Monday, December 29, 2008

In order to form a more perfect Union.

I’m probably going to get myself in trouble with this one. I would like to address the concept of unions in this country. I believe in putting the bottom line up front. That way there is no guessing my point of view. I am not a fan of labor unions. Now, that is my point of view.

Early unions or guilds in America played important parts in the struggle for independence. Just one example is that the “hosts” at the Boston Tea Party were members of the carpenters union. It is natural for us here in America to equate unions with independence.

There are few people who have studied American history would argue that the organized labor movement back in the early to mid 19th century was necessary. Early factories were a hold-over from the sweat-shops of England. Child labor laws and safety regulations were non-existent. In the late 19th century the general attitude was that labor had no rights at all. Anytime there was a strike, it was a mere rubber-stamp exercise to get a federal court injunction to end a strike. If the strike did not end, federal troops were called in to break it.

In 1902, the anthracite coal miners as members of the United Mine Workers struck and closed down all coal mining for the entire summer. The only reason the strike lasted as long as it did was because the mine owners refused to agree to arbitration. President Roosevelt intervened by appointing a board of arbitration. The strike was over in five days.

In those early days, there was no attitude of commonality of effort between labor and management. Management failed to understand that without labor, there was no company. Labor failed to understand that without a profitable business there would be no wages. The battle-lines were drawn and they were inviolate.

Those attitudes, at least on the side of management, have changed. Fifty years ago, I remember my dad, who was a trucking executive tell me of some of the early days of Teamsters organization in the 1940’s. Many of the smaller trucking companies would allow drivers to use company vehicles to and from home. After the Teamsters came in, that perk was not written into the labor contract and the members suffered for it. The trucking company owners/managers had been more like co-workers that bosses. The union forced an antagonistic relationship on all parties.

Looking at unions of today, they are losing membership at unprecedented rates. There are a number of reasons for this, but probably the most significant one is that they have been too successful. The large salaries the unions have negotiated for their members force the retail of those goods produced by union members to become unaffordable to the average purchaser. With extraordinarily high salaries, entire industries are finding it much more cost effective to move manufacturing out of the country, thereby depriving American workers of any salary.

When you go to the department store, or the mega-stores, it is nearly impossible to find American made products. Wal-Mart, which used to pride itself on selling American products, has given up and now sells a very large percentage of merchandise from China, India, and Indonesia because the same American made products just cost too much for their customers.

The United States used to have the corner on the high-tech manufacturing market. This is no longer the case. How many of you have called a Dell Computer representative and spoken to a native American-English speaking technician? If you have, it was a long time ago.

Now the big three auto makers are going to Congress with their collective hands out because they are in serious danger of going under. What are they planning to use the money for, reorganizing, re-tooling, or propping up their union obligations? The extreme success that the unions have had in negotiating wages and retirement benefits has forced the big three to a position of unsupportability. That is not to say the big three front offices have not made their share of mistakes. In addition to routinely caving to the unions, not having the ability to quickly switch manufacturing emphasis based on existing conditions has a devastating effect on profitability.

Staying with the auto industry, the United Auto Workers (UAW) is so powerful and has such a strangle hold on the industry that the front office boys have to go to Congress with their hands out because the UAW wants to make sure their flow of cash continues unabated. Now, Congress is going to give billions of our dollars to the big three and we will be saddled with this enormous debt for the rest of our lives and probably for the rest of my grandchildren’s lives. To paraphrase Everett Dirksen, “A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about real money.”

Well friends, we are way past real money here. It is time the unions play by real world rules and not rules for children who have to have everything handed to them. I have been haranguing on the UAW, but that is not the only union in great need of a wake-up call.

Probably the most powerful union in the United States is the National Education Association (NEA). This union has such a strangle hold on the education of our children that parents have little or no say over what goes on in the classroom. However, that is a subject for another posting.

As always, your comments and discussion are welcome.

Dan 

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Devaluing the Dollars in Your Bank Account

We are in the middle of an economic crisis. Wow! Is that a shock to any of you? Let me start off by saying that I am no economist. I’m just an average guy who is trying to look at this situation in the most logical way possible.

Here is the way I see it. In the mid ‘60s, President Johnson brought about the Great Society which, among other things, sought to alleviate the “crushing weight of poverty.” He wanted to solve these problems with a new form of “creative federalism.” Those of you who regularly read this column will remember my posting of 21 Oct of this year:

So, what did Johnson mean by “creative federalism?” In his speech, he urged the audience to “join in the battle to give every citizen an escape from the crushing weight of poverty…. To join in the battle to build the Great Society, to prove that our material progress is only the foundation on which we will build a richer life of mind and spirit.” These are wonderful thoughts and goals; no one will debate that. However, Johnson’s intent was to make those goals achievable through government action, not through the sweat and perseverance of the individual. As a result, the welfare rolls jumped drastically as government agencies tried to “distribute the wealth”….

The slippery slope was firmly set in place.

Let’s fast forward now. Under President Carter, the Community Reinvestment Act was passed. This was a law that forced lenders to violate good commercial practices by making loans that were, at best, questionable and at worst, unsupportable. The slippery slope had just developed a more pronounced down-angle.

Once again, let’s fast forward. Under President Clinton, even more disadvantaged borrowers were able to take out mortgages to achieve the “American Dream,” irrespective of their ability to support that dream. President Clinton “encouraged” lenders to even further violate good business practices and make more money available to these disadvantaged borrowers. Remember the mantra that there are more homeowners in America than ever before? Did anyone in Washington ever bother to look to see whether these homeowners could afford the “American Dream” they had achieved?

One of the great joys in my life has been the accomplishment of a goal through hard work. When I want something enough to work for it, the satisfaction that comes through achievement makes all the effort worth it. The message sent by the federal government to the so-called “disadvantaged” was that it did not want them to feel left out; therefore serious shortcuts were made available to them. Nobody bothered to tell them that they had to work to support their dream.

Once again, let’s fast forward to today. We have had the collapse of Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, and a host of others. The way I see it, there are two culprits in this debacle. The first is the federal government which had the arrogance to interfere with the free market system. This was wrong for many reasons. The Founders were wise enough to keep the federal government out of the free market. I am no constitutional scholar, but I am aware of only one situation where the Constitution allows the federal government to get involved in commerce within the US, and that is when there is a dispute between the States (some of you scholars can correct me on that one).

The other culprit is business and industry allowing the federal government to get away with their meddling. Truly astute business professionals should have been able to foresee the coming economic collapse caused by the meddling of the federal government and stopped it.

Now we are soon to be saddled with over one trillion dollars worth of debt that could have been avoided with the foresight of a sophomore economics student. What makes this situation even worse is that both the Republicans and the Democrats are fighting each other to see who can give which industry more of our money. The latest polls show that the overwhelming majority of Americans bitterly object to the bail-outs taking place, but Congress seems to be made up of people whose wisdom is so superior that they do not need to listen to their constituents.

There are a few brave Congressmen and Senators who have attempted to stand up against this tax against our future, but not enough. We have about a year to put together a slate of candidates that will decisively overturn this rampant growth of our debt, debt that is a direct result of government interference in the marketplace.

This interference in the marketplace is not limited to the front office; it extends down to the union halls and the massive corruption and power flexing that exists in the union hierarchy. That will be the subject of my next posting.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

This posting is available on http://carpentersmate.blogspot.com.

Daniel C. Lanotte

dlanotte@falconbroadband.net

Friday, December 26, 2008

No "PASS" for Obama Administration

We have a new administration due to take charge on 20 January. For those of us of the Conservative persuasion, it was a disappointing election season. 

A large number of people were disenchanted with the Republican ticket that was foisted on us by the main-stream-media. Many of these people stayed at home instead of voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Because of this, we may deserve what we will have to endure for at least the next two years.

There is a fairly wide variety of opinions on how we Conservatives are to approach the new regime. Numerous pundits have advocated sitting by and give the new administration and their Congressional Stooges a chance; that they may surprise us (oops, did I give myself away?). I am not cut from that cloth.

