Is the end really near for King Ron?

It's a rainy, dreary Saturday afternoon in Minnesota. With nothing better to do, I decided to do a little on line reading. I stumbled across this and immediately thought of my friend Savage Republican. From http://thefirstringblog.blogspot.com/.

This paragraph caught my eye (emphasis mine)....

By comparison, the GOP Chair for Party Chair between incumbent Ron Eibensteiner and Bill Pulkrabek is deathly quiet. Both sides are calling delegates and alternates for the GOP’s June Central Committee convention and lining up support. Pulkrabek continues to attack Eibensteiner’s leadership, releasing another letter suggesting the party’s fundraising has seriously dipped and needs to rebound. With Eibensteiner’s venture capital background, the fundraising issue is perceived as his strongest and Pulkrabek’s weakest. Whether this new line of attack does anything for Pulkrabek’s chances may be a moot point according to multiple sources close to the Eibensteiner campaign who are quoting internal polling numbers showing the current Chair with a large delegate lead. The Eibensteiner camp concedes a fair number of delegates remain uncommitted, but supposedly not by a margin that could significantly close the gap for Pulkrabek. How accurate the Eibensteiner camp’s assessment is will be known in a few weeks.

Given the conversations that I have had with the rank and file in the state Republican Party, Chairman Eibensteiner is not the most popular chairman. I find it a little hard to believe the Chairman's numbers, but if they are correct, he will have one last term to hopefully undo some of the damage done (to the State Party) in the last election cycle. However, if (as First Ringer hints) the Chair's numbers are not all that accurate...Hmmmmm - June 11ths Central Committee meeting should be wildly entertaining.

Well maybe I'm not the only one who noticed...

It appears that someone in the press also noticed the difference, between Jews, Christians and Muslims, in their reaction to the news that someone has "defiled" their holy sites/texts (see my post entitled "Outrage" from May 17). Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe - no less - picked up on the theme and expanded the discussion in his article here http://tinyurl.com/agumq

The paragraph that struck me the most was this:

Christians, Jews, and Buddhists don't lash out in homicidal rage when their religion is insulted. They don't call for holy war and riot in the streets. It would be unthinkable for a mainstream priest, rabbi, or lama to demand that a blasphemer be slain. But when Reuters reported what Mohammad Hanif, the imam of a Muslim seminary in Pakistan, said about the alleged Koran-flushers -- ''They should be hung. They should be killed in public so that no one can dare to insult Islam and its sacred symbols" -- was any reader surprised?

Well finally - someone gets it!

The End is near for King Ron!

Looks like the grassroots are finally going to rise up in MN and take back our party.
Here is an interesting link to what happened at the CD 4/5 convention.
The part that got my interest,

The interesting thing for me as an observer is the acute blame the party at this grassroots level accords to the State functionaries. Ron Eibensteiner is State Chairman and he is not appreciated in his role. Blame for disappointing losses last November to the DFL are not shrugged off as a reality of city political life, but are attributed to a disconnected leadership. Mr. Eibensteiner was in attendance, as were his opponents. They all gave speeches during the proceedings, asking for support when that office goes up for election this summer, I believe. Ron has very, very little support at this level and I do not see much chance that he will be reelected as State Chair. From where I sit it looks like the new Chair will be Bill Pulkrabek. He knows which side the toast is buttered on and talked an emphasis on grassroots politics.

I will lay out in the next few weeks my case for change and why Ron should not be chair.
But I think there is a statewide trend for change.
Stay tuned.

The Fight of our Lives

As I stated below (in the post entitled "Outrage") I am an evangelical Christian who has studied the "Big Three" of religion (Christianity, Judiaism and Islam). As such, I feel that it is important that someone (I guess that would be me) mention that we Americans are in the fight of our lives. The fight is against radical Islam. Some would say that all of Islam is our enemy. According to the Koran and the teachings of several Imams (both here and abroad) you would be correct, but I would argue that there are probably just as many "marginal" Muslims as there are "marginal" Christians. For the sake of this post, I am referring to the Wahhabist view point of the Koran and Islamic teachings (this is the Muslim sect that brought us Osama bin Laden and his followers and it is the primary sect of Saudi Arabia).

