Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell
The man who calls himself a great leader, Governor John Lynch, has failed to lead his own party in the fight to fix the New Hampshire budget that he screwed up in the first place.
With all the heat in the proverbial kitchen these days, it might surprise the casual observer that New Hampshire’s House and Senate are controlled by the same party.
Republican majorities in the state house and senate forced Governor Lynch to compromise his agenda if he wanted to get anything accomplished. He did, so he did. He was able to successfully campaign for re-election as a bi-partisan leader, when in reality he was just a wish washy politician who succumbed to the leaders of the opposition party. He promised New Hampshire that if we trusted him with a Democrat majority than we would really be able to see him shine shit and make it look appetising. Well, he got the shit shining part right, however his budget certainly doesn’t look appetising no matter how much shine he puts on it.
Now that Governor Lynch is trying to solve the New Hampshire budget deficit that he created by instituting even more taxes, his own party is turning against him. Democrats in New Hampshire are finger pointing and name calling. The truth is, Democrats, that you are ALL responsible for this stupid budget with your purposely inflated revenues.
Governor Lynch has now done what any good liberal would do, he blamed President Bush and the slowdown in the economy for his foolish budget shortfall. The truth is that New Hampshire revenues are up from last year. New Hampshire has never taken in so much money and it is still not enough to pay for the governor’s spending.
Democrats are now opposing his latest tax increases, mainly because it is an election year, it it wasn’t they would probably fall in lockstep with the spend-aholic New Hampshire governor.
The budget bill is hung up over competing plans to change liquor revenue. The House wants to raise extra money by cutting the discount that big retailers get on wholesale wine purchases. The Senate has other ideas, including a 3 percent across-the-board price hike, that the House has rejected.
So what has the governor been doing during this stalemate?
Gov. John Lynch’s hand has yet to be played. House and Senate members said they have not seen Lynch rolling up his sleeves to end the stalemates. Unless something gives in the next 24 hours, the Legislature is likely to go into a special session later this month.
NOTHING! Typical John Lynch, keeping his wussy mouth shut during debate. This is what he does whenever their is a controversial issue being debated. NOTHING! He always refuses to say which side of an issue he is on so not to offend the people on the other side. This is what he calls leadership. Hell, Lynch is a Democrat super delegate and he hasn’t even had the balls to tell us who he is supporting, he is simply waiting for the primary results so he can jump on the winning side. Again, this is what he calls leadership. Even his wife (not a super delegate) told us who she was supporting.
But that is not the governor’s way, he prefers to remain quiet until it is time for him to sign or veto a bill. Not taking a stand is his idea of taking a stand. It is his idea of leadership.
Obama Wins the Nomination! Hillary Steals the Show
Cross posted on Grizzly Groundswell
There are two big stories that came out of today’s final primaries. The first one, and really the only big story, is that Barack Obama appears to have captured the Democrat nomination for president. When the super delegates are counted Barack Obama will be the nominee.
The second story, and it is only a story because Hillary refuses to be outdone even in defeat, is the fact that Hillary is willing to consider the option of becoming the vice president candidate.
Let’s face it, the Clinton’s are media whores. On the day when all the attention should be on Barack Obama for capturing the nomination Hillary had to try to outdo him. And she has. Watching the news today it is apparent that the media considers Hillary’s consideration of the second slot as the bigger story. She has successfully gotten the media attention focused on her on Obama’s day. Typical!
Hillary Clinton didn’t even have the common courtesy or respect for Barack Obama to let him have his moment in the sun before she had to try to outshine him. What other possible reason could she have for no waiting ONE DAY to make her “big announcement?”
Hillary Clinton has effectively put Obama on the defensive now when he chooses his running mate. By publicly acknowledging that she is interested she knows it puts pressure on him to chose her, even if he doesn’t think she is the best choice. He will have to do it “for the party.” He will be convinced that the only way to find true party unity is to select her, and now that she has made her feelings public he will feel even greater pressure to do so.
