Seeking out the wise, good and honest

Common Sense or Class Warfare

2012-01-26T08:42:00.000-07:00

Obama said yesterday, "Now I hear folks running around calling this class warfare. This is not class warfare, let me tell you something. Asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as a secretary, that is just common sense. That is common sense."

Here is a video that rebutts this argument. Dan Mitchell listed 5 reasons of "Why Class-Warfare Taxes are Misguided". Here they are and my summary of them.

1. "Higher Tax rates discourage productive behavior." When you tax something you less of it. When you subsidize something you get more of it. Do we want to tax investments? That will shrink the amount of available money that can be invested in starting and expanding businesses. Investment creates jobs.
2. "High tax rates generate Laffer Curve Responses" People making over 200K a year paid 5 times more tax in 1988 under a lower tax rate than in 1980. In 2008, Obama was questioned on the rationality of raising capital gains tax when it was demonstrated that the government collected less money with it. Obama responded, "I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness"
3. "Higher tax rates on the rich don't help the poor. Class-Warfare types mistakenly assume the economy is a fixed pie... The best way to help the poo is faster growth. The chart shows that per Capita GDP has increased dramatically over time"
4. "High tax rates reduce competitiveness. Globalization increases the reward for good policy, and also increases the penalty for bad policy. Simply stated, it is now increasingly easy for labor and capital to cross national borders."
5. "Higher tax rates on the rich lead to higher tax rates on everybody." In 1913, when federal income tax started, the top tax rate was 7% applied to the top 1% of all citizens. Now that top rate is much higher but so are the rates for everyone earning less.

One of Obama's arguments on raising the capital gains tax is that we would go back to the same rate as we had under Bill Clinton and we would gain the same kind of sucess in the economy. I would argue that our failure in the last decade had more to do with the repeal of Glass-Steagall and its consequences and other Crony-Capitalism trends over the last 20 years.

Here are a couple of articles that led me to this video.
- The Cato Institute Responds to President Obama's State-of-the-Union Address
- Warren Buffett’s Fiscal Innumeracy

-

Martin Luther King Jr.

2012-01-16T10:09:00.000-07:00

This starts at 12:12 where the speech of Martin Luther King Jr. turns from what is to the future and what might be.

Some of my favorite quotes.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

"And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!""

Why we need Glass-Steagall

2011-12-01T01:00:00.000-07:00

"It is well enough that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system for, if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." Henry Ford

Before a month ago I did not know what the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was. Through my friend Mark Butler, I have come to understand a bit.

This is the shortest summary I could find explaining what the Glass-Steagall act is and why we need it back. Start at 0:52 for the shortest explanation.

Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 explained by Max Keiser and William Black and Webster Tarpley
"a summary of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 taken from the movie Fall of the Republic http://www.falloftherepublic.com released on October 21st 2009"

This video documents who the people were who supported and passed the law that repealed Glass-Steagall.

Who repealed the Glass-Steagall Act?
"The Glass Steagall Act President Roosevelt signed into law was repealed. See who swept aside the banking firewall protections on the 12th of November 1999"

My friend Mark Butler describes what fractional reserve banking is and why it is so dangerous to allow regular banks to do it.

First of all, there are two reserve ratios that are often confused. One is what percentage of deposits are not allowed to be embezzled. The other is how much capital (equity) is required for a given amount of loans.

The "fractional reserve" in FRB refers to the former ratio, "capital reserves" refer to the latter. The Austrian school of economics generally holds that lending out deposits is a form of embezzlement that distorts the economy, among other serious problems.

But it is perfectly legitimate for a bank to lend out money that investors lend to it, by purchasing bonds from the bank, for example. What the capital reserve says is that for every X dollars in loans a certain percentage must be backed by bank equity (i.e. the capital of the owner / stock holders), who take the first hit if anything goes wrong.

Higher capital reserves mean the bank is less likely to fail, less risky, and less profitable in the short run. An increase in required capital reserves is called "deleveraging", and the short term effect is a decrease in the amount of money a bank can lend out _unless_ they raise more capital (i.e. by selling stock).

Every bank however, tries to be as unstable as possible, because they are more profitable that way. That is why Lehman Brothers was leveraged thirty to one. That is all fine and good as long as they are willing to collapse and wipe out all stock holder equity, and a good percentage of the value of outstanding bonds whenever the wind shifts direction, without demanding a bailout and threatening dire consequences if they do not get one.

So here with the Basel Accords, the idea is to standardize the required capital ratios across countries so that a bank in one country isn't radically more profitable than another country simply because they are allowed to run with a far smaller safety margin.

Now personally, provided that we made embezzling deposits illegal, I don't think we need capital reserve requirements at all. If a bank wants to live on the edge, let them, as long as deposits are protected, and no one gets a handout. Tick tick tick boom every couple of decades or so.

From what I can tell, the repeal of Glass-Steagall is a major contributor to our Great Recession. Robert Kuttner said this on Oct 2, 2007.

A second parallel is what today we would call securitization of credit. Some people think this is a recent innovation, but in fact it was the core technique that made possible the dangerous practices of the 1920. Banks would originate and repackage highly speculative loans, market them as securities through their retail networks, using the prestigious brand name of the bank -- e.g. Morgan or Chase -- as a proxy for the soundness of the security. It was this practice, and the ensuing collapse when so much of the paper went bad, that led Congress to enact the Glass-Steagall Act, requiring bankers to decide either to be commercial banks -- part of the monetary system, closely supervised and subject to reserve requirements, given deposit insurance, and access to the Fed's discount window; or investment banks that were not government guaranteed, but that were soon subjected to an extensive disclosure regime under the SEC.

We must put the protections of Glass-Steagall back into place to prevent more busts like we have now and had in the 1929.

Against Political Extremes

2011-11-17T08:15:00.001-07:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-republican-partys-mitt-romney-problem/2011/08/25/gIQAKRsGCN_blog.html

Wow! This is about the most plain speaking article I have read about the nomination race. I agree with its analysis.

"parties no longer compete to win elections by giving voters the policies voters want. Rather, as coalitions of intense policy demanders, they have their own agendas and aim to get voters to go along."
...
"political parties are basically groups of people with intense policy preferences who are trying to figure out how much they can get away with. But you can’t get away with anything if you don’t hold office. So the basic work of political parties is figuring out precisely how much of their agenda they need to sacrifice on the altar of electability"
...
“Voter inattentiveness creates the opportunity for intense minorities to pursue their narrow goals,” the authors write. “But it also creates uncertainty about just what it takes to win an election. Parties work hard to figure out ways to increase the chance that voters will respond positively to them, but basic uncertainty about how the inattentive majority will vote is a persistent feature of electoral politics.”
...
"With Romney, Republicans worry that they will cede too much to voter preferences."
...
"So the Republican Party is left with candidates who are too ideological to be elected and a front-runner who isn’t ideological enough to be trusted. Making matters worse, voters are likely to pay particularly close attention to this election. With an economy this bad, there’s no chance that they’ll tune out, as they did in 2000. Then, peace and prosperity lulled the electorate into complacency, and George W. Bush was able to present himself as not all that different from Al Gore. The Republican Party got away with quite a lot in ideology that year without sacrificing electability. This year, they can’t."

These points bring out exactly why I am so fired up about Romney. Both parties really are made up of a coalition of groups that really believe in their issues. If they could, they would pick their champion of their cause to become President.

This election in particular is unusual because of the economic trouble we are in. We have to nominate someone that will have broad appeal to independent voters because it is likely there will be more voters than usual. There is some response to what some feel like extremism of the tea party. There are also indications that a ham sandwich could beat Obama, so we should elect as "conservative" a candidate as we can.

I am against extremes in the issues I am not as passionate about. I am sure that goes for everyone. I really want to get our financial house in order. We cannot mortgage out future on our grandchildren's backs. To me, this is an overriding issue. So when I hear others get passionate about their issue, I often think, "Are you going to sacrifice us getting a Presidency on this point?"

They probably think the same way. The point is that many more people are going to be paying attention this cycle than normal. On both sides and in the middle. I see that as a good thing. I would that more people be involved that normally are. The sane middle.

I see Romney as a pragmatic conservative. Pragmatic because he recognizes what is doable and what is not. He does not waste his time pontificating on a issue he know he won't win politically. He was a governor of a very blue state and that has given him good experience.

I see him as conservative mostly in the area I care about most, finance. He knows how to save troubled companies. He knows sound budgeting principles.

How conservative he is in other areas I am not as sure. To be honest I don't care as much. Maybe I see the reality that only so much change can happen at once. That being true, I would rather spend our political capital getting our spending and taxing right. Save the other political battles for another day.

Repealing ObamaCare with Congressman Paul Ryan

2011-10-14T08:30:00.000-07:00

This is a great interview of Paul Ryan by Peter Robinson of Uncommon Knowledge on Oct 3, 2011

Some quotes and notes.

Paul Ryan "Either we give the country a choice of two futures or we just go down the path we are on. I feel we have a moral obligation. Whether this is going to work politically or not, it doesn’t really matter. All I want to know is that… I did everything I can to stop this country from going off a cliff."

He talks about the difference a defined contribution plan would have rather than the defined benefit plan we currently have.

Peter Robinson "So your hope is generational, for seven decades, Americans have been taught to rely on Federal Government, first for old age pensions, then for health now for food stamps. Your hope is that by changing these programs, not eliminating them, not living up to Milton Friedman's ideal of wiping out seven decades of legislation. But by changing them you can begin instucting new generations in individual liberty" (Start time 34:53)

In answer to how do you keep getting elected in a democratic district, Paul Ryan said:

I don't say anything different at home than what I am saying to you right here. This is exactly who I am. That's the key. Don't try to be somebody you're not. You know if you don't get elected, you don't get elected. No big deal. If you want to be good at this job you have to be willing to lose the job.

I was at a stop and go gassing up the other day... I had a guy come up to me and said, "You know what, I don't always agree with everything you do, but I can tell you're trying and you're sincere and that's what matters to me"

What I believe is that people want conviction in politicians. They want people who are not just giving them vague platitudes. They want somebody trying to tackle these problems. People just know in their guts that we are going off the rails. This country is in deep trouble. ... They want people who are standing up and doing something about it. (Start time 36:34)

How the election needs to be. "We have to win an affirming election where the country give us the authority and the obligation to do this. If we don't, if we go into this election with just a personality contest, muddling the differences, just beating each other up, then its going to be ugly afterwards, no matter who wins."

Harmony in Politics

2011-09-09T01:01:00.000-07:00

As I was going to sleep to some classical music, my mind went to a statement Newt Gingrich made in the debates last night, "I'm Not Interested In Your Effort To Get Republicans Fighting Each Other". There were images of the Republican candidates very different voices yet they were in harmony. United in their desire to get those who want to work back to work. To have the idle capital invested. Like the manure Dolly Levi (see comment below) would call it, spread the capital out to all its investments to grow new things.

I sure hope that we can stick together with those that agree with us 80% of the time. That we focus on what will bring the greatest good and not divide ourselves needlessly.

Natural Law

2011-08-24T08:09:00.002-07:00

In a Facebook group I belong to, someone became frustrated at the desire of some to legislate morality. With all the back and forth, I became frustrated at how we rip each other to shreds when we agree with each other 80% of the time.

As I thought about what common ground I could find, I thought of Natural Law. I asked the group.

Do you all believe in natural law? A natural law is authoritative over all human beings. To reject it is to be evil.
Here is the shortest summary I could find about it. It details the other fundamentals of natural law. Here is a video that describes it well.

The question, "What is natural law?" kept coming to my mind. I like the way James A. Donald said it.

Natural law is a method, not a code. One does not reason from words but from facts. The nearest thing to a written code of natural law is the vast body of natural law precedent. But a precedent only applies to similar cases, and is thus rooted in the particular time and circumstances of the particular case, whereas natural law is universal, applying to all free men at all times and all places.

I also like how he disconnects it from questions about God.

“Ius Naturale” is the law applicable to men in a state of nature. It precedes religions and kings both in time and in authority. “Ius Naturale” does not derive directly from the will of God. As Hugo Grotius pointed out in the early seventeenth century, even if there was no God, or if God was unreasonable or evil, natural law would still have moral force, and men would still spontaneously back it with physical force.

