As I was reading the Rockingham News yesterday I came across this letter to the editor and I realized how clueless some people really are. I also realized that this could be a growing trend in New Hampshire. I hope I am wrong, but I fear the worst is yet to come.
The letter to the editor that I am about to quote shows a total lack of understanding of the constitution, in this case the Maine and New Hampshire constitutions, and a total disdain for men in general. Or it could be a disdain for the constitution and a lack of understanding of men. Either way it sums up this writer perfectly.
The letter to the editor that I am now going to quote is about the second amendment. The letter starts:
So continues the pointless gun debate, since one side is mired in the desire to protect their image, and the other staunchly protective of the victims, both human and animal, of gun violence.
Gun owners are just protecting their image while opponents protect the victims, humans and animal according to this writer. Apparently protecting your family is not worth anything to this woman and we will read her thoughts on that idea later. She then quote directly from the New Hampshire and Maine constitutions and what is written there about the right to keep and bear arms.
“New Hampshire Constitution – [Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.”
Maine Constitution – Section 16. To keep and bear arms. Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned. (By a bunch of Redcoats at their door).
She then throws a disclaimer on the end of the Maine constitution’s section on the right to bear arms that this was intended for the Redcoats.
Both these excerpts were written when the country was under siege. There was nothing in the minds of the newly hatched patriots other than affording farmers and citizens the means of defending themselves with more than pitchforks and fence posts. Certainly these brave words in the face of oppression were not meant merely to increase the membership dues of the National Rifle Association.
Historically she is incorrect, the New Hampshire constitution was ratified in 1788 while the Maine constitution was not ratified until 1819. The bill of rights was written in 1789 and ratified in 1791. The Revolutionary war ended in 1783. America was no longer under siege by the Redcoats.
A well regulated militia being necessary to being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That sentence is cut and dry, case closed. As is the sentence in the New Hampshire and Maine constitutions.
Look at what the New Hampshire constitution says; All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.” That cannot be misinterpreted, unless it is done willfully. ALL people have the right to defend themselves, their family, even their property in New Hampshire.
Maine’s constitution is even more straight forward and less prone to anything other than willful misinterpretation as it says the right to keep and bear arms shall never even be questioned. Yet here she is, questioning.
She goes on to state that men only carry guns to make up for their small dicks. Well, not in those words but the point was made. And what does she think about people who want to protect their family from the increasing violence we see in the nation every year?
May we see a list of names of people who have actually shot domestic intruders or carjackers as opposed to gang drive-by shooters? The majority of NRA members are much more familiar with hanging around woods at dawn with a six pack handy, ready to shoot hot lead into defenseless, petrified deer and birds than they are with home defense.
She isn’t buying any of it. She is blaming guns for drive by shootings instead of the people who have chosen this lifestyle. She wants to take guns away from law abiding citizens to stop drive by shootings? This is nothing but misplaced guilt. Instead of blaming the shooters for their actions she is blaming the constitution for the people who have illegally obtained guns. Banning guns from law abiding citizens will not curb criminal activity, it will encourage it.
This is how she ends her article:
Those constituents who interpret the Constitution relative to its time period, not to the needs and declarations of those interested only in image and ego.
Basically she is saying the constitution is dated, it is old news and irrelevant. Times have changed and so have we. She wants people who are elected to understand that the constitution is no longer valid when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. And she is back on the whole masculinity thing also.
This woman just wants to throw away the parts of the constitution that she doesn’t agree with and this is a scary thought. She is using flawed historical perspective to make this argument. Wouldn’t the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press have been adopted while America was under siege as she put it? Wasn’t this a protection also to protect against the Redcoats? (Assuming as she did that the Redcoats were still attacking us long after the war was over.)
This writer has an issue with the second amendment so much so that she wants to say the right to keep and bear arms has no place in today’s life. She is even willing to say times have changed to make her argument. She is willing to say the constitution is outdated because she hates guns. She hates men also if you couldn’t tell.
If the constitution is so outdated on this issue wouldn’t it be outdated altogether? Why stop at the second amendment? Let’s just throw the whole thing out, it’s old anyway. It’s time for a new one.
Today was the last day to file if a person decided to run for office in New Hampshire. No more Republicans filed so our nominee is Joe Kenney. Joe Kenney agreed to a voluntary campaign spending cap of $1.2 million and he challenged our liberal spend-aholic governor to do the same. He refused. Big fucking surprise there. Governor Lynch has no problem spending money as we have learned the hard way in New Hampshire. If he had agreed to an actual spending cap it would have been the first fiscally responsible thing this man has done since becoming governor.
