John R. McCommas

Another Example of Media Bias

2011-07-09T16:29:00.000-07:00

I have to put in my two cents on the layout of the Opinion Page in the print edition for The Bulletin today July 9 2011. Someone thinks he is being oh so clever!

On either side of a fantastic letter by John McCommas are seemingly combating op-eds. I love the concept but things didnt go 'right' --pun intended.

On the left, under the banner "From the Left", is a full frontal attack on presidential candidate Michele Bachman by Richard Cohen. Fair enough except for the unsubstantiated 'she hates fags' remark. On the right side, "From the Right", is ANOTHER attack on Mrs. Bachman! In a snarky backhanded way George Will basically writes she and her staff are "not ready for prime time". Will seemed to endorse Rick Perry from the way I read it.

What the fuck? -- Just whose idea of fairness and balance is this shit??!!! How about picking a From the Right columnist who is actually FOR BACHMAN? That would be the point-counterpoint you would expect in a head to head match up but someone seems to want it both ways here. The message sent was 'The Left AND the Right agree Bachman is a loser'.

Well that is not what the polls say lately boys!

I am not a Bachman supporter yet, I am leaning towards Rick Perry in fact, but I like her a lot and clearly she is not being treated fairly by The Bulletin and this is but the latest example. Mrs. Bachman is getting the same treatment as Sarah Palin gets. What is so threatening about a conservative woman who looks like she just might be our next president or Veep?

The Bulletin did the same exact thing a while ago with abortion which is another issue they are kinda funny about. From the Left had someone who naturally is *pro-choice*, but then on the other side was Kathleen Parker. Parker's so-called From the Right perspective was great until you get to the end where she says well gosh darn it even if abortion is murder, we still shouldn't make it illegal.

I guess that is a From the Right position the editor didnt mind printing, but that is not what most Pro-Lifers think.

The Norwich Bulletin seems to be saying heads the Left wins, and tails the Right loses.

note: The mentioned op-eds did not appear in The Bulletin's online version.

Barbara Boxer's Partial Birth Abortion Logic

2011-06-12T10:51:00.000-07:00

President Reagan 1981 Inaugural Address

2011-06-08T18:50:00.000-07:00

Senator Guglielmo: Instate Tuition Discount for Illegal Aliens

2011-05-29T18:01:00.000-07:00

Gianna Jessen Abortion Survivor in Australia Part 1

2011-05-27T16:57:00.000-07:00

Meme Mine

2011-04-10T05:56:00.000-07:00

Well Said Mr. Meme Mine

"Science divided by politics and criminally lazy copy and paste news editors, equals Climate Change.

The State of the Union Address from President Obama didn’t mention one word about the climate “crisis” so do the math. History is watching.

Where the planet saving scientists marching in the streets in protest at Obama turning his back on them? No, so the math.

Now you faded climate blamers are jokes for the history books and you remaining climate cowards can now return to rubber necking car accidents and yelling “FIRE ! “ in the movie theatre because this CO2 blunder was to progressivism and science what abusive priests and suicide bombers are to religion. REAL planet lovers were happy and relieved a crisis was averted and now we say “Pollution, energy and over population yes, but CO2 causing unstoppable warming? No.” The planet is not dying and condemning our kids to death just to make them turn the lights out more often was criminal and if any of you few existing believers of doom still think there are enough voters to say yes now to taxing the air to make the weather colder, YOU are the new denier.

And meanwhile, the UN had allowed carbon trading to trump 3rd world fresh water relief, starvation rescue and 3rd world education for just over 24 years of climate control instead of needed population control. Nice job. This Iraq War of climate WMD’s left progressivism being the new neocons for condemning billions of children to death through 25 years of needless CO2 panic. We missed getting Bush, let’s get Gore, the news editors, lazy teachers, PR firms and lab coat consultants in jail for mankind’s most shameful cultural blunder and mass crime of the civilized era".

Karyn White The Way I Fell About You

2011-03-17T18:57:00.000-07:00

This is Why Joe Courtney Hides

2011-03-06T10:40:00.000-08:00

A Message From A Real Leader

2011-01-22T17:23:00.000-08:00

Sarah Palin: "America's Enduring Strength" from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

'Discover New England' Remains Undiscovered:

2011-01-21T14:05:00.000-08:00

If you think "Discover New England" (<-- go ahead and click it, they need the hits) is going to save our elusive tourism industry than I would like to introduce you to my buddy "rationalguy1" who commented on my letter in the Courant. He was far more persuasive than I was -- and he has hard evidence "Discover New England" is a fraud. This is his post: “That whole website [Discover New England] is/was a complete scam. They were getting $600K+ for 10 years PLUS I'm sure they force the entities they feature to pay up too. For what? Checking Alexa.com, their traffic ranking was abysmal and their supposedly European traffic was equivalent to my piddling blog.”

This is what the analysis of Alexa.com said “Discovernewengland.org's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 1,256,546. We estimate that 54% of visitors to this site come from the US, where it has attained a traffic rank of 351,456, and the fraction of visits to the site referred by search engines is approximately 40%. Approximately 35% of visits to Discovernewengland.org consist of only one pageview (i.e., are bounces). It has been online since 1999.”

What does that mean? I have no idea. You can ask the office techies for that. What did make sense to me is comparing side by side their web traffic to that of the Norwich Bulletin and my own blog (very smart website).

The above graphic says it all. Not surprisingly my personal-rant diary is does not even register. The Bulletin’s website is top red one and the so-called “Discover New England” is hoveriing just above Zilch mark.

-- Still think the money our new Governor threw their way didn't go down a rat-hole?

Connelly and Katz Are Gone. Ding Dong the Witches Are Dead!

2011-01-21T12:16:00.000-08:00

There are just two people in politics that were on my enemy list and they both blew themselves up this year. The year has only began. What a pity I am out of enemies. I could not be happier dirtbag John Connelly is out as well as Cop-Killer Sympathizer FORMER Supreme Court Justice J. Katz. This Republican and that Democrat are two of a kind so far as I am concerned. We owe our lawenforcement much and these two betrayed our boys in two different and unforgiveable ways. I have address Katz before.

It certainly was “bad judgment” (--the understatement of the month) for this soulless lawyer to attempt to make a name for himself in the legal community by becoming the first to convict a Police Officer of murder while in his official capacity. The only problem is that a good cop and a good shooting stood in the way. Connelly using all his sleazy psychological tricks was aided by the Hartford Courant (OK, maybe I still have one more enemy to cross off that list) which turned this meritless case into about race, and nothing but race.

I recall one quote in the New London Day that the mob that showed up at the courthouse in support of the so-called "victim" knew Officer Scott Smith was a racist based on his military style haircut. That was the case against Smith in a nutshell.

This unholy alliance snookered a really stupid jury into convicting a good cop who took out a punk in self-defense. The case was thrown out by the Supreme Court supposedly on technical grounds, but I think that was just hogwash. They saw the injustice of the decision and went shopping for something in which they could use as an excuse for a do-over. The case was eventually settled. CONelly was humiliated.

Katz for once sided with the cop, and that may be the only good decision she ever made even if she did it only because she hates this piece of shit as much as I do.

Good riddance to both. Don't come calling again.

2011-01-21T11:54:00.001-08:00

GRASSROOTS EAST IS BACK!!!

2011-01-05T17:41:00.000-08:00

The following is an email I received from Ed Munster. I hope to see you there!

-- John McCommas

Dear fellow Republicans:

There is good news ahead for the Republican Party in the Second Congressional District.

A group of party leaders and activists have decided to renew the Grassroots East organization which existed in years past to support Republican candidates running in Connecticut’s Second Congressional District. The immediate goal is to attract members from every town in the 2^nd who will work together to elect a Republican Congressman and promote our Republican message in all elections throughout the district.

Grassroots East was founded in 1976 following Chris Dodd’s election to the U.S. House of Representatives. He followed Bob Steele, a Republican. In the intervening years the organization raised money and provided support to all of our candidates, including Rob Simmons who won back the seat in 2000 – twenty five years later.

The purpose of this letter is to invite you to attend our first official function on January 28, 2011, from 7:00-9:00 pm in the Holiday Inn at 11 Laura Boulevard in Norwich, CT. The event will honor past Members of Grassroots East as well as all of our 2010 congressional and state office Republican candidates. There will be light refreshments and a cash bar.

We hope that your Republican Town Committee members will support us and honor our Republican candidates by attending our event. Additional details are available on our Facebook page at Grassroots East.

We have kept the cost at a minimum. A mere $10 per person charge is requested to attend the Kickoff Event on January 28, 2011. Annual membership is $20 per person. However, for those attending on January 28, a $20 contribution will also include the annual membership in the GRE. Contributions in excess of these modest amounts would be gratefully appreciated. Checks made payable to Grassroots East should be sent to John Ferrara, 51 Trout Lake Dr; Westbrook, CT 06498-1618.

Sincerely,

Edward W. Munster

Acting Chairman

HALL OF SHAME -- Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin

2010-12-31T15:58:00.000-08:00

The text in italics is from "YouCanRememberThat.Com". The issue of the late Congresswoman's vote against the World War II after the Pearl Harbor attack was sparked by a headline on a newspaper I happened upon while cruising on eBay, "Woman is Lone Negative Vote". That was in the December 8th 1941 edition of The Detroit News. I yahooed this timid, pacifist mouse and found the following information from the said website:

QUOTE "Many people find it hard to believe, but after the deadly surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the vote by the U.S. Congress the next day to declare war on Japan was not unanimous. Jeannette Rankin, a Republican from Montana, cast the lone dissenting vote.

Declaring the war to be unnecessary and adhering to her beliefs as a lifelong pacifist, Rankin cast the solitary negative vote. Rankin had been a congresswoman during the First World War and had voted against America's entry into that conflict--along with 49 others--in 1917. Returning to politics more than two decades later, Rankin had, in fact, campaigned in 1940 on an anti-war platform and had won. Not surprisingly, very few people in her home state supported her decision after the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

So unpopular was her stance that Rankin decided not to run for re-election when her term expired in 1943. Interestingly, Rankin did not vote against declaring war on Germany and Italy following their declarations of war on the U.S. a few days later. Instead, she voted merely 'present.'

During the remainder of her life, (Rankin lived to be nearly 93) she travelled to India seven times and was a devotee of Gandhian principles of non-violence." END QUOTE

I guess its true that only the good die young.

Susan Campbell Has P.D.S.

2010-11-27T15:03:00.000-08:00

You know I keep running into this thing with you liberals suffering from Palin Derangement Syndrome (PDS). You are all for women’s rights unless we are talking about a Republican woman (like the many that ran for office this year) and Sarah Palin most of all. How about showing the lady a little respect for once?

Liberals are such hypocrites. They have said and written the most the sexist, disrespectful things about Palin’s looks and supposed lack of intelligence (they said the same thing about Reagan as I recall) and so on. I mean just on and on and on. They would never let a Republican behave in such a brutish manner towards a Democrat woman.

Take what Susan Campbell at the Hartford Communist said on her blog.: If you like Palin’s brand of feminism than you are a man.

What is that supposed to mean? Well Campbell thinks she is being oh so very clever with her double entendre. Campbell was saying that Palin is not really a woman. On the other meaning, Yes Palin does indeed poll better with men than women but that is not surprising because all Republicans do. Campbell has nothing over Mae West in that department. I glanced over her link and it was just a long string of barely literate insults similar to Eaglehart’s incoherent rants. There must be a real case to be made against Palin. Why don't they?

And are we talking about real equality or just the moonbat things on the Femi-Nazi Agenda? You know because those are two very different things. Not everyone who supports equal rights also supports infanticide.

I think its safe to say Palin is all for women’s rights and not so much on the Loony Left’s Politics of Victimization for example. 'Boo hoo hoo. Somewhere there is a man who makes more money than me --- whaaaaahhhhhhhh'.

Tell it to someone who cares. Maybe all those men (and women) that get more money than you get more because they are better at your profession than you are? Do we want the government to try to make life fair in every instance? That’s not only un-doable, that’s stupid.

Palin for her part makes very good points, which the liberals seem unwilling to even try to refute. They just resort to more of the same sophomoric, lame brain bad manners that typify Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Click here for a fantastic essay by Jeff Goldstein on the subject of PDS.

The New Face of The Enemy?

2010-11-22T16:51:00.000-08:00

"Don’t like TSA measures? Don’t fly" exclaims Sunday's editorial in the Norwich Bulletin. It made some good points but there are points to be made on the other side too that went un-addressed. The editorial was unconvincing because it did not attempt to answer some of those key points. Where is the moderation that the Bulletin so often speaks so highly of? Its just says its Big Brother’s way or the highway....

---literally!

Is there no room for compromise or smarter, more effective procedures or better technology. Nope, none of that will work.

The editorial is wrong when it says "This isn’t about taking away freedoms. It is a matter of public safety". The truth of the matter is its about both.

We do have to stop every bomb before it gets on the plane and there also must be reasonable limits to the governments ability to poke its nose and shove its gloved hands where it doesn't belong particularly when the targets of the search are not a threat.

Lets face facts boys and girls: We know what a terrorist looks like. It is our biggest advantage but the PC Police won't let us press that advantage. Your run of the mill terrorist is male, from 18 to say 50, he is a foreigner and they are all Muslim. Some are African like the diaper bomber (not African-American but African) while the rest are Middle-Eastern.

He has an accent or may not speak English and sometimes has a criminal record. He might have bought a one way ticket with cash, be using a fake passport and he might look really nervous, or might try to set his shoe on fire.