For the purpose of government and public policy, I think that it is better to describe the higher authority we appeal to as Natural Law rather than God. There is no need to polarize people who do not believe in God from those that do not.

Public Virtue

2011-04-20T10:06:00.000-07:00

It seems that most of my political discussions at work end on "people are selfish and there is no solution". That there will always be those leeching off those who produce. There will always be those who hoard the results of good fortune and hard work.

There is a solution. It is to revive public virtue. In the early days of our country there was debate whether a representative government could survive. Whether the people we good enough collectively to run themselves responsibly. In Mormon terms I would call this, "try the virtue of the word of God".

And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just—yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them—therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virtue of the word of God. Alma 31:5

In general conference, Lynn Robbins explained this principle in contrasting the difference between being or becoming and merely doing.

Alma discovered this same principle, that “the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just—yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword” (Alma 31:5; emphasis added). Why? Because the sword focused only on punishing behavior—or do—while preaching the word changed people’s very nature—who they were or could become.

One group in the Book of Mormon hunted the most evil part of their community. They also preached the word of God to them. They were successful. The pilgrims came to the New World. Pioneers went west. They left to build a virtuous society. We have no immediate land to escape to. We are all we've got.

I believe that there still is virtue in the public generally. We are children of God. As we teach and encourage that spark of light in each of us, hearts will change.

Public virtue is the collection of every private virtue. Build up where I have influence. Start where I have the most effect, myself. Then to my family and friends and then community and country. As we inspire the godly in each other, solutions will grow.

The Deficit Problem: Too Big To Solve, Too Important To Fail

2011-04-19T13:36:00.000-07:00

That the title of this Institutional Investor article. (found from Clark Judge)

It’s probably still well within the means of the United States to bring its soaring public debt under control and steer itself back to the path of fiscal stability. That solution, however, would require a massive public effort and shared sacrifice, the sort that philosopher William James might have called the “moral equivalent of war.”

It also would require the once-or-twice in a century level of leadership that has steered the country through major crises in the past.

The financial markets muted reaction to President Obama’s deficit reduction speech on Wednesday suggests such leadership is yet to emerge.

Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa are moving to stop using US currency when issuing grants and credits to each other.

Standard & Poor said "there's a 1-in-3 chance that it could downgrade the U.S. top credit rating within two years. Markets were down sharply on the news"

We have to get our budget in order. Time is running out.

Rand Paul Responds to Obama on Libya

2011-03-29T01:50:00.000-07:00

Senator Rand Paul responds to the explanation of Barack Obama on why we are bombing Libya. I heard it from a Facebook post from Young Americans for Liberty. Here are the quotes that moved me to post

We are already in two wars that we are not paying for. We are waging war across the middle east on a credit card; one who's limit is rapidly approaching.
...
What if helping Libya's interest hurts American interests? What if we are sending our military to where we might actually be helping the same terrorists we fight in other countries?

Bold Yet Modest Budget Reform

2011-03-10T09:50:00.000-07:00

I learned about this editorial of Scott Walker from Hugh Hewitt. I like what Hugh says, "It would be interesting to hear Harry Reid answer the question why he thinks what has happened to Greece and Ireland and is now happening to Spain cannot happen to the U.S."

The Choice of Two Futures

2011-03-10T09:44:00.001-07:00

Here 1 is a slide show from Paul Ryan. He shows why it is so important to balance our budget.

Learning to Read

2011-02-14T17:55:00.002-07:00

Here are a few videos and other resources to learn to read.

Between the Lions

The 1970s Electric Company

"The free exercise of religion is the paramount civil liberty"

2011-02-08T08:55:00.001-07:00

On Friday, Dallin H. Oaks gave a speech at Chapman University School of Law. Later Hugh Hewitt interviewed him. I have listened to the interview and found several things of note.

Well, the free exercise of religion is the paramount civil liberty in terms of priority and placement in the United States Constitution. And religion has always been in a sanctuary in the sense that it had a pedestal higher than other legal rights. And in Employment Division V. Smith, the United States Supreme Court dragged religion out of the sanctuary, and said you’re in effect, you don’t have any more free speech rights than people generally. You don’t have the right to override state laws any more than any other person does. And it just deemphasized religion very significantly.

The founders said that that Constitution presupposed a moral and religious people, and it would be inadequate to the government of any other.

HH: ... you quote Adams. And very early in this speech, John Adams wrote, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for our moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government than any other.” Then you go on to say, and I’m quoting you now, Elder Oaks, “I submit that religious values and political realities are so interlinked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of religion in our public life without seriously jeopardizing our freedom.” Do you believe for a moment that elite opinion makers will even take that argument seriously?

DO: No, I don’t believe elite opinion makers will take that argument seriously, but I’m trying to speak over their elevated heads to the people of the United States. And I think there are a lot of great people out there who’ll take that seriously. And some of them are affiliated Protestants, some Catholics, some Mormons, some Muslims, and a lot of people that aren’t affiliates with any religion, but believe down in their hearts that there’s such a thing as right and wrong, and they’re going to take it seriously.

I think that there is a broad consensus among very many that religious freedom and practice increases our freedoms. I have heard the word avarice before but have never gotten a good hold of what it means. Dictionary.com says it it "Extreme greed for wealth or material gain."

There is so much more in the interview. I have not yet listened to his address to the law school. I am including a shorter video of a question and answer session on the topic of religious freedom. Here is a transcription.

This caught my attention,

Another thing that concerns me about the diminished influence of religion in our society is the increasing volume of voices that say that religion has no place in the public square. In other words, in the halls of legislative chambers, in the courtrooms, in public debates, a religious opinion, or the advocacy of a religious leader, has no place. It’s somehow a violation of the separation of church and state. By the way, separation of church and state is a concept that has gotten up outside the four corners of the Constitution. The Constitution said there will be no establishment of religion, meaning no official state religion. It does not say that church and state should be separated by a wall impregnable, to use a term used in a United States Supreme Court decision some years ago. [emphasis is mine]

And an important distinction between the freedom of worship and freedom of religion.

I think we’re seeing erosion when some public figures, for instance, refer to freedom of worship rather than freedom of religion. Now let’s look at that for a moment. Freedom of worship is a far narrower concept than freedom of religion because freedom of religion includes the freedom to act upon one’s religious beliefs, whereas freedom of worship tends to indicate that religion is confined within the church or synagogue, if you choose to go there.

You can find the transcription and free audio for the interview here . The newroom at lds.org noted his talk to the school and provides a video and transcription of it. I have converted the video to mp3.

What Happened to 15 Million US Jobs?

2011-01-24T07:55:00.000-07:00

A friend sent me this article from NationalJournal.com. It opens with this sub title "Taming unemployment starts with solving the mystery of the jobs that were supposed to have been created in the past 10 years but weren’t."

I read quickly looking for why these new jobs were not created. The answer was we do not know, "Before we can fix our jobs machine, we must figure out what broke it. As several economists noted, anyone who says they’ve solved the problem is lying." Well count me in for finding out why.

Following are a couple quotes trying to find out why

Perhaps, some economists theorize, the United States isn’t creating innovative jobs because its workforce isn’t up to the challenge. For probably the first time in history, our young adults are no better educated than their parents. Nearly all our international rivals, in developed and developing economies alike, continue to make generational leaps in college graduation. Brainpower is still our comparative advantage with the rest of the world, but the advantage is shrinking.

“It is the best educated and those with the highest skills that derive the most benefits from a globalizing economy,” says Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a research fellow at the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics who studies global labor markets. “As the U.S. workforce becomes relatively less skill-intensive vis-à-vis the entire world, the broader benefits of the global economy, both in terms of job creation (and national well-being), are going to decline.”

A second quote:

Some free-market economists say that we could encourage more domestic investment by cutting corporate tax rates, although it’s fair to note that the jobs breakdown of the 2000s coincided with hefty tax cuts under President Bush. Still, liberal and free-market analysts alike have argued for a sweeping reform of America’s corporate tax code—one that would reduce rates while eliminating many deductions and provisions that give companies incentives to spend their global profits outside the United States. More narrowly, groups such as the Association for Financial Professionals have urged Congress to lower America’s tax rates on repatriated income, to levels closer to international competitors.

I am not sure why this is happening. It does fit in with my general malaise feeling I have had for quite a few years about the US economy. In particular, I look at the society I live in and what they produce or the services they provide. Are the things they are employed at something of intrinsic value or have we been riding a wave produced by giants before us?

I think of the space program, the marvels in manufacturing, in communication. What is my generation, what am I doing to contribute to the real value of the goods and services I am providing?

Perhaps the advances in manufacturing, transportation and communication is leveling the playing field of the earth. Those in much poorer places are much more hungry to work hard and get educated. Perhaps the leveling is allowing them access to opportunities to gain the necessities and even niceties of life.

I will continue to watch this and recommend my children and anyone else to not be satisfied just because they are at the top of their class. There may be a much bigger pool of of employees and entrepreneurs to compete with. I am confident that as we all (the whole globe) work hard and work smart there is an abundance of livelihoods that will be earned.

Will the laws of God will be suspended?

2011-01-22T08:15:00.002-07:00

I just read Dependence Day By Mark Steyn from a link from Hugh Hewitt. The first thing that caught my attention is what we said about our debt.

Within a decade, the United States will be spending more of the federal budget on its interest payments than on its military.

According to the cbo’s 2010 long-term budget outlook, by 2020 the U.S. government will be paying between 15 and 20 percent of its revenues in debt interest—whereas defense spending will be down to between 14 and 16 percent. America will be spending more on debt interest than China, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, India, Italy, South Korea, Brazil, Canada, Australia, Spain, Turkey, and Israel spend on their militaries combined. The superpower will have advanced from a nation of aircraft carriers to a nation of debt carriers.

The tone of the article does not get better after this.

One-fifth of British children are raised in homes in which no adult works. Just under 900,000 people have been off sick for over a decade, claiming “sick benefits,” week in, week out, for ten years and counting. “Indolence,” as Machiavelli understood, is the greatest enemy of a free society, but rarely has any state embraced this oldest temptation as literally as Britain.

He concludes with a dire prediction.

Without serious course correction, we will see the end of the Anglo-American era, and the eclipse of the powers that built the modern world. Even as America’s spendaholic government outspends not only America’s ability to pay for itself but, by some measures, the world’s; even as it follows Britain into the dank pit of transgenerational dependency, a failed education system, and unsustainable entitlements; even as it makes less and less and mortgages its future to its rivals for cheap Chinese trinkets, most Americans assume that simply because they’re American they will be insulated from the consequences.

...

Do you think the laws of God will be suspended in favor of America because you were born in it? Great convulsions lie ahead, and at the end of it we may be in a post-Anglosphere world.

This article brought to mind something I read a month ago, Top Test Scores From Shanghai Stun Educators

“Fifty years later, our generation’s Sputnik moment is back,” Mr. Obama said. With billions of people in India and China “suddenly plugged into the world economy,” he said, nations with the most educated workers will prevail. “As it stands right now,” he said, “America is in danger of falling behind.”

If Shanghai is a showcase of Chinese educational progress, America’s showcase would be Massachusetts, which has routinely scored higher than all other states on America’s main federal math test in recent years.

But in a 2007 study that correlated the results of that test with the results of an international math exam, Massachusetts students scored behind Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. Shanghai did not participate in the test.

We are being surpassed by countries with the will and work ethic to succeed in math and science. Is it so important that America be the best at everything? No. What concerns me is that we are selling ourselves into slavery. What I want is a world of independent, hard working, free people. Free to pursue happiness unchained by debt. Free to achieve great heights, free to help those in less fortunate circumstances to rise up and become self sufficient. What we need is a revolution in commitment and work.

When We Left Earth

2011-01-19T00:01:00.001-07:00

My wife and I just finished When We Left Earth: The NASA Missions on Netflix. What a history lesson! It was inspiring. I haven't paid that much attention to what we have planned for future manned spaceflight. It looks like we changed our direction recently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_program#Retirement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Constellation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Constellation#Debates_about_program

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11518049

Here is a link to the Netflix page for the shows. You will have to be logged in for it to work

The Threatened Demise of Religion in the Public Square

2010-08-05T13:05:00.000-07:00

"from where I sit, the greatest challenge faced by the [LDS] Church is the challenge to religious liberty that is growing worldwide." The Threatened Demise of Religion in the Public Square. Elder Lance B. Wickman, at J. Reuben Clark Law Society on 11 February 2010.