Hillary Clinton has accomplished two things today. First she virtually guaranteed herself a spot on the ticket to give the media the “dream ticket” they lust for so openly. And secondly, and more importantly to Hillary, she managed to steal Obama’s spotlight and re-direct it on her.
If the Obama/Clinton ticket comes to fruition and wins the presidency, Obama had better hire an official food taster.
Senate to Debate Global Warming Bill This Week
This week the senate will be debating a bill that would effectively grind the already slowing economy to a dead halt. The global warming initiative bill is up for debate this week and luckily there are still enough Republicans in the senate to filibuster this disastrous bill, and if somehow the bill is passed we still have a president who will veto it. At least for now.
The Senate measure, which has wide Democratic and some Republican support, would cap U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, cutting them by 18 percent by 2020 and by two-thirds by mid-century. It would specifically target refineries, power plants, factories and transportation for 70 percent reductions and make emissions allowances available to be traded in an open market.
We all know who will pay for the added costs of doing business that will be incurred by all of the above listed BIG BUSINESSES, we will. The American people will.
Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky called it “a giant tax on virtually every aspect of the economy,” and accused Democrats of being “laughably out of touch” in taking up the bill when the country is reeling from $4 a gallon gasoline and other high energy costs.
President Bush said at a White House event that the measure amounted to “a huge spending bill fueled by tax increases” and that it “would impose roughly $6 trillion in new costs on the American economy.”
You read that right, an additional $6 TRILLION, that’s trillion with a “T”, burden on the economy while we are in the midst of an economic slowdown and the mainstream media is hoping for predicting a recession. That sounds like sound fiscal policy, now doesn’t it? NOT!
So why should we back this horrible idea of a solution for a problem that doesn’t even exist? Or at least is not proven to exist?
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., a chief architect of the 500-page bill, said at a news conference the urgency of taking action against climate change cannot be overstated, declaring, “It’s about our children, about their children, and about the planet we’ve inherited.”
Oh, yes. The old standby excuse that we must “do it for the children”. The excuse that liberals always use when there is no logic or facts behind their arguments. Who wants to hurt the children? Nobody does so the Democrats do what they do best, play at the heartstrings of Americans.
When Democrats pull out that old standby line you know that they are losing whatever issue is being debated and this is no exception. Global warming has NOT been proven as fact and certainly not as being man-made. That is why this legislation is being pushed through the senate. This tax increase must be implemented before the American people find out the whole thing is fabricated.
As I wrote in my opening paragraph, luckily this bill is very unlikely to pass because there are still enough Republicans left in the senate. And in the unlikely chance that the bill does pass, we have a president that will veto it. But this bill is not going to go away.
But supporters of the bill acknowledged it will be difficult — perhaps impossible — to overcome a certain GOP filibuster threat against the legislation, meaning congressional action on global warming will probably be decided in the next Congress and by the next president.
That is where the bigger problem lies. This bill will come back next year and there in all likelihood will be a senate with an even larger Democrat majority and with a Democrat president. There is no doubt that this bill would pass in that scenario and a President Obama will sign it. Hell, even a President McCain will sign it. This will be one of, if not the first, tax increase to come to the American people next year.
I am beginning to think that we are fighting a losing battle in holding off some kind of global warming initiative, but the fight must go on. We can’t afford (literally) to lose this battle. Democrats claim to be the party of the little people, the working people, but who will these tax increases hurt the most? The middle class, just as always.
I have several problems with John McCain. So do the vast majority of conservatives. I am not going to list all of the issues I have with John McCain in this post as I have listed them repeatedly in the past. Besides I think that liberals and conservatives both know what the issues are that conservatives have with John McCain. The problems that conservatives have with John McCain are the same reasons why McCain is appealing to so many moderate and some liberal voters.
