Michael Kitch has seemingly and openly assumed the mantle of “attack dog as he wrote a piece in the NH Business Review (who knew they supported Socialists?) in singing the praises of the new political hit PAC, “Citizens of Belknap.”
This innocuous-sounding group of Leftists, disaffected RINOs, and Gunstock Commissioners (current and prior) is concerned with ousting the current Belknap County Delegation. Why? These State Reps in Belknap County that have changed the makeup of the Gunstock Area Commission to be Conservative after ousting squishy Republicans AND started to ask HARD questions about what was going on with the GAC’s overwatch.
And not getting answers. Various Commissioners quit, tossed out (re: Rusty McLear overstayed his interim term), or became ineligible to serve (re; Brian Gallagher who sold his home in Belknap County). So with other plans getting deep sixed, like the new Master Plan, revenge (IMHO) and retribution is the tone of this George Soros-supported (along with Belknap County soulmates of his) and Progressive-led (Brian Beihl of Open Democracy) has swung into political action. When you decide to deride, call names, and denigrate good Conservatarian Reps who wanted answers to those hard questions, you draw attention.
So, before I get into what I started out writing about “Mr. Kitsch,” a bit of background. After all, I don’t play at being a “journalist hiding my biases” – I’m a full-blown Conservatarian. Kitsch, not so much at admitting his. A quick story, if I might, on that “history” with one example (there are many).
The problem for this former Laconia Daily Sun reporter, scuttled from that “august” entity when they decided to jettison their own reporters and replaced them with the reporters from the then just failed Laconia Citizen, is that his hatred for Conservatives & Libertarians is now in full view, again.
Sidenote: including Gail Ober, who was one of the best, honest, and straight shooting reporters I’ve ever come to know – Kitsch couldn’t hold a candle to her. She was an honest Democrat – we disagreed but we could discuss and respect each other. Kitch, not so much.
Again: add as many “agains” as you want because there are a lot of them.
He and I have had words in the past, most notably over his anger that I (while on Gilford’s Budget Committee) refused to raise taxes on Gilford residents to send to other cities in other States simply because “they were hurting”. Yes, his socialist wealth-redistribution side came out in a literal screaming match at Meredith’s Church Landing hotel parking lot after a meeting, and he was peeved that this lowly blogger kept pointing out:
WHY would I want to do that? Those “hurting people” keep voting in the same nitwits and crooks into positions of authority that create those bad policies (re: Detroit, LA, Chicago, Milwaukee, New Orleans – you know, all the Democrat-run places) and conditions. Over and over again. Let them suffer from the consequences of their votes!! WHY should I punish my constituents for their electoral failures?
But I’m a cold-hearted Conservatarian that refused to use his Power to punish people who were innocent and send their money to others who refused to look out for their own self-interest. You see, everyone HAS to be equal in his eyes. You know, having the communist mindset of Equity where everyone has exactly the same outcome in life (aka, Enforced Shared Misery). He was infamous for doing reports in the Sun on the financial inequities of various towns around Lake Winnipesaukee forever pointing out that it “wasn’t fair” that some towns had far more successful and affluent. No one could be richer than another and he was adamant over the years that those rich people didn’t deserve what they had earned. You know, that “Eat The Rich” that the old Occupy Wall Street movement (and now a “thing” over at the Eco-Socialist site “Treehugger”).
What he is going to have a problem, conscious-wise, is how he is NOW going to have to explain his cognitive dissonance of being the “attack dog” for old rich white guys (to use the language of the Left) even as he hates those “old rich white guys” (with examples being Gary Kiedaisch (a serially fired CEO), Rusty McLear (a Gunstock Commissioner “squatter”), Hayden McLaughlin (owner of Belknap Landscape) who lost their “political play toy” otherwise known as the Gunstock Area Commission. I’ve been writing about the GAC for a while so I’m not going to regurgitate that here.
So all of the above is because I think that Kitch will be back to this political fight with a knife. I, on the other hand, have this:
However, in the NHBR hit piece Kitch wrote (GraniteGrok Op-Ed writer “Conservative Lady” wrote about it, in part, here) that uses that tired, shopworn bugaboo phrase “Free Staters” and “Extremists” epithats that NH-based Democrats, Progressives, and out-right Socialists, he decided to take on one of the Belknap Delegation’s Conservative State Reps in commenting on Gregg Hough’s Letter to the Editor in the Daily Sun.
So now he’s factually 0-2 (standard fare for him, the NHBR piece listed Norm Silber as a member of the “Free State” movement; he’s not.) And now, in trying to do another hit, he’s wrong again.
So Gregg’s LtE is listed below but here’s the relevant part:
The most important pieces of our Constitution’s framework is undoubtedly the separation of powers, specifically three distinct branches of government that perform independent functions. Somehow, we have allowed entire segments of our population to be wholly ignorant about who and what we are. Many people assign powers to branches that they simply do not have or believe that catchy sound bites such as “separation of church and state” are in the Constitution when it is clearly not.