We need to be on the lookout for THAT GUY!

Lets not pretend we have to worry about Aunt Bea shoving a bomb up a body cavity. Have we ever once caught an American-born, 75-year-old, Christian Caucasian woman trying to blow up an airplane in the name of Allah? I mean come on!

Nobody likes the idea of profiling and Lord knows some will feel unjustly singled out, but it is an idea which time has come. If the terrorists looked like middle-aged white guys than I would feel I was doing my part by answering a few reasonable questions.

It just seems to me that profiling is at least as reasonable as gawking at naked children and grabbing women's breasts and messing with the junk of American businessmen.

Israel profiles and it works. It’s time to get real.

No Glory in Selling Out Principals

2010-11-06T11:05:00.000-07:00

This stupid, lazy, ditzy non-serious op-ed by Susan Campbell at the Hartford Communist really pissed me off for some reason.

I can take a difference of opinion but not the disrespect she shows the issues that are very serious. First of all I am sick and tired of the liberals "can't we all just get along" line. What Campbell really means by "Stop this useless bashing of one another" is 'stop bringing up good points that I don't have an answer to!'.

It is true as Campbell writes that there were some trivial things that got more attention than they should have (and the press played no small role in that so Campbell should giver herself some credit) but the fact that our new senator lied repeatedly, "When I came back from Vietnam", over his military service was not one of them. Blumenthal in fact never lefft Connecticut. I find it curious Campbell failed to mention Blumenthal's misdeed but then takes another gratuitous swipe at Christine O'Donnell and witchcraft. Maybe Campbell thinks that with Blumenthal being elected that means his lie just disappeared!

Not a chance.

Maybe the Courant's storm-troopers don't consider it any big deal but those of us who did serve and have lost buddies do think it is a big deal. Now don't get me wrong. I am not pulling a Blumenthal here. I served in the Navy durning peacetime (1986-1990) and I really only lost one friend. It was not combat but an accident that was completely his fault. I never the less keep thinking back to three or four things that I could have done to prevent the accident. P03 Kenny Lynch has been gone now about as many years as he was years old then. I will never add him as a friend on facebook like my other old friends. A lifetime has gone by since then that he will be forever cheated out of. I just find that sad and impossible to reconcile with the voter's choice last Tuesday.

My heart goes out to the REAL Vietnam Vets who did serve. I think about them all the time. I feel for those that did not come back like Kenny and those that did but were never the same again. No doubt haunted by the far worse things than I am troubled with. I see the men coming back without arms or legs and one with a third of his head blown away and I think what a shame it is for the like of Blumenthal to have been elected. Those men are heroes. Blumenthal is a scoundrel who tried to pass himself off as one of them. Where are people's values and standards?

How can we believe anything he tells us?

It is shameful that Blumenthal now represents us. Maybe this is the consequence of not removing Bill Clinton from office? Our standards that have been allowed to slip have slipped some more. Blumenthal should not have even been nominated by the Democrats. There was no need to necessarily to replace him with a Republican. They could have replaced him with another Democrat that had not disgraced him or herself.

No they thought they had better chances this lying dick so sold our war dead down the river.

Linda McMahon was meet with the disdain the Democrats and the media elites should have showed Blumenthal. In a bygone era they would have. You would think it was McMahon that lied about her military career the way they carried on. McMahon's only sin is that she is a Republican in a state that openly expresses its intolerance for us. I don't feel sorry for her, I feel sorry for the whole state.

-- The Democrats most of all.

The liberals in the press were a lot more bothered with Machon's ability to go around them than they were with Bluenthal's lack of character. They did not like it one bit that she didn't need Campbell and the other kingmakers in the press to get her message out.

He won anyway and now they can write the final chaper anyway they like. I hope they are happy. Now Blumenthal has vowed to use his new position to enact revenge and is going after WWE and their supposed steroid use. Finally we have senator that really knows what the voters need eh?!

The other election issue I am deeply concerned is the human garbage on Death Row. Those men have committed the worst crimes you can commit against our own. Our new high minded Governor-elect see they are spared the sentence that juries have handed down.

If only the liberals would save some of their venom they usually use on their fellow Americans running for office instead on the killers of children (8, 13 and 16) or cop-killers. This is not a good time to be a family member of a victim: 'Sorry Dr. Petit! Looks like the killers of your whole family will outlive you after all'.

The Cheshire home invaders not only killed and raped Dr. Petit's wife and two girls but they went so far as to chain one of the girls to her bed, soaked her with gasoline and burned her alive. And Democrats and the media characterize terrorists getting water dripped down their noses for needed intelligence as "torture", but tellingly don't do the same for sweet girl.

As goes Connecticut so goes the nation? Thankfully not. They have higher standards outside this state. Democrats got their dicks knocked in the dirt, losing the House by a huge sixty-something margin.

Connecticut is my home and I hate to see what it is becoming. I wonder if it is to late. My Dad built a thriving business here back in the 1980's but he told me you are crazy if you start a business here today. Connecticut used to be a good place to do business, but no longer.

My parents moved to Missouri to protect what was left of their nest egg and I never saw him again before he died.

The election that has passed maybe many things but inconsequential and trivial as Campbell seems to think it was, it was not. The unwise choices of Connecticut voters will have grave consequences. Jobs will hurry their pace out of here as spending and taxes reach new highs. The voters here buy the tired old tactic of class envy warfare every single time. It is the poor however that will pay the highest price. Those with money will pull out -- deinvest.

I really liked Florida while I was stationed there in the Navy. The people are nicer and It’s sunny all the time, and never snows and they don't elect lying dirtbags like Dick Blumenthal.

Killers get what they got coming there too.

They also don't have an income tax. Maybe that is where I will end up. There certainly isn't much to keep me here with most of my family having already left.

But the thing I would most like to see is our state to get up, dust herself off, clean her house of the likes of Blumenthal, and gets back to common sense principals ---instead of sinking into a pit of moral relativism, socialism and certain failure.

Kathy Tate Bradish and the League of Liberal Women Lobbyists

2010-10-30T11:52:00.000-07:00

Dick Blumenthal Stumped On How To Create A Job

2010-10-29T17:39:00.000-07:00

Vote Bare Naked

2010-10-23T11:42:00.000-07:00

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz:

To get straight to the point, who the hell do you think you are ordering registrars to turn anyone away at the polls who is wearing “WWE apparel”? When has it been the standard that duly registered voters are not allowed to vote if they have a company name printed on their shirt that one of the numerous candidates used to work for?

If you really were a lawyer you know that there is a gigantic distinction between a shirt that says “vote for McMahon” and a shirt that has a person’s favorite wrestler shirt on it.

I have to remind you that the First Amendment of the Constitution (which is a higher law than your office’s regulations in case you were not aware) clearly states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.

Since the Amendments were found by the Supreme Court to apply to state governments as well as the federal government, that means your office may not, shall not, violate our basic rights. Your order is of a shockingly partisan nature and an obvious abuse of your authority you have been trusted with.

The irrelevant speech on such a T Shirt isn’t nearly enough of a correlation to the candidate to have any validity and is on its face not even debatable. You are wrong.

Would you similarly have registrars tell duly registered voters that have some sort of T Shirt that has some mention the Attorney General’s office to go home and change? What about all the other candidates and the companies they work for? Will this new regulation be uniformly applied or just to the one candidate you don’t want to win?

I demand that you rescind your order. It is inevitable that some voters in fact will show up wearing such a T Shirt who may or may not be a supporter of Mrs. McMahon. You have no authority to deny duly registered voters their right to vote based on such arbitrary grounds.

The only restriction on clothing worn to the polling place is a shirt or other apparel has an explicated message that say “Vote For Jane Smith” --- and even that is debatable in my opinion. It is mandatory that you apply the rules equally regardless of whom you personally support. I can only surmise that campaign supporters must show up to vote all the time wearing such T Shirts and are sometimes allowed to vote and promptly leave.

Your selective standards on this are unlawful.

Sincerely,

John R. McCommas

Obama Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes Benz Sheila Velastro Hartford..wmv

2010-10-02T17:08:00.000-07:00

Sarah Palin Speech at the Restoring Honor Rally ( Part 1)

2010-08-30T18:20:00.000-07:00

Denise Merrill: Part of the Problem

2010-08-07T16:19:00.000-07:00

Rush Limbaugh on Palin and the JournoList

2010-08-07T15:05:00.000-07:00

funny racoon

2010-08-05T17:16:00.000-07:00

The Day does not know what the Supreme Law of the Land is

2010-08-04T07:58:00.000-07:00

I want to take the time to settle an old score. I responded to this letter b y Donald M. Twitty of Westerly June 4th 2009. It is his opinion that waterboarding terrorists to get needed intelligence is "torture". I profoundly disagree but that is not the point I want to make here. Twitty wrote that “The United States signed the Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. These laws provide no exception for torture under any circumstances”.

Twitty then writes (and this is the point I responded to) "The Eighth Amendment states that treaties signed by the U.S. are the "supreme law of the land."

I wrote a letter of my own printed on June 6^th that [ Twitty’s] letter " incorrectly writes that the Eighth Amendment states that treaties signed by the United States are the supreme law of the land. In fact, the supreme law of the land is the Constitution, not treaties and not "international law" (whatever that is)… the Eighth Amendment says Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. There is nothing about treaties in there”.

The editor added a note under my letter saying "The Constitution addresses "treaties as supreme law of the land" in Article VI, Paragraph II". I was aghast by this. A lousy treaty trumps the Constitution? I was afraid that was tue but how could it be? Evidently there is considerable debate in the legal community over what is the supreme law of the land. Some liberals say it is treaties and conservative say it’s the Constitution.

What Article VI Paragraph II says is this

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

I had to read this several times to understand the meaning. At first reading I thought I was directly contradicted and therefore wrong. I must point out the paragraph is 64 words long. As a rule of thumb my English professor told me, a sentence over 25 words is incomprehensible. I guess the Founders did not know that…Well anyway note that the Constitution is importantly firstly name and then it says “and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof”.

Now stop right there and ask what does that mean all by itself? Clearly it says the power to make laws comes from the Constitution therefore the laws made by Congress is done so with the Constitution’s authority are therefore the laws are inferior and lower rank and subordinate to the Construction; right? (That was 40 words. Did you comprehend?).

From there the run-on sentence says “and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” So what does that mean exactly? I take it to mean that like laws, treaties are subordinate to the Constitution and like laws are subject to judicial review. If a treaty is contrary to the Constitution than what prevails? The text plainly says it is the Constitution.

To put it another way, consider what George C. Detweiler writes in his online paper “Treaties and the Constitution”.

"The language of Article VI clearly states that in the event of a conflict between a treaty and a state constitution or statute, the treaty trumps the state enactments. Analysis of the relationship between the Constitution and treaties and federal statutes requires some resort to the rules of grammar and punctuation and to history.

Two separate categories of laws are declared to be the supreme law of the land. Category one is the Constitution and laws of the United States made in pursuance thereof. The history of the Republic is replete with examples of U.S. laws which are not made in pursuance of the Constitution and which the courts hold to be void. Although the Constitution is (to use an academic legal term) the "super supreme" above all other law, the Founders expanded the term "supreme law of the land" to include constitutionally sound laws enacted to carry out the specific functions assigned to the federal government. Pockets of misunderstanding have developed when the second category is considered — treaties.

The Founders were learned men, well versed in the use of language, the law, and politics. They wrote clearly and precisely. Note that it is not all treaties that are declared to be the supreme law of the land, but only those made under the authority of the United States. Popular misconceptions center around trying to apply the language "made in pursuance thereof" to treaties as well as to laws of Congress. Under this misreading, it would become laws of Congress and treaties made in pursuance of the Constitution which are the supreme law. That is not the way the Constitution was written. The reference to enactments made "in pursuance thereof" is limited to laws of Congress. A semicolon follows, which sets apart and establishes the second category, treaties, made under the authority of the United States. What is the reason and the effect of creating the two categories? Did the Founders intend that treaties were supreme over the Constitution or statutes passed by Congress? In addition to the Founders’ insights cited above, history and decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court answer both questions in the negative".

I came to the same conclusion as Detweiler did, only less eloquently, just by reading the fucking thing. It is perfectly clear to any fool that treaties do not trump the Constitution.

I came across a Supreme Court case today that inspired this blog entry entitled Reid v. Covert that held (as Wikipedia puts it) that “The Constitution supersedes all treaties ratified by the United States Senate. The military may not try the civilian wife of a soldier under military jurisdiction”.

So I win. The Editor of the Day is wrong. HA! Mine is bigger.

Even Dead Fish Deserve Better Than the Courant

2010-07-29T10:40:00.000-07:00

I picked up a copy of the Hartford Courant last Monday (July 26 2010) for the first time in years and was actually considering getting a subscription. I had momentarily forgiven the past transgressions of their journalistic malpractice, as I am a forgiving soul (perhaps too much so). I have been feeling unsatisfied by the local papers lately. I had the practical goal of keeping up with proposed legislation at the state capital.

Then I opened up to the opinion section and saw the most intellectually unredeemable cartoon I have seen in a long time. It was a drawing by “Tote’s View” of a conservative with a copy of the Constitution in his hands and he is saying, “I’m not racist. I just want to go back to the Constitution as it was written”. On the Constitution is says “Slavery OK”.

No one needs to say it but I will anyway. How tunnel-visioned and shrilly partisan do you have to be to think this cartoon has any kind of point? It is certainly not funny.

