, and just keep watching:

From NRO come two wonderfully delicious notes of interest:

This weekend's Democrat analogy   [Mark Steyn]

Courtesy of James Carville:

"An act of betrayal," said James Carville, an adviser to the Clintons.

"[Bill] Richardson's endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic," Carville said. 

Under this analogy, Hillary is Jesus and Pennsylvania Easter morning. This may be a rhetorical overreach, James.  

03/22 09:36 AM

Bill Richardson - a Judas?  Carville get away with this while poor Soren Dayton of the McCain campaign get suspended for a single Twitter entry that pointed to stuff that most of us already knew? 

Speaking of the Rev Wright's church, we see another believer at Trinity spreading the gospel of black liberation theology:

Another Congregant...   [John Derbyshire]

… for the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church? This is Richard Williams, father of Venus and Serena, speaking to a foreign newspaper:

Tennis is a prejudice game. Well, I'm Black and I'm prejudiced, very prejudiced. I'll be always prejudiced as the White man. The White man hated me all my life and I hate him. That's no secret. I'm not even an American, it just so happens that I was born in America.

03/22 09:30 AM

While the latter is not of the campaign proper, it is from the church that will just keep on giving to those that are not in favor of an Obama presidency.  Of course, this may turn out that running against Obama than Hillary's built in negatives.

Just a gift basket!

 

 

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

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

As usual, this week's broadcast version of GraniteGrok and AnkleBitingPundits brings an array of items and guests for your consideration-- ALL STARTING AT 9AM! As always, thanks to the technical wizardry and analytical skills of Skip, if you are beyond the broadcast area of Newstalk 1490 WEMJ, simply click here for instructions on how to connect and listen on the Internet via livestream. (Podcasts here)

• Guest former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif joins us for the full first hour. Among the topics we'll touch in a "roundtable" discussion during which we'll encourage phone calls:

• Our RTK case that we argued before the NH Supreme Court Thursday involving Belknap County's closed-door appointment of a new Sheriff and the denial of documents in the same case.
• The ongoing brouhaha over the termination of the powerful Gilford Town Administrator. His defenders continue to cry "foul" while pointing to assumed RTK law violations. The big question is, "Why now?" Why did the terminated Town Administrator level "charges" a mere three days before the election?
• The troubles for Belknap County don't end with the secret Sheriff appointment. We are awaiting further response from AG Ayotte regarding the flawed budgeting and borrowing processes used by the county as well. Additionally, Skip has a bone to pick with the County Administrator regarding a RTK request. We don't really mean to pile on, but, what else can we do? Somebody needs to start paying attention to this level of government, as its costs, unlike local towns and cities, continue to rise much faster than the rate of inflation.

• We'll even touch upon the city budget process in Laconia, time permitting. Whew!

• Congressional candidate Grant Bosse checks in to talk about his piece in this week's Union Leader regarding government "stimulus".

• Guests Gilford Superintendent of Schools Dr. Paul DeMinico and HS Principal Mr. Ken Wiswell will join us in studio for some in-depth discussion about everybody's favorive whipping-boy, the "No Child Left Behind Act" (NCLB). We'll also talk about the latest drive to attain "International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme" (IB) status here in Gilford (GG post here. related SB minutes here and here) and elsewhere in the state. Again, this should be an interesting conversation, and we encourage listeners to join in during the program by calling the phone number as announced.

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... The best radio (in our humble opinions) anywhere...

 

Posted by Doug at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

From the San Diego Union Tribune:

Far be it from us to criticize compassion. There is nothing wrong with helping one's fellow, especially if the person on the receiving end has fallen on hard times or is pursuing worthy causes.

Charity is a positive thing, and especially when it comes from private individuals as opposed to government. Otherwise, there is always the risk that the whole enterprise might become an exercise in fostering dependence

While the above is taken from an editorial bashing Oprah's new TV show, I was still surprised to see a major newspaper state what should be the obvious: government giving may foster dependence.  Actually, dependence on the largesse of anyone can happen be it private money giving or public fund project.

Seemingly, it happens not with just individuals but with charities that have now gone on to be, over the years, professional social services organizations / NGOs / non-profits / pick your own name.

The Tribune editorial sets the stage for what I am really becoming tired of: in my local area, non-profits have become dependent on government tax money and believing that if they do not have access to it, chaos will certainly follow.  After all, they are ceratinly talking as if they are entitled to it, that it is their right to have access to it.  And they are not happy with elected officials (like me) and voters that are turning off the spigot.  These NGOs are now letting people know of their plight by whining about it. It certainly seems that they think it will so help them:

The leaders from numerous human service providers said they understand that a number of budget committee officials [this would be me, among many -Skip] have questioned whether the money they are asking from towns is a form of "double dipping" as they received state or federal support that is funded through taxpayers dollars.

However, they say the support from municipal budgets is integral in allowing them to apply for and receive grant funding that requires agencies to prove they have support from local communities.

I note that they are not disagreeing that they are double dipping in applying for funding at multiple levels of government for tax funds.  Given what they do here in NH, they will use each set of citizens (town, county, state, federal) as they believe necessary to get the funding.  It is rather easy to see where I could be counted four times over at each taxing level for funding their program.  And this practice is fair, how?

They certainly have made themselves dependent on that tax money, haven't they?  We had welfare reform years ago - most people, even if grudgingly, admit that it worked - more people came off the welfare rolls and became less dependent on the government.  Maybe it is time to do the same with NGOs / non-profits?  Perhaps they would blossom as well?  After all, don't we all know that the harder one works towards something, the better the outcome?

I also note, with more than a bit of annoyance, that we once again see a redefinition of terms and this is what drives me absolutely nuts.  The two are absolutely not the same thing!

My definition: 

Local community support = individuals within a given community agree with your mission and will support it and willingly give of their time and money.

Theirs:

Local community support = ability to persuade government officials to give us tax money.

After all, if you listen to what they say, which definition do you think they are using?   And they WANT to grow (like any organization):

CAP gets a large majority of its funding through programs whose funding is linked in some way to the federal government, but he said most require community participation in the way of some form of matching support.

He said the support of local communities is vital in providing ancillary funding that allows him to hire more staff members to go out into the community in meet the needs of residents.

And then those self-same members (try "employees") have to justify their positions, right?  No, not according to them. And you know what that means - growth means a need for additional funding, and the cycle never stops.  They also believe that they HAVE to provide those services regardless:

"We have to provide those services whether they give us the money or not." said Keller (executive director of New Beginnings). 

No, not really.  Here is the cold, hard truth - no organziation is entitled to always exist.  Government can, as it has the power to tax.  Private companies start up and go out of business all the time if they do not provide the services or products that the market place does not want (or at the price they are asking). 

Why should it be different with NGOs?  While they do provide services, the measurement should be similar - if the general public (and not government) does not support their services via individual giving, why should they continue to be in existence?

Maybe there is a bit of glimmer of understanding that perhaps the times are a changin' in their area as well with them being "disturbed" at the access door to tax funds being shut. Or not:

Kathy Keller of New Beginnings (battered women's shelter) said a lack of support from towns like Gilford raises a question of awareness of how many people they provide services to in the town. She said in SB2 voting situations, groups like hers have little opportunity to reach out to voters and explain their services before people go in to mark ballots. 

Well, THERE's an entitlement attitude fer ya!

Her words:           a lack of support from towns

My Translation:     Not a lack of support from the town, just a willingness to spend their tax money on government activities but not on NGOs.  It is yet to be seen if there is a real lack of support (see below).

 

Her words:           a question of awareness of how many people they provide services to in the town.

My Translation:     Don't you people UNDERSTAND what we do and why you NEED US?

 

Her words:           She said in SB2 voting situations, groups like hers have little opportunity to reach out to voters and explain their services

My Translation:     A scam.  Her group has been getting tax subsidies for years...I've never seen a comprehensive funding campaign from her organization (or others, other than United Way).  She has plenty of time for next year - elections just happened.  Do some quick planning and get on with contacting the PEOPLE in town and ask for financial support and just not their elected officials (true community support).

 

Her words:   before people go in to mark ballots.

My Translation: Stuck in neutral and in an entitlement dependent mode of operation on taxes.  Notice the knee jerk reaction of going after the tax money via the ballot.

Learn to raise money the old fashioned way - by asking individuals.

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

Quick aside - for those of you who may decide to bounce a Biblical commandment about helping the poor, so why not use taxes?  I saw this over at PC Watch, and I agree with it.  We, as individuals, are commanded to help the poor - not government.  We should not foist that responsibility onto government.  Remember, it is our attitude that is important (and works after that) to God - just having it taken from taxes is having no attitude at all.

A Bible study on poverty

In a new book, "Red Letter Christians," Tony Campolo makes the case that Christians can fulfill their duty to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and shelter the homeless by electing politicians who will make this the collective responsibility of the government and all taxpayers. For fear that even one Christian in America might be so misled by the noted evangelist and theologian, I decided to do something Campolo failed to do - consult the Bible.

Of course, that's not entirely fair. Campolo does offer a scriptural citation for his prescription for coercive wealth redistribution by government. It just doesn't apply. He cites Matthew 25:31-46, in which Jesus explains the responsibility each of us has individually to be compassionate to our neighbors in need. Notice Jesus did not suggest those listening to Him lobby Herod to take care of the poor. Notice Jesus did not suggest this was Caesar's responsibility. Notice Jesus did not suggest people, listening to His words then or reading them 2,000 years later, should mug the rich and distribute their wealth to the poor.

Jesus didn't suggest anything remotely like that to help the poor and truly needy. Instead, he speaks to each of us individually. He lets us know about this because it is the best prescription for both the poor and for us who make the sacrifice to help. Sacrifice is not meant to be easy. Sacrifice is not painless. And personal sacrifice is clearly what Jesus is prescribing for His followers in Matthew 25 - and throughout the rest of the Bible, for that matter.

Jesus doesn't suggest spreading the pain and sacrifice by forcing non-believers to carry the load. Jesus doesn't suggest reducing our own responsibility by foisting it upon the entire nation. Jesus doesn't suggest stealing from the rich to give to the poor. But that's what Campolo's version of enlightened Christian socialism is all about. He specifically says problems like poverty are too big for the individual and too big for the church. Only government can tackle them, he says. Gee, I wonder why Jesus forgot to mention that to us?

When Jesus talked to the rich young ruler, He told Him to sell his goods and give the money to the poor. Even Jesus didn't force him to do so - which He certainly could have done. Had He forced Him, the rich young ruler would still not be in obedience and still not eligible for the rewards of the afterlife. That is the result only of a personal decision to follow God, not the result of coercion.

There's nothing compassionate about taking from those who have and redistributing it. In fact, it would deny the Zacchaeuses of the world (Luke 19) from the gifts of repentance, forgiveness and salvation. Would that be biblical?

Go further two more chapters in Luke to learn of the kind of sacrifice God values. The poor widow who gave two mites, we learn, actually gave more than the rest. Why? Because it's not the amount that counts in God's eyes, it's the faith motivating the giving that counts. Campolo has this all upside down. God doesn't want or need our money to perfect His Creation. He requires our obedience and faithfulness.

The Bible does, however, warn us about people who use the poor as an excuse to sin, as a rationalization for sowing discord, as a means of undermining the very will of God. We see this explored in John 12, where Judas condemns Mary for putting expensive, perfumed oil in Jesus' hair. "Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?" demands the man who would betray Jesus. The next verse goes to Judas' motivations: "This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein."

Judas was like so many "do-gooders" today who demand we show compassion for the poor by giving them, the do-gooders, our money. That's not the way it's supposed to work. You're supposed to help the poor. You don't need a middleman, a Judas, a tax collector, a bureaucrat, a politician taking a cut. It's no longer charity. It's no longer compassion. It's no longer obedience to God.

And what did Jesus say to rebuke Judas' insolence? "Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always." It seems eliminating poverty is not what God requires of us. The poor will always be with us, He says.

So why help the poor? Because God commands it. He doesn't tell us to solve global poverty. He doesn't tell us to pass the buck to others. He doesn't tell us to enlist government in the cause. He doesn't tell us to make the poor a political cause. God wants us to look the poor person in the eye when we give. He wants us to show God's love when we do it. He doesn't want us writing bigger checks to the U.S. Treasury. He wants us serving Him. And through serving Him, we help spread the good news of His grace.

Source 

Posted by Skip at 7:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm no longer impressed with Obama - to imply that ALL whites are racists (""typical white person" using his grandmother as the example because she was fearful at times) is as racist as his Paster and of the former Kleagle of the KKK, Senator Byrd.

His poll numbers are starting to fall - Hillary may now have a chance as this reverse bigotry is shown (and ill defended).

I will say, the best form of a rebuttal is over at our friend John Hawkins blog, RightWingNews where he snags a quote from Mary Katherine Ham of Town Hall (links, gotta love'em!) -  emphasis mine:

"The white "resentment" that Obama speaks of does not primarily come from direct effects of affirmative action or the welfare state. It comes from the societal message that the majority of white people, who have had no part in oppressing anyone, are asked again and again and again to take responsibility for ills they did not cause (and, in many cases have been caused by earlier attempts at assuaging white guilt, like paternalistic welfare). They are lectured about creating a healing "dialogue" in which they don't feel free to speak, lest they employ the wrong politically correct buzz word and confirm their "inherent prejudice." They must feel guilt for "institutional racism" when many of them have never been a part of any racist institution. They're flagellated for benefiting from "white privilege" when many of them don't feel terribly privileged at all.

And, despite engaging in this years-long culturally honored guilt-fest to atone for sins they did not commit, they know that they'd instantly become trogolodytic racists in the eyes of the world for one wrong word, while Jeremiah Wright is excused and even applauded in some quarters for a 20-year stream of hate." -- Mary Katharine Ham

Well put.

My grandparents came from Ireland and Sweden around the early part of the 20th century - they participated in no slavery and certainly were not part of the culture that gave rise to it.  I've had no hand in oppressing anyone (except my kids when they broke my rules).

No, I do not feel "free to speak" because of what MKH points out - but I feel no guilt either.  The white privilege and the institutional guilt is beyond the pale of those that wish to oppress others.  

Privileged?  Hardly, other than I am privileged to live the in best country in the world that has done more to free and give freedom to more people than any other country in the history of the world. 

Do we have problems?  Sure do.  But to use a blanket brush stroke in one direction, while complaining about it in the other, serves only one purpose - a la Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (among others), keeping racism alive.

Getting my vote?  Not a chance sir - but because you are an extreme liberal and not because of the color of your skin.  Heck, you could be green with purple polka-dots and I still wouldn't vote for you. 

Posted by Skip at 5:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rays of light into dark corners...

Today at 10 a.m., yours truly and former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif will have our day in court-- the NH Supreme Court, that is. In case #'s 2007-0566 and 2007-0685, Tom will argue that the Belknap County Convention unlawfully met behind closed doors and a county employee unlawfully refused to produce documents to which we were entitled per NH's Right-to-Know laws. As you might recall, all of this involves the procedure by which they appointed a new Sheriff to replace the resigned previous occupant, duly elected by the voters of Belknap County. We contend that it must be open and transparent, as it involves a Constitutional officer, and they contend the position is that of an employee, entitled to the privacy privileges granted in 91-A provisions.

You can listen to or view the arguments live by clicking here. You can read more of the detail as submitted in our brief here and more follow-up here. When I get back, I will update with the notes Tom will use.

[UPDATE]

It went very well for us yesterday. Tom presented the case in a nutshell (These are his notes):

The fatal flaw regarding the matters before this honorable court is apparent in the presiding Superior Court Justice’s Order of 17 July 2007, when it stated:

“The Convention is entitled to hire public employees, including the hiring of an interim Sheriff, in a nonpublic session under the Right-to-Know law. RSA 91-A:3,II …” (On page 4)

I)  The fact is, nowhere does RSA 91-A empower the Convention or any other body to “hire” employees.  RSA 91-A only establishes conditions regarding employees.

II)  More importantly, the County Convention is not entitled to “hire any employee”. 

 

III)  Regarding Constitutional Officers, No Employer - Employee relationship exists.  Once a Constitutional officer is elected, they cannot be fired by their employer, the voters.  Moreover, when a constitutional officer is appointed to fill a mid-term office they cannot be fired by the appointing authority.