The PHRASE, Kitch, does not appear in the Constitution. It only appears in the 1802 “Danbury Letter” written by Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in Danbury, CT who were worried about the involvement of the Federal Government in their beliefs. In this, Hough is correct and YOU are wrong; you missed his point completely (or decided to twist it for partisan gain).
These lapses in basic knowledge whether accidentally or purposefully omitted, contribute exponentially to the divide we face as a nation. Strange how many seem to be proud of personal ancestry and where we come from, yet that same interest for our nation and its history has been brushed aside.
His point wasn’t about a discussion about “separation of Church and State” but that most people, especially in this age where public education has failed in teaching basic Civics including our foundational political philosophy (Kitch being a prime example) and Founding Documents, don’t know the meaning of our Declaration of Independence (the philosophy) and Constitution (our Federal government structure AND the strictures placed upon it). It wasn’t meant to be about religion vs government, just that most people have no clue what is and isn’t in those documents.
But Kitch went there anyways – any chance to discredit a Conservative even if he makes it clear he’s wrong at his attempt to do so. He decided to latch onto the “separation of Church and State” as if it was the main point of Hough’s Letter; it wasn’t. Pointing out that people like Kitch lack such knowledge WAS the point – and Kitch obliging gives him a great example of what he excoriated Hough over: “raises doubts about his capacity to comprehend that document”.
In this case, Kitch’s inability to read the document (Gregg’s Letter) for what it is instead of what Kitch wanted it to be.
And here’s Kitch’s THIRD problem, so I guess he’s really not 0 for 2 but 0 for 3:
Hough also writes “Enforcement of those laws is for the executive branch, the president.” Perhaps in Magaland, but in the real world there is the Department of Justice, as a number of Hough’s fellow Republican constitutional scholars may soon discover.
Sorry Kitch (“Magaland” – who apparently has Trump living rent-free in his head), I’ve never known either the Federal or any of the States’ Department of Justice’s be part of either the Legislative Branch or the Judiciary Branch. Only the Executive Branch. I was never been taught that it wasn’t in school, and in having read several constitutions (the US and NH ones several times over), I’ve never read it, either.
#FAIL.
I’ll leave that last bit with its nuance of that other State Reps will soon be in court – apparently, Kitch hasn’t read RSA 399, the GAC’s own bylaws, and the unredacted billing records that the rogue GAC Commissioner that amount to over $110,000, treating Gunstock as his own personal piggy bank (speaking of the DOJ). So, Kitch is not the bard and authority he believes himself to be.
I do ask, as he’s always attacked old rich guys in the past, why is he doing so now?
Oh, I know – he hates the idea that Government should EVER be limited in scope, cost, and intrusiveness. The current makeup of the Delegation is all about those three things in fidelity to our political start. Being a socialist, if not in name but certainly in outlook, that is both anathema and a real existential threat.
Those he’s protecting, however, only want their political toy box (Gunstock) back, so they’ve duped that aging scribe as well just like they did to NH State Senator Bob Guida
Here is Gregg’s piece in full (emphasis mine):
To The Daily Sun,
I heard someone use the phrase “Constitutionally illiterate” the other day and that got me to thinking. Trying to understand why people are so thoroughly and fundamentally mistaken on their understanding of the recent slew of Supreme Court decisions. Now I’m not addressing whether one is in favor or opposed to any decision, I am specifically addressing the lack of knowledge as to form and function of our government and Constitution.
The most important pieces of our Constitution’s framework is undoubtedly the separation of powers, specifically three distinct branches of government that perform independent functions. Somehow, we have allowed entire segments of our population to be wholly ignorant about who and what we are. Many people assign powers to branches that they simply do not have or believe that catchy sound bites such as “separation of church and state” are in the Constitution when it is clearly not.
These lapses in basic knowledge whether accidentally or purposefully omitted, contribute exponentially to the divide we face as a nation. Strange how many seem to be proud of personal ancestry and where we come from, yet that same interest for our nation and its history has been brushed aside.
Laws are only created by our bicameral Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives, period. All money bills must originate in the House. Enforcement of those laws are for the executive branch, the president. Which may not choose which laws to enforce but enforce them all. The judicial branch, this is to interpret the laws. Simply put, when a question arises as to a law’s constitutionality they are to decide in favor of the Constitution.
They all swear an oath not to you, or special interests, ideology, or pop culture. They swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution.
Rep. Gregg Hough
Kitch’s LtE in full (again, emphasis mine)
To The Daily Sun,
Rep. Gregg Hough is certainly correct to question how widely American citizens understand the Constitution that governs them. However, his command of English grammar, witnessed by his most recent letter in The Laconia Daily Sun, raises doubts about his capacity to comprehend that document.
For example, he asserts that “separation of church and state,” which he calls “a catchy sound bite,” has no place in the Constitution. In fact, the First Amendment begins “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” In other words, the Constitution expressly forbids the state from using its authority to sanction one religious denomination to the exclusion of all others as well as requires the state to allow citizens to worship — or not — as they wish.
Hough also writes “Enforcement of those laws are for the executive branch, the president.” Perhaps in Magaland, but in the real world there is the Department of Justice, as a number of Hough’s fellow Republican constitutional scholars may soon discover.
Michael Kitch
Penacook
