Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Rep. Pete Stark (D Ca) "There's No Border Problem

What an arrogant condescending jackass!

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Is the War on Terror 'Green Enough?'

Unbelievable, with Troops in harm's way for all these years, fighting to protect us from another terrorist attack, congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D. Az) is more concerned about whether or not the Military is using "renewable energy" in bases in Afghanistan than defeating terrorism. First, she declares the United States Air Force the largest user of energy on the planet and the Department of Defense the largest user of energy in America.

Is it proper civilian oversight to be more concerned with energy consumption than the Troops lives or the safety of the nation?

Monday, June 28, 2010

Wa. 03 Candidate Castillo to Propose The Stop Naming Our Buildings Act

In light of the passing of long time West Virginia Democrat Senator, Robert Byrd, who is well known for having many structures, buildings, roads, and other projects named after him, Jim Geraghty of National Review Online tells us a witty tail of Fred Thompson traveling with Trent Lott and noticing so many buildings and such named after the former Mississippi Republican Senator and how it appeared that he missed one, when they drove past a school with a different name.

He also tells of David Castillo, candidate for Washington States 3rd Congressional District saying, “If elected, I will introduce legislation that will forbid any building, road, museum, etc. built with federal dollars from being named for a living member of Congress or family member. I am thinking about calling it the ‘Stop Naming Our Buildings,’ or, the SNOB Act.”

Gotta love a candidate with a sense of humor.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

R-71 Names Can Be Made Public, Supreme Court Rules

By an 8 to 1 decision, Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that names and signatures of petitions, such as Washington State R-71 measure, can be made available to the public.

Seattle Times: Supreme Court rules petition signatures public; Ref. 71 names not immediately available

Gay Activists had sought the names and addresses of those who signed the petition seeking to place Washington’s Domestic Partnership bill, also known as “Everything Except Marriage” before the voters in an effort to prevent it from being implemented.

The measure failed and the Domestic Partnership went forward.

Gay Activists had stated they wished to have the names, addresses and signatures of petition signers to ensure no names were wrongfully placed upon the petition, but also to be able to “reach out and discuss with signers their having signed the petition.”

I am stunned that conservative justices, Samuel Alito and John Roberts agreed with this ruling as the obvious intent, as happened in California after their Proposition 8 passed, is to harass and intimidate signers of petitions activist groups may target.

The court left open the possibility of those opposed to making the names, addresses and signatures of signers public seeking and gaining an exemption in this particular case in a lower federal court due to such harassment and intimidation as has been seen in California.

In his dissent with the Supreme Court Majority Decision, Justice Thomas stated,

“Indeed, if the evidence relating to Proposition 8 is not sufficient to obtain an as-applied exemption in this case, one may wonder whether that vehicle provides any meaningful protection for the First Amendment rights of persons who circulate and sign referendum and initiative petitions.”

Justice Thomas also explained on his dissent,
“Just as ‘confidence in the integrity of our electoral processes is essential to the functioning of our participatory democracy,’ Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U. S. 1, 4 (2006) (per curiam), so too is citizen participation in those processes, which necessarily entails political speech and association under the First Amendment. In my view, compelled disclosure of signed referendum and initiative petitions1 under the Washington Public Records Act (PRA), Wash. Rev. Code §42.56.001, et seq. (2008), severely burdens those rights and chills citizen participation in the referendum process. Given those burdens, I would hold that Washington’s decision to subject all referendum petitions to public disclosure is unconstitutional because there will always be a less restrictive means by which Washington can vindicate its stated interest in preserving the integrity of its referendum process.”

Gay Activists who sought to make the names, addresses and signatures of signers available on a public searchable website have stated,
“the public has a right to know who signed petitions in the interests of transparency and since citizens who do so are acting as quasi-legislators.”

The thought that their signing petitions can also be made public and expose them to the very same backlash tactics they desire to use against any who don’t cave in to their whims obviously escapes them.

Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna, who enjoyed wide support in his joining other states in suing over the recently passed National Healthcare Reform, aka Obamacare, has successfully fought and won this case against Washington Citizens.

In my opinion, he also just shot himself in the foot in regards to future goals of becoming Washington State Governor, if he has any such goal.

Our freedom of speech in the nation is being ever so gradually limited and restricted.