Conservatives do not want to bring slavery back, and as I recall it, the Republican Party came into existence to abolish it and the Democrats that wanted to keep it. What we do want is for the court's to obey the clear textual parameters of the Constitution as it exists at the time. Stop reading stuff that isn't there and stop ignoring stuff that is -- like the Second Amendment for one. It is apparent the Hartford Courant has taken a page from “Journolist” and is calling anyone who opposes the Obama Agenda as racist.

"If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they've put upon us. Instead, take one of them – Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares –- and call them racists".

-- Spencer Ackerman of The Washington Independent

What is truly racist is using the authentic past racism of the past and present to further a political view that has nothing to do with racism. In effect they are calling wolf and the result is we all become deaf to allegations of racism even on the occasions that it is real.

I will not be subscribing to the Courant after all. I really and truly hope they go out of business. That is exactly what they deserve for being so Neanderthal and engaging in gutter politics that is not only reprehensibly lowbrow but so much so that it insults the intelligence of all of us. Themselves most of all.

Shame on them.

Denise Merrill: The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow!

2010-07-27T16:14:00.000-07:00

Democratz Pray 4 Tomorrow from Franc Ferdinski on Vimeo.

And Now I Know The REST Of The Story

2010-07-25T16:50:00.000-07:00

Sarah Palin's Notes

An Intolerable Mistake on Hallowed Ground

Earlier today, Mayor Bloomberg responded to my comments about the planned mosque at Ground Zero by suggesting that a decision not to allow the building of a mosque at that sacred place would somehow violate American principles of tolerance and openness.

No one is disputing that America stands for – and should stand for – religious tolerance. It is a foundation of our republic. This is not an issue of religious tolerance but of common moral sense. To build a mosque at Ground Zero is a stab in the heart of the families of the innocent victims of those horrific attacks. Just days after 9/11, the spiritual leader of the organization that wants to build the mosque, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, suggested that blame be placed on the innocents when he stated that the “United States’ policies were an accessory to the crime that happened” and that “in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.” Rauf refuses to recognize that Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of our ally, Israel, and refuses to provide information about the sources of funding for the $100 million mosque. Rauf also plays a key role in a group behind the flotilla designed to provoke Israel in its justifiable blockade of Gaza. These are just a few of the points Americans are realizing as New York considers the proposed mosque just a stone’s throw away from 9/11’s sacred ground.

I agree with the sister of one of the 9/11 victims (and a New York resident) who said: “This is a place which is 600 feet from where almost 3,000 people were torn to pieces by Islamic extremists. I think that it is incredibly insensitive and audacious really for them to build a mosque, not only on that site, but to do it specifically so that they could be in proximity to where that atrocity happened.”

Many Americans, myself included, feel it would be an intolerable and tragic mistake to allow such a project sponsored by such an individual to go forward on such hallowed ground. This is nothing close to “religious intolerance,” it’s just common decency.

- Sarah Palin

Ann Coulter on Hannity: "When the Democrats are in Trouble call a Republ...

2010-07-23T17:32:00.000-07:00

The Sarah Jane Adventures Series 3 Full Trailer

2010-07-18T11:10:00.000-07:00

Corazon Aquino

2010-07-05T08:57:00.000-07:00

This fine lady happens to be one of my personal heroes. What follows is an absolutely superb entry from Wikipedia that I can not hope to improve upon.

Maria Corazon "Cory" Sumulong Cojuangco-Aquino (January 25, 1933 – August 1, 2009) was the 11th President of the Philippines and the first woman to hold that office. Aquino was also the first popularly and democratically-elected female president and head of state in Asia.^[1][2] She is best remembered for leading the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution, which toppled the authoritarian regime of the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos and restored democracy in the Philippines. "Tita (Auntie) Cory", as she was affectionately known, is revered by many Filipinos as an icon of Democracy, and was hailed by TIME Magazine as the "Saint of Democracy," due to her well-known spiritual life and strong adherence to non-violence and democracy.

A self-proclaimed "plain housewife",^[3] Aquino was married to Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr., the popular opposition leader and staunchest critic of then President Ferdinand Marcos. Senator Aquino was assassinated on August 21, 1983 upon returning to the Philippines after his exile in the United States.

After her husband's assassination, the widowed Aquino became the reluctant leader of the opposition against the authoritarian rule of the Marcos regime. She united the fragmented opposition and strengthened its moral crusade against the abuses and excesses of President Marcos' martial rule. In late 1985, when President Marcos called for a snap election, Cory Aquino challenged his regime. Aquino thrust herself into the political arena only after one million signatures urging her to run for president were presented to her.

Despite having no prior political experience, except being her husband Ninoy's wife, Aquino proved to be a cult leader, inspiring orator and skilled campaigner. She ran for president with former senator Salvador Laurel as her vice-presidential running mate. When Marcos-allied Batasang Pambansa proclaimed Ferdinand Marcos the winner in the 1986 snap elections, Aquino called for massive civil disobedience protests against him, declaring herself as having been cheated and as the real winner in the elections. Filipinos enthusiastically heeded her call and rallied behind her. These series of events eventually led to the ouster of Marcos from power and the installation of Aquino as president of the Philippines in February 1986, an event which is now known as the historic 1986 EDSA .

Now in power, Aquino oversaw the restoration of democracy in the Philippines and the promulgation of a new constitution, which limited the powers of the presidency and established a bicameral legislature. Her administration gave strong emphasis and concern for civil liberties and human rights, peace talks and dialogues with communist insurgents and Muslim secessionists. Aquino's economic policies, meanwhile, centered on bringing back economic health and confidence and focused on creating a market-oriented and socially-responsible economy. Despite these achievements, Aquino's presidency was not smooth-sailing as she had to face series of nine coup attempts against her administration and destructive natural calamities and disasters until the end of her term in 1992.

After her term expired in 1992, Aquino returned to private life although she remained active in the public eye, constantly voicing her views and opinions on the pressing political issues in the country. In 2008, Aquino was diagnosed with colorectal cancer (the same ailment that killed her mother Doña Demetria "Metring" Sumulong Cojuangco) and after a one-year battle with the disease, she died on August 1, 2009.

That Racist Bill Cosby

2010-06-20T14:17:00.000-07:00

When you live in a free society as we do, we have no alternative but to put up with speech that we not only disagree with but that is also hateful and threatens to re-ignite the fires of racial hatred and mistrust. The only way to combat it is to disassemble it bit by bit. “Enlightened Racism: The Cosby Show, Audiences and the Myth of the American Dream” (1992) by Sut Jhally and Justin Lewis is one such pile of dog shit that for the most part refutes itself.

A quick thumb through

· Jhally and Lewis write that the USA is “still emerging from a deeply racist history a society in which many white people have treated and continue to treat black people with contempt, suspicion and a profoundly ignorant sense of Superiority”.

· Apparently the writers agree with the Alvin Poussaint an adviser to the Cosby Show when he characterized past black comedies that have enjoyed The Jeffersons (my favorate), Sanford and Son, and Good Times as “full of jiving jammin’, s streetwise style stuff that is the worst kind of stereotyping”.

· They write The Cosby Show “presents a misleadingly cozy picture a sugar candy world unfettered by racism crime and economic deprivation. Some have argued that the Huxtables’ charmed life is so alien to the experience of most black people that they are no longer black at all. They are just like white people”.

· They quote Henry Louis Gates ( remember him? ) as saying as long as all blacks were represented in demeaning or peripheral roles it was possible to believe that American racism was, as it were, indiscriminate. The social vision of “Cosby” however reflects the minuscule integration of blacks into the upper middle class [and] reassuringly throws the blame for black poverty back onto the impoverished.

· “Most white people –certainly those who watch The Cosby show – no longer see skin color as a barriers to liking someone or treating them as an equal. Unimpeded by such all-encompassing prejudice they are able to discriminate between black people, some of who have succeeded, some of whom have not. However they quietly (and perhaps unconsciously) retain the association of blackness as an indicator of cultural inferiority, albeit one from which African Americans, if they are talented enough or hard working enough can escape. This position is arrived at not through malice but through a failure to adequately recognize the disadvantaged position black people occupy in the class structure.”.

We are talking about a TV show, right?

Robert Miller characterizes the book this way

“According to Jhally and Lewis, the Cosby Show sets up an unachievable goal for African Americans. It sets them up for failure. They try to show that the odds are so great against African Americans successfully negotiating all of the obstacles between themselves and the American Dream that it might as well be impossible. The Cosby Show tells us quite the opposite. The show would have us believe that anyone, regardless of race, can achieve material success in the United States. Material success for the authors of the book is the key ingredient in the American Dream. According to them the Cosby Show is the consummate definition of the American Dream. The show depicts individuals, who under "normal" circumstances should not have achieved material success, achieving material success. It further sets them as an example of a strong family with the inclusion of the extended family. The Huxtables are what Americans should aspire to be. However, they are black” . The blackness of the Huxtables is the key for Jhally and Lewis. Their research has conclusively proven to them that simply being black is too much to overcome in America. Their book focuses on interviews and uses statistics to prove that the black experience in America is all but void of the successes that the Huxtables demonstrate. The authors believe that the success of the Huxtables in their achievement of the American Dream gives rise to an entirely new type of racism, enlightened racism. It gives the budding bigot a new reason for his views. An enlightened racist will believe that anyone can make it in the U.S. because our system is a fair and just one, and it is only the fault of the individual for a lack of success.

I guess the main point of contention I have with this book is that black people actually, in fact, are just like white people -- and vise-versa. We are more alike than we are different. Its just pigment after all. On the fair issue, no one ever said life was fair. As children this is one of the hardest lessons to learn but learn it we do as we become adults.

We all have equal opportunity -- or at least some measure of it -- but that is not to say we will all have equality of results of equal efforts. That is not to say that racism has been eradicated because it certainly hasn't been. That is not to say we will get what we deserve. Sometimes good things happen, sometimes they don't. There is beyond refute an element of luck in life. On the other hand, we certainly do have the power to shape our lives. We make these choices every day. Mr. Cosby himself has said if you go into a college library on a Saturday night you can find the students that will mop the floor with their classmates. We are not caught up in a tide where we don't have any control at all.

If we were all to remove a thin layer of our skin the races would all be indistinguishable from each other. Race is of no importance except for the importance that we apply to it.

Further the authors put undue importance on The Cosbys. You can’t look to a TV show for all the answers to life’s big questions.

What is authentically racist is the suggesting that because the fictional Mr. and Mrs. Huxtable are both well educated (as were their fictional parents) and well-to-do that somehow makes them not really black anymore. Now THAT is racist and offends me.

Something else I find unforgivably racist in this book is the idea that most blacks are ghetto poor. They are not. The authors’ premise that most blacks can never succeed because of institutional racism or enlightened racism (or whatever you call it) is bad enough. But if you think one step further what they are really saying is that blacks as a group are pathetic and helpless. They can never take on their problems and challenges and come out winners so they might has well not even try.

Give the folks a little credit. The American Dream is not so allusive as all that and you do not have to become a millionaire in order to get it. Take a look at white people in comparison as a group. Are our lives nothing but privilege and excess? We have more money than we know what to do with? Does Dynasty reflect how most white people live? Does even the Cosby Show reflect how most white people live?

I work my ass off in a distribution center and at 43 am going to college part time. Do I process the American Dream? Yes and No. I am relatively comfortable and happy at the place I am right now. I still have problems and worries and failings. I am not where I want to be yet professionally. Would I be considered a success by the authors if I were black? Are they judging us by the same standard? The standard of the American Dream is allusive and subjective.

There certainly is racism out there, and some of it is in this book, but it is not so prevalent as liberals who fan the flames desperately want us to believe. Bill Cosby and his alter ego Cliff Huxtable are examples of what every American man should aspire to be. He would still be such if he were white. Without the ideal, how will we strive towards a better life?

What I admire most about Mr. Cosby is not his material success but his wisdom and loving nature as a father that came across in his show and his books all to well. The really weird thing about this book is that Mr. Cosby himself financed the empirical audience study on which the book is flimsily based.

Side Me With Weicker on This One

2010-06-18T14:54:00.000-07:00

It was with a groan that I read the headline in the Willimantic Chronicle “Weicker doesn’t have anything good to say about Connecticut politicians” (June 18, 2010). The era of liberal blowhard Lowell Weicker is a part of Connecticut's past best forgotten most of the time.

But I have to admit that I agreed with 85 percent of what he said here.

The ex-Connecticut resident said Governor Jodi Rell was “disinterested” (very apt!) and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has made the state unfriendly to business and the Connecticut General Assembly failed to keep a lid on spending while selling bonds to pay for operating expenses.

All true.

He was speaking at a Connecticut Conference of Municipalities thingy. He predicted that the next Gov would be a one-termer like he was because of all the unpopular decisions he would have to make on the fiscal side of things “Its going to be a very cold shower on a very drunk state”.

Where I disagree is Weicker's implication that the reason he is unpopular is because he forced us to take needed medicine. Not quite asshole. Weicker is unpopular because he promised not to enact an income tax and then double crossed us and shoved it down our throats. The new governor will have four years to make a difference and that should be enough if he takes the bolder course of fiscal conservatism. Yeah that, and doesn't lie to us like Weicker did. I think Republican Tom Foly will govern by veto. We need a grown-up in the Executive Mansion. I actually think --or maybe its just hope -- that the people will respect a strong fiscally conservative governor looking after the big picture after the muddle of Rudderless Rell. – Kinda like the feeling you get after you have been out of work for a while and you are at your new job and your hands are busy earning some money. You know you won’t be paid until the Friday of next week but it just feels great to working again and be back on track. You know what I mean?

