Sunday, December 28, 2008

0-16 - The Pefect Season

All I have to say is that Ford needs to stick with the F-150 and sell the Lions for sucking so bad. 0-16? I can do a better job running this team.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Heads up for Next year

The good news is that we didn't get hit as bad as we could have in lame duck over in Lansing. The anti-freedom ban on smoking in privately owned businesses did not get passed conference. That is good news for those who support businesses to make their own decisions without the interference of the government goon squads. I'd keep an eye out on that next year.

Blue Cross reform is another issues. I have to read that more in depth to make a decision on whether to support or oppose that. That may be coming back.

What concerns me the most though is an increase in the gas tax. That talk was rumbling a bit in the last month after the insiders in Lansing have been pushing hard for it in the name of the roads. That needs to be watched very closely.

Christmas Time Updates

It's been a rough month for me, and I haven't had any time for this, so this is going back to some old news here, as well as more recent developments.

First off, what the hell is going on in the City of Brighton? Although I never lived in the city, I've always considered Brighton home, growing up just outside the city.

From the Argus:

One of the sections reads, “It shall be unlawful for a person to engage in a course of conduct or repeatedly commit acts that alarm or seriously annoy another person and that serve no legitimate purpose.”

Another section states, “It shall be unlawful for any person in the city to insult, accost, molest or otherwise annoy, either by word of mouth, sign or motions any person in any public place.”


Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? This is why people have no respect for the law nowadays. What in the hell does "annoy" mean? Why is this something that has to be codified into law?

I hope the council repeals this. What scares me the most about it is that the Argus article said that two council members had questions about the wording and still voted for it. That's crazy. These are laws, with penalties we are talking about here, not purchase agreements.

One interesting tidbit.
The ordinance was modeled after one in Royal Oak, where Brighton Police Chief Tom Wightman previously was employed.


Why am I not surprised that Royal Oak was the model for this turkey? Brighton doesn't need to be Royal Oak.

In other news, Chicago and Illinois Politics strikes again. Blagojevich has been arrested for allegedly trying to sell the US Senate seat of Obama that is now vacant. Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel could be tied into this. Now keep in mind that Blago is innocent till proven guilty. He's not into the league of George Ryan, Mel Reynolds and company yet.

Obama sure isn't qualified for the presidency by resume, but he's a lot more qualified than Caroline Kennedy is for the US Senate? The Democrats love their royality and fancy names. All you have to be is a famous rich leftist.

Granholm unfortunately didn't a spot in Obama's cabinent. Too bad. I was hoping she'd get what then Red Wings GM Jimmy Devellano got in 1991....booted upstairs. Cherry can't be worse.

As far as Hamburg politics goes, I'm staying away from that one except to say same as it ever was.

The big news right now though is the auto industry. Bush approved a loan to the auto industry. I have mixed views about this. I'm not against a loan if it is a loan and not a bailout. I hate handouts. On the same note, Congress rushed through a trillion dollar bailout to the credit markets, overseen by some of the same dumbasses like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank who helped cause the problem in the first place. If those people are bailed out (which I opposed), how can the middle finger be given to the domestic auto industry afterward. At least the auto industry had a lot more jobs in this country.

Now I'm no fan of golden parachutes, but what pisses me off is when CONGRESS, the biggest bunch of failures on the face of the earth, tells ANYBODY what their salary should be. Who the hell is Waxman and that crowd to tell someone that they need to take a $1 salary? If anyone deserves $1 salaries right now, it's Congress, and they still get their "cost of living increases."

I'll try to this updated more frequently again.

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Mark Sanford gets it

Sorry for the long delay between posts. Late November/December is tough. I had a trial and two papers I had to write and finish.

There's a reason I've hoped he was going to run back in 08, and why he would be my first choice in 2012. Mark Sanford wrote this in Politico back on November 29.

Mark Sanford - What's next for the GOP

Our party took nothing short of a shellacking nationally. Some on the left will say our electoral losses are a repudiation of our principles of lower taxes, smaller government and individual liberty. But Election Day was not a rejection of those principles — in fact, cutting taxes and spending were important tenets of Barack Obama’s campaign.

Instead, voters rejected the fact that while Republicans have campaigned on the conservative themes of lower taxes, less government and more freedom, they have consistently failed to govern that way. Americans didn’t turn away from conservatism, they instead turned away from many who faked it.


Mark Sanford walked the walk. THAT is why I hoped he was going to run. This governor had the courage of calling out big spenders in his own party, and did it in a fashion that brought much attention to the problem. When the state legislature gave a bloated spending bill to Governor Sanford, he line item vetoed it. To add insult to the injury, he brought two pigs to the capital, named one pork, named the other barrel, had a press conference with them. That sent a message, and it wasn't even partisan.

Sanford had three prongs on rebuilding the GOP.

First, let’s go back to the principle of saying what you mean and meaning what you say. A political party is much like a brand, and brands thrive or wither based on how consistently they deliver on what they promise. Along those same lines, it’s important for brands to stick to their knitting. If John Deere’s tractor sales are declining, they don’t say, “Tell you what, let’s make cars and airplanes, too.” Instead, they focus on producing better tractors.

I make that point because there’s a real temptation in Republican circles right now to try and be all things to all people. We tried that already — it was called “compassionate conservatism,” and it got us nowhere.


Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. The GOP got lucky in 2000 and 2004. While the Bush campaign are good organizers, they are poor strategists when it comes to message. In 2000, they barely beat a real bum in Gore, and in 2004, they ran against a traitor in John Kerry and barely beat him. It was buying time, because Congress did not keep the big spending parts of Bush in camp and simply followed him. Nobody respect followers.

Compassionate Conservatism was never real popular with the base. Bush got buy with much of the base because of social issues, bad opponents, jerks in the media and on the left we wanted to see lose (the old he's a son of a bitch, but our son of a bitch), and many on the left wanting to see a war lost for political reasons. (Politics stops at the border, and that continues now with Obama as president).

Eventually though, when the Republicans act like democrats, voters are rather going to have the real thing than democrat-lite. No Child Left Behind was a joke. Prescription Drugs including Viagra paid for by the feds? McCain/Feingold? Panic driven handouts after Katrina? Deficit Spending? Bridges to Nowhere? And now the trillion dollar plus bailouts. What the hell are you guys doing? I never signed up for any of that, and that is why I am a 1994 Republican and not a Bush Republican.


Second, our loyalties need to be to ideas, not to individuals. Ted Stevens in many ways personified the opposite of what the GOP is supposed to be about, reveling in his ability to secure pork and turning a blind eye to ethical lapses.

There needs to be a high standard for our franchisees. In other words, I believe Republicans and conservatives must agree on our core principles. St. Augustine called for “unity in the essentials, diversity in the nonessentials, and charity in all things,” and while I believe there should always be a big GOP tent, there must also be a shared agreement on the essentials — including expanding liberty, encouraging entrepreneurship and limiting the reach of government in people’s everyday lives.

First, let’s go back to the principle of saying what you mean and meaning what you say. A political party is much like a brand, and brands thrive or wither based on how consistently they deliver on what they promise. Along those same lines, it’s important for brands to stick to their knitting. If John Deere’s tractor sales are declining, they don’t say, “Tell you what, let’s make cars and airplanes, too.” Instead, they focus on producing better tractors.

I make that point because there’s a real temptation in Republican circles right now to try and be all things to all people. We tried that already — it was called “compassionate conservatism,” and it got us nowhere.

Second, our loyalties need to be to ideas, not to individuals. Ted Stevens in many ways personified the opposite of what the GOP is supposed to be about, reveling in his ability to secure pork and turning a blind eye to ethical lapses.

There needs to be a high standard for our franchisees. In other words, I believe Republicans and conservatives must agree on our core principles. St. Augustine called for “unity in the essentials, diversity in the nonessentials, and charity in all things,” and while I believe there should always be a big GOP tent, there must also be a shared agreement on the essentials — including expanding liberty, encouraging entrepreneurship and limiting the reach of government in people’s everyday lives.


I can't disagree with any of that.

Finally, we need to look toward the states for answers, rather than toward Washington.

I am struck by how many of my colleagues around the country were quietly advancing the kinds of reforms and conservative principles that Washington politicians would do well to emulate.

In Louisiana, Bobby Jindal is making market-based reforms to his state’s Medicaid program, while over in Georgia, Sonny Perdue is tackling health care affordability with a Health Savings Account program. Sarah Palin has cut spending and fought corruption in Alaska. Rick Perry in Texas has balanced the budget while cutting taxes, creating more than a million jobs in the process. Mitch Daniels in Indiana is innovating when it comes to building infrastructure.

I could go on, but the bottom line is that you don’t have to look far to find examples of how sticking to conservative principles not only yields a better-working government but, frankly, yields electoral success as well.


When Washington is the problem, change isn't going to come from Washington leadership like Blunt, Boehner, and McConnell. Instead, the following people need to be the voice and faces of our party. Sanford. Jindal. Palin. Pence. Hensarling. Coburn. That is the future of the party.


We’ve thrown $2.3 trillion toward bailouts and a stimulus this year with little to show for it in the way of results, with seemingly hundreds of billions more being contemplated by Congress each day. Borrowing from Medicare, Social Security, our grandkids and the Chinese to remedy a problem created by too much borrowing strikes me as odd, and hardly the “change” Americans really want.

Where change must come, though, is in once again making our party one that governs on the principles it professes. That change starts with each of us in elected office, and more importantly, with each person who cares about returning to conservative principles making their voices heard.


One thing I liked seeing was the Livingston County GOP putting up billboards and a commercial that subtlely mentions the good thing the LOCAL Republicans have been doing. We need to first and foremost regain the fiscal responsibility mantra in our party. That starts by walking the walk, and calling out all sides that do not walk the walk. It's time for more Mark Sanford and less government conservatism and less George Bush and "crap sandwich" "conservatism".