Caving in to Political Activists who’s history and stated goals is to intimidate and harass those who disagree with them has the potential to further remove the average citizen from participation in governing the land.

While I am confident the exemption stated above will be granted, the assault on our freedoms and the democratic process will not end there. We must remain ever guardful to retain and hopefully, regain some lost freedoms and liberties.

Sunday, June 20, 2010

Obama Holding Border Hostage Over Politics

Unbelievable, Arizona Senator Jon Kyl told constituents at a town hall that Barack Obama, in a private meeting with him, refuses to seal the Arizona border. Kyl quotes Obama saying, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’” Sen. Kyl continued, “In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’”

Once again, the agenda is more important than the safety and security of American Citizens

H/T RedState

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Is It Any Wonder The Left Labels Tea Parties As Racist?

Despite knowing for a fact that Tea Parties are not racist in our protests or attendance at events, some, a very small some, goes out of their way to ensure that label is hung around our necks. Although their numbers are extremely small, they supply just what the left looks for to falsely paint the movement as racist.

A good example of this would be a post placed up on the We The People website in an effort to taint Washington States 3rd Congressional District candidate, David Castillo.

Candidate for Congress makes Spanish available on his website
Posted by Donald Sampelton on June 16, 2010 at 12:00am

Most of us live in America, we go to work, come home to our families, enjoy the evening and go to sleep. We repeat this many times a week and hundreds of times a year.

We don't go to work because we want to, but because we must to provide for our families.

I have been put out of work 4 times in the last 8 years not because of lack of work, but because the employer could pay someone else less to do the work. ( and they could not speak English )

I happened to stumble across this YouTube video that really expresses my views on people in this country that are not able to speak or read english. They want this freedom we all love but with it comes a price. If they won't take the time to learn our language, how will they ever understand our values.

Now this Congressman put's his website on the internet with a Spanish option. We really need to go back to basics here if we are going to go forward.

Whoever did these YouTube videos must also be upset but at least they brought some humor into it.

Check out these videos and comment. This Candidate for Congress that is in Washington State is a good example of what we don't want in Congress.

David Castillo is American born to America parents. He’s served in the United States Navy and held sub-cabinet level positions in the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Homeland Security. And now, because he included a link to Google Translate on his webpage, which only translates a small portion of his webpage, he somehow is not qualified to run for congress?

That he advocates e-verify and bringing back the SAVE Act for passage means nothing, just that he provides a link to Google Translate to a drop down box for Spanish. What about the other languages within the drop down box? There’s Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Hebrew, Yiddish, Norwegian, Dutch, German, you name it.

His Issues page translates over to Spanish, telling them in their original language his stand on Illegal Immigration.

Here’s a little news flash for Mr. Sampelton, ILLEGAL ALIENS MAY NOT LEGALLY VOTE.

We have several naturalized American Citizens within our country who are still trying to learn our version of English. They may legally vote and many do.

We have the Republican Hispanic Assembly which just might contain some of those naturalized Americans that come from Spanish speaking countries.

Does it escape him that making a portion of his website in their original language might make it easier for them to discover who and what Castillo stands for? Yes, they are learning English, which to others coming to America legally, it one of the more difficult languages to learn.

Most Hispanic people hold conservative values from their culture. Do we just ship them off the Democrats to keep voting for them? Do we not want conservative people of all groups joining us voting for conservatives and conservative values?

Apparently Mr. Sampelton is more comfortable with trying to keep his lily white hands pure; exactly the opposite of what conservatism is about.

Both of David Castillo’s Republican opponents have similar views on securing our borders and dealing with Illegal Aliens. One is even being billed as the “Latina” in the race, but no one seems concerned that she is labeled as such, which would also appeal to Hispanics.

I don’t which opponent is behind taking such cheap shots at David, but apparently they know they cannot hold a candle next to him when it comes to experience, knowledge and ability to hold the office they seek.

So, they resort to such cheap shots.

David Castillo is clearly the best conservative candidate we have had in many years in Washington States 3rd Congressional District. He is the best bet we have in converting the seat held by now retiring Brian Baird back to Republicans.

Listening to him at events or forums, he clearly has a better command on the issues and offers ideas that make sense and would help get our country going again.