I firmly believe that it is our responsibility to hold their collective feet to the fire. Obama made a lot of very liberal and socialistic claims during the campaign but now that he has been elected he seems to be a bit of a mixed bag. He is keeping Gates as SECDEF, but his choice for attorney general, Eric Holder, is an avowed gun grabber.

When you step back and examine where he came from you have to realize that his political roots are definitely not conservative but are they truly liberal? They may be best described as opportunistic. The political machine that spawned Obama, Chicago, is opportunistic to the extreme. Looking at the “auctioning off” of Obama’s Senate seat, this should not shock the astute political observer. 

I was gratified to see that Obama’s organization took on the investigation of how much contact his people had with Governor Blagojevich concerning the auction. On the surface, the fast reaction of the Obama organization is laudable; do I believe any findings they will “uncover,” unlikely. 

I do not intend to give the Obama administration a “pass” for one instant. I urge all Conservatives to adopt the same attitude.

As always, I welcome comments/discussion.

This posting is also available on http://carpentersmate.blogspot.com.

Dan

Daniel C. Lanotte

dlanotte@falconbroadband.net

Saturday, December 20, 2008

President Reagan's Favorite Christmas Gift

President Reagan's Favorite Christmas Gift
By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
December 20, 2008

"Christmas has always been a very special day for as long back as I can remember," Ronald Reagan once wrote in a letter. "Maybe this was due to my mother and her joyous spirit about the day."

Although President Reagan could have spent his White House Christmases with family at his beloved ranch in Santa Barbara, Calif., he instead stayed in Washington, D.C. His sacrifice allowed Secret Service agents and other aides to spend Christmas at home with their families. He was a thoughtful person.

Reagan grew up in a desperately poor family. His father was a shoe sales clerk who had trouble keeping a job, partly because he was an alcoholic. "There were very few decorated trees in the years of my growing up. But never defeated, my mother would with ribbon and crepe paper decorate a table or create a cardboard fireplace out of a packing box. And she always remembered whose birthday it was and made sure we knew the meaning of Christmas."

His mother Nelle was an optimistic Christian woman who always looked for the positive side in every situation. President Reagan explained, no matter how bad things were for their family, his mother was always finding someone worse off than them. Reagan's most vivid early memory of his mother was of her with a covered dish taking it to a needy family. Nelle was always helping others.

Perhaps those lean years are one reason why Ronald Reagan once said a particular Christmas gift was especially memorable for him. It was his favorite gift and it came from his brother Neil. He called it "a gift truly in keeping with the spirit of the day." Neil had been struggling to find a suitable gift for his brother; they both were middle-aged adults and both men had successful careers.

Neil solved his dilemma by writing a letter. In the letter, Neil told his brother he had found a truly needy family with small children "who wouldn't go to bed with dreams of Santa Claus in their head." Ronald Reagan recounted how his brother Neil changed that and "became Santa himself, providing a Christmas from tree to turkey plus toys and gifts for all." Included in Neil's letter was a very detailed blow-by-blow account describing the "joy of the children and the grateful happiness of their mother."

This act of charitable giving by Neil reads like the end of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" and became President Reagan's most unforgettable Christmas gift. He called it "a gift that will never grow old," as he would re-read the letter or think about the family's reaction to Neil's generosity.

Helping and serving others gives true joy and happiness, not only to the recipient but even more so to the giver. Maybe Neil's gift was particularly touching to Reagan because he knew what it was like to go without.

Today, there are still families out there who are in difficult circumstances and they face a bleak Christmas. A gift like Neil's may be the perfect gift for you to give to that someone in your life who has everything. Your church or locally based charities such as the Salvation Army are aware of needy families. You could make a difference and receive special Christmas joy by giving to a family who has hit hard times. Then write a letter similar to Neil's describing the family's reactions and give it as a gift. This is the true spirit of Christmas.

On Christmas Eve 1984, speaking to the nation, President Reagan said, "families and friends across America will join together in caroling parties and Christmas Eve services. Together, we'll renew that spirit of faith, peace, and giving which has always marked the character of our people."

At the end of his tale, Dickens writes, "it was always said of [Scrooge], that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May this be said of all of us. And so, as Tiny Tim observed, God bless Us, Every One!"

Merry Christmas!

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/guest/2008/fmb_12201.shtml

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Where’s the money? Well, we have it, thank you.

A word from our friends at Americans for Prosperity Foundation

Our state has been able to weather the financial storm better than others because we restrict state spending and tax increases through our state constitution. The Colorado Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) has been an effective tool for reigning in government spending and regulation. It’s been a model to the nation and an inspiration for other anti-tax movements across the country.

But many policy groups have been attacking it lately. And Governor Ritter and the leadership in the state legislature supported a measure on the ballot this past November to take away important spending limits which TABOR enforces. But Colorado’s economy has fared better than other states. You are not hearing the cry for federal funds from the Governor because we are not in a financial crisis at this moment.

Find out more about how Colorado compares to other states and why we need to remain vigilant to hold the line on government expansion by downloading and sharing your copy of the Keeping Colorado Competitive report.

Download your copy here.

The effort to open up the state’s checkbook seems to be moving forward. It looks like there is interest in providing full online access to Colorado government spending and contracts through state law. AFP supports transparency in government as the best tool to hold our elected officials accountable-- Republican and Democrat.

You will be hearing more about this issue beginning in January. Watch for updates.

 

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

With only eight days left before most people take Christmas break, I wanted to personally wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. We’re grateful for all your help and support during this year, and we hope you have a wonderful season and time with family and friends.

 

End of year donations

Friends, this is an important time for us as we prepare for a busy legislative session in 2009. And we need your help to fund our efforts. Please consider a generous end of the year gift to Americans for Prosperity Foundation. We make it easy for you to give. Please visit our website to make a gift. Thank you again for your help.

Have a merry and wonderful Christmas.


Jim Pfaff
Colorado State Director
Americans for Prosperity Foundation

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is the nation’s premier grassroots organization committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits.

For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org

Postponing Reality

Postponing Reality By Thomas Sowell
December 17, 2008
 
Some of us were raised to believe that reality is inescapable. But that just shows how far behind the times we are. Today, reality is optional. At the very least, it can be postponed.
 
Kids in school are not learning? Not a problem. Just promote them on to the next grade anyway. Call it "compassion," so as not to hurt their "self-esteem."
Can't meet college admissions standards after they graduate from high school? Denounce those standards as just arbitrary barriers to favor the privileged, and demand that exceptions be made.
 
Can't do math or science after they are in college? Denounce those courses for their rigidity and insensitivity, and create softer courses that the students can pass to get their degrees.
 
Once they are out in the real world, people with diplomas and degrees-- but with no real education-- can hit a wall. But by then the day of reckoning has been postponed for 15 or more years. Of course, the reckoning itself can last the rest of their lives.
 
The current bailout extravaganza is applying the postponement of reality democratically-- to the rich as well as the poor, to the irresponsible as well as to the responsible, to the inefficient as well as to the efficient. It is a triumph of the non-judgmental philosophy that we have heard so much about in high-toned circles.
 
We are told that the collapse of the Big Three automakers in Detroit would have repercussions across the country, causing mass layoffs among firms that supply the automobile makers with parts, and shutting down automobile dealerships from coast to coast.
 
A renowned economist of the past, J.A. Schumpeter, used to refer to progress under capitalism as "creative destruction"-- the replacement of businesses that have outlived their usefulness with businesses that carry technological and organizational creativity forward, raising standards of living in the process.
Indeed, this is very much like what happened a hundred years ago, when that new technological wonder, the automobile, wreaked havoc on all the forms of transportation built up around horses.
 
For thousands of years, horses had been the way to go, whether in buggies or royal coaches, whether pulling trolleys in the cities or plows on the farms. People had bet their futures on something with a track record of reliable success going back many centuries.
 
Were all these people to be left high and dry? What about all the other people who supplied the things used with horses-- oats, saddles, horse shoes and buggies? Wouldn't they all go falling like dominoes when horses were replaced by cars?
 