Friday, November 21, 2008

Government sends message to auto industry

70% of the Union members in Michigan voted for Obama is the exit polls are accurate. They may or may not be, but it's probably close. I know the UAW push was probably close to unprecedented, and was a major reason for Obama's win. The thanks given for that? Their best ally losing his committee chair.

But we all the know the real controllers among the democrats isn't the David Bonior wing or John Dingell wing of the party anymore. It's the foreign car lovers and American car haters and rich leftist elitists of San Francisco and Hollywood. Nancy Pelosi and the worst of them all in Henry Waxman. Waxman hates freedom and wants to ban everything for one reason or another. Be is free speech, smokes, trucks, SUV's, or especially guns. The worst of the worst of the left.

""If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights,it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all." - Waxman on MSNBC

And I'm nervous that this fascist has a major committee chair. People like Waxman are the reason why we need the ultimate check and balance - the Second Amendment. No, that's not a threat. It's a caution because if the Waxman crowd get everything they want their utopian view of society - that's when we'll need it. Until then, we still have the ballot box and the courts. Checks and balances.

The democrats just kicked out a sane democrat for this fascist, Waxman. John Dingell was an old time liberal. He was too independent for this spot. Mr. Universal Health Care himself wasn't leftist enough for this position. Why? Because he liked the evil auto industry. He didn't completely drink the global warming flavor-aid. At least not at the expense of his district. For that, the longest serving member of congress gets pushed out to pasture. That's the change on the horizon by the democrats. From a liberal like Dingell to a fascist like Waxman.

Now back to the Big 3 and the debate on bailouts, etc. I saw this interesting piece from Pat Buchanan. Buchanan's not always right on some things, and goes further than I do in some areas, but when it comes to trade issues, he's right on the money. Government taxed and regulated the hell out of manufacturing at home, and forced them to compete with both hands tied behind their backs against foreign competition.

Who killed the U.S. auto industry?

To hear the media tell it, arrogant corporate chiefs failed to foresee the demand for small, fuel-efficient cars and made gas-guzzling road-hog SUVs no one wanted, while the clever, far-sighted Japanese, Germans and Koreans prepared and built for the future.

I dissent. What killed Detroit was Washington, the government of the United States, politicians, journalists and muckrakers who have long harbored a deep animus against the manufacturing class that ran the smokestack industries that won World War II.

As far back as the 1950s, an intellectual elite that produces mostly methane had its knives out for the auto industry of which Ike's treasury secretary, ex-GM chief Charles Wilson, had boasted, "What's good for America is good for General Motors, and vice versa."

"Engine Charlie" was relentlessly mocked, even in Al Capp's L'il Abner cartoon strip, where a bloviating "General Bullmoose" had as his motto, "What's good for Bullmoose is good for America!"

How did Big Government do in the U.S. auto industry?

Washington imposed a minimum wage higher than the average wage in war-devastated Germany and Japan. The Feds ordered that U.S. plants be made the healthiest and safest worksites in the world, creating OSHA to see to it. It enacted civil rights laws to ensure the labor force reflected our diversity. Environmental laws came next, to ensure U.S. factories became the most pollution-free on earth.

It then clamped fuel efficiency standards on the entire U.S. car fleet.

Next, Washington imposed a corporate tax rate of 35 percent, raking off another 15 percent of autoworkers' wages in Social Security payroll taxes

State governments imposed income and sales taxes, and local governments property taxes to subsidize services and schools.


That's the left hook. Here's the kick to the head.

And under the 14th Amendment, GM, Ford and Chrysler had to obey the same U.S. laws and pay at the same tax rates. Outside the United States, however, there was and is no equality of standards or taxes.

Thus when America was thrust into the Global Economy, GM and Ford had to compete with cars made overseas in factories in postwar Japan and Germany, then Korea, where health and safety standards were much lower, wages were a fraction of those paid U.S. workers, and taxes were and are often forgiven on exports to the United States.

All three nations built "export-driven" economies.

The Beetle and early Japanese imports were made in factories where wages were far beneath U.S. wages and working conditions would have gotten U.S. auto executives sent to prison.

The competition was manifestly unfair, like forcing Secretariat to carry 100 pounds in his saddlebags in the Derby.

Japan, China and South Korea do not believe in free trade as we understand it. To us, they are our "trading partners." To them, the relationship is not like that of Evans & Novak or Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers. It is not even like the Redskins and Cowboys. For the Cowboys only want to defeat the Redskins. They do not want to put their franchise out of business and end the competition -- as the Japanese did to our TV industry by dumping Sonys here until they killed it.

While we think the Global Economy is about what is best for the consumer, they think about what is best for the nation.

Like Alexander Hamilton, they understand that manufacturing is the key to national power. And they manipulate currencies, grant tax rebates to their exporters and thieve our technology to win. Last year, as trade expert Bill Hawkins writes, South Korea exported 700,000 cars to us, while importing 5,000 cars from us.

That's Asia's idea of free trade.

How has this Global Economy profited or prospered America?

In the 1950s, we made all our own toys, clothes, shoes, bikes, furniture, motorcycles, cars, cameras, telephones, TVs, etc. You name it. We made it.

Are we better off now that these things are made by foreigners? Are we better off now that we have ceased to be self-sufficient? Are we better off now that the real wages of our workers and median income of our families no longer grow as they once did? Are we better off now that manufacturing, for the first time in U.S. history, employs fewer workers than government?

We no longer build commercial ships. We have but one airplane company, and it outsources. China produces our computers. And if GM goes Chapter 11, America will soon be out of the auto business.

Our politicians and pundits may not understand what is going on. Historians will have no problem explaining the decline and fall of the Americans.


Some of us have seen this coming for a long, long, time.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

The Crap Sandwich Bailout is a failure.

Prior planning prevents piss poor performance. This rush job, which was "the only solution" according to those BRILLIANT minds in Washington with names like Pelosi, Reid, Boehner, Bush, Obama, McCain, and McConnell, is not working.

From the AP


WASHINGTON – Urgently shifting course, the Bush administration is abandoning the centerpiece of its massive $700 billion economic rescue plan and exploring new ways to shore up not only banks but credit-card, auto-loan and other huge nonbank businesses. Democrats are pressing hard to include a multibillion-dollar bailout for faltering automakers, too — over administration objections. Unimpressed by any of the talk on Wednesday, Wall Street dove ever lower.

"The facts changed and the situation worsened," Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said at a news briefing, explaining the administration's switch from its original plan to help financial institutions by buying up troubled assets, primarily securities backed by bad home loans.


How is throwing money at charlie foxtrots beneficial to the economy? As I said about the crap sandwich back on September 29.

Emergency and rushed Bills usually turn out to be real turkeys. That got us the Patriot Act approved by 99 senators. That got us the department of "Homeland Security." That got us a massive increase in government, the loss of our freedoms, and in my opinion did nothing to make us safer.

You can't rush this crap. You have to first try and prevent this. If that doesn't work, as it did not work here, you find the root of the problem. When a Japanese Maple (my dad will get that reference) wraps around a septic pipe and breaks it, you don't fix the pipe until you correct the Maple. Else, it will break again, and the maple roots would be even bigger. This bandaid does nothing to fix the problem. It is so Pelosi, Chris Dodd, GW Bush, Goldman Sachs Paulson, Barney Frank, and Boehner can say "Hey, we did something!" and go back to put their heads in the sand and hope the worse collapse happens when they retire so it isn't their problem.

There's no secret to the problems here. People spent more than they had. They screwed up. The banks also screwed up in lending. Fixed costs they did not budget for increased. Housing markets dropped. Jobs (in Michigan and some other places) were scarce. Energy prices increased dramaticly. Unless these are addressed, then this bailout will only make it worse down the road.

My plan would be this.
1. All of the above (Except ethanol which raises food costs) energy policy. We need to open up our domestic energy sources, creating jobs here and improving our national security at the same time. Drill in Alaska and offshore. Clean Coal electricity. Nuclear Power. And at the same time work for alternative fuel. Fuel Cell, cold fusion. This needs to be long term. As people spend less on energy costs, they have more money in their pocket. Demand will only increase with an industrializing China and India and their 2+ Billion people.

2. Reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This should have been done 5 years ago.

3. Cut pork spending.

4. As far as the Wall Street plan, the Republican Study Committee has an alternative plan which I can support. Click here to see Pence and Jeb Hensarling's plan

Paulson put all his eggs in one basket, as did Pelosi, Boehner, Dodd, Frank, Bush, etc. The rank and file house democrats and republicans alike united against this crap sandwich. It's time to think things through, quit rushing, and deliver something that isn't a crap sandwich.


I hope Obama's first act as president is to fire Henry Paulson, and then replace him with someone better.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Lansing insiders want to raise the gas tax.

The lastest studies by the political class concluded one obvious solution that comes to them. Taxes! More of them. My least favorite tax. The gas tax. With gas prices STILL high, and likely to go back to their rates three months ago with Washington DC unlikely to allow more exploration of supplies, along with increased industrialization of India and China, the last thing we need is another artificial price increase thank to Washington or Lansing.

The worst tax in the country is the gas tax. I blame the gas prices as one of the major contributors to the economic collapse. People did not budget for $4.00+ gas. People always must pay the gas taxes or they miss work. This raises the costs for shipping and of every single product on the market, especially food costs. It devastates the Big 3. People lose jobs, are foreclosed, etc.

I will seriously consider a primary challenge against anyone from our county who votes for this tax if they are not term limited out. I would run on this issue, number one.

The lefties at AP had this out titled 'Mich. gas tax, registration fees may have to rise'. First off, have to rise? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — Gov. Jennifer Granholm and lawmakers should consider eliminating Michigan's 19-cents-a-gallon gasoline tax and replacing it with a tax on the wholesale price of gas, according to a report being released Monday.

Swapping the taxes would let revenues rise or fall with changing fuel prices rather than tying gas revenues to consumption, which is falling as motorists drive more fuel-efficient cars or cut back on buying gas to cope with prices that at one point topped $4 per gallon.

The change could boost transportation funding in the long run and might ensure that a bigger share of taxes paid at the pump actually go toward Michigan's deteriorating roads, advocates say.