He enjoys broad Tea Party support, in spite of efforts by a fringe within to paint him as otherwise. He has received numerous conservative endorsements, including from FreedomWorks, several Republican leaders and conservative citizens.

See for yourselves at David Castillo for Congress.

Let’s ignore the cheap shots and actually run a strong conservative that will win this time, David Castillo.

Monday, June 14, 2010

Why Exaggerate Military Service To Get Elected?

Over many years of my life, I have followed several political campaigns from candidates of both parties. Many candidates display quite an impressive Military Record as part of the reason they should be elected, or so it seems.

While we have had many honorable people elected who performed heroic feats in their Military Service, some have either lied or grossly exaggerated their service in hopes voters see them as brave and honorable soldiers, ready to fight for the voters.

In my opinion and many others, doing so is a grave disservice to voters. It is false advertising, selling us a bill of goods while unable to actually deliver.

No one who ever served honorably should be ashamed of what they were assigned to do while serving, all jobs being necessary to complete even the smallest mission. From Company Clerks to Cooks, Motor Pool Mechanics to Artillerymen, Supply Clerks to Infantry, each and every job is important and must be performed so the mission can be successfully accomplished.

So, why do some feel the need to exaggerate their service?

I guess they feel it makes them brave in the eyes of others. It’s one thing to spin such yarns to your children or friends and neighbors, even at the VFW bar where we can easily pick out such braggarts by their ridiculous claims. But, to sell yourself to the public by either exaggerating your service, or omitting the truth of your service allowing others to assume you served in war, when you did not, is taking on to yourself something for which you are not entitled.

Look at the recent news of Connecticut’s Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, who gradually insinuated he served in Viet Nam when he never did. Or Mark Kirk, who overly boasted of a minimal unit citation as if he were personally awarded a citation of high merit.

Think back to 2004 and the claims made by Democrat John ‘F’in Kerry (who is said to have served in Viet Nam) and his being exposed by former shipmates, even though the media denigrated the shipmates, not Kerry.

Even Hillary Clinton boasted in 2008 how she tried to enlist in the United States Marine Corps, but was turned down due to wearing glasses. Then, recall her story of dodging sniper fire in Bosnia, only to be revealed a falsehood.

Some candidates hoping for office claim a disability from their time serving, revealing the nature of the injury, as former Senator Bob Dole did during his time in the Senate.

Others have not stated the injury, where it happened or how. Some have even tried the old Bovine Scatology of claiming they are not permitted to discuss where they were or how it happened, being some mythical “top secret” operation we are supposed to just buy in to.

Ask just about any Veteran who actually served in a combat zone and see how they view such claims. We know better.

Voters deserve truthful statements from candidates who claim Military Service, not bravado or even silence of where they served or how they served, especially if they make their service a major part of their campaign by claiming the rank they last held in campaign ads.

What voters don’t need is more candidates seeking office by either exaggerating or relying on lies of omission to pad an otherwise weak resume’ in hopes of fooling enough voters to see them as they aren’t.

In introducing an amendment to a war spending bill, to make inaccurate or misleading statements about one's military service record a punishable offense, this past May, Senator Orin Hatch (R. Ut) said,

“It is sad that there are those who attempt to inflate their record and make these claims. To do that defiles the sacrifice and service of those who have served in combat. Worse yet, it dishonors the sacrifice of the brave men and women in uniform who have given their lives in combat so that the freedoms we enjoy are defended.”

“It is a crime to dishonor the sacrifice of so many by falsely representing combat service for the purposes of self-promotion or benefit. My amendment would deter those who would falsely prop themselves up in order to appear worthy of the award and title of ‘combat veteran’.”

We deserve honorable and truthful elected officials, not someone who would exaggerate a claim or make vague statements, allowing others to believe an injury received in basic training was due to combat service, when they never served in such an area.

It matters not how bold or in your face their speeches or confrontations with others in the past may be, exaggerations and lies of omission are still dishonorable and not worthy of my vote or support and in need of being exposed to voters, regardless of party affiliation.

If we are to have honorable, truthful and reliable elected officials, it should begin in honest and open representation of any Military Service claimed.

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

"Thank You, Soldiers" Video Earns Author "Teacher Of The Year"

In March we were all touched by the You Tube video a Virginia teacher made of his third graders singing "Thank You, Soldiers," that was made for last years Veterans Day.

Third Graders - "Thank You, Soldiers."

I am very pleased to say that Michael Souder, the teacher left a comment on my Clark County Conservative blog,

"Michael Souder Says:
June 8, 2010 at 7:11 am edit

Thank you again for posting this. Please believe me, I am not bragging, I want to encourage those who figured I end up in trouble for this tribute – our latest headline in Colonial Heights newspaper is, “Tribute Earns Souders a special place in CH hearts – Teacher of the Year”. Yes – the youtube video is now well over 1 million views, and I was just names our school district’s Teacher of the Year. This is GOOD NEWS for all those who are discouraged about public education! Amazing what a little sincere appreciation can do!"
A most deserving award I think.

Thank you, Michael, for such a touching tribute.

Sunday, June 06, 2010

Administration Hopes To Boost Economy With Oil Sales

Given the serious nature of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil well tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico and subsequent environmental damage happening as a result of it, I was taken aback this morning to read of how there are efforts underway to increase oil production to benefit the struggling economy.

I was especially curious as to why this effort is even being considered, given how often we hear in the media about how detrimental oil is and how we must get off it altogether and move to “green energy.”

We hear how the Obama administration is further banning oil drilling, plunging hundreds of thousands more people out of work here in America in the midst of one of the worst economic recessions since the Great Depression.

An administration official said in regards to the effort, “The oil here belongs to the people and the international community is doing its part to help ensure that every citizen benefits from its vast potential.”

He went on to say, “the United States and its international partners were looking to use the expertise of giants in the oil industry to generate growth in the oil sector.”

What strikes me most when hearing of this effort is also reading Lawmakers Plead With Obama to Ease Drilling Ban, Warn of Economic Blow, where we read that Obama is defending his moratorium on expansion of oil drilling “as necessary to give officials time to figure out what went wrong before the Deepwater Horizon rig.”

Obama says, “Until that happens, it would be irresponsible of me to lift that moratorium.”

But, from the article mentioned above, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill lets us know that “The international community is committed to propping up the Iraqi oil sector for the benefit of its people.”

No doubt the Iraqi people have been adversely affected with 7 years of war and ongoing sabotage of their oil industry. But, why is it that we help bolster their oil sector while issuing moratoriums on our own and increasing the misery of our own people with ever increasing unemployment?

Surely oil wells and pipe lines being sabotaged in Iraq present their own environmental impact as well.

The UPI article says, “Oil officials emerged from December oil auctions saying they could rival Saudi Arabia in terms of oil production.”

Couldn’t the American economy benefit as well from such increased oil production in areas known to contain vast amounts of oil as well?

We have massive reserves of oil sitting underground within America’s shores and it just sits there, drilling it banned by the very government that sees bolstering Iraq’s economy with increased oil production as acceptable.

Instead, we are treated to heart wrenching photos of an oil soaked bird and calls for Get Off Of Oil vigils from leftist groups.

If so called “green energy” is supposed to be such a boost to our economy, as claimed by environmentalists, shouldn’t it also be of benefit to the Iraqi’s?

The American Petroleum Institute has listed some of the estimates of the negative impact banning off shore drilling will have on Gulf communities, already struggling as much of the rest of the country is.

But, Obama and administration officials are adamant about maintaining the moratorium on drilling American oil.

Yet, at the same time “is committed to propping up the Iraqi oil sector for the benefit of its people.”

As we often heard on the 1950’s I Love Lucy comedy show, Obama “has some ‘splainin’ to do.”

Saturday, June 05, 2010

Time to Get Off of Oil?

By now everyone is aware of the tragic accident of the Deepwater Oil Well in the Gulf of Mexico and the subsequent leakage of massive amounts of oil released into the Gulf waters. Daily news reports continue to point out to failures in efforts to stop it as those who have been long opposed to drilling America’s own oil for energy use increase their call for a total ban on all oil use.

The left winged group has sent out the call for what they are calling “Oil Spill Vigil” that begins,

“By Tuesday, the oil spill in the Gulf will have been gushing out for 50 days straight. It might already be five times larger than the Exxon Valdez, and now BP says that the spill probably won't be stopped until August.

