---by Micheal
Awhile back Pope Benedict touched off a fire storm of protest from the Muslim world when he quoted an ancient Byzantine emperor who said that Islam was a violent and intolerant religion. How dare the Pope say such things, the Muslim world shouted. Riots and death threats ensued. (see previous blog entry) Anyone who says Islam is intolerant is to blame for violence by Muslims. An odd logic at best.
Now enter the Islamic court in a Somalian town. "Anyone who does not pray five times a day to Mecca will be beheaded." (I kid you not. See Fox News story for Dec. 6, 2006). The court will impose what they call "Islamic Law" on all residents. Infractions will bring death.
Okay, NOW what do we do with Muslim outrage at being called violent and intolerant? Beheading isn't violent and intolerant?
I realize that any organization, religious or secular, has its occasional wackos. There are millions of quiet postal workers, and only a tiny few who go nuts with guns. One wacko postal worker is not respresentative. There are millions of respectable Christians, and yet the occasional Jim Jones or David Koresh surface from time to time. They're not representative of real Christianity.
The huge difference here, is that we do not hear a larger Muslim community saying, "There are some wacko Muslims out there, but we're not like that. They preach hate and intolerance and death, but that's not the true basis of Islam." Instead, we hear only of riots and protests, as if the statements were true enough, but how dare anyone actually say them. "For calling me violent and intolerant, You Die!"
If the greater Muslim community does not want to be "profiled" as all wackos, they need to speak out -- and loudly -- against the wackos in their backyards. If Islam really is NOT violent and intolerant, they need to take to the airwaves and teach everyone who'll listen, what the Quran really says, if it is, in fact, peaceful and tolerant.
Christians have to do this constantly. Some idiot somewhere decides to kill people he doesn't like and says God told him to do so. Christians everywhere are tarnished by such idiots. The sane Christians then have to spend lots of time explaining to people that God says (in the Bible) that murder is wrong and that vengance his His (not ours) to extract. Or that Jesus commands us to love our enemies (not kills them), etc. etc. Christians set the record straight. No one can prevent wackos from cropping up, but sane Christians defend their faith against the wackos.
Where are the Muslim defenders? Where are the Quran lessons that prove that Mohammed did not preach beheading to those who do not pray five times a day? Where have the wackos gotten Islam all wrong? Muslim defenders have a right, an obligation to speak up. If they don't distance themselves from Muslim wackos, we've no real choice but assume the wackos are actually representative of true Islam.
12.06.2006
9.15.2006
Pope Exposes Islamic Double-talk
---by Micheal
At a university in Germany, on Thursday, Pope Benedict XVI quoted from an ancient Byzantine emperor and set off an Islamic firestorm to rival that over some Danish cartoons.
What on earth did he say? On the topic of jihads, he quoted Emperor Manuel Paleologos II who said, "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." The emperor was speaking to that concept of become Muslim or die.
Amid the Muslim screams were statements like this, from Pakistan's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam: "Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence."
Huh? Play that back again, but slower. Anyone who accuses you of beating people will be beaten? How, exactly, is this proving the Pope wrong?
The loudly outraged part of the Muslim community are make the same kind of oxymoronic statements that American atheist liberals do. They can't tolerate people who are intolerant (usually meaning Christians).
Some Dane publishes cartoons of Mohammed. Muslims go ballistic, demanding death to the blasphemers. Al Qaeda openly announce that Americans should convert to Islam, OR ELSE! We've seen a taste or two of al Qaeda's "or else" before.
What did the the Pope say, or the emperor, for that matter, that vocal portions of the Islamic community are not saying themselves? Why are they yelling at the Pope, demanding apologies, when Muslims are saying the same thing?
What we seem to have here, is Islamic double-talk. On the one hand, they want to demand that everyone else convert or die, but they sure don't anyone (else?) to point that out. How dare they be so intolerant?
At a university in Germany, on Thursday, Pope Benedict XVI quoted from an ancient Byzantine emperor and set off an Islamic firestorm to rival that over some Danish cartoons.
What on earth did he say? On the topic of jihads, he quoted Emperor Manuel Paleologos II who said, "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." The emperor was speaking to that concept of become Muslim or die.
Amid the Muslim screams were statements like this, from Pakistan's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam: "Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence."
Huh? Play that back again, but slower. Anyone who accuses you of beating people will be beaten? How, exactly, is this proving the Pope wrong?
The loudly outraged part of the Muslim community are make the same kind of oxymoronic statements that American atheist liberals do. They can't tolerate people who are intolerant (usually meaning Christians).
Some Dane publishes cartoons of Mohammed. Muslims go ballistic, demanding death to the blasphemers. Al Qaeda openly announce that Americans should convert to Islam, OR ELSE! We've seen a taste or two of al Qaeda's "or else" before.
What did the the Pope say, or the emperor, for that matter, that vocal portions of the Islamic community are not saying themselves? Why are they yelling at the Pope, demanding apologies, when Muslims are saying the same thing?
What we seem to have here, is Islamic double-talk. On the one hand, they want to demand that everyone else convert or die, but they sure don't anyone (else?) to point that out. How dare they be so intolerant?
9.07.2006
Five Years post-9/11: What's Changed?
---by Micheal
On this fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, there have already been numerous tributes, retrospectives and editorials. One of them stood out, or at least provoked a bit more thought than the usual sentimental gush or jingoism.
William Dobson of Foreign Policy magazine wrote an editorial entitled: The Day Nothing Much Changed. In it, Dobson reminds us how just about everyone was saying that the 9/11 attacks changed the world forever. He argues that five years later, the world has managed to return to pretty much where it was on September 10th, 2001.
The global economy reeled a bit, but eventually recovered. The transportation network was paralyzed, but returned to a degree of normalcy. Sure, we have long, slow security lines at airports and taking off our shoes has become an almost invisible routine, but by and large, we get from A to B in much the same manner as before.
Civil libertarians wailed and tore their garments expecting the onset of a fascistic security state. Eavesdropping programs and wholesale commandeering of internet and phone records have become routine, but our rights and freedoms seem little different than 9/10.
Dobson is correct that the world system, and even our various national systems, have not been changed forever. We're back to grumbling about a gutless UN. It's fashionable again for liberals to bash patriotism. Democrats are back to complaining that George W is the devil incarnate. Republicans are back to complaining that Democrats are wieners. Nothing much has changed there.
Has anything really changed? In a more subtle, background sort of way, I'd say yes. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was over. The US had no major enemy any longer. What took the place of the old Soviets, was a shadowy new enemy -- Osama's Al Queda cells.
You could argue that the world really changed back in 1993 when Osama's boys tried to blow up the World Trade Center the first time. We didn't really notice the change back then. Osama failed, so we didn't take him seriously. He fired the first shots, but we hadn't thought of it as a war yet. In 2001, he got much better at the role of New Enemy.
Terrorists are still out there plotting death and destruction to (somehow) advance a twisted agenda. I wonder if any of those scheming terrorists have noticed something about terror as a tool -- it really doesn't work. Five years later, and many things really are about the same. They did not bring the USA to its knees, force the American government to cave in to their demands.
If it seems nothing much has changed after five years, it's not a sign of American complacency. It's proof that terrorism is a failure tactic of petty thugs.
On this fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, there have already been numerous tributes, retrospectives and editorials. One of them stood out, or at least provoked a bit more thought than the usual sentimental gush or jingoism.
William Dobson of Foreign Policy magazine wrote an editorial entitled: The Day Nothing Much Changed. In it, Dobson reminds us how just about everyone was saying that the 9/11 attacks changed the world forever. He argues that five years later, the world has managed to return to pretty much where it was on September 10th, 2001.
The global economy reeled a bit, but eventually recovered. The transportation network was paralyzed, but returned to a degree of normalcy. Sure, we have long, slow security lines at airports and taking off our shoes has become an almost invisible routine, but by and large, we get from A to B in much the same manner as before.
Civil libertarians wailed and tore their garments expecting the onset of a fascistic security state. Eavesdropping programs and wholesale commandeering of internet and phone records have become routine, but our rights and freedoms seem little different than 9/10.
Dobson is correct that the world system, and even our various national systems, have not been changed forever. We're back to grumbling about a gutless UN. It's fashionable again for liberals to bash patriotism. Democrats are back to complaining that George W is the devil incarnate. Republicans are back to complaining that Democrats are wieners. Nothing much has changed there.
Has anything really changed? In a more subtle, background sort of way, I'd say yes. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was over. The US had no major enemy any longer. What took the place of the old Soviets, was a shadowy new enemy -- Osama's Al Queda cells.
You could argue that the world really changed back in 1993 when Osama's boys tried to blow up the World Trade Center the first time. We didn't really notice the change back then. Osama failed, so we didn't take him seriously. He fired the first shots, but we hadn't thought of it as a war yet. In 2001, he got much better at the role of New Enemy.
Terrorists are still out there plotting death and destruction to (somehow) advance a twisted agenda. I wonder if any of those scheming terrorists have noticed something about terror as a tool -- it really doesn't work. Five years later, and many things really are about the same. They did not bring the USA to its knees, force the American government to cave in to their demands.
If it seems nothing much has changed after five years, it's not a sign of American complacency. It's proof that terrorism is a failure tactic of petty thugs.
8.30.2006
Katrina: still an agenda club
---by Micheal
At this one year anniversary of hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans, it is apparently still in vogue to use Katrina to push personal/political agenda.
On Monday, commentator/author Marcellus Andrews said, "Katrina's destruction of New Orleans is a symbol of our greatest collective sin. Our society ties the right to survival, even down to surviving a natural disaster, to the size of one's wallet. In the old New Orleans, people with money lived on high ground, while poor people lived way below sea-level. When the flood waters came, poor people drowned. They didn't have enough money to leave town."
Andrews is obviously angry that poor people died, but his socio-economic agenda just doesn't fit Katrina. There are many reasons people chose to live in New Orleans. Lack of money is not all there was to it.
No doubt Andrews favors programs to boost lower strata incomes, redistribute wealth so that the "poor" have enough money to do whatever rich people do. Equal wealth, however, would not necessarily have saved lowland dwelling people.
Andrews argues that public safety projects should equally protect the public. They cannot, however. Every design project has to strike a balance between strength vs cost. The public safety decision makers in New Orleans drew that balance line at Cat4. Up until Katrnia, a Cat5 hurricane, their design/cost decisions were right.
When a publicly funded levee fails, the low land will be flooded. Water doesn't care about wallets or a lack thereof, it just follows elevation.
In New Orleans, much of the land is below sea level. Only a fraction of higher ground remains. Even with equal wealth, someone would have been living in the low areas. Redistributing wealth would not raise New Orleans' lowlands. Why, does Andrews think that if everyone were wealthier, no one would live on the low ground. You really can't blame the entire US capitalist economic system for the fact that some people live in disaster-risk areas.
Andrews is beating us with Katrina to push his personal economic agenda, but it doesn't fit. We cannot buy complete safety from acts of God, even if with total wealth equality.
At this one year anniversary of hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans, it is apparently still in vogue to use Katrina to push personal/political agenda.
On Monday, commentator/author Marcellus Andrews said, "Katrina's destruction of New Orleans is a symbol of our greatest collective sin. Our society ties the right to survival, even down to surviving a natural disaster, to the size of one's wallet. In the old New Orleans, people with money lived on high ground, while poor people lived way below sea-level. When the flood waters came, poor people drowned. They didn't have enough money to leave town."
Andrews is obviously angry that poor people died, but his socio-economic agenda just doesn't fit Katrina. There are many reasons people chose to live in New Orleans. Lack of money is not all there was to it.
No doubt Andrews favors programs to boost lower strata incomes, redistribute wealth so that the "poor" have enough money to do whatever rich people do. Equal wealth, however, would not necessarily have saved lowland dwelling people.
Andrews argues that public safety projects should equally protect the public. They cannot, however. Every design project has to strike a balance between strength vs cost. The public safety decision makers in New Orleans drew that balance line at Cat4. Up until Katrnia, a Cat5 hurricane, their design/cost decisions were right.
When a publicly funded levee fails, the low land will be flooded. Water doesn't care about wallets or a lack thereof, it just follows elevation.
In New Orleans, much of the land is below sea level. Only a fraction of higher ground remains. Even with equal wealth, someone would have been living in the low areas. Redistributing wealth would not raise New Orleans' lowlands. Why, does Andrews think that if everyone were wealthier, no one would live on the low ground. You really can't blame the entire US capitalist economic system for the fact that some people live in disaster-risk areas.
Andrews is beating us with Katrina to push his personal economic agenda, but it doesn't fit. We cannot buy complete safety from acts of God, even if with total wealth equality.
8.15.2006
Red, Blue, but no red-white-and-blue
---by Micheal
America, the land of red white and blue, seems to be breaking into two separate nations, one red, one blue. I discovered yet another symptom of this change while doing some photo research for a project. I needed some images of chimpanzee faces. Among the expected wildlife shots, were many caricatures of president Bush made to look like a chimp.
The vast majority of these caricatures were simple homemade hack jobs, like copying and pasting chimp's ears onto an image of Bush, or clipping Bush's face and pasting it over a chimp's face. I'm sure each "artist" imagined he had created something unique and clever.
All those chimp-faced caricatures reminded me of some propaganda pictures from World Wars One and Two. During WWI, allied propagandists created images of German soldiers as apes, or the Kaiser as a fat chimp. In WWII, American poster artists created images of Hitler, Goering, Goebbels, etc. as chimps. There were posters of Tojo or other Japanese military officials as chimps.
The goal of those propaganda posters was to vilify an enemy, to liken him to a "lower form of life." With such images, we comforted ourselves about our intrinsic superiority over our enemies. It was okay to be insulting. They were enemies.
What does that say about America when our president is vilified as if he were a foreign enemy? Does it indicate that the Blue nationals don't regard Bush as their nation's president, but the leader of an enemy nation?
As much as I felt Bill Clinton's morals and ethics were deplorable, I cringed inside to hear Reds vilifying him as if he were the leader of a foreign nation, not the duly elected president of America. Does the office hold no respect anymore?
So there you have the symptom. We don't seem to have one president over one nation. We have, instead, the notion of a Red Nation and a Blue Nation. The leader of one, is seen as the evil occupier of the other. How long can that go on?
United we stand, divided we...
8.07.2006
Klingons Conquer Shoe Industry
-- by Micheal
If my old tennis shoes hadn't finally fallen apart, I wouldn't have suspected about the invasion.
My old shoes had been coming apart for months, but I was in denial. If they failed, I knew I'd have to go shopping. I loathe shopping. If I have a "feminine side," as pop culture likes to say, I'm pretty sure it loathes shopping too.
"Don't I have a dental appointment?" I asked my wife. "No," she smiled. "We're going shopping." I slumped in resignation.
All I wanted was a plain pair of white sneakers. No extra colorful stripes, no logos. Granted, it had been a few years since I'd shopped for shoes, but I honestly held onto a slim hope that plain white shoes could be found. Not the case. I might as well have been looking for a left-handed monkey wrench. No simple white shoes.
I did, however, discover that the Klingons have begun their conquest of Earth. They started with the shoe industry, probably because shoe makers had the poorest security. Proof of Klingon victory is on display on the shoe stores.
In case you didn't waste your youth watching Star Trek on TV like I did, the Klingons are an over-the-top warrior race who totally dress the part. Klingon costumes always sported spikes, lumps of metal and jaggedy bits sticking out everywhere. To make Klingon shoes, NBC's wardrobe people would add a rhino horn to the toe and miscellaneous spikes elsewhere. Klingons liked pain, you see.
As I stood before the tennis shoe aisle, it was obvious to me that the Klingons had taken over. There wasn't a plain simple shoe anywhere. They all had stripes, lumps and bulges. They had more ridges than a Klingon's forehead. They had fake cylindrical thingies to resemble the underside of an "air ride" moving van or fake tubes and bulges, as if to barely conceal marvelous hi-tech machinery. All that was missing was the rhino horn.
They're shoes! For crying out loud. Rubber soled tennis shoes! They're not space ships. Do I have to buy into this fake cyborg look? Can't a guy just buy a plain simple pair of white sneakers, I shouted. The clerks just look at me suspiciously. Obviously, they've been assimilated. I whistled a nonchalant tune as I walked out of the store, pretending not to know about the invasion.
For now, duct tape is keeping the soles attached to the uppers on my old shoes. My quest for simple earthling shoes will have to resume later, when the heat dies down. The Klingons won't get ME.
If my old tennis shoes hadn't finally fallen apart, I wouldn't have suspected about the invasion.
My old shoes had been coming apart for months, but I was in denial. If they failed, I knew I'd have to go shopping. I loathe shopping. If I have a "feminine side," as pop culture likes to say, I'm pretty sure it loathes shopping too.
"Don't I have a dental appointment?" I asked my wife. "No," she smiled. "We're going shopping." I slumped in resignation.
All I wanted was a plain pair of white sneakers. No extra colorful stripes, no logos. Granted, it had been a few years since I'd shopped for shoes, but I honestly held onto a slim hope that plain white shoes could be found. Not the case. I might as well have been looking for a left-handed monkey wrench. No simple white shoes.
I did, however, discover that the Klingons have begun their conquest of Earth. They started with the shoe industry, probably because shoe makers had the poorest security. Proof of Klingon victory is on display on the shoe stores.
In case you didn't waste your youth watching Star Trek on TV like I did, the Klingons are an over-the-top warrior race who totally dress the part. Klingon costumes always sported spikes, lumps of metal and jaggedy bits sticking out everywhere. To make Klingon shoes, NBC's wardrobe people would add a rhino horn to the toe and miscellaneous spikes elsewhere. Klingons liked pain, you see.
As I stood before the tennis shoe aisle, it was obvious to me that the Klingons had taken over. There wasn't a plain simple shoe anywhere. They all had stripes, lumps and bulges. They had more ridges than a Klingon's forehead. They had fake cylindrical thingies to resemble the underside of an "air ride" moving van or fake tubes and bulges, as if to barely conceal marvelous hi-tech machinery. All that was missing was the rhino horn.
They're shoes! For crying out loud. Rubber soled tennis shoes! They're not space ships. Do I have to buy into this fake cyborg look? Can't a guy just buy a plain simple pair of white sneakers, I shouted. The clerks just look at me suspiciously. Obviously, they've been assimilated. I whistled a nonchalant tune as I walked out of the store, pretending not to know about the invasion.
For now, duct tape is keeping the soles attached to the uppers on my old shoes. My quest for simple earthling shoes will have to resume later, when the heat dies down. The Klingons won't get ME.