The recommendation is one of many listed in a Transportation Funding Task Force report set for release Monday. The Associated Press got an advance copy of the 85-page report.

"We may need to shift away from a 19th- or 20th-century tax on motor fuels," said Rich Studley, task force co-chairman and head of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. He warned that the current system is becoming "obsolete."


Rich Studley is a good guy, but one siginificant power at the state chamber is the roadbuilders who have been pushing this for a long long time. That's not a slam, but a fact.

The 13-member task force was created by a state law asking for recommendations to improve roads, bridges, airports and public transportation and come up with new ways to pay for them.

The panel, which includes four legislators — two Democrats and two Republicans — decided to pass up delivering a preliminary report due Oct. 31 and release the final report months ahead of schedule.

The report says Michigan must double its transportation spending and warns that one or two incremental fee increases won't be enough to meet the need.

States have been struggling to find ways to raise enough money to fix crumbling roads and bridges and fund airports and public transportation. Gasoline sales nationally are down, so state and federal gasoline taxes are drawing in less money. Michigan continues to get back less in federal transportation dollars than it sends to Washington.



Matt Helms of the Free Press has this

Among the options:

• Increasing vehicle registration fees. Task force member Mike Nystrom of the Michigan Infrastructure and Transportation Association said his group would favor a progressive increase that would be higher for more expensive vehicles.

• Changing the state's gas tax from a per-gallon rate to a percentage rate, similar to the sales tax, helping stabilize gas tax revenues. Nystrom said one idea to offset the impact to drivers would be to lower the percentage when gas prices are high.

• Looking at public-private partnerships that could include leasing roads to for-profit companies that could build toll lanes, or public-private collaborations on light-rail systems.

• Raising the diesel tax to 19 cents per gallon from 15 cents, to make it equal to the state gas tax.


As far as I'm concerned, registration fees are another tax. As far as "expensive" vehicles, does that go for the original price or the current value? My truck was probably about $28,000 when the original owner bought it. I paid about $11,000 3-4 years ago. Used. Will I be paying a tax on a $28,000 truck, $11,000 truck, or about $6000 or so it would be worth today. Heads up.


As far as toll roads go, I'm not adverse to them - as long as they are NEW roads, and not on existing roads. Same goes with HOV lanes.

The biggest problem is this false premise that all state road money did, does, and always will only come from the gas tax. That idea needs to be squashed and we all need to send that message to our reps now and hope that once again, Lansing doesn't bend us all over during the lame duck session with term limited reps which got us all those fee increases in 2004. As Kevin Bacon's famous Animal House Quote goes - "Thank you sir may I have another!" Time to call Chris, Joe, and Valde and tell them no tax increases. With gas at about $2.00, now is the time the tax hikers are going to strike. They will not do this when it goes back to $4.00 - and it will likely do so next summer.

Now one of the few things I think that government should spend money on is infastructure. Michigan has one of the highest gas taxes in the country. It's not 19 cents like the media says. It's 19 cents, and then another 6% of the entire cost. So if the raw price of gas is $1.62.6, add 18.4 cents for the federal tax. $1.81 add 19 Cents for the state tax. That makes it $2.00 Now add the 6% sales tax. 12 more cents. $2.12. Right now if gas is $2.12 per gallon, 50 cents of that is going to the gas tax. Almost 25% of all costs. If the raw price was $3.62, the main taxes increase it to $4.00 Add .24 cents per gallon in sales tax. Now taxes are 62 cents per gallon going to the government. The diesel tax recommendation is as bad if not worse. Pay more in shipping costs if this happens.

One recommendation I have is this - all money from the sales tax for gasoline is earmarked for roads and not the general fund. That can be paid for by eliminating needless government pork, like MSU trustee Joel Ferguson's State Police building, Dan Mulhern's paid staff and figurehead position, cutting these trips for government officials, and taking a scalpal to the budget. Another idea I have is consolidating townships and eliminating duplication. If you want to talk about "moving to the 21st century" there's a start. Back in 1837, it would probably take me all day to get from Green Oak to Lansing by horse. Now I can do it in about an hour by truck.

This false premise on the gas tax being the only way to fund roads needs to get sent to Hell.

Friday, November 07, 2008

I'm Back in the USSA.....

You don't know unlucky you are boys.....

Let me preface this by the following. I'm not against community service. I'm a strong believer of VOLUNTARY community service. I used to coach football for free. I loved it. If I still had the time to do a good job doing it, I'd still have the whistle and coaches golf shirt coaching.

I have a problem when it is required, mandatory, by law. That's what Comrade Obama wants. I have a problem with the following for three reasons. He changed the words for obvious political words, but I saw the original.

Originaly on Obama's website

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.


Problems:
1. Involuntary servitude. The constitution. Big government in DC is forcing our students by law to committ 350-850 hours of work without pay. It's a mandate.
2. What is considered community service in the eyes of government? ACORN? Radical leftist causes? This strikes me of "reducation camps."
3. How will this be enforced? No diploma? Maybe the affluent areas won't have a problem by this, but some kids have to work for money to help support the family. Will they be denied their diploma?

The Times-Gazette also caught the original with the words 'to require'.

Obama or his people. changed it later for some reason. Good thing I saved the original paragraph. Here's the new one...

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.


Require is now "setting a goal." That's a nice vague term. Now they are making it sound like it is tax credits? Or are they really planning for the original "requirement" and want to delay that. I still don't care for the tax credit plan. Community service should be done for the right reasons. It is something government shouldn't go near, especially from the incompetent fools in Washington DC.

My guard is up. The true intentions can often be seen by the first draft posted, and that say "to require." My response to Comrade Obama's requirement is that he can take it and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Allan Filip running for 8th District GOP Chair

I knew this already, but was keeping it quiet until the Argus had this.

Allan Filip will not seek reelection after receiving the endorsement for 8th congressional district chairman.

"I will always cherish the honor of having served as chairman of the Livingston GOP over the last two years. I am proud of our group's accomplishments, Filip said. "I look forward to new challenges in the 8th district and hope we can build on the success of the Livingston GOP. I will continue to be very active in Livingston County."

Fillip made the announcement on Thursday night. He was endorsed by Mike Rogers and Larry Ward.


I think Allan did a good job for the party. Without going into details, it was a mess at the end of 06. I'm not going to point fingers on that here. It's done and over. Old news. The first thing is that the new leadership calmed some things down that needed to be calmed. That worked well for him as he wasn't a fan of inside baseball. He did well at putting some of the factions of the party back together and worked well with others. I was a Ron Paul supporter. He was a Romney supporter. Allan and I still worked well together. That doesn't mean we always agree, but we agreed much more than we disagreed and when we disagreed, we did so respectfully. I disappeared for a while from the inside stuff, but still kept in touch and did saw enough to see some of the good changes that took place.

Today, a good foundation is in place, and without the work the county put in, I have no doubt at least two races, if not possibly three or four would have been carried by democrats. That wasn't all Allan, but he was part of it. When McCain left the state, our county still had the capacity to do some things on our own.

Are things perfect? No. But I judge a leadership role of officers by this. Did the chair of the Livingston GOP leave the spot in a better position now than he did when he took it over? The answer is yes. That's all I can ask. Same goes for any other organizational position, VP, both Treasurers, and both Secretaries.

I know one person who is running for Allan's spot, and I'm probably backing him. I won't disclose that here yet. Stay tuned. Good luck to Allan for the 8th District spot. He's got my support, as well as the support of the previous chair, Larry Ward.

Obama's Chief of Staff former Freddie Mac board member

Some "Hope" and "Change." Besides being part of the Chicago Daley Machine and one of the most partisan characters in congress (Which is why I'm glad he made this pick), we got this.

From the Atlantic

Former President Clinton Appointed Emanuel To The Board Of Freddie Mac Where He Earned $231,655 In Director's Fees In 2001 And $31,060 In 2000. "Clinton's going-away gift to Emanuel was a seat on the quasi-governmental Freddie Mac board, which paid him $231,655 in director's fees in 2001 and $31,060 in 2000." (Lynn Sweet, "Too Much Money A Bad Thing?" Chicago Sun-Times, 1/3/02)


The Clinton Administration Ruled Fannie And Freddie Could Satisfy Affordable Housing Obligations By Purchasing Subprime Mortgages. "If Sen. Obama were truly looking for a kind of deregulation that might be responsible for the current financial crisis, he need only look back to 1998, when the Clinton administration ruled that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could satisfy their affordable housing obligations by purchasing subprime mortgages. This ultimately made it possible for Fannie and Freddie to add a trillion dollars in junk loans to their balance sheets. This led to their own collapse, and to the development of a market in these mortgages that is the source of the financial crisis we are wrestling with today." (Peter J. Wallison, Op-Ed, "Obama Voted 'Present' On Mortgage Reform," The Wall Street Journal, 10/15/08)



I saw this coming a long time ago. That's because I didn't drink the flavor-aid.

"There's nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight""

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Obama appoints The Matt Millen of Governors to his economic team

We now have an economic team to screw the country like they screwed Michigan. Of all the individuals that could be picked to Obama's economic team, we have this:

From the Detroit Free Press



WASHINGTON -- Gov. Jennifer Granholm and former U.S. Rep. David Bonior will serve on a panel of financial luminaries and corporate experts advising President-elect Barack Obama on the nation’s hard-bitten economy, ensuring Michigan, its troubled auto industry and labor has a seat at the table.


That's about as smart as appointing Ted Nugent to PETA's board of directors. What the hell was he thinking? Granholm's legacy on the economy are service tax increases, business tax increase, sin taxes, income taxes, tax shifts, fee increases, surcharges, unemployment, people leaving the state, debt, big government regulation, a push for a gas tax, pork projects for a $116 million dollar state police building, government picking winners and losers,

This country and state voted for Obama, so don't bitch to me. It's time for you to assume the position! "Thank you sir, may I have another!"