Weicker said that he understands that Rell is popular but that is because she has ducked the hard issues. No truer statement has ever passed through through the man's lips. I wonder why no one else has said that until now? I must have thought it a million times. Rell picks the issues she takes any sort of stand on extremely carefully. She tiptoes her way through everything, careful not to say or do anything unpopular. She guards her personal popularity points like they are gold.

Fools gold is you ask me. I am of the George W. Bush state of mind where if you have political capital, you cash it in on worthwhile policy initiatives. Bush may not be very popular now, but you have to concede he got a lot done in his presidency whether you agree with him or not. Unspent political capital is a waste. --- And an aside on Bush and Rell that always bugged me, I will never forget (or forgive) the time when the skittish Rell suddenly just had to be out of state visiting the Governor of Mass, who was once a cop-killer's lawyer, when Bush visited Connecticut. Rell was obviously scared shitless that President Bush's unpopularity might somehow tarnish her sterling reputation if she stood to close to him or someone snapped a picture of the two together. What a fucking Ninny.

Former Governor Weicker is absolutely right. Our Accidental Governor spends most of her time hiding from big issues. There is not one blessed thing I can think of that Rell made a difference on except for the brazenly Un-Constitutional Public Financing scheme of hers to fool the public into thinking she was never a Rowland crony. What a gem that is. You can find similar beauties of that landmark legislation in my cat Joe's litter box.

Weicker seems to be backing Ned Lamont for Governor (who incidently I saw yesterday at Willimantic’s "Third Thursday's" snooze of a festival on Main Street) which kinda undermines his well-reasoned criticisms of Rino-Rell and the Democrat General Assembly. It just seems to me that electing a liberal Democrat Governor like either Dan Malloy or Lamont now (NOW??!! WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY??!!) would be like throwing gasoline on fire. If Weicker were truly worried about spending, he would be holding fundraisers for Tom Foly. A Democrat Governor will not likely check the overspending of his own party. Certainly not enough! Hell I am not even sure Connecticut can be saved at this point.

The article mentioned something that surprised me about the 79 year old Weicker. He sits on the Board of World Wrestling Entertainment. Wow, really?

He said that Linda McMahon was a very decent person with a fine mind.

Well there you go then. That’s one good thing he said about a Connecticut Pol. I have never agreed with him so much.

Defending Louise Zurowski

2010-06-12T05:46:00.000-07:00

This letter in the Norwich Bulletin apparently refers to Louise Zurowski's letter "Education more about profit than children".

The working for free reference was just that, a reference and taking it literally is a bit intellectually dishonest. Mrs. Zurowski is herself a retired teacher of periodical schools. She has been a thoughtful and convincing critic of the Teachers Unions and crazy public school policies for many years now. She is an American citizen and has the right to write the paper. I always enjoy her letters which I consider gems amid the usual slush and I have only disagreed with one of them. I wish she would write more.

The public pays teachers and the public pays the school budgets. We live in a democracy and Mrs. Zurowski and anyone else for that matter has every right to speak her mind on what the proper level of compensation ought to be. If you don't like that then that's just to damn bad.

I would have Mr.Boada and his wife (who I am guessing is the real author of this letter based on the sexism crack) know that my property taxes will go up 170 bucks this year if the budget in Windham if approved. That's half a week's pay for me. We own a tiny little condo. My friends that live in an actual house are seeing their tax bills go up by three times that this year if we pass the budget which we will not.

The school budget is a full one million dollars more than last year. How can we sustain increases like this? We the taxpayers simply cannot afford to keep paying increases this huge every year or even every non-election year. I will be voting against the budget again. It is a matter of self-defense.

And the simple fact is that teachers do not work a full year and they are paid rather well. The letter writer says that 30 thou is not a lot of money for someone that processes a Masters Degree but that is only what they start at. Once teachers have tenure and enough seniority to avoid layoffs they are pretty much set up for life. The taxpayers that foot the bill cannot say the same about their jobs. The teachers will get large salary increases every year and they are unionized and this is a very Democrat state. Their interests are well looked after.

The taxpayers interests however are not so well pampered. Huge tax increases are shoved down our throats and if we say one word in protest about the level of the increase we are told we don't care about the children. It is as if the children are being held hostage.

My Mom was a teacher in the 1970s and they were not paid well at all. Teachers today have little to cry about. She taught because she loved teaching and she loved teaching me. My sister is a teacher and I am not unsympathetic to teachers, but there needs to be a balance between fair compensation and the taxpayers ability to pay.

We also have to consider the tax impact on business. If we tax them too much, we lose jobs. How will we pay the teacher's salary increases then? CT is bleeding jobs right now. Many businesses like Pratt and Whitney and Franklin Mushrooms and Rogers Corporation have no choice but to close shop and move to the pro-business states or overseas. The sad thing is as I watch them and the jobs go, I know they are dong the right thing.

John R. Rathgeber, president and CEO of the Connecticut Business & Industry Association, wrote in the Hartford Communist that Expansion Management Magazine has ranked the Connecticut General Assembly the least business-friendly legislature in the nation. I could say the same exact thing for the Windham Board of Education and Finance Board! More taxes are NOT the answer.

Fact is that today the teaching profession is an extraordinarily lucrative one. Many college-educated people do not earn anything near what a matured, experienced teacher earns. True some make more, but a lot make less. This year our teachers need to take one for the team.

And once again we the people pay the budget that pay teachers salary and the letter writer should follow his own advice when he says before accusing and make irrational comments, why don't you get some facts?

And one more thing. The editors characterization of Mrs. Zurowskis letter as "slinging mud" shows considerable bias. She was not slinging mud at anyone. She was simply making her case.

The teachers unions and their buddies in the press are a bit to sensitive these days. When taxpayer protest the level of the tax increases that are being shoved down our throats that is not slinging mud.

That is democracy in action. If you don't like it, move to Cuba.

Daria Novak One Step Closer to Replacing Courtney

2010-05-29T17:58:00.000-07:00

Richard Blumenthal: Lying Weasel

2010-05-23T19:09:00.000-07:00

No Mercy for the Pitiless

2010-05-16T06:39:00.000-07:00

It just cant be a coincidence. Every time --that is every single time -- I read one of these obnoxiously pious, sanctimonious, self-righteous, holier than thou, elitist opinions on how the Death Penalty should be abolished, they never say anything about the victims.

Why is that?

You would think that even if the sympathy wasn't sincerely felt that they would at least anticipate that it might be politically wise to put in a word of two about those whose lives were extinguished without pity.

But no.

Why is that? Don't victims count? Don't widows and widowers count? Don't parents who are faced with the unnatural reality that they have outlived one of their children count?

Why don't Media Liberals address the victim issue in these opinions? Why don't they explain to us why the terror the victims felt as their killers tightened their hands around their throats isn't worth the trouble of putting their killers to death?

Why don't they explain how the victims of the family should just get over it? and 'move on'?

Why don't they bring up specific cases and explain why that ultimate crime is not worth the ultimate punishment?

What about Cop-Killers?

What about terrorism?

Do liberals advocate that we just give Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of 9-11, a life term of free meals in a room without a view for the rest of his days? Would that be a just sentence in light of his crimes against all of humanity?

Has the writer of this editorial ever sat down before they wrote this editorial and contemplated about the terror the victims went through and the worth of their short lives? Some were so terrified that they leaped off the building. Did he think about them before they wrote this? If he did, there is no indication whatever.

The 9-11 terrorists murdered three thousand of our countrymen and yet the Death Penalty should be off the table. The max they should get is a 4 X4 cell without a view and three squares a day.

The 9-11 terrorists executions will be far more humane than the deaths of their victims suffered through, that's for sure. Some of our countrymen were buried or burned alive and suffered unimaginable pain and confusion before they mercifully died.

Then there are those that bravely ran into the burning buildings to rescue complete strangers and never came back out. What are those lives worth?

-- or not worth?

I remember one picture of a woman finding her way through a crack one of the 9-11 towers and looking at the helicopter that must have taken the picture. That lady needless to say did not find the help she was looking for. She is dead. If she didn't jump, she perished at the tower collapsed. I cant get her out of my mind. I wish to God that I could forget that haunting image.

Sorry. Every time I reconsider my position on the Death Penalty, I come back to the victims and the terror they must have gone through especially as all hope died for their rescue.

What about the home invasion in Cheshire? Dr. William Petit lost his entire family. His wife and daughters aged 17 and 11. He is all alone now.

Tell me what else would you do with the killers of three people, let alone three thousand?

And besides we don't call it the Capital Deterrent. We call it Capital Punishment.

We execute those who have earned it. If there is any deterrent effect, (and there has got to be), that is just an unexpected bonus.

Personally I think Death Penalty Reform should be about bringing back Old Sparky. I am an old fashioned kind of guy.

--- Not about leniency for first degree killers. I do feel sorry for the murderers as they are put through the process but that pity is tempered by my pity for the victims.

Linda McMahon is a Woman We Should Take Seriously?

2010-05-09T18:06:00.000-07:00

"Why is there always money for war but never money for education?"

2010-05-02T10:32:00.000-07:00

That's the bumper sticker I saw at the Mansfield Flea Market on my way back to the car today. I immediately thought of these two photos I had seen a short time before and I had to marvel at the short sightedness of the driver that affixed such a stupidly worded statement on his or her bumper. For the record the photos was in a 1973 soft cover over sized book called "The Best of Life". Life as in the now defunct magazine.

That's a union man for you. "Where is mine?" Leaving aside the unimaginable sum of what this country spends on education every year including the fat unionized teachers checks we write, it is just mind boggling that someone could be so ungrateful for the sacrifices some have paid for country. First of all it is a false choice that we have to have one or the other but not both. Or that throwing more and more money at education necessarily means a better educated student. Second, this person has the gall to quibble about the money spent on securing his freedom as if we could have shopped around to find a better deal somewhere? If only that money had been redirected to "education", than where would we be today? Who would be our rulers? The Nazis? The Soviets?

Or would we merely be one of many mediocre nations like the socialist basket cases of Europe?

I suppose in an odd way these views are the inevitable consequence of having it so good for so long. They have become spoilt like children. They are unappreciative of the sacrifices that have been made because they are so far removed from them. Our World War II veterans are disappearing every day. Soon they will be all gone. Some of us are forgetting the lessons we learned then. Foremost among them is to never be caught unprepared again.

America is special because we made different choices than other nations did and continue to do so. We do not believe in "free". We believe in rugged individualism. We have charity but once you are on your feet again, you are expected to care for yourself and your family. We believe in freedom and if necessary, we will spill our blood to make sure we remain free.

I have always had the utmost reverence for our brave men on the front lines no matter if it is a World war, Vietnam or the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are not cowboys. They must have been scared out of their wits lots of times.

I lost one friend while I was in the Navy. What would it have been like to have the list of your buddies still alive verses those that have fallen

---and the former is the shorter list? Education isn't free any more than freedom is. But when and if it came down to choosing one or the other it is beyond question what choice has to be made. The best education in a fascist state is not a life worth living.

Some people forget that.

Dick Morris on Rob Simmons

2010-04-22T06:46:00.000-07:00

Joe Courtney and the Lapdog Press

2010-04-19T16:10:00.000-07:00

Why is the Left Afraid of Daria and Sarah?

2010-04-10T15:18:00.000-07:00

Curiously absent from ECSU’s news release among the names of candidates that will speak at the Conservative Candidates Forum was Republican congressional candidate Daria Novak.

Was this an honest oversight? It would be naive to think so. Every other candidate I am aware of was mentioned, but not the lady that is likely to be Congressman Joe Courtney’s successor.

Elsewhere in the same edition of the Willimantic Chonicle was an article about a speech Sarah Palin gave at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference. The Chronicle purposely used an unflattering picture of the beautiful Palin in a conspicuous attempt to portray her as foolish. When the Chronicle runs a picture of President Obama they always use one that makes him look regal. Further the Reuters wire story described Palin as a “polarizing figure” yet they never describe Obama that way when he is even more so.

Why is it that liberals can’t tell a story straight when it comes to conservative women? Are they that afraid of conservatives with two X chromosomes that they have to stoop to these low-ball tactics?

Socialism You Can Believe in!

2010-03-28T18:48:00.000-07:00

Obama signs the Patients Rights Revocation Act of 2010. What a proud day...

Apologies to Matson but it was wrong the way he drew it up.

Remember in November

2010-03-27T11:47:00.001-07:00

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva

Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Klein (FL)
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz

Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burris (D-IL)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)

Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kirk (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)

Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Martha Dean for Attorney General

2010-03-20T15:53:00.001-07:00

We got a live one here!

Double click on the vid to catch the rest of the speech. Its worth listening to.

Blumenthal Litterally Not Ready For Prime Time

2010-03-14T11:15:00.001-07:00

What is the matter with him? If Blumenthal was unprepared to say anything then why in the world did he agree to be interviewed? Why is he even running?

Did he think he was just going to bullshit his way threw it like the Norwich Bulletin lets him get away with? If this is the guy with the answers then why doesn’t he have any answers?

He looked like a deer in Rob Simmons' headlights.

Rob already has a position on healthcare. He doesn't need to come up with something that straddles and dodges the single biggest major issue facing this state right now.

He's on it. Rob Simmons is a wonderful fit for Connecticut.