Wahhabist Imams teach that ALL people have 1 choice. Convert to Islam or DIE!!! Any who "coroborate" with the infidels (that would be us folks!) are to be killed as well. Don't believe me? Think I am exaggerating? Check out this news story from Yahoo http://tinyurl.com/7azlg. Or this one http://tinyurl.com/cvjxa In the first story, Abu Musab al Zarqawi said that it was ok to target Muslims who participate in the new government of Iraq. The second is a story about a Palestinian Imam who, in a televised broadcast, said that Muslims will one day "rule America". Think about this people. You think the evangelical Christians make life miserable for homosexuals? Care to guess what happens to "outed" homosexuals in an Islamic country? The same thing that happened to all of those who were kidnapped in the early days of the war - beheading! What happens to women who dare to want to go to work? They are killed for the sake of "honor".

So the next time you hear someone say that evangelical Christians are just as bad as the radical Islamists, remember which side beheads homosexuals and which side kills women who have the audacity to step out of their prescribed roles.....

Nancy Pelosi, Oath of Office, Amendment X and me.

I caught just a snippet of CSPAN last night. There was Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, the House Minority Leader, with an easel and a list titled "Ethics..." plus something else in the title line. She of course was raging about Tom Delay, R-TX, House Majority Leader. I saw the Ethics presentation and left CSPAN.
For ANY House member, Repub or Demo, to even mention ethics and not murmur "Mea culpa..." is comic relief. The VERY first thing they do after taking their oath of office is to break their oath of office. What part of the phrase "Congress shall make no law..." do these people not understand?
I will now reveal why I call myself Amendment X:

"Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This means Article 1, Section 8. Look it up.
This Amendment from the Bill of Rights was meant to guarantee that we would remain a republic, not a democracy.
It was meant to guarantee that Congress would not mandate how much water would flush from a toilet, outlaw the selling of oranges that were smaller than 3 1/8 inches in diameter, Social Security, tatoo removal programs, funded studies on the length of flight attendants noses and any of a myriad of other laws and regulations.
It was meant to trust that a citizenry could, and would run their own lives quite nicely, as long as they were protected from violence and fraud. Including violence and fraud from the government.

The other day I was stopped at the lights at Cty 42 and Hwy 13 looking north. It occured to me that there wasn't anything that I could lay my eyes on that was not taxed or regulated in some way shape or form. And I thought of this:

HE has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of
Officers to harrass our People, and eat out their Substance. From the Declaration of Independence

Ethics...PUHLEASE!!! Just start with keeping your oath of office.

Gas taxes hurt working poor and families

Gas prices are at an all time high with no relief in sight and the Minnesota House decided that we need to add another $.10 in gas taxes to the mix. Their reasoning is that we need more money to build new roads and fund mass transit. While I understand their budgetary need, I would like them to stop and think about how their actions adversely affect the rest of us – especially the working poor who are just barely able to afford to get to work as it is now.

Because of increased gas prices, bus fares will go up. For those that are fortunate enough to have a car, the added $2-$3 a week (depending on how far they have to drive to their job) is money that they don’t have to buy things their family really needs – like milk for their kids. For those that buy goods that are shipped into the state, expect the costs of those goods to go up as shipping companies are going to pass these additional costs on to retailers, who in turn pass them on to consumers! This does not even include the increases in registration fees for vehicles.

“Real wages” for the average hourly worker in the US actually FELL in 2004 (after adjusting for inflation) according to the US Dept of Labor statistics. Workers can not go to their employers and DEMAND an increase in pay in order to cover their budgetary “shortfalls”. Why should the MN House be any different? If roads need to be worked on, prioritize that needs to be done based on what is in the budget Do we really need more mass transit right now? If not, we should not be spending the money for it. These are the same real budgetary questions that working families have to ask themselves every month. Until the economic recovery is complete, the state should not be punishing struggling citizens by raising taxes on a product that is already too expensive for many to afford as it is.

Outrage?

Let me start this off by stating, upfront and for the record, I am a Christian. I am (according the the leftists) one of those evangelical right wing nut-jobs because I do believe that the Bible is the word of God and that we should live our lives according to the teachings of the Bible, in other words, I hold the Scriptures as sacred. However, I am not a typical (again according to the leftist defination) evangelical Christian inasmuch as I have studied the major Christian "sects" and the other 2 major world religions (Judiaism and Islam). Having said that, here is what I wanted to say today.

