Monday, December 12, 2016

Press Once Again Trying to Make Trump Look Bad...

Greetings, friends, neighbors and countrymen! I have been away from my blog for far too long and it's time I took up the keyboard sword again. This is the first installment of what I hope to be a series on the MSM's untruths, half-truths and downright smears of President Elect Donald Trump. I'm not going to waste my time on legitimate criticisms, just distortions and lies. Enjoy, and don't forget to leave a comment!

Once again, the press is playing games to make Trump look bad. The big story today is that he is skipping the majority of daily intelligence briefing meetings. I saw the interview and they are telling you only part of the truth of what he said. Here's the deal:
1.) While there are daily meetings, the daily briefings are written reports. The media knows this, so they have worded their reports to say that Trump isn't "receiving" the daily briefings. He is. What he has been skipping is some of the meetings. HE STILL GETS THE WRITTEN REPORTS.
2.) Trump stated he has been attending meetings himself about twice a week. VPE Pence and Generals Mattis and Kelly, secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security respectively, attend EVERY meeting, even those that Trump attends himself. HE STILL GETS THE WRITTEN REPORTS.
3.) Trump said that very little changes on a daily basis, which is why the daily briefing meetings are redundant. With filling his cabinet as well as a staff of thousands on his plate, attending meetings with redundant information is not something Trump sees an efficient expenditure of his valuable time. Pence and two generals are at every meeting and are instructed to contact him if something major changes, and that Trump is "only a minute away" if he is called into a critical meeting. HE STILL GETS THE WRITTEN REPORTS.
4.) He isn't president yet, and won't be for another 6 weeks. Once his cabinet and top staff positions are filled, he may be more available to attend the meetings. HE STILL GETS THE WRITTEN REPORTS.
5.) Many Presidents, including 0bama, have famously or infamously skipped the meetings. From the Washington Post, Sept. 24, 2012:
"...the president’s daily calendar shows Obama receiving an in-person briefing on the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) 43.8 percent of his time in office. (The percentage dropped from a high of 48.8 percent in 2010 to 38.2 percent through May of 2012.)"
George W. Bush “wanted personal and oral, and that matched CIA’s institutional interest in face to face with the president, much better for their bureaucratic politics, but unclear how good it was for presidential decision making,” he said. “On Iraq WMD [weapons of mass destruction], the direct brief was clearly pernicious; reading might have pointed to the dissents, but the briefers did not.”
"In contrast, Bill 'Clinton the reader was known to comment that his morning papers were better than the intel brief, and better written — to the point that the CIA director James Woolsey joked that when that Cessna crashed into the White House, that was him seeking an audience with the president.'
"Richard Nixon also had few, if any, oral briefings and instead received his intelligence from the morning memo of his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger."

6.) Ironically, all the present hoopla over whether or not a PE or President must attend the daily briefing meetings, was stirred up in an anti-Obama ad run by American Crossroads, Karl Rove's super-PAC; a good move for Rove, since both Bushes preferred attending the face-to-face meetings to the written briefings, but now backfiring as people apply his misinformation to the current PE.

Friday, October 14, 2011

WE are TEA

Please forgive my extended absence from blogging - life got crazy and I had to prioritize other things. I can't guarantee daily posts, but I'll do my best to bring you excellence in opinion, analysis and Tea Party thought! On with the show....

As the streets are aswarm with drum-banging, drone-chanting, increasingly unwashed mobs calling for everything from free pizza (free educations, free loans, free love, etc.) to the end of capitalism, media pundits are turning themselves inside out to see this movement as somehow having something in common with the Tea Party. I keep hearing that we have "common ground. Really? I suppose at a certain level we both have the same stick in our eye, or at least certain slivers in common, but that's where any resemblance ends. After several days for ideas swirling around in my head, I prepared this statement for anyone who will listen to explain the difference between the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street (etc.):

