—————————————————————————
Arty changes venue
October 21, 2008
POLITICAL TERRORISM
Vandals seek to silence voices of opposition votersRecently, the Obama Campaign for Change Office in Elizabeth experienced an act of vandalism. Every window in the office was smashed out. This comes on the heels of incidents where local Democratic candidates have had to deal with signs being torn down and/or destroyed around the county and Obama/Biden signs being removed along Elbert Road.
Elbert County is a very conservative, Republican county but about 1/6 of its citizens happen to be registered Democrats. The lack of tolerance and the disrespect shown toward Elbert County Democrats is extensive. Beyond that, the smashing of windows at the Obama office is a clear act of intimidation; in fact it is an act of American terrorism, designed to threaten those who would stand up and be counted in the political process. Those who perpetrated these acts are attempting to deny local Democrats the political rights conservative Republicans are so eager to defend and promote on battlefields around the world.
I call on all decent Republican candidates to issue statements deploring these actions. I also wish to gain the attention of those of you who are undecided or independent in the upcoming election. I want you to notice what some of your neighbors will do to stop you from noticing that you have a choice to vote for Democratic candidates in the upcoming election.
Arty Smith, Elbert
Arty considered it impolitic to mention the Democrat provocation for the vandalism. Note that in the first paragraph, the window breakage was accurately described as an act of vandalism. Yet in the second paragraph Arty’s true gripe emerges. The refusal of the majority to tolerate and respect Democrats is an act of American terrorism intended to prevent Democrats from “standing up and being counted.” So, evidently, the vandalism at Obama headquarters somehow interferes with Democrats’ voting franchise. And people in the majority who don’t tolerate and respect Democrats for, I guess, being alive and consuming water and food, are American terrorists.
I, for one, am glad Arty cleared this up.
In the third paragraph we find Arty prescribing the content of speech from “decent Republican candidates,” — if they fail to issue statements deploring these actions they are not “decent.” Now, it’s one thing to be measured by the content of your speech, that’s only reasonable, however, apparently in the new regime, silence is also grounds for condemnation.
As Bill Maher likes to say, “new rules!”
Arty, and Democrats in general for that matter, seem to think that their willingness to show up for the political process guarantees them a seat at the table — i.e. they should be “tolerated and respected.” Au contraire mon fraire, it is the content of your character plus the viability of your ideas that earn you tolerance and respect. Even if one grants Democrats the first element of that test, they’ve got a long way to go on the second.
It is in that second element that America is about to get a painful lesson. Socialism has never worked, can’t work, and won’t work under an Obama administration. As for all the marxist revolutionary characters involved with Obama, let’s hope he keeps them out of his administration so we don’t have to endure another national drama, like what the Clintons put the country through.
regulatory planning
“The title was founded on the right of discovery, a right, which was held among the European nations a just and sufficient foundation, on which to rest their respective claims to the American continent.”
“It may be asked, what was the effect of this principle of discovery in respect to the rights of the natives themselves. In the view of the Europeans it created a peculiar relation between themselves and aboriginal inhabitants. The latter were admitted to possess a present right of occupancy, or use in the soil, which was subordinate to the ultimate dominion of the discoverer. They were admitted to be the rightful occupants of the soil, with a legal, as well as just claim to retain possession of it, and to use it according to their own discretion. In a certain sense, they were permitted to exercise rights of sovereignty over it. They might sell or transfer it to the sovereign, who discovered it; but they were denied the authority to dispose of it to any other persons; and until such a sale or transfer, they were generally permitted to occupy it as sovereigns de facto. But, notwithstanding this occupancy the right to grant the soil, while yet in possession of the natives, subject however to their right of occupancy; and title so granted was universally admitted to convey a sufficient title in the soil to the grantees in perfect dominion, or, as it is sometimes expressed in treatises of public law, it was a transfer of plenum et util dominium.”
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833, Book 1, Chapter 1.
In other words, you were living here before me, but when I discovered your land, I became the owner. You can stay here but you can’t sell the land unless it’s to me. And even though you still live here, I can sell the land out from underneath you.
When I think about regulatory planning and land conservation, I can’t help but think how the more things change, the more they remain the same. And it didn’t work out too well for the Indians either.
Democan or Republicrat
Shipper’s position on regulatory planning
Thomasson’s position on regulatory planning
Randal O’Toole’s
Brilliantly Smart Growth
20th October 2008
Smart Growth has proven so popular that it is time to talk about the next step, which I call Brilliantly Smart Growth. If housing people in mid-rise, mixed-use developments can measurably reduce their daily miles of driving and carbon footprints, just think what higher densities will do. [Read more…]
divide and conquer
Obama’s America – See how many classes fit you.