IV)  No Elected Officer is entitled to UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

V)  Constitutional officers do not report to a higher authority other than the voters.

• Constitutional officers cannot be interfered with by the County Convention.
• Constitutional officers, the Sheriff, simply are not “employees”.
• Constitutional officers are not at will employees.
• A Constitutional officer, once elected or appointed, will complete the term proscribed by law without supervision or interference by the County Convention.

Finally, the defendant’s unlawful exercise of power does not become legitimate by reason of habitude.  The Convention repeatedly entered non- public session without citing an exception, they did not keep proper minutes, and did not seal any records pertaining to those meetings and more.

Record keepers, Clerks or Recording Secretaries cannot of their on volition release non-public records.  Non-Public records are SEALED.  No Record keeper or Clerk should have access to sealed records.  Records that are not “sealed” are simply not private.

Upon request the Convention's Records keeper and the Convention's Clerk individually denied public access to records, in violation of the Right-to-Know.  The public is entitled to review the actions of its elected representatives.

The public should never wake up one morning to discover an unknown individual has been “appointed” as an interim-Constitutional officer.  Who else, if any, applied for the office, how long have they been a resident, what qualification do they have?  Shouldn't the public should be able to ask, or review the record regarding how their representatives cast their vote?

In my opinion, the Honorable Supreme Court Justices seemed to have a full grasp of the importance of openness in government, noting it has a duty to choose more, not less whenever possible. While Tom answered their questions based on the foundation of our case, the opposing attorney representing the County Convention ALSO seemingly answered the Justices' pointed questions based on the foundation of our case. Like a cat batting around a ball of yarn, the four Justices of the Supreme Court asked question after question of our opponent, to which he really had no good answers. When he did, he basically affirmated OUR points as made above. There was much back and forth about people being able to know what their elected officials are doing on their behalf. I was quite struck with the importance the Justices gave to citizen access. They discussed and compared the appointment of the Attorney General as an example. They raised a hypothetical "back room deal" that might be able to be struck in non-public proceedings. The opposing attorney agreed that in that instance, openness is desired. Heh!

The Justices kept him at the podium for nearly 10 minutes BEYOND his allotted 10 minute period, with Chief Justice Broderick at one point asking him, "Is this your best argument?" To which the battered counsel (paid for by County taxpayers) replied, "yes, Sir."

I guess I feel for the guy, though. I'm sure it's not easy to argue against citizens having access to their government that's supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people. Like Justice Broderick stated-- "If we just hand out vote tallies from behind closed doors, we might as well shut down the government altogether." Then what?

 

 

Posted by Doug at 8:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Over at PolitickerNH, I saw these two stories about Jeanne Shaheen.  Essentially she:

• decries the high cost of gas at the pump
• wants to cut subsidies for the big oil companies.

First, we have this:

JEANNE SHAHEEN VISITS MANCHESTER GAS STATION, DISCUSSES STRUGGLES FACING MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES DUE TO RISING OIL PRICES

Crude oil hit an all-time record $112 per barrel last week; grocery and gas prices are up

(Manchester, NH) – Former Governor and current US Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen visited a Manchester gas station today to discuss the challenges middle class New Hampshire families are facing due to rising oil prices. The record-high cost of oil is reverberating throughout the economy, squeezing the middle class: gas prices are up to $3.15 per gallon in New Hampshire, the price of milk is up 26% over last year, and the price of eggs is up 40% over last year.

"Middle class New Hampshire families are facing a tight squeeze as grocery bills, gas bills and heating bills are all soaring," said Gov. Shaheen. "...We need an energy policy that invests in alternative energy..."

The problem with this statement is that alternative energy is not going to change the price of oil (e.g., the price of gas at the pump) any time soon.  Only a fool believes that changing from an oil based economy to "other than oil" will be simple or inexpensive (barring any disruptive technology showing up) in the short term.

How to get the price of oil down?  Well, worldwide demand is not going down.  More refineries and more supply are needed - none of which she advocates.

Now, let's transfer to this story: 

Shaheen wants end to oil subsidies

MANCHESTER- Standing outside a gas station former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D - Madbury) said Congress needs to stop providing subsidizes for oil companies.

"Washington needs to stop subsidizing the oil companies and start providing tax breaks for middle-class families," Shaheen said.

Shaheen, a candidate for the U.S. Senate, said the government should focus on funding for renewable energy sources.

Note: doesn't she know (or admit) that most of the big oil companies are also the biggest spenders on alternative energy?  Unlike Shaheen, they understand that they are not just in the oil industry but are in the energy industry.

Now, let's be clear.  Liberals LOVE having the tax code at their fingertips so that they can dictate your behavior by manipulating it.  Free marketplace person?  Not Jeanne Shaheen!  She does belong to that bracket of elites that does believe that they knows better than you do.  Especially when it comes to where you should be spending your money.

However, let's steer clear of the politics for a second and treat this as strictly an economic problem.

1. Shaheen wants to eliminate oil subsidies, therefore yielding higher heating and gasoline prices.  That additional cost will be passed onto consumers, as the oil companies' cost of business goes up.
2. Shaheen is not in favor of exploring for and recovering more American oil or letting new refineries be built.
3. Shaheen decries the high cost of gasoline for consumers.
   

Does anyone else see that Items 1 and 2 do not do anything for Item 3?

Sure, alternative energies may help going forward (just remember, if you removed the subsidies for those as well, those industries would collapse again - see 1970s).  At this point, they are not competitive in the marketplace (but only starting to be such in certain areas ONLY because of the cost of oil). 

ALSO READ: "invests" - spending your money on her kind of subsidies rather than what is really working in the marketplace.  In this case, government is the problem, not the solution.  After all, if you REALLY look into the numbers, the oil companies pay more in taxes than they make in profit.  Also, for the most part, if you took away the existing subsidies and tax credits away, the alternative energy industry would disappear (like in the 70s) unless it had big pocketed resources....like big oil companies - whose profits she wants to take - like a true socialist.

 

Course, stories like this reveal that at times, we really have a political problem and not an oil problem.  After all, if you increased the supply, with demand remaining the same, the price would go down (but basic micro- and macro- economics do not seem to be strong points of politicians).

You no doubt have noticed all of the headlines concerning the recent escalation in the price of oil. "Oil Price Eclipses All-Time Inflation-Adjusted High." "Gasoline Soars to near $4.00 a Gallon in Several States." "Price of Oil Driving U.S. into Recession." While these headlines caught your eye, there was another one that probably didn't: "SF County Approves Drilling Moratorium."

With a unanimous vote the Santa Fe County Commission, with the governor's full support, laid down a moratorium of at least one year on the granting of any drilling permits in the Galisteo Basin. The 100 people in attendance stood and cheered the Commission's decision. It was another victory for "NIMBY" (Not In My Back Yard) and energy obstruction groups who pretend to be solely concerned about environmental protection. The loser in this "victory" was you, the New Mexico taxpayer and America at large.

It might surprise you to know that private oil companies only control about 4 percent of world oil production. Most of earth's petroleum is supplied by unstable, non-democratic countries that are unfriendly to U.S. interests. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez openly discusses his wish to cut the United States off from his country's oil supply. The Venezuelan despot has stood hand-in-hand with Iran's dictator, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who also despises America. Russia's Vladimir Putin has nationalized private oil and is using oil and natural gas as an economic weapon against his neighbors.

While all of this is going on, our state is making it more difficult and more expensive to produce oil and natural gas here at home. It's not just the many restrictions, such as the unnecessary year's delay in drilling in the Galisteo Basin. The state is busily throwing more and more regulatory burdens on oil and gas companies including a push toward more "closed-loop" drilling. This requirement along with demands that drillers haul off massive amounts of benign drill cuttings (dirt from the hole that was drilled) to distant landfills stands to make drilling here in New Mexico so expensive we're going to need $200 oil to pay for it. Such counterproductive requirements create an incentive for oil companies to spend their money in other states that are friendlier to this vital industry. Even worse, some oil company investors are deciding they can get a better return on their dollar by pulling their money out of domestic oil and gas altogether.

You should realize that when oil and natural gas production is denied or delayed in New Mexico that it costs you directly. Our state is heavily dependent on revenue generated by my industry. In 2006 direct state income from oil and gas production ($2.83 billion) was more than half of what was spent in the general budget. When our work is delayed or when companies who wanted to drill wells in New Mexico go to Texas, Utah or Kansas instead, that leaves a hole in the budget. Instead of having a strong state economy we have problems such as a $500 million shortfall in the transportation budget. These shortfalls inevitably lead to more of your hard-earned money going to the taxman in order to cover the gap.

I'm greatly concerned about all of this and I think you should be, too. But there is an even more ominous problem. The U.S. imports more than 60 percent of its oil supply, and domestic production is sinking fast. Most of the easy-to-produce oil has already been tapped. What's left is in hard-to-get-to places or held off limits because of political shenanigans.

The next time you hear someone saying we need to reduce our dependency on foreign oil in their push for alternative energy, and then turn right around and start talking about restrictions on domestic drilling or increased taxes on American oil companies, you know they are not concerned about foreign oil at all. If we really want to pinch the hose of imported oil we're going to need a strong U.S. oil industry in addition to every solar panel, wind mill and nuclear power plant we can put up. Let's get real!

We've got a dangerous disconnect going on in this state and country when it comes to oil and natural gas. Every citizen should be alarmed when production of domestic reserves is needlessly delayed or stopped. Unfortunately, citizens are failing to see the connection between the energy we need for a strong America and how to get it.

(Author: John Byrom is president of the Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico)

 

 

Posted by Skip at 8:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Blue Star Moms & friends honoring the troops

The following was written by Johanne Duchesne. She is a brand new member of the Blue Star Mothers of NH and attended this past weekend's Gathering of Mothers in Concord in support of the troops in the face of the demonstrating antiwar protesters.

This word PEACE seems to have many meanings these days. 

When one hears, “Rest in Peace” you would think that it is something being wished to someone who has passed away – wishing them an eternal rest, in PEACE. 

But, then you have these “PEACE” activists who in their efforts to make a point about the casualties of war have stripped our soldiers of their dignity and of their eternal rest in PEACE.  I am referring to a recent demonstration on the front walk of our State Capitol on March 15th.  A Peace Activist group without permission from the families of our fallen soldiers saw fit to attach their names to pairs of boots and placed them in the walk to the front steps of the Capitol. 

As a member of the Blue Star Mothers organization, I was there with other Blue Star Mothers, including two Gold Star Mothers and veterans in a show of support for our troops.  The Activist’s demonstration caused the Gold Star Mothers much distress and anguish.  One Mom in her grief ripped the tag from the boots and the other took the boots with her son’s name and carried them with her as we walked. 

We were told that if the Mothers did not want the names of their sons or daughters included in their demonstrations that they would have to contact the organizer to have the names removed.  By what right do these people have to use these names anyway?  Oh yes, I guess that would fall under our right to free speech –which by the way is one of the privileges as Americans that our troops have fought and so many have lost their lives to defend.  Ironic, isn’t it? 

Johanne's son, Jonathan, enlisted into the Army in 1999 and served 3 years with the 82nd Airborne.  He is now in civil service as a patrolman with the Manchester Police Department.

Antiwar peaceniks dishonoring their memory (GG file photo)

 

Posted by Doug at 7:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 5:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Dr. Muoyad, Col. Gibbs with a homemade Iraqi-style pizza.

Recall that in a prior post, GraniteGrok's milblogger, Maj Kirk, wrote of Dr. Muoyad, who he calls a "true Iraqi patriot":

Muoyad, a member of the sizeable Sunni Jubori clan,  is a cardiologist by trade, a medical doctor who once successfully treated one of Saddam Hussein’s sons (Uday) for a gunshot wound during one of the several attempts made on the eldest Hussein’s life before he was killed by U.S. forces in July 2003.

He has lived in Dora for much of his life, and while it took us awhile to discover Muoyad’s influence and abilities as a uniter, not a divider of his people, he has become a symbol of the progress being made in his neighborhood.

Not one attack has been launched against U.S. or Iraqi Security Forces in the area since September, 2007 and under Muoyad’s guiding hand, the streets are clean, electricity and power runs nearly 24 hours a day,

Major Kirk sends the following alert:

Wednesday's Nightline will feature a series called "Where we stand" and this week's feature story is about Dr. Moayad, the Iraqi patriot I blogged about. I was there with the crew when they came down to the do the interview and shoot footage- I think it will be a very good piece.

It airs tonight on "Nightline" at 11:30pm EST. Should be interesting to watch network coverage of something we've had the inside scoop on here at the 'Grok. Thanks Kirk!

 

Posted by Doug at 7:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Will he raise his friend Rev. Wright from the dead? So it goes with America's "saviour"--, the new messiah that is Barack Obama. "Oh, stop it, Doug. That's enough with the whole 'Obama as a religion' meme." But really, what else am I supposed to think? Why, even the Boston Globe, a la John the Baptist, is proclaiming the coming of Obama. Consider the headline and opening paragraph in today's paper:

Hope aside, he faces nation's original sin

PHILADELPHIA - After a year of speaking of racial reconciliation in mostly hopeful, uplifting terms, Barack Obama yesterday offered a fuller, deeper, and more personal testament to the nation's tormented racial history and how to begin to overcome it.

The gospel according to a gushing Globe reporter continues as it all but identifies Obama's big speech as some new "Sermon on the Mount":

This wasn't the gauzy vision of diversity draped in tapestry metaphors and colored in rainbow hues: It was a nation confronting its sins and overcoming its deeply held fears and prejudices.

"A nation confronting its sins." Can you believe this?

"We have a choice in this country. . .," Obama said. "We can tackle race only as spectacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy. . . . We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day, and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card. . . . Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, 'Not this time.' "

Thus it was revealed: After a period of time spent wandering in the desert before the convention, followed by betrayal and intrigue, finally, after the third round of balloting, he rose again, in fulfillment of (the Globe's) scripture. Yikes!

Obama of Galilee turns 5 welfare checks into enough to satisfy (now THAT'S a miracle!) the large gathered crowd...

 

Posted by Doug at 11:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Town Meeting and elections have been held here in NH over the last couple of weeks (with more voting in some towns still to come).  I've been helping one group of people, the Moultonboro Citizens Alliance, with their site as they advocate for implementing SB2 style of voting and for keeping taxes lower.

Well, while they did not achieve their goal of getting SB2 implemented, they came REAL CLOSE!  And they did defeat a contentious issue of a new edifice in town.

During that time, lots of Letters to the Editors were written, pro and con.  The two that caught my eye seems to be all too typical lately - Wealthy couple moves into small hamlet, considers taxes dirt cheap, get buyer's remorse over the "smallness" of the town, and decide to ramp up town spending (and therefore taxes).

Because the mentality expressed by this couple (yup!  a twofer!)  of "we know better than you do even though we just moved in and have more money than you" irks me so much, being of sound mind and body, I just couldn't leave them alone. 

These are taken, by permission, from their site:

Well, I guess a number of people liked my treatment of Mr. St Amand's manifesto - I was asked for a repeat performance!  Thus, so as not to be accused of sexism, let's do for her what we did for him.  Let's translate what Madam St. Amand has to say in support of the new edifice being contemplated, shall we?

Letter to the Board of Selectmen                                                       February 14, 2008

Heh!  Good start – we know who we are talking to and the date.

Dear Selectmen,

I feel as if you all know my thoughts on the Recreation Strategic Plan based on my previous letter I read. Furthermore, I am in awe that over three hundred signatures did not open your eyes to see how important this vision is to the community and come forth with support.

And it goes down hill from here.  Let's see – 4,300 residents, 300 signatories – for the sake of 6.97% of the townfolk, let's build us a building!  Funny, I always thought it was a majority that usually carried the day – did the Missus forget the other 93% that didn't sign it? 

You know, if someone called me stupid ("...did not open your eyes to see how important..."), I'd not be all that impressed with whatever is being pitched to me.  Influencing people? Absolutely....just not the way she thinks.... 

Still, I understand that we are at a critical point where your support is needed for this immensely important project so I write to you today in hopes of further explaining my thoughts as a strong community member.

Translation: you're still stupid, but since you control the approval process, I'll twist myself in the wind to butter you up.  After all I'm what you call "a strong community member".  Hot diggity-do!  On my say so, you gotta believe me!