7.25.2006
Lebanese Dog Attacks Neighbor
---by Micheal
The mideast trouble has become one of nations fighting non-nations. Hamas and Hezbollah and Iraqi sectarian death squads are not nations. Yet, they field armies as if they were nations. They sometimes build some schools and hospitals for the locals, as if they were nations. But they're not nations. When the bullets and rockets fly, they really don't care if the locals' homes are bombed and jobs destroyed. They've proven that repeatedly.
These non-nation groups live like parasites within someone else's feeble "nation" state, but these groups have no citizens, no commerce, no infrastructure to worry about. This leaves none of the customary leverage which diplomacy has relied upon to coax nations into behaving themselves. Treaties and accords mean nothing when one of the parties has nothing to lose.
While shadowy non-nation militant groups have no reason to restrain themselves, their "host" nations do. It's the host nation's citizens, businesses and bridges that kick whacked. Host nations should not excused culpability any more than the owner of a vicious dog is excused when it attacks someone. "Hey, I didn't bite the girl, Rocko did." No one accepts that excuse. If a nation, weak or otherwise, adopts a vicious "pet" within their borders, they become responsible for its attacks.
If Lebanon is too weak to control its savage dog, or too weak to stop malicious neighbors from prodding their dog to attack, the nation of Lebanon is still responsible. It's not "unfair" that Lebanese citizens and infrastructure suffer. The Lebanese government thought it was just fine to harbor Hezbollah as a pet. They're now paying the price, just like any other homeowner would if their dog attacked someone.
If Lebanon is too weak to control that dog, then they'll just have to accept allowing Animal Control onto their property to put Rocko down. It's absurd to complain that Animal Control is trespassing.
Vicious breeds do not make acceptable pets. Property owners are held responsible.
The mideast trouble has become one of nations fighting non-nations. Hamas and Hezbollah and Iraqi sectarian death squads are not nations. Yet, they field armies as if they were nations. They sometimes build some schools and hospitals for the locals, as if they were nations. But they're not nations. When the bullets and rockets fly, they really don't care if the locals' homes are bombed and jobs destroyed. They've proven that repeatedly.
These non-nation groups live like parasites within someone else's feeble "nation" state, but these groups have no citizens, no commerce, no infrastructure to worry about. This leaves none of the customary leverage which diplomacy has relied upon to coax nations into behaving themselves. Treaties and accords mean nothing when one of the parties has nothing to lose.
While shadowy non-nation militant groups have no reason to restrain themselves, their "host" nations do. It's the host nation's citizens, businesses and bridges that kick whacked. Host nations should not excused culpability any more than the owner of a vicious dog is excused when it attacks someone. "Hey, I didn't bite the girl, Rocko did." No one accepts that excuse. If a nation, weak or otherwise, adopts a vicious "pet" within their borders, they become responsible for its attacks.
If Lebanon is too weak to control its savage dog, or too weak to stop malicious neighbors from prodding their dog to attack, the nation of Lebanon is still responsible. It's not "unfair" that Lebanese citizens and infrastructure suffer. The Lebanese government thought it was just fine to harbor Hezbollah as a pet. They're now paying the price, just like any other homeowner would if their dog attacked someone.
If Lebanon is too weak to control that dog, then they'll just have to accept allowing Animal Control onto their property to put Rocko down. It's absurd to complain that Animal Control is trespassing.
Vicious breeds do not make acceptable pets. Property owners are held responsible.
7.18.2006
A Little Clarification is Due
-- by Ed Naile
I know we are all ga-ga at the doings of our governor (the press and questionable polls anyway) and his endless photo-ops at changing weather patterns and all, but the credit for getting Massachusetts to pay up for a past agreement to reimburse New Hampshire for land lost to flood control projects designed to protect property south of our border should be directed where it belongs – with State Representative Stretch Kennedy.
Stretch started nudging our taxpayer organization several years ago about Massachusetts's failure to pony up $3.2 million they owed us per the interstate agreement. His thoughts were that if US Senator John Kerry was running for president he may want to grease the NH wheels with paid up back debts due our state but not coming out of his wife's campaign chest.
That did not work out so Stretch asked CNHT to start mentioning to candidate Mitt Romney when we see him that it may be wise to pay up. Smart move, good timing!
Enter the photo-op governor and his threat of a lawsuit on the heels of Stretch's plan. I don't know if this lawsuit deal was in fact a reality or another campaign production but to sue Massachusetts over $3.2 million would probably cost $3.2 million and take forever.
Besides, the possibility that a real live effective Governor like Mitt Romney would be intimidated by a more or less pip-squeaky one like we have is pretty remote – in my humble opinion.
So once again Stretch, thanks for doing the old-fashioned political arm wrestling no matter who tries to take the credit.
I know we are all ga-ga at the doings of our governor (the press and questionable polls anyway) and his endless photo-ops at changing weather patterns and all, but the credit for getting Massachusetts to pay up for a past agreement to reimburse New Hampshire for land lost to flood control projects designed to protect property south of our border should be directed where it belongs – with State Representative Stretch Kennedy.
Stretch started nudging our taxpayer organization several years ago about Massachusetts's failure to pony up $3.2 million they owed us per the interstate agreement. His thoughts were that if US Senator John Kerry was running for president he may want to grease the NH wheels with paid up back debts due our state but not coming out of his wife's campaign chest.
That did not work out so Stretch asked CNHT to start mentioning to candidate Mitt Romney when we see him that it may be wise to pay up. Smart move, good timing!
Enter the photo-op governor and his threat of a lawsuit on the heels of Stretch's plan. I don't know if this lawsuit deal was in fact a reality or another campaign production but to sue Massachusetts over $3.2 million would probably cost $3.2 million and take forever.
Besides, the possibility that a real live effective Governor like Mitt Romney would be intimidated by a more or less pip-squeaky one like we have is pretty remote – in my humble opinion.
So once again Stretch, thanks for doing the old-fashioned political arm wrestling no matter who tries to take the credit.
7.12.2006
Taxpayer Reunion '06
-- by Ed Naile
Last Saturday was our Coalition of NH Taxpayer's Family Reunion at the Hopkinton State Fairgrounds. This was our eighth such event. We call it a family reunion because that typifies the comments we most often hear from people who attend - so we went with it. We gave up trying to have speeches because people come to talk and meet each other.
Over two hundred of New Hampshire's small government, low tax, freedom loving activists were in attendance. We had a great time networking with people, some of whom we only hear about on the web or read about in the papers.
Dozens of candidates including Republicans, Libertarians, and Democrats signed our "CNHT Taxpayer Protection Pledge." Republican Gubernatorial candidate Jim Coburn waited to sign his Taxpayer Protection Pledge until the cookout. We thank him for that. There are 72 pictures of the event posted on our web site at www.cnht.org so far.
Congressman Charlie Bass attended and spent quite a bit of time walking around eating lunch and talking to our determined band of tax activists. We missed Congressman Jeb Bradley who usually comes due to a tight schedule in-state. His staff waited it out most of the day but it wasn't to be this year.
State Senator Bob Clegg rode his motorcycle this year. State Senator Chuck Morse was there as well. In fact, Sen. Morse and former Sen. Russ Prescott, both candidates for the Executive Council, talked and ate with cookout attendees. Chet Lapointe, Libertarian candidate for Congressional District 2 moved among the guests as well.
Our pal Al Kulas of WKBK 1290, fresh off a win in the NH Broadcaster awards for radio talk show hosts took time to drive out and see us. Al manned the microphone at WKBK for twelve hours straight during the floods this spring giving details of what was going on to police and citizens in the Keene area.
Ron Dupuis with his new Saturday morning show on WLMW 90.7 (also CNHT's Taxpayer Radio station) stopped by as well. Then Gardner Goldsmith of WNTK 99.7 in New London with his new "trimmed" look shook things up late in the day.
Our "Wall of Shame" of captured municipal documents was a big hit again this year with the new two foot by three foot Geoff Wetrosky "Missing" poster. We almost made a giant milk carton to put this little vote thief's face on but the posters are impressive enough.
We also have SCJ David Souter's interesting assessment card and property map, photo evidence of voter fraud from different towns, voter fraud confessions from UNH students, a poster-sized hand written superior court pro se petition, and all kinds of interesting stuff that takes up about fifty feet of wall space. We also like to call the “Wall of Shame” “What the Papers Won't Print.”
The only “speech” of the day which I call a “list” was when I got up on a chair and asked how many people were running for office. About half the hands went up! I predict it will be an interesting legislature next year with this group as part of the debate.
Our next “reunion” will be on July 7, 2007. This will be a Presidential Primary Cookout with a straw poll. The last time we held such an event we sold all 1,500 tickets two weeks in advance. See you there!
Last Saturday was our Coalition of NH Taxpayer's Family Reunion at the Hopkinton State Fairgrounds. This was our eighth such event. We call it a family reunion because that typifies the comments we most often hear from people who attend - so we went with it. We gave up trying to have speeches because people come to talk and meet each other.
Over two hundred of New Hampshire's small government, low tax, freedom loving activists were in attendance. We had a great time networking with people, some of whom we only hear about on the web or read about in the papers.
Dozens of candidates including Republicans, Libertarians, and Democrats signed our "CNHT Taxpayer Protection Pledge." Republican Gubernatorial candidate Jim Coburn waited to sign his Taxpayer Protection Pledge until the cookout. We thank him for that. There are 72 pictures of the event posted on our web site at www.cnht.org so far.
Congressman Charlie Bass attended and spent quite a bit of time walking around eating lunch and talking to our determined band of tax activists. We missed Congressman Jeb Bradley who usually comes due to a tight schedule in-state. His staff waited it out most of the day but it wasn't to be this year.
State Senator Bob Clegg rode his motorcycle this year. State Senator Chuck Morse was there as well. In fact, Sen. Morse and former Sen. Russ Prescott, both candidates for the Executive Council, talked and ate with cookout attendees. Chet Lapointe, Libertarian candidate for Congressional District 2 moved among the guests as well.
Our pal Al Kulas of WKBK 1290, fresh off a win in the NH Broadcaster awards for radio talk show hosts took time to drive out and see us. Al manned the microphone at WKBK for twelve hours straight during the floods this spring giving details of what was going on to police and citizens in the Keene area.
Ron Dupuis with his new Saturday morning show on WLMW 90.7 (also CNHT's Taxpayer Radio station) stopped by as well. Then Gardner Goldsmith of WNTK 99.7 in New London with his new "trimmed" look shook things up late in the day.
Our "Wall of Shame" of captured municipal documents was a big hit again this year with the new two foot by three foot Geoff Wetrosky "Missing" poster. We almost made a giant milk carton to put this little vote thief's face on but the posters are impressive enough.
We also have SCJ David Souter's interesting assessment card and property map, photo evidence of voter fraud from different towns, voter fraud confessions from UNH students, a poster-sized hand written superior court pro se petition, and all kinds of interesting stuff that takes up about fifty feet of wall space. We also like to call the “Wall of Shame” “What the Papers Won't Print.”
The only “speech” of the day which I call a “list” was when I got up on a chair and asked how many people were running for office. About half the hands went up! I predict it will be an interesting legislature next year with this group as part of the debate.
Our next “reunion” will be on July 7, 2007. This will be a Presidential Primary Cookout with a straw poll. The last time we held such an event we sold all 1,500 tickets two weeks in advance. See you there!
7.11.2006
Back to Court!
-- by Ed Naile
Next to the Attorney General's Office one of the most incompetent and unreliable levels of government in New Hampshire is our court system.
Yesterday I was watching John Babiarz put together his State Supreme Court appeal of a Superior Court decision regarding the sloppy election this past March in his hometown of Grafton.(Did you notice Grafton has “graft” in it?)
A short refresher.
During a machine count at the Grafton Annual meeting some school ballots were counted in the town machines and showed about 39 more votes being counted than there were voters on the checklist. This caused great concern amongst all involved and in a moment of weakness or stupidity some election official called the AG's office. Enter (waddle) Assistant AG Orville “Bud” Fitch.
For some reason Fitch ordered the seizure of all the ballots and a full recount ensued which when proper machines and techniques were used consistent results appeared. But the hand counts involved in the recount were less than consistent so as you would expect they were used instead of the machine counts to determine a planning board seat and Warrant Article #22.
Resident, taxpayer, and all around citizen John Babiarz filed a Superior Court case to stop the process and follow the logical path of using the consistent vote tallies and following the law regarding boards of recounts.
He lost. Surprise!
The town attorney claimed that Mr. Babiarz had no “standing” to bring the case based on RSA 677:4, a zoning and planning statute. The Town's case law:
Nautilus v. Exeter, which says in the first sentence of the issues heard: Only “persons aggrieved” have standing to appeal planning and zoning board decisions to superior court. RSA 677:4, :15
Superior (to what I have no idea) Court Justice Burling, wife of our esteemed State Senator Peter Burling, agreed that this was a legitimate argument, as you would expect, and rejected the argument in John Babiarz's case that RSA 669:35 should apply. It reads:
669:35 Appeal from Recount. – Any person aggrieved by a ruling of the board of recount with respect to any ballot may, within 5 days thereafter, appeal to the superior court for the county in which such town is located; and such court shall have jurisdiction in equity to hear and determine the question presented.
Source. 1979, 410:1, eff. July 1, 1979.
So here we are in the State Supreme Court arguing over plain English and the totally transparent intent of the legislature just because we live in a state in which courts like to play politician and render decisions that make them feel warm and fuzzy.
This judicial activism or blind stupidity only encourages town attorney's to to invent even more flatulent arguments in an effort to deny taxpayers their place in the political process. And it is another reason we may no longer deserve to have the first in the nation primary. We have become just too corrupt.
I should note that after John and I finished lunch his fortune cookie said, “expect good things to come in the mail.”
We will see.
Next to the Attorney General's Office one of the most incompetent and unreliable levels of government in New Hampshire is our court system.
Yesterday I was watching John Babiarz put together his State Supreme Court appeal of a Superior Court decision regarding the sloppy election this past March in his hometown of Grafton.(Did you notice Grafton has “graft” in it?)
A short refresher.
During a machine count at the Grafton Annual meeting some school ballots were counted in the town machines and showed about 39 more votes being counted than there were voters on the checklist. This caused great concern amongst all involved and in a moment of weakness or stupidity some election official called the AG's office. Enter (waddle) Assistant AG Orville “Bud” Fitch.
For some reason Fitch ordered the seizure of all the ballots and a full recount ensued which when proper machines and techniques were used consistent results appeared. But the hand counts involved in the recount were less than consistent so as you would expect they were used instead of the machine counts to determine a planning board seat and Warrant Article #22.
Resident, taxpayer, and all around citizen John Babiarz filed a Superior Court case to stop the process and follow the logical path of using the consistent vote tallies and following the law regarding boards of recounts.
He lost. Surprise!
The town attorney claimed that Mr. Babiarz had no “standing” to bring the case based on RSA 677:4, a zoning and planning statute. The Town's case law:
Nautilus v. Exeter, which says in the first sentence of the issues heard: Only “persons aggrieved” have standing to appeal planning and zoning board decisions to superior court. RSA 677:4, :15
Superior (to what I have no idea) Court Justice Burling, wife of our esteemed State Senator Peter Burling, agreed that this was a legitimate argument, as you would expect, and rejected the argument in John Babiarz's case that RSA 669:35 should apply. It reads:
669:35 Appeal from Recount. – Any person aggrieved by a ruling of the board of recount with respect to any ballot may, within 5 days thereafter, appeal to the superior court for the county in which such town is located; and such court shall have jurisdiction in equity to hear and determine the question presented.
Source. 1979, 410:1, eff. July 1, 1979.
So here we are in the State Supreme Court arguing over plain English and the totally transparent intent of the legislature just because we live in a state in which courts like to play politician and render decisions that make them feel warm and fuzzy.
This judicial activism or blind stupidity only encourages town attorney's to to invent even more flatulent arguments in an effort to deny taxpayers their place in the political process. And it is another reason we may no longer deserve to have the first in the nation primary. We have become just too corrupt.
I should note that after John and I finished lunch his fortune cookie said, “expect good things to come in the mail.”
We will see.
7.06.2006
Why Work? Patent your way to financial freedom!
---by Micheal
You can make a lot of money if you have a hot product that people want. Trouble is, it takes a lot of smarts to design a hot product. It takes a lot of sweat and real equity to make a product. If you hang in there for the long haul, you can make good money.
You could do all that hard work, OR you could take the easy way to riches. Be a Patent Troll. A patent troll is someone who takes out a patent for a widget with no intention of actually producing the widget. Their plan is to wait until someone else puts in the hard work actually developing and building widgets. Then, the troll sues them for patent infringement. Typically the widget-maker pays a settlement to the shadowy widget-patent troll -- like an extortion ransom -- in order to stay in business.
Why work? Patent your way to financial freedom. It's like a modern day version of the seventeenth century caribbean pirates (if you read my column last week).
A few high profile examples tell the Troll tale. eBay, the hugely successful online auction firm, was sued by some obscure outfit for infringing on their patented online payment system. RIM, the hugely successful makers of the Blackberry, was sued by some no-one firm for patent infringement. Apple has its hugely successful iPod, and gets sued by a second-tier struggling outfit because they claim they patented listing music in menus, etc. Huh?
Is all this patent troll stuff a new plague of evil on modern civilization? Was it better in the "good old days"?
No. The most famous patent troll is George B. Selden. Back in the 1870s, he could see that it was just a matter of time until the motorized "horseless carriage" came about. In 1879 he patents a basic design for four-wheeled vehicle powered by a "hydrocarbon" fuel engine. Now, Selden had no intention of actually making any automobiles. He wasn't a mechanic, nor an entrepreneur. He was a patent attorney. Surprise!
Eventually, Selden was right. Automobiles became very hot products. By about the year 1900, all across the USA and in Europe, mechanics and industrialists were inventing and building early automobiles. Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz were building the seeds of Mercedes. Henry Ford was tinkering with Model Ts. Ransom E. Olds was making his first Oldsmobiles, etc. etc. Almost any city of any size had its own automobile maker.
That's when the granddaddy troll sprung his trap. Selden swept in from the dark corners, announced that he owned the rights to the automobile. Everyone must pay him a royalty percentage of every automobiles they sold. Bwahaha!
At first, the patent looked solid. Many fledgling car makers knuckled under and paid Selden his "licensing fee." One brash upstart refused to pay. Henry Ford challenged the Selden patent in what turned out to be a long court battle. Ford eventually won. No one had to pay Selden license fees anymore. Everyone remembers Henry Ford. He actually made automobiles. Almost no one remembers George B. Selden, supposed "inventor" of the automobile.
Patent trolls. They're nothing new. Even though Selden eventually lost, he made a lot of money before that. Many other patent trolls have extorted their way to riches. Why work? they say. Easier to guess what someone else is likely to produce as a hot product, then wait for them to do all the heavy lifting.
America would be far better off if patents protected producers and makers instead of do-nothing pirates who lay in wait for someone else to put in the sweat equity. America needs more producers and far FAR fewer trolls.