Limits of Federal Government Power

2010-08-05T10:18:00.002-07:00

What are the limits to the powers of the Federal Government? In this clip, Pete Stark, House Representative from California's 13th district, says that it can do most anything in this country.

Thanks to DocMuscles for letting me know.

Proposition 100 Passes

2010-05-19T00:01:00.002-07:00

Proposition 100 Passes

My first reaction was WOW. I could not believe that it passed by such a large margin. I kept going back and forth over this. I do believe that education can be a great equalizer. Equalizing opportunity for the rising generation.

I did vote no because I truly felt like it was best. I do believe that reform can cause more dollars to be spent in the classroom. I feel like we were going in the direction of bankrupt California. Not that this was going to be the last straw but that it was one of a thousand cuts to drain us financially.

Anyway, I accept what the voters have chosen. I am happy that it has a constitutional expiration date. It will be interesting to see if this really will be for only 3 years. I expect a campain in 3 years of "Yes on X, not a new tax" campaign. I hope we take this opportunity to reform education and make it more efficient.

Vote Tomorrow on Proposition 100, AZ Sale Tax Increase

2010-05-17T08:27:00.003-07:00

Tomorrow we vote as a state whether or not we increase our state sales tax by 1% for a constitutionally limited 3 years. Regardless of how you vote, you should make an informed decision.

I have found some other information concerning Proposition 100 that we are voting on tomorrow. See also my previous post on Prop 100.

ABC 15 has a news piece about it. Click on "Governor Brewer, Byron Schlomach discuss Prop. 100" on this page. Following are some notes I took on the video.

0:00 - 0:20
ABC 15 News intro to story on Proposition 100

0:20 - 2:35 (2 min 15 sec)
Interview with Governor Jan Brewer who wants us to vote for Proposition 100

Stats from Jan Brewer:
2.2 billion cut out of the 1/3 we are able to cut
2/3 we are not able to cut because of mandate from voters and Federal government

2:35 - 3:25 (2 min 50 sec)
Some time spent on AZ Senate Bill 1070

3:25 - 5:25 (2 min 0 sec)
"Never voted for a tax increase" Jan Brewer

5:25 - 8:29 (2 min 56 sec)
Interview with Byron Slomac of The Goldwater Institute who wants us to vote no on Proposition 100
"1 billion dollars out of the private sector in to the public sector"

"We have nearly one non-teacher for every teacher in our schools right now"

I would like to see a graph or chart that shows what is in that mandated 2/3 of the budget and what is in the remaining third. The point about there being nearly 1 non-teacher for every teach also stood out to me.

I also found "Sales tax vote would solve only one-third of Arizona’s budget deficit" from the Tuscon Citizen.

An article from ASU's site seemed to indicate that the budget passed that includes the sales tax increase accounts for the other 2 billion in shortfall. ("Arizona's Budget Crisis: How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Going?" from ASU's W. P. Carey school)

This new information has not changed my vote. I am still planning to vote no tomorrow.

Tax brackets over the past century

2010-04-27T12:24:00.003-07:00

From flowingdata.com. I would like to see actual tax return data that included all the tax credits and such.

Anthem

2010-04-27T12:09:00.002-07:00

Here is "Anthem" as sung by Tommy Korberg from the musical Chess.

Tommy introduces the song like this, "It's a song of praise to his old country. At the same time he's not happy with what his country has become. It has a great deal to do with longing"

Lyrics

No man, no madness

Though their sad power may prevail

Can possess, conquer, my country's heart

They rise to fail

She is eternal

Long before nations' lines were drawn

When no flags flew, when no armies stood

My land was born

And you ask me why I love her

Through wars, death and despair

She is the constant, we who don't care

And you wonder will I leave her - but how?

I cross over borders but I'm still there now

How can I leave her?

Where would I start?

Let man's petty nations tear themselves apart

My land's only borders lie around my heart

Why I am voting no on Proposition 100, the Arizona Sales Tax Increase

2010-04-23T00:35:00.008-07:00

I am planning to vote no on Proposition 100 coming up on the May 18 election. I cannot believe that all avenues have been explored to balance the budget. I cannot believe that adding a tax will help speed up the recovery of jobs in Arizona.

See ballotpedia for a write-up of both sides of the issue.

What you you all think?

--Update 5-5-2010--

A couple more links

http://www.noprop100.com/

http://www.facebook.com/pages/No-on-Prop-100/107608792611918

There are two video links here and one hours long audio one.

Here is one of the videos that hit me strongly.

--Update 5-11-2010--

Deciding how to vote on this proposition has been the hardest to decide in a very long time. I have 7 children in the public education system and two more that will be. I want the best education possible. I am pretty settled on voting no for the following reasons.

Washington DC has one of the highest per student spending in the country and among the worst results.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/04/07/the-real-cost-of-public-schools/

Maybe a better solution would be to cut out the education middleman.

http://goldwaterinstitute.org/article/2810

Since the passing of proposition 301 in 2000, a smaller percentage of education money actually gets to the classroom.

http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article/4575

"If passed, Arizona would have the 5th highest sales tax rate in the country" http://www.noprop100.com/

Even if the tax expires in three years, it will put the brakes on a not so vibrant AZ economy. I think there are better ways to reform the system to cut out waste and still produce excellent students.

--Update 5-13-2010--

My friend Jen is on the School Board for Dysart School District. I called her this morning after a few emails back and forth. I wanted to understand her position well. She is for proposition 100. I respect Jen. She has worked hard for 1 1/2 years on the board.

To me it has come down to what will cause the least short term harm, because both ways will cause that. What will cause the greatest long term good?

By voting no, I will not put a brake on the recovery of the Arizona economy. Ronald Regan reduced taxes in the 80s and increased tax revenue. See the Wikipedia article on the Laffer curve and some videos explaining it.

The Laffer Curve, Part I: Understanding the Theory

The Laffer Curve, Part II: Reviewing the Evidence

The Laffer Curve, Part III: Dynamic Scoring

I am also very concerned that we do not go the same direction as California and Washington state. They have increased tax so much and are not willing to cut to have a balanced budget.

Also by voting no, more teachers will be laid off, class sizes will increase, some computer of other resources may not get replaced.

By voting no, I will provide a greater chance for reform in the school funding formula so that the full amount of funds per student follow the student. Perhaps there can be a reduction in administrative costs at schools so that more money gets to the classroom. I will not hinder the recovery of the Arizona economy.

Ooma: Nearly Free Phone Service

2010-04-23T00:15:00.002-07:00

About a month ago, I bought an Ooma Telo. We have been paying around $38 a month for Cox Communications telephone service. After using it for nearly a month, my wife was comfortable with us porting our existing number to it.

Just over a week ago the port finished. There were a couple of hiccups. I had to ask my sister in law to complain to Cox that she could not get through to my number. The voice quality is not always as good as Cox was.

For $38 a month, we will start to profit from our initial investment in just a few more months.

OIIOHH

2010-04-08T05:00:00.002-07:00

That stands for Obama Is In Over His Head.

Texas figured it out. A lady recently asked Obama if he thought it was wise to raise taxes through the recently health care bill when the economy is only showing the tenderest growth. He spent 17 minutes not answering her question.

He really can talk but I don't think he is willing or able to face economic facts.

Hugh Hewitt has merchandise if you so choose to declare was is becoming more and more obvious.

Free Will Offering vs Charity from Tax

2010-03-24T08:41:00.007-07:00

My friend Emily is happy that Obama's health care reform (HCR) has passed. It reminds me of a quote from Milton Friedman (numbers added)

There are four ways in which you can spend money.
[1] You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you're doing, and you try to get the most for your money.
[2] Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I'm not so careful about the content of the present, but I'm very careful about the cost.
[3] Then, I can spend somebody else's money on myself. And if I spend somebody else's money on myself, then I'm sure going to have a good lunch!
[4] Finally, I can spend somebody else's money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else's money on somebody else, I'm not concerned about how much it is, and I'm not concerned about what I get.

The bill just passed spends money like number 4. It is wasteful and more likely to breed corruption. We are running headlong into mountains of debt and have not considered repayment. It is irresponsible. It will prompt the health care givers to get out of the business or move elsewhere.

A better alternative is a plan by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Some points are:

- health care portability from job to job

- create state health insurance exchanges - a marketplace to compare difference policies will increase competition

- Increase transparency through a Healthcare Services Commission that relies on a public/private partnership

More details of the Patient Choice Act are here.

This is a more sensible plan. I cannot believe that we think raising taxes is going to get us out of this recession.

There are many that are out of jobs and also don't have access to health care. The best way to accomplish this is by free will offerings. Giving willingly either directly to someone you see in need or to charities that will offer relief.

Joseph Smith did not believe in Socialism.

Joseph accepted the economy of private property and individual enterprise. Even under the consecration of properties, individual stewards operated independently in a market economy, though they were obligated to return their "surplus" to the bishop
...
But capitalism never ruled Nauvoo as it did Chicago, a city that in 1844 was the same size as Nauvoo. The original name of the Nauvoo site, Commerce, was dropped after the Saints arrived. Rather than Promising entrpreneurs great wealth, Joseph asked that "money be brought here to pay the poor for manufacturing." Profits were secondary to creating jobs.
(Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, Richard Lyman Bushman, 2005, pages 502 and 503, view online)

It can also be noted that he did not practice Capitalism in the same way. The focus was on lifting those in a poorer position instead of enriching yourself. Yet it was all voluntary. The obligation he refers to comes after I covenant to obey the law of consecration. Yet it is a voluntary covenant. I recognize my position as a beggar before God (Mos 4:16-27). I then promise to do my best to help others both physically and spiritually.

Socialism or charity from tax, promotes wastefulness and corruption. On the other hand, greedy, unchecked capitalism leaves the poor and poorest without relief. The ideal is the accountability and reward that comes from capitalism along with free will offerings lifting up the unfortunate among us. We assist them to become self sufficient. This is best achieved by capitalism and persuasion to acknowledge our positions as beggars before God.

"capitalism is the least worst system available to us — until Zion can be achieved" Geoff B.

The GOP 3 Year Pledge

2010-03-22T07:56:00.002-07:00

Duane Patterson has made a 3 year pledge for the GOP. I cannot commit to 6 days a week. Yet I will continue to work to repeal the budget busting health care insurance reform bill now being passed.

I just donated a small amount to the National Republican Congressional Committee. I hope they continue to focus on how to regain a majority in Congress so that we can reverse Obamacare before it becomes another way to bankrupt the USA and deteriorates our access to health care.

One Day or One Week

2009-12-25T06:56:00.006-07:00

A bug has started to go through my family. It is a 24 hour stomach flu. Two or three of my kids have had it in the last couple of weeks or so. I make 4. For the last three it only takes 24 hours of resting your stomach from food and drink and then you can slowly add simple foods. For those that followed this prescription it only took about 24 hours until they could keep food and water down.

My nephew seems to have had the same bug. In his case he is only 2 years old. It is not pleasant to have an empty stomach. It is even less unpleasant to empty it. His parent kept giving him milk. That is was he was used to. He kept throwing up. It took about a week for him to get over his bug.

As I have been up since about 3 am, I have thought about this in relation to the health insurance bill the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. The way I see it, we can either convince our friends and family that they need to wake up and make their vote and dollars heard before this becomes law or we face a much longer battle to undo it.

I plan to find and detail exactly why this bill would be very bad for our economy and our health care. I also plan to suggest alternatives to this health insurance. But before we can even consider what is better we must stop this bill.

I think if all of us rise up and go to work we might have a few days or weeks of concerted effort. It may put us out of our comfort zone. It may be inconvenient or bothersome. Would you rather wait and see how this bill deteriorates the quality of heath care available to us? Should we just not worry about it because we are consigned that it is inevitable? Do you want to wait and see if it really will bankrupt us?