When I moved here a year and a half ago, despite my skepticism to move to a small community, I was repeatedly told that this was a small but cozy community.

Small.  Cozy.  Nice words – admirable words.  They connote a certain life style, a certain atmosphere, that is shared and accepted by all.  And no one was lying to you either.  Moultonborough is just that kind of town.

I immediately noticed that in addition to the limited amenities I would have to get accustomed to, there was no community center in which people could connect on many levels.

Oh, the privations - “limited amenities”. 

Methinks the downward slope is pitching down a few more degrees.  Note:  did she not realize that ("small", "cozy") before the ink on the P&S was dry?  Of is this a case of mistaken homework (or homework not done)?  Small means, well, small.  To have all those things means....larger!

Look, I lived in MA for many years – there was hardly ever a community center “ in which people could connect "on many levels”.  The fine town I live in now doesn't have one – people go and SEE each other.  They do not depend on the benefice of government to provide such. 

Another thought - is anyone else seeing this?  Is this the first time that I see somebody playing "good cop, bad copy" all by herself in each paragraph?  And if she is, what role does that mean that the good citizens are playing?  After all, the good cop-bad cop needs someone else to be present for this to work....

Everything I, or anyone else I knew, wanted to do was predominately outside of this community. A theater, variety of restaurants, a proper supermarket, a pharmacy, clothes/accessory shopping, and a full service health club would all have to be sought after in other people's communities.

Life's tough....get over it...and yourself.  You've deliberately moved into a small hamlet.  Right now, I'm smelling buyer's remorse. Oh, the indignity of it all - no place for decent shopping! 

Actually, the impression I'm getting is that it sounds like “you rubes don't know what you are missing for the necessities of life”.  Did you ever think that once all these were added, the terms “cozy” and “small” would no longer apply?

Or is that the point?

So many townspeople wondered why there was not one central place that we could meet, share a party, dance, exercise, listen to a lecture, send our children to knowing they were off the streets free of crime.

So many? How many people get all excited in rural NH “go to a lecture” - really?  Parties generally are a normal part of the general life - the building they are often held in is generally called a "home".  And if shoveling all this snow this winter isn't exercise enough, come on over - I still have plenty!

I think the kookiest one is “ send our children to knowing they were off the streets free of crime”.  If you are living in a rural area, and they are children, they will have to walk or ride their bikes...on those self-same crime ridden streets in rural New Hampshire.  Really - how "crime" ridden is Moultonborough???

If you really look at those items – it all adds up to a lifestyle of leisure wants.  Not needs; wants. 

By definition, a community in Merriam Webster's Dictionary is an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as species) in a common location.

"Species".  That's part of a community?  Of people?  Now, I know that taxonomically, we humans are a species.  But to put that in a Letter connotes something.....but I can't put my finger on it.  I guess I'm just a hick.....

Well, here's the actual definition

Function:                  noun
Inflected Form(s):      plural com·mu·ni·ties
Usage:                     often attributive
Etymology:               Middle English comunete, from Anglo-French communité, from Latin
                                communitat-, communitas, from communis

    Date:                         14th century

1:a unified body of individuals: as a:state, commonwealth b:the people with common interests living in a particular area; broadly :the area itself <the problems of a large community> c:an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as species) in a common location d:a group of people with a common characteristic or interest living together within a larger society <a community of retired persons> e:a group linked by a common policy f:a body of persons or nations having a common history or common social, economic, and political interests <the international community> g:a body of persons of common and especially professional interests scattered through a larger society <the academic community>

You might think that I'm nitpicking, but c'mon, we a merely "a species"?  If so, what is the use of a community center?  I think of the above definitions, I would have picked a different one.....

We continue to call ourselves a community, however, we leave for most of our needs outside of the library, town hall, post office, and a school event.

So, a community is now defined by this newly arrived person by what is or what is not in town for “things” it possess rather than for the people that are in it?  She concentrates not on the bonds that have already existed for years between its residents but for the buildings in town (or lack thereof)?

We run into our friends far more in Shaw's Supermarket than in Heath's which takes us out of our community.

Again, this is so typical - a community is defined by what it does not vs what it does have.  Instead of cherishing what is present, it is downgraded for what it does not have.

And tell us, is this travel to Shaw's forced on you?  Tell us, do you not have the freedom to shop at Heath's?  So isn't it a bit of hypocrisy that you complain about the size of the town but deliberately shop out of town so as to not organically grow your own community?  You raise your nose at the community that you are trying to call home?

Or do you pine for a home that only exists elsewhere?

There is very little "in common" about our interactions in this community as is stated a community should be.

The question, the hard question, is who are you to tell the present community that they are not a proper community?  After a year and a half, I surmise that you might just be starting to know your fellow townfolk – NH people aren't particularly enamored of “air kisses” and faux airs – it takes time, sometimes a long time, to develop the kinds of linkages you are seeking (but by the wrong method). 

Have you ever thought that by putting down the citizens and the Town of Moultonborough, as you have complained about so far, that you may well be self-selecting out of those friendships and that sense of community?  After all, who wants to deal with a newly arrived carpetbagger that immediately begins the screeds of “you're not good enough” and that the town must change according to their norms?

However, a community center and the prospect of all our recreation needs being significantly improved holds promise for our community to connect, find common ground, show empathy to a variety of age populations because we actually interact with each other if only to say hello in passing on our way in or out of our community/senior center.

Oh yeah, only saying “Hi there!” is going to deepen community bonds.  Isn't that just a tad bit – superficial? 

“All of our recreation needs” - oh Hallelujah, salvation is at hand!  We won't ever have to wish for another thing again! If she really wants this to be true, this project will have to graduate from edifice to grandiose in a heartbeat (or a few millions of dollars, take your pick).

Look, get real.  A building is not going to do any of these things.  The staff that will have to be paid to run the place and programs will not do or provide all these things either (any more than the staff at an exclusive country club is going to enhance your self-esteem other than that they do your bidding).

If you want all these psychological or spiritual benefits, there is one and only one answer to your sense of "needs "– that is you yourself.  It seems that you have a tremendous lack of being involved.  Trust me, get involved in the people - buildings generally don't seem to care.  You don't need a “community center” to achieve these goals – you only need YOU.

As a Family and Community Nurse Practitioner trained at the master's level, I have expertise in evaluating the needs of communities of all ages and diverse backgrounds. I practiced with personal integrity and sought ethical truths in constantly changing environments.

I cannot help but think "let's brag about ME!  I know better than you about what you need - let me prove it to me!".  And you should believe me too!

Please, what the heck is"ethical truths"?  Here we go with the psychobabble / New Age histronics.  And with this humanist phrase, who is the grand poobah that decides what is "truth" and what is "ethical"?  And what does that have to do with tax money (the main topic)?  And what will "ethical truths" mean if your idea of "ethical truth" id directly in opposition of someone else's common sense?   What if it is voted down?  In your eyes, will the voters become "unethical" or will they have merely "lied" to themselves to fit your narrative?

Is it ethical for you to force your vision on others?  Remember 93% of the folks in Town DIDN'T sign your petition.

As a RSPT committee member, I bring forward my professional background to evaluate the plan, financial responsibility, and health and mental well being benefits. I have been a part of the process in cheering the ideas while remaining grounded and offering other thought provoking alternatives as well based on my experience. While I serve as an interested community member, I also offer my professional expertise to this committee and the town at large. Having said that, it is most important to me that you as a governing body understand how responsible this plan is on so many levels and likewise, how irresponsible it is to put the brakes on a long overdue plan to improve our community.

Sigh...I just do not know what to say here (my head hurts).  She certainly likes her "professional expertise".

I hope that it has been obvious to see that I take an unbiased approach.

Nope, it's not obvious, and no, you're not unbiased.  What is clear so far is that you are ticked that Moultonborough does not have all the amenities (goodness gracious, not even a “proper supermarket”!) that it should based solely on your definition of what "community" should be. 

And it seems that you are bound and determined to get what you want so that the “sticks” won't seem so “sticky”.

There are many aspects of the community center that will not improve my life directly, however, it will improve the community.

'Course it won't – your needs are not to be met within Moultonborough until your expectations are changed to meet the community.  You made that quite clear in her opening paragraphs.  Yet, some of the folks' needs in town are such that this Community Center is far from being a need - the basics are.  By building and operating this, you might make that much harder for them.

Note:  It should not be that the community change itself for you; rather, it is the other way around.

There are aspects of the community such as Meals on Wheels that don't improve my life.

Let's face it – unless Mr. St Amand fritters away the family fortune being a Venture Capitalist, it is doubtful that she would be availing herself of that program – a program that may well be needed for those who can not afford the taxes that would be “growing the sense of community” in your fashion.

Why is it that those who want larger government never seem to connect the dots financially?  Clueless pills?  Or do we thank our educational system for not teaching proper civics, math, and a sense of playing good checkers (it teaches that there are consequences to making bad decisions rather painlessly, readying one for more important decisions).

But I am a community member so I support such services wholeheartedly. When I hear townspeople, including Selectmen, express concern over their own retirement issues in regards to supporting this plan, I am disheartened because they are negating the need to look at the progression of our community as a whole.

No, you are being selfish, plain and simple.  Again, at the rather young age of 40 or so, your husband has already retired. This is a dream far beyond (and already past) many of us.  Most people in town are not as privileged are you; perhaps a bit more of humility and a wee bit less of hubris could be served the next time you go to the diner for some home cookin'?

Note: there is NOTHING wrong with people voting their pocketbooks.  Or voting for the needs of their families before the wants of the community.

The townfolk that you denigrate (as they think of their ability to provide for their loved ones in seeing what may come over the horizon financially during their Golden Years) obviously have a better handle on the actual needs of their community than you.  One reason may well be (more than likely) far closer financially to those in real need than you.   They understand the potential heartache far better. And probably, are a bit more wise as well.

Again, being a “transplant” versus an “escapee” often means that the empathy you allude to above , at least the financial aspect, totally escapes you.

If the Selectmen truly believe in the definition of community, an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as species) in a common location,

You know, “as species” is getting annoying.  Stop it.  The residents are people, not “species”. 

then I believe you need to take a look inside yourselves and ask why you could possibly lead our community to believe that this plan is anything but responsible

Here we go again with the "stupid" part again - if you do not agree with me!.

and beneficial to the growth and development of our community at large. Moving forward to approve the requested $375K for the Architectural and Engineering phase allows us to move forward in getting the proper information to our community for further consideration.

Note: a lot of people don't have to spend a lot of money to have already figure it is not a good fit for the Town at this time....that's called being frugal....and not stupid.  And just think - they may not WANT the town to get larger.

This community is counting on your support even if they don't understand the impact of forgoing your support and this Recreation Strategic Plan.

Another translation: "In closing, just let me call you all stupid once again.  After all, we're only talking on the order of $90 / resident?"  What's that to a wife of a successful Venture Capitalist (to heck with the thought that this amount, for some, can be the better part of a week's take home pay)?

Respectfully,
Lisa St. Amand

Ugh

 

 

________________________________________________________________

Well, having fisked the Missus, let's serve up the Mister, shall we?

Oh, over at my original post, a Mr. Glenn Smith decided to leave a rather long comment.  Given that I am a "guest" of the MCA crew (whom I support to the hilt!), I will respond to it at my site ("Martha, throw anotha log on the fiyah, willya?") in a little bit.

BTW, Mr. Smith - as opposed to your attempt at a jiffy opening, the name I use at the Moultonboro Citizens Alliance site is NOT an alias - it is my name (albeit a nickname but one I've used for, oh, 40-odd years).

Although I am originally from MA and do not live in Moultonborough, I believe that with 23 years in the Lakes Region, I have seen plenty of my fellow native staters head north to NH.  Many of these "transplants" have come for the views and some for the "quality of life" issues.  Other "escapees", like myself, came more for the philosophy of "Live Free or Die" and the lower taxes.

I think I recognize these Letter writers that were listed earlier - the St. Amands.  Let's see which camp they fall into!

Editor, The Citizen:

The Town of Moultonborough will benefit in many ways from the establishment of a modern, well-equipped Community/Senior Center. Those benefits will spread into every aspect of our town's population from young children to active and less active seniors.

Ah yes, the dreams, the hopes, the aspirations!  What was originally a small idea has blossomed - Taj Mahal anyone?  And not just in the building, but also in the operation thereof.  For you see, simple programs begat more programs which begat more staffing requiring more stuff.  Which costs more money.  But that never seems to be part of the lexicon of those promising the benefits.  After all, it is always about the "quality of life" (and not the cost thereof).

There has been opposition to the community center by a few vocal people, but I am willing to bet all our residents will enjoy some aspects of the center.

A few?  I do believe it is more than a few!  And vocal is what they need to be - the norm is to continually grow at the expense of those that cannot spend.  Finally, there is a group that has the courage to stand up for those folks and buck that status quo - just like you did in the telcom industry.

I will not repeat the multitude of benefits derived from a community center as they have been extensively articulated in the committee's report and presentations to the Selectmen.

I retired with my family here in the summer of 2006. I have two children in the public school system and a pre-schooler.

And that's the rub.  Having started Telica, sold out to Lucent Technologies which then got bought out by Alcatel, Mr. St Amand is living the life that most of us only can read about.  Successful beyond most others' dreams also means that what he can support is also beyond most residents' ability.  Time after time, the "rich" come into a town from other places (in this case, MA) where everything abounds (but you pay for it in taxes). 

Previous to our move we vacationed in Moultonborough. My support is not based on a fiscal whim or that of an emotional stance, but rather from a position of need in all our lives here in Moultonborough.

The question is that of "need or want"?  Is it a nice to have, or a need to have?  Once again, the question must be raised - is it the proper role of local government to supply all the things that perhaps the private sector should be instead?  Should the wants of the few be credited more than the financial means of the many?

Again, the "vocal few" come into view - long time residents, far longer than your residency of a couple of years, that because of your stance, may be pushed out due to cost of higher taxes. 

 I have been very fortunate with my business successes to allow my family the opportunity to retire and live in probably one of the most beautiful regions in the country.

Yup, not an "escapee".  You have the financial means to advocate for a large capital project.  For you, the marginal cost of your taxes is probably easily borne.  Thus, it is fair to ask - when you talk about the community, do you think of these folks that are long time residents but of limited means or only what you believe is "necessary"?

We have great natural resources for tourism, our schools perform very well and our services are held in high regard given the small size of our full-time population. We need to continually look forward as a town to keep Moultonborough as a great place to raise families and to retire.

Money is not everything - hopefully a lesson that you have learned.  The problem is, it is a problem when you do not have such financial resources.  Notice the use of "small size" - given that, large increases are spread over a relatively small number of people.  While those that are of "means" believe it is a given to continually spend, why is there no consideration of those that cannot?

Our town is facing a critical juncture as to what we will leave our residents for the next 20 years.

The question can also be asked "if this goes forward, will all those that are here now be able to afford to enjoy all of the beauty of the town then?  Or do you not care?  Towns are not "legacies" to build.

We all have concerns with the present state of the economy, the cost of housing, and a tax system that relies on property valuations.We have little or no commercial tax base to supplement our residential tax base and the uncertainty of statewide education funding puts further pressure into the equation. The solution at this time is NOT to starve the community of a key component that takes a major step toward enhancing our town's quality of life.

You know, I really had to read this a few times......let's list the all the reasons why this edifice should not be built based on the economic uncertainty the citizens of the town must face.  Yet, given that uncertainty, let's SPEND in the face of what is happening!  After all, nothing should ever trump the "quality of life" (a phrase whose importance to "progressives" is only out-pointed by that of "it's for the children").

Oh yeah, this too - let's remake the state in our former state's image - taxes!  Do I smell a broad based taxer here?  It is really kinda of sad that for a person who says:

The community center will bring greater value to our town, our full-time and part-time residents, and visitors. This multi-generational facility will be a key factor in further establishing Moultonborough as a town where people want to live.

Clue one - pssstt - (whispering here) - they all ready do want to live in Moultonborough - that's why they are here already.  Many more may want to, but cannot because of taxes.  Get the connection?

People desire to be in towns/cities with good schools, amenities, and services. If we fail to continually add value to our town and enhance people's quality of life we will degrade our property values and lose our residents.