“The official Obama-Biden website provides the following alphabetical list of Party-approved minority groups who must live and act within the boundaries assigned to them by their progressive betters, as indicated in their group-specific Obama logo:
African-Americans, Arab-Americans, Asian-Americans, Disabled-Americans, Environmental-Americans, Euro-Americans, Faith-Americans, First-Americans, Foreign-Americans, Generation-Obama-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Kids-Americans, Labor-Americans, Latino-Americans, LGBT-Americans, Mediterranean-Americans, Military-Americans, Pacific-Americans, Republican-Americans, Rural-Americans, Senior-Americans, Small-Business-Americans, Sportsmen-Americans, Student-Americans, Veteran-Americans, and Women-Americans.
Real-life examples of Party-approved ethnic, gender, age, regional, and other minority voices in the skillfully directed chorus declaring Obama a new supreme leader.” The People’s Cube
government of the planners, by the planners, for the planners
Summarized History for Bill Number HB07-1246
04/12/2007 Signed by the Speaker of the House
04/16/2007 Signed by the President of the Senate
04/16/2007 Sent to the Governor
04/25/2007 Governor Action – Signed
Excerpt: THE MASTER PLAN OF A MUNICIPALITY SHALL BE AN ADVISORY DOCUMENT TO GUIDE LAND DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS; HOWEVER, THE PLAN OR ANY PART THEREOF MAY BE MADE BINDING BY INCLUSION IN THE MUNICIPALITY’S ADOPTED SUBDIVISION, ZONING, PLATTING, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR OTHER SIMILAR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AFTER SATISFYING NOTICE, DUE PROCESS, AND HEARING REQUIREMENTS FOR LEGISLATIVE OR QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESSES AS APPROPRIATE.
Elbert County’s Master Plan is already referenced in zoning, subdivision and 1041 regulations, prior to the enactment of this legislation. This is why the BOCC is trying to remove references to the Master Plan from county regulations. Elbert County has always had an advisory Master Plan, and unless references to the Master Plan are removed from county regulations, the Master Plan may be held to be regulatory by default, as it was in the SVV case.
Note that the new law also contains notice, due process and hearing requirements. The Master Plan has never been noticed and heard in the county under the terms that it would become a regulatory document. This fact would appear to present a due process problem to the assumption that the plan is already regulatory.
To remove all doubt, I support 100% the current commissioners’ intent to firmly establish the Master Plan as advisory by removing all references to it from county regulations.
I condemn with extreme prejudice the planning commissions’ attempts to make the Master Plan regulatory over all property holders in the county without holding an election on the question.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PEOPLE. I HOPE THE NEW BOCC CLEANS HOUSE OF THE LOT OF THEM.
Jabba the Hud
….because sometimes politics is funny. (click to enlarge)
2 abe points rebutted
It’s only Wednesday, I haven’t seen this weeks Elbert County fish wraps, and there’s already 2 Democrat points to rebut.
First, McShay’s cartoon, 
.
Anyone familiar with my history with the Republican Party here knows that we parted company years ago, that I have extensively criticized the buy-one-get-two local brand of Republican/RINO politics, and even went so far as to form an issue committee and sent out county-wide mailings critical of the status quo. The message has not changed and there are several posts on this board to that same end. McShay is flat wrong to paint me with that brush.
Secondly, on the Democrat Headquarters Vandalism, it is deplorable and, I agree, probably politically motivated. I feel very sorry that the nice lady who owns the property had to fear for her safety and perhaps even more. She is a victim and there’s no justification for it. All that said, I think Mr. Thomasson has gone hyperbolic again.
A day or so before the headquarters vandalism, persons unkown vandalized many of the Republican campaign signs along the highway in Elizabeth by covering them with “no”signs: 
.
Was breaking the windows at Democrat campaign headquarters a reasonable response? Of course not. But could it have been an extreme form of “blow back” for the campaign sign vandalism inflicted on Republican candidates? Possibly. We’ll probably never know for sure.
Democrats have been escalating their rhetoric and campaign tactics ever since they lost the 2000 presidential election. If they don’t turn that movement around toward peaceful and fair ends, toward responsive conversation, away from monologues of talking points, I shudder to think at what partisan violence they may be leading the country into. And even though I sense that hardcore Democrats will take to the streets and riot if McCain wins the election, I won’t let that threat change my vote.
At least Hollywood is doing its’ part to tone down the election rhetoric.
put it to a vote
Did you read the above?
Here’s the problem. What Mr. Thomasson described isn’t democracy. The room contained a self-selected group of people who were 99% in favor of regulatory planning. The planning commission members were in favor of regulatory planning. They brought letters from their friends who were in favor of regulatory planning. Mr. Miller from county planning had switched his recommendation to also favor regulatory planning. To be generous, from all those sources there may have been 200 votes in favor of regulatory planning.
Those 200 non-representative people were busy determining (amidst applause, self-congratulations and jokes) a county policy about regulatory planning that will have the authority of governing law over all of the land owners in Elbert County. They had a good ol’ time manipulating a system that most people in the county don’t even know exists.