As the Motorhead classic song Dogs goes

Here we are in the years
The blood, the sweat, the tears
Have made us bondage slaves
In a world that we never made,
The politicians lick our bones,
The tacticians, hearts of stone
They turn us against our brothers
Make us fight and kill each other
Locked in lust we put our trust in dogs

Here we are again,
The dead still look the same
Who cares they're soon forgotten
Nobody gonna miss a corpse that's rotten
Your fathers, mothers, daughters, sons
Have been taken by the chosen ones
But don't you forget you made the choice,
You made your mark, you raised your voice,
They're all the same, you're all to blame
You're dogs!


Yes, I blame the voters. They're dogs.

2008 Election Results and analysis - Livingston County

It was a mixed bag in Livingston County. We lost on Prop 2 which sucked and will really suck when you see the courts interpret what the definition of "discourage" means. Cliff Taylor also lost the county. Jay Drick didn't unseat Brennan.

Partisan races were big wins, if not by the margins I prefer. We unseated a democrat incumbent and did not lose any seats. We were McCain's 3rd best county (Allan, you forgot Missaukee County up North) by percentage. McCain pulled out, so our counties and state were on our own without any other support. Jack Hoogendyk was thrown to the wolves completely, and still at least won my county.

No democrats took any open seats in the county, nor did they defeat any incumbents, although one republican incumbent lost to another republican in Unadilla township. The Republicans successfully defended all their seats.The democrats only hold two positions of a partisan nature. They were both incumbents. Kevin Dobis and Lori Cowan in Putnam and Unadilla Townships. Putnam's local politics isn't really as partisan as much as it is between "Keeping Putnam Rural" or a more developmental approach.

The bad news is top the ticket is much closer. Overall it was 55.79% for McCain and 42.51% for Obama. That's a lot lower than the 62%+ win for Bush in 2004. This was a statewide problem for many reasons, not the least of which was McCain staffer announcing that he pulled out. This is usually the 3rd, 4th, or 5th most GOP county in the state (The other being Hillsdale or Allegan). This year, it was third.

The silver lining is that Mike Rogers, and newcomers Bill Rogers and Cindy Denby ran ahead of the ticket. Mike Rogers got 66.50% which was better than his 2006 numbers. Dave Domas soundly defeated Michael Moore's friend. I am surprised that Scott Lucas had a higher percentage than Donna Anderson did in their races. Lucas ran an anemic campaign, and Anderson worked for what she had. Over in Handy Township, there were enough partisans for Frazier to win the trustee spot held by Robert Redinger. Redinger had a lot of support among people in both parties, and he had an independent streak backing Denby for State Rep.

In Hamburg, we dodged a bullet. I thought the democrats would have taken the clerk's spot. The results there:
Matt Skiba (R) - 4766 - 41.63%
Debby Buckland (D) - 4444 - 38.82%
Write-ins (Hardesty) - 2239 - 19.56%

The question is this. Would Hardesty's votes go to Skiba otherwise, or Buckland? I don't know. Pat Evon for treasurer got 54.47% over Linda Taylor's 44.68%. That was ahead of the top of the ticket as McCain was held to 51% in Hamburg. The Hamburg County Commissioner seat was also close. Dave Buckland got 46% against Dennis Dolan's 53%. The new team in Hamburg of Hohl (unopposed), Skiba, and Evon, along with trustees have to show the population there that the local GOP does a good job, or there could be more troubles.

Putnam Township Supervisor was close, as always. The independent there took 18%, and Ron Rau won reelection with 44.32%. Green Oak was about as close as the top of the ticket. McCain got 54.68%, and Mark St Charles got 53.78% against Matt Evans who got a respectable 45.34%.

I can go down the list with the rest of them, but I'll say this. Countywide, I consider a 55.79% win a big loss. Period. Same thing I said about the 2006% election. In order for a Republican to win statewide, 64-65% is minimum. Anything less at the top of the ticket is most likely a loss.

Now what should the Livingston County Republican Party do at home? I think we need to build on the advertising campaign. We don't brag enough. The county runs well. We take that for granted here. We shouldn't. We need to let people who moved here recently that it is our officials, republican, who built this and maintained it properly. This county has a high bond rating, lowest millage rate, lower taxes, and lets us keep more money in our pockets and not in the hands of big government. We need to combat those who move from democrat areas and bring partisanship with them. This is how to do it. Let them know that they moved to a well run county. This is how it is done, and why republicans run it better than the democrat areas they came from and it will be gone if the same people that win there win here.

If you want to look at democrat run societies, look at Detroit and it's 62 mills in property taxes, or better yet, look at who started turning Detroit government into what it is today. It wasn't the blacks that started it either. It was white "progressive" democrats in the 1960's. The riots happened under white democrat rule. High taxes, more bureaucracy, less efficiency, and more problems.

We need to go back to less government and more freedom. For the most part, Livingston County does that. That's one of the things that makes this county work.

Make it down 450 in the Dow as of 3:30

Who is John Galt?

Blunt steps down from leadership

From Redstate


Roy Blunt is out as Whip. He held a press conference earlier.

This opens the Whip job for Cantor.

A team is coming together. With Adam Putnam and Kay Granger leaving, that clears those seats. Can we fit Hensarling in to one of those spots?


That's a start, but why the hell is "crap sandwich" Boehner still there? He needs to step down as well or get voted out of leadership. After 06 and his weak leadership in 08, he needs to stop his Matt Millen leadership.

We need ideas people in charge. The leading name I'm hearing is Cantor. He's an improvement, but I'd rather see Pence, Hensarling, Blackburn, or someone of that vein who can compete with ideas and then communicate them as alternatives to the big leftism of Obama, Pelosi, etc.

In other news, Dow down 300+ so far. It was down 500+ yesterday after Obama one. He's already tanking the economy. Oh well. You all voted for him. Walk it off.

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Self-destructed - from 06 to today, and the way to climb back

Going into yesterday, I told those that asked me that I gave McCain a 40% shot to win. I thought he had a shot at Pennsylvania. If he didn't win there, he had to run the table. I didn't think that could be done. My realistic odds were closer to 30% than 40%. Part of that was the McCain campaign's doing. Most of it was due to Congress, Bush, and Washington screwing up. This was not that hard to see coming. I'm not going to post anything close to the election that would decrease turnout on the right.

Obama's strategy was largely built on the 2000 Bush message and 2004 Bush organization with a few tweaks. Bush won largely thanks to the classic outsider message and by winning the ground game. Bush's people had a tin ear when it came to policy related issues, but they are ace organizers, and the difference was striking between 08 and 04. As far as Obama's campaign organization, Obama used to organize for a living. He was one of ACORN's best people. Seeing 2000 and 2004, the plan was all laid out for him and Axelrod. Obama expanded on the 2000 Bush strategy with with the financial jaggernault, a media in the tank for him, gullible voters and capitalizing on blunders. The one good thing I can say is that anytime one party gets total control of government, they eventually screw up badly. The Democrats will screw up badly, eventually. Chicago style Daley Machine Politics is coming to America. The bad part is that I'm going to get screwed as well as those who voted for them. Until then, protect your wallet, buy some more guns and ammo before the new bans (as soon as a high profile shooting takes place - it will nickle and dime us out), get out of the market before the capital gain increases and switch to other investments. They are going to do for this country what Granholm is doing here. Don't bitch to me about it if you voted for him. He's your president, not mine.

However the title of this isn't about how bad of a president Obama is going to be. It's titled Self-destructed - from 06 to today, and the way to climb back. I've always been a believer in taking care of our own house first. You don't beat even an empty suit with nothing. The worst aspect of the last few years in Congress is that the few real alternatives and the piss poor communication (and some cases, stepping on) of any alternatives that did exist. That was the biggest problem of the Bush administration and Congressional leadership.

1. Mistake number one is this. When Congress/Senate got its ass kicked in 2006, why did we put the same people in charge of leadership? Whips were put in charge when leaders were needed. John Boehner and Roy Blunt are not leaders. What alternatives to the crap from Pelosi that Boehner/Blunt proposed? Where was the fight against big government? They let Pelosi run the show and at most just said no and lost the vote. That's unacceptable. They needed then to put Pence (Who won with 65% overall and 56% in a county that Obama won with similar margin) Shadegg, and Hensarling in charge. They need to do that now, or at the very least take a page out of that playbook or they will not take Congress back, even when Obama screws up. Stop following and start leading. The GOP Congress spent time letting Bush do all the leading (he's not a leader. He'll sometimes take a stand, but there's more to leadership that just that.) and even stepped on the leadership of some of their own members at the behest of DC consultants and beltway people. That's unacceptable. That needs to change and change now.

2. Bailout. Bailout. Bailout. McCain sealed his defeat by his handling the bailout situation and never recovered. That lost much of the blue collar vote nationwide. After the house defeated the "crap sandwich" the first time, he suspends his campaign, and votes for a worse bill. McCain could have been the Maverick and fought this bailout bill for saying what it was, a bad bill, then offered an alternative. McCain's biggest strength was his fiscal restraint and he lost it there. Both parties were behind the bailout.

3. You had a matching funds candidate taking on a 500 million dollar machine, plus the union leadership, plus the media completely in the tank for Obama, plus the congressional money. There's only one way to fight against that and it is to run against the big money special interests. Run against them, expose them. What happened to taking down their names and making them famous? That needed to be done much more often than it was.

4. Cliff Taylor. This was the worst loss. We knew that Jon Stryker and his gazillions was going to try and take him out and we were unprepared to strike back. I saw a couple of anti-Hathaway ads, but why didn't we fight back with better ones, like Michigan's Surpreme Court being considered the best in the country, and show the voters why he deserved to keep the job. I did not see one Cliff Taylor sign. I tried for three months to get one. Most people did not know who Cliff Taylor was, but the democrats made sure their people did. The GOP has been counting on the incumbent tag and has neglected these races for years, counting on the Michigan Chamber of Commerce to do the job for them. The Chamber needs more help.