Try real hard to make this fit - by continuing to spend more and more, the only solution is to raise taxes. Look at MA - it is losing population; NJ is suffering even more and CA even worse.  What's the link - high taxes! 

It is evident throughout history in towns/cities that let their municipal facilities and services degrade, businesses move out, property values decline, and recovery often never happens.

A species argument - no one is advocating to not keep up what is already there - this is about adding, at a time of financial uncertainty for many,a large capital expense and a large operational expense.

Where the need for such needs to be settled by a majority of the folks.  And they should be voting their own interest and not to just satisfy the "noble" sentiments of those to whom finances are of small concern.

I applaud our town and your efforts to date with key investments in the Town Hall, Library, Life Safety Building and the High School. These have been very high value yielding investments by us that have moved Moultonborough into a "great town to live in" category.

It is fair to say that these can easily be seen as needs.  There is no hard and fast "need" for what you are advocating - for if there was, wouldn't private industry have supplied such a need?

The Community/Senior Center provides, in my mind, the glue to bring the entire community together with a variety of activities and social offerings geared for virtually all age brackets. This should be our next investment in our town.

If a town truly needs a simple building to bring it together, there are  more important problems with that notion (think about it)

We do not have shopping malls, activity centers, senior programs, pre-school activities, teen centers, etc. where we can participate in social or physical activities as readily as other towns and cities.

Once again, we see the philosophy of "only government can satisfy our wants and our needs - we ourselves are victims of our small town."  Help us, oh big spenders - build us a building that will save our souls!

Blech.....

The result will be a better place to live, a higher quality of life and a town whose valuation will continue to be sustained/grow even in challenging economic times.

Only those that are financially set are concerned with increased valuations in uncertain times.  What about the rest of the residents?

Please realize we need to gather around and support this community center in the best interest of all the residents here in Moultonborough.

How about this for an idea - making the town more affordable for its present residents and others that wish to move to enjoy the splendor of which you speak?  Or, are your snobbish millions trying to lock the barn behind you and raise the bar with higher taxes?

John St. Amand
Moultonborough

(formerly of Taxachuesetts, where  taxes are so much higher, they just seem lower here)

 

Posted by Skip at 9:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, Greg has been keeping up his side of the bargain and I can finally start back in.  Let's recap:

Greg wrote this:

Belknap County Residents, We need your HELP!! 

...In fact the budget proposed by the County Commissioners is actually more conservative than the budget proposed by the County Convention. The Commissioners budget is almost $700,000 less than the budget being considered by the Convention

My Response was here: 

No, not even a partial success - for the taxpayers, anyways

Where my principle argument was:

Methinks Greg and I are going to be having "a discussion" as there needs to be a pointing out a thing or two to Greg.  So, let the blogging debate begin (next post)!

My Rebuttal was here:

Blogging Councilor - the rebuttal

...Root cause - expenditures EXCEEDING revenue.  County Convention: No problem!  Amp up the revenue, right?  Well, can government sell a service or a product to do that?  Er, no. When politicians set budgets that are more than expenditures, they simply raise taxes....

...Great - the State is giving money that they don't have to a County that shouldn't be spending it in the first place...

...True, overall expenditures increases were up 3.9%. The problem is the COST of that increase!  With the "new found revenue", it still is an increase of 10.425% to tax payers - still an inflation rate multiple of between 3 or 4 times!  This is the problem of just examining the budget of expenditure year over year.  Or the revenue year over year.  In governmental spending, one ALWAYS has to look at the COST to the taxpayer, year over year....

Well, Greg has had his answer to me done for a while:

My Response to the Rebuttal - Please follow closely 

my response to that after the jump

First off, I think that we BOTH have to keep these a bit a lot shorter.  However, given that, time to discuss!

He has clearly missed my point. There was a partial success in the meeting. I consider a partial success to be the reduction in revenue to be raised by property taxes from 13.047% to 10.417%. This was created by a direct effect of the $351,000 increase in the revenue projections. I wouldn’t call a decrease in the amount to be raised by property taxes a loss to the taxpayers. I wouldn’t call it a victory either. I would call it a partial success 

Hmm, a rise in the revenue PROJECTIONS?  Gee, ANYONE can play at that game!  Once again, I go back to basic economics outcomes for the taxpayer:  if that projection is too optimistic, it isn't worth the paper it was written on.  Great for the PR, but will it hold up in real life?

I'm not thinking so. We'll see - a success ONLY if it proves to actually happen.

Skip goes on to say:

SO, here's the upshot - the County was demanding 14.14% more in taxes in one year. Effectively, this is a inflation rate multiple of 4!  Why does government always rise much faster than inflation rate (and generally, far faster than most peoples' income)? Where is the fairness to the general taxpayer in that?

It is true that government, whether federal, state or local increases at a greater rate than what is normally seen. In Laconia we have enacted a Spending-Tax-Cap that ties the growth in government spending to, in simple terms the rate of inflation.

Skip, you are part of the Gilford Budget Committee that has the ability to influence the level of town spending. The residents of Gilford have the final say on approving spending, which may not be as effective as our tax cap but does help keep growth under control.

That's right - WE are residents and activists and politicians that CAN and WILL watch out for the regular taxpayer.  There is no reason that government should grow at rates far faster than peoples' incomes.

If not US, then who else will?  Really, why should the "way it is" be that way in the first place?  

Simple answer - because it is allowed to happen.  Allow it to happen for too many years, then it seems to be normal and demanding that it not be is treated as the radical idea.

When it should be the norm. 

Unfortunately in the world we live in there is very little control over the tax increases we, the taxpayers feel. With a representative form of government the local officials feel the heat and hear the complaints more frequently and often than our state and federal representatives do. 

Only because we, the taxpayers that have to shoulder the burden, have allowed it to happen.  We, the general public, have become passive and with popular culture, have risen to the nirvana of the short attention span and an amazing lack of historical perspective and context (to which I blame our educational system). 

He does raise a good point: 

As many of you may know I am originally from Arizona. There are some things I miss in Arizona and many I don’t. One of the things Arizonans have the power to do is offer a petition articles on the local, county or state ballot. These petitions have the same effect as a law passed by the legislative body. If we had the same option in New Hampshire we could find a way to force a Spending-Tax-Cap on our county and state officials. 

You have, in the City Charter, the tax cap which helps.  In the Towns, it has to rely on the personal responsibility of the Selectmen or BudComm members to voluntarily enforce such.  At the County level, this can be done by RSA. Time for either electing those with self-restraint or willing to enact an RSA.

If the revenue projections for the county are accurate then there should have been more of a reduction in expenses, but I will go into that later. 

Actually, not right at all!  Expense can always be decoupled from revenues - look at the mess we are in now because the got decoupled in the wrong direction? Your argument is nuts - more revenue means less expenses???  Huh???   Remember, there is revenue (which they admit is lagging), the expenses (which they can control but did not), and Taxpayer Cost. 

And this is my basic argument, what I see as a major flaw, in your discourse.  The Commissionors and the Representatives have the ability to decrease expenses so as to minimize the COST to the taxpayers.  They refused to make the hard decisions to do so.

Not only refused to make the hard decisions, but threw more gasoline on the fire by going higher than the original budget!

It is true that the Medicare/Medicaid money is an “account transfer” from one level to another.

And then there is more....regardless of the why and how and history, it is important to just realize it is there.

You using this line of reasoning lets the Reps off the hook by giving them an out, an excuse.  To me, it just "is".  And if one is trying to be frugal, you deal with the "is" as you can.  And when the expenditures outweigh the revenues, you just don't go and use the taxpayers as an ATM!

The first step in accountability of the Reps is to take away the excuses and the reliance of the argument of "it's the State's fault...unfunded mandates....lower reimbursements".  Fine, we don't like it, it's not fair, yada, yada, yada.  You cannot excuse the expense side because of lowered revenues.

According to Bud Daigneault the surplus is running out. I am not certain how much is left in the Surplus Fund but I would argue that this type of use should not be a regular occurrence. After all the County Convention that decides the County Budget is a part of the same group that decides the State Budget. Why aren’t they looking out for the tax payer more vigorously?

Hallalujah!  FINALLY, he's seen the light; the clouds have rays of sunshine; the bluebirds are singing! (ok, I'm over the top a tad).

Maybe we are not so far apart - this is the bulwark of my argument - why AREN'T they, and why are we not keeping their feet to the fire?

I believe the revenue projections were short to emphasize a point.

No, the "fix" came in when the gas got turned up by folks like you and I!  No outcry - no fix. 

The point deserved to be emphasized, but not at the expense of the people that vote. I also believe that, even with the increase in revenue projections, the County Commissioners and County Convention are still purposely short on the projections to try and keep emphasis on the point they are trying to make.

I disagree....I do not believe that revenue will equal the projections.  It will be shown that the Reps have made a move to cool off the bad PR they received - no more, but no less.
 

I do strongly believe that if these revised revenue projections are accurate then the budget expenses should be cut drastically.

Regardless of the revenue, the expenditures should have been slashed so as to meet the actual revenues.  What must I say to get you to realize that the TAXPAYER COST is what matters?

If things were all lovely and equal, and everything was within the inflation rate, I'd be a tad better. However, you continue to not grasp the COST of the expenditure - and it is not the revenues! 

The county made the projections look gloomier so the emphasis would be on the additional spending at the state level.  

Right.  The Reps did this deliberately to make themselves appear to be financial buffons, to accumulate all kinds of bad PR, and finally have people in the general public turn the hairy eyeball on them, and will again and again until this gets fixed?

The people at the State level do not elect them....we do.  I doubt this is a PR stunt to make the Dems in Concord look bad.  They did this on the bet that no one would notice and have it make THEM look bad.

They lost.  And as you said, it may bite them in November. 

And now, I'll go after your next post in the next couple of days.....

 

Posted by Skip at 9:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, he's branching out!  Normally, DCE does his work over at Weekend Pundit...but for doing more local things, he's following our example (GilfordGrok) and has set up a blog for commenting on more local stuff as Chan at One Voice In Gilford.  Since this is Town Meeting time here in NH, his topic is appropro: taxes!

It's Not The Lack Of Taxes, But The Excess Of Spending

For the most part Town Meetings are finished for 2008. There are still a few that either haven't been held yet or haven't finished yet due to lengthy debates that will require reconvening at a later date.

It appears the taxpayers have sent a message to their towns, and by extension, to their legislators in Concord that we cannot afford to keep raising taxes at a rate above inflation. The 17.5% increase in the state budget may have looked great on paper, but the Democrats who pushed for that increase didn't seem to care that the taxpayers in New Hampshire didn't want to pay for it, seeing it as nothing more than a way to steal even more hard earned money from their wallets yet getting nothing in return.

Quite a few towns, including my home town, held the line on spending, keeping the size of their budgets stable, if not cutting them. The voters of one town, Allenstown, defeated every spending warrant article on the town warrant. Unlike the so-called Fair Tax Coalition, a group promoting some kind of alternative to property taxes, i.e. broadbased taxes, these folks understood the key to keeping taxes in check, and specifically property taxes, is to control the spending. No amount of 'alternative' taxes will fix the rising property taxes if spending isn't held in check.

We'll be putting him on the blogrolls at both spots just as soon as I get some time!) 

 

 

Posted by Skip at 8:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Imagine my surprise when I flipped on NewsNine WMUR TV Sunday morning to have to watch reporting on the antiwar protesters gathered in Concord, and hear that there were no counterprotesters on the scene because, well, it's just not true. Sorry Newsnine, you really blew this one! Our friend Blue Star Mother Sue Peterson sent the following pics and notes:

Doug - Here are some of the pictures..as soon as I get the rest, I will send them to you.  FYI - The one with us behind the flag - shows Denise holding the boots - they are the ones that she picked up from the sidewalk - the sidewalk was lined again with the boots and the soldier's names attached.  We had 4 Gold Star Moms with us yesterday....Jeb Bradley...Grant Bosse....and several Blue Star Moms and a few vets...It was a great time - and I am so thankful for those that were there....

Blessings,

Sue 

This was the very last picture - so there were 8 people that had left...Also, the white tag that Lynn is holding is her son Matt Stanley's name - she took it off the boots and threw them out in the snow.
 
We need to help educate the people of NH as to what these peace people do...they line them with shoes to represent the dead Iraqis - and when I asked "you mean those killed by Saddam," they could not answer me... they just want to make our soldiers look like baby killers.

More pics:

 

Gold Star Mom Nathalie Healy

 

.

Jeb Bradley joins in support of the troops and their mission

.

.

.

Grant Bosse, Sue Peterson, and the rest of the Moms & supporters walk so that it won't be said that people didn't support our troops in the face of the antiwar peaceniks...

.

They're right... we must NEVER forget!

 

 

Posted by Doug at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Can you imagine the outcry and craziness we'd see if the ongoing race-baiting we see between the Democratic candidates was happening on the Republican side?

Who can forget Hillary's Billy Shaheen, on Obama...

"The Republicans are not going to give up without a fight ... and one of the things they're certainly going to jump on is his drug use," said Shaheen, the husband of former N.H. governor Jeanne Shaheen.

"It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'" Shaheen said. "There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It's hard to overcome."

Or Hillary's Geraldine Ferraro on Obama:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she continued. "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

And now, we get Obama's pastor. What a guy...

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda’s attacks because of its own terrorism.

“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation.

I just can't imagine how any of this is going to play well in the upcoming campaign. Time to pull up a chair, grab a popcorn, and crack open a beer. This might get interesting!

 

Posted by Doug at 7:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

                                                                

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                                        Hour 2

Pat was out this week - Doug and Skip talk with our guests and each other! 

Hour One

Ofer Nave moved to NH as a part of the Free State project discusses  what is needed to run and serve as a State Rep (a guide to what it's like to run for and be a state rep.)  The hope is that this will serve as an effective tool to recruit liberty minded people to run for office. Ofer will walk us through the process, which, once you learn the details, you discover really isn't as hard as you might imagine.

Gilford elections - results of the BudgetCommittee (Green, Stewart running as conservatives) win (along with Kevin Roy).  Kevin Hayes will be a good Selectmen, NGOs-which ones were defeated and which passed and the history of how it came to be such. Terry Stewart joins the discussion. Is the outside agency issue dead (or will petition warrants fan the flames)?  Bonus - discussion on NGOs

Evans Juris Firing - Terry, Doug and Skip discuss (kudos to Connie Grant, insubordination (?)  when Evans said on WEZS  that the Board would have to fire him.  Alice Boucher starts it  all on Candidates Night "attacking" John Goodhue.  Assent that the Town Administrator serves at the pleasure of the Selectmen - no less, no more.  Collaboration - not if you judge it by body language of Connie and Gus.  Right To Know - Ms. Boucher may be on the wrong side (they cannot call you, per RTK).  There is no "defying" Town Counsel - he works for them and not the other way around.  Who is being the divisive one now?

        Evans Juris "They will have to fire me"
 

Hour Two

Interview with Jeb Bradley - candidate for NH Congressional District 1.  Vets for Jeb - high quality endorsements.  Anti-war Code Pink in Berkley - time to remove federal monies for Berkley?  Dems want tax hikes. Flat Tax?

The baloney from the mis-named Granite State Fair Tax - what they leave out of their equation that fouls their argument - local control, other state tax "baskets".

Liz Mair - Now working as the Online Communications Director for the RNC - earmark balooza!  Reach out to bloggers and the online communciation.  Why John McCain will match up well against Hillary and Obama (they use and spend earmarks - McCain doesn't). Skip brings up Obama's $1 million earmark to the hospital his wife's works for (and her salary goes up $200,000).  Skip points out that Congress's earmarks of $17,000,000,000 is $224 per 4 person family.

Wrap up - Skip is blog debating The Blogging Councilor about the Belknap County budget.   Flat Stanley travels in NH - blogged at GraniteGrok.  More on the County spending, Manchester budget out of whack.
 

SchlubCam:

                    Break 1 - talking about Free Staters, finding candidates

                    Break 2 - Discussion on Bono of U2 and his thoughts on President Bush

                    Break 3 - Movies in general, creating a DVD from Wednesday's meeting, discussion
                                 on Evan Juris's firing.

                    Break 4 - More on a Political Bet lost.

