99-0

The smartest man in any room can’t seem to put his name on a budget anyone will vote for.  This years nightmare on Pennsylvania Avenue is worse than the last–it even has the distinction of being discarded with more no votes than last years budget nighmare.  99-0. The Senate torpedoed his last budget 97-0 in May 2011, … Read more

Ha! And you thought the only “costs” of Government of taxes, fees, and fines

LA Times in 2011: “The White House said those changes alone would eliminate more than 1.9 million annual hours of “redundant reporting requirements” for employers, saving more than $40 million a year in costs.” As if that really is a big solution.Most assuredly, the Leviathan (Government) has grown larger and larger; the 2012 version of … Read more

Regulations didn’t Stop MF Global or JPMorgan Losses

JP Morgan earned a $5.4 billion profit in the first quarter of 2012.  It is on course for making a multibillion profit in 2Q2012 and a $20 plus  billion profit for the year despite its recent $2 billion loss.  Businesses  take risks, and some risks do not work out.  Businesses are at risk daily  as they must win enough willing and able customers so companies can pay employees, taxes, fees, and other expenses.

This JPMorgan loss has again kicked off liberal demands for even more regulations on an already highly regulated industry.  How are regulators  supposed to prevent losses from business risks?  Businesses like banks are in the business of risking money.  To keep banks from taking risks, you must stop them from making loans.

Read more

Do Retired School Superintendents Ever Really Retire?

Starting in July of 2012, Mr. Irwin Sussman will begin his new job as the Superintendent of SAU#43 ( Croydon-Newport), a not so curious turn of events for a man who recently “retired” after 40 years working in public education in New York State.  (Last week, you may recall, we introduced you to Robert Sullivan.  He retired as the Super in Middleboro MA, and is collecting $70-80K from the State of Massachusetts, while currently running SAU#21 in New Hampshire.)

Mr. Sussman was a teacher, school principal, and finally a superintendent, working in Lake Luzerne NY, when he “felt it was time” to retire…

After two decades at the Hadley-Luzerne Central School District, and the last eight years as the superintendent, Irwin Sussman told the board last week he will retire at the end of the school year.

Sussman, who turns 64 next month, will work his last day on June 30. His career in education spans 40 years.
“I feel that it’s that time,” said Sussman, who was the high school principal for about 11 years before he became the superintendent in January 2003.
Wait.  Didn’t I just say he was starting a new job in Croydon-Newport this July?

What and who are the neocons, really?

Me in stern rebuke mode

So I got into a little contretemps online the other day about “neocons” when someone suggested that I was one, or at least a supporter of one in saying Rep. Allen West of Florida would make an interesting choice for GOP vice president. In response I went off on a bit of a historical rant, explaining who the neocons (more accurately “Neo-Conservatives,” as they were originally known) are, and where they came from (the moniker today is usually just used as an epithet, with no historical background; kind of a substitute for “war monger”). My rant apparently served some purpose, as some people have emailed me and said “thanks, I never was clear before on exactly who or what the neocons were.” Then Skip saw it and said “run it, run it!” So, okay, here’s a heavily edited version of what I said:

Read more

Obama – really pandering

I think this, by Rameriz, says it better than this earlier one; this requires no “evolvement” I guess it is true, what they say about some politicians…. (H/T: Hot Air)

GrokTV Special Interview: Rep. John Hikel for NH Senate – Question 10 – Contrast yourself with the incumbent, Senator Lou D’Allesandro?

And the last question in our series of spotlighting John Hikel – If current NH State Senator Lou D’Allesandro is your opponent in the General election, how would you contrast yourself with him? Previous Questions: Question 1– Has it been everything you thought in the House?  glad you put the time in?  Best part of … Read more

HB 1704 – Republicans doing the dirty work by resurrecting HassanSpeech? Part 2

OK, Part 1 is here – which simply pulled out a couple of nuggets from the proposed HB 1704 as found at  NH.GOV. While there was enough uproar to have the NH Senate table it last week, it is supposedly coming back from the dead.  I have already made the pitch that the bill needs to be amended so that donors / contributors / supporters no longer be listed.  The reason for that as the Progressives have pushed politics into ever more parts of Society at large (instead of keeping it simply in the Governmental / Political sphere), they are coming up against The Law of Diminishing Returns which states that the next incremental “gain” for them (which I consider a loss when compared to traditional Western Liberalism / Constitutionalism) costs more and requires more.  Thus, the new tactic now in wide deploy of finding and deliberately creating damage to their political opposition; no, not just in the political realm but in and to their personal lives and families.  Their scorched earth mentality is to so punish ordinary citizens (often, whose only “political crime” is to defend traditional American values) that these folks will either remain silent or destitute on the street (after all, they are just following Obama’s lead in intending to bankrupt the coal industry and from EPA Regional Administrator whose “leadership style concerning energy companies was to “crucify the first five to pacify the rest” and by that, silence dissent.

I have to admit, the person that titled this amendment to HB 1704 is out to:

  • Protect the Political Class (and yes, Establishment Republicans are certainly often part of this Class)
  • Silence the opposition to their rule

I hate to have to keep repeating it, but when our Political Class is either seemingly incapable of remembering this or willfully wish to disregard it, I feel like I have to be an elementary school teacher and repeat, repeat, and repeat some more:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, here be the beginning of the fisking of the “Protect the Politicans’ Ass Amendment” (full text later in this post).

Read more

Adoption “Advocates” Have No Sense of Humor?