Here is what Joe Kenney said about signing the speding cap pledge:
“I want to make this about people, not about money,” Kenney said. “By taking the spending limit cap on my campaign I am also illustrating what I would do as governor. I will implement real spending limits in our state budget as well.”
Governor Lynch on the other hand would rather raise and spend money than make the candidacy about people. Joe Kenney went on to attack Governor Lynch for his miserable spending record:
He attacked Lynch for lack of fiscal discipline, referring to him as a multi-millionaire several times. He said he has hurt the state with increases in taxes and fees, and for signing a two-year budget that increased spending by $500 million. He also criticized introduction last week of a $90 million borrowing bill that Democrats passed without any public hearing.
“We need to get the reins and a hold on the New Hampshire budget,” Kenney said. “We need to keep New Hampshire, New Hampshire,”
To which the teflon governor replied:
“We will continue to be fiscally responsive but at same time be sure we are addressing the needs of our most vulnerable citizens,”
He still tries to claim he is fiscally responsible. I am getting sick and tired of this man playing me and all New Hampshire residents as fools. How fucking stupid does he think we are? Fiscally responsible, what a joke. This man is a fool. Or rather, he is playing us for fools.
Here is a little more information on Joe Kenney:
“Someone has got to take on John Lynch and I can’t think of any other better person than a U.S. Marine who grew up in this state,” he said. “I learned long ago that no one is unbeatable.”
Kenney, a legislator for 14 years including the last six in the Senate, is a U.S. Marine Corps Reserve lieutenant colonel who has been called up twice since the war in Iraq began. He is a 1984 graduate of the University of New Hampshire.
He pledged to veto any sales or income tax, and has signed a pledge to keep state spending within the rate of regional inflation.
He said he will cut spending and improve government efficiency, reduce energy costs by blocking the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, boost job growth and business recruitment, and push for a full-service hospital for veterans.
John Lynch has also pledged to veto a sales or income tax, but he knows with a Democrat majority in the state house and senate his veto will be overturned and he will get what he truly wants, a sales or income tax. Maybe both. And in typical John Lynch fashion, his name won’t technically be attached to it. The teflon governor strikes again.
Information from this article was used in this post.
On days like today it is hard to sit down and type. On days like today my heart really isn’t in it, but I am going to try. I have no choice, I feel as though I must type, because days like today are the most important days to type. So here goes.
Today is the day that America lost forever the ability to ever defend herself again. The supreme court has ruled in favor of the enemy combatants held at GITMO, they have ruled that the enemy is entitled to the rights of Americans citizens to a civilian trial.
Somehow the supreme court has decided that not only does the UNITED STATES constitution apply to people who are not citizens (I’m not talking about resident aliens), but is also applies to our enemies. People who were captured on the battlefield fighting against us are now entitled to a trial in American courts. This is unprecedented.
Justice Anthony Kennedy writing for the majority said, “The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.” Fine, nothing wrong with that, but we aren’t talking about Americans here, we are talking about people who are fighting against us.
Writing for the minority decision Justice Antonin Scalia said “the decision will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.”
Here is the problem, this will affect any future confrontation that America may need to engage in in the future.
And in a truly stunning turn of events Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the 9/11 mastermind may actually benefit from this decision. He was facing a military tribunal now he may have the right to a civilian trial on American soil. Funny how the man who planned the murders of three thousand Americans on September 11th because he hates America suddenly adheres to the American justice system when it benefits this mother fucker.
The supreme court feels that the rights of the enemy are more important than the rights of you and I. And the Democrats agreed and cheered the decision. I just don’t have anything else to say about this. Here are the traitors who gave constitutional rights to the mass murdering pieces of shit; Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, Anthony Kennedy, and John Paul Stevens. The usual suspects. While those in the minority were Chief Justice John Roberts, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
But on a side note what is almost as disappointing about this is the fact that I thought we had turned a corner with the appointments of Alito and Roberts to the bench, but we still seem to be in the minority. After a few great rulings by the supreme court we get this disastrous ruling. It may have been a 6-3 decision if Sandra Day O’Conner was still on the bench, so maybe we are closer. That will change if the next president has a supreme court appointment. We will never gain control of the supreme court, it was just a pipe dream. President Bush managed to stem the liberal activist supreme court tide with his two great nominations but it wasn’t enough. Perhaps it will be enough to tread water but it looks as though we are going to continue to swim against the tide.
Today is the day we lost the war, not because of our soldiers overseas, but because of the politics at home and now the supreme court. But we lost more than the Iraq war, we lost all future wars that we may have had to enter.
