The White House Fires Back at Jimmy Carter
Jimmy Carter said this.
Which prompted the White House to say this:
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) – The White House on Sunday fired back at former President Jimmy Carter, calling him “increasingly irrelevant” a day after Carter described George W. Bush’s presidency as the worst in history in international relations.
I just wish the president had fought back against everything that has been said about him over the last six years, instead of just letting the left attack him unanswered. It is really too little too late when it comes to defending himself now. The public has already turned against him.
Gun Control Coming to New Hampshire
Here is the latest shoe to drop in New Hampshire, gun control.
Last November the voters of New Hampshire decided to send the president a message about the Iraq war. They did this by sending two new United States Reps. to Washington. That was fine, I understand that, but they also replaced the conservative state government with a liberal state government. I still can’t figure out how they thought that was also sending a message to the president. Ignorance of how the political system works is now coming back to haunt us. New Hampshire voters are now paying the price for it. First we started getting many nanny state legislation, which you can read about in my archives just search nanny state, and now we are hearing rumblings about gun control:
Some of the state’s police chiefs say they would be happy to have clearer rules on issuing – and revoking – permits for people to carry concealed guns.
“There’s literally no definition of what’s a suitable standard to hand out a permit,” said Bradford Police Chief Jim Valiquet, president of the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police.
They site this case as reasoning behind stricter laws on concealed carry permits:
Alexander said he received a concealed-carry application last year from a Lebanon resident he said was a known member of a criminal gang, although the man had never been convicted of a felony. When Alexander denied the man a permit, the man successfully appealed to the local district court.
While I agree this man should not have a gun, denying this man a conceal weapons permit would not have stopped him from legally purchasing a gun in the state of New Hampshire.
All you need to buy a handgun in New Hampshire is a drivers licence. Not only that but according to New Hampshire law:
Carrying Without a License: It is illegal, under New Hampshire law, to carry a pistol or revolver concealed upon your person, except in your dwelling or house, or place of business, without a license;
You are allowed to carry a weapon on your person without a license as long as it is not concealed. You may also transport a weapon as long as it is unloaded. So making the laws more strict concerning concealed carry would not have stopped this man at all. He still would have been allowed to buy a gun and carry it, just not concealed.
So why then are they using this case against concealed weapons?This is just the first rumbling, first they talk about restricting concealed permits and then it continues from there. They have taken one case and will use it as a standard to restrict guns and ownership of guns. It won’t stop with concealed weapons, that is just the catalyst.
New Hampshire residents have always prided themselves as being independent with minimal government intrusion. Thanks to last November’s election we are turning into Upper Massachusetts, or East Vermont if you prefer.
Former President Carter says President Bush’s administration is “the worst in history” in international relations, taking aim at the White House’s policy of pre-emptive war and its Middle East diplomacy.
We may have to take him for his word on this. If there’s one thing Jimmy Carter should know about it’s bad administrations. How did Jimmy Carter’s foreign relations policy work out?
New Hampshire Moving Backwards on Child Sex Crimes
First, there was this:
the Senate takes up the repeal of the parental notification law. There will be a public hearing on May 29. The bill, which would repeal a 2003 law that required a parent to be notified before a minor daughter can have an abortion, easily passed the House, 226-130. Gov. John Lynch favors repeal
Isn’t having sex with a minor, consensual or not, rape? Yes. If you prefer to not call it rape, your daughter is guilty of bad judgement.(It’s still rape whether you like it or not).So your daughter can be raped and have an abortion. She can have a surgical procedure, and you don’t have the right to know.
Now, there’s this:
Should a 20-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl be on the public sex offender registry? Yes, under current state law. Yes, under federal law.
Maybe, under a bill the Senate is close to passing.
If HB 504, which won a 4-1 vote in committee, goes ahead this week, anyone under 21 could ask the court for removal from the public list of convicted sex offenders if the victim was as young as 13. If the bill passes, the state would fall out of compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act, meant to tighten laws that protect children against sex crimes.
Perfect, beautiful, this is great, isn’t it? I don’t know what’s going on in my state any more. This is just getting way out of hand. A twenty year old can rape a thirteen year old and not be a sex offender? What’s next? Here’s what’s next, all these people that have raped a thirteen year old can move to this state and be removed from the sex offender list. That’s just the type of people we want to move here. They can then leave the state and not have to re-register.
The bill, sponsored by Reps. Jennifer Brown of Dover, Lee Hammond of Lebanon, Ellen Nielsen of Claremont and Laura Pantelakos of Portsmouth, would allow an offender taken off the list here to move to other states and not be tracked.