The internet is all abuzz over the Newsweek "Periscope" item of May 9, 2005. As you all know, Newsweek stated (and has since retracted) that American soldiers "desacrated" a Koran by sticking it in a toilet. Now we don't know if that really happened or not, former detainees at Gitmo have long claimed it but there has yet to be any proof of these allegations. Because of this printed rumor, radical Islamists rioted and people DIED! Now others have discussed (at great length) the irresponsible behavior that Newsweek exhibited. I would like to, instead, focus on the "excuse" for the riots.

So you are mad that someone MAY have desecrated your holy book? Where was your "righteous" anger when the Buddhist temples and statues and holy documents were destroyed by your friends in the Taliban 10 years ago? What about when that the Palestinians defiled the tomb of Joseph when the Jews pulled out of Nablus(in 2002)? What about when Christian Holy Symbols are defiled in the name of "art" (a la "the Piss Christ")? Where was your "righteous" anger over that desacration? Please tell us Newsweek....where was your outrage over the desacration of THESE sacred items.....

What is wrong with people - part 2?

And then there is this out of Florida http://tinyurl.com/dozur. A judge ruled that a 13 year old girl, let me repeat this a 13 year old girl (who was a chronic run away) had the right to terminate the life of a baby that she back pregnant with during a consentual sexual relationship. What is the reason for this abortion, you might ask? She does not want to carry the baby to term. Regardless of what the mainstream media tells you, abortion - as a form of birth control - IS practiced in this country. There is no "risk to the mothers health", no rape, no incest none of the "normal" (or so we are told) reasons for this child to want an abortion. Simply put, she did not want to suffer the consequences (having a baby) of her actions (having sex) and the judge in Florida says that it is her right to be irresponsible!!!!!

Again, what is wrong I ask rhetorically? Simply put, people are no longer responsible for their actions and until they are held responsible for their actions, we are going to be in dire trouble.

What is wrong with people today?

This is a rhetorical question for I can tell you what is wrong. It is in the body of the story here http://tinyurl.com/cylt9. A grandmother in San Antonio is convicted of starving her grandchild to death and it is the governments fault according to the woman's defense attorney. The worse part of this story....apparently the child's parents and extended family aided grandma in starving the 4 year old child.

Then in Chicago, you have a man who brutally stabbed his daughter and her friend to death for a supposed disciplinary violation http://tinyurl.com/e34zy . His excuse was that the girl refused to come home. This father was recently released from jail. He was in jail because he violated his probation after he was sentenced for attacking the mother of the dead child with a chainsaw!

When are we going to quit excusing bad behavior in people? When are we going to start holding people accountable for their actions? How many more of our precious children are going to have to suffer (like Jessica Lundsford) because we are coddling the murders and rapists that are currently walking among us? We have to start protecting our children! Locking away sex offenders and violent domestic offenders for life is a good start. Taking responsibility for our own actions - and holding others responsible for theirs is an even better second step!

"OK, Hit the Snooze...just another 7 Minutes...

The recent Marine firefight, part of Operation Matador, is hard fought. And very dangerous. The enemy has given the Marines a style of fighting they've never seen before. Ever. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/10/AR2005051000221.html
The upshot is that most of the fighters are now no longer angry and radical Baathists but foreign fighters. Intelligence reports that they pour over the border from Syria. The talk is now about securing the Iraqi-Syrian border. Hugh Hewitt had a number of segments on Operation Matador and the closing of the Syrian border for the security of the American forces.
Hhhmmmm....we can close the Iraqi-Syrian border for security.
And the Mexican border? For security?
Or perhpas we should we re-set the snooze for 15 minutes?

Uh, Mr. President, Stop Hitting the Snooze Alarm...