We do not deserve to have our soldiers overseas fighting for our rights when the people at home aren’t willing to fight for our soldiers. Why should we lose another American life overseas for an unappreciative American public, and a supreme court that feels the enemy is more important? We have grown soft and weak.
The war is lost, it is time to bring the troops home.
This is something that has bothered me for quite a while. China has a
deal with Cuba and is drilling for oil just off of the Florida coast. Needless to say, the enviro-nazis in America will not let us drill off the coast of Florida.
Whenever I hear a conversation about the high price of oil at work and I hear the liberals I work with blame everything except the fact that we are sitting on our own oil but we aren’t allowed to touch it I start to boil inside. I usually throw out the line about how China is drilling off the coast of Florida but that the environmentalists won’t let us drill there. I am usually met with a blank stare. Naturally these people have no idea what I am talking about.
This scenario happened just yesterday to me. After I mentioned that little tidbit about China I was told that Americans need to turn down their heat in the winter. I was told that Americans feel as if it is their right to turn on every light in the house. i was told that if we just didn’t waste so much energy everything would be alright. Not in those exact words, but the point was made.
I then made the mistake of telling said liberal that America needs more nuclear plants. I figured that I could play to the environmental side of this liberal by mentioning that nuclear energy was actually one of the cleanest forms of energy available. He would have none of that.
That is why I don’t usually debate with liberals at work. That is why I usually keep to myself when it comes to politics. You can’t reason with the unreasonable.
Well somehow I have gone off on a tangent and I need to get back on topic. Where was I? Oh yeah, drilling off the coast of Florida. The point that I was trying to make before I got distracted was that while China is drilling off of our own coast most Americans don’t even seem to know, or care, that this is happening. Thankfully Republicans in the senate today brought it out in the open. Hopefully enough Americans out there who had no clue this was going on will now awaken and ask why. Why can’t we drill for oil on our coast while China can? They probably won’t though, but finally this is getting some mention.
“By prohibiting the United States from taking part in the same type of energy exploration that the Chinese are conducting just miles off our shores, the Democratic Majority on Capitol Hill continues to prove itself complicit in an energy crisis that has saddled American families and small businesses with gas prices that have reached $4.05 per gallon today,” the news release said.“Do congressional Democrats actually believe China has more ingenuity and more concern for the environment than the United States?” Republicans asked.
Finally this is being brought to light, the problem is that most people don’t even realize what is going on. Most people don’t seem to pay attention other than to bitch about the price of oil. We are sitting on more black gold than we can shake a stick at, but shaking a stick at it is all we are allowed to do. The oil just sits there off the coast of Florida waiting for someone to come and get it but the only ones who get it are the Chinese.
Republicans Block Tax Increases on Oil Companies
Yesterday the Republicans blocked a measure by Democrats to impose a 25% tax increase on BIG OIL. This is good news for the American people. If the cost of oil companies doing business went up 25% than the price of oil would have risen 25%. It is simple economics. Democrats are simply playing a political game, they are staging a publicity stunt. Nobody likes paying the high price of gas so Democrats know it is safe to “go after” the oil companies.
Democrats and their voters want to screw the big guy but putting additional taxes on the oil companies will not hurt BIG OIL as they will just pass the cost on to the consumers. It is no different than any other company who is forced to raise their prices because of the rising fuel prices. When the cost of doing business goes up so does the cost of the product. Oil is a product and if politicians raise the cost of doing business by imposing taxes oil prices will rise. Democrats know that their voters are blind to this fact and they hope enough frustrated Republicans will join them in this endeavor. Thankfully we had enough Republicans in the senate to nix this whole disaterous idea.
“The biggest hit wouldn’t be to the energy companies,” McConnell added regarding the Consumer-First Energy Act. “It would be the American consumer, who now dreads pulling his or her car into the gas station.”
This is simple economics but it amazes me how many people are ignorant of the concept. Just peruse the left wing blogs and sites like Digg and you will see the hatred and animosity for the Republicans that blocked this measure. The floating theory of coarse is that Republicans are in bed with the oil companies. These people don’t even realize that the Republicans just saved them from a 25% increase in fuel costs.
In fact it is the left wing enviro-nazis that refuse to let us drill for our own oil that is keeping us dependent on foreign oil. It is time for us to use our own resources and stop relying on other countries to give us the same product that we are just sitting on.
There is this concept called supply and demand, it works like this; if there is high demand but low supply, the price goes up. If there is high supply but lower demand the price goes down. So, if there is more oil the price will go down. If we drill for more oil the price will go down.
I apologize for having to explain simple supply and demand economics but there are obviously too many people out there who do not understand it. Perhaps this is the result of the left wing ideology that is being taught in our public schools and institutions.