Remember those two names New Hampshire, Rep. Jennifer Brown and Rep. Lee Hammond, they need to be voted out.
While the rest of the country is enacting Jessica’s law to become tough on child sex offenders, New Hampshire moves in the other direction and joins Vermont as being weak on child sex offenders.
Governor Lynch is beginning to show his true colors now that he has a Democrat majority in both branches of state government. I hope New Hampshire voters wake up in two years and vote all these people out of office.
I am just afraid New Hampshire will be a vastly different state by then, it will be, gulp, Massachusetts or Vermont. It may be too late already.
If I can find all these global warming doubters how come we don’t hear about more of them in the mainstream media? Man-made global warming is being presented as fact by the media and by politicians. Meanwhile the debate rages on by scientists. The fact that a politician is the leading voice on global warming is what should be alarming. They just want to get their hands into your pockets.
Here is yet another voice speaking out against man-mad global warming.
Climate change will be considered a joke in five years time, meteorologist Augie Auer told the annual meeting of Mid Canterbury Federated Farmers in Ashburton this week.
Man’s contribution to the greenhouse gases was so small we couldn’t change the climate if we tried, he maintained.
“We’re all going to survive this. It’s all going to be a joke in five years,” he said.
A combination of misinterpreted and misguided science, media hype, and political spin had created the current hysteria and it was time to put a stop to it.
“It is time to attack the myth of global warming,” he said.
There are many scientists now beginning to debunk the whole theory, yet it is still reported as fact. Children are being taught global warming as fact. They will grow up believing it is fact, that’s why it’s so important to stop this hoax before it is too late.
Water vapour was responsible for 95 per cent of the greenhouse effect, an effect which was vital to keep the world warm, he explained.
“If we didn’t have the greenhouse effect the planet would be at minus 18 deg C but because we do have the greenhouse effect it is plus 15 deg C, all the time.”
What’s this? The greenhouse effect is what’s actually supporting life on this planet? How can this be? What will happen to us if we reverse the greenhouse effect?
The other greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide, and various others including CFCs, contributed only five per cent of the effect, carbon dioxide being by far the greatest contributor at 3.6 per cent.
However, carbon dioxide as a result of man’s activities was only 3.2 per cent of that, hence only 0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in total. Human-related methane, nitrogen dioxide and CFCs etc made similarly minuscule contributions to the effect: 0.066, 0.047 and 0.046 per cent respectively.
“That ought to be the end of the argument, there and then,” he said.
“We couldn’t do it (change the climate) even if we wanted to because water vapour dominates.”
Human activity accounts for only .12% of all greenhouse gasses and yet we are supposed to believe we are destroying the planet.
UPDATE: Part 5, and Part 6 are now posted. Links to parts 2,3,and 4 can be found at the bottom of this post. Part 7 is now available. Parts 2, 3, and 4 are at the bottom of the page.
UPDATE: THE BROWNS HAVE BEEN CAPTURED
And here is my final wrap up post.
This is a story I have wanted to write about. It is a local New Hampshire story about two tax protesters in Plainfield New Hampshire. It has been in the local news here over the past few months, but I haven’t seen it on the national news. I thought it was time to get it out there.
Ed and Elaine Brown have been holed up in their Plainfield home since being convicted of tax evasion in January. They have fortified their house and built a watchtower over the year preparing for this day. They have many weapons and food to last years.
They believe that there is no law requiring them to pay federal income taxes. They have payed all local, and state property taxes they have owed over the years. It’s the federal income tax they are protesting.
The couple has asked the federal government since 1994 to cite a law that requires average Americans to pay taxes on their wages.
“They have never done so, and the reason they have never done so is because no such law exists,” Elaine Brown said.
They cite that they could have payed their taxes any time over the years and they said they would if the law requiring them to do so was showed to them. They refuse to pay based on beliefs and would rather die not paying taxes then to give in.
The Browns reiterated that they could have cleared their name at any time by paying the taxes the government says they owe. It’s not ego that keeps them holed up in their Plainfield home waiting for a potentially violent clash with government agents, they said.
“Nobody would be that stupid to get into this kind of pressure and anxiety every day” unless they were standing by something they truly believed, Ed Brown said.
As of now the federal marshals are not expecting any kind of armed conflict. They are planning on waiting this out and hoping that the Brown’s surrender peacefully. The Brown’s, on the other hand, are wating for a conflict and are prepared to die.