Something was bothering me inside about McCain’s nomination and I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. I have had this thought deep down inside and it has festered over the weeks since John McCain won the nomination of the party he contends to be a member of. I finally realized what it was last week, and during an email exchange that I had with Dee from Conservatism With Heart I wrote about it for the first time. Now I feel that I must share it with everyone and also expand on what I wrote.
I have many problems with John McCain, but my biggest problem actually goes beyond John McCain himself. My problem is about the future of the party and of conservatism. Here is part of what I wrote in my email to Dee:
Over the last couple of days I finally figured out what really concerns me with John McCain winning the nomination. If he were to win in November he would effectively recast the Republican mold, as I think Republicans would then think the key to victory would be to run the same way John McCain did, and I find that troubling, it would really set the conservative movement back.
For all of the problems that I have with McCain, there is more at stake than just this election. My fear is that as bad as an Obama or Clinton presidency would be, a John McCain presidency could also have negative long reaching ramifications. Only the ramifications of a McCain victory would be felt by the Republican party’s future as well as the country. John McCain is not running his campaign as a conservative, he is reaching out to moderates and liberals. He is ignoring conservatives just as he has for the last eight years. AND IT IS WORKING! As disturbing as it is that McCain is running as a RINO, or just as an outright Democrat, it is equally disturbing to me that Republican voters think that this is the right path to the white house. What good is it to have a president in office that shares your party affiliation but not your ideals? When is the last time that a liberal reached out to a conservative? It just doesn’t happen.
Yet this strategy is working. Republican voters seem to be so timid right now that they are afraid to nominate a conservative candidate for fear of getting trounced in November. They would rather nominate a moderate to liberal candidate and hope for the best for the next four years. I find this unacceptable for the fact that it will just worsen the situation for conservatives hoping to get elected down the road. If John McCain wins the presidency this year then it will cast the mold for future “Republicans” and their campaigns. If John McCain is successful in his bid for president than I fear other Republicans will follow the new template for victory. And that template is a liberal one.
And it is even greater than John McCain. Recently there have been several conservative writers and strategists who have come out and written that McCain should choose a Democrat as his running mate. This “re-branding” of the Republican party is being written about and discussed more and more.What does this “re-branding” mean? It means giving in and giving up. It means running away with your tail between your legs. I would rather have fought and lost, than turn tail and run, the way conservatives have this year.
I would rather have nominated a conservative candidate and lost in November than nominate a moderate to liberal candidate and win, simply because of the future. I don’t want to see future Republicans run as John McCain did this year, but the new Republican mold has been cast and the conservative movement has been seriously injured. We have been bloodied and bruised and we were beaten up by our own candidate.
While this new direction, or “re-branding”, of the Republican party continues under John McCain and seems perfectly acceptable to Republican voters it started before McCain’s nomination. It started with President Bush. Readers here know that I am an avid supporter of President Bush, with the exception of a couple of issues, I back him fully. But I have come to the conclusion that the “re-branding” of the Republican party may have started with him. Running for his first term in 1999 he said “Is compassion beneath us? Is mercy below us? Should our party be led by someone who boasts of a hard heart? I am proud to be a compassionate conservative. I welcome the label. And on this ground, I’ll take my stand, I am running because my party must match a conservative mind with a compassionate heart.”
That is when he labeled himself a compassionate conservative, effectively singling himself out and separating himself from “normal” or “traditional” conservatives. He made a distinction between a person being a conservative and a person having compassion. As if conservatives have no compassion. At the time this statement didn’t seem to mean very much, but looking back now it may have started the movement away from conservative campaigning.
I guess what it boils down to is this; John McCain’s nomination may signal a shift to the left by the Republican party. A shift that I fear will continue to grow if he is elected. What Republican candidate after seeing John McCain win the presidency running as a non-conservative Republican would then try to run as a conservative Republican? It will start slowly, but I am afraid the shift away from conservatism will be set in motion and it will be hard to stop the momentum as it builds.