Not one of those people in the room were elected to represent the people they were, effectively, governing. That is not democracy. No way. No how. Not even close.
Before they can reasonably connect the word “democracy” to “regulatory planning” in Elbert County, Mr. Thomasson and friends will need to put it to a vote of all the people.
Acting like thugs and courting sympathetic judges does not earn them the right to claim democracy.
A Tale of Two Cities
Elbert County needs 2 planning commissions. One for districts 1 and 2, and another for district 3.
Land owners in districts 1 and 2, who have all the economic options they need in nearby Douglas and Arapahoe counties, can keep the current socialist planning commission and socialist master plan. They can regulate themselves until the cows come home and sleep soundly each night in the knowledge that no one’s freedom in districts 1 and 2 will interfere with their anointed collective will.
Land owners in district 3, who need economic growth and real jobs in capitalized businesses to support families, provide benefits, make for career paths, and bring about the educational and cultural opportunities that attend to a modern economy, would have a new planning commission. This new commission would have the needs of district 3 as their primary focus and be dedicated to entrepreneurship, business-friendly tax incentives, relaxation and removal of regulations suited to a command economy, and fast track commercial and industrial development.
Districts 1 and 2 would go down their socialist road devoted to preserving their upscale bedroom ranchette lifestyle. District 3 would pursue capitalism and free enterprise and become a center for careers, jobs, manufacturing, the benefits of economic activity, and the accumulation of real wealth.
District 3 would no longer be a playground for the district 1 and 2 eco-socialists. It’s time for district 3 residents to quit subjecting themselves to the dead end policies and oppressive regulations that district 1 and 2 residents have to offer. Those policies, attitudes and regulations simply don’t work in district 3.
Out here in district 3, we need a real economy. Most of us cannot afford Utopia.
democracy dies with a chuckle
Issue: Advisory vs. Regulatory Master Plan
October 9, 2008, Elbert County Planning Commission Meeting Audio
(42 Megs, please right click and download to your computer for listening. Sorry about the file size. It is a very clear recording and with headphones you can hear pretty much everyone in the hall. The meeting lasted approximately 45 minutes.)
Of particular interest was the closing discussion about continuation of the issue. This planning commission has no intention of forwarding a recommendation to the current BOCC for an executive decision.
This planning commission and every member of the audience who spoke, often to applause, and excluding myself, favor a regulatory master plan. The audience contained many SVV activists. Listen to the audio. This is not democracy. This is not a vote of the people. These people don’t care about legalities. They will have their regulations one way or another. This is mobocracy.
Sward & Thomasson vision
“The BOCC needs to recruit small business in the county, veteran-based businesses, and an agricultural-based local farmers’ market. We need to seek grant money from the State of Colorado for developing cellulosic ethanol from indigenous switchgrasses and set up small distillation coop facilities. We need to utilize the dry and windy eastern half of the county to bring in the production of clean electricity via wind and solar technologies. We also need to develop our historical sites within the county, and sponsor a vibrant day tourism industry.”
From:What Patty Sward & Robert Thomasson Will Do To Fix It
Good grief!
A farmer’s market where there are no truck farms. State subsidies and state coops. Power technologies that require state subsidies to be economic. A handful of local historic sites. A vibrant day tourism industry to attract the tourist segment that likes to watch switchgrass grow when they’re not skiing in the mountains. Maybe we can find some descendants of indigenous Americans to claim some land for a casino. Look out Central City, we’re going to need some of your tour buses.
Come on people!!! This stuff is beyond pathetic.
Richard Miller, AICP, FLIP FLOP
RE:
Original August 28th Planning Document for regulatory amendments
Revised August 28th Planning Document for regulatory amendments
Both of these documents are dated August 28th. All of the detailed changes to existing regulations in both documents are identical.
The recommendations section, however, has been reversed in the revised version. There is no indication in the revised document that it now contains a reversal of opinion.
Mr. Miller’s revised recommendation would perpetuate Elbert County’s exposure to the spurious conclusions of Judge Holmes in the SVV case.
The BOCC should act with all due prejudice in this matter as soon as possible, and Mr. Miller’s subversion of his original recommendation should not be tolerated. Mr. Miller is quite wrong in characterizing the “advisory” nature of the master plan as a matter of “desire.” This is a matter of law, a matter of a long-standing precedent course of dealing, and a matter of rectifying an act of judicial hubris.
Mr. Miller’s new-found position that a resolution of the advisory nature of the master plan, if “desired” (by whom?), should be left to a complete re-write of all county regulations, is completely disingenuous. He knows full well that Elbert County can’t even get a rewrite to the master plan done, let alone a complete revamp of county regulations. The BOCC should put a stop to Mr. Miller’s hubris too.