                    Break 5 - More on Jeb

                    Break 6 - Skip likes Doug's pictures for the MTNP announcements,
                                 snippet of Evans Juris stating that the Gilford Selectboard will have to fire
                                 him to make him leave as Town Administrator

                    After the show - GOP message?  Why won't Republicans act in a manner of
                                traditional Republicans (less intrusive, more limited government) - they
                                win that way.
 

                 

Posted by Skip at 9:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Politically, California is often thought of as the home of Hollywood, Berkley, San Francisco and lots of other "different" places (think Venice Beach).  Shows like Bay Watch and bands like the Beach Boys have given rise to a certain "cache" in living there - sometimes "the American Dream".

Conservative? Nope, not these folks! Yet, there are Californian conservatives out there - after all, the one of the archtype political conservative came from California - Ronald Reagan.

One such group are these ladies:

 

 

These are ladies that are not to be trifled with - that cartoon is not there by accident!  They love this Country heart, soul, mind, and spirit and are bound and determined to see it through this century and onto the next no matter what by holding onto the truths and traditions that have made this country great.  Indomitable, indefatigable, and irascible.  We salute them (and watch out for their talons)!

I think the 'Grok should do this kind of thing more often. Let us know if you belong to, or know of, other local conservative groups that deserve a little applause!

Posted by Skip at 9:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Blogging from me has been light lately....just too much sloshing over the plate.

However, I have taken part in a MOST important project for one of TMEW's best friends (and mine),  Trouble!

My great niece, Emma, in the third grade, has asked us to take Flat Stanley along for a few weeks of adventure wherever we go.  This particular Flat Stanley hails from New Jersey where there has been a whopping 6 inches of snow all winter.  Currently, he is with us in New Hampshire.  To date he has been to the hematology/oncology department of Lakes Region General hospital (the nurses all flirted with Stanley).  He has also been down to "bob house row" in Meredith,  NH and the same day was "carried" to the top of a 5 foot snow pile near Lake Opeechee in Laconia, NH.  Friend to family and Flat Stanley, Skip Murphy was kind enough to keep Flat from flying free and further than Flat men ought to fly.  He was a bit cold but we are assured that friend Skip who braved the 5 foot snow piles and gusting winds, lakeside,  in sneakers and jeans kept Stanley from departing on an unescorted and unplanned flight.

The story of flat Stanley is ten years old and has served as a means of getting young readers excited about the notion of writing.  Those of us who are entrusted to entertain Stanley are requested to journal his adventures and most recently add any digital pictures or video to further document his adventures/in our hands, misadventures :) and return him to the child(unharmed) via the us mail.

It is fun to get folks involved with showing Flat a good time.

Hi Res pix after the jump!

Well, my intro to Flat Stanley was at Opechee Park in Laconia, NH.  We've had record breaking global warming snow fall this year, so we decided to let Flat see for himself.  Thus, after slow slog, up to the knee climb, we made it!

 

Well, even standing there trying to hold Stanley from flying away got to be tiring, so we decided to sit:

 

OK, I sat - Flat had plenty of energy! 

Remember - he had also made a short visit north to Meredith to visit the bob houses in Meredith Bay

 

Now, who was shuttling Flat around?  Our friend (and Auntie to Emma!).
 

Yup, Flat is doing the Quality Assurance gig to make sure that only the right amount of meds are being dispensed.  Ever ready, that Flat!

However, when it comes to dogs?  Well, the next three pix tell the story - great, perhaps a snack, and then ignominy!

 

 

 

 

 

Posted by Skip at 5:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Remember this?

Today, it's time to do it all over again!

The Blue and Gold Star Mothers of
New Hampshire

Gathering of Mothers Call to Arms

"… An eagle knows when a storm is approaching long before it breaks. The eagle will fly to some high spot and wait for the winds to come. When the storm hits, it sets its wings so that the wind will pick it up and lift it above the storm. While the storm rages below, the eagle is soaring above it." ~An unknown author~

Bring your flags! Join us as we walk around the State House in support of the Eagles in DC. 

At home for every man or woman who defends and ensures our liberty and protects the shores of America are the mothers who nurtured them into adulthood.  We are mostly the silent majority who just encourage and support our military sons and daughters.  We are extended by mothers whose blue stars turned gold when their son or daughter gave the ultimate sacrifice for the freedoms ALL Americans enjoy.  We are the Blue and Gold Star Mothers of NH.  Together we support our troops as they head towards Victory in the battles they encounter to protect the people and the borders of America.

On Saturday, March 15th, from 10:30am to 12:30pm we will assemble in front of the LOB with veterans, past, present and future who have served in the armed forces of these United States of America in support of the Americans Standing Up: CAll to Arms is to stand in solidarity with our armed forces in harm's way today. 

In the words of Lt. Col. Steve Russell, USA retired, we should make no apologies.  “What shall we say?  What more can we give to our nation than the type of sacrifice we have already given?  What words can we the soldiers use to convince Americans at home that the biggest mistakes being made in this war are on the home front, not the battlefront?  What will be the value of temporary civilian comforts and the illusion of national safety when a giant shadow of Islamic terrorism is casting itself onto our shores?  What will be the meaning of the rhetoric and the political debate when we sift through the rubble of a workplace, a shopping mall or public transit—digging out American bodies targeted for no other reason than because of our way of life and who we are as a people?  It is a scene that every soldier who has witnessed it abroad will fight with all his might to keep away—but we never thought that our own people would betray our efforts.”

We the Blue and Gold Star Mothers say YES to supporting our troops to Victory.

 

 

Posted by Doug at 7:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

As usual, this week's broadcast version of GraniteGrok and AnkleBitingPundits brings an array of items and guests for your consideration-- ALL STARTING AT 9AM! As always, thanks to the technical wizardry and analytical skills of Skip, if you are beyond the broadcast area of Newstalk 1490 WEMJ, simply click here for instructions on how to connect and listen on the Internet via livestream. (Podcasts here)

• Ofer Nave was born and raised in Los Angeles, and worked there as a software engineer for
  ten years before making the move to New Hampshire last fall as part of the Free State Project.  Now dedicated full time to achieving limited government in the Granite State, he has just finished helping the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance publish a guide to what it's like to run for and be a state rep.  The hope is that this will serve as an effective tool to recruit liberty minded people to run for office. Ofer will walk us through the process, which, once you learn the details, you discover really isn't as hard as you might imagine.

• All politics is local. We'll discuss the results of the local elections and what it means for the upcoming year. The silly anti-pledge warrant article passed in our town. Do people really want what the shadow group behind the effort promotes, or did the wording appeal to voters who didn't know the full story? And why is it so hard for public institutions to terminate its employees even when they have outlived their effectiveness? Our town will learn as the matter of the firing of the Town Administrator continues to unfold. We'll discuss our trip to the public hearing on the county budget on March 4th, where we witnessed one of the testiest (and clueless) public "servants" we have seen in a long time. Is this any way to run a government? 

• Jeb Bradley is looking to regain the House seat lost to Carol Shea Porter during the last Congressional election. He checks in to announce the support of a great number of prominent NH veterans and family members in his bid for the Republican nomination. We'll ask him what he thinks of the budget just passed by Congress.

• Our friend Liz Mair is now the Online Communications Director, eCampaign Division for the Republican National Committee. She'll drop by (well, by phone) to talk about earmarks with regards to candidates Clinton, Obama, and McCain.

• What about the prez race? First it was Billy Shaheen. Now Geraldine Ferarro. Will the last rogue that leaves the Hillary Clinton campaign please turn out the lights... Meanwhile, some of Obama's best friends are, you know, pastors.

Posted by Doug at 6:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Frequent readers of the 'Grok know that Doug and I believe in our Troops, are thankful for their sacrifice, and know that their mission is correct and necessary. 

We are also thankful to the Blue and Gold Star Mothers that we have met along our blogging way here at the 'Grok and on Meet The New Press.  We salute you all.

We also honor those that have completed their service and thank them for it. 

One gentleman (and his lovely wife) served his country well, and continues to do so now in civilian life in the Lakes Region fighting the good fight once again to make our democracy fairer for the residents of his town - we thank him doubley for his service!  Dr. Col Richard Juve, USMC (Ret.) passed the following along to me; please read it. 

My son served in Iraq in the USMC; this lady spoke for me and my son as well.

I was sitting alone in one of those loud, casual steak houses that you find all over the country. You know the type--a bucket of peanuts on every table, shells littering the floor, and a bunch of perky college kids racing around with long neck beers and sizzling platters.
 
Taking a sip of my iced tea, I studied the crowd over the rim of my glass. My gaze lingered on a group enjoying their meal. They wore no uniform to identify their branch of service, but they were definitely 'military' - clean shaven, cropped haircut, and that 'squared away' look that comes with pride.
 
Smiling sadly, I glanced across my table to the empty seat where my husband usually sat. It had only been a few months since we sat in this very booth, talking about his upcoming deployment to the Middle East That was when he made me promise to get a sitter for the kids, come back to this restaurant once a month and treat myself to a nice steak. In turn he would treasure the thought of me being here, thinking about him until he returned home.
 
I fingered the little flag pin I constantly wear and wondered where he was at this very moment. Was he safe and warm? Was his cold any better? Were my letters getting through to him?

As I pondered these thoughts, high pitched female voices from the next booth broke into my thoughts. 'I don't know what Bush is thinking about. Invading Iraq . You'd think that man would learn from his old man's mistakes. Good Lord. What an idiot! I can't believe he is even in office. You do know, he stole the election.'
 
I cut into my steak and tried to ignore them as they began an endless tirade running down our president.

I thought about the last night I spent with my husband, as he prepared to deploy. He had just returned from getting his smallpox and anthrax shots. The image of him standing in our kitchen packing his gas mask still gives me chills.
 
Once again the women's voices invaded my thoughts.
 
'It's all about oil, you know. Our soldiers will go in and rape and steal all the oil they can in the name of 'freedom'. Hmmm! I wonder how many innocent people they'll kill without giving it a thought. It's pure greed, you know.'
 
My chest tightened as I stared at my wedding ring. I could still see how handsome my husband looked in his 'mess dress' the day he slipped it on my finger I wondered what he was wearing now. Probably his desert uniform, affectionately dubbed 'coffee stains' with a heavy bulletproof vest over it.
 
'You know, we should just leave Iraq alone. I don't think they are hiding any weapons. In fact, I bet it's all a big act just to increase the president's popularity. That's all it is, padding the military budget at the expense of our social security and education. And, you know what else? We're just asking for another 9-11. I can't say when it happens again that we didn't deserve it.'
 
Their words brought to mind the war protesters I had watched gathering outside our base. Did no one even appreciate the sacrifice of brave men and women, who leave their homes and family to ensure our freedom? Do they even know what 'freedom' is?
 
I glanced at the table where the young men were sitting, and saw their courageous faces change. They had stopped eating and looked at each other dejectedly, listening to the women talking.
 
'Well, I, for one, think it's just deplorable to invade Iraq , and I am certainly sick of our tax dollars going to train professional baby-killers we call a military.'
 
Professional baby-killers. I thought about what a wonderful father my husband is, and of how long it would be before he would see our children again. 
 
That's it! Indignation rose up inside me. Normally reserved, pride in my husband gave me a brassy boldness I never realized I had. Tonight one voice will answer on behalf of our military, and let her pride in our troops be known.
 
Sliding out of my booth, I walked around to the adjoining booth and placed my hands flat on their table. Lowering myself to eye level with them, smiling I said, 'I couldn't help overhearing your conversation. You see, I'm sitting here trying to enjoy my dinner alone. And, do you know why? Because my husband, whom I love with all my heart, is halfway around the world defending your right to say rotten things about him.'
 
'Yes, you have the right to your opinion, and what you think is none of my business. However, what you say in public is something else, and I will not sit by and listen to you ridicule MY country, MY president, MY husband, and all the other fine American men and women who put their lives on the line, just so you can have the 'freedom' to complain. Freedom is an expensive commodity, ladies. Don't let your actions cheapen it.'
 
I must have been louder than I meant to be, because the manager came over to inquire if everything was all right
 
'Yes, thank you,' I replied.
 
Then, turning back to the women, I said, 'Enjoy the rest of your meal.'
 
As I returned to my booth applause broke out. I was embarrassed for making a scene, and went back to my half eaten steak. The women picked up their check and scurried away.
 
After finishing my meal, and while waiting for my check, the manager returned with a huge apple cobbler ala mode. 'Compliments of those soldiers,' he said. He also smiled and said the ladies tried to pay for my dinner, but that another couple had beaten them to it.     
 
When I asked who, the manager said they had already left, but that the gentleman was a veteran, and wanted to take care of the wife of 'one of our boys.'
 
With a lump in my throat, I gratefully turned to the soldiers and thanked them for the cobbler. Grinning from ear to ear, they came over and surrounded the booth.
 
'We just wanted to thank you, ma'am. You know we can't get into confrontations with civilians, so we appreciate what you did.'
 
As I drove home, for the first time since my husband's deployment, I didn't feel quite so alone. My heart was filled with the warmth of the other diners who stopped by my table, to relate how they, too, were proud of my husband, and would keep him in their prayers.
 
I knew their flags would fly a little higher the next day. Perhaps they would look for more tangible ways to show their pride in our country, and the military that protect her. And maybe, just maybe, the two women who were railing against our country would pause for a minute to appreciate all the freedom America offers, and the price it pays to maintain its freedom.
 
As for me, I have learned that one voice CAN make a difference.
 
Maybe the next time protesters gather outside the gates of the base where I live, I will proudly stand on the opposite side with a sign of my own. It will simply say, 'Thank You!'
 
To those who fought for our nation, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.
 
GOD BLESS AMERICA !
 
Please pray for God's protection of our troops and HIS wisdom for their commanders. Pass this on to as many as you think will respond.
 
'Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they protect us. Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. I ask this in the name of Jesus, our Lord and Savior.'
 
When you receive this, please stop for a moment and say a prayer for our ground, air and navy personnel in every area of the middle east.
 
There is nothing attached....
 
This can be very powerful.
 
Just send this to all the people in your address book.
 
Do not stop this prayer chain, please.... Of all the gifts you could give to anyone in the US Military, be it Air Force, Army, Navy, Marines or National Guard, prayer is the very best one....Amen.
 
GOD BLESS AMERICA 

Posted by Skip at 5:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Bumped and Updated:

This is unexcusable - perhaps THIS is why she resigned - or was she forced to resign?

This comes from an article from the Union Leader discussing Tom Tancredo, former Republican candidate for President as he visited BAE Systems as a campaign stop.  The below was left as a response to the article (the Union Leader allows comments on its articles):

Tancredo and his allies are xenophobics with strong ties to white supremacists groups. NH is going back to the times of segregation, and bringing back KKK.

- Representative Lily Mesa, Manchester

If indeed this was her feelings and her writing, there is absolutely no excuse for it. Given my conversations and emails with her, I am not surprised.

________________________________________________________________ 

For quite sometime, I was reporting about the attempt by Lily Mesa and Susie Nord (Democrats in the State House) to have HB404 passed here in NH.  This bill, if implemented, would have made it illegal for any law enforcement agent or official to ask anyone their immigration status.

Well, that bill failed.  I am happy to report that I am hearing that one of the legislators has decided to resign.  From talk show host, Micheal Graham at his blog "the natural truth":

Sad news for John McCain, Ted Kennedy and amnesty supporters across America: Rep. Lily Mesa has resigned from the New Hampshire state legislature.

According to some of her fellow legislators, she is resigning in part because her pro-amnesty, anti-enforcement bill was soundly defeated in the legislature. It would have banned any state or local resources from being used in any way to help enforce immigration laws. That proposal wasn't popular with the New Hampshire Union-Leader, or the people of New Hampshire.

Good.  and.  riddance.

HB404 was a lame idea to begin with, and they refused to even defend it in public.  If you are unwilling to defend your agendas in public, they deserve to be defeated.

Yippee!! 

(H/T: Mike P) 

Posted by Skip at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It's no secret that both Doug and I live in a small town here in NH, and recently the Town Administrator was fired by the Selectmen.  As in any small town, there's some strong differences of opinions (support the two Selectmen, support the fired T.A).  Thus, there's a bunch of spin going on (if you're interested, head on over to our local blog, GilfordGrok).