In the new Avengers movie, Thor is defending his brother Loki–the arch villain in the film–when he is reminded by Black Widow that Loki has killed 80 people in two days.  Thor replies, “he’s adopted.” I laughed.  The theater laughed.  It was funny. But not to Mara Parker from Trinidad, California.  She was offended and … Read more

“Hope…We Don’t Get Caught?”

No time like a famous fundraiser to revisit reality. The 2008 Hope poster, of Obama…” “‘… the artist who created the poster, Shepard Fairey, used another photograph of Obama but said he relied on the Obama-Clooney picture to avoid a copyright infringement case with The Associated Press. He pleaded guilty in February to criminal contempt … Read more

Op-Ed by Carolyn McKinney (Chair, RLCNH) “The Legislature must reestablish its place above the courts”

The Legislature must reestablish its place above the courts
By Carolyn McKinney, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire.

While many in Concord are clamoring over language for an educational-funding constitutional amendment (CACR 12), what’s being lost in the final debate of the 2011-2012 session is a constitutional amendment proposal far more important to the people of New Hampshire as they work to regain control of their government.

CACR 26, a constitutional amendment proposal that would remove the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court’s rule-making authority by repealing Part 2, Article 73-a of the constitution, is probably the most important effort still up for consideration this year. By passing CACR 26 and repealing Article 73-a, the Legislature, which is directly elected by the people each biennium, would regain sole authority to write the laws, rules and general policies of the state as our founders intended.

Since 1978, when Article 73-a was adopted under a description of the measure that called it a “housekeeping effort,” the language has given the Supreme Court the power to write court rules that have “the force and effect of law.” This language has severely upset the balance of powers in government to the benefit of the unelected five-member Supreme Court. Since 1978, the court has been using the language of Article 73-a to order the Legislature and the people of this state around, in effect creating the likes of an old-world oligarchy.

Making this analogy far too real is the language in Article 73-a that says the Chief Justice of the N.H. Supreme Court is “the administrative head of all the courts.” Because the Legislature is known in the Constitution as the “General Court,” some have interpreted Article 73-a as a constitutional change that gives the Supreme Court and the other courts it controls unrestrained authority over the Legislature, and by extension, the people. Such an understanding is intolerable in a free Constitutional Republic and it is also inconsistent with the rest of the N.H. Constitution, which makes CACR 26 that much more important to pass.

The court originally advocated for Article 73-a as a way to control the internal procedures of the courtroom, but it has since used the language to go much further than that.

Read more

HB 1704 – Republicans doing the dirty work by resurrecting HassanSpeech? Part 1

Free Speech Flag

Steve has written about this already, and I did as well, but in the time that the NH Senate decided table the bill last week, word is (Jeb Bradley from the Senate floor, from what I’m told) that this bill is going to be brought up AGAIN an voted upon on Wednesday.  Why are we bringing this up?  Once again, simple words that should be taken literally by ALL politicians are these words by the Founders:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of Speech; and the type of Speech with which they were most concerned with was Political Speech, which this bill addresses and not in a flattering way – in fact, in a really BAD way.  Political Speech – that category of speaking (be it audio, written, video, or other) that criticizes or upholds the actions of the Government pertaining to the issues of the day.  They KNEW that this was a pillar holding up our new country – putting any strictures on it in the political realm would be tantamount to opening the door to bad cronyistic government at best and tyranny at worst. And if the Amendments that I know about, if some of the wording that has already made it into the bill stays, I have two questions for the Senate Republicans:

Yo, chuckleheads!  What part of “abridging the freedom of speech” do you not get?  And WHY, in this time where many of you were put into office by folks who, more and more are Constitutionally minded, you think that your hides are more valuable than our ability to speak our minds freely to rip your hides to shreds (having earned such treatment or not) and therefore, wish to act contrary to that Constitutional philosophy??

In a lot of ways, what the Republicans are about to do is pass the hated HassanSpeech simply because THEY don’t want to be criticized by others.  Simpletons all – you all put yourselves out there voluntarily, and if what you think that the “incoming” is bad now, go read your political history again and see the stuff that was passed around in the late 1700s and early 1800s for electioneering.  Whether you think it “civil” or not is not the point and to be blunt, should matter not a whit.  Anyone should be able to say what ever they want in the political sphere (calling for violence and the like is obviously not in the political realm and remains defenseless and vile). I maintain that the real damage is NOT allowing politicians to pass laws to protect themselves but that this law will codify bullying of private citizens by forcing those engaging in political speech to list their Donor records.

Either reason is enough to kill this bill off as soon as possible (although Sean Doherty is right in trying to clarify how much can be collected for races – except I would raise the amounts much higher).  That said, let’s first start with identifying the bad parts of the bill as shown at NH.GOV as well as the three amendments that I know of are bad for political speech.  Also, there are parts of the current RSA that are NOT amended – and our Chuckleheads should be brought to account for not reviewing those given the current political retributions now taking place across the country (and, to be blunt, by the Obama campaign’s example).

Subsequent posts will fisk the amendments, which are FAR, FAR worse than what is listed below

Read more

Celebrate Mother’s Day With the Gift of Abortion

It’s still Mother’s day so you’ve still got time to take some gift advice from Democrat US Senator Kirstin Gillibrand; “This Mother’s Day, I can’t think of a better way to honor all the mothers in the country — past and present — than with a contribution to EMILY’s List,” Gillibrand writes. “They’re the ones … Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXing