2008 Presidential Race: The Conservative Conundrum

Although we're several months out from the General Election, there is a great divide amongst conservative voters who are traditionally solid for Republicans. The presumptive party nominee, John McCain, seems to be out to alienate these conservatives at every turn with his track record of support for decidedly un-conservative legislation (McCain-Feingold being the biggest), as well as things like fetal stem-cell research, and so-called "Global Warming". Not to mention his currying favor with leftists of all stripes (like LaRaza). Influential conservative leaders like Dr. James Dobson are so far refusing to endorse McCain, and McCain is refusing to meet with them to try and sway their thinking.

These disgruntled conservatives are more and more willing to either not vote, or vote for third-party candidates that are more in line with their conservative views. These conservatives are a major voting bloc, and presumably ones that a serious Presidential contender would not want to lose in what promises to be a close race in the fall. Yet this does not seem to concern McCain.

So the question for these conservatives becomes one of taking their votes away from McCain by voting for a third party, voting for the Democrat nominee, or not voting at all. Or voting for McCain and hoping a better candidate comes along in 2012.

My own decision making is coming down to this question: which of these three bad candidates will do the least amount of damage over the next four years?

I must say that I am extremely resentful at having to vote this way. I want a candidate I can be for, that I can support without any hesitation, and that I can be passionate about as I discuss the issues in the election. I haven't had that since 1984. I thought I had it at the time in 2000, but events have proved that not to be the case. And now I have a candidate that is even worse than George W. Bush in 2004.

After that election I swore to myself that I wouldn't be put into that position again - having to vote for a candidate that I so disliked and disagreed with on most points, just because the alternative was to vote for a slimy, traitorous, disgusting, crooked, dimwit like John Kerry.

Well here I am four years later and I am in the same quandry. The Democrats give me evil from the pit of hell regardless of who wins their nomination, while the Republicans offer me "evil lite" - one that is only slightly more to the right than the Democrat. A vote for a Libertarian, or a Constitution Party candidate can be viewed as a wasted vote, even though their positions are much closer to my own views than those of McCain, because they have no chance of winning anything.

So as I said, I have to decide which candidate will do the least harm to the issues I care about: the Constitution, the economy, and abortion.

The Constitutional issues for me distill down to a couple of points: Judicial nominees, and the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd guards all the other rights recognized by the Constitution, and gives free citizens of the Republic the final safeguards over their own liberties and a counter to those who would try to take them away. You can't have any of the others without the 2nd. If McCain will follow through on his statements to appoint Strict Constructionalist justices (like Scalia and Alito) to the court, I will feel like I got my votes worth with him. As it turns out, this is the exact
reason I voted for GWB in 2004, and he has gotten to appoint 2 justices who have turned out to be pretty good choices (although Harriet Myers just made me want to, well, spit).

The same situation presents itself now as it did in 2004: whoever is elected will likely appoint 2 justices to the Supreme Court, and that decision will affect the landscape of the Republic for decades to come. I can't in good conscience cast any vote that will put either Clinton or Obama into a position to make those choices.

Of course, if the Republicans so fumble the race this year that they end up losing more seats in Congress and getting 2/3rd majorities in both houses, this will become a moot point, as the Democrats will never allow a Scalia or Alito through the nomination process, and McCain will have to appoint a moderate at the very least. The special elections that have been held this year in normally safe Republican districts have all turned out disastrously for them, and I have no confidence in their ability to change their direction, because their leadership is spineless and weak.

It doesn't look good for a party that 8 years ago held control of the Presidency and both Houses of Congress. They have squandered it all and have very little to show for it.

Home Educators and 2nd Amendment Activists: More in common than meets the eye.

Attending the INCH Conference this past weekend - the Michigan State Homeschool Conference. Friday night is always the night where the politicians show up for a few minutes to connect with us and share a few remarks.

This year, we heard from:

• Chief Justice Clifford Taylor of the Michigan Supreme Court
• State Senator Wayne Kuipers, who chairs the Senate Education Committee, among others.
• State Rep. Jack Hoogendyk, who wants to run against U.S. Senator Carl Lenin, err, Levin this fall. Jack is getting his nominating petitions signed so he can get on the ballot.