Unfortunately for all the good people who had in good faith gone into all the various lines of work revolving around horses, there was no compassionate government to step in with a bailout or a stimulus package.
 
They had to face reality, right then and right there, without even a postponement.
 
Who would have thought that those who displaced them would find themselves in a similar situation a hundred years later?
 
Actually the automobile industry is not nearly in as bad a situation now as the horse-based industries were then. There is no replacement for the automobile anywhere on the horizon. Nor has the public decided to do without cars indefinitely.
 
While Detroit's Big Three are laying off thousands of workers, Toyota is hiring thousands of workers right here in America, where a substantial share of all our Toyotas are manufactured.
 
Will this save Detroit or Michigan? No.
 
Detroit and Michigan have followed classic liberal policies of treating businesses as prey, rather than as assets. They have helped kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. So have the unions. So have managements that have gone along to get along.
 
Toyota, Honda and other foreign automakers are not heading for Detroit, even though there are lots of experienced automobile workers there. They are avoiding the rust belts and the policies that have made those places rust belts.
 
A bailout of Detroit's Big Three would be only the latest in the postponements of reality. As for automobile dealers, they can probably sell Toyotas just as easily as they sold Chevvies. And Toyotas will require just as many tires per car, as well as other parts from automobile parts suppliers.
 
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com

Monday, December 1, 2008

Bombs in Bombay - What the terrorists attacks in India mean to the US.

Over the last several days the world has witnessed incredible carnage in the name of religion. Fox News reports “Indian police said Sunday that the only surviving gunman told them he belongs to the Pakistani militant group Lakshkar-e-Taiba

The group is seen as a creation of the Pakistani intelligence to help fight India in the disputed Kashmir region. Another group, Jaish-e-Mohammed, has also operated in Kashmir. Both are reported to be linked to Al Qaeda.” In that part of the world, religion is inextricably linked to politics and foreign policy.

We are also hearing reports that Muslims across the Middle East are condemning the violence which has killed more than 170 people. These “conscientious Muslims” are afraid that the violence will tarnish the image the world has of Muslims. I find this attitude astounding to the point of hilarity. Palestinians have been shelling Israeli settlements for years. The only reason they have not amassed the kill rate of the Lakshkar-e-Taibi is because they are so inept. They keep shooting small rockets into the Israeli settlements with no idea where they will land.

When you compare the average Muslim extremist attack with that undertaken in Mumbai last week, it is like comparing the bush league with the majors.

The BBC reported that the planning for the Mumbai attacks was extensive. At least one ship was hijacked and used as a mother ship to transport the attackers close to shore. They then went ashore in dinghies in two to four-man teams to conduct their attacks. The targets were preselected. All indications are that the attacks were rehearsed and well choreographed. 

The attackers were very well armed for the selected targets to affect maximum casualties. While a large number of people were killed, it doesn’t look like those killed were completely random victims. The attackers were specifically looking for people with American and British passports. They also specifically targeted the residence of an Israeli priest who had frequent Israeli guests.

This attack shows a high degree of planning and coordination, possibly with the complicity of elements of Pakistani Intelligence.

On the other hand, looking at the average Muslim extremist; young Muslims, mostly young men, are more than willing to strap on bomb vests and blow themselves up along with anyone who happens to be close by. But this is in the name of – well, I don’t know what they are trying to accomplish – I guess they are trying in some perverted way to advance Muslim principles. 

In my view this is a prime example of cowardice, not on the part of the suicide bombers, but on their handlers. If it is so glorious to die for Allah, why are they recruiting the young, passionate believers? Why do they not prove their devotion and blow themselves into the arms of their 72 virgins?

While fanatics can and often do create havoc, they are not the major concern for America; rather, it is the calculating and organized groups that may or may not be affiliated with Al Qaeda. However, certainly Al Qaeda has been an inspirational influence in the world of Islamic terrorism

The planning that took place before the Mumbai attacks reflect the thoroughness of the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks. I’m sure the planning did not take nearly as long, but it was certainly as thorough. This shows that the enemy is still willing and capable to undertake the requisite planning for a successful attack.

What really worries me is that the exact same scenario can be used right here on American shores with only a few alterations to the plans. These highly coordinated groups would like nothing better than to conduct a successful attack against a high profile event.

With a change in administration and a change in national emphasis the next couple of years will tell how the world of terrorism views the United States. If we are viewed as ineffective or uncommitted to the war on terror we can expect renewed targeting of US assets, if not on US soil itself. Vigilance and pressure on the terrorists is the only thing that will keep their attacks from our soil.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments. This posting can also be viewed at: http://carpentersmate.blogspot.com.

Daniel C. Lanotte

dlanotte@falconbroadband.net

Saturday, November 1, 2008

...................The Voice of the Rockies ..............: There oughta be a Law - Yes on 46 !

.: There oughta be a Law - Yes on 46 !

Obama, Powell and Popularity

By Thomas Sowell

Among all the people who are now scrambling to get on the Obama bandwagon, none is likely to impress more people than Colin Powell — especially people who know no more about the specifics of Colin Powell's actions than the specifics of Barack Obama's.

Like Ross Perot, Colin Powell once had such support from the American people that there was nothing to stop him from going all the way to White House — and beyond to greatness — except his own shortcomings. Both squandered historic opportunities.

One of the first signs of those shortcomings was Powell's flip-flop on the issue of racial quotas and preferences. In his memoirs, he opposed such policies. But at the Republican convention, he loudly demanded them, complete with a raised fist, which was hardly his usual style.

What he was trying to prove, we may never know. What he did prove was how unreliable he was.

More recently, Colin Powell sat silent while two lives were ruined in a special prosecutor's zeal to get a conviction in a case involving a non-crime: telling columnist Robert Novak that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.

The full story is told in Novak's book, "The Prince of Darkness." What is relevant here is that a New York Times reporter went to jail for refusing to tell who had revealed Ms. Plame's occupation to her, and White House aide Scooter Libby was convicted of perjury because his memory of what he said did not match the memories of some reporters — whose memories did not match each other's.

All the while Colin Powell knew that his own subordinate, Richard Armitage, was the one who had told Robert Novak that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. Neither Armitage nor anybody else was convicted for that because there was no crime to convict them of.

The only crimes were those created in the course of the investigation, unless the silence of Richard Armitage and Colin Powell are regarded as moral crimes.

Among the reasons given by Secretary Powell for supporting Barack Obama is that Obama can restore America's standing with foreign countries.

The idea that the United States must somehow rehabilitate itself in the eyes of the United Nations or NATO or "world opinion" is staggering, even though it is an idea very popular in the mainstream media.

The first duty of a President of the United States is to protect American interests — of which survival is number one — regardless of what others may say.

Virtually the whole world condemned Israel when it bombed Saddam Hussein's nuclear facilities back in 1981. But Israel understood that its survival was more important than international popularity.

Let us hope that today's Israeli government understands that issue the same way as regards Iran, since ours may not.

Despite the media hype that we need to rehabilitate ourselves in the eyes of the world, the United States of America remains the number one destination of immigrants from around the world, some of whom take desperate chances with their lives to get here, whether across the waters of the Caribbean or by crossing our dangerous southwest desert.

Even when dozens of governments around the world join the United States in coordinated efforts to fight international terrorism, the media will call our actions "unilateral" if some demagogues in France or Germany spout off against us.

The American nuclear umbrella has enabled Western European nations to escape responsibility for their own military survival for more than half a century.

Lack of responsibility has bred irresponsibility, one sign of which are unionized troops in NATO and NATO bomber pilots who have office hours when they will and will not fly, not to mention NATO troops letting American troops handle the really dangerous fighting in Afghanistan.

Maybe the time is overdue for NATO to try to rehabilitate itself and for Americans to stop trying to be "citizens of the world."

Friday, October 31, 2008

Republican Club of Falcon - 5th Congressional Candidate Forum

Well it finally happened. A live candidate forum with all 3 candidates for the 5th Congressional district on one stage. The Republican Club of Falcon (RCF) pulled off what no other organization was able to put together this entire campaign season in this race. (see video link below).

