Senator Hank Brown spoke at the monthly Elbert County Republican breakfast October 10th. Check out the short video clips linked below the following pictures.
Hank Brown on Republican Solutions
Hank Brown on Democrats and Deficits
DC and Pittsburgh
I’m sure everyone who reads this blog is familiar with the “Tea Party” protest in Washington DC last month. It was an adult response to overbearing government, expressed within constitutional parameters by people strongly vested in the American dream. On the surface it stands in stark contrast to the anarchist G20 protest in Pittsburgh a couple weeks later where all hell broke loose and riot police acted to disburse demonstrators.
The DC protest was a perfect picture of order, and the Pittsburgh protest was extreme disorder. While DC was a mature and law-abiding exercise in civil dissent and Pittsburgh was an adolescent riot that provoked a violent response, both events constituted dissent from current governance and power structures. [Read more…]
Murphy against term limits
Murphy thinks you should “give them a chance to campaign on to the ballot.” Oh, those poor elected officials who deserve more time governing us. My heart just bleeds for these victims of electoral cruelty. Won’t you save them from a future of obscurity as one of the merely governed? If you save them, you save us all. Please! Save us!
the numbers game
The National Tea Party, 912dc Demonstration, Taxpayers Protest, whatever you want to call it is over. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all we had to do was show up and create a giant spectacle in order to change things? I expect that many people interested in preserving the status quo will push that very view–that all we need to do is to make a clamor.
This is not all we need to do. As every good ACORN worker knows, US political policy is a numbers game, and they currently have the numbers. Not only that, they have the well-oiled machineries necessary to turn out big numbers in the future. They will be at every ballot box in force to ratchet the country left for every left-leaning issue and candidate, regardless of how small the degree of leftward shift is at stake. Leftism is a “single issue” for them. Any sub-issue or candidate in the basket brings them out to vote the entire basket.
In contrast, right-wingers are not baskets-of-issues folks. It’s not in their nature. Right-wingers carry around historical compendiums of justification for each separate issue in which they fervently believe. For them, it’s all about foundation and proven results, and proof is not a concept that applies generally to a group of things. It’s specific. The proofs vary depending on whether the issue–or candidate representing the issue–is economics, health care, civil liberties, property rights, criminalization, immigration, national defense, government organization, etc. and etc.
For those on the right, a thumbs up on one issue does not justify voting the set, or to put it in human terms, the ticket. On top of that, many recent Republicans have shown very un-conservative voting records once elected. Voting the Republican ticket, assuming it remains constituted in accord with recent history, means swallowing some bitter pills.
Hard to do as that seems, however, the alternative is more of what we now have–rampaging socialism. We can not rely on the left to muck things up to the extent that they will be voted out of office on the magnitude of their mistakes. Believers in leftist mythology don’t care much about mistakes. Leftist mistakes are just evidence that the brand of leftism they pursued was not sufficiently pure. They’ll do it better next time. Don’t worry about history and pesky facts. Just believe. The power of positive thinking is fine as far as it goes, but positive thinking that is not informed by historical evidence is no more than a cult.
So, to stop rampaging socialism, the right wing must vote against the left wing in the most effective way they can. They must maximize their votes by not distributing them among multiple candidates. In virtually all cases, these will be party-line candidates, and they will be objectionable in many cases compared to more ideologically pure candidates. And once elected, they may even turn out to be republican-in-name-only. Unfortunately that path is well traveled. Still, what reasonable choice do we have? We’ve got to get the numbers targeted as effectively as they can be to unseat the socialists.
Needless to say, this task would be greatly facilitated if the Republican Party itself would, in accord with the above party-line strategy, become born-again conservative. And dare I say, we could learn from the left on this count. The left don’t let their tangential views get in the way of their fundamental leftism–their belief that intentions matter more than results. Perhaps the right could start with that clue.
912 Project
An estimated 2 million people went to Washington yesterday to protest the Obama administration and the socialist legislation thus far produced and contemplated by Congress. All broadcast media, including Fox News, grossly minimized the attendance in their reporting to a matter of “10’s of thousands.” This is misrepresentation in the extreme and begs the question of a coordinated effort to keep the scale of this movement below the national radar. Washington locals reported this to be the largest demonstration in the US Capitol ever. Security was tight around the Capitol and all positions that would afford a commanding view of the entire assembly were off limits. This was probably done for security purposes but it also had the effect of precluding the capture–and subsequent broadcast–of sweeping images of the assembled mass.
The Capitol Police were extremely cordial and helpful. The protesters were polite, peaceful, purposeful, sincere, and happy to be exercising their constitutional right to free assembly to petition the government for redress of grievances.