Home Educators in Michigan have had 12 years or so of relative peace from the encroachments of the educrats and their lackeys in the legislature, because we have enjoyed Republican majorities in both the House and Senate. The 2006 shift from Republican to Democrat control of the House has changed this, and now all sorts of Legislative harassment is beginning in that chamber. One that has us most up in arms is HB 5912, which for the first time will implement a registration requirement for Home Educators in Michigan. Each child will have to be registered with the local government school, ostensibly so they can make sure that some parent isn't only claiming to home school when they really aren't. Or so claims Joan Bauer, the bill's sponsor. They don't want to restrict what Home Educators are doing - of course not. We just want to prevent abuse of the system. That's all.

Firearm people will instantly recognize this rhetoric! It is the same "logic" the gun-banners use when they want to implement gun registration schemes.

We don't want to take your guns away - heavens no! We just want to make sure that the criminals don't get them. Yeah, that's right. Criminals. Oh, and crazy folks like those Iraq war soldiers who come home and get PTSD and want to kill people. But you hunters - nahh, we don't want your guns."

What they are really saying is that they want to control you, and when they think they can get away with it, to come and take your guns away. And if you think I am some wild-eyed, smelly, snaggletoothed backwoodsman who likes conspiracy theories and believes in UFO's, I say to you: look at Great Britain. And then look at Australia. It's already happened. It's not some fantasy.

So why would firearms people want to have anything to do with homeschoolers? Aren't they just a bunch of religious nutjobs? Aren't they socially retarded misfits who are bringing up children who are unable to function in the "real" world? In a word - NO.

Home Educators see the same government encroachments and abuses of power that you do. They see their rights being trampled the same as yours are. The want Liberty and limited government just like you do.

If these two groups ever got together and acted on their common interests, congresscritters and legislators of all stripes would sit up and take notice, because these two groups can guarantee election wins! They are very vocal, and very active, and for the most part put their money where their mouth is. And their time too.

So think about it folks - take it from one who is a member of both groups: We can accomplish a lot together.

Tolerant, Peaceful, Accepting Potheads on display at Lagniappe's Lair

Reading up on the events at Lagniappe's Lair today, as I am wont to do when I have a few spare minutes, and I landed in the middle of a hornets nest. It seems the Keeper of the Lair has blogged critically about the pot-fest held recently in Boulder, CO, and is being lambasted by the potheads. He seems to be holding his own, however!

Reading through the 51 replies, I couldn't help laughing at them, but I was also struck by how intolerant and bigoted they were of The Keepers opinion. I mean, for those who just want people to tolerate their habit and not look down on them for it, they sure don't practice what they preach. One even commented on how much money he makes and how much better of a person that makes him than The Keeper. (I expected him to give the length in millimeters [since he was in China] and compare it to The Keeper as well) I guess it's too much to expect that those on the left who call conservatives by names like haters, bigots, and [insert aberrant behavior here]-ophobes would show us by their own actions the level of tolerance and acceptance they think we should have, so we conservatives might learn by their example. Alas, there seems to be no more character on the left than they think is on the right.

Personally, I am probably more lax on this particular subject than The Keeper. I prefer social scorn and disassociation to the big government solution to this problem. Of course, that presupposes a common moral framework in society which, unfortunately, doesn't exist like it used to, when alcoholics and drug abusers were ostracized from polite society and confined themselves to the seedier parts of towns. But, since we will not control ourselves, government will step in to fill the void.

So thank-you potheads for showing us your true selves. Not that we didn't know already. And thanks to The Keeper for poking a stick into the nest and stirring them up so we could see them.

On the eve of Income Tax Deadline Day...

...we have this quote from Ronaldus Magnus:

"[April 15] is the last day for filing income tax returns---a day that reminds us that taxpayers pay too much of their earnings to the Federal Government. And Americans will continue to pay too much money to the Federal Government until the Congress acts on our proposals to reduce tax rates across the board... While April 15 serves as a reminder, the people of the United States truly do not need to be reminded. They are victims of inflation, which pushes them into higher tax brackets. They are robbed daily of a better standard of living. They are discouraged from work and investment... Taxes are much too high to deal in half measures... The choice before us is clear. I strongly feel that the great majority of Americans believe that nothing would better encourage economic growth than leaving more money in the hands of the people who earn it. It's time to stop stripping bare the productive citizens of America and funneling their hard-earned income into the Federal bureaucracy. Today is a day when the people reaffirm their commitment to our system by contributing a portion of their income to the Government. Americans have always been prepared to pay their fair share, but today they should make it clear to all elected officials that government has gone beyond its bounds and that the people will not tolerate the ever-increasing tax burden they have experienced in recent years."

The only issue I take with President Reagan's statement is this: "Americans have always been prepared to pay their fair share" sounds suspiciously like "reasonable gun control", and language like that is always used to justify taxes and controls that are neither fair nor reasonable.

The rest of the quote is like cool water in the desert, however. Too bad most politicians today have forgotten the message.

Mayor Nutter lives up to his name

Mayor Nutter, of Philadelphia, gets my vote for Stupid Quote of the Week.

It seems that Hizzoner wants to impose gun control on the good people of Philadelphia. Problem is, Pennsylvania state law provides that only the state can regulate firearms, and this law is backed up by Pennsylvania Supreme Court rulings.

So this guy decides he doesn't have to obey these laws, and has enacted five local anti-gun laws in defiance of the State.

Here is his rationale:

Almost 232 years ago, a group of concerned Americans took matters in their own hands and did what they needed to do by declaring that the time had come for a change. We are going to make ourselves independent of the violence that's been taking place in this city for far too long.

Obviously, Hizzoner is a graduate of the Government Education System which no longer teaches real American history, otherwise, he would have realized that those very Patriots he is comparing himself to used GUNS (gasp!) when they took matters into their own hands.

Now, I suppose to some extent he is right, in that he will use his City Police force to enforce these illegitimate laws, and they certainly have guns.

Providentia Blog calls on all Philadelphia Police Officers of good conscience to refuse to enforce these laws. (I'm sure they all read me!)

Here is the original article, if you can stomach it.

Thus spake Moses:

If you talk about race, it does not make you a racist. If you see distinctions between the genders, it does not make you a sexist. If you think critically about a denomination, it does not make you anti-religion. If you accept but don't celebrate homosexuality, it does not make you a homophobe.

Charlton Heston

...and one on McCain

I have never understood the great flurry of interest in the selection of a Presidential running mate. This is a person who gets a few photo ops with the Candidate on the podium at the convention, makes a few speeches during the campaign, and gets one debate with the VP candidate from the other side. They are supposed to bring votes to the top guy in a region or state where they are weak. Then, when elected, they sit in their office for four years doing nothing, attending state funerals when necessary, and collecting a paycheck. Why this is deemed important is beyond me.

This election (assuming that McCain is the nominee of the Republicans), the VP nomination takes on some level of meaning beyond just a few uncommitted votes in the deep south.

John McCain has been clashing with conservatives for many years, and has missed few opportunities to poke them in the eye (as examples, I give you his "agents of intolerance" quote, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and the "Gang of 14"). But now, he needs us. He needs us to come out and vote for him on election day in order to offset the Obama Zombies. His rhetoric has been changing somewhat toward us, and he has apparently seen the light on solutions to the illegal immigrant problem. Still, most real conservatives don't trust him any farther than they can throw him.

This is where his choice for VP becomes important. There are rumors of Giuliani or Romney, neither of whom are conservative, and neither of whom inspire much of a following (all we have to do is look at their primary performances to see that). If McCain picks anyone like these two, or someone who is a "moderate", there won't be much of a chance for real conservatives to embrace McCain.

However, if he selects someone who is a known, committed, real conservative, it can be seen as an indicator that he understands at some level that it is conservatives who are going to win this election for him, and not crossover democrats and liberal republicans.

It would remain to be seen if this epiphany would last beyond Inauguration Day, however. There's that trust thing again.

A Couple of Observations on the Democrat Candidates

1. Has anybody noticed that now that Hillary Clinton is actually having to campaign and fight for her political life, she doesn't know how to do it? She is fine when all she has to do is show up and run out the party platitudes and everyone votes for her, but when she has to actually think and plan and work and contend, she just whiffs? If she can't stand up to someone as insubstantial as Obama, what is she going to do with Achma-whatshisname, or Putin, or even Gordon Brown?
   
2. What is with the Obama supporters? Those on the left consider those who listen to Limbaugh or Hannity to be "mind-numbed robots", but even the biggest Hannity "Great American" sycophant is Albert Einstein compared to the breathless and brainless followers of Obama. Seriously - the guy has all the substance of a bag of rice cakes, and you Obama people are OK with this?
3. So it looks like McCain v. Obama this election cycle. Volatile v. Vapid. I'm just inspired. Not.
   

Here's a point to ponder...

I haven't talked about (so called) Global Warming lately, but I read this statement today and thought it made and excellent point:

"Once the government gains control over energy decisions, do we really think they will relinquish it after manmade global warming is realized to be a false alarm? It has been said that whoever controls energy, controls life. Right now, the free market (which means you) controls those decisions. Do we need to remind ourselves how well things went in the former Soviet Union when the bureaucrats made the economic decisions, rather than letting the collective will of the people, expressed though a free market, govern the economy?... What will people do when they realize that going along with the 56-percent scientific majority has resulted in them giving up much of their personal freedom in the process? I wouldn't trade that freedom for any presidential candidate."

Climatologist Roy Spencer

Do People Actually Think Like This?

From an AP report on a protest by families and victims of the VA Tech gunman;

Va. Tech Families Protest State Gun Law

Published: 1/21/08, 10:25 PM EDT
By KRISTEN GELINEAU

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Survivors and families of the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings faced off Monday against gun-rights advocates over a bill that would prevent criminals and the mentally ill from buying firearms at gun shows.

About 100 supporters of the measure lay on the Capitol lawn to honor the victims of gun violence, as about 200 opponents stood nearby, holding signs that read, "Here Lie Disarmed Victims."

At one point, Jeff Knox, director of operations of the Manassas-based Firearms Coalition, approached survivor Colin Goddard and said students could have stopped student Seung-Hui Cho's rampage if they had been allowed to carry guns on campus.

"I would have stopped him," Knox said. "Because when I went to school, I carried a gun. It was legal; I did it."

Goddard, a Virginia Tech senior who was shot four times in the April 16 massacre, was taken aback, then said: "I feel sorry for you - the fact that you feel you need to protect yourself in every situation.

"You're afraid of crazy situations happening. I've lived through this and I know that I can't continue in my life afraid of things," he said, adding that he put his "full trust" in the police to protect society.

The bolding is mine.

When I read this I was speechless. I just don't understand this mentality.

Good for the VCDL - they got it just right! "Here lie unarmed victims"

Bush Administration sides with DC on Heller?

That's right. Ol' "Compassionate Conservative" George had his Justice Department file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the Heller case that sides with Washington DC.

Syd Wheedon, from "The Sight M1911" says it very well:

While I try to avoid doing too much direct politics in this newsletter, except as it relates to gun rights and law, I feel compelled to express my utter outrage at the Bush administration’s filing of an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court in support of the Washington DC handgun ban. According to the Washington Post, the government’s brief includes the following, “The court's decision could be read to hold that the Second Amendment categorically precludes any ban on a category of 'Arms' that can be traced back to the Founding era," the government argued. “If adopted by this court, such an analysis could cast doubt on the constitutionality of existing federal legislation prohibiting the possession of certain firearms, including machineguns.” Sorry guys, but it’s the Second Amendment itself that “casts doubt on the constitutionality of existing federal legislation,” and not any decision by a court.

Government is jealous of its power and it seems that parties and promises get thrown under the bus when the rubber meets the road. I am truly and profoundly disappointed.

I couldn't agree more.

German Educrats At It Again

In an article in WorldNetDaily.com, Bob Unruh reports:

A German family has completed its flight to Great Britain after the mayor of their hometown filed a court action to give custody of the children to the state because the parents have been homeschooling, according to officials at Netzwerk-Bildungsfreiheit, an advocacy organization addressing such issues.

Officials there said Klaus and Kathrin Landahl and their five children, including four of school age, "are in safety in England. They reached Dover on Saturday midnight."

Can you imagine having to leave your home, family, friends, and country just because you don't want the state to teach [that is, indoctrinate] your children, and some petty tyrant decides he knows better than you do? And the Landahls are not the only ones being forced into this decision.

Make no mistake, tyranny has returned to Germany and is growing.

Read the full article here.

More on Mitt

Not to be piling on or anything, but this quote from Mitt Romney in a recent interview with Tim Russert has just got me grinding my teeth. The gist of the answer is that Romney supports the 1994 (so called) Assault Weapons Ban and would sign one if he were President. Then he goes on to say:

"And if there is determined to be, from time to time, a weapon of such lethality that it poses a grave risk to our law enforcement personnel, that’s something I would consider signing. There’s nothing of that nature that’s being proposed today in Washington. But, but I would, I would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality…"

This has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard any politician say. "Extraordinarily lethal"? So that would make you "extraordinarily dead" instead of just dead if one of these weapons were used on you? Does it also kill your wife and firstborn child when it kills you, even if they are in a different part of town? Are you any less dead from taking a 30mm cannon round (think A-10 Warthog) through your head as you are from taking a .22 cal round (think Ruger 10/22) through the head? I know cleanup would be more of the pressure-washer variety than just stuffing you into the body bag, but you're still dead!

Maybe they could take you to Miracle Max if you weren't "extraordinarily dead" and get you back on your feet that afternoon! You're only mostly dead!

No politician spouting this kind of twaddle should be on the ballot for Dog-Catcher, let alone President of the United States!

Mitt Romney's speech

I'm sure I'm going to get myself in trouble with the thought police and the Federal Bureau of Intolerance with this one: I can't vote for Mitt.

According to some, this makes me a hater of Mormons. Honestly, the fact that he's a Mormon isn't at the top of my list of reasons not to vote for him. At the top of my list is that he has no moral compass when it comes to the issues that matter to conservatives. As I understand it, orthodox Mormon doctrine would be considered pro-life, pro-family, and against special homosexual "rights". Historically Romney has been none of these, but now that he's running for President he expects us to believe he is a faithful Mormon and has changed his mind on all this.

While that may have happened, it is likely it happened because he realizes that in order to become President he needs to hold those positions. Of course, once he's elected how do you know what you can count on him to do? His track record indicates he has not been what he now says he is.

Frankly, I'm tired of finger-in-the-wind politicians in both parties who have no convictions except for their need to stay in office or advance to the next office. And by all appearances that's what Mitt is.

The second thing that bothers me is his statement in his recent speech about his faith that "no authorities of my church" would influence him as President. That seems to say a lot, but to me it creates more questions than it answers.

Objectively, a man's faith has got to be the thing that drives him and influences everything he does, whether it is Mormonism, Buddhism, or atheism. Certainly then the leaders of that man's religious group would exert a certain influence on him, as they do on all their "followers" (for lack of a better term). I know my Pastor would exert a lot of influence on me if I were President, because he would be the one who was encouraging, exhorting, and teaching me. I would bring all this to the decision-making processes of the Presidency.

I would have respected his position a lot more if he would have said something like "My faith drives my life and influences every decision I make. I would seek the counsel of many in the decisions I would have to make as President, but ultimately those decisions are mine alone to make."

I know you're from Michigan, Mitt, but that alone isn't enough for me to vote for you.

Button Bucks and Feeling like a Schmuck

The Michgan DNR puts out it's annual Hunting and Trapping guide, and it talks about deer identification. It essentially says that while it is perfectly legal to take a "button buck", you should avoid it so they can grow up and produce more deer. They also give tips on how to know the difference between a button buck and a doe. It has something to do with the buck having a shorter face than the doe.