We are TEA

We seek not to occupy, but to influence
We seek not to disrupt, but to restore
We seek not to transform, but to correct
We seek not to inflame, but to inspire
We seek not to empower government, but to restrain it
We seek not to punish success, but to encourage it
We seek not to diminish prosperity, but to enable it
We seek not to confiscate private property, but to protect it
We seek to exercise charity through giving, not taking
We seek to uphold the constitution, not abrogate it
We seek to control our own destinies, not control the destinies of others
We believe in earnings, not handouts
We believe in individuals, not groups
We believe in citizens, not classes
We believe government is subject of the people, not people as subjects of the government
We are Tea.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Strip searches, groping and the illusion of "Safety"

In my last post, I ranted about being called a "sheep" for possibly subjecting myself to the indignity of undergoing either a virtual naked picture or being handled on the genitalia and breasts by glorified security guards as a condition of getting on an airplane.

I was supposed to go to Sacramento for a ragtime festival in which my significant other is appearing. When we bought the tickets in September, I wasn't aware of the presence of the scanner at O'Hare, from whence I would be flying. Even so, had I been selected for the random screening and refused the scanner, I would have been subjected to a normal pat-down. It wasn't until Nov. 1 that the Transportation Security Administration decided groping genitals and squeezing breasts were the "alternative" to nudie shots.

Well, after several sleepless nights and much agonizing, I decided to forgo the flight and stay home. I cannot tell you how difficult that decision was. My S.O. does not understand and feels that my refusal to accompany him was a lack of support for him. Of course, the cost of the ticket is non-refundable. So, big fight at home (and we almost never fight), financial loss much anxiety and anguish later, I'm sitting at home contemplating the state of affairs in our country. And I am ANGRY.

Having endured a groping as a child, I could hardly stand watching this video of a 3-year-old girl being "patted" (yeah... right):

I know - some of you who are parents see a cranky child being difficult. But as our perceptions are influenced by our experiences, I was screaming right along with that child, "Don't touch me! Don't touch me!" Now, I don't live my life as a victim. I don't dwell on those things which happened to me in the past, and while I still harbor anger and resentment about not having had justice served, I'm past most of the feelings of trauma. At least I thought I was. Funny how those things which we have buried deep in our psyche can bubble up when our memories are stirred or we are stressed, just as the Herpes virus which causes Chicken Pox can lurk deep in our tissues, only to emerge years later as shingles. So, here it was Tuesday and I was already feeling traumatized over what I MIGHT go through on Thursday.

But that isn't the only abuse I've seen the TSA perpetrate horrendous indignities on innocent people with no intent to do anything but get on a plane to fly somewhere:

So, on the one hand, I have people saying we're all sheep for putting up with this. On the other, people are saying that the TSA must do this to keep us safe, so buck up and get over it or (and this is my favorite!) "DON'T FLY." That really should be followed up with a pththththttttt!! or at least "Nyah-nee-nyah-nee-nyah-nah."

Well, if looking at just this small sampling of TSA harassment really makes you feel safer, I must question your common sense. But gee... at least it's fair, and after all you wouldn't put it past the terrorist thugs to plant explosives on a tiny boy or in an octagenarian's prosthetic leg or a cancer survivor's prosthetic breast (or to inject some in her gel implant), right? So, let's take a look at just how safe these NEW procedures are keeping us, really, and how much an improvement they are over the old metal detector and wanding procedures they've been using since 9/11/01, shall we?

Let's start by counting the number of commercial airliners that have fallen out of the sky at the hands of terrorists since then; specifically, domestic flights. That's okay, I'll wait while you Google it. Still waiting... Okay, NONE. A UPS cargo plane came down, not in the US, though. That is ZERO for some 102 MILLION flights.

Now, let's count how many terrorists trying to get on planes have actually been caught by TSA agents through routine passenger screening. That's okay... I'll wait. Um... NONE. So, just in case you were thinking that zero planes down was a testament to how well the TSA is doing, that ought to burst your bubble.

While looking up other things, I discovered a very interesting website for a group called the Airline Pilots Security Alliance. Their site hasn't been updated in a while, but I've been assured by president Dave Mackett that they're in the process of doing that and will be pushing hard on Congress in January. Here are some snippets from their spotlight article:

"The security strategy we use to protect this incomprehensibly large system was designed 40 years ago to deter rank amateurs from carrying guns onto airplanes to hijack them to Cuba. The threat we face today is anything but amateur. Al Qaeda is smart, patient, extraordinarily motivated, well-funded, and, above all, suicidal. There is presently no widely-deployable technology that has a significant chance of keeping such a well-prepared enemy out of such an impossibly large system every time – even most times.


"The American Airlines shoebomber passed through screening not once, but twice, wearing explosive-laden shoes, and was not detected despite being detained and questioned for hours within a month after intelligence warned of potential shoebombers; an untrained Maryland college student doing his own 'personal testing' of airline security successfully planted simulated weapons and explosives on multiple commercial airliners several years ago. He was successful every time he tried -- and in some cases, the weapons were not detected for weeks.

"Perhaps most damning, two recent classified TSA reports leaked to the public, confirm TSA screeners at multiple airports, failed to detect more than 90 percent of hidden weapons concealed by testers. This failure rate is nearly identical to that confirmed by a former FAA Red Team leader in covert penetration tests before 9/11. And these failures do not even consider an entire class of nearly undetectable weapons, like carbon knives and liquid explosives.


"Layer upon layer of new and more intrusive security, reacting to the latest 'just-discovered threat' cannot be the default response as time goes on. Focusing on defending the targets, and smarter, more selective passenger screening, as well as research and investment into less intrusive standoff screening and behavioral profiling, advantages not only the security of the traveling public -- it dovetails nicely into the revenue objectives of the airline industry by not alienating the very passengers the industry needs to remain robust. And it addresses the civil rights concerns of passengers who feel unnecessarily violated by the screening requirement. ..."

If you still think you're safe, go to their homepage and read all the articles under the heading, "How Safe Are You?" Or just read their summary article, "Reliability of Our Airline Security System as a Whole: There is very little chance we will be able to prevent or defend against the next 9/11."

They claim:

"The new 'multilayered' airline security system is a sieve, in which none of the layers work. Even all of them together cannot hope to prevent the kind of rehearsed, coordinated, well-planned terrorist attack Al Qaeda is capable of. Our government has spent $12 billion on airline security and recent government reports have found we’re no safer than we were before. ...

"It will take incorruptible people in positions of power who recognize the urgency of defending against future terror attacks and the truly woeful lack of preparedness of our present air security system, and are steadfast and fearless enough to put aside partisanship and special interests for the security of our country, to make us safe from future attacks, and to provide for the American people, true airline security.

"It will also take the concerted will of the country to hold them accountable to do so. Our failure to prevent future attacks will have devastating repercussions for American lives, our economy, our freedom and our collective futures.

"If Al Qaeda conducts a well-organized, coordinated attack on our airline industry tomorrow, there is much too great a chance they will succeed."

In test after test, agents and amateurs have been able to sneak weapons past checkpoints with 90-95% success rates. The scanners were put in place with the excuse that the Underwear/Christmas bomber would have been stopped. No, he wouldn't. Even David Pistole, the current talking head of the TSA, wouldn't quite go so far as to guarantee it when interviewed by Juan Williams on Nov. 19 (sorry, I can't find video on this, but trust me - he stopped short of saying the scanners and/or pat-downs would have caught that guy). But here's the deal - the Nigerian did not board the plane in the U.S. He had no passport. Security authorities in several countries were notified that the guy was a threat, but still he waltzed through security and onto a plane bound for the US. YOU JUST CAN'T FIX STUPID.

Oh, and speaking of not being able to fix stupid, check out this story, "Another TSA Outrage." It tells the tale of a soldier on his way home from Afghanistan on a military charter. Feel safer yet?

Even Congressman John Mica, one of the original authors of the bill establishing the TSA, has written to heads of more than 150 airports, asking them to opt out of TSA screening:

"When the TSA was established, it was never envisioned that it would become a huge, unwieldy bureaucracy which was soon to grow to 67,000 employees," Mica writes. "As TSA has grown larger, more impersonal, and administratively top-heavy, I believe it is important that airports across the country consider utilizing the opt-out provision provided by law."

In addition to being large, impersonal, and top-heavy, what really worries critics is that the TSA has become dangerously ineffective. Its specialty is what those critics call "security theater" -- that is, a show of what appear to be stringent security measures designed to make passengers feel more secure without providing real security. "That's exactly what it is," says Mica. "It's a big Kabuki dance."

So, let's see. No commercial passenger airliners out of 102 million since 9/11/01 have been taken out by terrorists. No terrorists have been caught in passenger screening. An awful lot of amputees, cancer victims, little old ladies, tiny tots and other innocent people have been shaken down, fondled, handcuffed, arrested, harassed, groped and humiliated, and I'll just bet the TSA has a huge collection of cigarette lighters, nail clippers, baby formula, applesauce, knitting needles and other everyday items which have never been used in a terror attack and could hardly be imagined as weapons. Even one of the creators of the TSA is telling airports to opt out. Common sense would dictate that these security measures are just not worth the hassle and expense.

But there's another thing that bugs me on a very deep emotional level. It's called the Constitution; and specifically the Bill of Rights.

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I'm a law-abiding citizen with no criminal history, no ties to terrorism, no international associations outside of Canada and Europe. Even my driving record is so clean you can eat off it.

My purchasing a plane ticket to go to a ragtime festival does not constitute probable cause. Making me stand for nude imaging and groping my genitals and breasts are NOT REASONABLE SEARCHES.

I've had friends tell me that safety should trump the Constitution. Really? As far as I'm concerned, our safety lies within the Constitution. If "safety" came first, I suppose next they could put us into chutes, have us take off all of our clothes and do a full body cavity search, plus some sort of MRI to make sure we haven't swallowed explosives in balloons that are hidden in our stomachs. Maybe police should go from house to house, doing thorough searches for drugs, unregistered firearms or other contraband to keep us "safe."

Maybe we should just tear up our Constitution, which is supposed to protect us from unreasonable searches and seizures, which is pretty much what we do when we allow ourselves and our children to be treated like this. But remember that it is the Constitution which stands between us and tyranny. It guarantees that our freedoms remain intact and we remain unmolested by our government. Government workers sticking their hands down our pants, squeezing our "junk," without reasonable cause is so very, very wrong.

I'm told over and over again, "If you don't like it, don't fly." Okay. I didn't. Now hear this:


I say LOSE THE SCANNERS, STOP MOLESTING US. If you're afraid that the skies will no longer be safe, YOU DON'T FLY.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Sexual Molestation at Airports

This morning, as I was going through my Facebook, I noticed that the chatter over the oppressive practice of body scanning or groping is reaching a fever pitch. I have to go on a short trip in a couple of days and I'm pretty much terrified about what I may be subjected to in order to get on an airplane. I've tried to get out of going on this trip, and I hope to never fly again until this practice is stopped, but I really don't have much of a choice. But I read a comment today that sent me over the top. A very well-meaning person, a fellow freedom fighter, made a comment that people who go through this virtual strip search/fondling were "sheep." I blew a gasket. Here's my reply:

@C___ - "Sheep"? Think about this for a minute. I have to get on a plane myself in the very near future. I was RAPED as a teenager and molested as a child. I'm turning myself inside out over the thought of what I will have to endure at the airport as a condition of getting on a plane. I'm having anxiety attacks. I'm scared to DEATH of what kind of memories this treatment will bring to the surface (and a lot of them are already surfacing and being re-lived). I HAVE to get across the country and driving is not an option due to cost and time. If I could get out of this, I would. If you don't have to fly somewhere, it's easy to sit there and call other people "sheep." Anyone who knows me can tell you that I'm anything BUT a "sheep." I feel angry. I feel violated. I feel like I'm going to be molested all over again. I would ask you, as someone who considers herself as a non-"sheep", what is your better idea? I don't know if I'll make it through the ordeal, and if I don't, I won't be on that plane and it will wreak havoc in my life and my relationship. Having to make a tough decision in the face of the increasing oppression and violation our government is subjecting us to does not make one a SHEEP.

My "history" is not something I choose to think of very much, nor do I allow it to ruin my quality of life. But now having to face this choice has dug up a lot of baggage which I would prefer to remain buried. I heard this morning that they're even doing this to LITTLE CHILDREN. I'm so sickened by this government intrusion - no, MOLESTATION - I could scream.

And I would ask you, what are YOU doing to stop the government from their march toward totalitarian oppression? I'm assuming a leadership position in our local Tea Party. I campaigned for candidates who respect our God-given rights and our Constitutional rights. I write a blog. I talk to legislators. If you're not out there, sticking your neck out, organizing friends and neighbors, doing everything humanly possible to stop the tide of oppression short of violence, then you, I respectfully submit, have NO RIGHT to call ME or anyone a SHEEP.

This crap MUST STOP NOW. The government does not have the right to "pat us down" using methods which, outside the airport, would be considered SEXUAL ASSAULT. Even the thought of what I might be subjected to has been a trauma. I still might back out of this trip, but much damage has already been done. This should not be a condition of flying.

Please, dear readers, get on the phone or send an email to your legislators and tell them we will not stand for this. But if you think it's okay to do this to 50-year-old ladies, 4-year-old boys and nuns, in the name of "safety," then, as Benjamin Franklin said, you deserve neither liberty NOR safety.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Onward, Tea Party Soldiers...

Yesterday was sure a mixed bag election wise. As a conservative, I should be elated at the change in power in Congress, but the results of local elections has almost entirely sapped my enthusiasm.

The election, short of a couple bright spots, were largely a disaster here in Northern Illinois. A lot of good, honorable people were chewed up and spit out by the political cartels. We have so much more work to do, if we can make it through the next couple of years. I'm thinking it might be time to move to Wisconsin.

Corruption and cronyism is rife in both parties. Out here in northern Illinois (as in most of the rest of the state, if not the entire country), party voting is a matter of choosing which cartel appears to pay you better. It's despicable. One of my good Facebook friends who was running for office in another state opined that the root of our country's problems is failure of political types to adhere to the Constitution. As far as I'm concerned, it's more than just lacking adherence to the Constitution which is to blame - it's a resignation to the perceived inevitability of being assimilated by one machine or another. It's elites in our local, state and federal government capitals making deals and appointing kings, all the while appearing to have our best interests at heart. I'm so disgusted I could spit.

And I have to wonder what people are thinking. Winnebago county has boasted the highest crime rate in the state of Illinois, yet the voters re-elected the man who has presided over this shameful blot, Sheriff Dick Meyers, passing over a fine and honorable man, Aaron Booker. Of course, they didn't have a chance to learn about that fine and honorable man because the local paper didn't cover much at all about the race except for the dog and pony show which ensued when the sheriff dragged Booker before a merit commission on trumped up disciplinary charges.

In legislative district 69, we had a very viable candidate, Robert Brokish, who lost rather handily to incumbent Democrat Chuck Jefferson, endorsed by the local paper for being a big suck on the teat of our already broke state government. Nice. Hey, voters! Hope you enjoy our tax increase coming down the tubes. Can you afford it? I guess you can.

And speaking of our broke state government, we still don't know who will be our next governor - fiscal conservative Bill Brady, or Blago protegé Pat Quinn, who has presided over perhaps the greatest financial debacle in the country. DUH. That should have been a no-brainer.

Gratefully, Congressman Don Manzullo, a good and pretty solid conservative, retained his seat, and so did State Senator Dave Syverson, although not without a few nail-biting moments as results vacillated as they trickled in. The Winnebago county board is now comprised of an overwhelming majority of Republicans, and some of the new members are conservative and hold to Tea Party principles.

Rockford Tea Party coordinator David Hale posted a rather wistful lament on Facebook this morning, along with a plea for more guidance and participation within the group. Criticism started to fly - everyone has an opinion and yes, they are entitled to them, but soon some of the disgruntled began to predict the end of our little Tea Party. It's not the end. This is just the beginning. We have much work to do. We have not been as successful as we would have liked. We aim to change that.

Remember that the Tea Party is more of a philosophy than an organization and our principles are these:
  • Fiscal responsibility
  • Lower taxes
  • Free markets
  • Constitutionally limited government
These are not new ideas, nor are they the exclusive property of any particular party or organization, nor are they "extreme" or "radical," as the Tea Party has been painted. These ideas will not die and We the People who are committed to them are not going away any time soon. We stand ready to be more effective in getting our message out and we believe that We the People will, sooner or later, realize that they can vote for their own best interests rather than whichever cartel seemingly offers the most benefits.

Einstein defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." I don't believe the people of this state are at all insane, but I do believe they have been lied to and made to believe promises like those of an abusive spouse who says, "Gee, honey, I'm sorry. I won't hit you again." Yes, he will hit you again. Hitting you is on his list of acceptable choices. We the Tea Party hope to help you learn how to duck. Better yet, to escape and step out of the cycle. We have our work cut out for us in Illinois.

"It does not take the majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tierless minority, keen on setting a brush fire of freedom in the minds of men."
~ Samuel Adams
"One man with courage is a majority."~Thomas Jefferson

Oh, and while you were paying attention to the election...

The Federal Reserve did something today that in February they promised they would not do - they monetized our national debt to the tune of $600 billion. Add that to the $1.7 billion they already monetized and we're in a whole world of trouble. If you don't know what that means, essentially the fed is issuing IOUs to sell in order to raise money (treasury bonds and other government debt), then printing its own money and buying those IOUs. This causes a great increase in the money supply. When the money supply increases without a corresponding increase in economic activity to stabilize its value, what results is inflation. The greater the imbalance, the greater the chance for hyperinflation. If you don't know what that is, you might want to read up on what happened in the Weimar Republic following WWI. Even the controversial Maynard Keynes observed: ""The inflationism of the currency systems of Europe has proceeded to extraordinary lengths. The various belligerent Governments, unable, or too timid or too short-sighted to secure from loans or taxes the resources they required, have printed notes for the balance."

They hope you're not watching - that you're distracted by the elections. They're not so far off, are they?

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

What are YOU trying to accomplish on Election Day?

I can't answer that question for you. Before you go vote today, I hope you will think long and hard about your answer. You've probably already made up your mind, but if you have any doubt, keep reading.

If you're going to the polls today because you like the direction your country, your state, your local municipality is going, then by all means, you should vote for the incumbent or the party of your incumbent, especially if it's the majority.

Me - I don't. I deeply fear for the direction in which our country is going. I also deeply fear for the direction in which Illinois is going. We're broke. There is no more money except for whatever the Fed can print, and the more it prints, the less value our savings will have in the future. Our economy is in horrible shape. Don't let the bastards tell you this is a "jobless recovery": without jobs, there IS no recovery. Jobs = productivity, and without productivity we have no economy, no growth and no future. The Obamacare abomination has very few redeeming qualities, but a whole lot of crippling provisions designed, intentionally or not, to break the backs of the insurance companies, take discretion away from your doctors, saddle businesses and individuals with burdensome taxes and mandates and red tape. Much has nothing to do with health care at all (like the 1099 mandate). It takes our choices away (men, ask yourselves - do you really need maternity benefits? You're forced to pay for them now). If Cap and Trade is passed, can you afford it when your energy bills "necessarily skyrocket," as Obama said? I can't.

So, I'm voting for two things, in this order: 1.) to stop the president's agenda and 2.) to reverse the growth of government intrusion and reduce the size of government and our tax burden.

As a conservative, I have felt for a long time that I have little representation in government. In Illinois, we have perhaps the worst parade of RINOs in the GOP outside of California. And the choices I have this year for certain offices are pitiful. It would be very easy for me to vote for some very worthy 3rd party candidates - Libertarian and Constitution party or even independents in protest. But I have to consider what that would accomplish.

To stop the president's agenda, and to stop the governor's agenda, my most important objective must be to unseat every sitting Democrat I can. And much as I hate to say it, the only way I can see to achieve that goal is to vote Republican, even if that Republican is a despicable RINO. In the congress, majority party matters, even if individual congressmen vote with the opposing party. The third party candidates might fulfill my second objective, but would do nothing to achieve my primary objective.

A VOTE FOR A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE IS A VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT. At least, it is for now. Things may be different in two years if they GOP lets us down again, but for now, it's true.

I've always been a straight Republican voter, with minor exceptions. 2008 was the first time in my life I really felt that I was holding my nose when I voted. This year, my stomach is turning. I very much want to vote Libertarian or Constitution, but that will not achieve my primary objective - to unseat Democrats. In this state, there's no question that the party machine is corrupt and rotten to the core - I'm hoping that we can either fix that, or at least improve that, within the next two years. If the Tea party doesn't go away, which it won't if I can help it, 2012 will be the year the GOP dies, and it will be a bloodbath.

I won't fall into the "character" trap, especially in the house and senate. Character counts, but not nearly so much as party.

At a Republican political function on Saturday, I introduced myself as being from the Tea Party. Someone who had been speaking with GOP muckity-mucks recently, said to me, "Oh, my God, they're scared to death of you!"

My instantaneous reaction was, "Good! They should be." This is the way at least some of our founding fathers intended our government to be.

"When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson

I do not want to tell you how to vote. You have to vote your conscience. But whatever you do, whatever your political beliefs, by all means VOTE!

How I'm voting:

If I want to fire Harry Reid (assuming he'll pull his ass from the fire), I must vote for a Republican for Senate, even if it's the slimy Mark Kirk. I detest Kirk, and his constant harassment of endless robo-calls and negative campaign ads have done nothing to endear me to him. But as I did with McCain, I'm going to hold my nose and vote for him. Yes, we'll be stuck with him for six years, but all I can hope for is that we'll have a good shot at Durbin in a couple of years. Some that I've talked to expect Kirk will go with the flow to represent his constituency. I have no reason to believe that, but they may be right. I can hope. And if the Tea Party continues to be a force in politics, perhaps we can pressure him enough to stay on the conservative side of things.

For governor and Lt. Governor, I'm going for Bill Brady and Jason Plummer, although neither of them set me on fire. Brady is so busy sucking up to the machine, I'm losing hope already that he'll be conservative, but this is a vote against Quinn as much as anything else. My objective is to unseat Quinn, period.

I wish to hell the Republicans had come up with someone qualified to run against AG Lisa Madigan. I might vote a 3rd party there. Who the hell is Steve Kim? I don't think he's ever prosecuted a case before and that's a real problem. Oh, but he promises to be sensitive to minorities and the elderly. HUH? The AG should be sensitive to one thing - THE LAW.

Secretary of State - I really haven't been able to come up with any real dirt on Jesse White. Personally, I like Roberto Enriquez, but he has spent too much time wooing the Hispanic vote and ignoring the rest of us. I have to wonder about his agenda. Being a Dem is not enough for me to want to fire White. The previous Secretary of State was Republican George Ryan. He's still in prison.

Comptroller - Judy Baar Topinka has been marginal, and we didn't get into this financial mess without her complicity. I might go for the Libertarian here, Judy Fox. She's the only CPA in the race! Having spent a good 7 years of my life in accounting, IT MATTERS.