Club spokesman Mark Shook told NewsFirst the event was "...a huge vote of confidence for the RCF by all three candidates who put their trust in the Falcon Republicans to have a fair, well run candidate forum..."

RCF choose Falcon area journalist Kathy Hare of the Falcon Herald as moderator.
NEWSMAN

District 5 opponents face off for first time
Colorado Springs Gazette
PERRY SWANSON
October 30, 2008 -
Candidates to represent Colorado's 5th Congressional District differed Thursday on everything from marriage to the economy.

The debate between Republican Doug Lamborn, Democrat Hal Bidlack and American Constitution Party candidate Brian Scott was the only face-to-face meeting of the opponents before Tuesday's election.

Lamborn said the government went too far recently when Congress and the president approved a $700 billion bailout package intended to loosen credit markets. He voted against the measure. Lamborn also spoke out against abortion, gay marriage and tax increases. But he appeared to try to shake the image of a stooge for the GOP that some opponents have said fits his voting record. By various measurements, Lamborn has voted with the Republican Party nearly all the time.

"I wouldn't be proud of being the most partisan member of government," Bidlack told the crowd of 100-some people who showed up for the debate at Sand Creek High School. Bidlack said if elected he would relentlessly seek ways to cooperate with the opposing party.

Lamborn said he would oppose his party if its agenda ran counter to the state's needs, and he has worked with Democrats. He and U.S. Rep. John Salazar, D-Colo., have worked together to urge the establishment of a veterans' cemetery in southern Colorado, he said.

But, "I will not be a water carrier for Nancy Pelosi," Lamborn continued, referring to the Democratic speaker of the House.

Bidlack gave different opinions on virtually every issue. Bidlack said he, too, opposed the economic bailout package, but for different reasons. Congress approved the measure too fast, he said, and it was too kind to the people who caused the mess, he said.

"If you've got an arsonist who set fire to a building, you don't say, 'Here's another gallon of gas, go see if you can put it out,'" he said.

Bidlack said he personally opposes abortion, but he views a woman's right to chose as paramount and would vote "mostly" prochoice. He said the government shouldn't decide who's allowed to get married.

Brian Scott received applause a number of times for his views. He acknowledged, though, that as a member of a minor party he's unlikely to win the election. If he does win, Scott said his chief concern would be ending the war in Iraq. He said he would set up an office in Baghdad to call attention to the conflict.

Scott promised to serve only one term if elected. He said if he successfully ends the war he wouldn't need a second term, and if he fails he wouldn't deserve one.


LINK TO VIDEO of RCF CANDIDATE FORUM (Copy and Paste)

http://www.gazette.com/video/index.php?bcpid=1155184276&bclid=1155106690&bctid=1890047711

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Why I am Voting Democrat this year !

I'm voting Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.

I'm voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.

I’m voting Democrat because I need the government to decide whether I am sick enough to need medical attention …and tell me which doctor I can go to.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on
a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job
of spending the money I earn than I would.

I'm voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they’ll now think we're good people.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if
it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.

I'm voting Democrat because I'm not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe that businesses should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They just need to break even and give the rest
away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.

I'm voting Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who could NEVER get their agenda past the voters.

I'm voting Democrat because my head is so firmly planted where the sun doesn’t shine that it's unlikely I'll ever have another point of view.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Friday, October 24, 2008

Friday, October 17, 2008

Audacity of Mendacity

by : Andy Pico,

Our country is on the verge of potentially electing a new Triumvirate of Obama, Pelosi and Reid together with The One’s sidekick, the Bumbling Biden, with the most radical, socialist agenda this country has ever seen in national politics. The Triumvirate could have a potentially filibuster proof senate majority able to ram through whatever far left radical measures dictated to the Triumvirate by their political backers within such groups as ACORN (currently under investigation for massive interstate voter fraud), Moveon.org and such Soros funded groups.

This coalition has a radical, leftist agenda that has nothing to do with preserving individual freedom, full employment, a robust economic climate or any of the key moral or social values this country has developed. Their entire methodology is built on deceit, fraud and intimidation of political opponents.

This Triumvirate has manufactured a great economic message focused on the current meltdown of the financial markets, aided and abetted by a complicit press which combines economic illiteracy with historical ignorance. The seeds of the current financial crisis were planted by the Democrat administration of Carter in the Community Redevelopment ACT and expanded by Clinton with the assistance of ACORN to strong arm lending institutions into making bad loans. The brief period of Republican control was unable to reform this coming, and predicted, financial meltdown due to Democrat obstructionism in Congress and in the courts.

Bill Clinton - "I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was president, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

I certainly would not be one to call the Former President a liar.

The facts, unreported by a complicit press, is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were established by Democrats, staffed by Democrats, (the former executives of these failed institutions are currently part of the economics team on Obama’s campaign staff), “regulated” by Democrats and provided campaign contributions with taxpayer guaranteed funds to Democrats. Obama, in his extraordinarily short time in the US Senate, managed to skim the 3rd largest amount, barely behind the Democrat chairman of the committee which oversaw those organizations. While technically legal, this defines the worst kind of corruption.

That the architects of our current financial crisis are likely to be rewarded with political control and given the responsibility to fix their own mess is one of the travesties of the scandal that is the current journalistic abandonment of any pretense of standards or integrity. That the Bumbling Biden could utter the most outrageous and complete fabrication of the history of Hezbollah in Lebanon and our involvement there along with the utter fantasy of his proposed intervention, and not be held to account by a press more interested in investigating 25 year old traffic tickets by Governor Palin’s relatives and whether Joe has a current plumber’s license, has to rank as one of the most despicable failures of modern and corrupt journalism.

The economic measures being proposed by those who have brought you this looming recession will repeat the governmental economic idiocy that ushered in the Great Depression.

Here in Colorado the Democrat candidate for the Senate is one of those responsible for restricting energy development resulting in high gas prices and utility bills, based in part by the fraud of man-made global warming and extreme environmental over-regulation. His possible election will not only reward his own complicity in our economic problems but help hand a filibuster proof Senate majority to this radical and irresponsible Socialist Triumvirate.

Rarely has so much been at stake. On positions of the economy, conduct of the war, worldwide anti-terrorist operations, opposition to the state sponsors of international terrorism, energy development, phony climate control, misguided tax policies and most of all, a culture of death which will include taxpayer funded abortions; this Radical Triumvirate is far outside of the political mainstream.

Do not reward this Audacity of Mendacity with political victory and the near dictatorial control over our economy by economic illiterates. Here in Colorado, vote to elect Doug Lamborn, Scott Starin, Wayne Wolf, Marilyn Musgrave, Mike Coffman, George Lilly and John Lerew to their Congressional seats; Bob Schaffer to the US Senate; Sarah Palin for Vice President and that other guy running with her for President.

Pico, of Colorado Springs, is a retired navy commander, naval Flight officer and economist.

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Sunday, August 17, 2008

From the EPC Democrat Party Website:


From the EPC Democrat Party Website:
(And what it really means in plain English, the official Language de Colorado.)FOR NOW

So I was trying a new Google feature I have been selected to beta test, and put in Local+Organizations+wishful exaggerations of the truth, and up pops the El Paso County Democrat's website. Their actual stated beliefs are in bold. Fortunately I was able to get a plain English translation of their stated beliefs (shown below.)
ENJOY- NEWSMAN

As Democrats We Believe:
In Defending all of the human rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Except for free association, freedom to keep what you earn, freedom of speech for conservatives on college campuses, freedom of the US Marines to recruit in Berkley, and the right to keep and bear arms.
A clear separation of Church and State. Except that we must ignore that separation is nowhere in the Bill of Rights or the US Constitution, and that the phrase was expressed in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson (who was in France at the time and had no part in the constitution) to a Baptist convention. But it advances our religion of global climate change & anti capitalism (except for our favorite for profit abortion clinics.) So all hail and praise, separation from god is now our God.

Swift and appropriate punishment for criminal behavior. Except when the "criminal behavior" is unlawfully crossing our border, trespassing and property damage by liberal protesters, or sexual crimes against children in Vermont.

Freedom from undue government interference in our private lives and personal decisions. Except if you want to home school your kids in California.

Fiscal responsibility in government. The responsibility we feel to ensure you pay your fair and ever growing share for our ever growing government's fiscal needs.

Equal opportunity for all citizens. And equal preferences for all those we can divide into diverse and separate sub groups who need our protection and assistance cause they just can't make it if all things were really equal.

A quality education that gives all individuals the opportunity to reach their potential*. *For those that can afford a private school like Chelsea Clinton had, or live in areas with a Conservative school board, and Union government schools with little accountability or hope of improvement for those unlucky enough to live where the Education Union is strong. But hey, we need their union money and organization skills.

A quality environment in which to raise our children. With freedom for the transgendered to use their restrooms, to parade down main street, and adopt them when their backwards conservative parents are finally jailed for their homophobic thoughts.

The value of diversity within the community. With the worthwhile goal of total diversity of each and every human family, diversity of language until we all speak and understand a different diverse one, and diversity for all thoughts and ideas, except conservative ideas, traditions, morals and morays which must be eliminated.

Rewarding honest, hard work with a living wage and fair taxation. Well history proves were lying here, but just smile and give us a pass.

Community support for strong families. Except if they're headed by an evil white male who regularly listens to Rush Limbaugh.

Security in our homes, our communities and our nation. Except we opposed the "make my day" law to allow true personal security. On national security, we elected representatives that tried to cut and run, but they couldn't get it passed. Elect more Democrats and we will promise a foreign policy triumph like Jimmy Carter gave us in Iran. (He got a Nobel Peace prize for the lasting peace he brought to the middle east too.)

A nation that will serve as a model of economic and social justice to the rest of the world. And be a model like Fidel Castro's Cuba, whom we Love and Praise.

And remember to vote Democrat in the Fall, Our Invincible team is recommended by more ruthless dictators than any other party.

(WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Add another name to the list of political observers who think a Clinton-Obama ticket would be unbeatable: Cuban leader Fidel Castro.)

Danny Glover and Jane Fonda will be next months guest speakers.

This has been a test of Democrats ability to take humor as well as dish it out.
NEWSMAN

Saturday, August 16, 2008

The Russian Incursion Continues

Click on the map to enlarge the map image

A couple of days ago I received the email below from a trusted friend. He says that it is authentic and that is good enough for me. Forgive me for removing the names;
I’m sure you understand the reason.
Begin forwarded email.
Capt _____ provides input from someone inside Georgia. If he emailsit, it's reliable. FYI-----Original Message-----From: Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:42 PMTo:
Subject: FW: GeorgiaAdmiral, Sirs, Word from Inside Georgia. Sad news.v.r.CAPT Counter-Terrorism & Defense Operations-----Original Message-----From: Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 11:38 PMSubject: GeorgiaBy all accounts, the Georgian Coast Guard was essentially destroyedyesterday by Russian regular army troops in Poti. No people killed orinjured, as there was no resistance.

Three ships seized and destroyed.Buildings on the base damaged and/or destroyed, including the commandcenter. Other GCG vessels had left Poti before this and were not taken. Theradar station at Anaklia was destroyed. Not yet at Supsa, the Russians wereexpected to destroy that station as well.It has chilled me to hear of all of this, as so much of that infrastructurewas built or improved as a part of my w! ork these past years. It can berebuilt if the money is found but i t pains me nonetheless.

It is the destruction and looting in the villages near Abkhazia, and aroundSouth Ossetia that is so horrific. There is no foreign aid to help familiesrebuild their lives. The Georgia, Osset and Abkhaz youth who are a part ofit are thugs and criminals easily brought to the Russian fold in return forfree reign. There is no reasonable explanation on earth for what theRussians are now doing in Georgia. It does not equal the genocide of Darfur,but it is all here in my backyard.My family is terrified, and the patriotic rhetoric is maxed out in volume.Thankfully it appears that the Russians will not press on to Tbilisi.Amazingly we still have electricity and phone service. And water.Gracefully yesterday provided a moment of peaceful irony - at the Olympicsin Beijing Georgian athletes won 2 gold medals. The first was in judo. The second was in wrestling. The Georgian defeated - a Russian! And in Olympicappropriateness the two combatants threw their arms around each other inexhaustion and respect.

I think all of Georgia was standing for their anthemduring the medals ceremony .Best wishes,
End of forwarded email

As I pointed out in my last Political Discourse, Putin wants to put the old Soviet Union back together. It seems that Georgia’s crime was being friendly with the West and specifically their desire to join NATO. When the rebelling region of South Ossetia tried to break away and rejoin with Russia, Georgia went in for the purpose of putting down the rebellion. That was the excuse that Russia needed/wanted to attack Georgia.

North Ossetia has long been aligned with Russia. In the map insert above, North Ossetia is the area marked as Alania. While South Ossetia has strong ties to Russia, has long been considered a part of Georgia.

Russian forces have been in South Ossetia, theoretically as a peacekeeping force, but their wonton actions against the Georgians as noted in the above email goes beyond merely protecting allies and preventing further violence. Georgia has also had peacekeeping forces in the area.
As of this morning, 16 August 2008, the Russians and the Georgians have signed a cease-fire agreement, stipulating that Russian forces are to return to their previous positions in South Ossetia with the ability to patrol the Georgian border. General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of the Russian military staff has stated that a return of Georgian forces to South Ossetia would not be acceptable.

To slightly shift gears, the Associated Press reported today that Poland and the United States have concluded an agreement to place anti-ballistic missiles in Poland. The negotiations have been going on for 18 months with the stated goal to place missiles in Poland to protect from any current or projected IRBM/ICBM capability within Iran or other potentially unfriendly Middle Eastern country. Russia believes that the anti-ballistic missiles are a direct slap in the fact to them and has threatened retaliation in the form of its own nuclear arsenal.
Two days ago, Russia also made the statement that Georgian borders are no longer sacred, the same with any rebellious region within any of the former Soviet states that ask for Russia’s assistance.

Given the bellicose stance Russia has taken in the recent past, it would be reasonable to expect all of the former Soviet states to be in danger of re-absorbs ion. Russia is already looking with laser focus on the Baltic States.

After my last posting, a number of commentators as well as several of my friends have commented on the similarity between the current Russian actions and the incursion of German troops into the Sudetenland on 01 October, 1938. This incursion was due to the appeasement mentality of the Europeans at that time. The current actions of the Russians and the world’s desire for peace today make it feel like it must have in the late ‘30s. How many more of the former Soviet satellite states are going to be given to Putin?

Since the pull-out of US forces from Viet Nam, and the Marines from Lebanon, the United States has come to be viewed as a country that does not go the extra mile to back its friends. I believe that it is time to reverse that trend and show the world that we do back our friends. In the past, the Russians have typically responded only to adversaries that come to them from a position of strength. Giving in to their bullying in Georgia and Poland removes any semblance of strength. If we do not stand up for our friends now we could see a resurgence of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe and a renewal of the Cold War.

As always, I welcome your comments/discussion.

Daniel C. Lanotte

Monday, August 11, 2008

The Russian Bear out of Hibernation

On June 12, 1987, President Reagan made the famous demand, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” in a speech to the people of West Berlin. It was also heard on the East side of the wall. This was the prelude to the greatest peacetime implosion of a multilithic regime this world has ever seen. Today, 21 years later, we still laud Reagan for his courage to even make this challenge, after all of his advisors counseled against it.

In December of 1991, after the erosion of the Soviet world from the edges, the Soviet Union ceased to exist. A painful period of the Russian version of democratization began. The newly wealthy grew out of the corrupt officials that had run the country. Still, there was some hope that the new Russian Republic would work through these growing pains and come out the other side as a democracy, governed by the rule of law. The old hard-line Communists were suppressed and it looked as if Boris Yeltsin might just be able to pull it off, if his health held up. At least that is the short version.

Now fast forward to 2000. With the succession of Vladimir Putin to the presidency of Russia, another KGB professional was again in power. For the past eight years Putin has been consolidating and confirming his power.