I choose not to wait. I am sick today. If I stick to resting my belly, after a judicious waiting period, I will be back to normal. I want the same for our health care system and economy.

For those of you ready to take action, send this to your friends. Contribute to ReverseTheVote.org, they are targeting 24 Democrats that voted for this. Take further action to reverse the vote so we don't have to repeal the deal.

Do what is takes to stop Obamacare

2009-12-21T02:57:00.002-07:00

I have a good friend that has recently become more politically active. I am not sure what he might call himself but I am pretty sure he opposes the current health care bill going through congress.

Hugh Hewitt is urging Tea Party participants to help reverse the vote by trying to reverse the vote of at least 3 Democrats who previously voted for the bill. He suggest that we focus on the 24 Democrats targeted by reversethevote.org

Some of the Tea Party participants will want to grouse about what the Republicans did -- or didn't do -- when they were in the majority before 2007. Some will worry about being co-opted or about losing their influence or position within the media spotlight as 2010 begins to shift to the elections, which inevitably highlight the two parties. Still others will be dreaming "third party" dreams and won't want anything to do with the Party of Lincoln.

A test of the movement is directly ahead. To defeat Obamacare, it is going to have to team up with the GOP. The next few weeks will tell us a lot about the motives, and staying power, of the new activists of 2009.

Tea Party participants, Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats, none of the above, whatever you call yourself. If you really oppose the health care bill, now is the time to show up or amp up your effort.

Contribute time or money to reversethevote.org or work in tandem with them to focus on these 24 Democrats. Let's stop this bill. Only then can we begin to talk about reasonable solutions to health care insurance.

Five Steps to Stop Obamacare

2009-12-19T11:32:00.004-07:00

My dad called me this morning with a Republican political survey in the mail he was upset about. I too do not like some of the mail I get that smacks of smarmy sales tactics.

I finished our conversation by talking to him about the health care bill going through the US Senate now. I encouraged him to contribute to ReverseTheVote.org. It is a group targeting 24 House Democrats who voted for Obamacare but who are vulnerable to a well funded Republican candidate in 2010.

I also recommend following Hugh Hewitt's Five Steps To Stop Obamacare. I want to focus my energy on those things that will bring actual change in this situation.

I read this morning from Hugh, Nelson Caves. So Will American Medicine Unless A Different Democratic Senator Steps Up Or Three House Democrats Change Their Votes. So perhaps sending a message to House Democrats is most important at this point.

I encourage you to take action and speak with your contributions. Even $10 would send a message that you care enough to let yourself be counted. Let your representatives and others know where you stand.

Avoid phony security popups

2009-10-16T11:24:00.005-07:00

A while ago I got a phony security pop up on our family computer. Someone must have clicked it because the pop up kept reappearring with a scary noise. I ended up using Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware to remove it.

Unless you recognize a pop up as coming from the anti-virus software you installed, you should always just close the window. If keeps coming back it may mean that someone in the house installed the aggressive software by mistake.

One way we have reduced this risk is to add bookmarks to the sites we want our little kids to go to for our little kids . This limits them somewhat in the sites they can get to. I also have them use Firefox, mostly because it has Adblock Plus. It eliminates annoying, sometimes inappropriate, and more rarely dangerous ads.

We also use bsecure internet filter. I think it is work the money.

Here are some more guidelines to keeping yourself and your computer safe online.
Top 5 Internet dangers for kids: A resource guide
Think before you click
“Free Security Scan”Could Cost Time and Money

May We Never Forget

2009-09-11T16:03:00.001-07:00

4 minutes to remember - 9/11/2001 tribute

Serious Health Care Reform Requires Serious Tort Reform

2009-09-03T07:00:00.001-07:00

From Hugh Hewitt.

What's absurd about the effort is that every high-sounding call for the need to change and the crisis of health care is immediately understood to be hypocrisy because the speakers aren't demanding the sort of damage caps in medical malpractice cases that will have immediate and dramatic impacts on the costly practices of preventative medicine.

Ted Kennedy and President Nixon's national health insurance plan

2009-08-29T09:03:00.002-07:00

From Father John H. Taylor and Hugh Hewitt, I learned about the 1971 attempt of Richard Nixon to reform health care. Ted Kennedy regretted that he did not compromise with President Nixon.

The persistent Mormon academic criticism of ‘capitalism’

2009-08-14T16:04:00.004-07:00

An interesting dialog of capitalism and its criticism and defense from a Mormon perspective.

The persistent Mormon academic criticism of ‘capitalism’

I agree with his short conclusion, "capitalism is the least worst system available to us — until Zion can be achieved"

NotSoSure.org

2009-08-04T09:58:00.001-07:00

I just found out a friend of mine is starring in a couple political videos from NotSoSure.org about nationalized health care.

"In episode two, our friends discuss the importance of 'testing' something before you risk it all. This lesson is applied to the health care reform debate in Washington. See more videos like this at http://notsosure.org."

K-12 budget

2009-07-31T23:49:00.002-07:00

I am putting some posts here on the K-12 budget

http://www.espressopundit.com/2009/07/governor-vetoes-k12-budget.html

$100 Billion instead of $1 Trillion

2009-07-18T11:44:00.001-07:00

On Mon July 6 Hugh Hewitt interviewed Dr. Irwin Redlener of Columbia University. I think he was the most liberal of the three guests he had on that day.

HH: ...We’re talking about extending Medicare to the population, right?

IR: Yes.

HH: The cost of that is staggering.

IR: I know, Hugh, but it’s not exactly cheap to have 47 million people not in the system, who when they get really sick and show up in an ER, they’re getting charged, it’s costing unbelievable amounts of money for things that maybe could have been prevented in the first place.

HH: But you know it’ll happen. If we go Medicare for everyone, the government’s going to put the squeeze on reimbursements, doctors are going to begin to dump patients, and they’re going to begin to do, they’re going to have boutique and concierge practices, and the elite will be taken care of, the elite, and the rest will get in line.

IR: Yeah. Well, let me ask, this is what I would say to the people, let’s say, on the other side of the debate. What is the alternative to this horrible mess we have now where the insurance company clerks are prohibiting me and people I know from getting the health care they need?

HH: $100 billion dollars a year for community clinics, so that poor people get served. $100 billion bucks a year. It’s one-tenth the cost of what the Obama administration is pushing, and it will deliver hundreds of times the actual care.

IR: And you know, I don’t disagree with that. So the question is, it is a politically feasible reality? And this is the point I was making to you before. I don’t care how we get there. But we have to figure out how we’re going to control the costs, prevent these unbelievable numbers of unnecessary procedures and interventions and surgeries, and make that people are getting good, quality, comprehensive care that they need, that’s preventive in its orientation. If we could figure that out, I don’t think I have a problem with that. But how are you going to get $100 billion dollar a year program passed?

HH: Because the Republicans will spend that rather than the trillion that the government plan will spend.

$100 Billion instead of $1 Trillion. That is one tenth of the cost! The current reform being written is way too costly partly because it will drive competition out of the business. Then the only way to control costs is to ration our health care.

Listen to or read the complete interview.

Healthy Debate on Health Care

2009-07-18T11:40:00.002-07:00

On Mon July 6 Hugh Hewitt spent three hours interviewing some knowledgeable about health care. Listen to or read the complete interviews.

Hour 1 - Robert Moffit of the Heritage Foundation
Transcript, Listen Now, Podcast

Hour 2 - Clayton Christensen from the Harvard Business School
Transcript, Listen Now, Podcast

Hour3 - Dr. Irwin Redlener of Columbia University
Transcript, Listen Now, Podcast

Health Care Reform Cost Visualization

2009-07-07T14:14:00.003-07:00

The cost of the proposed health care is very large. This video uses pennies to visualize the cost of this plan in relation to the GM bailout and our what we paid our soldiers.

Obama Budget Cuts Visualization

2009-07-07T14:11:00.002-07:00

A great video that puts the $100 million dollar budget cuts proposed by Obama in April in perspective.

1776 (the musical)

2009-07-04T11:28:00.003-07:00

A great tradition I got from my wife's side of the family is watching 1776 a musical about how the Declaration of Independence came to be.

Here is a list of those in this scene.

Massachsetts - John Adams
Pennsylvania - Benjamin Franklin
Connecticut - Roger Sherman
New York - Philip Livingston
Virginia - Thomas Jefferson

Unemployment Rate With and Without the Recovery Plan

2009-07-02T13:57:00.003-07:00

Here is an updated graph to the story I linked to earlier. I got it from Innocent Bystanders.

Romney talks about Government option health care

2009-07-02T13:36:00.003-07:00

Hugh Hewitt interviewed Mitt Romney about the major changes being considered in Health Care Insurance. The crux of it for me is why providing a government paid option will be so bad for patients as well as doctors and health insurance providers.

Having a government option will turn into a single payer system like Canada has. Employers choose what insurance options to provide employers. They are going to pick the government option because it is tax payer subsidized. The government is going to eat up a lot of the money in red tape administration of the program.

The system may "cost" patients less out of pocket, but they are really going to pay in longer wait times and sometime unavailable services.

The Geography of Jobs

2009-06-09T05:15:00.002-07:00

Here is an interactive map from TipStrategies.com.

It shows the job losses that happened as a result of hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the US car companies job losses that started in 2006. It continues to show the losses in other metropolitan areas that started to mushroom at the end of 2008.

"Obama repackages stimulus plans with old promises"

2009-06-09T05:06:00.003-07:00

This is the title of an Associated Press article. I found the reference from Power Line.

This is the chart they are referring to.

Stopping Obamacare's Government Option Via The Blue Dogs: The List and Contact Information

2009-06-05T10:25:00.002-07:00

The radical changes to our healthcare system need to be resisted. Hugh Hewitt has a list of contact information of Blue Dog Democrats in the US Congress.

I urge you to contact these beginning with those in your state. Pass this on to your friends and family.

"On The Other Hand..."

2009-06-04T20:39:00.001-07:00

From Hugh Hewitt,

President Obama's causal argument today concerning equivalence between the Holocaust and the plight of the Palestinians was the worst part of a lousy speech, but I have a handful of e-mails arguing that it wasn't so bad.

OK, fill in the next paragraph:

"Slavery was a terrible scourge upon the men and women who suffered under it, and a deep stain on the American republic and upon every slave-owner and every American who was silent about its inherent evil

On the other hand...."

Sometimes there is no "other hand," and the attempt to create one today was deeply dishonest pandering by the president.

Find more info here.

Jon Stewart, War Criminals & The True Story of the Atomic Bombs

2009-05-05T09:08:00.002-07:00

Here is a link to a video response to John Stewart's claim that Harry Truman was a war criminal for dropping atomic bombs on Japan.

See also the Wikipedia article for more facts about the bombings.

The Mittleider Method

2009-04-23T08:22:00.007-07:00

My wife attended a gardening workshop on Tues. She is so excited and I am too. We already adjusted some on our soil so as to not drown some of our tomatoes. Click here to see the first half of one of "The Mittleider Gardening Course" book is online. Use the menu on the left to jump to the different sections available. You need to click on the menu items with the leaf icon to see the topics within.

This shows what soil beds look like

Growing vertically increases your yield

Here is a video showing the double ridges used in the Mittleider method

Keywords: Mittleider Method, garden, gardening

Instructions for creating watering system
http://foodforeveryone.org/pdf/MGC_Chpt_16.pdf

Tyrannosaurus Debt

2009-03-26T14:53:00.003-07:00

I love School House Rock. I recently found one that shows what is happening with our national debt. At some point, just paying interest on the debt will be taking a very big chuck of our budget.

Hugh Hewitt also has a post on the forecast of the budget for the next ten years. The graphic shows how much we will be adding to the debt.

9 Principles, 12 Values

2009-03-17T22:35:00.002-07:00

I found out about the 9-12 project from my wife and Glen Beck. He created "We Surround Them", a photo mosaic from pictures of people who agree with at least 7 of the 9 principles.

The Nine Principles

1. America is good.

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.

3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.

5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.

6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.

7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.

8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.

9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.