5. Conceding the state. Whoever that aide was that announced McCain was pulling out of Michigan needs to get blacklisted. If you pull out of states, you don't announce it to the world. That gets you tagged as a quitter. Even that aside, I was not laughing at Howard Dean's 50 state strategy in 2004. Reagan won 49 states. Probably more impressive given the quality of candidates, the first Bush won 426 electoral votes. Nobody comes close to that today. McCain lost many of his votes by not fighting hard there. Bush made the same mistake in 2000, but was able to run the table.

6. No planning whatsoever. When the party throws as many people to the wolves as they did, there needs to be mass firings up and down the board. This crap has gone on for too long and is a big reason why you will never see me ever donate to the NRCC or NRSC. The conventional way hasn't worked. The 1994 way did. It's a great blueprint. Stop tossing tough seats to the wolves and conceding them before it gets started. Limiting the playing field limits victories to running the table. Hell, this year in the senate, the NRSC considered losing 4 seats a victory. What the hell is that about? Losing one is defeat, but I expect to win every game I play. The worst case was in Arkansas. Pryor was almost unopposed. No Republican ran.

After 06, I posted these pieces and much of what I said then applies today.

First is why I supported Mike Pence for minority leader. Second is is Newt's advice about turning 2008 into 1994. That didn't happen. That did not happen largely due to putting the same people with the same strategy in charge. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Lastly in 2006, I said then that it was time for Big Government Conservatism to end. Two words with that. The bailout.

That common sense I posted in 2006 wasn't followed, and we got our asses kicked as a result. Now we're back in 1976 all over again. Now this is what I would do if I was GOP boss, both state or federal.

1. Run a slate in each state taylored to the dynamics of each state (or localities within the state). Obama's the money machine. They have a lot of money to defend seats. Run against the fat cats, K Street, and rich leftist hypocrites funding them. Contest all races, and pick a half-dozen issues to run on. Criteria for these candidates - no rematches. Once you're knocked out of congress, that's it. Game over. New blood is needed, as well as new ideas to change Washington without being changed by Washington. The slate needs to be by state. At the same time, that means putting up with Republicans who may be more liberal or conservative than others on some issues depending on the issues. That I'll get to more in "balance." Run on the 70% issues. This is to get around the money defecit that will happen under the Obama regime.

2. Balance. Outside of being a great communicator, this is what Reagan brought that people forget. He knew what played well in which state, and found a way to balance Western libertarians, Midwest conservative populists, Security voters, Northeast Rockefeller Republicans, and Southern Conservatives, and even was able to win California which while at one time was more Republican friendly, was never a conservative state statewide. The Republicans lost this when they ditched states rights. This more than anything else is the problem that Bush and Congress had. They alienated all groups here as some time or another. That I pin mostly on Bush's policies. This needs to be remembered with any nationalized campaign. Hit those 70% issues. Then leave the rest of the stuff to the states where it belongs. We don't need a constitutional amendment on gay marriage. I don't live in Massachusetts. I live in Michigan. We don't need DC'ers running our states. That goes for perscription drugs bills, no child left behind, and all the other "compassionate conservatism" stuff that was pushed over the last eight years. Leaving things to the states is what preserved the big tent.

3. Don't neglect the intellectual side of conservatism, especially limited government. We need the "Joe the plumbers" but we also need the Jerry Zandstras. Without the ideas, a party is bankrupt. Without practicality, a party is still in perpetitual defeat. Both are needed. This side has been neglected over the past few years in all areas outside of foreign policy, and even that is debatable. Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, and Dick Armey were never replaced in Congress. I don't always agree with them, but when they left was when the mismanagement really started to begin.

3. Screw mandates. They don't exist. Period. The democrats never let Bush have a mandate. In 2004, when the GOP gained seats along with the presidency, there was no mandate. Bush thought he had one. He thought wrong. In 1992, Bill Clinton thought he had a mandate. He thought wrong. "Mandates" last as long as the policy is accepted by the people. No more, no less. Those who think otherwise, overreach and lose their jobs. That goes for Democrat and Republican alike. If the GOP buys into the mandate talk, they'll lose more seats.

5. Run on the 70% issues. We can start with balancing the budget without raising taxes, something a democrat congress has not done since before my lifetime. It was the 1994 Republicans that did it. Other issues. Ballot integrity which democrats hate because they sometimes steal elections. These issues need to be brought up immediately when Obama takes office. The GOP members of Congress need to lead, communicate the message, and tell Pelosi, Reid and Obama to put up or shut up on fiscal responsibility. Pence brought in a balanced budget before. It got voted down by his own party. Guess who is still in office and ran ahead of the ticket. Guess whose leadership got an ass kicking. It's time to lead, and make them follow or at the very least, get the hell out of the way like Clinton did to an extent after 94.

Maybe this time Congressional leadership got the message and will stop listening to the DC beltway. If not, maybe their seats go next.

Monday, November 03, 2008

Last Minute

I probably won't be on the computer tomorrow so for those looking for comments on Election Day

RightMichigan will have a liveblog


RedState will have a lot of national comments as well

This election comes down to one thing. Turnout. If we don't turn out like 1996 or 2006, game over and the entire national government is governed by the Chicago Daley machine. If they don't turn out like 1990, game over the other way. I already voted. If you haven't we need you there. Supreme Court, checks and balances, energy policy, life issues, 2nd amendment, free speech, and Obama's plan for a new "civillian defense force" aka a standing army in the US is on the line.

Vote for McCain/Palin. Vote for the moderate! This time it's important.

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Just Win Baby!

This may be my last post before the election. I got a real busy week both before during and after Election Day. Sometime, more than likely next week when things calm down, I'll post the analysis, results, home runs, and blunders of epic proportions committed on all sides, and where things go from there. I don't know who will win, and depending on difference situations, I can see either side winning this, or more accurately, either side giving the election away to the other guy.

There's been a lot of hype with the polls ranging from blowouts to the margin of error to near ties under 50% depending on the polling firm and sampling used. Which polls are accurate? Only one. The one on election day itself.

That stuff is for the most part out or our control. Unlike many on the left, I know I can't control what others do. However we can control what we can control. If we want to win, there are several things we can do. If we're to stop Obama's "Civillian National Security Force" and his goon squads from trying to shut us up, take our guns, raise our taxes, expanding government, and grabbing our freedoms, this is what we must do:

1. Vote. I already have. This is most important.
2. Get others of friendly persuasion to vote if they haven't.
3. Sign up if still possible to be Poll Challengers to maintain the integrity of the polls.
4. If unable to do that, be a poll watcher to maintain the integrity of the polls.

With Barack's Chicago-Daley style of politcs, that needs to be watched now more than ever. I won't be live blogging this election, since I'll be out in the middle of the action, and won't be taking my valuables like a computer with me. I don't know what to expect. I will be prepared for literally anything.

Defend Freedom! Defeat Obama! Defeat his cult! Defeat his goon squads! Defeat the media! Defeat the left! Defeat the Chicago Daley machine!

Friday, October 31, 2008

Bradley effect or Brady effect

With Obama ticket, we hear a lot of talk about the Wilder effect or Bradley effect, which is often misunderstood. The Wilder effect is not about people voting against a candidate because of race. It's when a voter lies to the pollster saying that they are going to vote Wilder instead of the opponent they planned on voting, for whatever reason. It does not have to be race. The voter does not want the pollster to think that he or she is racist.

The Bradley effect is coined back in 1982, but there's another factor there, even in California. The BRADY effect. On the ballot was an extremely restrictive firearms law. This resulted in 80-90% turnout in some rural areas in California, which voted for to defeat Bradley.

From the American Thinker:

The facts, however tell a different story. It isn't the "Bradley effect" Democrats should fear, but something else. Call it the "Brady effect," named after the one of the radical gun-ban lobbies in America, The Brady Campaign.


In 1982, gun-banners were successful in placing an initiative on the California ballot dubbed "Proposition 15," which would have essentially banned handgun sales and mandated gun registration statewide. Bradley supported the handgun ban and his opponent, George Deukmejian, opposed it. Polls showed that Prop 15 enjoyed early support in the campaign season. But that wouldn't last.


The National Rifle Association, in partnership with California state and local gun rights groups and grassroots activists, sprang into action, educating voters about the dangers of Prop 15 and how their Second Amendment rights hung in the balance.


By Election Day, Prop 15 had gone from having majority support to being radioactive. Not only did Republicans oppose it, but so did Reagan Democrats and an overwhelming majority of the state's law enforcement community. As Bill Saracino, who was executive director of Gun Owners of California at the time, recalls: "Because of Proposition 15, turnout in rural areas was unprecedented, reaching 85 percent to 90 percent in some Central Valley and Sierra foothill counties. Deukmejian's campaign was savvy enough to ride that tide."


And what a tide it was. Proposition 15 lost by a whopping 63 percent to 37 percent, and polls after the election showed that a clear majority of Californians who voted "no" on Prop 15 also voted against Tom Bradley in favor of George Deukmejian.


While many politicians and pundits of varying political persuasions have come to learn that the power of gun owners, hunters, sportsmen and freedom advocates cannot be ignored on Election Day - hardcore Liberals have a more difficult time facing reality. It is much easier for them to cry "racism" than swallow the truth.


The truth for them this time around is that Barack Obama is the most rabid anti-Second Amendment candidate to ever run for the U.S. presidency. Obama is not only opposed to right-to-carry permits for law-abiding gun owners, but has also endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.


As a U.S. Senator, Obama voted to ban most rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting. As a State Senator, he voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of citizens and homeowners who use a gun in self-defense. Also as a State Senator, he endorsed raising the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition 500 percent. And Obama supports gun registration - which history has shown is the first step to gun confiscation.


If Obama's legislative record on the Second Amendment isn't clear enough, he infamously reminded voters in Pennsylvania earlier this year of his disdain for gun owners, calling them bitter xenophobes who use the Bill of Rights, which protects gun ownership, and religion as a crutch.