If Democrats really wanted to save the citizens from the high price of gas they wouldn’t be raising taxes on oil, they would be looking at ways to obtain more oil.
Fuck the polar bears.
Once again when writing about Governor Lynch I have to ask, does this sound like leadership to you?
To deal with the state’s budget shortfall, the governor had proposed bonding $80 million of operating expenses. The House had quite sensibly rejected borrowing money to solve the budget mess. The governor, to whose popularity most of them owe their election and hoped for re-election, convinced some of them to reconsider, but not quite enough of them.
In regular session, he would need a two-thirds majority to overturn the earlier decision. So he came up with a clever plan. The Legislature would finish its business and have an immediate special session to consider the budget crisis. At the new session, he only needed a majority.
Republican Sen. Ted Gatsas had long ago called for a supplemental budget bill to consider and openly debate possible solutions to the budget crisis — a revenue shortfall of around $200 million. But the abuse of power session wouldn’t allow open debate, so the only thing to be considered was the governor’s borrowing scheme with a couple of non-controversial technical amendments tacked on so it could be called a budget “plan.”
No open debate, no free exchange of ideas, no hearings. Just one bill considered under a clever plan to bypass House rules.
Nothing illegal and nothing honorable. Isn’t democracy grand?
What a guy, huh? He couldn’t get his way, even with a Democrat majority so he pulled a little fast one here. Governor Lynch basically wanted to borrow money we don’t have to balance the budget on paper. This effectively just pushes back the due date, but the bills will still come due. He charged the budget.
He didn’t have enough support in the regular session because he was required to get a super majority vote. So as soon as the session ended the sly one, slick Johnny, called for a special session, this required only a simple majority and stifled debate. And to top it all off the doors were locked so nobody could leave for fear of there not being enough people present to conduct business. Over anxious to spend Democrats immediately passed this bill and the rest is history. New Hampshire still has a budget deficit, we just don’t have to pay for it yet.
Below is an editorial that appeared in today’s New Hampshire Union Leader reprinted in it’s entirety. This editorial hits on a few of the points that I have been making here for awhile and this just reinforces my opinion of our teflon governor.
GOV. JOHN LYNCH’S inability to stop legislative overspending is getting tiresome.
On Monday, Lynch allowed a terrible school funding bill, which he opposes, to become law without his signature. As usual, he waited until the very last moment to make a decision, and it was the wrong one.
The school funding plan is bad for lots of reasons. The most obvious is that it spends $180 million the state doesn’t have. Spending money the state doesn’t have is becoming a Lynch specialty.
Last year Gov. Lynch signed a state budget that raised general fund spending by $475 million, even though the state didn’t have the revenues needed to meet the increase. That budget is now estimated to end roughly $200 million in the red.
In addition to overspending, the new school funding law brings back donor towns and gives the same base amount of money to each district, rich or poor, regardless of the district’s need. Lynch opposes both of those bad provisions. But he let the bill become law anyway.
We remember a certain governor who managed to prevent legislators from overspending. He simply promised to veto any bill that raised taxes or spending. He ended up having to veto a state budget. But the state didn’t collapse. Instead, legislators realized he meant business, and they fell in line. Runaway spending stopped cold.
That governor’s name was Craig Benson. He was defeated by a fresh-faced former executive named John Lynch who promised to be just as fiscally responsible. Unfortunately, Gov. Lynch hasn’t lived up to that promise, and the result is the biggest state budget increase in two decades and a school aid plan that overspends to the point that it sets us up for an income tax.
We’re pretty sure Benson would have vetoed, or at least threatened to veto, this awful school funding bill, as Lynch should have done. Benson would have found a way to keep legislators from spending money the state doesn’t have. Gov. Lynch said he would do the same. He just hasn’t commanded enough authority in Concord to make it happen.
The first line in this editorial I don’t quite agree with, governor Lynch doesn’t have an inability to stop the overspending, he has an unwillingness to stop the overspending. He wants to overspend. He needs to overspend. I do however agree with the last part of the opening sentence, it is getting tiresome. Expensive also.
This article is so correct I just can’t wrap my tiny mind around the idea that so many New Hampshire residents fall for his bullshit. The last sentence in this editorial is perfect also. The writer claims Lynch hasn’t “commanded enough authority” to make fiscal responsibility a reality in New Hampshire. I would call it, and have here on many occasions, a serious lack of leadership on behalf of the teflon man.