12 Values
* Honesty
* Reverence
* Hope
* Thrift
* Humility
* Charity
* Sincerity
* Moderation
* Hard Work
* Courage
* Personal Responsibility
* Gratitude

We the People (Tea Party)

2009-03-17T22:27:00.002-07:00

I came across this on the Sonoran Alliance site.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Tenth amendment of the US Constitution

The Price of Freedom

2009-03-02T09:27:00.002-07:00

I saw The Price Of Freedom last Friday. It inspires gratitude in me for those who are willing to risk their blood to refresh the tree of liberty. (See Thomas Jefferson quote)

The Speech of Rush Limbaugh

2009-03-01T23:26:00.004-07:00

Over a decade ago I cut my political teeth listening to Rush Limbaugh. I don't particularly like his arrogant schtick. My most listened to commentator, Hugh Hewitt clued me in to Rush's recent speech at CPAC. Here is the video. Here is the transcript.

I am now 20 minutes into the 90 minute recording. Rush is an effective communicator of the economic liberty principles I believe in.

K-12 Education Public Funding

2009-02-16T10:59:00.002-07:00

My wife sent me this article about K-12 funding in the current AZ Legislature. I have started to read some at respectforregularfolks.com. This issue is very concerning to me.

We are in difficult economic times. I work at CB Richard Ellis. All of the US employees are getting a pay cut. How do we deal with smaller public revenues in AZ?

There is a part of me that says that public school funding should be like insurance. You pay every month with an assurance that if something goes wrong, you will still be able to pay your bills. There is another part of me that says budgets must be cut when revenues go down.

I am no expert in personal budgeting let alone public ones. I do have a couple of questions. How will budget cuts be affecting charter schools? Would they get the same cuts public schools get? What else could be cut to replace the proposed cuts in education?

I would appreciate any insight.

The Next Two Years

2009-02-15T04:56:00.002-07:00

I found this post at Sonoran Alliance announcing PoliticalAZ.com. It does not have RSS yet, which would make it an easy add to my reader.

Since the Nov elections, I have occasionally been thinking about what is next. I have resolved to become involved earlier in the election cycle for 2010. Support for candidates early in the election cycle mean more.

If anyone has any suggestions for who would be the best choice for US Senator for AZ, AZ Governor, other governors, AZ State Legislature or US Congress, let me know.

Freshman Congressman Sleeps on Cot

2009-02-14T13:05:00.000-07:00

The Owed People

2008-11-21T11:53:00.002-07:00

I read Atlas Shrugged for the first time this last year. I do not agree with all of the philosophy it covers or inspired.

I do agree that there is something wrong with accepting and promoting the morality of "the owed people". Hugh Hewitt links to John Agresto's Party of Privilege ... Party of plumbers.

"Establish irreligion as the state religion"

2008-11-20T08:22:00.004-07:00

From Neal A Maxwell, Oct 1978 BYU Devotional, "Meeting the Challenges of Today"

We are now entering a period of incredible ironies. Let us cite but one of these ironies which is yet in its subtle stages: we shall see in our time a maximum if indirect effort made to establish irreligion as the state religion. It is actually a new form of paganism that uses the carefully preserved and cultivated freedoms of Western civilization to shrink freedom even as it rejects the value essence of our rich Judeo-Christian heritage.

He continues.

Your discipleship may see the time come when religious convictions are heavily discounted. M. J. Sobran also observed, "A religious conviction is now a second-class conviction, expected to step deferentially to the back of the secular bus, and not to get uppity about it" (Human Life Review, Summer 1978, p. 58). This new irreligious imperialism seeks to disallow certain of people's opinions simply because those opinions grow out of religious convictions. Resistance to abortion will soon be seen as primitive. Concern over the institution of the family will be viewed as untrendy and unenlightened.

In its mildest form, irreligion will merely be condescending toward those who hold to traditional Judeo-Christian values. In its more harsh forms, as is always the case with those whose dogmatism is blinding, the secular church will do what it can to reduce the influence of those who still worry over standards such as those in the Ten Commandments. It is always such an easy step from dogmatism to unfair play--especially so when the dogmatists believe themselves to be dealing with primitive people who do not know what is best for them. It is the secular bureaucrat's burden, you see.

Am I saying that the voting rights of the people of religion are in danger? Of course not! Am I saying, "It's back to the catacombs?" No! But there is occurring a discounting of religiously-based opinions. There may even be a covert and subtle disqualification of some for certain offices in some situations, in an ironic "irreligious test" for office.

However, if people are not permitted to advocate, to assert, and to bring to bear, in every legitimate way, the opinions and views they hold that grow out of their religious convictions, what manner of men and women would they be, anyway? Our founding fathers did not wish to have a state church established nor to have a particular religion favored by government. They wanted religion to be free to make its own way. But neither did they intend to have irreligion made into a favored state church. Notice the terrible irony if this trend were to continue. When the secular church goes after its heretics, where are the sanctuaries? To what landfalls and Plymouth Rocks can future pilgrims go?

If we let come into being a secular church shorn of traditional and divine values, where shall we go for inspiration in the crises of tomorrow? Can we appeal to the rightness of a specific regulation to sustain us in our hours of need? Will we be able to seek shelter under a First Amendment which by then may have been twisted to favor irreligion? Will we be able to rely for counterforce on value education in school systems that are increasingly secularized? And if our governments and schools were to fail us, would we be able to fall back upon the institution of the family, when so many secular movements seek to shred it?

It may well be, as our time comes to "suffer shame for his name" (Acts 5:41), that some of this special stress will grow out of that portion of discipleship which involves citizenship. Remember that, as Nephi and Jacob said, we must learn to endure "the crosses of the world" (2 Nephi 9:18) and yet to despise "the shame of [it]" (Jacob 1:8). To go on clinging to the iron rod in spite of the mockery and scorn that flow at us from the multitudes in that great and spacious building seen by Father Lehi, which is the "pride of the world," is to disregard the shame of the world (1 Nephi 8:26–27, 33; 11:35–36). Parenthetically, why--really why--do the disbelievers who line that spacious building watch so intently what the believers are doing? Surely there must be other things for the scorners to do--unless, deep within their seeming disinterest, there is interest.

If the challenge of the secular church becomes very real, let us, as in all other human relationships, be principled but pleasant. Let us be perceptive without being pompous. Let us have integrity and not write checks with our tongues which our conduct cannot cash.

Before the ultimate victory of the forces of righteousness, some skirmishes will be lost. Even these, however, must leave a record so that the choices before the people are clear and let others do as they will in the face of prophetic counsel. There will also be times, happily, when a minor defeat seems probable, that others will step forward, having been rallied to righteousness by what we do. We will know the joy, on occasion, of having awakened a slumbering majority of the decent people of all races and creeds--a majority which was, till then, unconscious of itself.

Let us stand up for our religious and political liberty.

"hope, however audacious, will no longer be enough"

2008-11-18T08:31:00.001-07:00

"The day is now upon us, and hope, however audacious, will no longer be enough"

That is my favorite line in a very long article that best describes Obama's Triumph, the GOP's Calamity (Found through Hugh Hewitt)

"389 years ago..."

2008-11-10T12:51:00.000-07:00

A "typographic mashup of the history of slavery, racism, and the progress of African"

"What Now?"

2008-11-10T11:50:00.005-07:00

One of my friends who happens to be a political Independent asked me recently, "What now?" What does the Republican Party do?

I just read "What Now?" by Clark Judge. I agree with all of this.

- I am a bit worried that we might reward those who think they can intimidate the USA.
- I am proud that this election marks a high point in our society against racism.
- Since 1992, Republican's have won the popular vote in only 1 of the 5 Presidential elections.

I believe that smaller government and less taxes will move us out of the recession. Increasing taxes will likely worsen or prolong a recession.

I believe that voluntary welfare systems work much better than those that collect their funds by compulsion. I also am wary of government involvement in these better systems.

I believe that establishing a stable democracy in the middle east is very important to stabilizing the world.

As our country unifies over developing renewable and cheaper energy sources, we will no longer need to rely or financially support government that do not support free peoples. It will take hard work. I know we are up to the challenge. Drilling at home is an important stop gap.

As we shine the light of day on government processes, we can reduce corruption in our systems.

We need new leadership to promote these and other important issues. To better communicate them. To elect leaders that stand with integrity for them.

Who I am Voting For

2008-11-01T08:24:00.011-07:00

Here I will post some of the people I am voting for and why.

Here are some of the resources I used to come to my decisions. VoteSmartAz.org has a personalized guide for voting. They are funded by The Center for Arizona Policy. Here is my personalized guide. I will note any other sources below.

See also, how I am voting on the Arizona Ballot Measures

Maricopa County Special Health Care District (District 4)
I vote for Gerald Cuendet.

I liked the way he answered the VoteSmartAZ questionaire. He seems respected by his peers. I am not convinced that Elbert "Bick" Bicknell is qualified for the position.

Maricopa County Community College (District 4)
I vote for Paul Srch (His site).

The site of Randolph Lumm is here. Maricopa Colleges Faculty PAC endorses him.

Dysart School District Board
Jennifer Tanner (ballotpedia, flyer I made)
April Allen (ballotpedia, flyer I made)
Anthony Piazza My wife went to the forum. She says that he was very enthusiastic, ready to work as team. He seemed very intelligent.

Prop 415 For home rule of City of El Mirage
My Vote is Yes.

The allows the city to spend a much greater amount than would otherwise be set by the set by the state (article about Buckeye).

City of EM Bond Question
My Vote is Yes.

It is a secondary property tax. I understand this to mean that it pays for specific things and then it expires. It will pay for Fire Fighting, Parks and Streets.

Judges
I am asking for you help in voting against judges. I found a review by the lighthouse blog. There are other resources from a search I did. Some of you have said there are certain judges you want to vote against. I want to know why. And why should I trust your sources?

Update: Below is from a person I trust. He trusts the lawyer source he has. I probably will vote this way.

As far as judges I had a long discussion with a lawyer that works at the court. He has some wonderful insights on the judges having worked for them or in the court rooms. He also has the advantage of direct information from his conservative collegues. There are a number of judges that are on the borderline of yea or nay because of liberal/conservative leanings or poor managment but following was his recommendations.
Bales, Scott - YES
Johnsen, Diane - YES
Scott-Timmer, Ann - NO
Orozco, Patricia - NO
Abrams - NO
Akers - NO
Araneta - NO
Arellano - NO
Baca - NO!!
Ballinger - YES
Blakey - YES
Buttrick - YES
Cohen - YES
Contes - NO
Davis - YES
Ditsworth - YES
Dunevant - YES
Flores - NO!!
Garcia - NO!!
Gentry-Lewis - YES
Gordon - YES
Hannah - YES
Harrison - NO
Hilliard - YES
Hoffman - YES
Katz - NO!!!
Kemp - NO
Klein - YES
Mahoney - YES
McClennen - YES
McMurdie - YES
McNally - YES
McVey - NO
Miles, Linda - NO
Miles, Robert - YES
Oberbillig - YES
Padilla - NO
Potts - NO
Ryan - YES
Sanders - NO
Steinle - YES
Stephens - YES
Trujillo - NO
Udall - YES
Whitten - YES

Hope this helps. After speaking with him over an hour about each judge and their strengths and weaknesses I decided to vote this way.

I look forward to hearing from you.

--------------------
See also, how I am voting on the Arizona Ballot Measures

Why John McCain?

2008-10-31T10:42:00.004-07:00

In that last days of the Presidential campaign, I just found this at McCain's site. I agree with every point.

We cannot tax ourselves out of a recession. The Tax Man Cometh
Do we want to trust our security to someone whose mettle has not yet been tested? Mark Biden's Words

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph..."

2008-10-30T17:09:00.002-07:00

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". The narrator of the book War and Peace says this. Some have attributed this to Edmund Burke.

Difference between wrong and rotten

2008-10-30T00:52:00.003-07:00

I just posted a comment on Emily's blog.

Some people are wrong. They do not believe in something that I believe would be wrong. I believe that McCain will be a better President that Obama. That he will lead us in a direction that will more likely bring prosperity, security and a more moral society.

Some people are rotten. They do evil things for fun. Enough said. Don't treat someone you think is wrong like they are rotten, if they are not.