In contrast, the Obamas were out of town at a health care rally attended by 15,000 people.
See YouTube video at “USS of A” performed at 9/12 Capitol Protest.
See another YouTube video at “9/12/09 West Lawn of U.S. Capitol – National Taxpayers Demonstration.
county term limits
ELBERT COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING, JULY 8, 2000 NEW BUSINESS:
Term Limit Proposal: Scott Wills [Elbert County Republican Party Chairman] came before the Board to request that the Board of Commissioners consider placing a ballot measure on the November 2009 ballot to eliminate statutory term limits for the offices of Assessor, Clerk & Recorder, Coroner, Sheriff, Surveyor & Treasurer and that the ballot question be separate for each office. Commissioner Shipper made a motion to place the removal of term limits on the ballot and each office be listed individually on the November ballot for consideration of the public. Commissioner Schwab seconded the motion. The roll having been called, the Chair declared the motion unanimously carried and so ordered.
With minimal discussion the following resolutions were passed:
- Assessor Resolution
Clerk Resolution
Coroner Resolution
Sheriff Resolution
Surveyor Resolution
Treasurer Resolution
Measures to remove term limits in Elbert County have gone down at the polls in each of the last two general elections. All 3 current Commissioners resided in Elbert County during those elections. Nevertheless, on the strength of the above request, 2 of 3 Commissioners signed resolutions that read, “the Elbert County Board of County Commissioners believes that in the interest of better and more efficient government it is desirable to permit the [above elected officials] to serve more than two terms.”
I would have been a lot happier if the Elbert County Commissioners had found that the VOTERS should have the option of deciding whether the above elected officials should serve more than two terms. Instead, the resolutions basically acknowledge that without term limits we’ll be stuck with the same elected officials until they decide to quit or until they end up crosswise with the law. To favor removal of term limits in Elbert County means you have a low regard for elections, voters, and the messy trappings of representative democracy.
A proponent of the above measures said to me last night, “Go find a better a candidate [for one of the above offices.]” Now, isn’t that a little like bringing a knife to a gun fight? Go find a better candidate to run against an entrenched incumbent? Do I look stupid?
If the system is set up to crowd out new talent you won’t get new talent. It’s patently absurd to assume that the current complement of office holders are the best possible. Not to disparage them, but the day we become complacent with our public servants is the day we surrender our freedom to them.
P.S.
ECDW
July 13, 2009
The July meeting of the Elbert County Democratic Women was called to order at 6 pm at the Kiowa Pizza ….. Those present were ……Sheriff Wm Frangis.Sheriff Frangis spoke to the November election and the elimination of term limits for County Officials. 47 counties have removed all term limits while some others have changed from 2 to 3 terms. This will be on the November mail in ballot and each elected office will be voted on separately. The County Commissioners are not included on the ballot. The Sheriff stressed that this is not a partisan issue.
The fact that both political parties want perpetual licenses on our public offices raises some red flags.
stimulate who? what?
Obama’s Stimulus Spending Chart
So, the stimulus package was really a “stimulate the government” package with unprecedented inflationary deficit spending. How does transferring the country’s wealth and treasure to government agencies that do not produce new goods and services, that do not make a profit, that only redistribute after first confiscating private wealth, and that consume tremendous overhead expenses, stimulate the productive sector of an economy?
In tough economic times, stimulating the dead-weight of government is the last thing we should do.
7/11/09 ECR Breakfast Forum
(Links to brief YouTube clips)
Colorado State Senator Greg Brophy
Mountain States Legal Foundation Executive Director William Perry Pendley
ECR Breakfast #2
Leondray Gholston, Vice Chairman of the Republican Party of Colorado spoke at the 2nd Elbert County Republican breakfast today. Scott Wills, Elbert County Republican Party Chairman introduced Mr. Gholston.
Gholston to Republicans: Belly Up to the Table – wmv file, 10 megs.
Check Government’s Authority at the Door – wmv file, 3 megs.
Remove the Agenda – wmv file, 9 megs.
politics by planning
Court of Appeals No.: 08CA0890
Elbert County District Court No. 07CV48
Honorable Jeffrey K. Holmes, JudgeCitizens for Responsible Growth, Elbert County, a Colorado nonprofit corporation; Laura E. Shapiro; and John T. Dorman, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
RCI Development Partners, Inc., a Colorado corporation, Defendant-AppellantORDER REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS
Division V
Opinion by: JUDGE KAPELKE*
Graham and Booras, JJ., concurNOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(f)
COLORADO APPELLATE RULES 35(f) Paragraph 2
No opinion of the Court of Appeals shall be designated for official publication unless it satisfies one or more of the following standards:
(1) the opinion lays down a new rule of law, or alters or modifies an existing rule, or applies an established rule to a novel fact situation;
(2) the opinion involves a legal issue of continuing public interest;
(3) the majority opinion, dissent, or special concurrence directs attention to the shortcomings of existing common law or inadequacies in statutes;
(4) the opinion resolves an apparent conflict of authority.