You can make a lot of money if you have a hot product that people want. Trouble is, it takes a lot of smarts to design a hot product. It takes a lot of sweat and real equity to make a product. If you hang in there for the long haul, you can make good money.
You could do all that hard work, OR you could take the easy way to riches. Be a Patent Troll. A patent troll is someone who takes out a patent for a widget with no intention of actually producing the widget. Their plan is to wait until someone else puts in the hard work actually developing and building widgets. Then, the troll sues them for patent infringement. Typically the widget-maker pays a settlement to the shadowy widget-patent troll -- like an extortion ransom -- in order to stay in business.
Why work? Patent your way to financial freedom. It's like a modern day version of the seventeenth century caribbean pirates (if you read my column last week).
A few high profile examples tell the Troll tale. eBay, the hugely successful online auction firm, was sued by some obscure outfit for infringing on their patented online payment system. RIM, the hugely successful makers of the Blackberry, was sued by some no-one firm for patent infringement. Apple has its hugely successful iPod, and gets sued by a second-tier struggling outfit because they claim they patented listing music in menus, etc. Huh?
Is all this patent troll stuff a new plague of evil on modern civilization? Was it better in the "good old days"?
No. The most famous patent troll is George B. Selden. Back in the 1870s, he could see that it was just a matter of time until the motorized "horseless carriage" came about. In 1879 he patents a basic design for four-wheeled vehicle powered by a "hydrocarbon" fuel engine. Now, Selden had no intention of actually making any automobiles. He wasn't a mechanic, nor an entrepreneur. He was a patent attorney. Surprise!
Eventually, Selden was right. Automobiles became very hot products. By about the year 1900, all across the USA and in Europe, mechanics and industrialists were inventing and building early automobiles. Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz were building the seeds of Mercedes. Henry Ford was tinkering with Model Ts. Ransom E. Olds was making his first Oldsmobiles, etc. etc. Almost any city of any size had its own automobile maker.
That's when the granddaddy troll sprung his trap. Selden swept in from the dark corners, announced that he owned the rights to the automobile. Everyone must pay him a royalty percentage of every automobiles they sold. Bwahaha!
At first, the patent looked solid. Many fledgling car makers knuckled under and paid Selden his "licensing fee." One brash upstart refused to pay. Henry Ford challenged the Selden patent in what turned out to be a long court battle. Ford eventually won. No one had to pay Selden license fees anymore. Everyone remembers Henry Ford. He actually made automobiles. Almost no one remembers George B. Selden, supposed "inventor" of the automobile.
Patent trolls. They're nothing new. Even though Selden eventually lost, he made a lot of money before that. Many other patent trolls have extorted their way to riches. Why work? they say. Easier to guess what someone else is likely to produce as a hot product, then wait for them to do all the heavy lifting.
America would be far better off if patents protected producers and makers instead of do-nothing pirates who lay in wait for someone else to put in the sweat equity. America needs more producers and far FAR fewer trolls.
6.28.2006
Why Work? Sue your way to financial freedom!
---by Micheal
The latest wave of suits brought against companies smacks more of piracy and brigandism than anything resembling legal justice. All you have to do is become financially successful, gain some public notoriety and BLAMO, you can expect to get sued by someone, for something -- no matter how inane -- in hopes of forcing you to provide them with a hefty windfall.
Dan Brown makes tons of money off his book. A couple of less successful authors sue him trying to get a chunk of it for themselves.
Apple makes millions off its iPod. Failed rivals sue on trumped up patent infringement cases, trying to get a chunk of the millions for themselves.
MySpace.com makes millions with its social networking gimmick. A mother sues MySpace because her daughter was assulted by a 19-year old MySpace user.
These are just three recent examples, but the list is long. The lesson is clear. Don't waste your time working for a living, just wait for someone else to amass a pile of coins, then try to snatch some away.
It reminds me of two pirate or brigand stories from history. First are the more famous Pirates of the Caribbean. The lesser known are the robbers along the Natchez Trace.
Pirates: Rather than work hard for pay, (or build, or invest, or whatever) some greedy but lazy folk in the 16 and 1700s had figured out an easier way for a buck. Instead of working, they would lay in wait behind small Caribbean islands. They waited for the treasure ships bound for Spain. That old Hollywood nonsense about pirate ships sailing the open seas for ships to rob was, well, nonsense. That was too much work, for too little prospect of success. Instead, the REAL pirates just sat and waited for the loaded treasure ships to sail by. THEN they would row out quickly and take them by force. Why work? Just wait for someone ELSE to scrape together a pile, then steal it from them.
Robbers: In the early 1800s, Natchez Mississippi was a commerce port. It's on the Mississippi river, just north of the Louisiana line. Boats would bring trade, goods, people, cash, up the river from New Orleans and the gulf. Rather than continue up the river, many goods, people and cash traveled inland, through Nashville, to the Ohio and Cumberland rivers. That wilderness road was called the Natchez Trace. Much like the lazy pirates of the Caribbean, robbers along the Trace knew that money and goods were going to be coming along, so they would just sit and wait to ambush the travelers. Why work? Let someone ELSE make the stuff, or earn the cash, then steal it from them.
All these fluffy lawsuits smack too much of modern-era piracy. Ever notice that no one sues a struggling company or poor sot? Caribbean pirates didn't attack west-bound ships. They were empty. East-bound ships usually had gold bound for Spain.
Perhaps what our court system needs is a legal equivalent of the US Navy. In the late 1700s and early 1800s, the (few) warships of the US Navy patrolled Caribbean waters looking for pirates. They fought and killed quite a few. We need a modern lawsuit pirate buster to roam the courtrooms and blast those who are bringing bogus suits in an effort to take a stash from a wealthy victim. (not that the wealthy are only victims, some of them need busting too)
Maybe then, we can get Americans back to work -- doing something constructive -- and not just laying in wait to steal what someone else has produced.
The latest wave of suits brought against companies smacks more of piracy and brigandism than anything resembling legal justice. All you have to do is become financially successful, gain some public notoriety and BLAMO, you can expect to get sued by someone, for something -- no matter how inane -- in hopes of forcing you to provide them with a hefty windfall.
These are just three recent examples, but the list is long. The lesson is clear. Don't waste your time working for a living, just wait for someone else to amass a pile of coins, then try to snatch some away.
It reminds me of two pirate or brigand stories from history. First are the more famous Pirates of the Caribbean. The lesser known are the robbers along the Natchez Trace.
Pirates: Rather than work hard for pay, (or build, or invest, or whatever) some greedy but lazy folk in the 16 and 1700s had figured out an easier way for a buck. Instead of working, they would lay in wait behind small Caribbean islands. They waited for the treasure ships bound for Spain. That old Hollywood nonsense about pirate ships sailing the open seas for ships to rob was, well, nonsense. That was too much work, for too little prospect of success. Instead, the REAL pirates just sat and waited for the loaded treasure ships to sail by. THEN they would row out quickly and take them by force. Why work? Just wait for someone ELSE to scrape together a pile, then steal it from them.
Robbers: In the early 1800s, Natchez Mississippi was a commerce port. It's on the Mississippi river, just north of the Louisiana line. Boats would bring trade, goods, people, cash, up the river from New Orleans and the gulf. Rather than continue up the river, many goods, people and cash traveled inland, through Nashville, to the Ohio and Cumberland rivers. That wilderness road was called the Natchez Trace. Much like the lazy pirates of the Caribbean, robbers along the Trace knew that money and goods were going to be coming along, so they would just sit and wait to ambush the travelers. Why work? Let someone ELSE make the stuff, or earn the cash, then steal it from them.
All these fluffy lawsuits smack too much of modern-era piracy. Ever notice that no one sues a struggling company or poor sot? Caribbean pirates didn't attack west-bound ships. They were empty. East-bound ships usually had gold bound for Spain.
Perhaps what our court system needs is a legal equivalent of the US Navy. In the late 1700s and early 1800s, the (few) warships of the US Navy patrolled Caribbean waters looking for pirates. They fought and killed quite a few. We need a modern lawsuit pirate buster to roam the courtrooms and blast those who are bringing bogus suits in an effort to take a stash from a wealthy victim. (not that the wealthy are only victims, some of them need busting too)
Maybe then, we can get Americans back to work -- doing something constructive -- and not just laying in wait to steal what someone else has produced.
6.23.2006
Some Thoughts On...
---By Ron Dupuis
…How we treat prisoners; The American Civil Liberties Union complains that the prisoners incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay are not only held illegally, they are mistreated to the extent the goes beyond “cruel and unusual”. If civil liberties are some sort of divine right and not instead something we as Americans fought for, I’m sure the A.C.L.U. will jump all over Al-Quada for the brutal way they treated the two brave, young American prisoners last week.
…Illegal Immigration; There are times when a compromise is necessary. Many conservatives feel that the only way to solve the illegal alien situation in this country is to send all 11 million back to where they came from. Tempting, to be sure, but not very practical.
I wish our elected Representatives in Washington would consider the “In My Humble Opinion” solution.
First, and most importantly, close the borders. You cannot resolve the illegals problem with four or five hundred a day sneaking across in order to plunder our liberal social programs designed to help the needs of our own citizens.
Next, require every illegal alien living in the United States to register with the government. They will be allowed to continue living peacefully and un-bothered in order to get their affairs in order, as long as they are model citizens, pay their taxes, and not arrested for any crimes. However, and this is a big however; they will be required, within six years, to return to their country of origin and apply for re-entry. Aliens who complete this requirement the first year will be at the top of the list for entry. Second year applicants will be placed further down the list, so forth and so on. The number of aliens applying legally will always have priority.
No one has a better understanding of the immigration problem facing this country then syndicated columnist Phyllis Schafly. Please read her thoughts on the 14th amendment and encourage your congressman to take the appropriate action.
Click hereto review “American Citizenship is Precious.”
…Weapons of mass destruction: “Bush lied, people died” We’ve been listening to this propaganda for at least three years from the obstructionist left wing of the Democratic party. Now the WMD’s have been found, no one wants to talk about it.
The truth of the matter is that Saddam “Insane” did have stockpiles of lethal gasses that he used on his own people and was capable of probably getting ready to us them on Americans.
The truth of the matter is that there was an Iraq/Al-Quada connection before the war. And the truth of the matter is that Democrats will say anything, even lie, in order to advance their cause in regaining political power.
…How we treat prisoners; The American Civil Liberties Union complains that the prisoners incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay are not only held illegally, they are mistreated to the extent the goes beyond “cruel and unusual”. If civil liberties are some sort of divine right and not instead something we as Americans fought for, I’m sure the A.C.L.U. will jump all over Al-Quada for the brutal way they treated the two brave, young American prisoners last week.
…Illegal Immigration; There are times when a compromise is necessary. Many conservatives feel that the only way to solve the illegal alien situation in this country is to send all 11 million back to where they came from. Tempting, to be sure, but not very practical.
I wish our elected Representatives in Washington would consider the “In My Humble Opinion” solution.
First, and most importantly, close the borders. You cannot resolve the illegals problem with four or five hundred a day sneaking across in order to plunder our liberal social programs designed to help the needs of our own citizens.
Next, require every illegal alien living in the United States to register with the government. They will be allowed to continue living peacefully and un-bothered in order to get their affairs in order, as long as they are model citizens, pay their taxes, and not arrested for any crimes. However, and this is a big however; they will be required, within six years, to return to their country of origin and apply for re-entry. Aliens who complete this requirement the first year will be at the top of the list for entry. Second year applicants will be placed further down the list, so forth and so on. The number of aliens applying legally will always have priority.
No one has a better understanding of the immigration problem facing this country then syndicated columnist Phyllis Schafly. Please read her thoughts on the 14th amendment and encourage your congressman to take the appropriate action.
Click hereto review “American Citizenship is Precious.”
…Weapons of mass destruction: “Bush lied, people died” We’ve been listening to this propaganda for at least three years from the obstructionist left wing of the Democratic party. Now the WMD’s have been found, no one wants to talk about it.
The truth of the matter is that Saddam “Insane” did have stockpiles of lethal gasses that he used on his own people and was capable of probably getting ready to us them on Americans.
The truth of the matter is that there was an Iraq/Al-Quada connection before the war. And the truth of the matter is that Democrats will say anything, even lie, in order to advance their cause in regaining political power.
6.20.2006
Lee Slocum Passes
-- by Ed Naile
I was just coming back into NH by truck from Iowa and a Stihl Timbersports event I was working when I learned from my wife by cell phone that Rep. Lee Slocum was killed in a traffic accident. It still has not sunk in completely.
Lee was a CNHT Director before he was elected to his first term and was still on our e-list as an adviser. I remember driving around Amherst stuffing newspaper tubes with his election material in 2002 several days before he won. When we heard Lee was elected to the House we were ecstatic!
Lee had swatted more than a few political hornets nests in his area during a stint on the school board and with his well-reasoned (liberals hated that) letters to the editor.
He was a perfect gentleman and you had to be on the lookout for his wry sense of humor. He was one of the smartest people I have ever met. At Lee's funeral Rep. Mirski said he downloaded and saved all Lee's e-mails. I will be doing the same. He will be missed for a long, long time by our gang.
I was just coming back into NH by truck from Iowa and a Stihl Timbersports event I was working when I learned from my wife by cell phone that Rep. Lee Slocum was killed in a traffic accident. It still has not sunk in completely.
Lee was a CNHT Director before he was elected to his first term and was still on our e-list as an adviser. I remember driving around Amherst stuffing newspaper tubes with his election material in 2002 several days before he won. When we heard Lee was elected to the House we were ecstatic!
Lee had swatted more than a few political hornets nests in his area during a stint on the school board and with his well-reasoned (liberals hated that) letters to the editor.
He was a perfect gentleman and you had to be on the lookout for his wry sense of humor. He was one of the smartest people I have ever met. At Lee's funeral Rep. Mirski said he downloaded and saved all Lee's e-mails. I will be doing the same. He will be missed for a long, long time by our gang.
6.12.2006
Voter Apathy May Be Curmudgeonliness
---by Micheal, the curmudgeon
Sometimes, it seems there's no getting-along with the vast bulk of the human race. There's always someone in your face bombasting at you about how wrong you are. Rather than continue to endure that contradictory chorus, some people opt to chuck it all and live alone as a curmudgeon-hermit. Being a curmudgeon-hermit is almost a New England tradition.
New England's first curmudgeon-hermit may have been William Blackstone. William left England in 1623 to escape the petty tedium of the "Lord Bishops". He chucked the cushy life for wild New England, as an assistant chaplain for a settlement expedition.
That expedition landed near what is now Weymouth, Mass, but it was tough going. Most of them wimped out and returned to the comforts of England within two years. William was no "mountain man" survivalist type, but a rough life of peace and quiet looked better than comfort amid bombasts.
William dragged his library (186 books!) north to a sunny hillside on the unpopulated Shawmut peninsula. He built himself a little house near a cool spring, planted a garden and grew an apple orchard. For many years, it was just William, his books, his garden and 800 acres of peace and quiet. Not a bad life.
All that changed in 1630. Ships of the Massachusetts Bay Colony arrived. Settlers set up the town of Boston on William's once-peaceful hillsides. The new neighbors proved far too similar to the Lord Bishops. Within five years, William had all he could stand. He packed up his books and trekked south.
Leaving bombastic 'civilization' yet again, he found another sunny hill, this one beside the quiet Pawtucket river, just north of Narragansett Bay. He built himself another house and planted another orchard. He spent much of his time studying his books. Happy Hermit, round 2.
Not long after that, however, Roger Williams showed up with his religious exiles from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They all set up the town of Providence just a few miles south of Blackstone's new idyl. "Oh maann," William might have said. "There's just no escaping these people." He was getting too old to start over again, so kept pretty much to himself, the refugee curmudgeon-hermit on a hill north of town.
When it comes to politics, a lot of people feel like William Blackstone. Self-important "Lords", irritating opinion-monopolists, and far too much angry shouting. It's enough to drive almost anyone into becoming a curmudgeon-hermit. Today, however, we don't have Blackstone's option. All the real hills are taken. So, people retreat inside their homes and don't answer the door, or the phone.
Voter apathy may be a misdiagnosis. They might be refugees on virtual hillsides. Any candidate or party looking to woo more voters won't lure them with louder shouting and hotter rhetoric. Those would-be voters will just do like Blackstone did, pack up and find a quieter hill someplace else.
Sometimes, it seems there's no getting-along with the vast bulk of the human race. There's always someone in your face bombasting at you about how wrong you are. Rather than continue to endure that contradictory chorus, some people opt to chuck it all and live alone as a curmudgeon-hermit. Being a curmudgeon-hermit is almost a New England tradition.
New England's first curmudgeon-hermit may have been William Blackstone. William left England in 1623 to escape the petty tedium of the "Lord Bishops". He chucked the cushy life for wild New England, as an assistant chaplain for a settlement expedition.
That expedition landed near what is now Weymouth, Mass, but it was tough going. Most of them wimped out and returned to the comforts of England within two years. William was no "mountain man" survivalist type, but a rough life of peace and quiet looked better than comfort amid bombasts.
William dragged his library (186 books!) north to a sunny hillside on the unpopulated Shawmut peninsula. He built himself a little house near a cool spring, planted a garden and grew an apple orchard. For many years, it was just William, his books, his garden and 800 acres of peace and quiet. Not a bad life.
All that changed in 1630. Ships of the Massachusetts Bay Colony arrived. Settlers set up the town of Boston on William's once-peaceful hillsides. The new neighbors proved far too similar to the Lord Bishops. Within five years, William had all he could stand. He packed up his books and trekked south.
Leaving bombastic 'civilization' yet again, he found another sunny hill, this one beside the quiet Pawtucket river, just north of Narragansett Bay. He built himself another house and planted another orchard. He spent much of his time studying his books. Happy Hermit, round 2.
Not long after that, however, Roger Williams showed up with his religious exiles from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They all set up the town of Providence just a few miles south of Blackstone's new idyl. "Oh maann," William might have said. "There's just no escaping these people." He was getting too old to start over again, so kept pretty much to himself, the refugee curmudgeon-hermit on a hill north of town.
When it comes to politics, a lot of people feel like William Blackstone. Self-important "Lords", irritating opinion-monopolists, and far too much angry shouting. It's enough to drive almost anyone into becoming a curmudgeon-hermit. Today, however, we don't have Blackstone's option. All the real hills are taken. So, people retreat inside their homes and don't answer the door, or the phone.
Voter apathy may be a misdiagnosis. They might be refugees on virtual hillsides. Any candidate or party looking to woo more voters won't lure them with louder shouting and hotter rhetoric. Those would-be voters will just do like Blackstone did, pack up and find a quieter hill someplace else.
6.08.2006
Ding Dong Zarqawi's Dead
---by Micheal
Some of the press reports sound almost as giddy as the chorus of Munchkins singing over the death of the Wicked Witch of the West. Yes, the removal of Zarqawi from the hostile soup of Iraq is unquestionably a good thing. We need to avoid undue euphoria, however. It will only turn on us.
The death of Zarqawi is good for Iraq because he was interjecting a wider, and very savage, element of jihadism into an already tense national-birth situation. Many Iraqis would rather that American forces were not in their country. They would rather run things themselves. A fellow like Zarqawi didn't want things to stabilize in Iraq. He and his followers wanted massive unrest and chaos for their own ideological agenda. They were using Iraqis. It seems the Iraqis finally reallized they were being used, and whispered where a few bombs might do a world of good.
What we, in the US, need to avoid, is the undue optimism that the death of Zarqawi has removed the heart of the insurgency. I think we Americans tend to overgeneralize our villains. We thought that removing the Kaiser would "end all wars" back in 1918. It didn't. We thought defeating Hitler would end facist oppression. It didn't. We were elated that the fall of the Soviet empire would herald an era of peace. It didn't.
Terrorism didn't die with Zarqawi. Nationalist resistance to US forces won't cease. Radicals who believe suicide bombs are the way to do things, are still with us (such as in Toronto). If we talk ourselves into thinking the death of Zarqawi will make all things good again, we'll just be in for yet another huge disappointment. After all, those singing Munchkins were pretty quickly reminded that the Wicked Witch of the West had a very angry sister.
Some of the press reports sound almost as giddy as the chorus of Munchkins singing over the death of the Wicked Witch of the West. Yes, the removal of Zarqawi from the hostile soup of Iraq is unquestionably a good thing. We need to avoid undue euphoria, however. It will only turn on us.
The death of Zarqawi is good for Iraq because he was interjecting a wider, and very savage, element of jihadism into an already tense national-birth situation. Many Iraqis would rather that American forces were not in their country. They would rather run things themselves. A fellow like Zarqawi didn't want things to stabilize in Iraq. He and his followers wanted massive unrest and chaos for their own ideological agenda. They were using Iraqis. It seems the Iraqis finally reallized they were being used, and whispered where a few bombs might do a world of good.
What we, in the US, need to avoid, is the undue optimism that the death of Zarqawi has removed the heart of the insurgency. I think we Americans tend to overgeneralize our villains. We thought that removing the Kaiser would "end all wars" back in 1918. It didn't. We thought defeating Hitler would end facist oppression. It didn't. We were elated that the fall of the Soviet empire would herald an era of peace. It didn't.
Terrorism didn't die with Zarqawi. Nationalist resistance to US forces won't cease. Radicals who believe suicide bombs are the way to do things, are still with us (such as in Toronto). If we talk ourselves into thinking the death of Zarqawi will make all things good again, we'll just be in for yet another huge disappointment. After all, those singing Munchkins were pretty quickly reminded that the Wicked Witch of the West had a very angry sister.
5.29.2006
Cha-Ching
By Ron Dupuis
“Cha-Ching! Cha -Ching!
That’s the sound of the United States taxpayer’s cash register every time it has to pay for service’s provided for illegal aliens. The conservative estimates are that over 12 million illegal aliens currently reside in the United States. Almost all receiving some sort of “social service’s” paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. Additionally, there are approximately 1100 illegals sneaking across the border every day in order to apply for those U.S. benefits.
Cha-Ching! Cha-Ching!
What we need is a little common sense thinking. A migrant worker here to help with the lettuce or tomato crop a few months out of the year does not have to bring his entire family. Programs in other countries are designed to make it economically viable to import workers, give them a good standard of living while here, then return them home with enough cash to raise their economic position, have been in place for years.
I don’t know of any American who is opposed to people legally entering this country in order to escape deplorable economic conditions in their own land. In fact, most Americans that I have spoken with feel that if some social service type assistance is needed in order to start a new life, so be it. The problem is that waves of illegals entering through our porous borders are not only destroying the very programs designed to help them, they are impacting the quality of life they seek here. We are a compassionate people. We simply cannot afford to maintain the standard of living we all enjoy in America while providing for these illegals and their families.
Congress is attempting to resolve this problem. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was an attempt to comprehensively address the issue of illegals entering this country. It was designed to punish corporations for hiring undocumented aliens, strengthen our border enforcement, and expand a path to citizenship for three million illegals already living here. If all of this sounds familiar to you, if may because the current legislation being debated in Congress is pretty much the same as that 1986 Act. Only now there are over twelve million illegals living in this country. It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now.
If it takes ten thousand new border patrol agents, a barrier the size of the Great Wall of China, or the 2nd Marine division in full battle array, what Congress needs to do is close the borders and close them immediately. Then, and only then, can we resolve to question of illegals workers and their families living on the U.S. taxpayers dollar.
Cha-Ching!
“Cha-Ching! Cha -Ching!
That’s the sound of the United States taxpayer’s cash register every time it has to pay for service’s provided for illegal aliens. The conservative estimates are that over 12 million illegal aliens currently reside in the United States. Almost all receiving some sort of “social service’s” paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. Additionally, there are approximately 1100 illegals sneaking across the border every day in order to apply for those U.S. benefits.
Cha-Ching! Cha-Ching!
What we need is a little common sense thinking. A migrant worker here to help with the lettuce or tomato crop a few months out of the year does not have to bring his entire family. Programs in other countries are designed to make it economically viable to import workers, give them a good standard of living while here, then return them home with enough cash to raise their economic position, have been in place for years.
I don’t know of any American who is opposed to people legally entering this country in order to escape deplorable economic conditions in their own land. In fact, most Americans that I have spoken with feel that if some social service type assistance is needed in order to start a new life, so be it. The problem is that waves of illegals entering through our porous borders are not only destroying the very programs designed to help them, they are impacting the quality of life they seek here. We are a compassionate people. We simply cannot afford to maintain the standard of living we all enjoy in America while providing for these illegals and their families.
Congress is attempting to resolve this problem. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was an attempt to comprehensively address the issue of illegals entering this country. It was designed to punish corporations for hiring undocumented aliens, strengthen our border enforcement, and expand a path to citizenship for three million illegals already living here. If all of this sounds familiar to you, if may because the current legislation being debated in Congress is pretty much the same as that 1986 Act. Only now there are over twelve million illegals living in this country. It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now.
If it takes ten thousand new border patrol agents, a barrier the size of the Great Wall of China, or the 2nd Marine division in full battle array, what Congress needs to do is close the borders and close them immediately. Then, and only then, can we resolve to question of illegals workers and their families living on the U.S. taxpayers dollar.
Cha-Ching!
5.10.2006
On...
---By Ron Dupuis
…Gas prices and Democrats- Senator Chuck Schumer recently said that higher gas prices are going to be the” final nail in the GOP coffin this election year”. I guess Senator Schumer and the Democrats think all of us out here with our “gas guzzlers” are going to follow their “blame the Republicans in power” mantra every time we fill our tanks. Most of us realize that it’s the obstructionist Democrats that are partially responsible for our dependence on foreign oil. No drilling in Alaska, no drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, in fact no exploration on any ocean of the entire world without paying the United Nations a tax (Law of the Sea Treaty). My personal favorite; no wind farm off the shore within view of the Kennedy compound on Cape Cod? If there are to be ANY “final Nails” in a political party’s coffin, it will be the nails of the Democratic hypocrisy.
…Illegal immigration- The Democrats, in my humble opinion, cannot win the House. That’s not to say that the Republican cannot lose it. Democrats are against any extraordinary measures to stem the flow of illegals into this country. They are also in favor of some sort of amnesty for the twelve or so million illegals already here. My suggestion to Republican candidates for ANY office is to form a Newt Gingrich type contract with America with immigration as the primary issue. Think of it! Thirty or forty congressional candidates telling the voters that their primary goal for the new session will be to close the borders and stop the rape of American social services. They would ALL be swept into office.
United 93- The critics who felt it was too early to make a movie about the tragic events of September 11th were wrong. I urge everyone to see this movie soon. After that go on the internet and bring up a web site the shows the photographs of the twin towers. Just to be reminded as to what about a billion Muslim fanatics want to do to us.
…Gas prices and Democrats- Senator Chuck Schumer recently said that higher gas prices are going to be the” final nail in the GOP coffin this election year”. I guess Senator Schumer and the Democrats think all of us out here with our “gas guzzlers” are going to follow their “blame the Republicans in power” mantra every time we fill our tanks. Most of us realize that it’s the obstructionist Democrats that are partially responsible for our dependence on foreign oil. No drilling in Alaska, no drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, in fact no exploration on any ocean of the entire world without paying the United Nations a tax (Law of the Sea Treaty). My personal favorite; no wind farm off the shore within view of the Kennedy compound on Cape Cod? If there are to be ANY “final Nails” in a political party’s coffin, it will be the nails of the Democratic hypocrisy.
…Illegal immigration- The Democrats, in my humble opinion, cannot win the House. That’s not to say that the Republican cannot lose it. Democrats are against any extraordinary measures to stem the flow of illegals into this country. They are also in favor of some sort of amnesty for the twelve or so million illegals already here. My suggestion to Republican candidates for ANY office is to form a Newt Gingrich type contract with America with immigration as the primary issue. Think of it! Thirty or forty congressional candidates telling the voters that their primary goal for the new session will be to close the borders and stop the rape of American social services. They would ALL be swept into office.
United 93- The critics who felt it was too early to make a movie about the tragic events of September 11th were wrong. I urge everyone to see this movie soon. After that go on the internet and bring up a web site the shows the photographs of the twin towers. Just to be reminded as to what about a billion Muslim fanatics want to do to us.
5.04.2006
Moussaoui: Justice vs. Revenge
---by Micheal
Zacarias Moussaoui got life in prison instead of death. Predictably, some people are satisfied and others are not. One man, whose wife died in the twin towers was angry. "I wanted revenge," he said. "Justice was not served," he added later.
While I can certainly understand his feelings, the reality of what he said is troubling. Revenge equals justice?
The prosecution, and the popular media, were painting Moussaoui as a goat -- the only goat US authorities had in custody -- upon which all the sins of 9/11 could be placed. He was played up as an evil, sadistic jihadist for which the 3,000 deaths could be blamed. Death for death.
But, our laws and court system were built upon fairness and getting at the truth. There is supposed to be a balance of punishment to the crime. We don't cut off hands for petty theft. In Singapore, the punishment for overstaying your visa or rape is caning.
While wanting death for death is a very human feeling, is it really the direction we want to go? Look at the culture of death in Iraq. If your political views upset someone, they kill you. If you belong to the "wrong" ethnic group or sect you can be kidnapped and executed, or just blown to bits on the street, as revenge for some deaths in the other ethnicity or sect, which might have occurred before you were even born.
This mind-set, this eagerness to dish up death in revenge for wrongs, is what will destroy the nation of Iraq. In that Iraqi culture, revenge equals justice. Do we really want to adopt that system?
From what I'd seen and read of the trial, Moussaoui was a two-bit nobody who only fancied himself to be a big-time terrorist. He wanted to be infamous. In reality, he is nothing. At least in a "martyr's" death, he could be somebody. The jury denied him his desire. The facts didn't bear out his claims.
Justice was served. An unstable idiot who says he wants to kill people is kept off the streets. Killing him might have made some people feel better, but justice in America is not supposed to be driven by our feelings.
Zacarias Moussaoui got life in prison instead of death. Predictably, some people are satisfied and others are not. One man, whose wife died in the twin towers was angry. "I wanted revenge," he said. "Justice was not served," he added later.
While I can certainly understand his feelings, the reality of what he said is troubling. Revenge equals justice?
The prosecution, and the popular media, were painting Moussaoui as a goat -- the only goat US authorities had in custody -- upon which all the sins of 9/11 could be placed. He was played up as an evil, sadistic jihadist for which the 3,000 deaths could be blamed. Death for death.
But, our laws and court system were built upon fairness and getting at the truth. There is supposed to be a balance of punishment to the crime. We don't cut off hands for petty theft. In Singapore, the punishment for overstaying your visa or rape is caning.
While wanting death for death is a very human feeling, is it really the direction we want to go? Look at the culture of death in Iraq. If your political views upset someone, they kill you. If you belong to the "wrong" ethnic group or sect you can be kidnapped and executed, or just blown to bits on the street, as revenge for some deaths in the other ethnicity or sect, which might have occurred before you were even born.
This mind-set, this eagerness to dish up death in revenge for wrongs, is what will destroy the nation of Iraq. In that Iraqi culture, revenge equals justice. Do we really want to adopt that system?
From what I'd seen and read of the trial, Moussaoui was a two-bit nobody who only fancied himself to be a big-time terrorist. He wanted to be infamous. In reality, he is nothing. At least in a "martyr's" death, he could be somebody. The jury denied him his desire. The facts didn't bear out his claims.
Justice was served. An unstable idiot who says he wants to kill people is kept off the streets. Killing him might have made some people feel better, but justice in America is not supposed to be driven by our feelings.
5.01.2006
Brave New Era
-- by Ed Naile
Sometime this week the NH Senate will vote to pass HB 626 and for all intents and purposes end the Right to Know Law as we know it. (For now.)
This action is the culmination of a lot of hard lobbying, and frankly, lying, by members of the sham Right To Know Commission. The NH Municipal Association, now under a new name and NOT under its original purpose has been out to gut RSA 91-A since they themselves became subject to the Right To Know law after a loss to the Manchester Association of Firefighters over the Association's right to NHMA documents. NHMA was deemed a public organization by the State Supreme Court. So this is really an act of self preservation for them.
In any case, this will be interesting to watch as school boards, boards of selectmen and especially school superintendents and town managers test the new limits of their secrecy largess.
CNHT did our part in exposing what the intent of HB 626 was so we have no responsibility for this mess. Actually, we have as much new opportunity as we found in the View Tax. That stupid idea was cooked up by the same type of elitists that are cut from the same mold as the RTK Commission.
The View Tax took a little time to catch hold but it happened and assessing firms that tried to scam taxpayers with a computer program full of garbage have a lot less swagger in them than they did a year ago. They are also under a lot more scrutiny. We have some new faces on the Assessing Standards Board so it will no longer be the refuge of the self-interested it once was.
This time around it will be NHMA that is responsible for the mistrust and contempt taxpayers will have for elected officials who make secret deals with each other. We know how to catch elected officials who cheat and will be glad to show new members how it is done. Then let the local sparks fly.
No NH newspaper will admit we are in the midst of a sizable taxpayer revolt but anyone with a rudimentary understanding of our annual meetings could see coming. It was mentioned at least once in the Boston Globe right after the city elections last November but seems not to be news here.
Predictions:
The next move the RTK Commission will make will be to create new amendments to remove elected officials who betray other officials who they catch cutting back-room deals. Any board member who publicizes intercepted secret emails must be punished by the other members.
Another move by the RTK Commission will be to charge an hourly rate to assemble public documents for taxpayers to make access much more expensive and limit requests. Now, taxpayers often have to go to Superior Court or get elected to office just to get the simplest of records. Case in point, newly elected Dover City Councilor Dave Scott just uncovered an unlawful $3.2 million dollar pay and benefits plan for the Dover Police Chief.
The City Manager, Paul Beecher, who tried to scam taxpayers in that deal split for Kingman Arizona days after the “heist.”
Paul Beecher used to be the head honcho at NHMA.
See how much fun this is going to be.
Sometime this week the NH Senate will vote to pass HB 626 and for all intents and purposes end the Right to Know Law as we know it. (For now.)
This action is the culmination of a lot of hard lobbying, and frankly, lying, by members of the sham Right To Know Commission. The NH Municipal Association, now under a new name and NOT under its original purpose has been out to gut RSA 91-A since they themselves became subject to the Right To Know law after a loss to the Manchester Association of Firefighters over the Association's right to NHMA documents. NHMA was deemed a public organization by the State Supreme Court. So this is really an act of self preservation for them.
In any case, this will be interesting to watch as school boards, boards of selectmen and especially school superintendents and town managers test the new limits of their secrecy largess.
CNHT did our part in exposing what the intent of HB 626 was so we have no responsibility for this mess. Actually, we have as much new opportunity as we found in the View Tax. That stupid idea was cooked up by the same type of elitists that are cut from the same mold as the RTK Commission.
The View Tax took a little time to catch hold but it happened and assessing firms that tried to scam taxpayers with a computer program full of garbage have a lot less swagger in them than they did a year ago. They are also under a lot more scrutiny. We have some new faces on the Assessing Standards Board so it will no longer be the refuge of the self-interested it once was.
This time around it will be NHMA that is responsible for the mistrust and contempt taxpayers will have for elected officials who make secret deals with each other. We know how to catch elected officials who cheat and will be glad to show new members how it is done. Then let the local sparks fly.
No NH newspaper will admit we are in the midst of a sizable taxpayer revolt but anyone with a rudimentary understanding of our annual meetings could see coming. It was mentioned at least once in the Boston Globe right after the city elections last November but seems not to be news here.
Predictions:
The next move the RTK Commission will make will be to create new amendments to remove elected officials who betray other officials who they catch cutting back-room deals. Any board member who publicizes intercepted secret emails must be punished by the other members.
Another move by the RTK Commission will be to charge an hourly rate to assemble public documents for taxpayers to make access much more expensive and limit requests. Now, taxpayers often have to go to Superior Court or get elected to office just to get the simplest of records. Case in point, newly elected Dover City Councilor Dave Scott just uncovered an unlawful $3.2 million dollar pay and benefits plan for the Dover Police Chief.
The City Manager, Paul Beecher, who tried to scam taxpayers in that deal split for Kingman Arizona days after the “heist.”
Paul Beecher used to be the head honcho at NHMA.
See how much fun this is going to be.
4.20.2006
Our Common Culture
-- by Ed Naile
A week ago I spent a week in England, the Brighton Hove area, in a small town named Lewes. We went to Stonehenge, Oxford, Dover cliffs, the Tower of London, and a few other spots.
Leaving the US for Gatwick we sat in the terminal as our plane coming in emptied of passengers. Just as it arrived several young mothers with strollers approached the gate. They were carrying American flags and were meeting husband soldiers.
As the men and women in dusty camo exited the plane, better than half of the two hundred or so people waiting for flights stood and applauded – for a long time. The applause got louder as each new tanned face came into view.
I wonder what those same people would have done if a whole plane load of national news media got off and had to walk the gauntlet next? Where's an over-ripe tomato when you need one?
In England I learned that scones are just as tasteless there as they are here. Even with a thing called curded cream? And as I suspected, a Big Mac tastes the same in London as it does in Hong Kong or NH.
The telly had a special about Dr. Who I could have watched on PBS.
There was another British show from which our American “Deal or No Deal” with host Howie Mandel was probably morphed.
Arnold Palmer was doing commercials in England for second home developments in Spain (nice golf courses).
Many of the kids wear American sports team shirts.
PT Cruisers are popular.
For the life of me I could not spend the change I kept accumulating. They need a paper One Pound note over there.
Almost got hit by a tiny little car as I crossed a tiny little road in the middle of nowhere. Driving around corners on two wheels seems to be a national sport.
The best part of the trip:
No news at all for a solid week about the all consuming news of Katie Couric switching networks. These Brits know what's important.
The last time I was in Gatwick was several weeks after 9/11 and most of the cabbies I saw had American and British flags in their back windows. I would wager some of the people applauding our soldiers in the US were Brits going home on our flight.
A week ago I spent a week in England, the Brighton Hove area, in a small town named Lewes. We went to Stonehenge, Oxford, Dover cliffs, the Tower of London, and a few other spots.
Leaving the US for Gatwick we sat in the terminal as our plane coming in emptied of passengers. Just as it arrived several young mothers with strollers approached the gate. They were carrying American flags and were meeting husband soldiers.
As the men and women in dusty camo exited the plane, better than half of the two hundred or so people waiting for flights stood and applauded – for a long time. The applause got louder as each new tanned face came into view.
I wonder what those same people would have done if a whole plane load of national news media got off and had to walk the gauntlet next? Where's an over-ripe tomato when you need one?
In England I learned that scones are just as tasteless there as they are here. Even with a thing called curded cream? And as I suspected, a Big Mac tastes the same in London as it does in Hong Kong or NH.
The telly had a special about Dr. Who I could have watched on PBS.
There was another British show from which our American “Deal or No Deal” with host Howie Mandel was probably morphed.
Arnold Palmer was doing commercials in England for second home developments in Spain (nice golf courses).
Many of the kids wear American sports team shirts.
PT Cruisers are popular.
For the life of me I could not spend the change I kept accumulating. They need a paper One Pound note over there.
Almost got hit by a tiny little car as I crossed a tiny little road in the middle of nowhere. Driving around corners on two wheels seems to be a national sport.
The best part of the trip:
No news at all for a solid week about the all consuming news of Katie Couric switching networks. These Brits know what's important.
The last time I was in Gatwick was several weeks after 9/11 and most of the cabbies I saw had American and British flags in their back windows. I would wager some of the people applauding our soldiers in the US were Brits going home on our flight.
4.19.2006
Live Free and Fly?
-- by Ed Naile
The Aldermen in Manchester have been making big decisions lately. Big important decisions. They have officially changed the name of Manchester Airport to “Manchester Boston Regional Airport.”
This bone-headed idea actually serves a purpose much larger than the simple renaming of a municipal entity. It gives voters a look inside the skulls of the people who are supposedly looking out for Manchester taxpayers.
It appears they have more of a regard for Boston than they do their own city. What's next, rename Manchester and make it Lowell NH?
The in-house generated survey by the Manchester Airport Authority states that some huge amount of “west of the Mississippi” travelers do not know where Manchester is. No kidding. Most can't pick NH, or any other state other than the one they live in, out on a map. That, in the minds of Manchester Aldermen is a reason for a NH airport to become, in the minds of travelers, a suburb of Boston?
How are people so dumb as to not know where NH is, supposed to find our airport in the first place. Its almost seventy miles away!
Maybe I am jumping the gun. The Aldermen probably have a deal with people who make maps of Boston to have a mention of the location of the NH airport. They will probably have a little disclaimer on the map that states: Manchester Boston Regional Airport is in New Hampshire - see some other map.
Look up Logan Airport on the net and you will find it called Logan Airport as well as Boston Logan Airport. So Manchester Airport should really be called Manchester Boston Logan Regional Airport. I can't wait until we rename Pease Airport.
When I think of Boston I think, rude, dirty, expensive, snarled traffic, dangerous drivers, and long lines. When I tell people about the Manchester Airport I tell them it is like your uncle has his own airport he lets you use.
My wife is a flight attendant who has flown out of Boston for thirty years. Once, in her uniform, walking across a street, she was hit by a car. The driver backed up looked at her laying on the ground and drove off. She was also half way to Boston to go to work on Sept. 11, 2001.
Kudos to Alderman-at-large Mike Lopez, Ted Gatsas of Ward 2, Bill Shea of Ward 7 and Betsi DeVries of Ward 8 who were opposed to this nutty idea.
Rather than link NH to a state from which most people are trying to move away, why not try to accentuate what we have here.
The Aldermen in Manchester have been making big decisions lately. Big important decisions. They have officially changed the name of Manchester Airport to “Manchester Boston Regional Airport.”
This bone-headed idea actually serves a purpose much larger than the simple renaming of a municipal entity. It gives voters a look inside the skulls of the people who are supposedly looking out for Manchester taxpayers.
It appears they have more of a regard for Boston than they do their own city. What's next, rename Manchester and make it Lowell NH?
The in-house generated survey by the Manchester Airport Authority states that some huge amount of “west of the Mississippi” travelers do not know where Manchester is. No kidding. Most can't pick NH, or any other state other than the one they live in, out on a map. That, in the minds of Manchester Aldermen is a reason for a NH airport to become, in the minds of travelers, a suburb of Boston?
How are people so dumb as to not know where NH is, supposed to find our airport in the first place. Its almost seventy miles away!
Maybe I am jumping the gun. The Aldermen probably have a deal with people who make maps of Boston to have a mention of the location of the NH airport. They will probably have a little disclaimer on the map that states: Manchester Boston Regional Airport is in New Hampshire - see some other map.
Look up Logan Airport on the net and you will find it called Logan Airport as well as Boston Logan Airport. So Manchester Airport should really be called Manchester Boston Logan Regional Airport. I can't wait until we rename Pease Airport.
When I think of Boston I think, rude, dirty, expensive, snarled traffic, dangerous drivers, and long lines. When I tell people about the Manchester Airport I tell them it is like your uncle has his own airport he lets you use.
My wife is a flight attendant who has flown out of Boston for thirty years. Once, in her uniform, walking across a street, she was hit by a car. The driver backed up looked at her laying on the ground and drove off. She was also half way to Boston to go to work on Sept. 11, 2001.
Kudos to Alderman-at-large Mike Lopez, Ted Gatsas of Ward 2, Bill Shea of Ward 7 and Betsi DeVries of Ward 8 who were opposed to this nutty idea.
Rather than link NH to a state from which most people are trying to move away, why not try to accentuate what we have here.
4.11.2006
I'm Baaack
---By Ron Dupuis
Rumors of my early demise are somewhat exaggerated. Those readers who are happy for me can thank Dr. Tom Wharton and the wonderful doctors, nurses, and registered cardiovascular technicians’ of the Exeter Cardiovascular Associates and the catheterization lab at Exeter hospital. Dr Wharton and his team performed a procedure known as "angioplasty" on an artery that was 99% blocked then installed a couple of "stents", and in two days I was feeling 100% better.
To Dr. Wharton; May GOD not only bless you and all your associates, may HE always smile down on the work that you do.
Now for the politics.
On...
Immigration: I’ve spoken with a number of military people in the last year and they all agree that when you are being “invaded", the first thing you have to do is stop the invasion. You don’t make plans for an occupation, and you certainly don't form a strategy for how to get along after the invasion is complete. Washington has it all wrong. Whether it be amnesty, a guest worker program, deportation, or shoot on sight, the first step in solving the problem is to stop the invasion. Anything less is only compounding the situation.
By the way, someone should inform Washington that we already have a guest worker program. It'’s called a GREEN CARD. When I mentioned this to Senator John McCain at a function the other night, his response was that we needed this "exchange of ideas and discourse”. I then commented on the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 and how many conservatives feel this was the beginning of our problem. What makes his legislation different? Senator McCain then promised to send me a letter outlining his views and requested that I critique and return it in order to continue the “exchange of ideas and discourse”. I responded that I will do such, however, "first close the border”.
A point I failed to bring up was the guest worker program that allows immigrants to pay their back taxes and a two thousand dollar fine in order to be on the path to citizenship. If Joe Average American refused to pay his taxes and got caught, the fine would be a lot more than two thousand dollars. The chances are very possible that we would be sharing a cell with a three hundred pound roommate named Bubba and eating off metal plates.
On...
Iraq; You read it on these pages over a year ago. After getting rid of Saddam "Insane” our job would be to write a constitution and let the Iraqis form a democratic government that had a chance to live in peace. Much as General MacArthur did for Japan.
We've done that and now its up to the citizens of Iraq to pick up the ball. Our young men and women have died so that Iraq could be free of a brutal dictatorship not witnessed in the world since Hitler. It is getting really close to the time for the Iraqi people to determine their own future.
On...
IMHO radio; I have received another positive endorsement from the station concerning the IMHO radio program. I have been assured the final approval will come within the next 24 hours. We are planning a three hour talk program geared to all ages and political affiliations to be aired on Saturday morning. Stay tuned.
Rumors of my early demise are somewhat exaggerated. Those readers who are happy for me can thank Dr. Tom Wharton and the wonderful doctors, nurses, and registered cardiovascular technicians’ of the Exeter Cardiovascular Associates and the catheterization lab at Exeter hospital. Dr Wharton and his team performed a procedure known as "angioplasty" on an artery that was 99% blocked then installed a couple of "stents", and in two days I was feeling 100% better.
To Dr. Wharton; May GOD not only bless you and all your associates, may HE always smile down on the work that you do.
Now for the politics.
On...
Immigration: I’ve spoken with a number of military people in the last year and they all agree that when you are being “invaded", the first thing you have to do is stop the invasion. You don’t make plans for an occupation, and you certainly don't form a strategy for how to get along after the invasion is complete. Washington has it all wrong. Whether it be amnesty, a guest worker program, deportation, or shoot on sight, the first step in solving the problem is to stop the invasion. Anything less is only compounding the situation.
By the way, someone should inform Washington that we already have a guest worker program. It'’s called a GREEN CARD. When I mentioned this to Senator John McCain at a function the other night, his response was that we needed this "exchange of ideas and discourse”. I then commented on the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 and how many conservatives feel this was the beginning of our problem. What makes his legislation different? Senator McCain then promised to send me a letter outlining his views and requested that I critique and return it in order to continue the “exchange of ideas and discourse”. I responded that I will do such, however, "first close the border”.A point I failed to bring up was the guest worker program that allows immigrants to pay their back taxes and a two thousand dollar fine in order to be on the path to citizenship. If Joe Average American refused to pay his taxes and got caught, the fine would be a lot more than two thousand dollars. The chances are very possible that we would be sharing a cell with a three hundred pound roommate named Bubba and eating off metal plates.
On...
Iraq; You read it on these pages over a year ago. After getting rid of Saddam "Insane” our job would be to write a constitution and let the Iraqis form a democratic government that had a chance to live in peace. Much as General MacArthur did for Japan.
We've done that and now its up to the citizens of Iraq to pick up the ball. Our young men and women have died so that Iraq could be free of a brutal dictatorship not witnessed in the world since Hitler. It is getting really close to the time for the Iraqi people to determine their own future.
On...
IMHO radio; I have received another positive endorsement from the station concerning the IMHO radio program. I have been assured the final approval will come within the next 24 hours. We are planning a three hour talk program geared to all ages and political affiliations to be aired on Saturday morning. Stay tuned.
4.06.2006
Science humbug: Jesus walked on ice, not water
---by Micheal
Doron Nof, an oceanography professor at Florida State University is publishing a paper in which he asserts that Jesus walked on floating ice, not water. Professor Nof, a non-religious Jew, describes himself as an "equal opportunity miracle buster," because he and a colleague suggested in the 90s that it was "just" wind that parted the Red Sea for Moses.
The problem with Nof's latest "miracle busting" is that he apparently has almost no idea what he's busting.
Nof's study of core samples suggests that the Sea of Galilee was as much as 10 degrees cooler 2000 years ago. Freezing was much more likely. That, and he describes a phenomenon called Springs Ice, in which saltier spring water floats on top of a body of fresh water and can cool and freeze faster in cold air than the whole lake could. In an interview with a CNet reporter, Nof explained that Springs Ice would be confined to near shore (the spring source)
Jesus, Nof claims, could have been walking on Springs Ice, not water. Sound plausible? Only if you have less than a Sunday School youngster's knowledge of the events.
Nof admits to having less knowledge than that. "I don't know whether the story is based on someone seeing Jesus walk on ice..." Nof told a Washington Post reporter. Nof is only operating on a culture-rumor level of knowledge of the event he's claiming to "bust."
Read the accounts -- Matthew 14:22-33, Mark 6:45-51, and John 6:16-21. The boat load of disciples saw Him. Eyewitness accounts. Note too, that there were strong winds and high waves. This is hardly the placid, non-mixing waters of Nof's mental image. Jesus walked out to a boat far into the lake, not near shore where Springs Ice might form on a calm cold night.
What if there were chuncks of Springs Ice? Imagine the scene. Jesus is on shore. The boat is out in the middle of the lake (they had been trying to row across for several hours against the headwind). Jesus has to travel against the wind and waves. If there were chunks of floating ice, they would have been coming at Jesus at a good clip. He'd be jumping from chunk to wave-tossed chunk like someone trying to go UP a wiggling DOWN escalator. How likely does this sound?
As a kid in Minnesota, I found out the wet way that walking on ice chunks is not easy. Unless the ice is thick, it will more likely break than support your weight. Unless the ice chunks are much longer/wider than you are tall, they'll just tip and dump you in than let you stand on their edges. Real ice doesn't behave like cartoon ice.
Come to think of it, if Jesus really had run against the wind and flow of ice, hopping from chunk to chunk to a boat out in the middle of the lake, that really would have been a miracle. Mere mortals couldn't have pulled that off.
Sadly, however, Professor Nof serves as a fine example of "science" managing to "bust" only its own poor understanding.
Doron Nof, an oceanography professor at Florida State University is publishing a paper in which he asserts that Jesus walked on floating ice, not water. Professor Nof, a non-religious Jew, describes himself as an "equal opportunity miracle buster," because he and a colleague suggested in the 90s that it was "just" wind that parted the Red Sea for Moses.
The problem with Nof's latest "miracle busting" is that he apparently has almost no idea what he's busting.
Nof's study of core samples suggests that the Sea of Galilee was as much as 10 degrees cooler 2000 years ago. Freezing was much more likely. That, and he describes a phenomenon called Springs Ice, in which saltier spring water floats on top of a body of fresh water and can cool and freeze faster in cold air than the whole lake could. In an interview with a CNet reporter, Nof explained that Springs Ice would be confined to near shore (the spring source)
Jesus, Nof claims, could have been walking on Springs Ice, not water. Sound plausible? Only if you have less than a Sunday School youngster's knowledge of the events.
Nof admits to having less knowledge than that. "I don't know whether the story is based on someone seeing Jesus walk on ice..." Nof told a Washington Post reporter. Nof is only operating on a culture-rumor level of knowledge of the event he's claiming to "bust."
Read the accounts -- Matthew 14:22-33, Mark 6:45-51, and John 6:16-21. The boat load of disciples saw Him. Eyewitness accounts. Note too, that there were strong winds and high waves. This is hardly the placid, non-mixing waters of Nof's mental image. Jesus walked out to a boat far into the lake, not near shore where Springs Ice might form on a calm cold night.
What if there were chuncks of Springs Ice? Imagine the scene. Jesus is on shore. The boat is out in the middle of the lake (they had been trying to row across for several hours against the headwind). Jesus has to travel against the wind and waves. If there were chunks of floating ice, they would have been coming at Jesus at a good clip. He'd be jumping from chunk to wave-tossed chunk like someone trying to go UP a wiggling DOWN escalator. How likely does this sound?
As a kid in Minnesota, I found out the wet way that walking on ice chunks is not easy. Unless the ice is thick, it will more likely break than support your weight. Unless the ice chunks are much longer/wider than you are tall, they'll just tip and dump you in than let you stand on their edges. Real ice doesn't behave like cartoon ice.
Come to think of it, if Jesus really had run against the wind and flow of ice, hopping from chunk to chunk to a boat out in the middle of the lake, that really would have been a miracle. Mere mortals couldn't have pulled that off.
Sadly, however, Professor Nof serves as a fine example of "science" managing to "bust" only its own poor understanding.
4.01.2006
Hot Democrat Races For Congress
-- by Ed Naile
CNHT News Flash for 4/1/06
The Democrat Primary for Districts #1 and #2 just became even more crowded after a new ruling by Deputy AG Bud Fitch.
Fitch has drafted some interesting opinions in the past regarding elections in NH but his newest draft has Democrats really excited.
Under his newest and ever-changing interpretation of the domicile of a voter or candidate, Fitch has ruled that is is now possible for South Dakota resident Geoff Wetrosky to run for Congress as a New Hampshire citizen as he has always “in his mind” wanted to live in the Granite State and told somebody that once as proof. That is only part of this exciting news.
Since Wetrosky, according to Fitch, had always “in his mind” wanted to live in NH and had never actually established a home here, he can run in BOTH DISTRICTS!
This is really self-evident in the language of State Statutes if you read them in bed with a flashlight under your Buzz Lightyear sheets.
It gets better.
Mr. Wetrosky can run from Democrat Party Chair Kathy Sullivan's house, where he was a recent NH voter, or he can run from Salem with a post office box. The latter choice is probably the hardest to accomplish because so many Massachusetts residents have bought up all the available boxes to register their Lexuses and Beemers.
Wait there is more!
Since this is going to be a banner year for Democrats here in NH - where all America votes - our good friend Jesse Burchfield has agreed to come back to NH to run Geoff's campaign.
We hear donations are through the roof!
CNHT News Flash for 4/1/06
The Democrat Primary for Districts #1 and #2 just became even more crowded after a new ruling by Deputy AG Bud Fitch.
Fitch has drafted some interesting opinions in the past regarding elections in NH but his newest draft has Democrats really excited.
Under his newest and ever-changing interpretation of the domicile of a voter or candidate, Fitch has ruled that is is now possible for South Dakota resident Geoff Wetrosky to run for Congress as a New Hampshire citizen as he has always “in his mind” wanted to live in the Granite State and told somebody that once as proof. That is only part of this exciting news.
Since Wetrosky, according to Fitch, had always “in his mind” wanted to live in NH and had never actually established a home here, he can run in BOTH DISTRICTS!
This is really self-evident in the language of State Statutes if you read them in bed with a flashlight under your Buzz Lightyear sheets.
It gets better.
Mr. Wetrosky can run from Democrat Party Chair Kathy Sullivan's house, where he was a recent NH voter, or he can run from Salem with a post office box. The latter choice is probably the hardest to accomplish because so many Massachusetts residents have bought up all the available boxes to register their Lexuses and Beemers.
Wait there is more!
Since this is going to be a banner year for Democrats here in NH - where all America votes - our good friend Jesse Burchfield has agreed to come back to NH to run Geoff's campaign.
We hear donations are through the roof!
3.28.2006
Confessions of a closet Red Sox fan
--- IMHO-NH
I was looking for a tax abatements workshop meeting at the community center. I took one of the empty seats in Room 201 as a gaunt, middle-aged man walked up to the lectern. When he stared speaking, I realized I was in the wrong meeting.
"Hi. My name is Jeff (not his real name), and I'm a Red Sox fan." The rest of the attendees showed their approval with soft applause. "I have been living a double life," the gaunt man continued, "hiding the truth from my friends and family."
He stopped to suppress a tremble in his voice. I decided that this meeting sounded a ton more interesting than any tax abatement workshop. Slyly, I switched on the voice recorder in my jacket pocket, leaned back and put on my best "you poor thing" face.
"Everyone thinks I'm this 'okay' guy...not all obsessed with sports like all other guys." His head dropped as if he could no longer bear eye contact. "But I'm not okay. I had no idea I was a LBF (later explained to me as a Latent Baseball Fan). No idea! I grew up in a state with no baseball pride. No one ever talked about it."
"My wife boasts that I'm not like her friends' husbands. My kids think it's cool to have a dad with time give horsey rides. All that changed when we moved to New England a few years ago."
"The truth of my...condition, started to show up in the late summer of 2004. I caught myself listening to my co-workers talk about the Sox at the water cooler. At first, I could walk away. But then the Sox made it to the playoffs. Would they make it? I was curious. My slide into ruin had begun."
"I pretended to make photo copies just so I could stand near the water cooler longer. My will power totally crumbled when the Sox were so far behind in the championships that they were almost out of it. Would the next game eliminate them -- again? Was this curse thing real? I had to know. I was hooked."
"The night of Game 4, I told my wife that I needed some batteries. Truth was, I snuck off to Wal-Mart and watched that fateful comeback game in their TV department. They came back to win it in the 9th! They were still alive! In my dancing around, I knocked over a big display of video tapes. It was embarrassing, but it did give me a plausible excuse to tell my wife for why it took me three hours to buy a pack of double-As. That was close. I knew I had to be much more careful."
"I thought that after the Sox won the Series, and the curse broken, that my...problem...would be over. I wouldn't care anymore. I figured I could quit then. I was wrong. I followed the Sox in their 2005 season too. I used to throw away the Sports Section. Now I would leave it lying on the table awhile so I could steal glances at the Sox stories. I would listen to Red Sox radio in car on the way home from work, but change the station back as I got home. I was determined that no one knew."
"My wife would be angry. My kids would be disappointed. My boss, a Yankees fan, would give me all the stinker projects. My career would be ruined. I had to live a lie. Don't you see? I had to!"
"During the '05 playoffs, I would pretend to bring work home to do on the computer. Under the spreadsheet I had an ESPN web page. I was forever glancing over my shoulder. I even put a Victoria's Secret website up to hide the ESPN, so if my wife caught me quickly clicking back to the spreadsheet and wondered what I was up to, she could catch me in a more acceptable sin."
"I was reading everything I could about the Sox during the off season. I wanted to know what happened to Theo. Why didn't they sign Johnny? Would Curt ever be the hero he once was? I had to know. Yet, I continued to hide and pretend."
He shook his fists in rage. "I'm living a lie, I tell you!" Finally, he slumped, the picture of total despair. He spoke softly, as if only to himself. "Opening day is almost here. I don't know how much longer I can hide it. They'll discover my secret. I know they will. I'll be forced to sleep in the garage. My kids will wear paper bags on their heads. I'll be jobless, outcast." His voice trailed off to mutters.
One of the others gently led Jeff back to his seat. The rest of them circled around him, giving reassuring pats on his head and shoulders. I took that moment to slip out of the room.
Who would have known? He looked so normal.
I was looking for a tax abatements workshop meeting at the community center. I took one of the empty seats in Room 201 as a gaunt, middle-aged man walked up to the lectern. When he stared speaking, I realized I was in the wrong meeting.
"Hi. My name is Jeff (not his real name), and I'm a Red Sox fan." The rest of the attendees showed their approval with soft applause. "I have been living a double life," the gaunt man continued, "hiding the truth from my friends and family."
He stopped to suppress a tremble in his voice. I decided that this meeting sounded a ton more interesting than any tax abatement workshop. Slyly, I switched on the voice recorder in my jacket pocket, leaned back and put on my best "you poor thing" face.
"Everyone thinks I'm this 'okay' guy...not all obsessed with sports like all other guys." His head dropped as if he could no longer bear eye contact. "But I'm not okay. I had no idea I was a LBF (later explained to me as a Latent Baseball Fan). No idea! I grew up in a state with no baseball pride. No one ever talked about it."
"My wife boasts that I'm not like her friends' husbands. My kids think it's cool to have a dad with time give horsey rides. All that changed when we moved to New England a few years ago."
"The truth of my...condition, started to show up in the late summer of 2004. I caught myself listening to my co-workers talk about the Sox at the water cooler. At first, I could walk away. But then the Sox made it to the playoffs. Would they make it? I was curious. My slide into ruin had begun."
"I pretended to make photo copies just so I could stand near the water cooler longer. My will power totally crumbled when the Sox were so far behind in the championships that they were almost out of it. Would the next game eliminate them -- again? Was this curse thing real? I had to know. I was hooked."
"The night of Game 4, I told my wife that I needed some batteries. Truth was, I snuck off to Wal-Mart and watched that fateful comeback game in their TV department. They came back to win it in the 9th! They were still alive! In my dancing around, I knocked over a big display of video tapes. It was embarrassing, but it did give me a plausible excuse to tell my wife for why it took me three hours to buy a pack of double-As. That was close. I knew I had to be much more careful."
"I thought that after the Sox won the Series, and the curse broken, that my...problem...would be over. I wouldn't care anymore. I figured I could quit then. I was wrong. I followed the Sox in their 2005 season too. I used to throw away the Sports Section. Now I would leave it lying on the table awhile so I could steal glances at the Sox stories. I would listen to Red Sox radio in car on the way home from work, but change the station back as I got home. I was determined that no one knew."
"My wife would be angry. My kids would be disappointed. My boss, a Yankees fan, would give me all the stinker projects. My career would be ruined. I had to live a lie. Don't you see? I had to!"
"During the '05 playoffs, I would pretend to bring work home to do on the computer. Under the spreadsheet I had an ESPN web page. I was forever glancing over my shoulder. I even put a Victoria's Secret website up to hide the ESPN, so if my wife caught me quickly clicking back to the spreadsheet and wondered what I was up to, she could catch me in a more acceptable sin."
"I was reading everything I could about the Sox during the off season. I wanted to know what happened to Theo. Why didn't they sign Johnny? Would Curt ever be the hero he once was? I had to know. Yet, I continued to hide and pretend."
He shook his fists in rage. "I'm living a lie, I tell you!" Finally, he slumped, the picture of total despair. He spoke softly, as if only to himself. "Opening day is almost here. I don't know how much longer I can hide it. They'll discover my secret. I know they will. I'll be forced to sleep in the garage. My kids will wear paper bags on their heads. I'll be jobless, outcast." His voice trailed off to mutters.
One of the others gently led Jeff back to his seat. The rest of them circled around him, giving reassuring pats on his head and shoulders. I took that moment to slip out of the room.
Who would have known? He looked so normal.
3.15.2006
The "Right to Film" Law
-- by Ed Naile
To follow up on a story about JJ Valera of Windsor who was forced to go to Hillsborough Superior Court, North to get “permission” from the Town of Windsor to film the Annual Meeting there – we “won”!
Judge Conboy, with several sets of film crews (one was our guys) in the courtroom, made a personal plea to everyone that they all understand that cameras are allowed in public meetings. Her subsequent order followed that lead with the total amount of costs incurred by Mr. Valera be awarded to him with an extra blessing — the Town of Windsor has TEN days to pay!
That Saturday, the independent film crew which was the center of this controversy attended the Coalition of NH Taxpayers Directors Meeting at our office in Concord and filmed about an hour or so of the CNHT Directors discussing the issue from beginning to end.
Our CNHT Directors are all well aware of the Right to Know Law, RSA 91-A, from Part I Article 8 of the NH Constitution, right up to current legislation, HB 626, designed to gut it.
How timely of this out-of-state crew to show up and document what average taxpayers go through when trying to attend their own town meeting or get simple documents from elected or appointed officials.
HB 626 is in the hands of the State Senate as I write. The bill was drafted with much input by the state's most anti-taxpayer organization, (funded with tax dollars of course) The NH Municipal Association.
A proposed new section for 91-A allows for “outside meetings” after which attendees must report at the “next meeting” what happened at the “outside meeting.”
Of course if the “next meeting” is another “outside meeting”...you get the picture.
No wait, you won't.
To follow up on a story about JJ Valera of Windsor who was forced to go to Hillsborough Superior Court, North to get “permission” from the Town of Windsor to film the Annual Meeting there – we “won”!
Judge Conboy, with several sets of film crews (one was our guys) in the courtroom, made a personal plea to everyone that they all understand that cameras are allowed in public meetings. Her subsequent order followed that lead with the total amount of costs incurred by Mr. Valera be awarded to him with an extra blessing — the Town of Windsor has TEN days to pay!
That Saturday, the independent film crew which was the center of this controversy attended the Coalition of NH Taxpayers Directors Meeting at our office in Concord and filmed about an hour or so of the CNHT Directors discussing the issue from beginning to end.
Our CNHT Directors are all well aware of the Right to Know Law, RSA 91-A, from Part I Article 8 of the NH Constitution, right up to current legislation, HB 626, designed to gut it.
How timely of this out-of-state crew to show up and document what average taxpayers go through when trying to attend their own town meeting or get simple documents from elected or appointed officials.
HB 626 is in the hands of the State Senate as I write. The bill was drafted with much input by the state's most anti-taxpayer organization, (funded with tax dollars of course) The NH Municipal Association.
A proposed new section for 91-A allows for “outside meetings” after which attendees must report at the “next meeting” what happened at the “outside meeting.”
Of course if the “next meeting” is another “outside meeting”...you get the picture.
No wait, you won't.
3.08.2006
RSA 91-A is The Right To Know - Who's Nuts?
-- by Ed Naile
Last week I was called by one of our members J.J.Valera of Windsor about some issues in his town. One that hit the papers March 7 was the story about an independent film crew who wanted to film the Windsor Town Meeting on March 14.
J.J was told in rather salty language by the town moderator that no ----ing way would a ----ing camera be allowed in the ----ing Windsor Town meeting.
So J.J called our pal at the AG's office “Bud” Fitch who gave this advice: Go get a court order. So off to Hillsborough Superior North we went Monday, at 10 am - with the film crew.
The 'pro se' petition was hand written in the courtroom hallway while my wife Debbie and I went and got cash for the petition filing fee, as the Valeras thought a check was sufficient and did not bring $145.00 cash.
All this was done with the film crew in tow. Talk about getting handed an issue!
As this was unfolding, down the court house hallway comes State Representative Jordan G. Ulery of Hudson on business of his own. I flagged him down and Rep. Ulery, looking quite the part of the NH State Rep. with a white sea captain's beard, business suit and all, gave us a brief but interesting history of the Right to Know Law in NH. If the film crew was looking to make a grass-roots film they had just hit the motherlode.
And then came the Manchester paper's reporter who was watching all this from a few feet away. She wanted to know what was going on and was given the whole story from J.J about the Windsor Town Moderator while being introduced to the film crew – a story in itself. That was Monday. Tuesday it hit the papers.
Also on Tuesday I found out that a Windsor Selectman has given Mr. Valera a letter stating there will be no opposition by Windsor officials to the Town Meeting being filmed.
So why did a long time Town Moderator not understand he was in a no win position trying to stop public access?
Why didn't the now Deputy AG Fitch just call the Town of Windsor and tell then get on with it?
Was it necessary to advise the Valeras' a court order was needed to enforce this clearly basic law?
When asked for a quick solution, why didn't a Superior Court judge just grant an order and skip holding a hearing? Don't they have serious business to attend to?
Will the Valeras' get their $145.00 back?
Film at 11:00PM.
Not this next 11:00PM or the one after that. But stay tuned!
Last week I was called by one of our members J.J.Valera of Windsor about some issues in his town. One that hit the papers March 7 was the story about an independent film crew who wanted to film the Windsor Town Meeting on March 14.
J.J was told in rather salty language by the town moderator that no ----ing way would a ----ing camera be allowed in the ----ing Windsor Town meeting.
So J.J called our pal at the AG's office “Bud” Fitch who gave this advice: Go get a court order. So off to Hillsborough Superior North we went Monday, at 10 am - with the film crew.
The 'pro se' petition was hand written in the courtroom hallway while my wife Debbie and I went and got cash for the petition filing fee, as the Valeras thought a check was sufficient and did not bring $145.00 cash.
All this was done with the film crew in tow. Talk about getting handed an issue!
As this was unfolding, down the court house hallway comes State Representative Jordan G. Ulery of Hudson on business of his own. I flagged him down and Rep. Ulery, looking quite the part of the NH State Rep. with a white sea captain's beard, business suit and all, gave us a brief but interesting history of the Right to Know Law in NH. If the film crew was looking to make a grass-roots film they had just hit the motherlode.
And then came the Manchester paper's reporter who was watching all this from a few feet away. She wanted to know what was going on and was given the whole story from J.J about the Windsor Town Moderator while being introduced to the film crew – a story in itself. That was Monday. Tuesday it hit the papers.
Also on Tuesday I found out that a Windsor Selectman has given Mr. Valera a letter stating there will be no opposition by Windsor officials to the Town Meeting being filmed.
So why did a long time Town Moderator not understand he was in a no win position trying to stop public access?
Why didn't the now Deputy AG Fitch just call the Town of Windsor and tell then get on with it?
Was it necessary to advise the Valeras' a court order was needed to enforce this clearly basic law?
When asked for a quick solution, why didn't a Superior Court judge just grant an order and skip holding a hearing? Don't they have serious business to attend to?
Will the Valeras' get their $145.00 back?
Film at 11:00PM.
Not this next 11:00PM or the one after that. But stay tuned!
2.28.2006
Bankrupting the Village: Timeline of Bedford
-- by Ed Naile
Here is a reverse time-line for the new Bedford school construction “Plan” voted in last year. Where have all the supporters gone? And whatever happened to “Build It And They Will Come.”?
Home Sales for ZIP Code 03110 Bedford NH
Month-Year #Sales Average Sale Price
02-2006 2 $306,000.00
01-2006 40 $424,000.00 taxpayers find out school will cost $60 million
12-2005 19 $438,000.00
11-2005 51 $466,000.00
10-2005 48 $428,000.00
09-2005 34 $501,000.00
08-2005 46 $560,000.00
07-2005 48 $486,000.00
06-2005 31 $463,000.00
05-2005 23 $451,000.00
04-2005 22 $477,000.00 $46 million school passes during snowstorm
03-2005 24 $410,000.00
02-2005 18 $563,000.00
01-2005 23 $428,000.00
12-2004 18 $429,000.00
11-2004 37 $406,000.00
10-2004 30 $457,000.00
09-2004 33 $402,000.00
08-2004 57 $450,000.00
07-2004 65 $475,000.00
06-2004 49 $387,000.00
05-2004 29 $479,000.00
04-2004 16 $401,000.00
03-2004 21 $387,000.00
02-2004 22 $366,000.00
01-2004 42 $375,000.00
March 2005 — Annual school board election SB2
$49.5 BOND PASSES WITH 67% OF THE ONLY 31% OF VOTERS
WHO COULD MAKE IT TO THE POLLS during a snowstorm
that canceled many other annual meetings.
February 2005 — Session 1 of school board's deliberative
session for the upcoming March SB 2 ballot election to
deliberate another citizen petitioned warrant article to
sign the tuition contract with Manchester. School board's
warrant article appears to approve bonding in the amount of
$49.5 million dollars for a combo school of grades 7,8
and a high school. (Notice the “deal” to bring in more voters
by catering to another set of grades. This is very common in
unnecessary construction projects.)
January 2005 — Supreme Court issues zip opinion ruling
in favor of Bedford School Board and preventing petitioners/
plaintiffs from having a 'hearing on the merits'.
June 2004 — Special election petitioners file suit against
Bedford School Board.
June 2004 — Bedford School Board refuses to comply with
election results and refuses to sign tuition agreement.
June 2004 — Special Election petitioned by 1500 citizens
demanding that school board sign the 20 year tuition
agreement with Manchester PASSES WITH A HUGE
MAJORITY OF 92% OF THE VOTES.
March 2004 — Annual School Board's Election (SB2)
proposed Warrant Article for a $45 million dollar
bond to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS
Tuition contract passes. Bedford Academy passes.
February 2004 — Session I or school board's deliberate
session prior to the Annual Secret Ballot Election SB2
to be held in March, 2004, the citizen petitioned warrant
article (originally proposed by Attorney Stan Tefft and
including 800 signatures) requiring the 'Bedford School
Board to sign the 20 year tuition agreement with Manchester'
was unlawfully amended by then Town Council Chairman,
Bill Greiner, by the insertion of the words "if, and only
if, the high school bond passes".
November 2003 — Bedford School Board 'special of the
day' Warrant Article again for a $45 million dollar bond
to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS* (boycott)
July 2003 — School Board's special election (SB2)
Warrant Article for $9 million dollar bond to
buy land on Route 101 to build a high school
FAILS AT THE POLLS.
March 2003 — Annual Secret Ballot Election SB2
School Board's Warrant Article for $45 million dollar bond
to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS.
Tuition contract with Manchester passes.
Currently there are few articles in the local papers from the supporters of the new school now that it is becoming apparent that the per student cost will rise from $7-$8,000 for tuition in Manchester to about $15,000 for an education in Bedford – whatever that will be like.
The projected student “increases” are actually dropping, as are the jaws of taxpayers as they discover a new soccer field is “sinking,” a new access road is needed, water lines need improvement, teachers need to be hired, and supplies and furniture bought.
The School Superintendent Ann “Reamed'us” who promoted the construction is leaving, as is the school board chair Dan Sullivan..
The head of the local 'taxpayer' organization, Roy Stewart, who supported the new construction because the student population was supposedly growing, has not given an explanation of the newly found costs for the project to the press. The press dutifully reported every emanation from him during the campaign to build this fiasco. Now there is silence.
Here is a reverse time-line for the new Bedford school construction “Plan” voted in last year. Where have all the supporters gone? And whatever happened to “Build It And They Will Come.”?