As you can probably guess, I took a button buck this year, and I am feeling like a schmuck about it. My father-in-law and the next-door neighbor (both experienced hunters) are telling me that there was no way to tell, but it isn't helping me much. I feel like I have violated some unwritten rule and will be looked down upon by other hunters ("That's the guy that shot a button buck last year. Yeah, what a schmuck!") Somehow I now have the Scarlet "BB" branded on my camo.

Having pretty much only seen does in the eight years I have been hunting deer, I guess I didn't have anything to compare deer face lengths to. At least, not until now.

Oh well, it's still venison in the freezer. That's a good thing.

For those interested in this sort of thing: 295gr Powerbelt hollow point over 105gr Triple-7. 30 to 40 yards, double-lung, through and through. Scoped T/C Encore. Dropped where he stood.

One interesting technical note - I used a monopod shooting stick for the first time on this shot and found that I didn't like it too much. The adrenaline was pumping so hard that I was shaking like a leaf and was having a hard time keeping the crosshairs on target even with the stick. I think my lightened trigger helped me here as I didn't need much force to touch it off, so when the crosshairs were in the right spot I just gave a little twitch on the trigger and it went off.

I am certainly preferring a well-braced sitting or rested shot rather than the monopod. Maybe I should try a bipod shooting stick and see if those are any better.

Firearm Deer Season 2007

Well, this week marked the start of firearm deer season here in Michigan. So what was I doing on opening day? Sitting in my office! Yes, you're right - I'm likely not going to shoot any deer from my office, especially considering it's in the basement, and my employer is rabidly anti-firearm and anti-self-defense.

When these arrangements were originally made, I agreed to take the 2nd week of the season because the other guy who I back up with SQL Server administration tasks wanted to take the week to go visit his mom in Arkansas and spend Thanksgiving there (American, not Canadian Thanksgiving, for my readers in the land of the Maple Leaf). The boss likes to have one of us here at all times just in case something needs to be administered.

Today, I find out that the trip was cancelled, and that said co-worker will be working on his roof repair project all week, which he has been working on since the spring! Not a full roof re-do, mind you, just a small overhang on his front porch.

So here I sit, working and blogging, rather than being out in the woods freezing my backside off and hoping a deer decides to amble across the path. I did go out two Sundays ago and made sure my deer gun, a nice Thompson/Center Encore 209x50 muzzleloader, was properly sighted in, and it was putting those 295 grain hollowpoints right where I wanted them (as it usually does). I put a new trigger spring in it over the summer, which gives it a very light 2-1/4 pound trigger pull. My gear is washed with the soap that smells like dirt and leaves, and tonight I will be checking my fanny pack to see that all my "survival gear" is packed and in good condition. I may even go out and get my kill tags tonight if I have time.

But I won't get out into the woods until Wednesday. *sigh*

But at least I get to go out! And there are still Muzzleloader and late firearm seasons before the end of the year, so there are plenty more opportunities to go out. Perhaps I can find a place to blog in the evenings if there are any interesting stories to relate.

Swedish Nitwits and other Idiocy

The Paul W. Smith Show on WJR once again provides me with fodder for my blog. No, it isn't the spat between State Police Col. Munoz and Sheriff Bouchard (which was, by the way, disgraceful). In fact, Paul didn't even talk about these two items while I was listening this morning. I have to give credit to the news staff at WJR for these:

Item Number 1: Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize. This prize was once coveted as one of the highest honors anyone could get for their humanitarian or scientific work. If you were a Nobel prize winner, you were something!

Today, these Swedish knuckleheads have once again displayed their foolishness for all the world to see by naming AlGore, that well known purveyor of lies, disinformation, and junk science, the recipient of the formerly esteemed Peace Prize. This is how low the "scientific" community has sunk. It's no longer about science, or peace, or truth, or the enduring worth of someone's body of work. It's about giving the finger to anyone who doesn't toe the ideological line espoused by the Nobel committee. Ask Raymond Damadian. Never heard of him? Ever had an MRI? Then you know about his work.