However, I NEVER would have looked at this firing from this perspective, what a seque:

GILFORD Town Administrator Evans Juris has filed a complaint with the selectmen alleging that one of them, Gus Benavides, has created a hostile work environment for Juris. That got us to thinking. Couldn't certain New Hampshire businesses file a simliar complaint against the Legislature?

New Hampshire has prided itself on its business-friendly climate for decades. The state's traditional hands-off approach to the economy has made ours the fastest-growing state in New England, both in economic activity and population.

But lately that is changing. Legislators are acting with increasing hostility to certain businesses, namely ones they don't like.

This year the House and Senate voted to shut down payday lenders by literally legislating away their ability to make a profit. The House considered, but has postponed, a bill that would put most, if not all, cigar bars out of business by creating a 60 percent cigar tax, making cigars sold here more expensive than those sold in neighboring states, including Massachusetts.

Gov. John Lynch has proposed forcing health insurers to offer an insurance plan that will contain a price cap so low that it will quickly become unprofitable for any insurer that offers it.

And Gov. Lynch wants New Hampshire to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which will increase electric rates for everyone, residents and businesses.

The question is not whether the state will go after more businesses, but what industry will it target next?

Businesses, of course, can't file a complaint against the Legislature for creating a hostile working environment. Instead, they just leave. Before legislators pass more laws hostile to business, they need to stop and consider how many industries they can chase out of the state before they tank the economy.

 

 

 

Posted by Skip at 7:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Regular readers know that we discuss health care related issues from time to time. Even though I believe that the winning the new world war is the first order of business for the president, I acknowledge that rising health-care costs are something almost as important for many people, including me. The dangers posed by a Democrat White House win in November are almost as stark in the health care "solutions" they present as they are in surrendering the war. Does anybody think a retreat from a socialistic health care system, once in place will be easy, or even doable at all? Once we nationalize some sizeable chunk of our economy, will other pieces be far behind?

This YouTube video shows Republican candidate John McCain discussing health care in America, how we should tackle the specific problem of chronic disease, options we should consider as we look to fund long-term problems, and market incentives to keep costs down. He even mentions walk-in care centers. Hopefully he means the type that we have long favored here at the 'Grok.

Once again, Senator McCain demostrates that when you consider the actual facts of what the candidates represent, and the specifics of their offerings, there is a huge difference between the candidates. McCain calls for "outcome-based treatment" controlled by families--NOT the government. I like that!

.

Posted by Doug at 10:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Jeb Bradley speaks to Belknap County GOP (GG file photo)

US House candidate Jeb Bradley's office has released an impressive listing of veterans announcing their support in the upcoming Republican primary. Of the list, I know Al Baldasaro, Natalie Healy, Bob Jones, and Susan Peterson rather well, and greatly respect their judgement. Obtaining the public support of the people named and those they influence undoubtedly represents a major step for Jeb as he seeks the nomination to take on Carol Shea Porter in November. [UPDATE: Jeb will join us Saturday morning on the radio division of the 'Grok, Meet the New Press]

“VETS FOR JEB” TEAM FORMED

Jeb Bradley Releases “First 50”List of Veteran Supporters for Jeb

 Wolfboro, NH – Jeb Bradley today released, with great pride, the first 50 members of his Vets for Jeb team. Comprised of 50 military veterans from across the New Hampshire, the team will advise Jeb on veteran related issues and assist him in spreading his message of support for needs of our veterans.  “It is with great honor I announce the first fifty members of my Veterans for Jeb team,” Bradley said. “We owe these men and women our most precious freedoms and they deserve in turn to be treated with honor and respect from our government. That is something I have always fought for and will continue to, when I am elected in November.”

 “Jeb worked to increase veterans healthcare funding while in Congress, and successfully fought to reject proposals to raise healthcare costs for retired military members and their families. He fought for us, now we’ll fight for him,” said Paul Chevalier, Past State Commander of New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars.

"Jeb always fought for veterans in New Hampshire. He worked to keep the emergency room at the Manchester VA Hospital open and provide veterans with a new outpatient clinic in Somersworth. Jeb didn't just talk about what he would do ---he made things happen" said Al Baldasaro a State Representative from Londonderry and a Marine.

Here is the full listing:

 

VETS FOR JEB TEAM

Paul Chevalier  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign WarsAl Baldasaro  ---  Retired United States Marine Corp

Earl Beale ---  Past State Commander New Hampshire American Legion

Bob Blais  ---  VA&MR New Hampshire American Legion

Peter Burdett  ---  Retired Commander United States Navy

Fran Byron  ---  Former Commander Danville Post 115 American Legion

John Calo  ---  Commander of New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Beth Castricone  ---  Former President New Hampshire Ladies Auxiliary Veterans of Foreign Wars

Joe Caouette  --- New Hampshire Veteran

Don Caron  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Harold Chamberlin  ---   Commander Post 18 American Legion Wolfeboro

Ingrid Crete  ---  Children and Youth Officer American Legion Post 27 Londonderry

Ginny Deady ---  New Hampshire Representative of WAVES National

Jack Deady  ---  Former President Military Intelligence Association of New England

Denise DeBlois  ---  Past State Commander of a New Hampshire Veteran Service Organization

Gary Desrosiers  ---  Detachment Commander Sons of American Legion

Don Duhamel  ---  Founder of Liberty House

Dale Finnemore  --- Service Officer for New Hampshire Disabled American Veterans

Ed Foley  ---  Commander Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 11557 Greater Conway

Jim Golden  ---  Commander Rochester Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1772

Bob Graham  ---  District 3 Commander Veterans of Foreign Wars

Natalie Healy  ---  Gold Star Mother

Bill Hooley  --- Past State Commander New Hampshire American Legion

Dana Hussey  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Larry Johnson  ---  Retired United States Air Force

Bob Jones  --- Vietnam Veteran

Ed Joyce  ---  Commander Veterans of Foreign War Post 9347 Manchester

Dave Kenney  ---  President Reserve Officers Association

Russ Lauriat  ---  Former  Commander Post 7015 Veterans of Foreign Wars  Goffstown

Dennis Lynch  ---  Jr. Vice Commander Marine Corp League Seacoast Detachment

Greg Lynch  ---  Commander Veterans of Foreign War Post 1088 Kingston

Bancroft McKittrick  ---  Colonel United States Marine Corp Retired

Jack Martin  ---  Chaplin American Legion Post 27 Londonderry

Brian Matchett  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Disabled American Veterans

Chuck Mitchell  ---  Former Commander Post 8179 Veterans of Foreign Wars Londonderry

Jackie Nevin  ---  President of Ladies Auxiliary of the New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Jack Neylon  ---  Former State Commander of a  New Hampshire Veteran Service Organization

Sandy Neylon  --- Former State President of a New Hampshire Veterans Service Organization

Frank  O’Neil   ---   Former State Commander New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Hank Page  ---  Marine Corps League Seacoast Detachment

Bob Patenaude  ---  Commandant Marine Corps League Lakes Region Detachment

Roland Patnode  --- Past State Commander New Hampshire Veterans Service Organization

Gene Pawlick  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Veterans of Foreign Wars

Susan Peterson  ---  Blue Star Mother

Tony Romano  ---  Former Commandant Marine Corps League

Don Smith ---  Commander Veterans of Foreign Wars Post in Raymond

Russ Tanguay ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Disabled American Veterans

Ken Warner  ---  Marine Corps League Lakes Region Detachment

Bob Wayss  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire Disabled American Veterans

George West  ---  Former State Commander New Hampshire American Legion

.

Posted by Doug at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The old man placed order for one hamburger, French fries and a drink.

He unwrapped the plain hamburger and carefully cut it in half, placing one half in front of his wife.

He then carefully counted out the French fries, dividing them into two piles and neatly placed one pile in front of his wife.

He took a sip of the drink, his wife took a sip and then set the cup down between them. As he began to eat his few bites of hamburger, the people around them were looking over and whispering.

Obviously they were thinking, 'That poor old couple - all they can afford is one meal for the two of them.'

As the man began to eat his fries a young man came to the table and politely offered to buy another meal for the old couple. The old man said they were just fine - they were used to sharing everything.

People closer to the table noticed the little old lady hadn't eaten a bite. She sat there watching her husband eat and occasionally taking turns sipping the drink.  

Again, the young man came over and begged them to let him buy another meal for them. This time the old woman said 'No, thank you, we are used to sharing everything.'

Finally, as the old man finished and was wiping his face neatly with the napkin, the young man again came over to the little old lady who had yet to eat a single bite of food and asked 'What is it you are waiting for?'

She answered - (Continued below)

(H/T: Sue)

'THE TEETH.'

Posted by Skip at 8:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Exit...

The story of the firing of the Town Administrator here in the 'Grok's hometown seems to have attracted statewide attention. With that in mind, I am posting the following piece with a bit of the backround information for those who might be interested. [Cross-posted at GilfordGrok. Other posts here and here. Excellent Laconia Daily Sun reporting by Michael Kitch here.]

As the fallout from the termination of Town Administrator Juris' employment continues, you should keep several things in mind...

The Town Administrator does, in fact work FOR the Selectmen, not the other way around. The official job description states that the Town Administrator

Serves, at the pleasure of the Board of Selectmen, as the chief administrative officer of the town. Responsible for carrying out the duties and responsibilities assigned by the Board of Selectmen.

It continues to provide that the Administrator

Establishes effective working relationships with all town boards, commissions, committees, and departments.

Last Friday, Town Administrator Juris, in a letter on official town stationary sent to the BOS and released to the media, declared

"a hostile work environment, along with discriminatory and threatening behavior by Selectman Gus Benavides."

After laying out a list of grievances, many of which appear to be rather petty and of the nature of what reasonable people would think "go with the territory," the Town Administrator's letter thus closed:

"In the event that the Board wants to resolve the matter, please let me know so that I can attend the meeting with counsel."

Translation: "Have your lawyers contact mine." As one can see, this type of situation completely flies in the face of the job duties listed above, and represents a fatal flaw in the relationship between the Administrator and the BOS. When two parties communicate via lawyers, there is no "effective working relationship."

Beyond that, the official job description states the Town Administrator

Coordinates and administers all Town legal matters. Assists Town Counsel with the collection and review of material for preparation in legal matters. Recommends, with the advice and consent of Town Counsel, legal strategies for approval by the Board of Selectmen.

As you can see, because the legal matter exists between the Administrator and the Board, the conflicts of interest are impossible to resolve. This effectively prevents the Administrator from fulfilling his duties to the Selectmen here, too, creating yet another fatal flaw in the relationship.

In this instance, the Board of Selectmen exercised the only option that made any sense when considering what was best for the town, which is their duty. Nobody could possibly claim that in the existing situation, fatally flawed as it was, anything positive could get accomplished. As a citizen and taxpayer, I don't want to see a situation like we had brewing fester and drag on. I pay taxes and expect them to be used to fulfill the duties required of the municipality by law. A nasty and poisoned relationship between our elected representatives and the person charged with operating the town in no way satisfies that mandate.

Section 15 of the Employment Agreement Between the Town of Gilford, NH and the Town Administrator holds

The Town shall defend, save harmless and indemnify the Town Administrator against any tort, professional liability claims, or demands or other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of performance of the duties as Town Administrator. The Town will compromise and settle any such claims or suit and pay the amount of any settlement or judgement...

In other words, we, the taxpayers of Gilford, are on the hook to pay the legal expenses of BOTH sides in this matter. How is that beneficial to Gilford?

Two of the three Selectmen, led by Connie Grant, demonstrated courage and leadership on this matter that is rare in today's political world-- risking intense criticism and blowback from supporters of a powerful, long-time town administrator and actually doing the right thing...

 

Posted by Doug at 3:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The following press release issued by the Manchester Republican Committee discusses a declining revenue problem in that city similar to what we have witnessed here in Belknap County. The difference between the approach of our Republicans here in addressing the problem and those in Manchester couldn't be any greater. As I've previously noted, in Belknap County, Democrats propose trimming budgets and Republicans thwart them. A Republican County Commissioner stated in a public meeting: “The problem with the budget is not spending. We just don’t have the revenue to support our expenses.” And then the Republicans, to a man (and woman) voted to raise taxes on everybody in the county. Perhaps they could take note of what their Manchester party brethren have to say about how to fix the problems caused by declining revenues:

Manchester Republicans Call on the Board of Alderman to join Mayor Guinta in Protecting the Taxpayers

With the City of Manchester starting off with $12.3 million less revenue going into this fiscal year, the Manchester Republican Committee is urging the Board of Mayor and Alderman to do what every family and business would do when faced with the same situation, cut spending.

"This is exactly the worst time to consider a tax increase," said John Castelot, Chairman of the MRC, "With the cost of health care, food and gasoline skyrocketing, the board of Alderman need to heed Mayor Guinta's warnings and work with him to find the necessary spending cuts."

In an election year move and in a attempt to one up Mayor Guinta's fiscally sound budget that included a tax cut, last year, Democrats on the BMA, led by Alderman-at-Large Mike Lopez, raided a one-time fund for $3.5 million.

That money, with the loss of $5 million in tuition money due to Bedford students leaving West High School, makes up the bulk of the shortfall.

The unwillingness of Democrats to make hard decisions last year set up the city for a tough financial position this year, according to Castelot.

"Thanks a lot, Mike," Castelot said, "After years of voting for every tax hike proposed by the Baines administration, you chose to feed your insatiable need to spend by playing  budgetary games with $3.5 million of the taxpayers money."

"The Alderman need to work with Mayor Guinta and do what business and taxpayers do every day when faced with financial challenges, and that's cut spending, "said Tammy Simmons, MRC Treasurer, "Rather than force people to give even more of their earnings or risk losing their homes, the Aldermen should take a hard look at the budget and focus on saving every possible penny."

Republicans support lower taxes, less regulations, personal liberty, and more efficient government. For more information about the Manchester Republican Committee, please visit www.manchestergop.com or call 879-0022.

 

Posted by Doug at 6:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Given this Notable Quote, another bon mot provided by a reader!

Here's another of his thoughts to ponder as well:

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."

Sounds like we hit that day a LONG time ago.

(H/T: Randy)
 

Posted by Skip at 4:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"The dignity of man is not shattered in a single blow, but slowly softened, bent, and eventually neutered. Men are seldom forced to act, but are constantly restrained from acting. Such power does not destroy outright, but prevents genuine existence. It does not tyrannize immediately, but it dampens, weakens, and ultimately suffocates, until the entire population is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid, uninspired animals, of which the government is shepherd."

                    - Alexis de Tocqueville

(H/T: John) 

Posted by Skip at 10:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

John McCain in Wolfeboro, NH (GG file photo)

 

Here is the latest inside assessment of the status of the McCain campign as distributed in a "internal memo" to campaign leadership:

INTERNAL MEMO

To:                 Campaign Leadership

From:              Rick Davis

Subject:           McCain Message

Date:                3/11/2008

John McCain is now the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party. It is critical, as we prepare to face off with whomever the Democrats select as their nominee, that we all follow John's lead and run a respectful campaign focused on the issues and values that are important to the American people.

Throughout the primary election we saw John McCain reject the type of politics that degrade our civics, and this will not change as he prepares to run head-to-head against the Democratic nominee.

John McCain will continue to run on his principles and will focus on the future of our country. The stakes could not be higher in this election, and John will contrast his vision for America with that of Senators Clinton and Obama. He will draw sharp contrasts: victory versus surrender to Islamic extremism; lower taxes and spending versus more big government; free-market solutions to health care versus costly mandates; and the appointment of strict constructionist judges versus those who legislate from the bench.

Overheated rhetoric and personal attacks on our opponents distract from the big differences between John McCain's vision for the future of our nation and the Democrats'. This campaign is about John McCain: his vision, leadership, experience, courage, service to his country and ability to lead as commander in chief from day one.

Throughout his life John McCain has held himself to the highest standards and he will continue to run a respectful campaign based on the issues. We expect that all supporters, surrogates and staff will hold themselves to similarly high standards when they are representing the campaign. To help guide you, please find talking points below.

This is an exciting time for our country and our Party. Thank you for your dedication and hard work. We face a great challenge this November: John is ready, and with your continued support I am confident we will succeed.

