We Have AUDIO!

There has been some issues with the podcasts. It has been fixed (I hope) so I will be adding the ENTIRE ELECTION COVERAGE to the podcasts later this week! I am cutting the MP3 into segments and listing the contributors in the segments, so you will have to give me a day or two to label.

What is there to fear?

In the wake of the elections, what is my biggest fear? I wonder if this is Jimmy Carters 2nd term. We have lived through this before, and it did not kill us... too much. I can see more spending and more deficits over the next four years. We have two years that we have to tolerate until we can fix the mess we are in. But a lot of damage can be done in two years.

You have already seen my fear of the "fairness" doctrine, and you know about Hoover's... err... Obama's tax plan, what else could go wrong? How about partial birth abortions? What about late term abortions? Both are disgusting procedures that DO constitute murder in my eyes. How about Obama's "share the wealth" comments? What does that mean? Obama has not fully explained what he meant by this, but considering his voting record (the little that he has), and his ideas and comments, I am thinking socialism.

I know the picture I created has a communist flag, but then again, we have never seen communism in the world. We have seen extreme socialism (such as "communist" Russia and China) and therefore the flag fits. I fear that Obama, in conjunction with the Democrat Congress, will move us one step (or more) closer to socialism. If I have to give my hard earned money to the government so they can "redistribute income" to those who DON'T work, what would you call it? Socialism.

What else do I fear? Click the links on the right hand side that say "black panthers" and you will see. Intimidation, fraud, and cheating are the tactics used by the far left for years. Add to those videos the actions of Acorn, and the "don't be selfish" message from Obama, and you start to see the how close we are to socialism.

Barack wants big government, income redistribution, government run healthcare, and government control over the media (IE: fairness doctrine). He can't do it alone, but he doesn't have to; we have given him a Democrat Congress. (Talk about a free pass!) I know of another country, one previous and one current, that is very similar to the one Barack wants to create; China and the U.S.S.R.

I am quitting my job. Thank you for sharing your paycheck with me, comrade!

YES! I hear you!

I am getting your letters, and I know how you feel. I can not respond to everyone. Please do not email me with "did you get my email." The answer is YES! But there are WAY too many. Please give me some time. I am flooded, but I am reading. I am sorry if I am going so slow. I awoke to over 150 emails; some long, some short, all very good. I can not respond to everyone, but I will try to address everyone's concerns.

First, the fairness doctrine. Yes this is a real thing. It was enacted in 1949 to "ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair." (The Museum of Broadcast Communications

There is a part two to this. The net is also susceptible to "fairness" via content policies. Just ask the FCC commissioner. He said, "the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned." -commissioner Robert McDowell

What next? How about another economic depression like in 1932? Look at Obama's tax plan, then look at this plan from Hoover (that failed miserably). Don't be fooled by the wording, this is what BOTH plan call for. Tax the top tier more, give money to everyone else. Yes, I am part of "everyone else," but I can see though the fluff. Simply put, the higher taxes to the top tier will cause a rise in prices to the lower tiers. There will be no relief from this policy, only an increase to cost of living. Mark my words, Obama will fail because this is Hoover's failed plan.

Keep the emails rolling, I will try to address every issue you raise. FYI, no I do not feel safe in my own home. Even Obama's VP agrees with me; within 6 months we will face crisis.

More to come check back later today!

Quick note from Scott: the podcasts are working correctly again, so we now have the entire Jennifer Horn interview up in its entirety (not cut down to 30 seconds). Sorry for the technical difficulties.

Ready... Set... GO!

It is 8am EST, and the races have begun. Make sure you get out to vote today. This morning I have been writing, so check for updates on the site. Today I dedicate to the races, and tonight I am going to be on the air. Listen tonight from 7-midnight to 1590 WSMN Nashua's source for news and talk, or online (Click the WSMN logo on the right). Call in and talk with us on the air at WSMN at (603) 883-9900.

New Hampshire and the Election Cycle

No, I am not going to bore you to death talking about the literal meaning of this post's title. This is a treat for you. Want to know what was going through my head today while I was in studio? Did you miss the show and our wonderful guests? Well how about a quick recap of the topics, a few free shout outs for my special guests, and I will also post links up to their websites. (Remember that we keep recordings of our shows in the "podcasts" link. GO LISTEN! You'll be sorry if you don't!)

Our guests (click a name to go to their website):

Paul LaFlamme

Sandra Ziehm

Jacqueline Casey

Part one (click here to listen to the podcasts)

Today we had Paul LaFlamme in the studio during part one of Temperature Gauge Live (sorry about the picture Paul, it was the best one on the web). We talked about his debate in Hollis, spending in New Hampshire, alternative energy (sort of, we got side tracked), over regulation (what we got side tracked to), and the economy. Over all, Paul came across as an intelligent conservative who is looking out for you and me.