If you oppose ObamaCare then nominate Rob Simmons.

Did You Know?

2010-03-13T16:26:00.001-08:00

I think this vid shows some pretty stiff challanges for the USA and my response is...

Bring it on baby!

Michael Buble? Nope. Introducing Ben Sharkey

2010-03-07T16:43:00.001-08:00

Sings a lot better and is better lookin to boot.

Things That Make You Go Hummm......

2010-03-05T16:36:00.000-08:00

-- per your command sir....

John R. (please don't forget the R this time) McCommas
29 Kathleen Drive Unit 7A
Willimantic CT 06226
860-377-3134

Editor

Why is our congressman hiding from us? Could it be that disaster of a town hall meeting in which he tried to defend his position of ObamaCare? Does Joe Courtney have better things to do than listen to his constituents?

Republican Daria Novak is our Scott Brown. Novak is an articulate, successful businesswoman (Founder and President of ERUdyne) and has the same common sense conservative values of the people she would represent. Novak opposes ObamaCare that the lawyer-incumbent wants to shove down our throats. Please look at her website and then send that wonderful lady to Congress!

John R. McCommas

From: rhackett@norwichbulletin.com
To: johnray67@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 09:40:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Daria Novak for Congress

John...We’ve discussion over and over again....and you’re still wrong, and quite frankly, I’m getting tired of it. Your “assumption” that because we endorsed Joe Courtney in the last campaign we are “targeting” Republicans running against him has absolutely no truth to it whatsoever....so...when you make your snide little cheap shots suggesting such a thing,. You’re letter is untrue and baseless. Period.

So...if you wish to write a letter to the editor endorsing Daria Novak’s candidacy — leaving out the cheap shots and untruths — please feel free to do so...and we will be more than happy to publish it.

As for now....given your feelings, I have no intention of editing your submittals. So, that means you’ll have to resubmit something if you want it published.

Ray

On 3/3/10 9:43 PM, "John R. McCommas" wrote:

Mr. Hackett

Well didn't the Norwich Bulletin endorse that him? It is my recollection that you did. Am I mistaken?

If that will get it passed the censorship committee Mr. Hackett, fine. Is there anything else you would like to change?

I only agree because I want that Ms. Novak elected. The reason I put "Bulletin-endorsed" in there is to remind folks that you and your paper endorsed that sorry excuse for a Representative. I think it is absolutely fair game to question the neutrality of the press. The fact that question the neutrality of the press is now seemingly off limits in the editorial pages kinda-sorta proves my point; don't it? So I will take that as a win.

When a Republican runs for office she has two opponents -- The Democrat and the press.

If you folks would just come right out and say "This is a Joe Courtney newspaper and we will cover things like we please" I would not have any quibble with how you slant the news.

But the fact is you insist you have this veneer of neutrality that does not exist in the real world. I will not concede that point.

I wish I could find it now but the blog on Free Norwich isn't archived and no search option seems to exist. There was a blog entry a while back when Joe Courtney finally came out of hiding to have a town meeting. The NB article first characterized the crowd as unfriendly (which it was) but then the online version (and the print version) was changed to something more neutral to Courtney.

But not before the guy at Free Norwich saw it. Busted.

I will send you a link if I ever find it. Nothing personal Mr. Hackett.

John R. Mccommas

From: rhackett@norwichbulletin.com
To: johnray67@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 17:25:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Daria Novak for Congress

Only if you’re going to remove the phrase “Bulletin endorsed” in reference to our incumbent congressman. But that’s your decision.

On 3/2/10 5:14 AM, "John R. McCommas" wrote:

Are you going to print the letter or not as revised Mr. Hackett?

860-377-3134

John R. McCommas

From: rhackett@norwichbulletin.com
To: johnray67@hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:09:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Daria Novak for Congress

John...We’ve had this conversation many times, and quite frankly it’s getting old.

If you wish to write a letter endorsing the candidacy of Daria Novak, I have no problem with that and I’m happy to publish it. If you wish to disagree with my opinion, I have no problem with that. If, however, you wish to continue to use inflammatory words that have no basis in fact, that I have a problem with.

Your repeated references to “Bulletin-buddy” regarding Congressman Courtney is what I’m referring to.

So...if you want your letter published...stick to the point that you want to make...in this case endorsing Novak’s candidacy....feel free to state that you disagree with my assessment of the race...but keep the cheap shots that have no basis in truth out.

Ray

On 2/26/10 7:27 PM, "John R. McCommas" wrote:

What exactly is it you don't like about the first line (other than it being the truth)?

I am referring to this op-ed which YOU wrote. Don't you remember it?

Ray Hackett: "Unless GOP finds quality candidate, Courtney is safe"

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/opinions/columnists/x1528807197/Ray-Hackett-Unless-GOP-finds-quality-candidate-Courtney-is-safe

Daria Novak is a quality candidate. Have you ever even talked to her?

You said that Ms Novak (and the other gentleman) does not have any kind of chance unless she gets REALLY BIG BUCKS. It was my opinion at the time that you were poisoning the well. You wanted to create this idea that she has no chance so no one will give her any money. It would becomes a self full-filling prophecy. I have seen the so called neutral press employ this tactic before.

That isn't fair game Mr. Hackett? You sure do have a peculiar ideas what people should or should not be allowed to say. Ed Dunn never tried to put words in my mouth -- or take them out.

Fine. You win. Let me rearrange a few things so that it might get passed the censorship committee.

How about instead we say (and it is we now that you are forcing me to rewrite my opinion to better reflect what your opinion of what your opinion is).

Make it this instead

Editor

Why is our Bulletin-endorsed incumbent congressman hiding from us? Could it be that disaster of a town hall meeting in which he tried to defend his position of ObamaCare? Does Joe Courtney have better things to do than listen to his constituents?

Republican Daria Novak is our Scott Brown. Novak is an articulate, successful businesswoman (Founder and President of ERUdyne) and has the same common sense conservative values of the people she would represent. Novak opposes ObamaCare that the lawyer-incumbent wants to shove down our throats. Please look at her website and then send that wonderful lady to Congress!

John R. McCommas

From: rhackett@norwichbulletin.com
To: johnray67@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:00:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Daria Novak for Congress

John...If you want have this published....the first line has to go.

Ray

On 2/26/10 2:54 PM, "John R. McCommas" wrote:

John R. McCommas
29 Kathleen Drive
Unit 7A
Willimantic CT 06226
phone 860-377-3134

Editor

Ray Hackett suffers from an acute case of wishful thinking if believes Bulletin-buddy Joe Courtney is going to have a cakewalk to re-election.

If such were so, than why is the incumbent hiding from us? Could it be that disaster of a town hall meeting in which he tried to defend his position of ObamaCare?

Republican Daria Novak is our Scott Brown. Novak is a successful businesswoman (Founder and President of ERUdyne) and has the same common sense conservative values of the people she would represent. Most importantly Novak opposes ObamaCare that the lawyer-incumbent wants to shove down our throats. Take a look at her website and then please send that lady to Congress!

John R. McCommas

psst: Please don't forget the R in my name this time. I was named for my two grandfathers and the R stands for Ray who was my Dad's Dad. Thanx -JRM.

From: do-not-reply@blue-swarm.com
To: johnray67@hotmail.com
Subject: Thank you for your contribution
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:03:26 +0000

John,

Thank you for your recent contribution of $100 to Daria Novak for Congress.

Your support provides the necessary resources to help Daria succeed in her efforts.

We look forward to working with you as the campaign progresses. Thank you again for all of your support and dedication.

Best regards,

The Daria Novak for Congress Team

02/26/2010

-----------

Your receipt:

Amount: $100

Credit Card Type: Visa

Card Number: XXXXXXXXXXXX8595

Contributor Name: John McCommas

Name on Card: John R. McCommas

Physical Address: 29 Kathleen Drive . Willimantic CT 06226

Occupation: Fork Lift Driver

Employer: Rite Aid Distribution

Transaction Number: 2865217757

-----------

Contributions to Daria Novak for Congress are not deductible for Federal income tax purposes. Federal law requires us to obtain and report the name, mailing address, occupation and name of employer for each individual whose contributions aggregate in excess of $200 in an election cycle. Contributions from corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited. By law, the maximum amount an individual may contribute is $2,400 per election.

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Dick Blumenthal and the Croakley Factor

2010-02-28T05:49:00.000-08:00

Well the Oracle of Norwich has spoken!

Notice how Mr. Hackett painted all the senate candidates as in dire straights except his favorite candidate Dick Blumenthal? You would almost have to think that the election will just be a formality unless you stop and think for yourself.

Mr. Hackett's wishful-thinking analysis belies the reality behind it. His candidate has the same inherent weaknesses that his counterpart Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Croakley did. Blumenthal, like Croakley, firstly just doesn't get it. They are just not one of us. Croakley and Blumenthal are slick lawyers who live in their lawyer-world that is totally detached from ours, when what we need is someone real.

What does he intend to do as senator since he cant even initiate one of his nuisance lawsuits from that perch? I think he picked the wrong year to make his move.

People are going to be asking questions that he has no foggy idea how to answer. Where is he on ObamaCare? We the People don't want it. How is he going to straddle that one?

If Blumenthal wants ObamaCare than we don't want Blumenthal. Its just that simple. Watch that 30 point he has nose-dive like Croakley's lead did when people start asking him questions (questions that the Norwich Bulletin should have already asked).

Blumenthal cant coast forever. The press has given him a free ride thus far but that is about to end.

Just as Blumenthal has a lot in common with the ill fated Croakley, I think Rob Simmons and Daria Novak have a lot of the same potential and good qualities that Scott Brown has.

Simmons and Novak are right on the issues, they are just like us and both oppose ObamaCare and oppose this reckless spending and over-printing of money.

Scott overtook a 30 point deficit and defeated Ray Hacketts candidate not by magic, not on his good looks, but because Scott was right on the issues. We don't need useless lawyers like Croakley. Blumenthal and Joe Courtney. They and people just like them are the ones that got us in this mess in the first place. We need real people to deal with real issues facing us.

I think Simmons and Novak are not only going to be contenders, I think they are going to win just like Scott Brown did.

Kill The Bill

2010-02-27T08:27:00.000-08:00

Whether the mandate that we all buy insurance is constitutional or not comes down to the who sits on the Supreme Court. I am not sure if it is or not. I would have to give that some thought. What I or anyone else thinks though isn't important.

I suspect the Court will go along with it probably 5-4 or maybe even 6-3. The Commerce Clause seemingly has no limits. My fellow conservatives have to remember that there are people on that court that can't be persuaded with reason or the clear, unmistakable, textual parameters of the Constitution (case in point Kelo V New London). There are four or five of them, depending on what kind of day Justice Kennedy is having. If the only thing that can save us is the Supreme Court than we are all fucking screwed.

What I am sure is that so called Healthcare *reform* of this kind is a very bad idea and we got the vast majority of Americans on our side. We have to make our voice heard. KILL THE BILL!

Any bill this Congress (which has way to many lawyers in it including that guy that supposedly represents us) comes up with will be bad for you and me and our posterity. It looks like the House of Reps will flip over to Republican control in November and if they shove this down our unwilling throats than Rob Simmons will be in the majority when he is elected to the Senate too.

I am praying that the Democrats are not that suicidal. Democrats take my advice that will help you get re-elected. Don't pass anything! They --and the rest of us-- would all be far better off.

The problem is that a bill passed and signed into law can't really be undone. There is the President's veto power for one thing, and even a President Palin could not realistically expect a bill reversing the damage to ever cross her desk. It would be virtually impossible to get rid of this monstrosity once it is passed.

This so called reform has to be killed outright. Kill it, burn it and scatter the ashes to the four winds.

Never mind a court challenge. We need to kill it with good old fashioned Democracy. Call or write our senators and reps and tell them to kill the bill. If enough of us do, we will kill it.

It would be well worth sacrificing anticipated Republican takeover of Congress to stop this very bad legislation.

It is that important.

I want the Republicans back in charge but not at the cost to our healthcare system. Obama has to fail so that we can keep our place as the preeminent healthcare system in the world.

Healthcare can and should be improved -- by the NEXT Congress.

The longer the issue drags on, the better it is for We the People. Hopefully the up coming elections will make getting anything passed impossible.

That's not a bad thing

Make Daria Novak a Congresswoman

2010-02-26T12:29:00.001-08:00

Ray Hackett suffers from an acute case of wishful thinking if believes his friend Joe Courtney is going to have a cakewalk to re-election.

If such were so, than why is Courtney hiding from us? Could it be that disaster of a town hall meeting in which he tried to defend his position of ObamaCare?

Republican Daria Novak is our Scott Brown. Novak is a successful businesswoman (President and Founder of ERUdyne) and has the same common sense conservative values of the people she would represent. Most importantly Novak opposes ObamaCare that the lawyer-incumbent wants to shove down our throats. Take a look at her website at http://www.novakforcongress.com/ and then please send that lady to Congress!

Trick

2010-02-25T18:14:00.001-08:00

Palin on the "Settled Science" of The Global Warming Theory

2010-02-22T16:26:00.000-08:00

Over the last few months, and even again today, very unsettling revelations have come to light about the “settled science” of man-made global warming. With all of these shoes dropping you’d think every member of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would be barefoot by now.

One thing after another keeps popping up to further discredit the theory of man-made global warming. The IPCC’s supposedly definitive report proving the theory is riddled with serious errors. The organization has been publicly chastised by everyone from its former chair to the heads of the UK’s biggest funder of climate research and Greenpeace UK. One of the world’s top climate change scientists, Prof. Phil Jones, has conceded that there’s been no significant warming since 1995; that the medieval period may have been warmer than today; and that he’s had trouble even keeping track of raw data crucial to the global warming theory. Yet President Obama still seeks to create a federal office for global warming, and they’re still talking about mandating their cap-and-tax plan that's based on discredited data.

The Obama administration’s environmental extremism also shows up in its aversion to oil and gas development. A true all-of-the-above approach to energy would mean allowing oil and gas explorers to drill here and drill now because America has the proven reserves needed to meet our energy challenges. A new industry study reveals that the federal government's current restrictions on oil and gas drilling in Alaska and off the U.S. coastline will cost us $2.36 trillion through 2029. Think of the millions of U.S. jobs we could create, and how much more secure America would be, if we had a true free market approach to energy independence that allowed us to finally drill!

And though I applaud the President’s newly declared interest in nuclear power, it should be noted that he’s merely following through on loan guarantees authorized during the prior administration. What’s more, while the White House now touts the building of new nuclear power plants, its budget inexplicably calls for cutting funding to the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. A real nuclear energy plan requires a strategy for dealing with nuclear waste storage and recycling.

The man-made global warming hysteria isn’t based on sound science, and the Obama administration’s energy policy isn’t based on sound economics. If the climategate revelations teach us anything, it’s that we need to cool down the rhetoric and fire up our common sense.

- Sarah Palin

Palin's Tea Party Speech

2010-02-07T17:29:00.001-08:00

The Democrats Are Not Our Friends!

2010-02-05T18:08:00.001-08:00

Mr. Nice Goes to Washington

2010-01-31T13:08:00.000-08:00

It was one of those great moments in politics that you never forget. That insufferable elitist snob David Gergin asked this shitty-ass question:

"We know from the Clinton experience that if this bill fails that it could be another 15 years before we see another health care reform effort again. Are you willing under those circumstances to say I am going to be the person, I am going to sit in Teddy Kennedy's seat, and I am going to be the person who is going to block it for another 15 years".

To which our true blue all American hero Down Town Scott Brown replied, with just a little bit of annoyance, "With all due respect its not the Kennedy seat and its not the Democrat's seat. It is the people's seat".

It was probably over right then and there. It is not to often that a nice guy finishes first. This is the exception. Scott never lost his cool when his opponent and the press threw one ridiculous lie at him after another.

Congratulations Mr. Brown. No, make that Congratulations Senator-elect Brown.

I Do My Homework

2010-01-31T10:39:00.000-08:00

Speaking of censorship! I wrote a letter to the Norwich Bulletin on the Citizens V the FEC case and the Bulletin's mistaken opinion on it. One of the commentators -- a certain mr teem -- claimed that I did not do my homework:

"Its a shame when letter writers don't bother to think through what they're suggesting or bother to use even a modicum of research. Media corporations have always been exempt from USC441b. That's in one of those other pesky clauses of the First Amendment that people sometimes ignore".

So I posted the links to all my research. And then *poof* they disappeared! Sometimes my comments do come back. And maybe they don't like outside links being posted as they tend to take readers away from their website. Fair enough I guess but it does interfere with the free exchange of ideas. Liberals are not really big fans of that I have noticed. Have you noticed that too?

On the point about the media being exempt from the speech restrictions, that is exactly what this case was all about. Isn't Citizens United a part of the media? They put together a movie about the election coming up that is really no different than what 60 Minutes might have done only their bias tilts the other way.

What if the government was banning the airing of 60 Minutes hatchet-job on Sarah Palin? Isn't that the same thing?

Well try out some of these links which I read. I wrote a paper for a class on this subject but I would have read all this stuff anyway. I have a passion for First Amendment cases and Citizens United V the FEC was a big landmark case.

The Decision

Citizens United Redux: The First Amendment Vindicated? <-- really good!

Citizens United website

Wikipedia

Corneli University of Law

OYEZ

FEC

Bob Bauer opinion

The Fallacy of Campaign Finance Reform by John Samples

NewsBusted !!

2010-01-27T18:31:00.001-08:00

Why I Switched

2010-01-24T12:43:00.000-08:00

Connecticut Bob and someone called Tessa Marquis at "My Leftmeg" put up posts celebrating abortion. I then wrote this long -- but not angry -- post which it turns out is to long so I will put it up here instead. There should be not space limits on a subject as important as this.

I used to be pro-choice but my conscience kept bothering me until I finally changed my changed my mind about two years ago. I have President Obama to thank for that. He horrified me into it.

I probably never really was in the pro-choice camp anyway because every single time a debate came up between the pro-abortionists and the pro-lifers, I would always secretly root for the Life side. I admired Operation Rescue only at the time I thought of it as a magnificent exercise in Free Speech.

To be brutally honest I think I was for *choice* probably because it was the more popular position to take. When I was younger my priorities were different. I remember these screaming arguments from the pro-abortionists "Well what if a girl is raped by her father?!!" , --- which almost put me in the position of having to defend incest. And incest is definitely not cool.

Their other scare tactic was that men should not have any position on abortion unless it is to support it because men can't get pregnant. -- Which is only true for the walk away Joes.

As I write this there are two delightful girls giggling and playing outside my condo. Its almost a sign....

To tell you the truth I am not as nearly bothered by the early abortions as the latter ones. That is what really changed my mind. Far from being moderate, the self described "moderates" are opposed to any restriction on abortion at all no matter how late it is.

I recall one really hateful woman who was the head of one pro-abortion organization (Susan Yolen) who even opposed a bill that would make it illegal for a man to murder a wanted child while he was still in the womb. Before "Jenny's Law", it was perfectly legal for a man to kill his girlfriend's baby as long as he wasn't born yet. Of course he also killed the mother too, but the killer was not charged with the murder of the baby because it just didn't count under CT law as a person at the time as hard as that is to believe. This happened in Plainfield Connecticut which is just a stone's throw from here.

Now isn't that taking *choice* a bit to far? Yolan actually sided with he murderers of pregnant women. Talk about tunnel-vision! And yet this is seen as the more enlightened positon.

The way I think of it is that when a child develops a mind, then no matter what religion you are (and even if you don't have one), you have to admit that he or she has a soul and should have at least some rights. If abortions are to be allowed at all, they should only be in the first trimester before the soul manifests itself.

But even then it is just so unthinkable to me. If you know anything about human genetics, the instant that sperm meets egg a distinct individual is created. The person that tiny fertilized egg is destined to be is cast in cement. Eye color, hair, sex and even some say sexuality are all chosen at that moment. If a different sperm made it in there, it would be a totally different person.

The parents who are inconvenienced may rationalize that they/she can have children latter in life but it will never be that same infant. It will be someone entirely different. An aborted baby can't be replaced ever.

My mom had several pregnancies before she had me. They all died. Two were really bad ones my Dad told me. It bothers me that my Mom must have been in a lot of emotional pain. I was the first to be born alive. On my birth certificate those two deaths are noted on it. My sister was born without any trouble after me. I often wonder about them. It was such a pity they did not make it. Were they boys or girls? What was wrong with them that made my Mom miscarry? What ever they were, you can't argue that were nothing.

I think the only morally justifiable reason for an abortion is to save the life of the woman (when it is authentically at stake) because every person has the right to protect herself. Other than that, I don't have much sympathy anymore for the other rationalizations for abortion. I admire Sarah Palin for her decison to carry her baby to term even though it was not an ideal situation. Likewise for her daughter. It is quite telling that her opponents hate her for the act of not killing her baby. That is quite telling of their morality -- or lack of it.

Just because the child is exterminated quietly without so much as a whimper does not mean that it isn't murder. Did you know that some babies are actually born alive when the doctors (if you can call them that) try to abort them? What would the pro-abortionists have done with these children I wonder? They are not human beings too?

Gianna Jessen is one such person.

We know what Obama's position was on her. If he had his way, Miss Jessen would be dead. 'Just give them a warm blanket' and wheel them into the corner to suffer and die from neglect. That's President Obama's position on the matter in a nutshell. On a bill that would give these children rights as citizens he voted "present". He really wanted to vote "no" but clearly he made a political calculation. I am surprised he got elected despite his "present" vote.

I really can't believe this kind of thing goes on in the best country in the world. It has to be stopped. Did you know that babies cry in the womb? If that doesn't melt your heart than man, you just don't have one.

I don't think of this choice as a euphuism. Not any more I don't. The era of legal abortion will someday be called for what it is -- the holocaust.

I urge you to listen to your conscious like I did mine. At least oppose the late abortions. That's what a real moderate would do, wouldn't she?

He Did It !!!

2010-01-19T19:32:00.000-08:00

TIME IS UP FOR THE DEMOCRAT SUPER-MAJORITY !

Win One For the Gipper Scott !!

2010-01-17T15:51:00.001-08:00

Scott Brown For Senate

2010-01-13T18:23:00.001-08:00

Right man, Right time.

Not Ready For Primetime

2010-01-10T16:05:00.001-08:00

"My mind is open and i want to come back on your show and answer that question."

So open his brains are falling out.

Damed if You Do, Dead If You Don't

2010-01-07T15:33:00.000-08:00

Retired Police Officer Gerard Chartier could not be more right in this letter to the editor. Carefully consider what you are risking by going into the law enforcement profession. Wives and husbands, you got a say in this too. You and your spouse need to do a sit down on this one.

Just ask former Officer Scott Smith out of Milford. Dirtbag Prosecutor John Connelly and the media railroaded him when all that happened is some punk he was arresting went for a knife. Smith shot in self defence.

It turned out latter that this same punk while being arrested on a different charge made the same crazy maneuver while being arrested -- going for a small knife. The police were surprised but managed to subdue him on that occasion. Most people when presented with this evidence would inescapably conclude that Smith was telling the truth but not John Connelly. Many claimed Connelly wanted to make a name for himself at Smith's expense.

Count me among them.

Connelly and the media made it out to be a racial incident when it was no such thing. Asked why people thought Officer Smith was a racist, they pointed to his military style haircut.

Don't laugh. The jury bought it. They convicted him of manslaughter, which I suppose was their sorry version of compromise justice. Connelly had charged him with First-degree premeditated murder, which made no sense based on the circumstances of the case.

One thing I would add is think-twice if you are white. Even if you are a women. Officer Stephanie Moin got TEN YEARS in jail for letting her dog bite a robber suspect on the ass when she suspected he was about to flee. There is no guarantee if you are Black either.

The media will be out to get you and you can't fight that. The jury will read the racially charged newspaper reports, and then lie and say they didn't.

Smith was lucky. His case was thrown out of court on appeal, not really because of the technicality they claimed, but because of the obvious injustice of it. But a stupid, spineless, heartless jury did convict him just to be politically correct. Remember that.

Lawyers are very dangerous people. And remember, prosecutors are lawyers as are judges. Both were out to get Smith from the get-go. I followed the case from start to finish. The jury latter regretted their verdict but it was to late the judge gloated.

After the state Supreme Court threw out the case, Smith was recharged and Officer Smith plead to a minor charge that was a face-saver for Connelly. I don't blame Scott for taking the deal. He was scared. But predatory lawyers like Connelly are still out there waiting for another case so he can say he was the first to put a cop in jail for something he did in his official capacity.

This letter writer could not be more right. You have to think hard on this one guys and girls.

If you find yourself in such a situation and you hesitate thinking about all this, the punk will get his knife in your throat.

Damned if you do .... dead if you don't ...

RINOs --Wrong Then. Wrong Now.

2010-01-02T06:36:00.000-08:00

I snapped up a copy of the Middletown Press at the Mansfield Flea Market last summer and this image keeps haunting me. So I moved the cat who has made my box of old newspapers his favorite bed, and fished it out to post this snowy morning. Its so telling; isn't it?

I wish I could put up the whole paper in fact. Nearly every page is full of stories about so-called "GOP Extremism". You can feel the newspaper's anguish for us por por Republicans; can't you?

'They really really want us to have a chance you have to understand'! The mainstream media as it is now known wants to stop us from making the fatal mistake of nominating Goldwater --- or Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush or Sarah Palin...

The more things change, the more things stay the same. This isn't just about media bias, its about those spineless fifth-columnists RINOs who let the press scare them into betraying their stated beliefs.

-- On on that, we know how sucessfull the Johnson presidency was now, don't we?

True scores of RINOs have thankfully left the party but enough remain to make a constant nuisance of themselves.

Here is a little sampling of the headlines which tell the story all by themselves.

"Extremism Splits GOP"

"Ike Asks Goldwater to Explain Position"

"Area Republicans Go Slow on Barry Views"

"GOP Isn't United Behind Goldwater"

"Former Legislator Bolts GOP, Unhappy with Barry"

"Rockefeller Blast Goldwater's Stand"

Under the last front-page above the fold headline is a picture of Republican (well sort of) Senator Nelson Rockefeller with the caption "Barry frightens him".

Oh, and let me read to you a bit of the inside editorial "Goldwater and the Press". Its just so rich:

"....Usually the newspapers in a campaign are accused of being a one-party press whose publishers invariably support Republicans and this results in news stories favorable to their candidate. In the last election it was charged that most reporters are Democrats and hence Vice-President Nixion suffered and President Kennedy benefited. This year the charge that seems to be shaping up is that Eastern Newspapers are against the senator. Thus it appears to be the case that for the second campaign in a row, the Republican candidate will do most of the complaining...In short, the outcries about the press usually com late in the campaign -- usually from the loser -- but this year the Goldwater supporters are taking no chances: They are getting their complaints in early. All this is not to say that the press as a whole will get though this campaign without error or misquotation, for this is humanly impossible, nor is it to say that Senator Goldwater will not have the editorial support of as many newspapers as is usual for a Republican candidate. But it is to say that the performance of the press, good, bad, or indifferent, will be the subject of distress to one side or the other, and possibly both."

Like I said -- rich.

-- Giving Denise Merrill All She Deserves

2009-12-25T13:03:00.000-08:00

Ladies and Gentlemen, Laura Branigan!

2009-12-24T17:04:00.001-08:00

I had all her tapes. She was a great lady. We sure do miss her.

Time Magazine’s Sticky Fingers

2009-12-24T07:25:00.000-08:00

If you are in what used to be called a record store and you are offered free magazines, take my advice and tell them NO. Not only will you be hooked into an un-free subscription once the free part is over, they will years latter spontaneously enroll you in a magazine you never ordered at all and of course bill your credit card.

I was suspicious something was up when I started getting Time Magazine in the mail which I never ordered. I have hated that particular despicable publication since the 1980's not because it leftwing, but because their reporting is often boldface lies and anti-American. Why would I want to read that trash much less pay to read it?

So launched an investigation. I will be damned if this rag is going to get any of my hard earned money particularly if they are in as much trouble as the liberal newspapers that are all going broke. I don't want to save it.

I called Time Magazine and they referred me to the swindling company they do business with to get subscriptions. I was on hold for the better part of an hour. I got them to cancel it and I found out they already billed my credit card. Nice huh? They refunded the money once caught.

It is true that about two years ago, I cancelled Newsweek and others in a deal I did sign up for (I never ordered Time). Before I had to pay, I cancelled them. I thought that was smart; no? I took advantage of them.

But no. You can't trust them. Those thieving trolls kept my credit card number on file that I used to buy my CDs and they used it years latter out of the blue. I wonder how many others they did that to who passively shrugged it off. The lesson relearned is you got to watch your money like a hawk.

There is always someone after it using clever ways to rip you off.

Sarah Palin For President

2009-12-19T06:43:00.000-08:00

This last go around Michael Reagan said something that I --- at the time -- reluctantly agreed with. He said that Republicans are looking around for his father. The younger Reagan said that someone like his Dad only comes around once in a lifetime. And certainly there was nobody remotely like the Gipper in 2008 Republican primary.

Well, as hardly needs to be pointed out, we settled for John McCain with a whimper. We let the media pick our candidate. McCain really wanted to pick Senator Joe Lieberman for Veep, but that would not have helped him with the base of the Republican Party. McCain used his VP choice to extend an olive branch to us real Republicans with his now historic choice of the Reaganeque governor of Alaska.

--- AND THEN ALL FUCKING HELL BROKE LOOSE!

Michael Reagan was wrong. I don't know how the old man did it, but Ronald Reagan was back -- and in high heels!

McCain's choice of Governor Sarah Palin was not just a game-changer; it was a stroke of genius. Dishearted Republicans like myself were so disillusioned with the wishy-washy McCain that we were actually considering voting for Hillary Clinton if she won the nomination of her party. Ann Coulter even endorsed her with some surprisingly strong reasons. Overnight real Republicans were suddenly genuinely enthusiastic for the McCain ticket. Palin is the reason why.

With Sarah Palin in the number two spot, real Republicans did not hesitate for a moment to cheerfully hop aboard the "Straight Talk Express". Had it not been for the energy Palin supplied, McCain would have lost by a lot more than he did.

In every way that is important, Sarah Palin IS RONALD REAGAN. There are others that have more experience, who are more eloquent with turn of phrase, or who you can argue deserve the nomination more by virtue of having toiled in the fields for so many years. But we did that in 1996 and Bob Dole lost; didn't' he?

Palin has her detractors and notably those detractors were Ronald Reagan's detractors as well. Almost every criticism of either Reagan or Palin are interchangeable. "to inexperienced", "dangerous", "not one of us", "to conservative to be elected".

Palin is the whole package. I can't tell you just exactly what it is, but Reagan and Sarah Palin both had/have it. There are so many parallels between Reagan and Palin that makes her ascendancy almost dare I say ..."inevitable"?

So far the media-liberals and the Democrats have recognised who Palin really is better than Republicans. Media-Liberals recognise Palin as the number one threat to Obama and his (and their) agenda. The media-liberals are not going to let her push Obama out of Pennsylvania Avenue 'after they have worked so hard to get him there.'

Expect stepped-up attacks.

If the Republican Congressional landslide in 1994 was Reagan II, than Palin's presidency is Reagan III.

Mark my words -- Sarah Palin will be the 44th President of the United States of America.

The Snooper Report

2009-12-13T11:55:00.000-08:00

The Snooper Report

"Taking Our Country Back One Marxist Spider Hole At A Time"

With a line like that, you got to check it out!

I ran across this while doing research. I got to get back to my paper now.

See ya....

Disallowed Speach -- "Abortion Is Murder"

2009-12-13T04:29:00.000-08:00

There are just some things that liberals just don't want to hear. For all their talk about diversity, liberals really can't stand people -- or speech -- that is not exactly like their own.

The Norwich Bulletin, in order to attract interest in its website version of the paper, has a comment section on the bottom of most stories and opinions.

This letter by Mr. Mark T. Kalinowski o-pined about the evil of abortion, but then concluded that it still should be between a mother and her doctor. I responded to that simply "Abortion is Murder".

I checked back latter and the post was erased (I rewrote it at least twice with the same result) seemingly because somehow what I said was ummmm... what?

Racist? Well no....

Sexist? Nope...

Homophobic? Oh come on!

The post was erased either by other readers hitting the "report" button or the webmaster because it was a assertion that liberals just don't want in the public square. Now precisely why is that? They have tolerated the most hateful exchanges between liberals and conservatives on lot of other subjects. Why is abortion special?

I think I know the answer to that. Deep down the Pro-Abortionists (yes Virginia, there is such a thing) know what they advocate is the killing of innocent children.

That must be the reason. Otherwise, why pull the plug? Everything I post now disappears automatically. Is this what we have to look forward to in the age of Obama? --Words that are to dangerous to be heard just disappear in a blink? Will their next be a knock at my door? Yes, it can happen here if we let it.

Are we going to allow it then?

This is a time to be vigilent of not only our own rights but those of others. We can only protect them if we stand together. Whether you agree with my words or not, you should stand up next to me and defend my right to say them.

Journalists should know that better than anyone else.... or so you would have thought.....

Overturn McCain-Feingold

2009-12-06T18:20:00.001-08:00

Gossip Culture

2009-12-06T07:58:00.000-08:00

Why can't the media gossip queens just let the Tiger Woods issue die? The MSM builds up people as stars only so they can tear them down in some gotcha moment.

Ms Goshay in the Norwich Bulletin today claims that Mr. Woods cultured an image of perfection. Funny but I don't ever recall Mr. Woods saying he was perfect but then again, I don't read the National Inquirer.

Ms. Goshay's real beef -- as she plainly states -- with Mr. Woods is that he is a clean cut guy who apparently likes money and seems to prefer white women.

The only thing that is really important is he never lied in a civil right case like Bill Clinton. Where is the "so-what" argument now that it really is appropriate to bring up?

Needless to say, the press (yellow and otherwise) should stay out of Mr. and Mrs. Woods' marriage -- if they still have one. The editors and reporters of the Fourth Estate should cancel their subscriptions to People Magazine and start reading -- and covering -- the harder, more important news.

The real issue is this sustained undignified feeding frenzy. When they get some scrap of meat like this the press act like rabid piranha fish. They keep it going as long as they can till the next trivial, yet sensational, brouhaha presents itself.

I Remember when the Clinton's moved into the White House, the press was following Chelsea's cat around on the White House lawn. The Norwich Bulletin printed an editorial that week rightly ridiculing the foolishness; It isn't a cat. it "Madonna with a tail. Even so that rag prints all this shit while other far more important issues (such as the leaked emails that prove global warming is a hoax) wind up on the editing room floor.

The press has once again embarrassed itself, and this once proud industry is to far gone to even be properly ashamed of it.

The Anti-First Amendmentists

2009-11-26T09:37:00.000-08:00

Have you ever entered a dark room, flicked on the lights only to see surprised cockroaches scatter into the nearest cracks and crevices? Well that's how I felt when I happened across this Wall Street Journal blog while writing a paper for school.

I think some the best advice in politics I ever got was the best way to lose your argument is to overstate your case. So I don't go throwing around words like un--American indiscriminately, but its hard to see the 501 (c)(4) group, tax exempt, nonprofit "Accountable America" as anything but un-American

--or more specifically anti-First Amendment.

Most such groups -- both liberal and conservative -- are about issue advocacy, but this one is out to kill other groups and imprison conservatives who violate either actual laws or trivial technicalities. The so-called Accountable America doesn't seem to make any distinction. It is just out to destroy anyone they can.

Accountable America is going after people who contribute to any of of the groups it disagree with. They OUT contributors publicly, send threatening letters, offer rewards to snitches and tries to embarrass people into self-cencorship.

I don't think that is a proper way to win an argument. What do you think?

This isn't a watch dog group; this is a pair of rabid wolves. If these two men can't win on the merits, than maybe Misters Judd Legum and Tom Matzzie (pictured) might want to consider the possibility that they are just plain wrong.

Don't take my word for it. Here are Accountable America's stated objectives in their own worrisome words.

1. Financial Crisis Accountability Project: We will amplify the demands of the American people for accountability for the financial crisis. We will highlight the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission which has a mandate from Congress to investigate and make criminal referrals around the financial crisis.

2. Conservative Group Project: We seek to discourage groups and right-wing donors trying to "swiftboat" progressives. We aim to educate the public about the connections between these donors, many with unsavory business and personal stories, and lawmakers in Washington.

3. Stop Conservative Ideas: We're highlighting some of the bad ideas that conservatives are still pushing even after all the recent turmoil in the economy.

Accountable America is a non-partisan (yeah right!), non-profit corporation. We do not seek to elect or defeat candidates or endorse candidates for federal office.

Let Your Little One Live

2009-11-25T14:25:00.001-08:00

Same to You Governor

2009-11-16T16:16:00.000-08:00

Good riddance to Jodi Rell --the worst governor in Connecticut history. Rell has been a feckless leader that raised taxes, spent like a Democrat, appointed liberals to the bench and promoted people based on their sex and race. Liberal Rell signed an Incumbent Protection Plan that will retard the political process for the rest of our lives just so people would forget she was a Rowland crony.

Rell stabbed legislative leaders of her own party in the back countless times. The only thing Rell ever gave a damn about was her precious personal popularity points. Rell never used her substantial political capital for anything except preening herself.

The only good thing that Rell ever did that’s worth mentioning is her veto of a bill abolishing the death penalty.

With Republicans like Rell, who needs Democrats?

Life Under ObamaCare

2009-11-14T05:19:00.001-08:00

Happy Birthday New Europe!

2009-11-09T16:52:00.001-08:00

You are 20 years old today. Many happy returns.

Eric Crowley for Windham Mayor

2009-10-10T07:02:00.000-07:00

Peter Quercia and the sign issue is the perfect microcosm of the larger problems in Windham, which the two other parties are simply incapable to solving. Even when a solution is easy, they screw it up. Peter Quercia that can do a job, a better job, a job that will last for decades and at the same time preserve what should be treasured relics from Windham’s heyday. He can also do it for a hellava lot less of the taxpayer's bread.

And what is the response to this Godsend from the Democrats and the so-called Bottom Line Party?

Democrat mayorial candidate Dawn Niles and the First Selectman Jean De Smet issue Quercia a cease and desist order.

Similiarly Republican Mayorial candidate Eric Crowley is a smart young man can do a smarter, better job than these two old timers because of the very fact there is so much Crowley hasn't learned that isn't true. There are new better ways to do things and electing Crowley will be the smartest thing Windham voters have done in a very long time.

It was no less than Albert Einstein that said that the very definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Windham will continue to sink in disfuntion until voters grab their collective trusty broom and sweep the crusty old ineffective incumbents into the dustbin of history.

It’s high time for new people to chart a new course for Winham.

Enough is enough. Eric Crowley should be our next mayor.

Boycott the Credit Card Cheaters

2009-09-28T14:30:00.000-07:00

John R. McCommas
29 Kathleen Drive U-7A
Willimantic CT 06226
860-377-3134

Dear Chase Credit Card

I just got off the phone with two of your representatives. I questioned why you people would charge me a $17.07 finance fee when I paid off the balance (almost 1000 dollars) last month.

I paid on time and the representatives didn’t dispute that the bill was paid in full and on time.

They insisted I still owed you $17.07 to hold a zero balance. They told me that you people charge interest daily even on bills paid on time, but I don’t understand why last month’s statement did not include last month’s interest. This is a shell game with no pea.

I just got off the phone with a representative from my Bank of America credit and she said that if I paid off my balance today with them that there would not be any reason to charge me interest on a zero balance. She assured me I would get no bill next month for a finance charge as you did with me.

Why is it that Bank of America can some how figure out how to charge me interest in such a way that my statement reflects accurately what I owe them in a given month and you can not?

I asked your representatives that this bullshit charge be taken off. Given the money you people have made off of me, with your rip-off interest rates, I did not think this was too much to ask. Your representative and her supervisor did not agree.