Economic Policy: Ideal and Reality

2008-10-28T11:01:00.008-07:00

I have a friend who does not seem as conservative as me when it comes to economic policy. She is considering voting for Obama. I emailed her Teach school children what spread the wealth means. I agree with her premise that many people are poor because of their lack of opportunity.

She looks forward to a civil implementation of the Law of Consecration. I also look forward to this. I see it being based on the principles taught by king Benjamin and those more fully practiced hundreds of years later.

One key principle in this economic policy is that they gave voluntarily. They were not compelled to give the poor their means. They did make covenants that they would be giving. So after a man made a covenant, he was held accountable.

This kind of economic policy is already available. There are many charities that promote self sufficiency and the dignity of work in the way they uplift those in need and want. There is the perpetual education fund. There are humanitarian charities. There are opportunities to serve with our own hands in the communities where each of us live.

Charitable welfare is possible as far as we are able to persuade those around us that it is a good thing for them to do personally. Compelling those around us to be charitable is not as effective as having them acknowledge their position before their Maker; that they might give of their means to provide relief and opportunity to those around us.

The above is the ideal. The reality is that very many of us are not charitable. Many don't care so much to help the less fortunate. We can do better in persuading others and ourselves to be more giving. I really like the focus both candidates gave for a day or two on promoting service.

Obama is the most liberal presidential candidate(1, 2) ever nominated by either of the two main parties. If he gets elected and is not checked by a Republican House or Senate, we may turn this recession into a depression like FDR did. You cannot tax your way out of a recession.

Teach school children what spread the wealth means

2008-10-27T17:41:00.004-07:00

I thought this was an effective way to teach school aged children what spread the wealth means, Conversations with Molly.

Absurd Customer Service

2008-10-16T12:23:00.004-07:00

I just listened to a friend talk about the run around he is getting. His hard drive flaked out near the end of its warranty. The manufacturer gave him a refurb and it flaked out after 2 months. They kept saying that they could not send him a new one. They finally agreed to send a refurb and extend his warranty so he does not have to worry that it will give out a day after his originally warranty expires.

It took many many emails back and forth to convince them to apply an exception to their warranty policies. This reminded me of the post by Erik Sink (Absurd Customer Service) on the differences of large companies versus smaller ones.

Arizona Ballot Measures

2008-10-13T09:27:00.014-07:00

I will post here what I think about the Arizona Ballot measures. Respond if you do or do not agree.

The two main sources I am using to decide are the pamphlet the AZ Secretary of State publishes and Arizona 2008 ballot measures at ballotpedia.org

See also who I am voting for.

Prop 100 known by its supporters as the Protect Our Homes Act.
My Vote is Yes.

The sponsor's statement describes the measure this way: "this Initiative prohibits the government from charging any new tax on the sale or transfer of real property in Arizona. Currently, there are no real property sales or transfer taxes in Arizona. However, the government could enact a real property sale or transfer tax at any time. This Initiative would prohibit the enactment of any new real property sales or transfer tax by a constitutional amendment."

I agree with the supporting arguments. I am a little wary of putting this in the State Constitution. This is my only reservation at this point.

Prop 101 Medical Choice for Arizona or the Freedom to Choose Act
My Vote is No.

We should allow people to choose to pay their own medical costs. It prevents a mandatory health care system for the state of Arizona (see 101 Q&A). This video gives arguments for. See also yeson101.com.

I am a little wary of the murky language that is argued by the opposition. Perhaps it is not worded well. I am again wary of putting this in the constitution. Sounds like it belongs in the law instead.

How could those who rely on Medicaid and Medicare could lose coverage? The video argument says it will jeopardize AHCCCS, how?

Update: I received some feedback from a Doctor. I have changed my vote to No. I may support something like it but it seems it is too geared towards helping insurance companies than individuals.

The reason I initially was for this was that it allowed individuals to opt out of a AZ State run mandatory health ins system. Our medical cost are more than many other nation's. We also have many more treatments and innovations as a result. I think it is important to make reasonable access to health care to all who want health care.

I generally like the premise of the system Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts. It required everyone who could afford insurance to get it. Like liability insurance for autos. Those who could not afford it, would get assistance to buy their own. It left it up to each family where to get it. It allowed for lower rates because everyone was in it. It also allowed for competition of Ins companies.

I don't want a government run health care system.

Here is the quote from the Doctor:

This is a very politically mediated proposition. This proposition is written and backed by the insurance companies and gives them an advantage. Passing of this will not affect Medicaid.

My concern is that we are further legislating Insurance Companies rights over the rights of the consumer and most of the medical societies initially took a "no" position, however, after they all received subtle threats from the insurance companies attorneys, these societies back pedaled and last week have taken a "neutral" position on this which means that this proposition, vague in its wording, gives leverage to insurance companies many times placing the consumer at further risk.

Vote your conscience.

My vote is "no."

Prop 102 Yes for Marriage
My vote is Yes

"Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state"

Simple. That is marriage.

Prop 105 known by its supporters as the Majority Rules Initiative.
My vote is No.

Their definition of majority is 50% +1 votes of all registered voters. That means someone who doesn't even vote gets counted as a no. This is not a principle of a democratic republic.

Prop 200 known by its supporters as the Majority Rules Initiative.
My vote is No.

"the real reform comes in July of 2010, when the consumer loan act is reinstated and 36% interest rates become the law of the land again." Video Arguments against 200.

Prop 201 known by its supporters as the Homeowners Bill of Rights.
My vote is No.

201 "will forbid the defendants from recovering any attorney's fees, even if the case was frivolous or if they win". From arguments against. I agree with the others too.

Prop 202 Immigration. Illegal Hiring.
My vote is No.

This seems like a misrepresentation. From what I can see it weakens the illegal hiring laws. I think we should allow more legal immigration. We need to enforce the laws on our books.

Republican officials come out strong against Prop. 202

Prop 300 increase the salary of legislators from $24,000 a year to $30,000 annually
My vote is Yes.

This is not a very big increase. It will allow more people to be able to afford to serve.

-----------------------------
See also who I am voting for.

Life, Faith and Family

2008-09-23T15:07:00.013-07:00

What a moving video! I transcribed it here

This November, America's future hangs in the balance. Catholics across the nation will have the responsibility to make their voices heard. Many issues are at stake. Some are more important than others. No issue can be ignored, but none are more crucial to the foundation of our country than Life and Family. The family must be strengthened not redefined. Human life is paramount and must be protected from conception to natural death.

Catholics have been integral to the success of America. Since the beginning, Catholic immigrants helped build this country and their children fought to preserve it. Now, more than any other time in history, a new generation must stand for truth. The strength of our nation is not only in its military or economic power, but in our commitment to moral values. For the good of the world, 67 million catholics in America, working alongside countless others, can protect the values this great nation was built upon: Life, Faith and Family.

This election day, everything you hold sacred will need your vote. Vote your conscience.

This message will touch many more people of faith than just Cathloics. Stand up and be counted. Fear not the shame of the world. Fight for the good and honest. In every place there are good people running for office, seek them out. Find someone you trust and ask their opinion.

Moroni was a prophet and a captain in an army to defend the liberty of an ancient people. This is what he did to rouse the people to fight for the truth.

He rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it—In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children—and he fastened it upon the end of a pole.

And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren Alma 46:12-13

Our democratic republic will only stand as long as there are many good people willing to act. Be willing to spend some time and energy to find out what is being decided this election. Help a friend register to vote. Choose wise people to represent you.

If not now, when? If not you, then who?

Why I am voting for April Allen

2008-09-21T20:24:00.005-07:00

April Allen is running for the Dysart School District board (There are three 4 year terms open on the board). Here is a flyer I created that summarizes my reasons for voting for her. If you also agree, print out copies and let your friends, family and neighbors know. Encourage them to get registered and vote.

I have know April Allen for many years. She is responsible and a go getter. She is organized. I trust her to make decisions that will continue to improve the district.

Do what you can to help her get elected.

Voter Registration Resources

2008-09-21T07:36:00.002-07:00

Here are some resources for getting registered to vote in AZ and early ballot requests in Maricopa County

https://servicearizona.com/webapp/evoter/ Register Online

http://www.azsos.gov/election/forms/VoterRegistrationForm.pdf Print a registration form to mail in.

https://recorder.maricopa.gov/earlyvoteballotnet/permanentevlist.aspx Permanent Early Voting List. "All early ballots must be received in the Office of the County Recorder, other officer in charge of elections or deposited at any polling place in the county of residence, no later than 7:00 p.m. on Election Day."

Why I am voting for Jen Tanner

2008-09-17T09:55:00.003-07:00

Jennifer Tanner is running for the Dysart School District board (northwest part of Phx metro area). Here is a flyer I created that summarizes my reasons for voting for her. If you also agree, print out copies and let your friends, family and neighbors know. Encourage them to get registered and vote.

In the last seven years, I have had many opportunities to see her leadership. She has a level head. She is passionate about doing the right thing. She is compassionate with those she serves with. She is a hard worker. She will greatly benefit the students of the district.

Get out to vote on Tues Nov 4. Help Jen and other good, wise and honest leaders get elected too.

Charlie Gibson Interviews Sarah Palin

2008-09-12T06:12:00.007-07:00

Here is part one of Charlie Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin.

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Here is Hugh Hewitt's commentary on it. Some quotes:

Charles Gibson threw fastballs --fair, but hard fastballs-- and Sarah Palin connected on every one save the Bush Doctrine and even there she recovered nicely, demonstrating a poise that will serve her very well in the next 54 days.

My mail shows a lot of hostility to Gibson, but I think that is misplaced. We want tough interviews of all four candidates. We just want them of both tickets, with the same abruptness when Obama filibusters and stammers.

Right of Center

2008-09-08T13:57:00.003-07:00

I have some friends who are newer to the political world. A while ago I took the political compass survey. It was interesting. According to it I am right of center. I am also in the middle according to a authoritarian/libertarian scale.

Take the survey and find out where you stand. Are the people you vote for in line with your standards?

"The Double Standard and The Great Divide"

2008-09-08T13:45:00.001-07:00

The Double Standard and The Great Divide

A great post on how differently the mainstream media treats Palin and Obama.

Watching the Polls

2008-09-08T07:48:00.002-07:00

I have a friend who is excited at the results of the recent Presidential election polls. Each party traditionally has had a bump in the poll after their convention. I like the Real Clear Politics poll average. They average out the results of several polls. Their is margin of error in any poll. They try to stay consistent with their methodology. Sometimes looking at the trend of the poll is more important than the actual numbers.

It is promising to see these polls. Another week or two will show us if this really has been a turning point in the Presidential campaign.

The Words They Used

2008-09-06T00:24:00.002-07:00

The NY Times has an interesting graphic that shows the frequency of certain words the speakers of the two parties used in the Republican and Democrat conventions.

Sarah "Baracuda" Quotes

2008-09-04T05:09:00.001-07:00

Collected by Hugh Hewitt, here are some awesome Palin lines from her speech at the convention:

"Some candidates use change to promote their careers. John McCain has used his career to promote change. "

"The presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery.."

"There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you."

"The special confidence of those who have seen evil and have seen how evil is overcome."

How I am Voting

2008-09-02T08:46:00.006-07:00

For the Republican Primary today following is how I am voting for the offices that are contested.

AZ State Representative District 12
Steve Montenegro
Jerry Weiers

Voting record of Robert Blendu on votesmart.org
Voting record of Jerry Weiers on votesmart.org
Email response of Steve Montenegro
I think it would be good to have someone new that also has my values in the state leg.

AZ Corporation Commission
Rick Fowlkes
Joseph Hobbs
Keith Swapp

Links the candidate's websites
AZ Republic Reviews of the Candidates (see the links on the right)

I like having engineers and experts being in charge of this commission. I also think that incentives work better than mandates for developing new energy sources. Site for Fowlkes, Swapp and Hobbs.

Board of Supervisors
Writing in Liegh Strickman because she better supports the protection of Luke Air Force Base.

County Assessor
Kevin Ross

I think he was wrongly accused in the last election. He is for a smaller budget for his office.