The other inconvenient truth facing Obama supporters is that gun ownership is strong in the U.S. Roughly half of all American households own at least one gun, and according to an ATI-News/Zogby poll of likely voters, gun owners favor McCain over Obama by a more than 2 - 1 margin - 62 to 29 percent.


The Second Amendment is just one of many critical issues at the heart of the upcoming presidential election. The mythical "Bradley effect" may be some comfort for those who can't admit their political positions are unpopular. But Obama supporters and gun-banners should not be surprised if the very real "Brady effect" eats into their numbers on Election Day.


Obama is the most radical gun grabber ever to run for president, one who voted against allowing people to plea self-defense in cases if they defended themselves in their home, if the locality had a gun ban - like his home of Richard Daley's Chicago.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Spread the Wealth? Obama his brother's keeper? He doesn't. Deeds, not words.

If there is one thing that bothers me the most in politics, it is people who do not live what they believe. People that tell us, the people, to do one thing when they themselves do something completely different. I don't like it when it is done by the left or the right, and I lambasted the 06 Republicans for that.

The 2002-2006 Republicans lost congress due to too many of them not living what they believe. When a significant portion of the base is social conservatives, along with many of the moderate independents (social conservative, economic liberal), it's not going to be good when people like Don Sherwood make the news for allegedly choking his mistress 35-40 years younger than he is (while married). Sherwood, Foley, etc. When another portion of the base is economic conservatives, Ted Stevens and the bridge to nowhere is bad news. That also eliminates the social liberal, economic conservative moderates in addition to the base. That lead to an ass kicking in 2006 that was frankly deserved. Stevens is likely to be sent home this year, and Sherwood and Foley were sent home in 2006.

Barack Obama is the perfect example of the elitist hypocrite. He talks about being his brother's keeper. He talks about spreading the wealth. The bottom line though is that he sure does not act like his brother's keeper. He sure as hell doesn't spread his wealth. No, that's not for people like Barack Obama. That's for us. He wants us to not be our brother's keeper, but big government's forced donors. He wants us to spread the wealth to big government.

Even the left wing Huffington Post of all places showed Obama's record of charity, particulary before he ran for president. From the left
Up until recent years when their income increased sharply from book revenues and a Senate salary, Obama's family donated a relatively minor amount of its earnings to charity. From 2000 through 2004, the senator and his wife never gave more than $3,500 a year in charitable donations -- about 1 percent of their annual earnings. In 2005, however, that total jumped to $77,315 (4.7 percent of annual earnings), and to $60,307 in 2006 (6.1 percent).


Spreading the wealth, huh? But that's not the most shameful, not at all. For someone who claims to be his brother's keeper, he certainly doesn't extend that to even his own family.

Barack Obama's brother lives in a slum in Kenya. His aunt lives in a South Boston housing project.

What has this multi millionaire author and lawyer, done to help them? I'm not referring to handouts since I don't believe in them myself, but I do believe in hand-ups. This is his own family and in one case his own brother.

This is an example of another politician who fails to live what he believes. He talks about hope and change, but when it comes to DEEDS and ACTIONS, he shows that he is just another typical rich leftist generous with other people's money, and couldn't be bothered to help people himself. To him, that's government's job with other people's money.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC Makes Howell Endorsements for 08

I got this press release sent to me. I wasn't on the panel this year due to time constraints, but I trust these people as the objective questions and scoring is the same. I'm not in Howell anymore, so I don't follow the schools there as much as I used to, but the Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC is still based in Howell, and most of the founders and a plurality of active members are still in that district.


CONCERNED TAXPAYERS PAC MAKES HOWELL SCHOOL BOARD ENDORSEMENTS

The Concerned Taxpayers Group, PAC, of Livingston County endorses Olav "Kris" Kauserud and Doug Moore for the two full-term positions up for election on the Howell School Board on November 4th. In the partial-term election for the Howell School Board, The Concerned Taxpayers Group, PAC, of Livingston County endorses Deborah Drick. All of the candidates were invited to participate in the endorsement process. Questionnaires that were returned were evaluated by our panel using an objective scoring method. Our panel consisted of citizens from Howell Twp., Cohoctah Twp., Brighton Twp., and the City of Brighton. This citizens panel is very concerned about the future of our public schools in Livingston County. The voters of Livingston County should have as much information as possible about which candidates will work towards responsible fiscal stewardship and to promote a sound educational environment in our public schools. The candidates endorsed above will work for positive change in those areas if elected.

Paid for by the CONCERNED TAXPAYERS GROUP, PAC, of LIVINGSTON COUNTY with regulated funds. 1*** (Address removed), Howell, MI 48855

Monday, October 27, 2008

A Class III preventable tragedy

You all know my stance on the 2nd Amendment. It's one of my bedrock issues in my less government philosophy. Those that know me also know of my lack of tolerance of stupidity when it comes to firearms. I'm not exactly a nice guy when it comes to that stuff, and won't put up with being around. This case here could have been prevented with a little common sense, especially from the range officer. I would never allow this. I'll explain why later.

From the Boston Herald.

The mother of an 8-year-old boy who shot himself to death at a supervised gun expo in Westfield yesterday says she’ll remember her son as an angel.

“He was a beloved, beautiful child. He was an angel,” said Suzanne Bizilj of Ashford, Conn., whose third-grade son, Christopher, died Sunday after firing an Uzi submachine gun at the Westfield Sportman’s Club.

Christopher apparently lost control as he fired the gun, forcing it upwards and back, causing him to shoot himself in the head, said Westfield Police Lt. Hipolito Nunez. Christopher was under the supervision of a certified instructor, as well as his father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, when he was shot.

The annual machine gun show is advertised as a free-for-all for gun enthusiasts, and has created discord among some club members, said longtime club member Bob Greenleaf.

“To let an 8-year-old boy fire an Uzi is the height of stupidity,” said Greenleaf.

Greenleaf, a member of the club for 44 years, was so opposed to the annual machine gun shoot that he resigned from the club’s board of directors four years ago.

An ad for the show posted on the Sportman’s Club Web site boasts: “No age limit or licenses required to shoot machine guns, handguns, rifles or shotguns!!!”

“You will be accompanied to the firing line with a certified instructor to guide you, But You Are In Control - Full Auto Rock And Roll.”


This is rare. Real rare that it happens at a range, and real rare that it was with a Class III firearm. A true Uzi is a class III firearm. They are very tightly regulated and have been since 1934. In order for me to own a Class III firearm (Fully automatic), I need to pay $200 for the stamp, send in fingerprints, get the permission of the local chief law enforcement, and then cough up at least $10,000 and probably $20,000 for a pre-1986 fully automatic firearm. There's also been one homicide in 70 years with a legally owned Class III firearm (by a cop). I'm not sure how many negligent stupidity causing deaths which happened by this, but that's probably in the single digits as well.

I am not adverse to SUPERVISED 8 year olds firing a gun in proper conditions, as long as it is the right gun. .22, .410. Low on recoil, easier to handle.

I've shot pistols, shotguns, and rifles and am familiar with the recoil of each and the variences of recoil. It takes time and experience to get used to it. If you rapid fire (not my style) a semi-auto, you see a little bit of a kick. The pistol rises up as the gun fires. I've never fired an uzi, but I have fired a fully automatic firearm once, on full auto. I was in my early 20's, 190 pounds, and in pretty good shape. I did not have an easy time controlling the recoil on that. Not at all. While it was fun shooting, I would damn well not want to give someone probably 60-85 pounds a full auto to shoot, considering my own troubles at 200 pounds and some experience. It would take me much more shooting to have the ability to control a fully automatic pistol or carbine.

Three major mistakes were made here.

Mistake 1 - Full auto firing. An 8 year old does not have the strength to control the firearm, nor the experience in dealing with it. I pin this on the range officer who should have said, no and explained why.

Mistake 2 - Not using 3 round burst to limit trouble. If this was insistant, the uzi should have been set to a 3 round burst, not the whole magazine.

Mistate 3 - Range officer was not right there with him to jump in when he lost control. He should have seen that beforehand. The range officers I know would never ever let this happen. This was not proper supervision.

No, I'm not going anti-gun, but I am a hardass about gun safety, and this is something that could have been prevented with better situational awareness, common sense, and experience. SAFR always hosts a family firearms day, usually either in the Howell area or Battle Creek area. You will never see this there. Everyone makes sure of it. The range officers there are in control.

A lot of interesting discussion on the High Road about this. General opinion there is the same as mine.

In short, with hunting season coming up and the use of firearms increasing in the next two months, let's be safe and smart out there.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Proposal 2 is Bad News - Vote NO

A lot of hype and claims are being made about Proposal 2. I was leaning against when I saw the ballot language, and I'm staunchly against this now after I real the actual language. You'll find a lot of sites and reasons, scientific and otherwise attacking this proposal, but I'm going to stick with something I'm more familiar with. Language.

Here is the ballot summary language of Proposal 2. Unedited and verbatum. This is what you see on the ballot.

Proposal 2:

A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO ADDRESS HUMAN EMBRYO AND HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH IN MICHIGAN

The proposed constitutional amendment would
- Expand use of human embryos for any research permitted under federal law subject to the following limits: the embryos -
* are created for fertillity treatment purposes;
* are not suitable for impantation or are in excess of climical needs;
* would be discarded unless used for research;
* were donated by the person seeking fertillity treatment.

- Provide that stem cells cannot be taken from human embryos more than 14 days after cell division begins.

- Prohibit any person from selling or purchasing human embryos for stem cell research.

- Prohibit state and local laws that prevent, restrict, or discourage stem cell research, future therapies, and cures.

Should this proposal be adopted?

Yes___

No____


See anything wrong with how this is written? I'll have to look up more precedents, but I have several concerns. I'll break down this, line by line. I assume attorneys wrote this, and every word there is for a reason.

A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO ADDRESS HUMAN EMBRYO AND HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH IN MICHIGAN


First off, this is a Constitutional Amendment. That is the Supreme Law of Michigan, second only to the US Supreme Court. Secondly, it mentioned not just "stem cell" research, but Human Embryo research itself.