Home Sales for ZIP Code 03110 Bedford NH
Month-Year #Sales Average Sale Price
02-2006 2 $306,000.00
01-2006 40 $424,000.00 taxpayers find out school will cost $60 million
12-2005 19 $438,000.00
11-2005 51 $466,000.00
10-2005 48 $428,000.00
09-2005 34 $501,000.00
08-2005 46 $560,000.00
07-2005 48 $486,000.00
06-2005 31 $463,000.00
05-2005 23 $451,000.00
04-2005 22 $477,000.00 $46 million school passes during snowstorm
03-2005 24 $410,000.00
02-2005 18 $563,000.00
01-2005 23 $428,000.00
12-2004 18 $429,000.00
11-2004 37 $406,000.00
10-2004 30 $457,000.00
09-2004 33 $402,000.00
08-2004 57 $450,000.00
07-2004 65 $475,000.00
06-2004 49 $387,000.00
05-2004 29 $479,000.00
04-2004 16 $401,000.00
03-2004 21 $387,000.00
02-2004 22 $366,000.00
01-2004 42 $375,000.00
March 2005 — Annual school board election SB2
$49.5 BOND PASSES WITH 67% OF THE ONLY 31% OF VOTERS
WHO COULD MAKE IT TO THE POLLS during a snowstorm
that canceled many other annual meetings.
February 2005 — Session 1 of school board's deliberative
session for the upcoming March SB 2 ballot election to
deliberate another citizen petitioned warrant article to
sign the tuition contract with Manchester. School board's
warrant article appears to approve bonding in the amount of
$49.5 million dollars for a combo school of grades 7,8
and a high school. (Notice the “deal” to bring in more voters
by catering to another set of grades. This is very common in
unnecessary construction projects.)
January 2005 — Supreme Court issues zip opinion ruling
in favor of Bedford School Board and preventing petitioners/
plaintiffs from having a 'hearing on the merits'.
June 2004 — Special election petitioners file suit against
Bedford School Board.
June 2004 — Bedford School Board refuses to comply with
election results and refuses to sign tuition agreement.
June 2004 — Special Election petitioned by 1500 citizens
demanding that school board sign the 20 year tuition
agreement with Manchester PASSES WITH A HUGE
MAJORITY OF 92% OF THE VOTES.
March 2004 — Annual School Board's Election (SB2)
proposed Warrant Article for a $45 million dollar
bond to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS
Tuition contract passes. Bedford Academy passes.
February 2004 — Session I or school board's deliberate
session prior to the Annual Secret Ballot Election SB2
to be held in March, 2004, the citizen petitioned warrant
article (originally proposed by Attorney Stan Tefft and
including 800 signatures) requiring the 'Bedford School
Board to sign the 20 year tuition agreement with Manchester'
was unlawfully amended by then Town Council Chairman,
Bill Greiner, by the insertion of the words "if, and only
if, the high school bond passes".
November 2003 — Bedford School Board 'special of the
day' Warrant Article again for a $45 million dollar bond
to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS* (boycott)
July 2003 — School Board's special election (SB2)
Warrant Article for $9 million dollar bond to
buy land on Route 101 to build a high school
FAILS AT THE POLLS.
March 2003 — Annual Secret Ballot Election SB2
School Board's Warrant Article for $45 million dollar bond
to build a high school FAILS AT THE POLLS.
Tuition contract with Manchester passes.
Currently there are few articles in the local papers from the supporters of the new school now that it is becoming apparent that the per student cost will rise from $7-$8,000 for tuition in Manchester to about $15,000 for an education in Bedford – whatever that will be like.
The projected student “increases” are actually dropping, as are the jaws of taxpayers as they discover a new soccer field is “sinking,” a new access road is needed, water lines need improvement, teachers need to be hired, and supplies and furniture bought.
The School Superintendent Ann “Reamed'us” who promoted the construction is leaving, as is the school board chair Dan Sullivan..
The head of the local 'taxpayer' organization, Roy Stewart, who supported the new construction because the student population was supposedly growing, has not given an explanation of the newly found costs for the project to the press. The press dutifully reported every emanation from him during the campaign to build this fiasco. Now there is silence.
2.22.2006
A Wider 93 in NH May Not Fix Much
---by Micheal
I commute every day from Exit 4 (Londonderry) to Boston. For better and worse, 93 is a big chunk of my life. The commute one way usually takes an hour and a half. It can take three hours on bad days. Talk of widening 93 to three lanes promises to reduce my commute time, though not without controversy (see Dave Buhlman's recent article) You'd think, given the promises, that I'd be yelling, "loose the bulldozers!" but I'm not.
I'm starting to think that it may be a huge waste of money. Many millions will be spent. Years of construction-related snarls endured. In the end, it may not have mattered one whit. The commute to Boston will still take one to three hours. Why spend huge bucks and be no better off? Who'd buy that?
Imagine if a house-cleaning service said they'd clean your house for $500. Sounds like a lot, but if it got the house really clean, it might be worth the pain. You pay the cleaners. When you come back home, the house is just as dirty as when you left, would you think "Oh well, maybe there's a bit less dust on the shelves"? Bet not. Bet you'd want your money back. The trouble with government highway projects, however, is that you can never get your money back. The only option is to not spend it in the first place.
The reason for my growing doubt that more lanes from Exit 1 north will help ease traffic came to me this week. This week, the commutes to Boston have been under an hour! That's very rare. Weather is a variable ("Is that a raindrop? Slow down to 30mph!!"), but it's been clear and dry rather often during slow weeks and this week. Weather's not the reason. Crashes (most often the stupid getting caught being stupid) are a variable too, but we've seen the usual blue lights and tow trucks this week. No big change there.
What changed? Mass is on school vacation week. There are fewer Mass commuters because they're out having fun with their kids instead. 93 is the same width. The weather is the same. The crash rate is the same. The only variable that...well...varied, is that there are fewer Mass folk on 93.
Widening 93 to three lanes -- or even 33 lanes -- won't solve the underlying problem: There are too many Mass folk on 93. A rail line from Concord won't fix that. Mass already has a rail line. It isn't fixing things. I'm beginning to think that the trouble with 93 lies in Massachusetts, not New Hampshire. Why waste millions, perhaps over a billion NH dollars to "fix" the part of 93 that isn't broken? We'll never get our money back when it's all done and the commute still takes two hours.
Just say no.
I commute every day from Exit 4 (Londonderry) to Boston. For better and worse, 93 is a big chunk of my life. The commute one way usually takes an hour and a half. It can take three hours on bad days. Talk of widening 93 to three lanes promises to reduce my commute time, though not without controversy (see Dave Buhlman's recent article) You'd think, given the promises, that I'd be yelling, "loose the bulldozers!" but I'm not.
I'm starting to think that it may be a huge waste of money. Many millions will be spent. Years of construction-related snarls endured. In the end, it may not have mattered one whit. The commute to Boston will still take one to three hours. Why spend huge bucks and be no better off? Who'd buy that?
Imagine if a house-cleaning service said they'd clean your house for $500. Sounds like a lot, but if it got the house really clean, it might be worth the pain. You pay the cleaners. When you come back home, the house is just as dirty as when you left, would you think "Oh well, maybe there's a bit less dust on the shelves"? Bet not. Bet you'd want your money back. The trouble with government highway projects, however, is that you can never get your money back. The only option is to not spend it in the first place.
The reason for my growing doubt that more lanes from Exit 1 north will help ease traffic came to me this week. This week, the commutes to Boston have been under an hour! That's very rare. Weather is a variable ("Is that a raindrop? Slow down to 30mph!!"), but it's been clear and dry rather often during slow weeks and this week. Weather's not the reason. Crashes (most often the stupid getting caught being stupid) are a variable too, but we've seen the usual blue lights and tow trucks this week. No big change there.
What changed? Mass is on school vacation week. There are fewer Mass commuters because they're out having fun with their kids instead. 93 is the same width. The weather is the same. The crash rate is the same. The only variable that...well...varied, is that there are fewer Mass folk on 93.
Widening 93 to three lanes -- or even 33 lanes -- won't solve the underlying problem: There are too many Mass folk on 93. A rail line from Concord won't fix that. Mass already has a rail line. It isn't fixing things. I'm beginning to think that the trouble with 93 lies in Massachusetts, not New Hampshire. Why waste millions, perhaps over a billion NH dollars to "fix" the part of 93 that isn't broken? We'll never get our money back when it's all done and the commute still takes two hours.
Just say no.
2.20.2006
Ruminations
By Ron Dupuis
Now that the Nashua Board of Alderman are discussing the use of School funds from the State that were allocated for Special Education to be used instead for the Pennachuck takeover, I thought I would revive an old column I had written some time ago.
Years ago, reputed South Boston mobster Whitey Bulger and his gang went to legitimate businessman Stephen Rakes and with a gun held to his head, forced Rakes to sell his business, one South Boston Liquor Mart, at a financial loss. The reason, Rakes was under pricing other liquor stores in the area, who also happen to be friends of Bulger. (Authors note; when referring to strong arm gangsters, my lawyer said it is always wise to use the word “reputed”.)
From Utah to Florida to New London Connecticut the process of Eminent Domain has been controversial, to say the lest. Even right here in the “Live free, or die” state.
Sometime during the year 2002, a group of "reputed" politicians and community activists got together and decided that the city of Nashua would be better served if one newly formed government agency controlled the drinking water supply of not only its own community, but also that of several others throughout the entire state. Thus was born the Merrimack Valley Regional Water District.
The purpose of the newly formed water district was clear and concise from the very beginning. To take by eminent domain all the assets and property of a successful New Hampshire company that has been servicing customers throughout the state for over 150 years. The impact of such a takeover would mean that politicians in the city of Nashua would have total control over the operation, rate setting, and future system modernization plans of communities from Hollis to Bow, from Milford to Gilford, and from Raymond to Amherst. The reason for the take over was that company in question was in danger of being sold to a foreign corporation. A second reason given was that not having to worry about a bottom line profit; the Water Authority would be well suited to handle the operation.
Let’s assume for the moment that the reasons given are valid. The next logical step for the politicians of Nashua would be to take by eminent domain other foreign controlled corporations in the area. Convenience stores come to mind. Most are controlled by a British company. Citizens could go to City Hall, pay their water bill, and buy a super size slurpy at the same time.
A couple of the areas finest hotels are controlled by foreign companies. Citizens could now go to City Hall, pay their water bill, and book a room for their next wedding or Bar Mitzvah. Of course any toast given would have to be done with a super size slurpy.
Years ago the process of “Eminent Domain” was used to take tax delinquent abandon property to build playgrounds, or roads, or other such projects for the public good. This was the purpose of Article 5 of the Constitution. The intent was not to take property and pass it on to private “for profit” developers. Neither was the intent to allow governments to seize to assets of successful private companies under the guise to “public good”.
The United States Supreme will be hearing other cases concerning the abuse of Eminent Domain this session. Those of us who are concerned with the government’s abuse of power will be watching closely.
Reputed mobster Whitey Bulger strong armed his way into owning a business ostensibly to help some friends. The real reason is that it was a power grab for his own financial benefit and control.
There is a pretty hefty reward out for the capture of reputed mobster Whitey Bulger. I’m wondering if he is hiding out in Nashua somewhere.
Now that the Nashua Board of Alderman are discussing the use of School funds from the State that were allocated for Special Education to be used instead for the Pennachuck takeover, I thought I would revive an old column I had written some time ago.
Years ago, reputed South Boston mobster Whitey Bulger and his gang went to legitimate businessman Stephen Rakes and with a gun held to his head, forced Rakes to sell his business, one South Boston Liquor Mart, at a financial loss. The reason, Rakes was under pricing other liquor stores in the area, who also happen to be friends of Bulger. (Authors note; when referring to strong arm gangsters, my lawyer said it is always wise to use the word “reputed”.)
From Utah to Florida to New London Connecticut the process of Eminent Domain has been controversial, to say the lest. Even right here in the “Live free, or die” state.
Sometime during the year 2002, a group of "reputed" politicians and community activists got together and decided that the city of Nashua would be better served if one newly formed government agency controlled the drinking water supply of not only its own community, but also that of several others throughout the entire state. Thus was born the Merrimack Valley Regional Water District.
The purpose of the newly formed water district was clear and concise from the very beginning. To take by eminent domain all the assets and property of a successful New Hampshire company that has been servicing customers throughout the state for over 150 years. The impact of such a takeover would mean that politicians in the city of Nashua would have total control over the operation, rate setting, and future system modernization plans of communities from Hollis to Bow, from Milford to Gilford, and from Raymond to Amherst. The reason for the take over was that company in question was in danger of being sold to a foreign corporation. A second reason given was that not having to worry about a bottom line profit; the Water Authority would be well suited to handle the operation.
Let’s assume for the moment that the reasons given are valid. The next logical step for the politicians of Nashua would be to take by eminent domain other foreign controlled corporations in the area. Convenience stores come to mind. Most are controlled by a British company. Citizens could go to City Hall, pay their water bill, and buy a super size slurpy at the same time.
A couple of the areas finest hotels are controlled by foreign companies. Citizens could now go to City Hall, pay their water bill, and book a room for their next wedding or Bar Mitzvah. Of course any toast given would have to be done with a super size slurpy.
Years ago the process of “Eminent Domain” was used to take tax delinquent abandon property to build playgrounds, or roads, or other such projects for the public good. This was the purpose of Article 5 of the Constitution. The intent was not to take property and pass it on to private “for profit” developers. Neither was the intent to allow governments to seize to assets of successful private companies under the guise to “public good”.
The United States Supreme will be hearing other cases concerning the abuse of Eminent Domain this session. Those of us who are concerned with the government’s abuse of power will be watching closely.
Reputed mobster Whitey Bulger strong armed his way into owning a business ostensibly to help some friends. The real reason is that it was a power grab for his own financial benefit and control.
There is a pretty hefty reward out for the capture of reputed mobster Whitey Bulger. I’m wondering if he is hiding out in Nashua somewhere.
2.16.2006
Ruminations
---By Ron Dupuis
In view of what’s going on along our southern border I thought perhaps we should reflect upon the words of the old “Rough Rider” himself.
"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Legal immigration is one thing; we should welcome anyone that wishes to enter this country seeking a better life. The problem is that our borders are being violated by drug smugglers and other nefarious characters who wish to dismantle the very freedoms that attract so many worthy refugees. Additionally, it boggles my mind to try to understand why this country can place thirty five thousand U.S. troops on the border of South and North Korea and not spare any to prevent the invasion of our own country.
“In My Humble Opinion” we should require South Korea to place an equal amount of their troops on OUR southern border in order to prevent the invasion of our country.
__
A United Arab Emirates company has been approved to buy a British firm that controls most of the operation in six U.S. ports. They include Baltimore, New York, Philadelphia, Miami, New Jersey, and New Orleans.
In my wildest dreams I never thought I would agree with Sen. “Chucky” Schumer of New York who stated “America's busiest ports are vital to our economy and to the international economy, and that is why they remain top terrorist targets." "Just as we would not outsource military operations or law enforcement duties, we should be very careful before we outsource such sensitive homeland security duties."
In view of what’s going on along our southern border I thought perhaps we should reflect upon the words of the old “Rough Rider” himself.
"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Legal immigration is one thing; we should welcome anyone that wishes to enter this country seeking a better life. The problem is that our borders are being violated by drug smugglers and other nefarious characters who wish to dismantle the very freedoms that attract so many worthy refugees. Additionally, it boggles my mind to try to understand why this country can place thirty five thousand U.S. troops on the border of South and North Korea and not spare any to prevent the invasion of our own country.
“In My Humble Opinion” we should require South Korea to place an equal amount of their troops on OUR southern border in order to prevent the invasion of our country.
__
A United Arab Emirates company has been approved to buy a British firm that controls most of the operation in six U.S. ports. They include Baltimore, New York, Philadelphia, Miami, New Jersey, and New Orleans.
In my wildest dreams I never thought I would agree with Sen. “Chucky” Schumer of New York who stated “America's busiest ports are vital to our economy and to the international economy, and that is why they remain top terrorist targets." "Just as we would not outsource military operations or law enforcement duties, we should be very careful before we outsource such sensitive homeland security duties."
2.15.2006
Abusing Disabilities Act, Everyone Loses
---by Micheal
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was supposed to improve the lives of the less-able. Make-work lawyers are abusing the ADA to extort a generous income for themselves. They will cheapen the lives of everyone in the process.
Case in point: The Ft. Lauderdale Museum of Art opened a King Tut exhibit. Few new exhibitions open without a wrinkle or two to sort out. The Tut exhibit was over crowded and experienced delays at its openings. Things settled out, as they usually do. Despite that rocky start, the museum's spokesman, Michael Mills, said thousands had enjoyed the exhibit which included some 131 artifacts.
Not everyone, however, was there to find out about ancient Egypt. Two disabled women got angry about having to wait 45 minutes for the only scooter-capable elevator and having to use a restroom in a nearby restaurant. They found a lawyer who would file a suit against the museum for not adequately complying with ADA. (This would be a building issue which the museum would have always had. It wasn't Tut-specific. Where were they before this?)
Not to miss a bandwagon (or gravy train), other lawyers also sued the museum on behalf of three blind visitors who felt the museum did not provide them with an adequate experience. Only 19 of the 131 artifacts were described in the audio tour. (Were there 19 really cool objects and 102 other bits of stuff? I mean, a golden sarcophagus is not the same as a clay pot. Does everyone need an audio tour of the clay pot?)
A very telling couple of facts are that the museum had received no complaints, no requests to provide additional services for the disabled or to correct physical errors (such as providing a clear 36 inch wide pathway, etc.). Instead, the first they hear of any trouble is a suit. One of the demands of the suit is that the deficiencies be corrected (why didn't they ask without lawyers?) The more telling fact is that the suit requests attorney's fees.
Now we've lifted the rock and had a peek at the truth. This is a suit to generate income for some lawyers, not to help the handicapped.
Having worked in the museum exhibit design world for over 12 years, I know first hand that most museum directors try very hard to make their exhibits accessible to as many visitors as possible -- old, young, disabled, etc. They want as much happy visitation as they get. Unlike the lawyers, museums live pretty much hand to mouth on ticket sales. They must constantly balance costs vs. reaching the widest practical audience.
I know that no exhibit, no public space for that matter, will be as 100% accessible as 100% of people want it to be. Lawsuits which pretend to redress injustice, but really punish/penalize to make a point will only diminish everyone else's quality of life. Imagine a school in which students who scored under an A were beaten. Very soon, there would be only a few students remaining -- and they'd be very nervous all the time. That's how it will go with Museums. Only a few will be able to afford to offer a scant few things to see. Most will just cease to exist for lack of funds.