Barack Obama Refuses to Release his Birth Certificate
Barack Obama is refusing to release his birth certificate to the public. But why? It makes no sense. Unless he wasn’t actually born on American soil he has nothing to hide. If however, he wasn’t born on American soil than he is ineligible to run for president. Why else would he refuse to release it?
Perhaps he is just taking a stand and saying that this is a non-issue and doesn’t deserve any of his time or effort. Perhaps he is saying it is below him. He is probably right, but by refusing to show his birth certificate he is just creating another distraction, another controversy that he really doesn’t need in his campaign. There are enough distractions and controversies without him creating another one. So what else could there be? I keep coming back to whether or not Obama was born in this country or not. I am left to speculate because Obama refuses to release a document that should hide nothing controversial.
There is probably nothing there, I think, but I will never know for sure because he has created this wall of separation between himself and the public he wants to lead. If there is nothing there than this shows another lack of judgement from the candidate running on his judgement. If there is something there than the public needs to know. Not that it would change the minds of his supporters anyway, they don’t care about the constitution.
It wasn’t that long ago that the mainstream media was abuzz at the idea that John McCain wasn’t eligible to be president because he was born on the Panama Canal and not legally a citizen. It was all over the news, so where is this story? Relegated to blogs. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, and I want the media to take a gander into this issue.
Barack Obama has brought this scrutiny on himself, he can easily stop it. Just show us your birth certificate.
Minneapolis Looks at Banning Car Idling
This is the latest shoe to drop in the global warming scam as the government looks at legislating more and more behaviors. The Minneapolis mayor wants to make it illegal for people to let their car idol more than three minutes.
Just think about that for a minute, the government is going to tell you how long you can idle your car for before you must either turn it off or drive. If this was just a case of saving gas, fine, but even then it isn’t the governments responsibility to tell you that you have to save gas for your own good. But this goes beyond even that as this is an attempt to stop man-made global warming, a theory that is yet to be proved.
This is more proof of what I have been writing about on this issue. Global warming is being used as an excuse to raise taxes and pass restrictions on everyday life. That is what this legislation is about, CONTROL! This can no longer be denied when you read about this attempt to meddle in the everyday life of citizens.
New Hampshire Democrats Apologize For Having no Class
I recently wrote about the despicable money raising email
that was sent out by New Hampshire Democrats last week here. In the email the Democrats compared the two parties by saying that while the Democrats have raised record amounts of money, the Republican’s leader died and the Republicans are split. The email went on to claim that the Democrats were flush with cash while the Republicans are scraping bottom. That was a wonderful sentiment to send out about the death of the Republican majority leader earlier this year, isn’t it? What a bunch of scumbags! Using a death for political gain? Democrats will stop at nothing to hold on to their power.
Now Speaker of the House Terie Norelli (Democrat) has issued an apology for the email and I applaud her for that, although it was a no-brainer and she had to do it, she did the right thing. However, and I suppose you knew there would be a however, there is more to this story in my opinion. I see a lack of leadership here by the Democrats. I have already made my case on this blog about our teflon governor’s lack of leadership, but now it seems to be a problem that isn’t just limited to him. It appears to be a problem that has infiltrated the whole state Democrat party. Perhaps the gaining of power in all branches of state government for the first time in over one hundred years has made them grow complacent, perhaps they have grown lazy, but one thing is for sure, they are not leaders.
The problem that I have is with her excuse for why the email was sent in the first place. She basically said that she was sorry but that neither her nor anybody else whose name was on the email even knew about the email. She claims the email was never approved to be sent, but that is was sent out anyway. From her computer no less.
Either she is lying, she has no control over her subordinates, or she is hiding behind them. Neither option makes her look good.
I am going to take her at her word and talk about what I feel this means. Here is her excuse:
“Staff now knows that they are not allowed to send out anything without legislator approval,”
According to the speaker the staff knows that what they supposedly did was wrong but they did it anyway. If Speaker Norelli were any kind of leader would her subordinates ever think it was a good idea, and acceptable, to do something they knew wasn’t allowed? Didn’t they fear repercussions? Or perhaps the speaker wasn’t enough of a leader to assure that her subordinates knew what was right and wrong. It doesn’t matter, all that matters is that we see a lack of leadership here.
This lack of leadership runs throughout the New Hampshire Democrat party and it starts at the top, Governor Lynch. The New Hampshire Democrat party is just sailing in the ocean with no direction and no rudder to steer the ship. They are prone to follow the winds instead of sailing into them. In the current climate with an economic slowdown, a housing crisis, and record gas prices New Hampshire needs someone to stand up and say “this is what we are going to do” instead of what we are getting.
Where leadership is needed we in New Hampshire have a party only interested in doing whatever it takes to hold onto power.