- Expand use of human embryos for any research permitted under federal law subject to the following limits: the embryos -


ANY research. Federal law prohibits federal tax dollars going to embryonic stem cell research. That's it. Think of all the possibilities that can be used with embryo research. Cloning. Humam animal hybrids. etc.

- Prohibit any person from selling or purchasing human embryos for stem cell research.


Why is only stem cell research mentioned here? Look at the words. Everything is added for a reason. This does not address for research besides embryonic stem cell research.

- Prohibit state and local laws that prevent, restrict, or discourage stem cell research, future therapies, and cures.


Notice again how this is written. This is the worst line of the whole proposal, despite my otherwise libertarian leaning views. What does "discourage" mean? Blocking of tax money? I have no idea. Attorneys I know who I asked about this have no idea. I'm not sure if even a Georgetown grad could figure out the meaning of "discourage." Restrict is a rather broad word as well. The second part is written so it looks like it refers only to stem cell research. No, that's just one portion. "Future therapies." What is that? That can be anything. Cloning for cures? Therapies?

The actual law is posted at MICAUSE, which is leading the fight against this.

Petition Language:
INITIATIVE PETITION
AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
A Proposal to Amend the Constitution of the State of Michigan by adding a new Article I, Section 27 as follows:

Article I, Section 27. (1) Nothing in this section shall alter Michigan’s current prohibition on human cloning.

(2) To ensure that Michigan citizens have access to stem cell therapies and cures, and to ensure that physicians and researchers can conduct the most promising forms of medical research in this state, and that all such research is conducted safely and ethically, any research permitted under federal law on human embryos may be conducted in Michigan, subject to the requirements of federal law and only the following additional limitations and requirements:

(a) No stem cells may be taken from a human embryo more than fourteen days after cell division begins; provided, however, that time during which an embryo is frozen does not count against this fourteen day limit.


(b) The human embryos were created for the purpose of fertility treatment and, with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing, the person seeking fertility treatment chose to donate the embryos for research; and

(i) the embryos were in excess of the clinical need of the person seeking the fertility treatment and would otherwise be discarded unless they are used for research; or


(ii) the embryos were not suitable for implantation and would otherwise be discarded unless they are used for research

(c) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human embryos for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.


(d) All stem cell research and all stem cell therapies and cures must be conducted and provided in accordance with state and local laws of general applicability, including but not limited to laws concerning scientific and medical practices and patient safety and privacy, to the extent that any such laws do not:

(i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section; or


(ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies or cures.

(3) Any provision of this section held unconstitutional shall be severable from the remaining portions or this section.

Going over this:

(1) Nothing in this section shall alter Michigan’s current prohibition on human cloning.


What is human cloning?
(a) “Human cloning” means the use of human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology to produce a human embryo.

The prohibition is only limited to this:
(1) An individual shall not intentionally engage in or attempt to engage in human cloning.

(2) Subsection (1) does not prohibit scientific research or cell-based therapies not specifically prohibited by that subsection.

(3) An individual who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $10,000,000.00, or both.

(4) As used in this section, “human cloning” means that term as defined in section 16274 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.16274.


Hybrids? That's being pushed in parts of England.

Combine with this:
any research permitted under federal law on human embryos may be conducted in Michigan


and then this.

(d) All stem cell research and all stem cell therapies and cures must be conducted and provided in accordance with state and local laws of general applicability, including but not limited to laws concerning scientific and medical practices and patient safety and privacy, to the extent that any such laws do not:

(i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section; or


(ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies or cures.


Those words. "discourage, restrict"

This is a poorly written proposal and a poorly written amendment for the constitution unless you want blanket immunity for God knows what. MICAUSE is right. 2 goes 2 far. That's an understatement. I'm voting Hell No on proposal 2.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Rich New York Democrats committ vote fraud in Ohio

Vote fraud is real. It's been real, and not just ACORN. It's more prevalent now than ever, and here's the latest proof.

The ballots of four wealthy New York Democrats were yanked yesterday after they admitted they set up a temporary house in Ohio and then voted in the battleground state.

The New Yorkers and nine pals from around the country admitted they should never have registered in the Buckeye State, said prosecutors, who had investigated the group for possible vote fraud.

As part of a deal with prosecutors, the 13 said they were sorry and had "misunderstood" the state's voting rules.

"Without reservations, we apologize to the community [and] for the problems this misunderstanding has caused," said Greg Nolan, spokesman for activist group Vote from Home.

The Post reported Monday that the group is run from the East 82nd Street brownstone of Heather Halstead, daughter of Halstead Properties founder Clark Halstead.

Halstead and her husband, Marc Gustafson - along with Bank of New York Mellon exec Joel Speyer and former New York Sun reporter and Scarsdale resident Daniel Hemel - and their pals were investigated after they crammed into a three-bedroom house in Columbus and registered to vote.

All of them cast Ohio ballots, even though they are already registered in New York.



This is no mistake. You can't tell me these people did not know what they were doing. Halstead, and Gustafson are all on the donor lists, and active in other states. They knew exactly what they were doing.

To the prosecutor. Why the HELL are you letting them go? If elections can not be trusted, this entire country is at risk. They should get the maximum punishment possible with major fines and jailtime, and I'm not one quick to support such a measure. This can not be tolerated.

I'm sure these rich leftists would have LOTS of fun in Ohio prison, or even in the Franklin County jail.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

The Downticket Races in Livingston County

All the hype is on the Presidential Race between McCain and Daley machine's puppet Obama. However, that's only one race, and the rest of the ballot is just as important.

Over in Livingston County, that is as follows:

State Supreme Court - The Michigan Supreme Court was recently hailed as the Finest Court in the Country. Cliff Taylor is one of the biggest reasons for it. As far as Hathaway goes, she donated to MUSLIM COMMUNITY PAC and Triangle Pride PAC, as well as democrat groups (as expected as she's their nominee for judge.

4th Appeals - I left this blank. Both are democrats. Paula Manderfield is facing Michael Kelly. Manderfield is an Ingham County Judge. Kelly is an attorney with plaintiff loyalties. If I had to pick one I'd pick Kelly. He's pro-life.

For District Judge, Jay Drick has a rematch with Theresa Brennan. Jay is a good guy and has my vote.


US Senate - Carl Levin v Jack Hoogendyk. Hoogendyk would be more of a Mike Pence sensibility to the biggest group of jokers on the face of the earth. The US Senate is the epidomy of the Peter Principle and nobody fits that bill in Michigan more than Carl Bailout Levin. While there is worse in the senate (Feinstein, Obama, Kennedy, Kerry, Biden, Leahy, Dodd, Stevens, Byrd) we can surely do better.

US House - Mike Rogers voted against the Bailout. The Livingston County Democrat head Judy Daubenmeir racked him over the coals for it. Bob Alexander (a gun grabber), is her main candidate. I don't think so. I'm sticking with Mike.

State House:
47th District - Cindy Denby was Joe Hune's chief of staff. Joe did a real good job sticking up for fiscal conservatism when it wasn't always popular by leadership. He had a 100% anti-tax record, and voted against the fee increases, tax shifts, and other gimmicks as well. Cindy ran Joe's office well and would get my support if I still lived there. I don't know anything about Scott Lucas, outside of the fact that he didn't even get his campaign statements in on time.

66th District - Bill Rogers understands struggling businesses. He's in the home builder's industry and we all know how that's doing these days. We need some fiscal conservatism in Lansing. Donna Anderson is a nice person, but way too much of a big government supporter, pushing for micromanagement of how businesses conduct their operations.

State level Education Trustee Boards (State Board, MSU, UM, and Wayne State) - I went against all incumbents here.

County Races (Prosecutor, Sheriff, Treasurer, Register of Deeds, Drain Commish) - All unopposed except for a write in)

County Commish:
1st District - Maggie Jones v Pam Green
3rd District - Dave Domas v Adrian Campbell Montgomery
8th District - Dennis Dolan v Dave Buckland

I don't know much about Pam Green. Maggie Jones I know, but not that well. Domas is a good guy and running against someone whose claim to fame was being in a Michael Moore movie. That's automatic disqualification with me. Dolan v Buckland was a rematch from 06.

For the school races, If I still lived in Howell, I'd back Debi Drick and Doug Moore. Nothing against the others, but I know they have good heads on their shoulders.

Ballot Proposals:
Prop 1 - Medical Marijuana - I'll take some heat for this, but I'm voting yes.

Prop 2 - Human Embryo Research - I'll get to this later. After reading it in depth, I went from leaning no to hell no.

Putnam Twp Fire Renewal

Brighton Schools bond and Brighton Schools Sinking Fund - Aren't they nearly bankrupt due to spending to begin with?

I'll get to the townships later.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Two Weeks left till election

Sorry for the lack of updates. I had a ton of work to do and that took priority. I should be getting on back soon. I'll mention this quickly.

Polls. I've seen 1pt and 2pt margins. I've seen 10pt margins. Which is true? Which isn't? Who knows. The difference between a lot of them is the sampling and estimates. Somee polls have a larger democrat sample and a lower Republican sample. That's an educated guess by the polling firm. Some say it is intentional sampling by in particular the media polls to try and depress GOP turnout. I don't know.

All I know with the polls is this. At best, it is a snapshot in time of how the election would be on that day. The real poll that counts is election day. You can control this poll if you are registered. Show up and cast your vote. This is the one that counts.

Also, those in the media going after Joe the Plumber should get their cameras smashed over their head, or stabbed by their own pens. Joe does not deserve to be vetted for daring to ask their Caesar a question that made him look bad. Joe is not running for office. He's a guy making a living. Obama does not get the vetting Joe did, and he wants to be our president.

I think the media should be vetted. Take the names of those who go after people like that. Vet them. Look up their past. They have skeletons. It's time these people who go after families (hypocrite Campbell Brown whose dad is a democrat politician who went to prison) and after Joe get theirs. In the alternative, call up the advertisers and tell them if they advertise here that we won't do business with them until someone better is in that timeslot or column.