Will McCain be a lesser evil than either Barack Obama of Hillary Clinton, the answer is yes. But to me it isn’t enough of a difference for him to win my vote. Conservatives may be better off in the long run if Obama or Clinton was to become president in November. At least it would buy us enough time to regroup the conservative Republican base, to “re-brand” the “re-branded” Republican party back to where it should be.
If McCain wins the presidency the “re-branding” may be complete and irreversible. It will be too hard to start a conservative movement within the Republican party if the party wins an election without holding conservative values. It will be much easier to start a conservative movement in the party if John McCain loses in November. As bad as an Obama or Clinton, (Obama would be far worse), presidency would be, it may be worth it in the long run if we are able to nominate a strong conservative in the 2012 election.
The prospect of President Obama makes the idea that conservatives would be better off if we lose the election sound pretty foolish, the damage he could do to the country in four years would quite possibly be irreversable. I could never route for the scenario that I wrote about above. That alone should be enough for me to vote for John McCain, but I can’t.
The last two paragraphs illustrate how conflicted I have become during this election cycle. So to draw this long, rambling, convoluted post to an end let me summarize it this way; John McCain’s nomination may change the Republican party forever if he is to win, that is what my biggest problem with him is. If he were to lose, we may be able to mount a new conservative movement but the damage done to the country by an ultra-liberal president may be far reaching and irreversible.
So here is where I stand, I refuse to be a part of the “re-branding” of the Republican party by voting for John McCain. I hope he wins because he will be better than either of the Democrats, (slightly), but he will have to do it without me. And there are many others out there who feel the way I do, I can’t be alone. Can I?
I will not sell out my beliefs, convictions and ideals by voting for a candidate who doesn’t share them just to ensure that my party wins the election. What would it actually mean to have convictions if I was so easily willing to throw them away?
Barack Obama Quits the Trinity United Church
After twenty years of subscribing to the hate filled rhetoric of the Trinity United Church Barack Obama has quit the church. This was probably the right (pardon the pun) thing to do but what took so long?
Let’s face it, there is nothing uniting about this church. The candidate who promises to bring Americans together, to work with both parties, even though he has never crossed the aisle to work with Republicans in his brief tenure in government, was a member of this dividing church for twenty years. He HAS to believe the rhetoric that was coming from the pulpit or he would have quit 19 years ago. He must have believed it, he raised his little girls up in that church. He subjected them to the hate. Why would he if he didn’t agree with it?
Either he believes it or he has extremely poor judgement, either of which disqualifies him to be president.
He remained in the church throughout Reverend Wright’s tenure and we are supposed to believe that he had never heard him make any of those controversial comments. It wasn’t until it became a political albatross that he decided to leave the church. It became politically advantageous for him to quit, so he did. Pure and simple. Jeremiah Right even went on television and admitted that when Barack Obama denounced his words that he was just doing what he had to do as a politician. In other words, lying. That is what this is about also, political gain, that’s it. He still must hold true to the words that are spoken there:
“I’m not denouncing the church and I’m not interested in people who want me to denounce the church,”
“It’s clear that now that I’m a candidate for president, every time something is said in the church by anyone associated with Trinity, including guest pastors, the remarks will imputed to me even if they totally conflict with my long-held views, statements and principles,” he said.
Does he disagree with the pastor’s views, if he does why did he stay? It makes absolutely no sense that he would stay in a church if he disagreed with what was being preached there. Those words above don’t look like the words of someone who disagrees with the church, they look like the words of someone distancing himself from the church because he is running for president. Those are two distinctly different reasons for leaving the church.
Barack Obama still hasn’t answered the most important question; why did he stay there so long?
Read more here.
This certainly is good news. It looks like the cap and trade climate change bill is going to die a slow death in the senate….at least for now. It sounds as if it will be tabled until next year, when coincidentally either McCain, Clinton, or most likely Obama will be president and will be in favor of this legislation. But for now anyway, it looks like president Bush has won this round in the fight, and we are all better of for it.
a backdrop of rising gasoline prices and the sluggish economy makes it difficult to win votes for a regulatory scheme that will raise the prices of electricity and gasoline.