Thank you.

Posted by Doug at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Anybody that watches TV and follows politics at all knows that the Democratic candidates seemingly spend inordinate amounts of time campaigning in churches and would have to admit we don't see the same on the Republican side. While we generally associate faith and Christian values with conservatism, we just don't find Republicans as publicly mixing it with politics-- at least within houses of worship with cameras rolling.

As Catholics, we just don't do politics in Church. It's God's house, and of course, the purpose of Mass is to worship Him-- period. But that doesn't mean that people who are Catholics cannot still have an opinion when it comes to politics. In fact, we are encouraged to be active and involved-- we just don't bring it into our Churches. Instead, we are asked to seek out politicians who will best reflect our beliefs and values in line with the teachings of our faith.

Yesterday, the McCain campaign released the following report announcing he has won the support of many Catholics from across America. And why not? When you look at the core teachings of the Church regarding life, forgiveness, and respect for our fellow man, Senator McCain stands head and shoulders above the Democrats candidates who are, after all, representing "the Party of Death." I am glad that our religion is more low key when it comes to politics within the confines of our Church walls. I am glad that my pastor won't stand in front of the Church and tell us who to vote for-- that way there, it is up to US to venture forth into the world and make our own decisions using our best judgement. I am proud to call myself a Catholic, and I am proud that many of my fellow brothers and sisters have joined with me in publicly announcing support for John McCain.

ARLINGTON, VA -- Today over 100 prominent Catholics nationwide have come together to support John McCain for president. The National Catholics for McCain Committee, led by U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Former Governor Frank Keating (R-OK), is growing rapidly. The group is represented by elected officials, businessmen and women, grassroots organizers, students, and Catholic leaders from over two dozen states.

"John McCain has a common sense vision for America based on faith, freedom, and families," said Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), National Co-Chair of the National Catholics for McCain Committee. "Committed to the protection of innocent human life, he is a leader Catholics will be proud to support. John McCain knows from experience what it means when a society tramples on the truth of the value of the human person. He is committed to defending the dignity and value of every person, regardless of their status."

John McCain expressed his deep appreciation and stated, "I want to thank Catholic voters today, who have played a vital role in electing me as the Republican nominee for the presidency. I am humbled by the support of such a diverse group of Catholic leaders who are dedicated to the defense of traditional marriage, advocate for the protection of innocent human life, and share my vision for a stronger, safer and more prosperous America. I stand firmly with those Catholics who believe that human rights are natural rights for all people, in all places, and in all stages of life."

The National Catholics for McCain Committee is actively recruiting Catholics at the national, regional, state, local, and parish levels to help share John McCain's vision and pro-Catholic message. 

Here is the list of those officially signed on: 

Catholics For McCain Co-Chairs:

U.S. Senator Sam Brownback, Kansas
Former Governor Frank Keating, Oklahoma

Catholics For McCain National Leadership Committee:

Republican House Leader John Boehner, Ohio   
Former U.S. Senator Mike DeWine, Ohio           
Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Florida        
Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, Florida
Former U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig, Washington, DC
Representative Ray LaHood, Illinois      
Representative Dan Lungren, California 
U.S. Senator Mel Martinez, Florida
Representative Jean Schmidt, Ohio
Representative Pat Tiberi, Ohio

Catholics For McCain National Steering Committee:

David Adams, Florida, Retired Senior Foreign Service Officer    
Laurence Alvarado, Florida, Managing Director, Bearing Point & Contributor, InsideCatholic.com 
Hon. William Barr, Virginia, Former U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
David Barron, South Carolina, Former Advisor & Surrogate, Reagan for President           
Andresen Blom, Hawaii, Former Executive Director, Hawaii Right to Life 
Gerry Bradley, Indiana, Law Professor, University of Notre Dame School of Law
Helen Anne Bunn, California, Owner & Operator, Health Care Facilities
Frank Cannon, Virginia, Treasurer, Susan B. Anthony List & Former Campaign Manager, Bauer for President
Mary Cannon, Virginia, Speechwriter & Former Deputy Communications Director, Kemp for President
Ryan Carney, Virginia, Former Chairman, CUA Republicans & Former Finance Director, Brownback for President
Alan Carson, Georgia, President, Obor Digital
Joseph Cella, Virginia, Founder, National Catholic Prayer Breakfast
Theo Chalgren, Minnesota, Visual Media Producer
Linda Chavez, Virginia, Conservative Author & Syndicated Columnist
Denis Coleman, Florida, Former Chairman, Covenant House & Former General Counsel, Bermuda
Jim Corbett, South Carolina, Former State Director, Brownback for President
Lisa Correnti, Maryland, Grassroots Activist & Homemaker         
Timothy Costa, Rhode Island, Policy Advisor
Marjorie Dannenfelser, Virginia, President, Susan B. Anthony List
Martin Dannenfelser, Virginia, Former Vice President, Family Research Council
Shawn Denton, Florida, Catholic Outreach Coordinator in Broward County, McCain for President
Terry Denton, Florida, Catholic Outreach Coordinator in Broward County, McCain for President
Bob Destro, Washington, DC, Law Professor, Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law
Stephen Louis A. Dillard, Georgia, Attorney & Former Legal Policy Advisor, Huckabee for President
Bernard Dobranski, Michigan, Dean, Ave Maria School of Law
Aggie Dowd, New Hampshire, Political Activist
John Dowd, New Hampshire, Former State Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party & Coordinator, Catholics for Bush
Martin Duggan, Missouri, Television Host & Catholic Activist
John Eddy, Arkansas, Former National Victory Director, Republican National Committee
Tracy Eddy, Arkansas, Former Senior Staffer, the White House
Umberto Fedeli, Ohio, President & CEO, Fedeli Group
Ariel Fernandez, Florida, Catholic Outreach Coordinator in Miami-Dade County, McCain for President
James Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania, Former State Regional Coalition Chair, Catholics for Bush
Dorothy Fleming, Minnesota, Deputy Chair, Republican Party of Minnesota
Angela Flood, Virginia, Former Deputy Political Director, the White House
Robert P. George, New Jersey, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University
Martin Gillespie, New Jersey, Former Director of Catholic Outreach, Republican National Committee
Rob Gleason, Pennsylvania, Chairman, Republican Party of Pennsylvania
Frank Hanna, Georgia, CEO, Hanna Capital, LLC
Hon. Melissa Hart, Pennsylvania, Former Representative, US House & Candidate for Congress
Deal W. Hudson, Washington, DC, President, Morley Publishing Group
John J. Jakubczyk, Arizona, Former President, Arizona Right to Life                   
John M. Klink, California, Former Diplomat, Vatican
Christian Kotscher, Georgia, National Principal, IBM
Alfred A. Lagan, Massachusetts, Founder & Chairman, Congress Asset Management Company
Alyssa Lombardi, Virginia, Teacher & Pro-Life Activist
Connie Marshner, Virginia, Writer, Editor & Grassroots Leader
Kitty Martinez, Florida, Former Educator
Hon. Bob McDonnell, Virginia, Attorney General, Virginia
Edward McFadden, Virginia, Former Senior Advisor, Fred Thompson for President
Margaret Melady, Virginia, Former President, American University in Rome
Amb. Thomas Melady, Virginia, Former US Ambassador, Vatican           
Tom Monaghan, Florida, Catholic Philanthropist & Founder, Domino's Pizza & Ave Maria University         
Hon. Maureen Mooney, New Hampshire, State Representative (R-Merrimack) & Former State Director, Catholics for Bush 
Mario Murgado, Florida, President & CEO, Miami Automotive Retail, Inc. Brickell Motors
Dennis Myers, Florida, Broward County Republican Executive Committee
Chris Nolan, Maryland, President, Landbridge Equity, LLC
Catherine Nugent, Missouri, President, Willis Pendleton Inc.
Joe O'Farrell, Georgia, Catholic Activist & Fundraiser
Patrick O'Meara, Michigan, Founder, O'Meara Ferguson Kearns, Inc.
Hon. Brian Palmer, Michigan, State Representative (R-Romeo)
Dana Phillips, Iowa, Former Co-Chairman, Catholics for Brownback
William F. Plunkett, Jr., New York, Attorney
Alexandra Preate, New York, Principal, Capital HQ
George Prezioso, New York, Vice President, AWMA
John Pudner, Georgia, President, Concentric Direct
Robert Reilly, Virginia, Former Director, Voice of America
Maureen Roselli, New Jersey, Founding CEO & Former President, Catholic Alliance
Austin Ruse, Virginia, President, Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute
Cathy Ruse, Virginia, Former Chief Pro-Life Spokesman, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Paul G. Scolese, Virginia, Former Staff, Bush-Cheney 2000 Presidential Transition Office
Lauren Shea, Florida, Political Activist   
Timothy D. Shea, Florida, Real Estate Executive
Shawn Smeallie, Virginia, Partner, American Continental Group
Jack St. Martin, Colorado, Former Campaign Manager, Beauprez for Governor
John Stanton, Pennsylvania, Former Executive Director, Southeast Pennsylvania Pro-Life Union
Frank Stella, Michigan, Chairman & CEO, F.D. Stella Products Company
Hon. George W. Strake, Jr., Texas, Former Secretary of State, Texas & Former Chairman, Republican Party of Texas      
Warren Sweeney, New Jersey, Former Executive Director, National Right to Life Committee
Christina Valentine, Virginia, Former President, Franciscan University of Steubenville College Republicans
Rick Valentine, Virginia, Former Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Susan Valentine, Virginia, Vice President, Virginia Society for Human Life
Tim Von Dohlen, Texas, 2004 Delegate & Former Representative, Texas State House
Pat Von Dohlen, Texas, Pro-Life Activist
Robert Wasinger, Virginia, Former Campaign Manager, Brownback for President
John Willke, Ohio, President, Life Issues Institute, Inc.
Chuck Yob, Michigan, Republican National Committeeman, Michigan
Eugene J. Zurlo, South Carolina, Chairman, Zurlo Investment Trust & Former President, Catholic Radio Association

Catholic Students For McCain Leadership Committee:

Billy Valentine, Virginia, Chairman, Catholic Students for McCain, Franciscan University of Steubenville
Lauren Benning, Florida, Catholic Outreach Coordinator in Lee County, McCain for President, Duke University
Raymond M. Gennawey, III, California, Former Chairman, CUA Republicans, Catholic University of America
Danielle Huntley, Massachusetts, Former President, Students for Life of America, Boston College School of Law
Kilty Maher, Iowa, Ave Maria University
Matthew Rooney, New Jersey, Former Chairman, CUA Republicans, Rutgers Law School
Terry Schilling, Illinois, Student Body President, Franciscan University of Steubenville
Thomas Ternan, Texas, Franklin & Marshall College
Katie Wilcox, Michigan, Ave Maria Law School
Colm Willis, Oregon, Boston College

Posted by Doug at 8:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

[NOTE: This was originally posted on February 25th. We are bumping this back up to the top as a reminder for those who are participating in today's elections in towns across the Granite State not to be fooled by this thinly-veiled attempt at paving the way for broad-based taxes and the destruction of the New Hampshire Advantage.]

Our friend Jane Aitken of the Coalition of NH Taxpayers (CNHT) sends the following article in order to help Granite Grok readers further understand who's really behind the "anti-pledge" warrant articles appearing on some 88 towns here in NH. As it is an underhanded attempt to chip away at our New Hampshire Advantage, we are doing everything we can to expose this group for who they are and what they are trying to do to our beloved Granite State... 

Once again it's the time of year when NH residents will attend town meetings, school meetings, and deliberative sessions, to decide how  their tax dollars will be spent. They will make decisions about the education of their children.  Since we in NH cherish local control, I present to you some infiltrators to be wary of during these discussions.

There will likely be present operatives from a group by the name of "Granite State Fair Tax Coalition". They may be offering any number  of "resolutions" for approval in the form of citizens petitioned warrant articles.

These articles may contain resolutions calling for our candidates for  State Representative, State Senator, and Governor to reject the local  "Taxpayer Protection Pledge".

This is merely an attempt to demonize those taking the Pledge as well as an attack on the Pledge itself. Taking the Pledge simply means that fiscally responsible legislators promise to reject any broad-based new tax such as a sales or income tax. Along with the goal of getting candidates to reject the Pledge, the articles may even be amended to specifically state the consideration of an income or sales tax.

The reasoning behind this non-binding action seems purely psychological and intended to convince taxpayers that  somehow, a new broad-based tax will lower property taxes. However, freedom of speech dictates that one's right to take the Pledge cannot be legislated away. Candidates can and will continue to take the Pledge if they expect to be elected.

 

The argument against a state income tax is a strong one, shown in studies such as the Yankee Institute of Connecticut's "Fifteen Years of Folly" which proved that the added burden of a state income and sales tax made NO significant impact on the lowering of property taxes.

Accusing Pledge-takers of keeping taxes high, is an unproven foregone conclusion and an insult. GSFTC cannot produce ONE study that shows property taxes to have been lowered  as a result of an added sales or income tax.

Our last two governors took the Pledge as did many of our fiscally responsible local legislators. It is their promise to keep spending in control and keep education under local control. You can click here to view the pledge for yourself.

Finally, the group known as "Granite State Fair Tax Coalition" is NOT a bona-fide 'grassroots' group but a branch of a larger cabal of groups influenced by national and international outside interests, who are  themselves tax-exempt.  Because of who they are, they DO NOT belong in town meetings looking to pave the way for more taxation at the state level, even if this were an appropriate place to lobby for such taxes. You can explore GSFTC's list of supporting groups by clicking here. (The last link on that page should be this one)

The Pledge is offered each year by The Coalition of NH Taxpayers, a bona-fide grassroots user-supported NH-based taxpayer advocacy group, the largest of its kind.

If GSFTC or any of it's affiliates shows up at your meeting, they should be shown the door. If an article to dump the Pledge finds its way onto your ballot, it should be voted down.

Posted by Doug at 6:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Sunshine in those dark corners...

With the March 20th date for oral arguments at the NH Supreme Court in our Right to Know Law violation lawsuits filed against the Belknap County Convention fast approaching, I noted with great interest a NEW RTK lawsuit against county government here in the Granite State. Much like ours, involves a County Convention wishing to conduct business behind closed doors.  Will they never learn? Writing in the NH Union Leader, correspondent Lorna Colquhoun has the details:

A lawsuit threatens to stop work on the $38 million Grafton County House of Corrections.

The suit, filed under the state's Right-to-Know law by Grafton residents Robert Hull and John Babiarz, contends the vote to approve the jail project came after an illegal "caucus"... [snip]

The lawsuit requests an injunction, which would stop work on the jail. It was prompted by the county delegation meeting held Feb. 11, when the vote was taken on the new jail.

Oh that darned Right to Know Law! Why, without it, politicians could just get the job done as they see fit-- without having to bother with us pesky citizens! Anyway, much like what we've witnessed here in Belknap County as of late, the UL story reports

The proposal passed by one vote on the second try during a meeting that state Rep. Edmond Gionet, R-Lincoln, characterized as a "circus."

Here's how it all went down:

 

To pass, the jail proposal needed a two-thirds majority vote by the 26-member county delegation to pass. The first vote failed, 17-9, and following a 15- to 20-minute recess after that vote, a second try was made and it passed by 18-8.

At issue in Hull's and Babiarz's suit is that during that recess, "a quorum of the delegation assembled in a private area to discuss" the vote taken in the previous few minutes.

In minutes of the recessed meeting, according to court papers, "it is stated that during this recess, some members moved into a private room to caucus."

Enter the Right to Know Law:

The lawsuit contends members of the public were excluded from what it calls "the caucus meeting" and that there was no written notice posted for that meeting.

"Following the caucus meeting, (delegation Chairman Catherine Mullholland) called the recessed meeting back into order and a vote was taken on a motion" that led to passage of the new county jail.

Hull and Babiarz sought minutes of the caucus, but, according to the lawsuit, were told by Clough, "There are no minutes" for the caucus meeting.

Oops!

They are asking a judge to rule that the county violated the Right-to-Know law "as a consequence of conducting the caucus meeting without preparing and making available minutes of the meeting" and that an order should be issued enjoining the county commissioners from continuing with the plans for the jail.