Treasurer - I do wish Rutherford had an accounting background as well. Party isn't so much a consideration here, but he looks like a party loyalist.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Robert Brokish closes gap in race for State Rep in D-67

Rob Brokish has had a tough fight this election. He's running against an entrenched Democratic incumbent, Chuck Jefferson, in a very mixed district in the southwest quadrant of Rockford and environs. Even though he's done the requisite time as a party foot soldier, serving as both a precinct committeeman and even appointed Vice-Chair of the Winnebago county GOP, the powers that be in the Illinois Republican Central Committee have decided that giving him any money at all just might prompt the Big Boys in Chicago to throw a bunch of money at Jefferson, and then, gee, that just might knock some other Republican incumbents off the cliff. So, good guys like Rob are left to scratch for money just to buy campaign signs.

That gutless rag, the Rockford Register Star, which has pretended to be alarmed over the financial condition of Illinois and the corruption which is rife (which they ignore in their own back yard), had the nerve to endorse Jefferson because, essentially, he's a suck-up to Mike Madigan, and was mentored by his predecessor in office, Edolo J. "Zeke" Giorgi (with known Mob ties), shows up at events to show he cares, and is in a better position than his opponent to try to suck money from the dry teat of Illinois' treasury (read that: taxpayers). Brokish has been trailing his opponent by about 15% at previous best guess, since his cash-starved campaign can't afford polling.

But his campaign got a little surprise last week. They got a call from downstate - the Illinois GOP did a little polling themselves and found that Brokish had closed the gap, trailing Jefferson by a mere 3 or 4 points - well within the margin of error.

Folks, this is a miracle!!!

I'm going to share with you something I sent to all my Rockford friends way back in June. Please copy it, share it, email it to your friends. A couple hundred votes could make the difference for this guy who deserves a chance to represent us in Springfield and help turn this shipwreck around. It's not too late for contributions, but if you have any friends in the 67th district or who might have friends in the 67th, please pass this along to them!

Open Letter to all my friends in Illinois and beyond…

As you probably know, I’m more concerned than ever about the future of our country and also of our state. We’ve reached a point where our freedoms are more threatened than ever. Our state and federal budgets are a shambles and out-of-control deficit spending is the rule rather than the exception. These conditions threaten our jobs, our future security and that of our children and our very way of life.

The state of Illinois is completely out of control. With a budget of $26 billion, we are facing a $13 billion shortfall - the worst fiscal crisis in the country outside of California. Yet a measure calling for a forensic audit of the state’s finances to identify waste and fraud was just defeated in the state house on a straight party line vote - Dems voting against the audit, Republicans voting for it. Nobody even knows what’s in the budget that was just passed and we’re staring down massive tax increases and hasty and draconian budget cuts - the latter only if our legislature decides to make tough decisions, which they’ve managed to avoid thus far - and yet not a single Democrat broke ranks to open the books!

For those reasons, I’m doing whatever I can to support candidates everywhere who have shown a commitment to fiscal responsibility, free markets and Constitutional integrity. One of those candidates is a newcomer, Robert Brokish, Jr., running for State Representative in District 67 which covers the Rockford Metro area. Rockford is the third largest city in Illinois which makes Dist. 67 one of the most important in the state outside of Chicago.

I’ve had the pleasure of meeting Rob on a number of occasions and can tell you that besides being a nice guy, he is committed to the principles I believe are critical to restoring our state to financial health, to restoring jobs and preserving our personal prosperity. In this era of out-of-touch politicians who care little about their constituencies, I find Bob’s willingness to listen a refreshing quality. I regret that I live outside of his district and thus cannot vote for him, but I have sent a contribution, albeit a small one. I only wish I could do more.

Anymore, merely voting for the representative of your choice in your district is not enough to ensure that our future state legislature is composed of individuals who can save it. If you care about the future of your state, I strongly urge you to consider making a contribution, even a small one, to this candidate in this most important district. If every one of you could forego a coffee and donut at Starbucks, it would make a difference. You can also help by passing this letter along to your friends and acquaintances. I wouldn’t ask this if we weren’t in very dangerous times.

More information is on his website:

His positions are available on Project Vote Smart:

Find him on Facebook:!/robert.brokish?v=info

Thank you for listening. It’s time to stop the insanity!