In the run-up to the 2003 parliamentary elections, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the wealthiest of the new Russian billionaires, financed opposition parties running against Putin’s United Russia Party. For this indiscretion, the government charged Khodorkovsky with fraud and tax evasion. The sentence was for eight years. Under the Russian legal system, he was eligible for release in 2008. Removing this source of financing, Putin’s ruling party easily won reelection. In early 2007 Khodorkovsky faced new charges of money laundering and embezzlement in preparation for the upcoming 2008 elections. Putin could not take a chance of losing his legislative mandate.

Putin and the ruling party have recently taken to flexing their collective muscles in the old ways. In August of last year, Putin announced the resumption of long-range bomber flights because of security concerns. This renewed assertiveness now can be viewed as the first overt step in a campaign to reestablish the regional power base that the Soviets had established after World War II.

In the past week, Georgia has sent troops into the break-away enclave of South Ossetia to discourage thoughts of independence. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, South Ossetia has claimed to be independent from Georgia. This urge for independence was further enhanced with the recent declaration of independence by Kosovo.

Russia has been claiming that they are just acting as peacekeepers. But Russia is goaded by NATO’s promise to admit Georgia. Last week, Russian forces rolled into the area in support of the separatists. Two days ago, 8 Aug, it was reported that Russian troops had moved into South Ossetia with 150 tanks plus assorted other vehicles. Today, it was reported that Russian and Georgian forces are engaged. There are also reports of the Russian Navy blockading Georgian ports.

With the aforementioned examples of Russian expansion of control, both internal and external, it could be argued that Russia under Vladimir Putin is attempting to rebuild, at least partially, the Soviet power bloc of the Cold War days. While the West has been watching developments related to Muslim Terrorism, Putin has been restoring the Russian military which had fallen into abject disrepair; this repair and modernization being paid for by proceeds gained from re-nationalized industries such as the petroleum industry.

This is a complicated world, made more so by the resurgence of Russia as a power with which to be reckoned. Only time will tell the lengths to which Putin will go to achieve the level of his desired power.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussions.

Daniel C. Lanotte

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

The Coalition for a Conservative Majority Responds

Dear CCM Colorado Springs members,

Earlier today, you received an email from the former CCM-Co Springs chapter president announcing his resignation. In his letter, he makes very pointed accusations against myself, CCM’s founder Tom DeLay and CCM’s Colorado Chairman Bob Beauprez, and sends a considerable amount of misinformation to all of you as members as CCM members. For this, I am very disappointed.

To backtrack and re-trace the structure and intention of CCM; we are classified as a not-for-profit, 501c4 organization that does not support the election or defeat of any candidate for office. CCM’s mission is to recruit, organize and activate conservatives in specific policy areas so that we may have a voice in the public arena. We have many odds against us when looking at the funding and organization of Left wing groups, and the national media who too often ignore the values of conservatives. The last thing we need to do as committed conservatives is to point our action in our own direction.

Unfortunately, there has been an attempt to divide us as conservatives in what has become a bitter fight in Colorado’s 5th congressional district. At a time when Mark Udall is supporting an extreme liberal agenda in his race for the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama is heading to Colorado to accept his party’s Presidential nomination and, just today, Governor Bill Ritter was extensively quoted in the Rocky Mountain News championing a ballot initiative that would raise taxes and the cost of gas prices on all Colorado residents, CCM’s action items should be to engage in the debate on these issues so that the public is aware of the liberal policy agenda being spewed out by these extremists. From a grassroots level, the CCM-CO Springs chapter has a unique opportunity to define the issues and provide the public with the correct information on each of these and many other items that the Left will attempt to distort.

It is regretful that the intense primary situation in the 5th Congressional District has spilled over with personal politics and emotions that are misdirected and not accurately communicated to you as CCM members. However intense the primary situation is, it should not take our eyes off the primary goal: to beat the liberals at their own game on their own turf by effectively organizing our activists and communicating conservative values in the public policy arena.
CCM CO Springs now has a unique opportunity to repair this fracture and build on a new foundation of agreed upon principles. With new leadership and a better sense of direction, I have no doubt in my mind that this chapter will only increase in activity, performance, and results. I encourage all of you to put this unfortunate, personal matter behind you and continue on the road of communicating our principles and making a difference in the public policy debate that surrounds the upcoming events and elections.

I believe we should have a CCM members-only meeting within the next week to discuss the internal organization of CCM-CO Springs and wanted to get some feedback from as many of you on this.

Thanks to all of you as committed conservatives, as I know in my heart we can do great things going forward with our organization.
If I have inadvertently missed any of the CCM-Springs members, you may forward this to them.
Sincerely,

Chris Perkins
Executive Director
Coalition for a Conservative Majority

1012 Pennsylvania Ave. SE Suite 300
Washington, DC 20003
202-543-3816
chris@ccmajority.org

Dan responds to Fisk's CCM resignation

The CCM-CS has agreed to the tenants under which the national organization was established. It is good that Kyle is passionate about putting together a head-to-head discussion between candidates. One question I would pose is why it was only the 5th CD race. We have a number of contentious races here in El Paso County that would be eligible for such a forum. None of these have been recommended.

I also know that Kyle is a very strong Jeff Crank supporter and I applaud him for that loyalty. However, I feel that it was inappropriate to use the proposed tactic and forum to promote Mr. Crank. As we have seen in previous “candidate forums,” they served to provide a platform for two candidates to levy unanswered questions and accusations as well as promote falsehoods against the candidate who was not in attendance. As we all know, just the utterance of a statement in a political campaign is to imply accuracy.

As the chairman of the Planning Committee for the Falcon Republican Club, we discussed having a series of candidate forums for the 5th CD, State House 15, and the District Attorney. In each of these races at least one of the candidates made it known that, for whatever reason, they would not be able to accept such an invitation. The Falcon Republican Club has the same obligation as the CCM-CS in that we cannot endorse or imply endorsement of any candidate before the primary.

After the primary, we will endorse and work for the primary winner. Of course, the CCM-CS cannot endorse any candidate at any time. As stated above, providing a platform for one or two candidates to levy charges, lies, or accusations against a non-participating candidate would imply that the organization is proffering a negative endorsement on one candidate. For this reason, the Falcon Republican Club has rejected the idea of holding any candidate forums before the primary. We are still considering holding candidate forums before the general election between primary winners of both parties.

I support CCM National in their decision concerning the proposed candidate forum for the 5th CD. I also believe that it would be appropriate for CCM-CS to host candidate forums for all races between the party candidates leading up to the general election.

Daniel C. Lanotte

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Partisan President Kyle Fisk resigns CCM

Kyle Fisk, widely viewed by a growing group of CCM members as "In the Tank for Crank" to such a degree that he would jeopardize the CCM goal of building a conservative majority by scheduling a divisive debate not wanted or agreed to by all campaigns in a Republican primary just to advance his guy Jeff Crank "a never before elected challenger" to current incumbent congressman Doug Lamborn, got their proof of Kyles priorities today.

From: Kyle Fisk <kyle.fisk@gmail.com>Date: Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:17 AM
Subject: OPEN LETTER - Kyle Fisk CCM ResignationTo: Kyle Fisk <kyle.fisk@gmail.com>

Attached and copied below. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce, quote from, or forward along to interested parties the contents of this email.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CONSERVATIVES OF THE 5th CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Re: Resignation of Kyle Fisk as President of the Coalition for a Conservative Majority, Colorado Springs ChapterMonday, August 4, 2008 10:00 PMAt this evening's membership meeting I submitted my resignation as President of Coalition for a Conservative Majority-Colorado Springs effective immediately. I firmly believed that an organization of this type had tremendous possibility. Due to campaign finance laws, limited resources, and a focus on electing candidates, political parties can only do so much to advance the conservative debate.