That may be true right now but the next president will have no problem raising the prices of electricity and gasoline. You can count on it, all three remaining candidates love to raise taxes and that is what this whole bill is about, just look at the theme that you can plainly read in the following quotes.
The government would allocate some permits to utilities and industrial companies, and auction others to generate revenues.
In the long run, you want people who burn carbon to pay more,” says John Rowe, the CEO of Exelon,
“I believe in cap and trade. I believe we ought to put a price on carbon,” Rogers says
But senators who want to auction permits, and then use the money for a variety of projects
Billions of dollars are at stake in this argument over how to auction or allocate the pollution permits.
Permits, revenues, auctions, putting a price on and paying for carbon. That is all this is about, paying the government more money. They are no longer even trying to hide it. I know I sound like a broken record but this is too important to ignore. The next president is in favor of this massive tax increase that will kill an already slowing economy, all in the name of taking in revenue for social programs that will addict more people to government entitlements.
Democrats Look to “Nationalize” Hurricane Insurance
The Democrats are beginning to show us their true colors. Between the recent threat by Maxine Waters to socialize the oil companies and this latest news that Democrats are looking at “nationalizing” hurricane insurance there can no longer be any question that these people are nothing more than socialists.
As hurricane season begins, Democrats in Congress want to nationalize a chunk of the insurance business that covers major storm-damage claims.
The proposal — backed by giant insurers Allstate Corp. and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., as well as Florida lawmakers — focuses on “reinsurance,” the policies bought by insurers themselves to protect against catastrophic losses. The proposal envisions a taxpayer-financed (emphasis added) reinsurance program covering all 50 states, which would essentially backstop the giant insurers in case of disaster.
Big government swooping in to save the day. Not surprising, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama support this increase in spending, as does the RINO governor of Florida, and vice president candidate (UUUGGGHHH) Chalie Crist. McCain, at least so far, opposes it.
“This is a very large federal program,” and the only state currently in a position to benefit is Florida, said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Mr. McCain’s policy director.
By the way, how come Democrats aren’t being accused of being in bed with BIG INSURANCE?
Sen. Clinton received $1.5 million from individuals in the insurance industry during the 2008 campaign cycle. She received $10,000 from Allstate employees, and $12,550 from State Farm, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Mr. Obama received $960,000 from individuals in the industry. Employees from Allstate and State Farm, both based in Mr. Obama’s home state, gave him $25,000 and $35,600, respectively.
McCain has also received money from BIG INSURANCE.
Mr. McCain, who opposed the federal catastrophe plan, received $690,000 from individuals in the insurance industry, $9,000 from Allstate employees and $21,000 from employees of State Farm.
It is becoming quite clear that the Democrats are moving towards, or at least talking about “nationalizing” (read socializing) several different privately run businesses. These people must be stopped. Nothing comes without a price and it is always the taxpayers who will pay. With all of the federal programs that are being promised we are in for major tax increases, somebody has to pay, and it is always the people who work the hardest.
These Democrats are showing us a frightening path forward into socialism that is going to cost us all dearly. Too many people love the promise of a free, or in the case of this hurricane insurance “nationalization” an almost free ride. Too many people have become accustomed to the idea that the government should take money from the workers and give it away. They have been seduced by the promise of a free lunch and I wonder if we are going to be able to stop it.
The Democrats of today have forgotten the words of one of their most esteemed leaders, JFK, when he said: “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.”
Unborn Personhood Amendment Reaches Colorado Ballot
According to this article Colorado voters will vote to add an amendment to the state constitution that defines a person as “any human being from the moment of fertilization”. This amendment has become known as the “Definition of a Person” Amendment.
In order to get this to the ballot the group “Colorado for Equal Rights ” had to collect about 100,000 signatures, they collected 130,500.
Perhaps the most heartening aspect of this whole issue is WHO started the ball rolling.