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

Republicans 'destroying' Belknap County... (and themselves, in the process)

Fans of the various Superman incarnations might recall the minor character, Bizarro, failed clone of Superman. After being hit by a meteor, Bizarro’s “powers” were the reverse of Superman’s. Leaving Earth, the evil clone moved to a world known as “Htrae” with “Bizarro-Lois,” creating “Bizarro World.” According to the Wikipedia

In the Bizarro world, a cube-shaped planet known as ‘Htrae’ (Earth spelled backward), society is ruled by the Bizarro Code, which states that it is a crime to do anything well or to make anything perfect or beautiful. In one episode, for example, a salesman is doing a brisk trade selling ‘Bizarro bonds. Guaranteed to lose money for you.’

Simply put- it is a world where up is down and in is out and good is bad. Come with me as I pay a visit to “Bizarro World…”

Writing in a post at our local blog, GilfordGrok, I noted that here in the Granite State, it is the job of the County Convention-- comprised of the county’s delegation of NH house representatives-- to review and approve the county budget that is proposed to them by the members of the County Commission. The Convention has much the same power and function as a municipal budget committee, with one difference: Unlike a municipal budget committee’s decisions, which are subjected to one final layer of checks and balances-- the voters, who get the last word, the Convention’s vote is the ultimate and final authority. As our elected representatives, the Convention members form a purely republican (small “r”) form of government, in that we completely rely on them to act on our behalf. They are the eyes and ears of the taxpayers of the county. Let me repeat what I wrote last week at GilfordGrok: “Based upon my recent observations, they have failed us miserably.” After what I witnessed this past Tuesday night, I stand pat by that observation.

It is no secret that fiscal matters at all levels of government are facing extra scrutiny lately. With a slowing economy, and rising costs of energy and other necessary items of life, taxpayers are getting pinched, and are looking for relief wherever possible. In Laconia, the citizens have enacted a tax cap, vowing to live within their means. The practical result is that the city is now choosing how it spends its resources carefully, in some cases going without—much like any average family. Dittoes for neighboring Gilford, where the Selectmen, the School Board, and the Budget Committee have all worked to lighten the load on the taxpayers. Not so for the County. Over there, it’s “taxpayers be damned, business as usual.”

 

During the start of Tuesday’s hearing of the county budget, it was acknowledged that “certain events” caused the Convention to allow the public the chance to provide input and comment. Without going into the details as to why there even was this opportunity for the public, we all know that there has been considerable interest since the news broke regarding the hit about to be felt by the county’s hapless taxpayers. When the word spread, there was no doubt as to the concern felt by a great number of people. In fact, it was so great, that the entire Laconia City Council attended Tuesday’s public hearing, along with Gilford Selectman Connie Grant and three members of that town’s Municipal Budget Committee.

In normal circumstances, politicians and bureaucrats facing such consternation would at least pay some lip service to those applying pressure. Not so in the Bizarro World that is Belknap County. Despite pleas from taxpayers and officials calling attention to fiscal belt-tightening in their own towns and school systems, the Bizarro characters that are the county’s “leaders” and the head administrator would hear none of it. Instead of accepting the input with genuine interest and courtesy, they insulted and sniped at members of the public that dared speak their concerns.

At the meeting’s outset, one of the Convention members, Democrat Jane Wood asked whether they might revisit areas of the budget in order to consider some possible cuts. The chair of the Convention, Republican Steve Nedeau replied, “We won’t go down that slope.”  Following that, the Republicans blamed the fiscal woes facing the County on the Democrats in Concord, claiming it is they who are depriving the County of needed funds. Republican County Commissioner Daigneault followed this by profoundly noting, “The problem with the budget is not spending. We just don’t have the revenue to support our expenses.” Huh?

Republican faux-conservative Fran Wendleboe then piped up and added, “The Democrats laid this burden on the counties during a middle of the night deal. Our hands are tied.” They are? What about trimming some spending?  Oh no—not in Bizarro Belknap County. Nope. The only fix is to take more from the taxpayers.

At the end of the meeting, Representative Wood (Democrat) once again tried to cut something from the budget. Again the Republicans beat back this attempt at providing the taxpayers relief. Such is the lay of the land in Bizarro Belknap County: Democrats propose trimming budgets and Republicans thwart them. This follows the same pattern that has led me and a former Laconia mayor to a Supreme Court Right-to-Know lawsuit: The Republicans want closed-door meetings, and the Democrats disagree. Up is down. In is out. Black is white. I don’t know what to think anymore…

[Does anybody believe any of this helps Republicans regain majority status here in NH? I don't. What it shows is that we need a new batch of Republicans-- BADLY!]

 

Posted by Doug at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Along with the recent publicity involving the approval of a Gold Star Mothers' memorial statue in Manchester, there is, sadly, a bit of controversy. While it's unfortunate that this is the case, the points being made are worth consideration, and need to be aired. Our friend, NH Blue Star Mother Karen Thurston explains...

The NH Gold Star Mothers Memorial Association uses the name NH Gold Star Mothers; yet have no Gold Star Mothers on their committee. The NH Gold Star Mothers Organization is not part of nor should they be confused with the NH Gold Star Mothers Memorial Association. The misuse of such an honored name has caused a great deal of confusion around the state.

I have supported the idea and the effort of the group for the Gold Star Mother Statue. The work the committee has done should be commended. However they have not included those they are claiming to honor: the NH Gold Star Mothers. Many of the NH Gold Star Mothers have asked that the memorial be placed at the NH Veterans Cemetery.

The concerns that surrounded this project from the start have been given to the committee and they have been all but ignored. When the requests of the mothers were brought to the committee, one of the reasons given for placing the memorial statue in Stanton Park was the Gold Star Mothers Memorial represented the living and not the dead. The committee was asked about security and development of the park, which will be needed not only for "NH Gold Star Mothers Sunday", but also "National Gold Star Mothers Sunday", along with the "Blue to Gold" services held to honor these mothers. We were told that neither would be a concern. Really? How do we know this for sure?

The NH Gold Star Mothers have asked that the statue be placed at the NH Veterans Cemetery Memorial Walkway, where many have laid their children to rest. Here, a Mother will not witness anti war protests. The Veterans Cemetery Walkway is where she can visit her child in peace and not worry about being safe. The memorial statue will always be cared for and be protected and never have to be moved. The NH Blue Star Mothers in support of our sisters, knowing very well that we at anytime could join their ranks, support them in wanting the Memorial Statue placed at the NH Veterans Cemetery. 

This is a statue of honor and should be treated as such.

Karen Thurston
Blue Star Mothers of New Hampshire

Posted by Doug at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I was struck, once again, by the sage words of Professor Walter E. Williams over at Town Hall concerning Universal Healthcare (reminder, he was one of our first guests on Meet The New Press, ll bolded emphasis is mine.

Then read what yet another of our NH Legislators wants to do (after the jump).....sigh.... 

Liberty Versus Socialism

A fortnight ago, I wrote about Mississippi Legislature House Bill 282 that would have imposed fines or revoked licenses of food establishments that served obese people. Fortunately, the measure died in committee. State Rep. Ted Mayhall, one of the bill's sponsors, justified it by saying that he wanted to bring attention to the fact that "Obesity makes people more susceptible to diabetes, which puts a further strain on the state's financially-challenged Medicaid program."

His sentiments were expressed by quite a few readers who didn't necessarily support such a measure but opined that if a particular behavior or lifestyle imposed costs on others through tax-supported health care, the government had a right to intercede.

Similar justification was used for laws requiring helmets for motorcyclists and bicyclists. After all, if one exercises his liberty to ride without a helmet, and has an accident and becomes a vegetable, society has to bear the expense of taking care of him.

 I've said for years that if someone chooses to ride without a helmet, let them.  However, they had better have stickers all over the bike and helmet stating that they had insurance.  If not, the EMTs had the ability to just leave them by the side of the road. Dr. Williams is right - why should all of the citizenry, via their government, be forced to care for those participating in risky behavior? 

Note: my son rides....without a helmet.  I consider him an adult perfectly able to make his own, rational decisions.  And yes, I have informed him that if he dumps the bike and makes a vegetable of himself, expect no help from me....buy insurance! 

The fact that an obese person becomes ill, or a cyclist has an accident, and becomes a burden on taxpayers who must bear the expense of taking care of him, is not a problem of liberty. It's a problem of socialism where one person is forced to take care of another. There is no moral argument that justifies using the coercive powers of government to force one person to bear the expense of taking care of another. If that person is too resolute in his refusal to do so, what is the case for imposing fines, imprisonment or death?

[snip]

Forcing one person to bear the burden of health care costs for another is not only a moral question but a major threat to personal liberty. Think about all the behaviors and lifestyles that can lead to illness and increase the burden on taxpayers. A daily salt intake exceeding 6 grams can lead to hypertension. A high-fat diet and high alcohol intake can also lead to diabetes. A sedentary lifestyle can lead to several costly diseases such as hypertension, diabetes and heart failure.

He's right and all one has to do ...

...is look over at Britian where everyone pays for a socialistic healthcare system.  People have to pay, and now the System there is starting to restrict who gets what kinds of care based on their lifestyles and present conditions.

There are many other behaviors that lead to a greater health care burden, but my question is how much control over your life you are willing to give government in the name of reducing these costs? Would you want government to regulate how much salt you use? What about government deciding how much fat and alcohol you consume? There are immense beneficial health effects of a daily 30-minute aerobic exercise. Would you support government-mandated exercise?

You might argue that it's none of government's business how much fat, salt or alcohol a person consumes, even if it has adverse health care cost implications. I'd ask: Wouldn't the same reasoning apply to helmet laws and proposed obesity laws? Last year, The Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act was introduced in Congress. It's a measure to prevent schools from serving "junk foods" such as pizza, burgers and French fries. If the government protects children from "unhealthy" meals at school, would you want government to also protect them from unhealthy meals at home?

When I was 14 or 15 years old, smelling myself, I thought I could take over the house. My mother told me that as long as she was paying the bills, I was going to do what she said. That's great for a parent/child relationship, but do we want the same relationship between government and its citizens? 

Then I read this at the Concord Monitor and just cringed again.  Here all around us are the sobs of people screaming that healthcare insurance is too expensive.  I've said, over and over again, that one of the largest reasons that healthcare IS so expensive is not the doctors, the hospitals, the drugs, or the expensive equipment, it's

Government.

And here is yet one more sterling example:

Most of the cost of insurance can be directly attributable to government mandates.  Someone thinks that something is a good idea, or that something is unfair, or we have to help everyone, and then you hear that insurance has to pay for it.

Great, one more person's good idea and truly believes that WE all have to pay for that good idea.

I keep believing that the Republican Party is supposed to believe in less intrusive government.  Yet they keep sticking their hands in eveyone's wallets?

The mantra here in NH used to be "lower taxes is the result of lower spending" - cannot blame this one on the Dems can we?

And it should have stayed personal, too.  Look, I'm not the most svelte of folks, but if I want to lose weight, I have no intention of demanding that government take care of me via mandates to insurance companies.

Once again, we see people who can make law that just don't get real economics.  Mr. Clegg, the insurers are not going to ante up the extra cost.  No matter what he may say or think, this is effectively a tax, via a mandate to issue coverage, on those that purchase insurance here in NH.

I hope we all remember him the next time we pay our insurance benefits.

Remember all those folks that are "uninsured"?  No you know some of the reason why.... 

Posted by Skip at 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

                                                                

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

Hour 1 - Coming Soon!                                        Hour 2 - Coming Soon!

Note:  This was mostly a "local" broadcast in that MTNP had 4 of the 5 candidates for Gilford Selectman in studio.  However, agreeing with the late Congressman Tip O'Neal from MA, all politics is local.  Our names may be different, but the issues seem to be everywhere.  Listen in to what they have to say.

Note 2:  Since they all came into the studio, look below at the Schlubcam.  The only audio that is not present is our opening banter from this week and our interview with Roger Moran from FL.

 

Hour One

Opening Banter

Dennis Corrigan - candidate for Gilford Selectman

Kevin Hayes - candidate for Gilford Selectman

Roger Moran - why can't government ever tighten it's belt?

Hour Two

John Goodhue - candidate for Gilford Selectman

Dale "Chan" Eddy - candidate for Gilford Selectman

Discussion - SB2 and Granite State fair Tax (not fair; and will result in a broad based tax that will not be under the control of the local towns and cities)   Part 1   Part 2 

SchlubCam:

                    Dennis Corrigan - interview

                    Break - going from Dennis to Kevin

                    Kevin Hayes - interview

                    John Goodhue - interview

                    Break - Going from John to Chan

                    Dale "Chan" Eddy - interview

                    Doug, Skip, and Chan discuss SB2 and why the GSFT is way off base.
                       SB2 & Social Services         Break-more on Social Services   
                       GTFS discussion -Goodhue endorsement
 

Posted by Skip at 6:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Heh!  And I always thought that the driver's controls should be on the INSIDE!  Genius!

Vandals halt some hybrid buses in Hunters Point

The Municipal Railway will not use buses from its new hybrid fleet on one line that runs through the public housing projects in San Francisco's Hunters Point neighborhood until officials can stop troublemakers there from turning off the buses' power switches.

Yup, as I've always said, computers' attention span is only as long as its extension cord.  Seems to apply to buses too (hybrid = electric).  On/Off switches have the same effect. 

Muni drivers have reported over the last couple of weeks that people have been shutting down the power on their buses by flipping a switch that can be accessed easily through an unlocked panel on the outside of the bus.

When that happens, the drivers can't accelerate, they lose radio contact with dispatchers and the interior lights on the buses go out. The power loss does not affect the brakes.

And the genius who not only put the On/Off outside was who?  And the evaluation committee missed it, and the workers who maintain these puppies?

Now, I could start in on the "trouble-makers", but face it, it is kinda funny! 

"We see this as an isolated problem but one we certainly take seriously," Muni spokesman Judson True said Thursday.

Yeah, I'd say so.  Buses that don't move tend to get in the way.... 

Until locks are installed on the power boxes, True said the hybrid buses will not be used on the 54-Felton line.

Posted by Skip at 1:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hold onto your hats!

Starting Saturday morning at 9 am!

As usual, this week's broadcast version of GraniteGrok and AnkleBitingPundits brings an array of items and guests for your consideration-- ALL STARTING AT 9AM! As always, thanks to the technical wizardry and analytical skills of Skip, if you are beyond the broadcast area of Newstalk 1490 WEMJ, simply click here for instructions on how to connect and listen on the Internet via livestream. (Podcasts here)

This week is town meeting/election time for many towns in NH. Here in our little slice of Heaven that iis Central NH, we have an exciting and vibrant body politic-- especially in our little town of Gilford. Ever since we adopted SB2, things have only gotten better! Here's the lineup:

.

• Four of our five Selectmen candidates will stop by for a quick visit. While you might not live in our town, many of the issues and strategies at play are similar. Dennis Corrigan, John Goodhue, Kevin Hayes, and Dale "Chan" Eddy are all confirmed. This should be exciting.
• Roger F. Moran of Hobe Sound, FL wrote an excellent letter about reducing government spending rather than to raise taxes, which we printed in this post. Wrote Roger:

  A family living frugally can always tighten their belts a notch more during adverse times. There isn't a small business that, squeezed in a recession, cannot cut its overhead. There isn't an international conglomerate which, under pressure, cannot improve its bottom line.

  Only federal, state and local governments seem unable to perform this basic necessity.

See what I mean about all politics being local? What Roger writes is totally applicable here in NH, too.

• Once again, given that it's on the ballot in many towns here in Central NH, we'll talk about the benefits of adopting the Official Ballot (SB2) method of voting for local matters. While the opponents are crying to high Heaven, the fact remains that by accepting this change at town and school district meetings, NOTHING REALLY CHANGES except that the final decisions are made in the privacy of a booth with all day voting and the opportunity to vote absentee. Oh, and participation goes way up...

• The Granite State Fair Tax Coalition declined our offer to join us on the show to defend their "anti-taxpayer pledge" warrant article appearing on 88 town warrants this year here in the Granite State. As we have noted in prior postings, this is nothing more than a means to demonize our present form of property tax driven government funding system with a new, broad based tax, thus destroying the NH Advantage.

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... The best radio (in our humble opinions) anywhere...

 

Posted by Doug at 12:01 AM |