Just got this from a friend newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/5/9/132244.shtml .
As I read down the article, I noticed that Montgomery County, Maryland was mentioned...again (see the Friday and yesterday's post).
But, what prompts me to write is a tendency I've seen over the past 20 years with the Federal government, and the press plays a significant part. The thought came again to the fore when President Bush used the term "vigilantes" to describe the participants in Minuteman Project in Arizona (www.minutemanproject.com/ ). First, look up the term vigilante. The definition is a member of a vigilance committee. The history of the vigilance committees was to watch over a community where there was no legally established method of jurisprudence. The vigilance committee was born out of frustration and the lack, or in many cases, the unwillingness of the local constabulary and courts to protect citizens and their property. Movies and TV have given the term vigilante a very negative meaning. Were all vigilant committees positive? "All power corrupts..." So, the answer is no. There are the examples that the media glorifies. That being said, the vigilance committee came out a need that government was not addressing (basically, the prime reason for existence of government- to protect the rights of its citizens to enjoy their lives and property, the latter being an extension of the former [read Bastiat kids, just as Uncle Amendment X has told you to do!
www.constitution.org/law/bastiat.htm ]).
So, the question I ask is this: What drove these men and women of the Minutemen Project, all United States citizens, to use their time, money and other resources to expose themselves to possible danger and death on a hostile border? They could easily have spent this time with their families, at their jobs. But they chose to volunteer to protect their families by standing watch on a border that George Bush seems unwilling to protect. They finally felt driven to do something that the government is absolutely unwilling to do.
Tom Clancy, the author, is considered a military expert. He has been called to testify before Congress as an expert witness. I was introduced to him 10 years ago by a friend of mine. I'm not a fiction reader, but reading "Debt of Honor" and I was hooked.
Clancy's recent book is "Teeth of the Tiger" and combines Columbian drug lords, radical Islamists, the Mexican border and a co-ordinated attack on America. There is evidence that Middle Eastern men are smuggled across the border for $50,000-per man. Most people are charged $1,000 or so by the coyotes. So, somebody REALLY wants Middle Easterners in America. Middle Easterners and others are referred to as OTM-other than Mexicans. And OTM's account for about 25% of all illegal crossings.
Vigilantes, Mr. President?
I think not at all.

"WE Know Best..."

I just re-read Lady Liberty's blog from Friday. It got me to thinking back about 30 years ago. I was Chairman of the Extension Classes Student Board at the University of Minnesota (in effect I was the Class President for all Extension Students at the U). Extension classes were (and probably still are) heavily attended by adults who were intent on getting their degree, however, were also working full time. One of the things we, and my predecessors, had lobbied for for some time were classes and graduate degree programs from the Graduate School, full credits as were the Day School classes. We asked for nothing to be cut. We wanted the same curriculum, content, books, requirements-an exact copy of the Day School classes, except taught in the evenings and/or Saturday (many classes with 5 credits were taught two days of the week. Since the U has gone to a full semester program instead of quarters and semesters, I don't know how those classes are taught, or the conversion from quarter to semester credits). Well, the ivory tower Graduate School opposed us at every, and I mean every juncture. Three of us had a much worked for meeting with C. Peter McGrath, President of the University. We wanted to put our case before him. Well, we walked into the meeting, and there was a representative from the Graduate School talking to President McGrath. And the Grad School representative didn't leave, but stayed for OUR meeting. We were SO disappointed. The establishment was talking. No, they were screaming!
What all this has boiled down to was a comment by Dean Woods back in 1975. Dean Woods was an older man who had been at the University for a long time. He had great wit and wisdom.
At one of our meetings, he said "I'd hate to be one of those Graduate School deans or administrators and tell you people, who are all taxpayers that pay their salaries, that you are not going to be treated the same as day school students."
Seems that the parents in Montgomery County Maryland grabbed their pitchforks and torches and stormed the castle.
Good for them. What is sad and of note is that they had to go to court to do it.
Sounds like they need to re-align the School Board there in Montgomery County.
Wonder if any of them know Dean Woods?

I have been meaning to write on this for a couple of days, but every time I start thinking about it, I get rather angry. Earlier this week, the Washington Times reported that the Montgomery County (MD) School District was starting a "pilot" sex education program that purportedly taught that homosexuality was "normal" and "natural". Several concerned parents, who wanted to sit in on the class (to see how objectional the content may or may not be) were told that they were not welcome in this class. The parents were concerned (after attending a parent information meeting) that the program would teach that homosexuality is OK. When the school district realized the parents intent, they said that having the parents in the classroom would have a "chilling effect" on the conversation. Well, the parents fought back and took the case to court. Today, in a victory for all parents, the pilot program has been pulled from the curriculum for this school year (http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20050505-115955-2689r.htm).