(click to enlarge)
“The Court of Appeals decision is based solely on this procedural issue [timely filing of the original lawsuit], and its opinion does not address the validity of the BOCC’s action.” West Elbert County Sun, 6/4/09.
Hold on! The West Elbert County Sun would improve its credibility if it did not present partisan opinions in news stories.
The Court of Appeals did not lay down a new rule of law, did not alter or modify an existing rule, did not apply an established rule to a novel fact situation, did not find an issue of continuing public interest, did not find a shortcoming in existing common law, did not find an inadequacy in statute, and did not resolve an apparent conflict of authority. If any one of these conditions had been met, the Court of Appeals would have published it’s opinion as legal precedent. Since the opinion was unpublished, not one of these conditions was met.
I guess we’re to assume the merits of the plaintiffs position on limiting the BOCC’s authority are more important than the plaintiff’s obedience to legal rules of procedure. According to the West Elbert County Sun, John Dorman intends to appeal his case to the Colorado Supreme Court if he can’t get the Court of Appeals to change its mind, so the case can be heard on the merits. The Court of Appeals, however, “generally employs the same standard of review as the trial court in its review of the Board’s action.” [Citizens for Responsible Growth v. RCI, Unpublished order 08CA0890, May 21, 2009.] It appears the Court of Appeals already considered the case’s merits or lack thereof, found the trial court to be “clearly erroneous” on the question of subject matter jurisdiction, wisely avoided further enabling this political issue, and ordered the trial court to dismiss the case.
Another key fact mentioned in the Court of Appeals order, which I don’t believe has been mentioned in all of the press about this case, is that when the BOCC approved the SVV project, they did so upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission’s purpose is to interpret the county master plan, which they did in this case to a reasonable conclusion that the SVV development should be approved. The plaintiff’s case has always been cast against the BOCC in the press, as if the BOCC acted in violation of the master plan, when in fact they were simply agreeing with the interpretation of the master plan given them by the Planning Commission–which is what they usually do!
In effect, the plaintiffs want neither the BOCC nor the Planning Commission to interpret the master plan. Who does that leave? Judges–the branch of government the left uses to advance their “progressive” agenda.
For the uninitiated, “progressive” means living a poorer life with fewer jobs, less economic activity, less energy available, in smaller living spaces, driving in less safe cars, enduring higher taxes with less income under private control, acting under more regulation of all aspects of life, with fewer opportunities to engage in commerce and few opportunities to act without the approval of quasi-public socialist committees. Progressivism stifles freedom and causes stagnation and decline. Progressivism’s only beneficiary is the governing class. Everyone else, even the intended beneficiaries of progressivism, loses.
Conservative newspapers, conservative radio, conservative tv, and conservative internet communications are all booming, and all the left can think about is how to shut them all down. If leftist progressivism is so wonderful, why can leftists only get people to cooperate with them by using force, coercion, threats, intimidation, and subversion?
The 1st Amendment. Use it or lose it.
a crock
Our old crock pot gave up the ghost after 20 years and we bought a new one. I’m still counting the improvements in crock pot technology that 20 years of free market competition yielded for less money than the original.
- a slim oval design
- glass lid with vent holes
- ergonomic lid handle with a spoon carrier
- built-in silicon lid gasket
- transport clips for locking the lid down for trips to pot lucks
- removable spoon drip tray
- bracket for holding the hot lid which also spins around to provide a cord wrap structure
- easily cleanable aluminum housing
- lighter weight heating element
- flip up silicon handles for secure handling
- 3 stage heating element
No doubt these many improvements did not come from one source. They came about from multiple innovations by many companies competing to win customers in the free crock pot market.
Imagine how many of these innovations would not have occurred in a government-controlled crock pot market. Imagine how the absence of competition coupled with the presence of federal oversight and regulation would have cemented that 20 year-old crock pot design into our culture.
Consider the medicare-subsidized and fda-regulated health care industry in America, or the new federally-managed American automobile industry. Consider driving a 50-year-old Chevy on the island of Cuba.
Governments don’t adapt very well. It’s not in their nature.