As it stands now, lawyers get their money either way. There's nothing to stop them from filing insipid suits to generate income. They either extort it from the plaintiff, or swindle it off the gullible dupes who agreed to bring the suit.
What we need is a provision in which the law firm itself has to pay (and very dearly) for bringing frivolous lawsuits. If being stupid or greedy doesn't have a cost, they'll just keep doing it.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was supposed to improve the lives of the less-able. Make-work lawyers are abusing the ADA to extort a generous income for themselves. They will cheapen the lives of everyone in the process.
Case in point: The Ft. Lauderdale Museum of Art opened a King Tut exhibit. Few new exhibitions open without a wrinkle or two to sort out. The Tut exhibit was over crowded and experienced delays at its openings. Things settled out, as they usually do. Despite that rocky start, the museum's spokesman, Michael Mills, said thousands had enjoyed the exhibit which included some 131 artifacts.
Not everyone, however, was there to find out about ancient Egypt. Two disabled women got angry about having to wait 45 minutes for the only scooter-capable elevator and having to use a restroom in a nearby restaurant. They found a lawyer who would file a suit against the museum for not adequately complying with ADA. (This would be a building issue which the museum would have always had. It wasn't Tut-specific. Where were they before this?)
Not to miss a bandwagon (or gravy train), other lawyers also sued the museum on behalf of three blind visitors who felt the museum did not provide them with an adequate experience. Only 19 of the 131 artifacts were described in the audio tour. (Were there 19 really cool objects and 102 other bits of stuff? I mean, a golden sarcophagus is not the same as a clay pot. Does everyone need an audio tour of the clay pot?)
A very telling couple of facts are that the museum had received no complaints, no requests to provide additional services for the disabled or to correct physical errors (such as providing a clear 36 inch wide pathway, etc.). Instead, the first they hear of any trouble is a suit. One of the demands of the suit is that the deficiencies be corrected (why didn't they ask without lawyers?) The more telling fact is that the suit requests attorney's fees.
Now we've lifted the rock and had a peek at the truth. This is a suit to generate income for some lawyers, not to help the handicapped.
Having worked in the museum exhibit design world for over 12 years, I know first hand that most museum directors try very hard to make their exhibits accessible to as many visitors as possible -- old, young, disabled, etc. They want as much happy visitation as they get. Unlike the lawyers, museums live pretty much hand to mouth on ticket sales. They must constantly balance costs vs. reaching the widest practical audience.
I know that no exhibit, no public space for that matter, will be as 100% accessible as 100% of people want it to be. Lawsuits which pretend to redress injustice, but really punish/penalize to make a point will only diminish everyone else's quality of life. Imagine a school in which students who scored under an A were beaten. Very soon, there would be only a few students remaining -- and they'd be very nervous all the time. That's how it will go with Museums. Only a few will be able to afford to offer a scant few things to see. Most will just cease to exist for lack of funds.
As it stands now, lawyers get their money either way. There's nothing to stop them from filing insipid suits to generate income. They either extort it from the plaintiff, or swindle it off the gullible dupes who agreed to bring the suit.
What we need is a provision in which the law firm itself has to pay (and very dearly) for bringing frivolous lawsuits. If being stupid or greedy doesn't have a cost, they'll just keep doing it.
2.14.2006
AG's Report on Voter Fraud
-- by Ed Naile
Here it is 2006 and the NH AG's office is releasing another of its earth-shattering reports on the non-existence of voter fraud in our fine state.
I remember the last “report” they did back in 2001. The AG's office was so proud of it we did not find out for several months afterward they had gone to the effort of ginning up a report on the 2000 election at all.
I stopped by Senator Jack Barnes's office one day and asked him to pry it out of them if he could. Senator Barnes made a call and I headed across the street to the AG's office to pick it up. Orville “Bud” Fitch was there in person to hand it to me with some pathetic disclaimer I told him I was too busy to listen to.
Here is how the first report went.
Durham was “investigated” and it was found by the NH AG's office that some students there were registered in other states but voted here in NH on an impulse. That would be stealing a vote in the real world.
(As has been the case with the AG's office that they claim they want to prosecute people who vote twice, and seem not to care about the huge amount of people who have no business voting here at all. If we investigated arson this way we could practically eliminate that crime as well.)
A dozen or so students wrote letters to the Supervisor of the Checklist asking to be taken off the Durham voter checklist after casting a vote here. They stated in their letters that they were really residents of other states.
My favorite letter started like this:
Dear Supervisor of the checklist,
I am one of the 1,700 students who wrongly voted in Durham. Please take my name off the list...
In another letter a young fella described how he was “shanghaied” by a Gore/Lieberman van full of girls who took him to the polls to vote even though he said he was a non-resident. They told him he was allowed to vote anyway so he did. After getting back to his apartment in Lee his roomie informed him it was illegal for a non-resident to vote so he also wrote to have his name taken off the list.
The Coalition of NH Taxpayers has all the materials from the 2001 “investigation” by the NH AG's office in our ever growing collection. You know what is striking about all the letters from the non-resident voters who wrote to have their names taken off the Durham list AFTER voting here? (That would be stealing a NH vote.)
They are all very similar! And we have never seen any like them again. It is as though they were asked to write the letters to the Durham Supervisor of the Checklist by some “higher power.” What a coincidence. MAYBE SOME ENTERPRISING STATE REP. COULD ASK “BUD” FITCH AT THE NEXT ELECTION LAW COMMITTEE HEARING IF ANYONE FROM HIS OFFICE DID ASK STUDENTS TO WRITE LETTERS IN LIEU OF PROSECUTION, wink wink.
In any case, no one was prosecuted for being an out of state voter nor was any campaign or professor held accountable for lying to students or encouraging them to vote illegally in the 2000 election. (remember this point for part 2 or 3 of this series)
There was one of those dog and pony shows of a joint legislative committee investigation into voter fraud that year as well if memory serves me correctly. Supervisors of the Checklists from Durham and Hudson as well as other towns testified how non-residents are flocking to the polls to register same day using non-resident drivers licenses for identification.
It seems the local election officials were concerned enough in past elections to notify the Department of Safety's and Secretary of State's offices that long after elections non-residents still were using other states drivers licenses in violation of state law. In effect, they were not NH citizens after claiming to be to vote and several local election officials were concerned they were part of an illegal action by not taking the non-resident off the checklists.
Don't worry they were told. That is just a violation of Department of Safety laws regarding new residents being required to get a valid NH license after 60 days not election law violation. So just register everyone.
In an interesting moment during one of the joint legislative hearings into voter fraud, then Representative, now Senator Bob Clegg, pinned down an as-always illusive Secretary of State Bill Gardner with this question:
If a person registers same day to vote in NH but has no intention of living here is that a crime? Bill Gardner said, after some thought, “yes” he believed it was.
My how times have not changed. Out of the 50 thousand or so same-day registrants in 2000, the 96,000 same day registrants in 2004, an all the ones in between, the AG's office can't come up with one single non-resident voter.
And the NH press dutifully wrote about there being little evidence of voter fraud in NH.
Here it is 2006 and the NH AG's office is releasing another of its earth-shattering reports on the non-existence of voter fraud in our fine state.
I remember the last “report” they did back in 2001. The AG's office was so proud of it we did not find out for several months afterward they had gone to the effort of ginning up a report on the 2000 election at all.
I stopped by Senator Jack Barnes's office one day and asked him to pry it out of them if he could. Senator Barnes made a call and I headed across the street to the AG's office to pick it up. Orville “Bud” Fitch was there in person to hand it to me with some pathetic disclaimer I told him I was too busy to listen to.
Here is how the first report went.
Durham was “investigated” and it was found by the NH AG's office that some students there were registered in other states but voted here in NH on an impulse. That would be stealing a vote in the real world.
(As has been the case with the AG's office that they claim they want to prosecute people who vote twice, and seem not to care about the huge amount of people who have no business voting here at all. If we investigated arson this way we could practically eliminate that crime as well.)
A dozen or so students wrote letters to the Supervisor of the Checklist asking to be taken off the Durham voter checklist after casting a vote here. They stated in their letters that they were really residents of other states.
My favorite letter started like this:
Dear Supervisor of the checklist,
I am one of the 1,700 students who wrongly voted in Durham. Please take my name off the list...
In another letter a young fella described how he was “shanghaied” by a Gore/Lieberman van full of girls who took him to the polls to vote even though he said he was a non-resident. They told him he was allowed to vote anyway so he did. After getting back to his apartment in Lee his roomie informed him it was illegal for a non-resident to vote so he also wrote to have his name taken off the list.
The Coalition of NH Taxpayers has all the materials from the 2001 “investigation” by the NH AG's office in our ever growing collection. You know what is striking about all the letters from the non-resident voters who wrote to have their names taken off the Durham list AFTER voting here? (That would be stealing a NH vote.)
They are all very similar! And we have never seen any like them again. It is as though they were asked to write the letters to the Durham Supervisor of the Checklist by some “higher power.” What a coincidence. MAYBE SOME ENTERPRISING STATE REP. COULD ASK “BUD” FITCH AT THE NEXT ELECTION LAW COMMITTEE HEARING IF ANYONE FROM HIS OFFICE DID ASK STUDENTS TO WRITE LETTERS IN LIEU OF PROSECUTION, wink wink.
In any case, no one was prosecuted for being an out of state voter nor was any campaign or professor held accountable for lying to students or encouraging them to vote illegally in the 2000 election. (remember this point for part 2 or 3 of this series)
There was one of those dog and pony shows of a joint legislative committee investigation into voter fraud that year as well if memory serves me correctly. Supervisors of the Checklists from Durham and Hudson as well as other towns testified how non-residents are flocking to the polls to register same day using non-resident drivers licenses for identification.
It seems the local election officials were concerned enough in past elections to notify the Department of Safety's and Secretary of State's offices that long after elections non-residents still were using other states drivers licenses in violation of state law. In effect, they were not NH citizens after claiming to be to vote and several local election officials were concerned they were part of an illegal action by not taking the non-resident off the checklists.
Don't worry they were told. That is just a violation of Department of Safety laws regarding new residents being required to get a valid NH license after 60 days not election law violation. So just register everyone.
In an interesting moment during one of the joint legislative hearings into voter fraud, then Representative, now Senator Bob Clegg, pinned down an as-always illusive Secretary of State Bill Gardner with this question:
If a person registers same day to vote in NH but has no intention of living here is that a crime? Bill Gardner said, after some thought, “yes” he believed it was.
My how times have not changed. Out of the 50 thousand or so same-day registrants in 2000, the 96,000 same day registrants in 2004, an all the ones in between, the AG's office can't come up with one single non-resident voter.
And the NH press dutifully wrote about there being little evidence of voter fraud in NH.
2.12.2006
Ruminations
I recently embarked on a fact finding mission to Vermont. I wanted to learn for myself if the state is as liberal as the rest of the country feels it is. I spoke with a cross section of citizens. Subjects, ranged from the Burlington judge who suspended a child molester’s sentence, to the town of Killington’s attempt to succeed from the state. Also, I couldn’t resist asking about my favorite Vermonter, “screaming” Howard Dean.
A retired school teacher's view on Judge Cashman; “He said he no longer believes in “punishment”, but feels instead “rehabilitation” should be the road traveled... Since a lot of people in the state seem to disagree, and since Judges are elected and re-appointed by the Legislature every few years, Cashman will simply no be re-affirmed and fade into retirement.”
A Killington shop owner's view on the town's attempt to succeed and become part of New Hampshire; “This is an attempt to bring Killington’s perceived tax problems to the attention of the Legislature.” “That’s all and nothing more.” “It will never happen.”
A Rutland waitress on Howard Dean; “ He was a little more moderate when he was Governor.” “I don’t understand why, but he seems to have moved further to the left since his run for the presidency.”
I realize these are not very enlightening statements, however, Vermonters are reluctant to speak about politics to outsiders by nature. Given the fact that it had been raining all week shutting down the ski slopes didn’t help my cause. Everyone was in a bad mood.
__
There is a New York Times story posted on Drudge that says with the mid term elections coming up Democrats are worried that they are “failing to exploit GOP troubles.” Both far left Senators “Bluto and Otter” (Kennedy and Kerry) along with former Vice President AlGore, Senators Reid and Boxer, all feel that the time is ripe to find their collective voices and take back the House and Senate this year.
The problem, In My Humble Opinion, is that the Democrats have not only no message, no solutions, no credible leaders, but are also so far to the left of any semblance of mainstream America that they will probably loose a few more seats in November.
__
While writing this my T.V. is on and I’m watching a bunch of radical Muslims riot because of a cartoon. People are being killed. I hope there isn’t anyone left in the world who feels we should just standby and allow Iran, or any other Muslim controlled nation, to become a nuclear power.
A retired school teacher's view on Judge Cashman; “He said he no longer believes in “punishment”, but feels instead “rehabilitation” should be the road traveled... Since a lot of people in the state seem to disagree, and since Judges are elected and re-appointed by the Legislature every few years, Cashman will simply no be re-affirmed and fade into retirement.”
A Killington shop owner's view on the town's attempt to succeed and become part of New Hampshire; “This is an attempt to bring Killington’s perceived tax problems to the attention of the Legislature.” “That’s all and nothing more.” “It will never happen.”
A Rutland waitress on Howard Dean; “ He was a little more moderate when he was Governor.” “I don’t understand why, but he seems to have moved further to the left since his run for the presidency.”
I realize these are not very enlightening statements, however, Vermonters are reluctant to speak about politics to outsiders by nature. Given the fact that it had been raining all week shutting down the ski slopes didn’t help my cause. Everyone was in a bad mood.
__
There is a New York Times story posted on Drudge that says with the mid term elections coming up Democrats are worried that they are “failing to exploit GOP troubles.” Both far left Senators “Bluto and Otter” (Kennedy and Kerry) along with former Vice President AlGore, Senators Reid and Boxer, all feel that the time is ripe to find their collective voices and take back the House and Senate this year.
The problem, In My Humble Opinion, is that the Democrats have not only no message, no solutions, no credible leaders, but are also so far to the left of any semblance of mainstream America that they will probably loose a few more seats in November.
__
While writing this my T.V. is on and I’m watching a bunch of radical Muslims riot because of a cartoon. People are being killed. I hope there isn’t anyone left in the world who feels we should just standby and allow Iran, or any other Muslim controlled nation, to become a nuclear power.
2.07.2006
Charlatan Gets Spanked In A Two Hundred Year Old Tradition
-- by Ed Naile
Logan Darrow Clements, purveyor of “FreeLoaderMedia,” just finished leading his lemming march over the cliffs of Weare, NH in a failed from the beginning effort to send a message to US Supreme Court Justice David Souter for his anti-property rights vote in the US Supreme Court Kelo Decision. The message was and REMAINS: Live by the laws you create.
Another message is: Don't send an ego-maniacal media hog to do what a couple vigorous high school seniors could have done with a voter checklist and some cell phones.
When Logan Darrow Clements isn't engaged in other personal fantasies like running for Governor of California, he claims to run a media consulting business. In this case, he ran it like he was hell-bent on losing. Logan Darrow Clements set the anti-eminent domain issue back as far as he possibly could. And the NH press are grateful. You can see it in their “the voters have spoken” editorials the Monday after the debacle.
Logan Darrow Clements should be on David Souter's Christmas list from now on because without Logan Darrow Clements running around threatening lawsuits for which he has no money to pay, or “rallying the troops” of people who cannot vote in Weare, or getting hate mail directed at local officials as though they were to blame for Souter, a legitimate petition to take Souter's house could have passed. It only lost by less than 40 votes. Here is what really happened. At a Senate Bill 2 deliberative session (RSA 40:13) activists and special interests are predominantly who shows up. That was the case in Weare. Logan Darrow Clements had some of his out of town “helpers” show up for good measure to help sink the vote as well, just in case Weare voters didn't get the “message” that this was a non-resident generated event.
At any deliberative session the supporters of or opponents to any warrant article try to gut the wording of the warrant article they oppose so that when it appears before all the voters at the annual meeting on a paper ballot in the secrecy of the polling booth the issue is for all intents and purposes, “pre-defeated.”
The Souter supporters know that if a warrant article to take Souter's house winds up on a town meeting ballot it will be passed overwhelmingly because the general voting public shows up on that day en mass. That is what happened to the “Lost Liberty Hotel” hodge-podge Clements was selling. It was doomed from the start because Clements was only interested in one thing; publicity for himself.
As long as Souter is on the bench and eminent domain is an issue, a warrant article to take his house should be on every ballot.
This was a fiasco from the start. Next year if 40 more voters show up and and a properly worded, petitioned warrant article is on the ballot it could be quite interesting.
Logan Darrow Clements, purveyor of “FreeLoaderMedia,” just finished leading his lemming march over the cliffs of Weare, NH in a failed from the beginning effort to send a message to US Supreme Court Justice David Souter for his anti-property rights vote in the US Supreme Court Kelo Decision. The message was and REMAINS: Live by the laws you create.
Another message is: Don't send an ego-maniacal media hog to do what a couple vigorous high school seniors could have done with a voter checklist and some cell phones.
When Logan Darrow Clements isn't engaged in other personal fantasies like running for Governor of California, he claims to run a media consulting business. In this case, he ran it like he was hell-bent on losing. Logan Darrow Clements set the anti-eminent domain issue back as far as he possibly could. And the NH press are grateful. You can see it in their “the voters have spoken” editorials the Monday after the debacle.
Logan Darrow Clements should be on David Souter's Christmas list from now on because without Logan Darrow Clements running around threatening lawsuits for which he has no money to pay, or “rallying the troops” of people who cannot vote in Weare, or getting hate mail directed at local officials as though they were to blame for Souter, a legitimate petition to take Souter's house could have passed. It only lost by less than 40 votes. Here is what really happened. At a Senate Bill 2 deliberative session (RSA 40:13) activists and special interests are predominantly who shows up. That was the case in Weare. Logan Darrow Clements had some of his out of town “helpers” show up for good measure to help sink the vote as well, just in case Weare voters didn't get the “message” that this was a non-resident generated event.
At any deliberative session the supporters of or opponents to any warrant article try to gut the wording of the warrant article they oppose so that when it appears before all the voters at the annual meeting on a paper ballot in the secrecy of the polling booth the issue is for all intents and purposes, “pre-defeated.”
The Souter supporters know that if a warrant article to take Souter's house winds up on a town meeting ballot it will be passed overwhelmingly because the general voting public shows up on that day en mass. That is what happened to the “Lost Liberty Hotel” hodge-podge Clements was selling. It was doomed from the start because Clements was only interested in one thing; publicity for himself.
As long as Souter is on the bench and eminent domain is an issue, a warrant article to take his house should be on every ballot.
This was a fiasco from the start. Next year if 40 more voters show up and and a properly worded, petitioned warrant article is on the ballot it could be quite interesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)