Third-party groups like CCM have an invaluable role in bringing today's key issues to the forefront of the public discourse.However, I will not stand idly by as this organization engages in partisan and biased politics. It is the right of the electorate in our community to be fully aware of what happens behind closed doors during this primary election season. CCM-National vetoed our plans to hold a "Conversation with the Candidates" event at our August membership meeting. They canceled our event because not all three candidates would confirm their participation in the event. Initially claiming that a 501c4 could not host this type of event, they retracted this position when confronted with the facts concerning 501c4 activities in Colorado.The position of CCM-National in this case is unconscionable. They claim that having a public forum with candidates in this primary would constitute a perception of support for Jeff Crank and Bentley Rayburn, the challengers in this race. Their reasoning is that Doug Lamborn has publicly stated his unwillingness to debate and therefore any open forum is thereby biased against him in favor of his opponents. This logic is terribly flawed. Doug Lamborn does not have the right to dictate anything to CCM-Colorado Springs. It is Congressman Lamborn's prerogative not to attend our event. However, it was equally our prerogative to hold an event and I am extremely disappointed that we were forbidden to hold any townhall meeting.Chris Perkins, the Executive Director of CCM in Washington, DC, expressly forbade our group from moving forward with our plans. CCM-National decided instead to protect the incumbent in this race and deny the voters a chance to have their questions answered.

By adopting this position, CCM-National placed the local chapter of CCM in an untenable position. By forcing us to cancel our plans once invitations had been sent to all three campaigns, canceling the event actually creates the perception that we are supporting the incumbent and shielding him from an open conversation with the voters, as well as denying his opponents the freedom to speak, simply because he declines to join them.Our State Chairman Bob Beauprez, along with a majority of the CCM-Colorado Springs officers, supported the effort to host a neutral, fair, balanced townhall meeting of the candidates to discuss the issues. Among our officers we have supporters of all three Republican candidates in the 5th CD. Our membership is composed of supporters from all three campaigns. This was not to be a partisan event. We are a community group that wanted to talk about the issues.To be forbidden by the national staff to proceed with these plans is preposterous. We would not have been violating any laws, we would not in any way have been compromising our 501c4 tax status, and we would not have been playing favorites. These rather ludicrous claims disguise what I can only assume is the deeper motivation of Tom DeLay and CCM-National to protect Doug Lamborn and deny his opponents the opportunity to be heard.CCM-Colorado Springs should be a place that welcomes open, respectful, and sincere dialogue about the issues. Under my administration, we did everything possible to accommodate Congressman Lamborn and his conditions for a public forum. In fact, we were prepared to cancel tonight's activities in lieu of a forum on Friday, August 8th, which Lamborn's campaign manager had requested. However, when pressed for a commitment, the Doug Lamborn campaign rapidly retreated and stated their intention not to attend any candidate townhall meting under any circumstance.Doug Lamborn has the right to remain silent, but his opponents should not be forced to live by that code.

Candidates who wish to speak at our events should be allowed to do so, regardless of whether the opponents accept our invitations to join them. Otherwise we renounce personal responsibility and freedom of opportunity, pillars without which our republic cannot stand.Tom DeLay and CCM-National is, in my opinion, protecting Doug Lamborn. CCM-Colorado Springs, a supposedly neutral third-party group, has crossed a very dangerous line. I can not remain part of an organization that elevates the preferences of any candidate or elected official above the good of our local chapter. Therefore, I must tender my resignation.I look forward to serving with conservative activists throughout our community on these critical issues through other venues and organizations.

Respectfully,Kyle FiskFormer President of CCM-Colorado Springs

Sunday, July 27, 2008

RCF calls for party chairman's resignation

A message to all El Paso County Republicans: Garcia must go.

July 26th 2008

The Republican Club of Falcon is shocked and dismayed that our Republican County Chairman, Greg Garcia has cast aside his pledged commitment to remain neutral during primary election contests and has thus violated our party by-laws.

Garcia's editorial criticizes Dan May who is engaged in a primary contest with John Newsome for District Attorney. It is unprecedented for a county party chairman to take sides during primary elections. He also ignores the false statements repeatedly told by Jeff Crank about Congressman Doug Lamborn and Bentley Rayburn and criticizes Lamborn and Rayburn for pointing out Cranks false statements.

Republicans should consider that Garcia's proclaimed code of fair campaigning was never approved by the membership, and is a smoke screen for political favoritism. Garcia is not acting objectively as he would have us believe. During the 2006 campaign, Garcia was a leader in the Jeff Crank campaign for Congress. His Executive Director, Nathan Fisk, who distributed the editorial, publicly supported Crank during the 2006 primary and refused to support the Republican nominee, Doug Lamborn, after the primary. Garcia and Fisk are biased and are using rose colored glasses when viewing Crank's false statements.

Garcia's behavior is dividing our county party and negatively impacting our ability to unify and help Bob Schaffer and John McCain win in November.

Therefore, the Republican Club of Falcon calls for the resignation of Greg Garcia for violating Bylaw 2.03 which absolutely forbids an officer of the county party from supporting or opposing any candidate in a contested primary.

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Enter OSHA - By Dan Lanotte

In this election year, there is a lot of discussion on the economy, the environment, the terrorist threat, the oil/price crisis, entitlements, and a myriad of other “hot buttons.” What I hear precious little about is what is really great about our country; what is really great about our people.

When we look back on the accomplishments that have come out of the USA we cannot help but marvel at the ingenuity and perseverance of American entrepreneurship. However, when we look back at the golden age of the Industrial Revolution, one thing that stands out as different from today is the lack of government regulation and taxation.

Back when Carnegie, Rockefeller, and the other industrial titans got started they were not hampered with such onerous regulations as Sarbanes Oxley. They were not taxed to the point that exploration and experimentation were activities that could only be undertaken after all of the government regulations and accounting had been satisfied. That was a day when the entrepreneur was able to let his ideas soar.

Today, the entrepreneur is buried under a mountain of regulation and is often taxed out of existence. If this intrepid entrepreneur is foolish enough to take on five or more employees, he comes under the laser beam of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Here is a true story. I know a man who is the safety engineer for a company that cleans meat packing plants. One of the safety requirements of the workers is that when they are working over a certain height off the floor they must wear a safety harness to arrest their fall in case of a mishap.

This requirement was/is well briefed and enforced for all employees. During one shift a few years ago, an employee neglected this rule and fell off a catwalk and tragically died. This happened several hundred miles from my friend’s office. My friend was not at the site of the mishap when it happened. Enter OSHA. The OSHA inspector wanted the US Attorney to prosecute my friend for murder because the worker neglected to fulfill his responsibility to protect his own life. Fortunately, the US Attorney did not deem it a credible case and did not prosecute.

This is only one example of the crushing bureaucracy that the federal government has placed on us. There are such examples as declaring a farmer’s field unworkable because a mouse lives there or a forest cannot be logged because an owl has taken up residence ten miles away. The worst case for the United States is banning oil exploitation in that massive wasteland called ANWR. If you have seen photos of this barren frozen desert you would be as aghast as I am.
Our current Democrat-controlled Congress is crushing the very livelihood out of our country.

Please do not mistake my ire as to be aimed only at Democrats. There are plenty of Republicans out there who are complicit in this crush. We are at a point where we are going to finish sliding all the way down that slippery slope into a totally socialistic society where the government controls every facet of our lives, or we are going to take it back and re-take our position as the world leader in innovation and entrepreneurship.

It is time we stop living with our hands out for our daily pittance and take responsibility for our own actions and living. It is time for the federal government to discontinue its evolvement into what Lenin made of Russia.

It is time to return to the ideals of conservation of the US Constitution.

As always, I welcome your questions/discussion.

Dan

Sunday, June 29, 2008

There oughta be a Law - Yes on 46 !

by: NEWSMAN

Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial
STATE RACISM DOESN'T WORK - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ON THE ROPES

Remove all the political pettifoggery, obfuscation and claptrap, and one thing becomes clear: decisions based on race and gender are racist and sexist. Period.

That's why a recent poll regarding the November ballot issue that would end racial and gender preferences by the state indicates the measure will win by a landslide.