Source 1
Source 2

So, you readers of my blog who are Nobel Prize recipients (I'm sure there are lots of you out there!), be aware that your awards have been stripped of all honor and integrity by these ignorant, vindictive Swedes.


Item Number 2: Michigan House of Representatives sends new helmet bill to Senate. In an apparent fit of pique at not getting every last percentage point of tax increase they wanted, the Michigan House has passed a bill that will allow motorcyclists to ride their machines without a helmet - if they pay the state $100 per year for the privilege.

So I guess now we have the "No Helmet" tax. No word on whether the Senate will relegate this foolishness do the nearest dustbin. Supposedly the Governess does not support this new tax. Yeah, right - she's a Democrat, she never met a tax she didn't like, or a new means of regulating everyone's behavior she didn't want to implement.

And just for the record, I oppose helmet laws as an unlawful and unnecessary infringement on the right of people to make their own choices for themselves. I'm not a motorcyclist, but if I were I would always wear a helmet when riding. That would be my choice.

More on MSP Headquarters

Several weeks ago I blogged briefly about the proposed new headquarters building for the Michigan State Police in downtown Lansing. Last night on WXYT Channel 7 in Detroit, reporter Steve Wilson asked some very hard questions and got some very interesting answers. You can go here to view the video or read the transcript. This is a two part story (so far, there is more coming) and you can link to part 2 on that page.

The Joel Ferguson angle is interesting. No-bid contract, long-time supporter and contributor, downtown wasteland. Corruption is the word that comes to my mind. And why is it only ONE legislator, out of the whole bloody lot of them, is standing up and questioning this? ONE!

So, Michigan voters - you elected this person. Are you blown away yet?

The Problem, encapsulated

Reading The Detroit News coverage of the Michigan House debate overnight on the state budget, and I gleaned this nugget:

The lone Republican "yes" vote was cast by Rep. Chris Ward of Brighton. Because he voted against the Republican tide, he temporarily stepped down from his leadership position as House minority floor leader.

"Our state is on the brink of a constitutional crisis, and the time has come for all of us, regardless of party, region and philosophy to pull together to show that our state government can work," Ward said. "The institutions of our government are bigger than any one person."(emphasis mine)

Rep. Ward's comment epitomizes the problem with government at every level. Those who are in government think it is their job to perpetuate and increase it. That it is their job to take money away from people who can't afford to have it taken away, and turn around and give it away to people or entities who either don't deserve it or who shouldn't be getting government money anyway.

Rep. Ward, not only should you resign from your Minority Floor Leader position, you should resign from your House seat. You are a disgraceful example of the worst things in government.

Here's a news flash for ya Rep. Ward, straight from a real Republican - Ronald Reagan: "Government isn't the solution to our problems, Government is the problem." Learn it, live it.

Hail to the Victors? Not!

A little sports commentary today, reflecting on the weekend events. If the Tigers hadn't lost yesterday, my sports weekend would have been complete, as MSU and the Detroit Lions won, and UM and Notre Dame lost.

Good wins for the Spartans and Lions, but with these teams performance over the last few years, cautious optimism is all I can muster up for them. I enjoyed the games, especially late when the game was on the line, when both teams responded on both sides of the ball.

I do have to make a comment about UM folks who were ready to fire Lloyd Carr after the Appalachian State debacle. The nastiness I have heard about him is just incredible. I'm no UM fan, but for crying out loud people - this man has done more for UM football than even your precious Bo Shembechler (who never won a National Championship like Lloyd Carr did), and you people are ready to draw and quarter him and send the pieces to all the UM Alumni clubs around the country. Any football program in the country would be tickled pink to have his record, and you want him gone? Puh-leeze! Get a grip! This ain't the 60's and there are no more football factories, and you people need to pull your heads out and realize it!

Coach Carr, here's one Spartan who respects what you have done even when it's often been at our expense. You should retire whenever you want to, walk out with your head high, and tell all those UM doofuses what they can do with their maize and blue.