“We know there’s a possibility that this will end badly and they will end up killing us,” Elaine Brown
The Browns, who sequestered themselves in their Plainfield home after a January jury trial, have said that if they leave, it will be either as free citizens or “in body bags.” But whether they perish or not, Ed Brown said, he’s confident the ordeal will have a positive ending.
“Only God knows the time frame,” he said. “And no matter how it ends, it will be good. It doesn’t matter. If they do something to us, they’ll make martyrs out of us.”
This sounds like it is going to end badly to me. So far both sides have been playing the wait and see game.
UPDATE: My latests updates on this situation can he read here, Part 2, Part 3,Part 4, and also this.
Today Duncan Hunter appeared on Howie Carr’s radio show. Howie Carr is a Boston conservative radio host. He deals with issues local to Boston as well as national issues.
He has issued invitations to all candidates running for president to appear on the show when they are in New Hampshire. To date most of the Republican candidates have been on several times. All Democrats have declined the invitation so far.
Here is a link to the audio of the conversation that they had on May 18th.
It is starting to look like New York mayor Michael Bloomberg may enter the 2008 presidential race as an Independent. He will be self financing his campaign and it is reported he will be willing to spend one billion dollars of his own money.
Reports that Bloomberg, New York’s Republican mayor, is willing to spend a big chunk of his personal fortune — perhaps as much as $1 billion — on a White House run set off a new round of speculation about his intentions and his possible impact on the November 2008 election.
The speculation was egged on by Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a conservative Republican and Iraq war opponent who also is considering an independent bid and had dinner with Bloomberg recently.
It also sounds like Chuck Hagel might be willing to run on the ticket with him. It’s hard for me to decide which party this would hurt more. Bloomberg is socially liberal so I don’t know how many Republican voters would switch to him, although the top teir Republicans I wouldn’t call true conservatives. And with the perceived anger of Democrats at George W Bush, I can’t believe many of them would vote for a Republican, although he is a former Democrat.
This would seem to add a very intriguing aspect to the race.
A liberal on social issues with a strong track record as a manager and businessman, Bloomberg would probably pull votes from both parties, Democratic political consultant Hank Sheinkopf said.
He would be simply hoping that the anger of voters who are fed up with both parties would translate into people voting for him.
A third-party bid would hope to take advantage of public discontent with the Republican and Democratic parties, which already has led 60,000 people to sign up for an Internet-based movement aimed at fielding a bipartisan independent ticket in 2008.
But
“Americans like the idea of third parties, but as we’ve seen repeatedly they are pretty well satisfied with the two-party system,” said public opinion analyst Karlyn Bowman of the conservative American Enterprise Institute
Historically when voters actually get in the booth not many of them actually vote for a third party candidate.
This would make for an interesting dynamic in the ’08 election though and warrents keeping an eye on.
John Murtha (D-PA) Accused of House Rules Violation
Murtha shouted at and chastised Rogers on the House floor Thursday for offering a motion last week to challenge $23 million Murtha requested in an intelligence bill.Murtha had requested the money to prevent the administration from shuttering the National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown, Pa., which is part of Murtha’s district.
“I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone, and you will not get any earmarks now and forever,” Murtha told Rogers, according to the draft transcript given to The Politico.
“This is not the way we do things here — and is that supposed to make me afraid of you?” Rogers replied.
“That’s the way I do it,” Murtha said.
This doesn’t exactly sound like the bi-partisanship we were promised in November. Not only that but it appears as though Murtha has violated house rules.
If it took place as alleged, Murtha’s tirade could violate House rules, which forbid members to block earmarks based on how a colleague votes.
First they have to bribe their members with earmarks to get the votes for the Iraq war spending bill with timelines. Now Murtha threatens another member of congress because of the vote that he cast. This isn’t the first time he has done this recently.
This shouting match follows a similar outburst Murtha directed at Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) last week.
Murtha yelled at Tiahrt on the House floor for voting in favor of Rogers’s motion, members and aides familiar with the incident said.
You can read more about Murtha here. You won’t hear about it in the mainstream media. I wonder why?
According to a nationally recognized pollster, former Massachusetts governor and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has opened up a double-digit lead in New Hampshire over his two closest rivals.
A New Zogby International telephone poll posted on its Web site shows Romney jumping to 35 percent support from 25 percent a month ago.
His closest competitors, Arizona Sen. John McCain, who won the 2000 New Hampshire presidential primary, and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, both stand at 19 percent in the poll conducted May 15 and 16 with a margin or error of plus or minus 4.5 percent.