Lastly, McCain. McCain needs to use his strengths. This is time of crisis. McCain needs to articulate his plans, with the foreign policy, with the mortgage crisis, and energy costs (still important), and use his experience (Palin did more than Obama in 1/2 of the time). He has it, and Obama is a pee-wee league candidate who did jack and shit during his four years in the Senate. (named a post office, and gave money to Congo). Jack left the building.

Two weeks left. The window is almost shut. Time to raise doubts and time to close the deal.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

NRA endorses McCain

I saw this coming as soon as it was a McCain v Obama race. The NRA is if nothing else, pragmatic. I don't agree with them giving McCain a flat out endorsement, although I agree with their "Defeat Obama" campaign. This isn't the Joe Schwarz endorsement which was pitiful of a clear anti vs clear pro. This election here is a leans our way vs the worst ever. It was a pragmatic pick from a pragmatic organization. Among gun organizations in Michigan, you have NRA's pragmatism sometimes to a fault, GOA's ideologues sometimes to a fault, and SAFR being at IMO, the rights spot in-between. MCRGO is just a joke and has been since June of 2002. American Hunters and Shooters Association is a fraudulent group that is a gun control organization committing astroturf in an attempt to look pro-gun and split gunowners away from voting against gun grabbers like Obama. Look up Ray Schoenke on my previous blog posts and you'll see what they are really about.

McCain's been good on this issue lately, signing the amicus brief regarding the DC Gun ban and voting against the ugly gun ban. He hasn't been perfect and had that bad stretch in the early 2000's on this issue, most likely IMO because of a spat he had with the NRA quasi-endorsing Bush in the primary in 2000. With their man Bill Richardson (from what I've heard he was their top choice) losing the democrat primary, and giving us the choices we have, it clear who is better than the other guy.

GOA on the other hand doesn't care and supports nobody at all. Both are equally bad to them.

SAFR's PAC (Bipartisan, I was the Republican and there was an active Democratic Party member on the PAC as well) graded McCain a "mixed" rating and Obama an unacceptable rating. SAFR's PAC has never endorsed a mixed rating candidate for president, and this year was no exception. If someone sees the candidate list, it is obvious who is better, but there's a difference between "better than the other guy" and an "endorsement."

From a partisan standpoint, the NRA's endorsement was great. From a gun rights standpoint, I can see the argument, I'd rather see a McCain B- (which would be an accurate grade, up from his C before thanks to a couple of very good votes recently) and Obama F- grade instead of giving McCain the endorsement from a gun rights credibility standpoint. They still should go with a continuation of the Defeat Obama campaign. I understand the pragmatism here as McCain's no Joe Schwarz, but I don't like lowering standards either.

One thing all gun rights organizations agree on however. Mr. Joyce Foundation Obama hates the 2nd Amendment and would ban everything if he had the chance. Let's not let him do it. Defend freedom and defeat Obama.

Barack Obama was ACORN's Attorney

I should have caught this a long time ago. ACORN's workers have several convictions of vote fraud, and was also tied into the housing loan scandals through intimidation tactics. I missed the obvious when looking for a redmeat tie between ACORN, Obama's work as a community organizer and these scandals. Obama was a "community organizer" and doesn't mention the name of it. I focused on looking at the Annenberg and Woods funds, and already knew about the Joyce Foundation. I didn't take a good look at his legal record however. Law records are some of the most preserved records in this country.

I started to catch on one of the other bloggers at Media Circus posted this titled>UPDATED: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans. They say this.

Cas­e­ Name­
B­uy­cks-Rob­erson­ v­. Ci­t­i­b­an­k F­ed. Sav­. B­an­k F­ai­r Housi­n­g/L­en­di­n­g/I­n­suran­ce
Docket­ / Court­ 94 C 4094 ( N­.D. I­l­l­. ) F­H-I­L­-0011
St­at­e/T­erri­t­ory­ I­l­l­i­n­oi­s
C­as­e S­ummary
P­la­int­iffs filed­ t­heir cla­ss a­ct­io­n la­w­suit­ o­n July 6, 1994, a­lleg­ing­ t­ha­t­ Cit­iba­nk­ ha­d­ eng­a­g­ed­ in red­lining­ p­ra­ct­ices in t­he Chica­g­o­ m­et­ro­p­o­lit­a­n a­rea­ in vio­la­t­io­n o­f t­he Equa­l Cred­it­ O­p­p­o­rt­unit­y A­ct­ (ECO­A­), 15 U.S.C. 1691; t­he Fa­ir Ho­using­ A­ct­, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; t­he T­hirt­eent­h A­m­end­m­ent­ t­o­ t­he U.S. Co­nst­it­ut­io­n; a­nd­ 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. P­la­int­iffs a­lleg­ed­ t­ha­t­ t­he D­efend­a­nt­-ba­nk­ reject­ed­ lo­a­n a­p­p­lica­t­io­ns o­f m­ino­rit­y a­p­p­lica­nt­s w­hile a­p­p­ro­ving­ lo­a­n a­p­p­lica­t­io­ns filed­ by w­hit­e a­p­p­lica­nt­s w­it­h sim­ila­r fina­ncia­l cha­ra­ct­erist­ics a­nd­ cred­it­ hist­o­ries. P­la­int­iffs so­ug­ht­ injunct­ive relief, a­ct­ua­l d­a­m­a­g­es, a­nd­ p­unit­ive d­a­m­a­g­es.

U.S. D­ist­rict­ Co­urt­ Jud­g­e Ruben Ca­st­illo­ cert­ified­ t­he P­la­int­iffs’ suit­ a­s a­ cla­ss a­ct­io­n o­n June 30, 1995. Buyck­s-Ro­berso­n v. Cit­iba­nk­ Fed­. Sa­v. Ba­nk­, 162 F.R.D­. 322 (N.D­. Ill. 1995). A­lso­ o­n June 30, Jud­g­e Ca­st­illo­ g­ra­nt­ed­ P­la­int­iffs’ m­o­t­io­n t­o­ co­m­p­el d­isco­very o­f a­ sa­m­p­le o­f D­efend­a­nt­-ba­nk­’s lo­a­n a­p­p­lica­t­io­n files. Buyck­s-Ro­berso­n v. Cit­iba­nk­ Fed­. Sa­v. Ba­nk­, 162 F.R.D­. 338 (N.D­. Ill. 1995).

T­he p­a­rt­ies vo­lunt­a­rily d­ism­issed­ t­he ca­se o­n M­a­y 12, 1998, p­ursua­nt­ t­o­ a­ set­t­lem­ent­ a­g­reem­ent­.
P­la­int­iff’s La­w­yers A­lexis, Hila­ry I. (Illino­is)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Child­ers, M­icha­el A­llen (Illino­is)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cla­yt­o­n, Fa­y (Illino­is)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cum­m­ing­s, Jeffrey Irvine (Illino­is)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Lo­ve, Sa­ra­ No­rris (Virg­inia­)
FH-IL-0011-9000
M­iner, Jud­so­n Hirsch (Illino­is)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Oba­m­­a­, Ba­r­a­ck H­. (Illinois­)
FH-I­L-0011-7500 | FH-I­L-0011-7501 | FH-I­L-0011-9000
Wi­ckert­, J­o­hn­ Hen­ry­ (I­lli­n­o­i­s)
FH-I­L-0011-9000



More information is found on that side about that particular case. Seeing that, I went to Westlaw. Barack Obama does not have a long litigation history of published cases. Five cases of his were published. Two of them were ACORN, one of which he worked on twice on the Distict Court level as well as the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Baravati v. Josephthal, Lyon & Ross, Inc., 28 F.3d 704, (7th Cir.(Ill.) Jul 01, 1994)

This was a defamation case and non controversial.

Barnett v. Daley, 32 F.3d 1196, (7th Cir.(Ill.) Aug 23, 1994)
Judson H. Miner (argued), Barack H. Obama, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, Nathaniel R. Howse, R. Eugene Pincham, P. Scott Neville, Jr., Howse, Howse, Neville & Gray, Chicago, IL, for plaintiffs-appellants.

This was a lawsuit over redistricting in the City of Chicago. Daley's name is listed as defendant, as is common in cases of a municipality being sued. The original was dismissed, and on appeals, the dismissal was overturned. I really can't fault this case, but the firm listing is interesting.


Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) v. Edgar, 880 F.Supp. 1215, (N.D.Ill. Mar 31, 1995)

Judson H. Miner, Jeffrey Irvine Cummings, Barack H. Obama, Davis, Miner, Barnhill and Galland, P.C., Chicago, IL, for Ass'n of Community Organizations for Reform Now, (Acorn).

This goes to appeals. This suit is over Illinois and Motor Voter Law.


Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) v. Edgar, 56 F.3d 791, (7th Cir.(Ill.) Jun 05, 1995)

Judson H. Miner, Jeffrey Cummings, Barack H. Obama, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, Chicago, IL, for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), et al.

Illinois fought Motor Voter because of Federalism and concerns of you guessed it...vote fraud. Acorn won.


- Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Federal Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338, (N.D.Ill. Jun 29, 1995)

That's the case the other bloggers are attacking.


- Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) v. Illinois State Bd. of Elections, 75 F.3d 304, (7th Cir.(Ill.) Jan 26, 1996)

The lawyers for this case:

Judson H. Miner, Jeffrey I. Cummings, Barack H. Obama, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, Chicago, IL, for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Equip for Equality, Incorporated,

This was another case similar to the previous Motor Voter case. This case was dismissed.

Barack Obama is a self-described Community Organizer (A term which came from Chicago far leftist Saul Alinsky). ACORN is the "Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Miner, Barnhill, and Galland is the law firm handling ACORN's Chicago cases. Judson Miner, partner and first name mentioned, had 98 published cases. Three were ACORN, and associate Obama was in on all of them.

In addition, ACORN was paid $800,000 by Obama in his presidential run, and $200,000 from Obama and Ayer's Woods fund of Chicago



There's smoke, and there's fire.