Now aside from the homosexual indoctrination, the thing that disturbed me the most (as a parent) was the whole air of superiority that came out of the school board. The whole "we know better than you about what to teach your child and if you don't like it tough!". Bravo to the parents that stood their ground and told the school distict that WE THE TAXPAYERS, who provide your salary, are in charge.

Two More Reasons We Are a REPUBLIC, Not A Democracy

"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." --James Madison, Federalist No. 10

And :www.fee.org/~web/0405iolpdf/ftp.pdf
Again, I also highly recommend Bastiat's "The Law".
http://www.constitution.org/law/bastiat.htm
Yikes, 'cause in a democracy you and I would be forced to particpate in illegal schemes like, oh, Social Security. Wait a minute...
OK, then... in a democracy we'd be forced to support things we hate and are morally opposed to, like..wait another minute...
Hhmmm... we are forced to contribute to these things.
Oh, oh.
Read Bastiat. He puts it much better than I do.

Track their Votes

I recently started receiving an e-newsletter that tracks the votes of your representatives in DC. It tells you how they voted on bills that came before them the week before and the bills that are pending in the upcoming week.

For example, on the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (that was before the House this past week) you can find out that the only members of the Minnesota delegation that voted against this common sense bill were Rep Betty McCollum (DFL CD4) and Rep. Martin Olav Sabo (DFL CD5).

You can find this wonderful newsletter at http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/index.html. If you are at all interested in how your states representatives are voting this session, please sign up for this newsletter. You owe it to yourself, as a concerned citizen, to know how your state's representatives are voting.

"Yes Virginia..." Part II

From one of my favorite columnists, Dr. Walter E. Williams of George Mason University
www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/ww20050223.shtml
www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/ww20050309.shtml

Let Me See...Which Letter?

I have to admit I'm looking at this tempest in the Senate and I hear the cry "Separation of church and state" ad naseum. But, I only hear it from the lefty pukes (they are are not liberals. They are libertines and lefties). Well, just a bit of research and here is the letter
( www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html ) from which that phrases emanates. Now, the question I pose is how is it that the lefty pukes take this single letter, a private letter, to a private recipient, as gospel (pun intended)as original intent for the 1st Amendment and apply this letter as original intent and are absolutely inflexible as to it's meaning and YET, they completely ignore The Federalist Papers as evidence of original intent and claim the Constitution is a living document. Except of course where this one letter proscribes resolute and intragsigent original intent.
Ah yes. The intent buffet.

Is this a fight worth fighting?

People have asked why this fight over the judiciary is important. Here is a stellar reason why this battle over the judiciary is not only necessary, but it is vital to the survival of our children and this country!

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0405/27obscene.html

A Georgia law that prohibits "obscene" phone calls was struck down yesterday by the Georgia Supreme Court. Now, I can hear you saying "what business of it is the government's if 2 consenting adults want to carry on a lewd conversation?" Well friends, the case before the Georgia Supreme Court was brought by a 17 year old who made a series of collect obscene calls to a 14 year old girl that he met over the internet! Oh did I mention that he made those calls while he was in jail? The case was brought about when the mother got the phone bill and had the audacity to ask her daughter what the calls were about. Imagine that, a parent getting involved in their minor childs life?!?!?!?

This is why the judiciary is such an important issue.

The "Disappearing" Wall

I ran across this little beauty this morning.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/26/opinion/26tue1.html?ex=1115265600&en=d52d3ad406f82074&ei=5070

Apparently the New York Times has issues with politicians speaking at a church. Unless, it is their politicians speaking in a church - then they are surprisingly silent (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58834-2004Oct24.html).

It's just another one of those things that make you go "hmmmmmmmm"

Otay 'Panky...Let's Start:"Yes Virginia, There is a Social Security Trust Fund"

A great article:
http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=6843
And so the debate is on. And in the words of an elected official friend of mine "If we can't tackle Social Security, we have no hope to address Medicare." And Medicare, my fellow Americans, makes Social Security small potatoes. Very small potatoes.