Maricopa County Sheriff
Writing in "Please anyone else resonable" for the republican primary

City of El Mirage Council Member
James McPhetres
Bill Conner
Roy Delgado

Blog of Roy Delgado

AZ State House District 12 Primary

2008-08-26T14:40:00.009-07:00

Based on the response to my email below and my research, I plan on voting for Steve Montenegro and Jerry Weirs on Tues Sep 2.

They are running for the Republican primary for Arizona State House District 12. Here are the three choices on my ballot.

Steve Montenegro

Jerry P. Weiers

Robert Blendu

If any one know a reason to vote for a AZ Corporation Commision candidate, let me know.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rich Alger
Date: Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: Lack of Internet Zoning Laws
To: Jerry Weiers , "John B. Nelson" , Robert Blendu , Steve Montenegro

I never got a response that I remember from any of my elected representatives to my email [Nov 19, 2007] on the CP80 Internet Zoning Initiative. I would like to hear your position on this and other topics.

What is your position on Ballot Proposition 102 which will put in the state constitution, "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state"?

What do you think of implementing something like this to increase transparency on the state house?http://wisegoodhonest.blogspot.com/2008/05/increase-government-transparency.html

Why are you better than the alternatives in the primary to help support and develop the state economy?

Why are you better than the alternatives in the primary to help support and develop alternatives for energy. How will you help or stay out of the way for private sector solutions for better energy security?

Why are you better than the alternatives in the primary to prevent necessary spending, to keep taxes low and ensure the state budget is solvent for years to come?

How will you keep us safe from security threats within our state?

Why should I contribute my time and money to help you get elected over the other primary election options?

-
Rich Alger
--------------------------------------

Here is the response of Steve Montenegro.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Steve Montenegro
Date: Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: Lack of Internet Zoning Laws
To: Rich Alger

Dear Sir:

I'm sorry for the delay in responding. With the campaign in full mode I am spending most of my time knocking on doors and phoning voters to talk with them about the issues. Its very nice to have someone care enough to contact me instead!

In quick order here:

Yes, I do support protecting marriage. I know that opponents of the ballot proposition claim that we already have laws that do that, but they do not make that argument honestly. They know that mere laws are what were overturned in CA and Mass. and they would like the same to occur here. Only a constitutional amendment will offer real protection.

I support transparency efforts and believe it should all be available online. I would also like to see transparency extended to local governments as well.

I am a big admirer of Rep. Weiers and he and I are campaigning together for the two house seats. Rep. Weiers was just named "Champion of the Taxpayer"by the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers and he does an excellent job of protecting our vital interests while still looking out for the taxpayers.He is also excellent on issues of illegal immigration, transportation, and is widely considered the legislature's expert on issues relating to sportsmen and the outdoors.

Mr. Blendu's record is very much the opposite of Mr. Weiers'. He was just named "Friend of Big Government" by the same taxpayer group, he voted for last year's budget that put us into our current deficit, and he didn't even show up to vote on this year's budget. He is campaigning largely on the basis that he deserves the credit for I-10 getting one more lane of highway when credit goes to a much larger group of people, and he ignores the fact that he voted for $2.3 Billion for the light rail system for Phoenix and Tempe when Mr. Weiers was advocating for that money to be spent on additional freeways and busses that would actually help to relieve congestion. There are more areas of disagreement, but I don't want to turn this email into a barrage of complaints. Suffice it to say that Mr. Weiers and Mr. Blendu regularly end up on the opposite sides of these votes and they cancel each other out. That makes no sense to me and I don't believe it benefits the district or the state.

Alternative energy is not yet a topic that I am overly familiar with,although I know that I will be spending a fair amount of time on it between the election and the start of the session (should I be fortunate enough to win). In general, I support alternate energy sources, clean energy sources,and especially domestic energy sources. Where I get concerned is when government uses mandates and often brute force to dictate winners and losers, often disregarding market forces. This results in inefficiency that manifests itself in higher rates for ratepayers, usually without producing the results that we were promised. I favor limited government and freemarkets.

Regarding taxes and the budget, I would refer you to my earlier answer regarding my opinions of the rest of the field. On these issues Mr. Weiers is rock-solid and Mr. Blendu is not. I see eye to eye with Mr. Weiers on these issues.

As far as security threats go, much of what I've learned comes from my work for Congressman Trent Franks. Our focus tends to be more on national security threats than Arizona-specific threats, but I think that my knowledge would be a compliment to the knowledge already present at the Capitol. Secure borders remains a focus for both Mr. Weiers and myself,while Mr. Blendu's proposal for a brand new guest worker plan that allows unlimited "guests" into our state makes little sense until the border is secured and we can track and account for those in our country.

Regarding contributions, I am maxed out on contributions, but Mr. Weiers may still take additional contributions. We would both be very grateful for anytime you could contribute, especially on Election Day where we will have volunteers manning the polling locations. As to why you might help? I hope that my responses indicate that Weiers and Montenegro are solid conservative Republicans who will do what is best for the district and the state.
Thanks again for taking the time to write!

~Steve Montenegro
www.MontenegroAZ.com
-------------------------------------------

Campaining for John McCain

2008-08-21T09:00:00.003-07:00

For several months I have felt blase about politics. I felt different after listening to John McCain late Saturday night. He will make a fine President. I fully support him and have decided to do what I can to help him get elected. Today I am donating to http://www.johnmccain.com, http://yesformarriage.com/ and http://protectmarriage.com/.

I am also going to research some candidates for local and state office as well as propositions. I will post the result of my research here on this site. I would love your input so I make the best choices this election season.

We must be informed on what we vote for. Don't forget to register to vote.

Update 2008-08-22

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:57 AM, [a friend of mine] wrote:

I am not really sure if he will make a fine president. Some of his stands are really far left for a conservative Republican. But the more I learn about Barack Hussein Obama, GO MCCAIN!!!!!

Maybe I meant that he will be "fine" or good enough as president. I do believe McCain will do everything in his power to keep our country secure.

I also like what I believe is his sentiment behind campaign finance reform. I do NOT like McCain-Feingold. We should not hog tie ourselves when it comes to campaign finance. I do support increasing transparency in government. We should know as much as is possible exactly who supports what campaign.

"church and state on a collision course"

2008-08-19T09:44:00.002-07:00

I have found some answers to the question I posted Sunday.

Those seeking to redefine marriage to include same-sex marriage are seeking the collective acceptance of its citizens. Once same-sex marriage is codified in law, more measures will be taken to force the acceptance of same-sex relationships.

From The Divine Institution of Marriage:

Legalizing same-sex marriage will affect a wide spectrum of government activities and policies. Once a state government declares that same-sex unions are a civil right, those governments almost certainly will enforce a wide variety of other policies intended to ensure that there is no discrimination against same-sex couples. This may well place “church and state on a collision course.” Banned in Boston...

One case I found today is the California Supreme Court saying that doctors cannot refuse treatment of gays on religious grounds. A doctor did not want to help a lesbian get pregnant with donated sperm.

Another case in 2006:

Catholic Charities of Boston made the announcement on March 10: It was getting out of the adoption business. "We have encountered a dilemma we cannot resolve. . . . The issue is adoption to same-sex couples."

There are many more instances like this. There is no inherent right to acceptance. I do "not object to rights ... regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference. " Divine. Thomas Sowell said:

Homosexuals were on their strongest ground when they said that the law had no business interfering with relations between consenting adults. Now they want the law to put a seal of approval on their behavior. But no one is entitled to anyone else's approval.

Here are some other sources I have found with reasonable arguments for traditional marriage.

http://thechair.blogtownhall.com/

http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/the-cultural-argument-against-gay-marriage

http://calmarriagedefense.blogspot.com/

Persuade Someone without a Reference to Religious Belief

2008-08-17T09:32:00.005-07:00

Do you have any insight as to how I could persuade someone without a reference to religious belief that "only marriage between a man and a woman [should be] valid or recognized" by the state (CA Prop 8).

A month ago, I asked a question like the above of some friends. I strongly believe that "The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity." (The Family: A Proclamation to the World)

This morning I found The Divine Institution of Marriage. A document "to explain [the LDS church's] reasons for defending marriage between a man and a woman as an issue of moral imperative" I have not read it all yet. It has given me some points of reason that might persuade voters to constitutionally define traditional marriage.

The Church does not object to rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference.

I agree with this. Defining traditional marriage is not about taking away civil rights.

Marriage is not primarily a contract between individuals to ratify their affections and provide for mutual obligations. Rather, marriage and family are vital instruments for rearing children and teaching them to become responsible adults. While governments did not invent marriage, throughout the ages governments of all types have recognized and affirmed marriage as an essential institution in preserving social stability and perpetuating life itself. Hence, regardless of whether marriages were performed as a religious rite or a civil ceremony, married couples in almost every culture have been granted special privileges aimed primarily at sustaining their relationship and promoting the environment in which children are reared. A husband and a wife do not receive these privileges to elevate them above any other two people who may share a residence or social tie, but rather in order to preserve, protect, and defend the all-important institutions of marriage and family.

I will probably post more as I read through this and gather other sources to support these propositions.

Here is a list of some of the public statements the LDS church has taken on Same Sex Marriage:

20 October 2004. "The Church accordingly favors measures that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and that do not confer legal status on any other sexual relationship"
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/first-presidency-statement-on-same-gender-marriage

Last date noted: March 2005. Church Joins Other Faith Groups in Defense of Traditional Marriage
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/church-joins-other-faith-groups-in-defense-of-traditional-marriage

24 February 2008. Care for the Flock. "On 23 February 2008 The Salt Lake Tribune posted an article about [Peter] Danzig who was a member of the Church’s Orchestra at Temple Square. According to the story, in June of 2006 Mr. Danzig published a letter-to-the-editor in the Tribune (and letters in other local newspapers) encouraging members to oppose Church leaders on the issue of same gender marriage."
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/care-for-the-flock

30 June 2008. California and Same-Sex Marriage. "The following letter was sent from the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Church leaders in California to be read to all congregations on 29 June 2008"
"We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman."
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/california-and-same-sex-marriage

13 August 2008, The Divine Institution of Marriage. "The California Supreme Court recently ruled that same-sex marriage was legal in California"
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage

UPDATE 2008-11-03:
Some one sent me a link to a speech by Robert George, "On the Moral Purposes of Law and Government". He is a Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University.

I have not listened to all of it but I like it so far.

Increase Government Transparency

2008-05-09T08:26:00.003-07:00

Bills like this are a good reason to increase government transparency. Perhaps reform like the following are in order.

"ReadtheBill.org believes bills should be posted online for 72 hours for anyone to read before Congress debates them."

http://readthebill.org/aboutus

"Each bill, and every amendment, must be read in its entirety before a quorum in both the House and Senate."

http://www.downsizedc.org/read_the_laws.shtml

trackback to hh

"We chose you because we trust you"

2008-04-02T09:07:00.002-07:00

The check engine light went on in one of our cars yesterday. A few months ago I was toying with the idea of finding a mechanic nearer our home we could trust. I have used this closer one for a couple of oil changes. With the input of my wife, we decided to use the one we used for years before. The one that is further from our house.

This morning Progressive Tire & Auto Center called me. They said that our car did not need a tune up since it had one 2 years ago. "I would be happy to take your money, but you probably don't need it", he said. They said they would check the cause of the engine light and let us know if there was work that needed to be done.

One phrase I said stood out to me and prompted me to post praise of this shop, "We chose you because we trust you". It is difficult to gain the trust of an expert you must depend on. Here is a map to their location. I recommend them.

Change

2008-03-03T07:46:00.002-07:00

If this is the kind of change Barack Obama want us to make, the world better watch out for a revolution of good.

Send your message of support to Mitt Romney

2008-02-06T09:28:00.000-07:00

At the bottom of this post is my response to a confirmation email from the MittRomney.com. They sent it after I donated again to his campaign. Here is a link to the contribution page. How much do you support Mitt? Are you willing to offset the money of his own he has committed?

I am committed to the principles that attracted me to his campaign over a year ago. Regardless of the outcome of this nomination, I believe he is the best choice. There are still at least 20 states that have yet to decide. They deserve the best choice to stay in the race.

Hugh Hewitt gave Seven Reasons To Support The GOP's Nominee: "The war and six Supreme Court justices over the age of 68".