Therefore I want this account closed.

I am paying your $17.07 bullshit charge and it will be the last you get from me unless of course you have other sneaky charges and fees you want to apply before my account is closed

I am posting this letter on Facebook and my blog so my family and friends know how you do business. If they have accounts with you, I am advising them to close theirs as well.

John R. McCommas

Ray Hackett Cancels Election

2009-09-27T11:56:00.000-07:00

For the Second Time veteran Bulletin Editor Ray Hackett has called off an election.

According to Hackett the Democrat primary will decide the next Governor. If you thought you were going to have a say, watch a debate, maybe cast a vote for your choice than you were sadly mistaken. It’s over unless you are a Democrat. Your voter card is null and void.

Ray Hackett has made a ruling and if you don’t like it than that’s just to bad.

Evidently the Democrats in the legislature will be overturning the Constitution and crowning the incumbent Democrats. Rell likely will say she disagrees with that but will let the law abolishing elections go into effect without her signature. She will however purse her lips un-approvingly and wag her finger.

Back on August 22nd – 15 months away from the election in November 2010 – Mr. Hackett said the Republicans have no hope on defeating Bulletin Buddy Joe Courtney.

Hackett wrote that very few people could name Courtney’s opponent. Well there is a reason for that of course – he doesn’t have an opponent yet. Courtney himself will not even be nominated until next summer – assuming he decides to run and does not have a primary. What’s more how many people can name Joe Courtney as their congressman? The man has gone into hiding since the furor erupted over the nationalized healthcare. He held one meeting! One! The majority of the people are not happy with what is going on in D.C.

Courtney’s name-rec is not all that wonderful as noted by Ed Munster at the last 2nd Congressional Convention here in Windham. Tellingly on Youtube the Bulletin was doing an interview with their favorite Congressman and it was so long they had to do it in twelve segments. As of right now the first video has been viewed 195 times. Part two has only been viewed 34 times.

Think about that for a moment. What explains that huge drop off? The last one was only viewed just 15 times and the Bulletin staff probably accounts for half of that.

What this disinterest tells me is that people are not interested in what Courtney has to say. That does not bode well for his chances of keeping his job.

It just amazes me that someone who is touted having seen it all twice can say that Joe Courtney is a shoo-in when there has been such a rebuke of Congress over issue after issue but particularly over Obama’s plan to takeover healthcare.

People are afraid that their coverage will be taken away. Seniors are afraid that funds that are presently used on them will be diluted so the government to cover 20 year olds. Dick Morris said they have good reason to be scared to death and evidently ace reporter Ray Hackett is unaware that seniors do tend to vote in elections.

Mr. Hackett’s contention that the election is over before it begins is one born of desperation. The Second Congressional District is always fought over and it has turned over a number of times. Just ask that other Bulletin Buddy Sam Gejdenson about that.

For the record their are currently two (and there may be more coming) candidates for the Republican nomination and they are

Matt Daly
Daria Novak

Madonna Defeats Berdick in Griswold

2009-09-19T05:50:00.001-07:00

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/news/x1754594093/Madonna-defeats-challenger-in-Griswold-Republican-primary

Congresswoman Daria Novak

2009-09-13T17:50:00.001-07:00

With all due respect to Bulletin Editor Ray Hackett, the election has not been canceled.

I make it a rule not to endorse to early but this lady looks like a winner to me.

Pledge Me This Joe Courtney

2009-09-07T08:24:00.000-07:00

I am not at all impressed with our congressman’s often touted “pledge” not to accept the congressional healthcare plan until Obamacare is passed. Big fucking whooptie do!

What would impress me would be if Joe Courtney pledged to not accept contributions from lawyers and law firms for the up coming election. Sleazy lawyers filing one meritless lawsuit after another is the real reason why our healthcare premiums are sky-rocketing at the same time our coverage diminishes. It is not because the insurance companies are mean.

According to Opensecrets.org, Courtney took nearly 220,000 dollars from lawyers and law firms in 2008 – far more than any other industry. Since 2006 Courtney has gobbled up $639,551 -- almost twice as much as the second biggest contributer class. At this rate he will probably exceed one million in the next election.

If Courtney (who is a lawyer himself) wants to prove he really is on our side he would support tort reform and not have take anymore of the lawyers’ money.

The lawyers’ interests and his constituents’ interests are mutually exclusive. Courtney can’t serve both interests at the same time. Courtney must choose whose side he is really on

--them or us.

Autherine Lucy: The Ladylike Heroine of 1956

2009-09-06T16:04:00.000-07:00

Time and Again as they say. I snapped up a copy of the Middletown Press from March 2 1956 at the flea market today. I love reading these old papers to gain perspective. Its easy to forget nowadays there really was much to fear for a black woman even in the best country on Earth once upon a time.

Miss Autherine Lucy went to court with no less than Thurgood Marshall as her lawyer and won the right to attend the University of Alabama in Lucy v. Adams. A racist, angry mob though did not allow her to attend. The punks literally chased her away and the bad guys won for a while. The school justified her continued expultion because they "could not guarantee her saftey".

It was not for nothing however. Miss Lucy made the first step and it was important. There is a very nice write up on her story on Wikipedia.com

The victory for the bad guys did not endure. The bad guys became good guys. In 1980 the University overturned her expulsion of its own accord and Autherine Lucy-Foster graduated in 1992 earning her Masters degree in Elementary Education. Her daughter also graduated.

According to Wikipedia the University named an endowed scholarship in Mrs. Foster's honor. They also unveiled a portrait of her which "overlooks the most trafficked spot on campus. The inscription on it reads "Her initiative and courage won the right for students of all races to attend the University".

Autherine Lucy Foster will celebrate her 80th birthday on Oct 5th.

Snake Skin

2009-09-05T07:44:00.000-07:00

What reason can Hartford Courant Editor Naedine J. Hazell give for printing four photos of politicians accused of corruption on the September 3rd Front Page and only listing the party of the sole Republican?

"Republican Councilwoman Veronica Airey-Wilson's" co-defendants were not identified by their political affiliation in their captions under their photos including Mayor Eddie Perez.

Why not?

Click on the photo so you can read it. There was no mention of Perez's political affiliation -- or anyone else's -- besides Wilson's until the ninth paragraph on Page Two. Why is it that when Democrat gets into trouble he sheds his political affiliation in news reports, but when a Republican does the same her first name becomes "Republican"?

Remember When TV Didn't Suck?

2009-08-06T07:10:00.001-07:00

Opps, They Did It Again...

2009-08-03T05:03:00.001-07:00

The Norwich Bulletin has for at least the second time printed material with the same exact error even after I shamed them into correcting it once.
In the July 31st edition, the firefighters mentioned by Rick Holmes in “Obama brings beer to America’s conversation about race” were importantly not all white.

Lt. Ben Vargas, one of the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court civil rights case Ricci v. DeStefano, is Hispanic as you might guess by last name.
Why do liberals keep forgetting about the color of Lt. Vargas’ face? Is Lt. Vargas invisible? Are liberals entitled to brush aside facts that don’t fit in with their arguments nowadays?
You know in the same way the President can disregard the fact his government takeover plan of healthcare will increase the deficit and not reduce it?

Should we consider conservative high-profile, non-white people like Thomas Sowell or Janice Rogers Brown or Clarence Thomas or Miguel Estrada or Alberto Gonzales or Michelle Malkin all white too from now on?

Likewise should we consider Sarah Palin a man?

Another error (if that’s truly what it was) repeated by the Bulletin (once in Holmes’ op-ed and again in the editor’s note after my last letter) is the black firemen of New Haven all “failed” the test in question. That is not true.

Some or all of them passed but did not score high enough to get a promotion right away. There is a huge difference between flunking — that is getting an F — and not scoring high enough to get one of a limited number of positions available. But that is another factoid that just doesn’t dovetail with the liberal argument nicely.
-So they just invent something that sounds better.

To address the body of the opinion piece which was about the arrest of Professor Gates, the incident was manifestly not a racial incident until President Obama and Gates deliberately decided to made it one.

So I don’t know about this “teach this lesson by example” stuff. That’s a bit like setting a building on fire and then calling the community together to discuss the serious issue of arson.

Instead giving the man a beer both men should have offered an apology to the cop that was just doing his damn job.

As a matter of reference, a buddy of mine mouthed off to cops and he literally got just two obnoxious words out of his mouth and they whisked his white butt to jail for the night.

It is ironic that the President who is so quick to apologize on behalf of the United States of America can’t bring himself to apologize when he so clearly should do so.

Obama played the race card but got trumped by the truth.

Health Rations and You!

2009-08-02T10:17:00.001-07:00

More Selective Standards at the Bulletin

2009-07-11T16:51:00.000-07:00

The selective standards of the Bulletin have taken on a particularly pungent odor when it comes to conservative vs. liberal Hispanic politicians. Where was the Bulletin with all its righteous indication when Democrats filibustered Miguel Estrada for the District of Columbia Court of Appeals?

Why didn’t the Bulletin’s reporters question that the attackers of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales might have been motivated by racism? Where was “de la Communidad” when Republicans could have used some help getting Republican Hispanics into high positions?

The Bulletin’s double standards have led it to print falsehoods to bolster its case. There are two glaring errors in two different stories about Sonia Sotomayor in the July 11th edition. First it is far from clear she would be the first Hispanic to serve on the Supreme Court. The first was Benjamin N. Cardozo who served from from 1932 to 1937. Second, the Bulletin falsely claimed in “Republicans vow to challenge her record” that the plantiffs in Sotomayor’s case that was reveressed by very court she hopes to sit on latter this year were “all white”.

That is a lie. One of the men who earned his promotion is Hispanic and due some serious backpay — no thanks to Sotomayor.

Conservatives contend that there are many fine judges of the Hispanic persuation who are perfectly qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. Sotomayor does not happen to be one of them and racism has nothing to do with it.

She’s a bad judge.

The Parker Problem

2009-06-17T18:15:00.001-07:00

You know some statements are just better put in pictures. The photo below was inspired by Kathleen Parker's latest poorly aimed (and even more poorly reasoned) cat scratch (missed) at Governor Sarah Palin.

Parker you will all remember poked a polar bear with a sharp stick and got eaten by it.

Her credibility with her supposed base of conservatives over, Parker just can't resist picking off that scab. I guess it is the only way she can get a response.

So here is mine!

John R. McCommas

Another Example of Media Bias

Barbara Boxer's Partial Birth Abortion Logic

President Reagan 1981 Inaugural Address

Senator Guglielmo: Instate Tuition Discount for Illegal Aliens

Gianna Jessen Abortion Survivor in Australia Part 1

Meme Mine

Karyn White The Way I Fell About You

This is Why Joe Courtney Hides

A Message From A Real Leader

'Discover New England' Remains Undiscovered:

Connelly and Katz Are Gone. Ding Dong the Witches Are Dead!

GRASSROOTS EAST IS BACK!!!

HALL OF SHAME -- Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin

Susan Campbell Has P.D.S.

The New Face of The Enemy?

No Glory in Selling Out Principals

Kathy Tate Bradish and the League of Liberal Women Lobbyists

Dick Blumenthal Stumped On How To Create A Job

Vote Bare Naked

**Obama Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes Benz** Sheila Velastro Hartford..wmv

Sarah Palin Speech at the Restoring Honor Rally ( Part 1)

Denise Merrill: Part of the Problem

Rush Limbaugh on Palin and the JournoList

funny racoon

The Day does not know what the Supreme Law of the Land is

Even Dead Fish Deserve Better Than the Courant

Denise Merrill: The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow!

And Now I Know The REST Of The Story

Ann Coulter on Hannity: "When the Democrats are in Trouble call a Republ...

The Sarah Jane Adventures Series 3 Full Trailer

Corazon Aquino

That Racist Bill Cosby

Side Me With Weicker on This One

Defending Louise Zurowski

Daria Novak One Step Closer to Replacing Courtney

Richard Blumenthal: Lying Weasel

No Mercy for the Pitiless

Linda McMahon is a Woman We Should Take Seriously?

"Why is there always money for war but never money for education?"

Dick Morris on Rob Simmons

Joe Courtney and the Lapdog Press

Why is the Left Afraid of Daria and Sarah?

Socialism You Can Believe in!

Remember in November

Martha Dean for Attorney General

Blumenthal Litterally Not Ready For Prime Time

Did You Know?

Michael Buble? Nope. Introducing Ben Sharkey

Things That Make You Go Hummm......

Dick Blumenthal and the Croakley Factor

Kill The Bill

Make Daria Novak a Congresswoman

Trick

Palin on the "Settled Science" of The Global Warming Theory

Palin's Tea Party Speech

The Democrats Are Not Our Friends!

Mr. Nice Goes to Washington

I Do My Homework

NewsBusted !!

Why I Switched

He Did It !!!

Win One For the Gipper Scott !!

Scott Brown For Senate

Not Ready For Primetime

Damed if You Do, Dead If You Don't

RINOs --Wrong Then. Wrong Now.

-- Giving Denise Merrill All She Deserves

Ladies and Gentlemen, Laura Branigan!

Time Magazine’s Sticky Fingers

Sarah Palin For President

The Snooper Report

Disallowed Speach -- "Abortion Is Murder"

Overturn McCain-Feingold

Gossip Culture

The Anti-First Amendmentists

Let Your Little One Live

Same to You Governor

Life Under ObamaCare

Happy Birthday New Europe!

Obama Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes Benz Sheila Velastro Hartford..wmv

Congresswoman Daria Novak