Towards the end of the segment, Sandra Ziehm called in to talk with us. I tried to get Paul and Sandra to work off each other for a couple minutes, like a round table of sorts, and it worked out fairly well.

Segment two, we said goodbye to Paul and talked with Sandra one on... two (?) Sandra talked about the record of her opponent, taxes, spending, and some of the ridiculous legislation that has been presented under the Democrats. I have to say, this woman makes a lot of sense. Sandra is an intelligent, well informed, solid conservative.

I was inept in my duty to reign in the filibustering today, so I decided to turn segment three over to Jacqueline Casey. I posed a few soft questions to her and started to feel guilty. Jacqueline spoke about second amendment issues such as gun free zones and crime rates, stated she was a "Ron Paul" Republican (or rather she is a Libertarian), and eluded that her favorite word when it came to taxes and spending was "no!" We also talked about proposed taxes by the Democrats and spending issues. Just so I could milk my point about gun free zones, I played devils advocate with her. You must listen if you want to know what I asked!

If you’re going to listen to one of the shows, this might be the one. (I am still partial to the one with Jennifer Horn –website-, listen to Part 2) The part with Sandra (2) has a conversation between a Lanna and Sandra. This is one of the best parts, listening to Sandra talking to one of our great listeners.

I want to thank all three candidates for taking the time to come talk with us on Temperature Gauge Live. Also, thank you to those who are listening, reading, and continue to support us at Temperature Gauge and Temperature Gauge Live. If you want to leave a question, comment, or just want to voice your opinion, I will pass on any “appropriate” comments to the candidates. Remember to visit their websites!

Paul LaFlamme

Sandra Ziehm

Jacqueline Casey

Just the Facts, Scam... ahh, Ma'ma

Now THAT’S what I call a debate. The candidates actually debated! If you missed this one, you missed the best one. Obama came off as cool, calm, and collected… almost. He was sent reeling a few times by the questions and comments from McCain.

Obama might have looked good on the surface, but by watching and listening to Obama’s responses, you could tell he was having a hard time fielding McCain’s assaults. Obama stammered and stuttered his way though a few different factual inaccuracies, and in some cases, out and out lies.

One of the worst inaccuracies was when Obama said people at McCain rallies are yelling “kill him” towards Obama. This is not true for two reasons. First, Obama made it sound like people were calling for Obama’s death. Not ONE person called for Obama’s death, and this fact is backed up by the investigations of the Secret Service.
Supposedly, when Bill Ayers name was mentioned, someone yelled “kill him,” in reference to Bill Ayers. This is an important distinction to make, and Obama tried to blur the truth. Obama lied by telling only half of the truth.
Here is an example; It’s like if I said, “I hate when I run over frogs in the rain” and someone twists my words and tells you I said “I hate frogs and run them over” then qualifies it as a racist statement toward people of French descent. Obviously the words in the second quote were said, but not in the way they are written.

So why is this important? If you haven’t figured it out yet, Obama is a liar through and through. He gives you half the truth, and even the truth he gives you is twisted around. Obama may have looked smooth, but McCain dominated in substance. Rather than recap the debate, let me point out other Obama half-truths

Let’s start with one of my favorite subjects, oil. Obama said the oil companies have 68 million acres leased that they are not drilling. He was correct about the leased land, and that’s about it.
Fact:
Exploratory drilling is being done on quite a bit of the 68 million acres. Though they are not producing oil yet (key word is yet), they are using the land. The only area that can be listed as land used is those that are actually producing oil. Thus, the areas that are being drilled for exploration are not counted until they produce oil. Oh, and by the way, it takes about 10 years for an exploratory hole to produce oil. Thank you for the half-truth Barack O-Liar.


Another favorite subject of mine is education. Barack tried to claim that he doubled the number of charter schools of charter schools in Illinois. Talk about stretching your resume! First, you happened to put your name on a bill, so you didn’t do a damn thing other than sign. Second, you AND your fellow politicians double the charter schools in Chicago. That is one city out of the entire state. Sorry bud, be honest.
Fact:
You supported legislation that doubled the amount of charter schools in the city of Chicago, you did not personally double charter schools in Illinois (you fraud!).

Again, Obama tried to claim he breaks ranks with the democrats (he claimed bill S.5 as an example.) How often does Obama reach across the aisle?
Fact:
18 to 26 among democrats voting on this, and Obama happened to vote along side about 40% of the Democrats? How is this even CLOSE to breaking ranks? About 97% of the time, he voted the party line. Enough said.