When activist judges are more than willing to rewrite rules of long-standing, periods of exile should never be self-imposed "for the good of the party." Exiles can go on a very long time indeed. Ask the Whigs.

Emphasis added.

The GOP as well is the party committed to victory in Iraq and the wider war. A four year time-out would be a disaster, a period of time in which al Qaeda and its jihadist off-shoots would regroup in some places and continue to spread in others. Iran, even if punished in the months before November, would certainly continue and accelerate its plans under the soft pleadings of a President Obama or Clinton 2.0.

These aren't the years to wish a pox on your primary opponents' heads beyond June.

I will support the GOP's nominee. The remaining Republicans also deserve to have a conservative choice.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rich Alger
Date: Feb 6, 2008 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Thank You for Your Contribution!
To: Romney for President <info1@mittromney.com>

I want you to know that I continue to support you. Keep going! Stand up and fight hard!

McCain Is My Third Choice

2008-01-27T08:37:00.000-07:00

John McCain is my third choice for President behind Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. I agree with Hugh Hewitt's short list for why.

There's a reason why Senator McCain never brings [the gang of 14] up when asked to discuss his qualifications for the presidency. It is on the list with the votes against the Bush tax cuts, the McCain-Kennedy immigration "reform," McCain-Feingold, ANWR and many other things.

The Gang of 14 is short hand for why John McCain should not be the nominee of the GOP.

"The Gang of 14 was a term coined to describe the bipartisan group of moderate Senators in the 109th United States Congress who successfully negotiated a compromise in the spring of 2005 to avoid the deployment of the so-called [constitutional] option" Wikipedi a. The constitutional option was a Republican plan to change the rules of the Senate so as to not allow filibustering of judicial nominees.

"Senator McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts. Now he's for them." Mitt Romney on Thursday, April 26th, 2007 in Stratham, N.H. Found at PolitiFact.com. See also, MediaMatters.org view on this PolitiFact article.

I will support whoever is the Republican nominee. I am convinced that Mitt Romney is the best choice.

"Fredheads: It Is Time To Support Mitt"

2008-01-23T07:26:00.000-07:00

"Fredheads: It Is Time To Support Mitt", The Jawa Report is a blog by a long time Fred Thompson supporter. Hugh Hewitt links to him,

The Jawa Report's Dr. Rusty Shackleford endorses Romney after Fred's exit. Conservosphere bloggers know that RS is a leader among online Fredheads.

UPDATE: From the comment thread at My Pet Jawa, the most succinct defense of Romney's record as a conservative governor in a deep blue state:

Here is Romney's actual conservative record:

---In the four balanced budgets he signed into law, Governor Romney used the line-item veto or program reduction power to cut spending by nearly $1 Billion. Over the course of four budgets, Governor Romney made over 300 line-item reductions, 350 line-item eliminations and struck language 150 times.

--- When Gov Romney took office in Massachusetts, he inherited a $2 billion deficit. While in office, he turned the $2 billion into a surplus----WITHOUT raising taxes.

---Gov Romney solved the health care crisis in Massachusetts----and his plans are still used today. He did this by using the free market and competition---and without raising taxes.

--- Gov. Romney was instrumental in passing a bill abolishing a retroactive capital gains tax in the state that would have forced nearly 50,000 taxpayers to pay an additional $200 million in state taxes and fees

--- 4 years ago --- before the illegals marched in our streets --- Romney opposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to get driver’s licenses. "Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy," the governor said. (Scott S. Greenberger, "Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented," The Boston Globe, 10/28/03)

--- Romney vetoed a bill in 2004 that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate paid by citizens at public colleges and universities in Massachusetts.

--- Romney vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research

--- Romney vetoed a bill that provided for the "morning after pill" without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent

--- He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation
Bren | 01.22.08 - 6:56 pm |

Huckabee is my fourth choice

2008-01-22T10:38:00.000-07:00

Out of the candidates that have gotten the most votes in the last few weeks, Mike Huckabee is my fourth choice. My ranking is

1. Mitt Romney
2. Rudy Giuliani
3. John McCain
4. Mike Huckabee

One reason is that he is not as fiscally conservative.
Huckabee---Whatever Tax You Pass, "You Will Have Nothing But My Profound Thanks"

Another reason is his position on the war in Iraq. From the Jan/Feb 2008 Edition of Foreign Affairs, Huckabee said, "The Bush administration's arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. "

Mitt Romney could not believe a Republican said this, "I can't believe he'd say that. I'm afraid he's running for the wrong party. The truth of the matter is this president's kept us safe these last six years."

Victor Davis Hanson has more to say on this as quoted by Hugh Hewitt.

I want to be clear. I will support whoever is the Republican nominee. Mitt Romney is the best choice.

Why I Like Mitt Romney

2008-01-05T12:54:00.000-07:00

Last night my wife and I watched an "Ask Mitt Anything" meeting in New Hampshire that took place Friday Jan 4. After watching it we discussed how much we liked it. My wife expressed frustration that everyone doesn't see how great he would be as President. Following are some of the reasons why I like Mitt.

I Trust Him

I first heard about Mitt Romney late in 2006. I was impressed with his determination in fighting for a traditional definition of marriage. I bought Hugh Hewitt's book A Mormon in the White House?: 10 Things Every American Should Know about Mitt Romney. The more I read, the better I liked him. I have followed his campaign for the last year. I have studied his position on the issues. I have found evidence that his character lines up with what he says.

I Agree With Him

I cannot find a policy of his that I strongly disagree with. My ranking of the issues are :

War on Terror
We must defeat jihadists. These are the far extreme of Islam. They do not represent the mainstream. Their ability to wage war must be truncated. We must also persuade more and more Muslims that "religious freedom, separation of religious and political authority in a state, civility, tolerance, democratic persuasion rather than coercion" is morally superior. (George Weigel)

Spending
We cannot continue to spend beyond our means. Perhaps a practical solution like a "72 Hours of Online Sunshine Rule" would help.

Energy
We must become energy independent. It is better to be independent from countries of energy supply like, Venezuela, Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Mitt has the energy and vision to rally the country like we did to get a man to the moon. He can inspire the younger generations to study science, math and engineering. He will get us to invest in the best technologies for energy sources and increased efficiencies.

Social Issues
Guarding Our Children on Their Computers
A Record of Protecting Traditional Marriage
A Record of Protecting Life

More sources of Mitt Romney on the issues:
Fox News profile on Mitt Romney. At the bottom there is a section with a issues tab. EvangelicalsForMitt.org: On the Issues, "Why We Support Governor Romney". Top Ten Issues of MyManMitt.com

He Can Win

"As a fiscal and social conservative, he's the only candidate who can hold the Reagan coalition together. Plus, he has already put together a strong, well-organized campaign with the firepower to win. Every single other GOP candidate either alienates a key part of the coalition or has weak a operation incapable of defeating a well-funded, ruthless, counter-to-our-values opponent in the general election." ("Why We Support Governor Romney". EvangelicalsForMitt.org)

He Can Get It Done

Not since Ronald Reagan has someone inspired the same optimism and energy from me. Reagan effectively addressed the public directly. Romney did the same in Massachusetts. The legislature was going to pass a bill that would raise taxes. Romney mailed each household the bill that they would individually have to pay. The bill was defeated.

He has turned around many businesses. He turned the Salt Lake Olympics into a success. He got major health care reform passed in the liberal state of Massachusetts. He did it using private sector providers that are cheaper to administrate.

Conclusion

My wife would have liked if all her family had cable, she would have asked them to watch. Mitt was very relaxed in this kind of environment. As voters learn more about him the more they will like. I hope this article provides you with some information to make an informed choice.

Freedom and Religion

2008-01-03T10:56:00.001-07:00

These two quotes from Mitt Romney's "Faith in America" speech point out important connections between freedom and religion.

Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.

and

We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning.

Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left.

It reminds me of the story of Captain Moroni and his call to defend their rights and religion, if necessary by the sword. "Behold, whosoever will maintain this title upon the land, let them come forth in the strength of the Lord, and enter into a covenant that they will maintain their rights, and their religion, that the Lord God may bless them" (Alma 46:20).

There is a proper balance of spirituality in public life. It is between two extremes. "Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God." (Mitt Romney). Freedom also allows the person who does not believe in spirituality. No man should be forced to join a religion. In contrast faith should not be forced from the public square. The freedom to chose these things should be defended with our might.

"The Twinned Threats of Faith"

2008-01-03T10:28:00.001-07:00

From George Weigel about his new book, Faith, Reason, and the War Against Jihadism: A Call to Action. (edited and numbered by me)

The Pope accurately described the twinned threats of faith detached from reason,

[1] so that you can believe that God commands you to do the irrational, like blow up the World Trade Center, and reason having lost faith in itself,

[2] so that the West no longer has the capacity to say here is why religious freedom, separation of religious and political authority in a state, civility, tolerance, democratic persuasion rather than coercion, here is why these things are morally superior.

Those are the two sides of the great culture war in the world today, and the Pope hit it right on the head.

Mitt Romney touched on this theme in his Dec 6, 07 "Faith in America" speech.

I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired . so grand . so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer. The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.

Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom... killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance.

National Fast for Guidance

2008-01-03T08:59:00.000-07:00

Abraham Lincoln appointed a National Fast Day for March 30 1863. I did not realize that our country has a history 2 3 of declaring fast days. As our country decides our next President, let each of us set a time to fast and pray for guidance. That we may collectively choose the best of the wise, good and honest.

Article 6

2007-12-12T06:46:00.000-07:00

Hugh Hewitt interviewed mp3 Larry O'Donnell on Monday. Larry went crazy on the McLaughlin Group last Friday.

The funniest reaction to Hugh's interview was a caller (Mormon) who said he wants to know what Mormon stole Larry's lunch money when he was little. Larry seems to have a personal vendetta against Latter-Day Saints.

The point is that according to article 6 of the US Constitution, "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States". For some reason Larry seems to think that a conservative Mormon running for President has a different standard to meet than the Democratic Majority Leader of the Senate. In order to exclude yourself from Larry's venom, you have to have an "elastic relationship" with your church.

Hugh gave a warning around the end of 2006 to those with spiritual beliefs. If you support those who attack Mitt Romney based on his beliefs you are opening up the door for the sharp knifes against anyone with faith who wants to serve in a public trust. Article 6 expresses the legal standard for those who serve the United States. It also codifies our common feeling that you should not exclude those who want to serve just because they have personal beliefs different than yourself.

A better standard is to look at the values leaders hold. Use their actions over a long period to assess their character. Do they walk their talk? Do their values whether fiscal, social, international or otherwise match up well with yours? Or, recognizing your own failings, those you want us to work towards?

For comprehensive coverage on article 6 on the Constitution, see also http://article6blog.com.

Lack of Internet Zoning Laws

2007-11-19T10:20:00.000-07:00

Our world is organized and protected in part by zoning laws. It ensures that harmful industries are kept away from residential areas. The Interne is long overdue in this kind of regulation. I found this site recently and found their arguments to be persuasive. We have the technology to do this. It will preserve individual choice. It will only make it easier to keep out content I do not want.

From http://www.cp80.org/solutions/technology/
See also an informative flash presentations at http://www.cp80.org/training/

The solution is simple. Categorize and organize all Internet content using the existing and available ports which will allow users to access what they want and avoid what they don't want. This solution creates a space for those who value the freedom and who want to avoid unwanted intrusions into their businesses, homes, and minds.
The implementation could be equally simple. An Internet governing body, accountable to the world governments and the public they represent, can designate content specific ports and appropriate penalties to ensure compliance. Furthermore, individual governments would be free to implement additional laws as appropriate for their citizens to enhance the adoption and enforcement of this approach.
The CP80 Foundation is dedicated to offering solutions that are free, that leverage existing technologies and infrastructure, and that consider the global nature of the Internet. The foundation is also committed to educating and enabling the individual consumer to the real possibilities of a better Internet.
The CP80 Foundation is also proposing the Internet Community Ports Act (ICPA) in the United States that honors, supports and protects the basic human rights and freedoms that all people should enjoy. The ICPA can be used as a roadmap for legislative efforts in other countries around the world.