If Elbert County citizens want a regulatory master plan they should vote on the question. Judge Holmes and Mr. Miller should not be deciding this matter between themselves.
(click to enlarge)
(click to enlarge)
will of the people
America is a republic governed by elected representatives. The will of the people is expressed at the point in time those representatives are changed out for new ones. The will of the people is the engine of an orderly election. In America, an election is the only functional expression of the will of the people. It is not an expression subject to interpretation by anyone, especially those standing for, or succeeding in, an election. It’s simply a matter of electoral mathematics.
Marx’s Communist Manifesto, first published in 1848, took several decades, a civil war, and a couple of economic depressions, to fully gestate into organized political action in America. It took the form of socialist progressivism late in the 19th century, and like the drunk at the party who just won’t go home, it’s been with us ever since. The Left, who subscribe to variations on Marx’s themes, don’t limit or recognize the role of the will of the people in America as outlined in the Constitution. For them, the will of the people constantly evolves. For them, the role of leadership is to enunciate this moving target, each day if need be, and rule on policies in accord with their anointed divinations.
This point is worth restating. For the right, the will of the people is an election. For the left, the will of the people is a mythology.
To our great collective misfortune, governance based in Marxism failed miserably wherever it was tried. It directly led to the deaths of 100’s of millions of citizens, innocent people put to death through war, famine, and persecution by progressive states acting under the authority of the will of the people.
One of the minority candidates for commissioner in Elbert County thinks he can ‘advocate for’ the will of the people here. The first problem is that by definition, a minority candidate cannot represent the will of the majority unless he succeeds in defrauding the majority. Moreover, beyond the scope of a specific election, the will of the people cannot be abstractly known or advocated, by anyone. Anyone who advocates for the will of the people is, in reality, advocating for their own subjective concept of the will of the people – for their myth. Elbert County voters should not reward this delusional approach since, as history has shown, this path leads to extremely negative outcomes.
To be sure, it’s a free country and commissioner candidates can advocate for whatever they want. As voters, we must decipher the candidates’ well known self interests and their myths about the will of the people. Those candidates who sell myths about the will of the people that happen to confirm their own self interests should come under the most scrutiny.
And elected commissioners should be guided first by the law, and secondly by factual assessments grounded in objective circumstances. Delusions and myths about the will of the people are a very poor substitute for good governance.
acorn
Brophy’s Ballot Pics
From: Senator Greg Brophy
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:12 PM
Subject: The Amendments 2008
The Amendments 2008
The cheat sheet here at the top with my recommendations on the left; make yours in the blank and take it with you to the polls.
A46 yes ______
A47 yes ______
A48 yes ______
A49 yes ______
A50 yes ______
A51 no ______
A52 yes ______
A53 no ______
A54 no ______
A55 no ______
A56 no ______
A57 no ______
A58 no ______
A59 no ______
Ref L yes ______
Ref M yes ______
Ref N yes ______
Ref O yes ______
(analysis below)
Ed Begley Jr.
As Lars Olfen in A Mighty Wind
i.e. My answer to the question, “What is your favorite line from any movie?”
poverty of the left
“Our water resources are under siege. The Master Plan is being made irrelevant by BOCC policy moves. No prospects, no jobs, no leadership. Elbert County Republicans have risen to the occasion by coming out with three uninspired candidates with no detailed platform to solve our problems.”
Lets look at this lament.
Water resources are under siege by who? The Left who want to regulate water resources in Elbert County.
The Master Plan is advisory and when the BOCC moves to clarify this fact in county regulations, who complains? The Left.
Who have stonewalled and fought all economic development in Elbert County for as long as anyone can remember? The Left.
Who thinks they can plan and design the best solutions for Elbert County? The Left.
We need candidates who will shrink government, reduce and remove regulations, and prevent government from impeding the private sector in doing what it does best – capitalism.
To the Left, capitalism is the “C” word, never to be uttered in polite company. Candidates who do not exhibit signs of totalitarian tendencies are “uninspired.”
The Left got exactly what they fought for – a stagnant local economy that is hardest on the middle class (the poor don’t stand a chance here.)
Elbert County must move beyond the Left’s failed country-in-county utopia and embrace a prosperous future. We’ve reached a dead end with the Left’s empty visions. It’s time to admit that mistake and dump the Left’s failed ideology with all the prejudice it deserves.
clean coal is not
——————————————————————————————–
Mudballs-R-Us
“In response to Schwab’s allegations, Thomasson said to hear that he is out of control is hurtful, but he refuses to fling mud at them.”
“This is absolute character assassination,” he said. “They just don’t care.” ElbertCounty News, 10/2/08 Page 1.
Mr. Thomasson refuses to fling mud?
Indeed. Since the inception of his website Abe21.net, a day has not gone by that Thomasson ever stopped flinging mud. Talk about unclean hands.