The petition drive — which actually collected 130,050 signatures — originated with 20-year-old Kristi Burton, who said in a news release that she developed a deep passion for the pro-life movement at 13 years of age.
A twenty year old girl began this whole movement. This does make you think that possibly the next generations haven’t fallen as far as it sometimes feels as though they have. Here is a statement that was released by the young lady:
“All humans should be protected by love and by law, and this amendment is a historic effort to ensure equal rights for every person,” Burton noted in her statement.“We at Colorado for Equal Rights are incredibly thankful for our many volunteers who worked so hard for each signature we delivered to the secretary of state’s office and the churches who stood behind us and supported us,” she added. “This victory is the voice of the people, and all credit goes to our Creator.”
This looks to be one of the most interesting aspects to the November election that I have seen so far. I will be watching with great interest to see what the voters day about this. And if passed, what repercussions come from it.
June 12th: Carbon Belch Day
A group called Grassfire.org is trying to organize a protest to save the planet from…..Al Gore. In an effort to bring further awareness to the global warming scam, they are urging people to waste as much energy as possible on June 12th, which they are calling Carbon Belch Day, to try help people to break free of the global warming hoax that is being crammed down our throats.
Conservative grassroots group Grassfire.org wants people to waste as much energy as possible on June 12 by “hosting a barbecue, going for a drive, watching television, leaving a few lights on, or even smoking a few cigars.”
The point: the group wants to “help Americans break free from the ‘carbon footprint guilt’ being imposed by Climate Alarmists.”
That is exactly what is going on with this whole scam movement, GUILT. Americans are being guilted into giving up more money, and more freedoms and luxuries to the government in exchange for feeling good about themselves. After all, nobody wants to hurt the environment, so if it takes giving up money and freedoms isn’t it a small price to pay? The government knows what is best for us, so just shut up, bend over, and take it.
“It’s time for Americans to purge ourselves of the false guilt that Al Gore and the Climate Alarmists have placed on us,” Elliott (grassfire.org’s president)said.
Grassfire.org said it chose June 12 as the day it wants Americans to rev up their SUVsbecause it coincides with expected debate in Congress over a $1.2 billion carbon tax rebate program. “Carbon Belch Day will have at least as much impact on the so-called ‘planetary emergency’ of man-made global warming as the goofy save the earth mandates telling us to turn our lights off for an hour,” said Elliott.
This whole protest is going to go nowhere, but at least somebody is organizing a movement against the global warming alarmists. More and more skeptics seem to be coming out and it is none too soon. In fact it may be too late. We are reaching a critical time here. All three presidential candidates have bought into this whole tax scheme and so we will pay dearly soon. We will pay literally with our tax dollars, and we will pay with our freedoms and luxuries as well.
One day Americans will wake up and realize what happened, and they will wonder how it got to this point unless we stand up and be heard.
Guilt is a powerful tool, perhaps the most powerful. And the alarmists are using it purposely and wisely with their gradual erosion of America’s resolve to fight them.
Judicial Watch, a government watchdag group, wants Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore investigated for the commercial that ran featuring her and Newt Gingrich talking about global warming. As I first wrote about here, this commercial appears to have broken the restriction of free speech bill otherwise known as McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. The problem lies in the fact that an Al Gore company paid to air this ad within 30 days of a special election. Freedom of speech is not allowed 30 days before an election, thanks to John McCain.
“Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore may want to save the world, but they still have to follow federal law,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “This multi-million dollar contribution to Pelosi by Al Gore’s group is absolutely prohibited. The FEC and the IRS ought to act quickly to enforce the law.”
While I believe that McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional it remains law. And as long as it’s law than politicians have to abide by it. Even the speaker of the house has to follow the rules. Too bad, Nancy. Intentional or not, you broke the rules and you were caught.
Nancy Pelosi, of all people, should know the laws. Especially one that she was very much in favor of. Thank God she is a Democrat or the media might actually have to cover this.
Read more here.