The problem with the left’s legislative agenda for America, which they seem unable to adequately describe in less than a thousand pages of federal spaghetti-legalize, is we’ll never know all of the wonderful human products, behaviors, solutions, and creativity that they preclude from coming into existence.
electorAl CORruptioN
Star Trek opens today
the leftist experience
[T]he moral destruction of communism was worse because the confusion between common morality and communist morality remains deep rooted. With the latter hiding behind the former, it is parasitical and polluting, using common morality to spread its contagion. Here is a recent example: in the discussions that followed the publication of The Black Book of Communism, an editorial writer at the French communist newspaper L’Humanite’ announced on television that 85 million deaths did not in any way tarnish the communist ideal. They represented only a very unfortunate deviation. After Auschwitz, he continued, one can no longer be a Nazi, but one can remain a communist after the Soviet camps. This man, who spoke in good conscience, did not realize at all that he had just articulated his own most fatal condemnation. He could not see that the communist idea had so perverted the principles of reality and morality that it could indeed outlive 85 million corpses, whereas the Nazi idea had succombed under its dead. He thought he had spoken as a great and decent man, idealistic and uncompromising, without realizing that he had uttered a monstrosity. Communism is more perverse than Nazism because it does not ask man consciously to take the moral step of the criminal, and because it uses the spirit of justice and goodness that abounds throughout the earth to spread evil over all the earth. Each communist experience begins anew in innocence.
Alain Besancon, A Century of Horrors, 2007.
American leftists will ridicule their comparison to communists, however, in moral relativity, in masking harmful policies under good intentions, and in denial over their policies’ historical failures, leftists and communists are a distinction without a difference. [Read more…]
John Andrews’ speech in Kiowa
John Andrews’ speech – wmv file, 48 megs.
contrived continuity
The psychological state of the militant is distinguished by his fanatical investment in the system. This central vision reorganizes his entire intellectual and perceptual field, all the way to the periphery. Language is transformed: it is no longer used to communicate or express, but to conceal a contrived continuity between the system and reality. Ideological language is charged with the magical role of forcing reality to conform to a particular vision of the world. It is a liturgical language for which every utterance points to its speaker’s adherence to the system, and it summons the interlocutor to adhere as well. Code words thus constitute threats and figures of power.It is not possible to remain intelligent under the spell of ideology.
The most obvious sign that ideological insanity is artificial is that it is reversible: when the pressure ceases and circumstances change, one gets out all at once, as if from a dream. But it is a waking dream–one that does not block motility and maintains a certain apparently rational coherence. Outside the affected area, which is the superior part of the mind in a healthy person–the part that articulates religion, philosophy, and the “governing ideas of reason,” as Kant would say–the comprehensive functions seem intact but focused on and enslaved by the surreal object. When one wakes, one’s mind is empty; one’s life and knowledge must be entirely relearned.
Alain Besancon, A Century of Horrors, 2007.
The Republican mistake of the 2008 election was to embrace a portion of the left’s ideological insanity to bring in moderates, which ended up ratcheting the debate to the left. Whoever concluded that Republicans could score by giving the ball to the opposition should be fired. [Read more…]
blowback
“Because white guilt is a vacuum of moral authority, it makes the moral authority of whites and the legitimacy of American institutions contingent on proving a negative: that they are not racist. The great power of white guilt comes from the fact that it functions by stigma, like racism itself. Whites and American institutions are stigmatized as racist until they prove otherwise. . . . .[T]he larger reality is that white guilt leaves no room for moral choice; it does not depend on the goodwill or the genuine decency of people.” Shelby Steele, White Guilt, 2006.
The moral authority that comes from an absence of moral choice is actually no moral authority. This is a prescription for endless manipulation–by both blacks and whites–which Steele documents at length. He also wrote, [Read more…]
last nerves
I don’t really want to know how many last nerves I’ve got left. Each time I think, “That’s it, he’s gotten on my last nerve,” [Read more…]
hot ‘n cold
Via Getty Images. caption: Handout picture released by the Venezuelan Presidency press office showing the President of the US,Barack Obama (L), and his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez (R) chatting before the opening of the 5th Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, on April 17, 2009.
.
.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (R) gives U.S. President Barack Obama a copy of “Las Venas Abiertas de America Latina” by author Eduardo Galeano during a meeting at the Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, Trinidad April 18, 2009. Obama sat down with South American leaders on Saturday, saying he was ready to listen and learn after promising an era of more regional cooperation and a new start with communist Cuba.
.
3 weeks ago:Hugo calls Obama “ignorant”
color me skeptical
“There is no such dichotomy as Reds AND Greens, but Green Reds, and vice versa. It was a deep concern for the livable planet being saved that pointed me originally towards socialism and revolution. That will not change, and Marx only made me a more confirmed green.”