A Qunnipiac University/Washington Post/Wall Street Journal poll surveyed 1,300 likely Colorado voters and found that 65 percent support the proposed state constitutional amendment to end preferences. Only 15 percent plan to vote against it. For opponents to the measure, the odds are almost insurmountable.

The initiative will appear on the ballot as Amendment 46. If approved, the amendment would read: "The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any group or individual on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public contracting, or public education."

The overwhelming support of the measure perplexes some academics and political pundits. Rather than accept the fact that Coloradans object to racism and sexism, some have decided that supporters of the measure are simply confused. They have argued that people who signed the petition, which contained a few simple words, were misled.

The Rocky Mountain News quoted Colorado State University political science professor John Straayer explaining that voters don't know a lot about the amendment, so they tend to "automatically say, 'Oh, you don't want to have preferences. Fair is fair, equal is equal' ... When people focus on it a little more, look at the ads, more people will become cognizant of why those preferences were put in in the first place."

In other words, they might come to a conclusion other than "fair is fair, equal is equal." They might come to a conclusion that "fair is fair," but sometimes an unfair policy unfairly benefits me. Or they might conclude that "equal is equal," and sometimes unequal benefits me.
The instinctive reaction - the one in which Coloradans are repulsed by the idea of race or gender-based preference by the state - is the moral and intelligent reaction.

Racism is the simple act of basing behaviors and words on race; sexism is the act of basing behaviors and words on sex. An enlightened society bases behaviors and words on more relevant considerations, such as intelligence, character, experience, education and achievement. Race and gender don't enter the equation.

When the state bases college admission - or hiring decisions, or anything else - on skin color and sex, the state engages in racism and sexism. It really is that simple.

When racism and sexism somehow become justified, as people rationalize them with circumstances and needs and the desire to counter historical bias, it doesn't change the basic fact that's apparent when people read the simple wording of the proposed amendment. Their reaction: racism and sexism are wrong.

Racial and ethnic minorities don't need favorable treatment, as if they're somehow less capable than others. Women don't need favorable treatment to compete with men. On merit alone they will reverse conventions and ignorant prejudicial practices of the past. Racism and sexism have always been wrong. They cannot be made right by counter efforts at racism and sexism on the part of the state.

Colorado voters are on the verge of institutionalizing genuine civil rights, with an amendment that forbids state officials from basing decisions on sex and race. They support it instinctively and overwhelmingly.

That's because racism and sexism have no place in this modern world. They're the remnants of a bygone era, when good ol' boy networks, cliques and conformity could survive in markets limited by primitive communication, low-end technology and barriers to entry that no longer exist
In today's highly technical, well-connected, decentralized and intelligent markets, only merit, innovation, intellect and prosperity compete.

Today, nobody can afford decisions based on gender or race. That's why Coloradans instinctively cringe at the thought of state decisions based on gender and race - decisions that are sexist and racist.

There oughta be a law, and it looks like there will be one soon.

http://www.gazette.com/opinion/ropes_37745___article.html/state_action.html

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Crank-Rayburn Poll = Lamborn up by 20+ %

by: NEWSMAN


Controversial Crank and Rayburn Poll gives Lamborn a 20 point lead over his opponents.


According to the June 20 issue of the Colorado Statesman, Leslie Jorgensen reports that the controversial Crank/Rayburn poll of 525 republican voters found that incumbent congressman Doug Lamborn has a 20 point lead over his closest opponent.


"The poll consisted of more than 30 questions. In the first round, before respondents heard information about the candidates, 51 percent of the voters said they intended to vote for Lamborn. Of the remaining 49 percent, 27 percent favored Crank, 13 percent favored Rayburn, and 9 percent remained undecided."


"On positive name recognition, Lamborn received a 68 percent, Crank 46 percent, and Rayburn 33 percent. The poll revealed that Rayburn and Crank have to overcome a lack of name recognition. About 28 percent of the polled respondents said they did not recognize Crank's name; 37 percent had never heard of Rayburn."


Even after some information of questionable objectivity was provided about franked mail and earmarks, Lamborn was still 20 points in the lead.


"When respondents were asked again whom they would vote for, Lamborn's support slipped to 46 percent. Of the remaining 54 percent, 26 percent said they would vote for Crank, 15 percent for Rayburn and 13 percent remained undecided."

Friday, June 20, 2008

Promoting play could stop liberals moving here

On June 17 The Gazette had an editorial criticizing the anti-Colorado Springs play, "This Beautiful City," in which the Springs is depicted as populated by religious zealots who want to conquer the world.

This is an unbelievable opportunity for the city.

Think of the liberals we can stop from moving here.

We should find some way to subsidize this play.

We should have a Web site with a cowboy chewing on a cigar and packing a .45 on his hip.

The caption could say: Welcome to Colorado Springs; we hang hoss thieves. Onward Christian soldiers.

Dennis Mercadal, Colorado Springs

http://www.gazette.com/opinion/don_37495___article.html/letters_families.html

Monday, June 16, 2008

Modern-day Paul Revere sounds alarm on spending

OPINION

JOHN STOSSEL Syndicated columnist

Congress is spending us into a hole. We hear about the cost of earmarks and the Iraq war. But what about “entitlements”? That’s the government’s ironic term for programs that transfer money from people who earned it to people who didn’t.

Entitlement? How can you be entitled to someone else’s money?

To finance “entitlement” programs, the government threatens force against the taxpayers who provide the money.
Why are people who favor compulsion called humanitarians, while those who favor freedom are stigmatized as greedy? But I digress.

Today’s big problem with entitlements is that their growth will soon eat everything in the federal budget. Last month, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed the growth of government spending and deficits for Rep. Paul Ryan, R.-Wis., ranking member of the Budget Committee. The report estimated that spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which in 2007 represented about 8 percent of GDP, would balloon to 14.5 percent in 2030 and 25.7 percent in 2082. There is no way that can fly.

If you add in all other spending, including interest on the debt, federal spending under the CBO’s scenario would eat up an astounding 75.4 percent of GDP in 2084. If taxes don’t keep pace, the CBO says the “additional spending will eventually cause future budget deficits to become unsustainable . . . .” And if taxes were to keep pace? The CBO says, “[T]ax rates would have to more than double.” One alternative to raising taxes would be to cut other spending. But at current spendinggrowth rates for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, all other spending would have to be reduced to zero in 2045. How likely is that?

Ryan is understandably alarmed. In the May 21 Wall Street Journal, he wrote about a bill he’s proposing that would: give individuals tax credits with which to buy their own health insurance in a competitive national marketplace, let the states have flexibility in running Medicaid, give workers under 55 money to buy insurance rather than rely on Medicare when they retire, permit younger workers to invest up to a third of their Social Security taxes in private accounts, increase the retirement age and temper the growth in Social Security benefits.

I don’t know if that would be enough. What we really need is a top-to-bottom freeing of the economy, including the health care industry, and massive cuts in government both spending and taxes. This would leave us wealthy enough to take care of ourselves, with private charity assisting those who can’t manage. But Ryan’s heart is in the right place. At least he’s trying to get the public and his colleagues to focus on what’s important. He told me he hopes to play the role of “Paul Revere, sounding the alarm about the government’s unsustainable fiscal path.” Sadly, his proposal has been largely ignored.

The Wall Street Journal didn’t even publish any letters about it. At least Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle said, “I am encouraged by Congressman Ryan’s leadership in his efforts to address this serious problem that continues to swallow the budget and swamp our economy.” And the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget agreed: “It shows tremendous courage and leadership on Congressman Ryan’s part that he is willing to lay out a comprehensive and detailed plan.”

Pleasantly surprising is the lefty home-state Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s reaction, praising Ryan for “putting a plan forward” while the presidential candidates are “skirting the issue.” But for the most part, Ryan’s plan is being ignored. That’s too bad, because this budget problem is the big one.

The longer we wait to address it, the uglier it gets.

Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News’ “20/20” and the author of “Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know is Wrong.”
The Republican Club of Falcon presents member and visitors opinions and commentary. The views expressed are solely those of the author and are not necessarily the views of the RCF or its entire membership.