Meanwhile, our political leaders in Washington aren't even talking about the real solution—getting off oil once and for all, and fully powering our economy with clean energy. It's clear we need a major public outcry to make this horrible tragedy a turning point.

So on Tuesday—day 50 since the spill—we're organizing emergency Oil Spill Vigils to demand an end to our dependence on oil, call for stepped-up efforts to end the spill, and stand in solidarity with all those affected in the Gulf.”

Note, they are not calling for ending America’s dependence on foreign oil, but a complete end to its use, showing they have no idea just how petroleum use effects our lives daily and for the better.

Moveon continues,
“We'll gather together, read stories from Gulf residents affected by the spill, and observe a moment of silence. All you need to do is find a nearby public location for people to gather, invite friends, and tell the local media about it. We'll help you recruit people and give you all the guidance you need.

By standing together at events coast-to-coast, we can make sure lawmakers understand that the American people are demanding bold action to prevent disasters like this from happening again.”

If and other groups so adamantly crying out “get off of oil” had an inkling of how oil use benefits our daily lives, they would be calling for an end to the severe restrictions on domestic drilling of oil that has been in place for decades now.

As we know, left winged groups aren’t known for the thinking abilities and react emotionally “in the moment,” instead of actually joining in on productive measures to help clean up such tragic accidents or to help bring the leakage to an end.

The ongoing spill from this accident cannot be marginalized nor should it be, it is creating a mess and the inaction and inattention paid to it by the current administration, who finds vacations in Chicago or golf games more important, allows the tragedy to grow worse than it should be.

Instead, we are shown the comment of one Republican in an email sent out by Jon Vogel of the DCCC as indicative of all Republicans, with no mention from him that other Republicans joined Democrats in opposing that comment.

Moveon indicates the leaking well might not be stopped until August. History shows that is a very generous estimate as a 1979 oil well accident in the Gulf of Mexico took some 10 months to stop, and it was only in 200 feet of water, not nearly a mile deep.

But it should also be noted that it was capped eventually, the Gulf cleaned and recovered and the environment survived. Mexico’s refusal to pay damages due to the accident of their well is not comparable since BP has stated time and again they will pay damages.

What remains unanswered and unasked by our so-called media, is why neither BP nor the Obama administration is using the Supertanker vacuuming that the Saudi’s used in the early 1990’s to clean-up a massive oil spill in the waters off of their nation and that not only might have kept oil from reaching the shores of Louisiana, but recovered much of it as well.

Instead, we see and hear all of the finger-pointing as the spill now seems to be used to help implement more restrictive legislation and raise taxes, further wrecking the already struggling economy.

Left out of the discussion is what do we use to power our energy needs, while seeking any alternative energy sources? Alternative methods such as solar and wind power have come under fire by the very same people that demand they be constructed, in areas away from their homes.

Ignored by those demanding we stop the use of oil is how our nation often responds to emergencies and disasters around the globe, all powered by oil: Fueling “the Worlds EMT”.

Demonizing the oil companies and accusing them of putting profits ahead of safety concerns over not having what is known as Acoustic Shutoff Valves installed is little more than the usual political posturing we see and appears to be more agenda driven, since no mention is made of the unreliability of such methods of activation, nor do they account that the failure wasn’t in the method of activation, but the failure of the valve itself to close.

And still, those crying “get off of oil” give no viable solution or alternative that would suit our energy needs, nor do I see any of them not driving, turning off lights, flying in airplanes or forgoing any of the multitude of every day products shown in the link above, all derived from petroleum.

Holding “vigils” and “moments of silence” might make a liberal feel better, but they accomplish absolutely nothing in helping to curtail the tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico, nor do they supply one ounce of the energy needs of our nation.

They only stir up emotions used to further the socialist agenda of total takeover of our industries by a leftist government.

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Bush Gets Blamed for Al & Tipper Gore's Split

Unbelievable! Is there anything the left won't attempt to pin on Bush?

CBS's Katie Couric "report" on the Gore split includes the comment, "It's been ten years since that oddly public passionate kiss at the Democratic convention. That was followed by Gore winning the popular vote for President but losing the electoral vote. Family friend Sally Quinn says that may have done the marriage irreparable harm."

See Real Clear Politics for the video. Further comments at