Let’s skim the “Joe the Plumber” issue. Joe said he was going to buy a company that is projected to make $250 to $280 thousand a year. He wanted to know if his taxes would go up. Let’s stipulate that Joe’s company make $250K. The answer under Obama’s plan is yes.
Fact:
You will receive a tax increase if you make $200k gross or more annually ($250K if you are married filing joint). Let’s talk about the increase of 3%. If you made $199,999 this year, and you make $200,000 next year, your taxes will be $6,000 more for 2009. That extra dollar you make next year is going to cost you $6K. Sound equitable to you?


Speaking of taxes, the Tax Policy Center claims that the national debt would substantially increase with either candidate’s current policy. Even with Obama’s proposed spending cuts, he could increase our debt by $281 billion for the year 2013. That’s not over the next five years that is just one years deficit increase for calendar year of 2013 (re-election year). McCain is not innocent here either, he needs to do some major spending cuts too, but I trust McCain to cut spending, not the “tax and spend” record of Obama.

I also love how Obama walks around the truth by avoiding key facts. So “small businesses” who do not supply healthcare coverage would not be fined. This is great, don’t you agree? Now define small business. Mr. Obama? Oh, that’s one fact that you conveniently ignore. Is small business a company with 2 employees, or 10, 20 may be? Do you take into account how profitable the company is? Or does profit only matter when you decided how much the company must pay in taxes? (33% not high enough for you? what about 70-80%, like France?)

Obama also claims that his health care plan will cut family’s premiums by $2,500 annually. At least Obama has strong optimism! Maybe you should try a lower number, Mr. Obama. Let say $1,600 at best. He claims he can save $120 billion a year, but that is an inflated figure. He MIGHT save $77 billion (64% of what he is claiming)

At this point, I think you get the idea. Like I said before, there were some good parts to this debate. My two favorite moments happened to be John McCain moments. The first was a slip of the tongue when John was talking about the government. He called Senator Obama, “Senator Government”. Personally, I think it was a fitting name, but John corrected himself. It was an obvious slip up as evidenced buy John’s reaction to his own words.

The second great moment was when John said,
“Yes. Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country.”
And John is correct. He is not President Bush, and he will not be President Bush. John McCain has his own ideas, his own cabinet appointments, and will not govern the way George Bush has. It is important that John distinguished this fact, and that he called Obama out on this.

I think John did fairly well. The only complaint I have about McCain’s performance was that he did not press Obama when he had him pinned. John had Obama on the ropes, and let him go. McCain did a good job pointing out inaccuracies in Obama’s statements and platform, but did not dig deep enough or push hard enough. It left a lot more work for the fact checkers and analyst, like me. But like I said, it was a good debate. I would call this a slight McCain win.

So here we are, with less than 3 weeks until the election. It is up to you. Do you want to pay more taxes, screw up the economy more and increase the chances of being killed in your own home by a terrorist? If so, vote Obama, or just stay home this election cycle.

Want to be safe in your home, not afraid of a terrorist attack? How about fixing the economy? Want to reduce the national debt without raising your taxes? Vote John McCain.

And where is your name, Senator Obama?

Take a look at the signatures. Notice the names on the first page. John Sununu is at the top of column 2 and John McCain is the second name in Column 1.

Barack Obama must have just been "Present"...

Enough To Warm Your Heart

Sunday morning was a bit unusual for two reasons; First, it was unseasonably warm. The second part needs a little explaining. What I saw from my front porch, on this warm Sunday morning, I have not seen since I was a child. I saw the effects of true "Family Values."

At first glance, I saw a young teenager riding his bike with his little sister. The teenager was wearing the quintessential "Rapper-Wanna-Be" clothing, so I figured it was the typical "got stuck with my sister" situation. As they got closer, I could hear the little girl complaining, but could not make out the words. I saw the boy grab the front of the bike and pull her forward and let her glide. I thought he was frustrated with the girl, and it made me a little nervous.

When the girl came to a stop, I could hear what she was saying. She was cried to her brother because she could not move the bike on her own. "Pull me," she begged. "NO!" he replied. The little girl told him she couldn't move without him pulling, but the teenage boy told her she could do it, she just needed to try. Now my curiosity was peaked.

I started to pay close attention to what was being said by the siblings. He told her to push the pedal, but she found it too hard. He pushed her forward one more time, and told her to push the pedal as she was moving. After she stopped coasting, she begged for another push. The boy declined and said he was going ahead without her.

The girl begged then she sat on the sidewalk. The boy did not give in. He simply told her that she could do it, she just needed to try harder. The girl had dug her heels in, and was not going to budge. The teenager came back and told her to get on the bike. Once on the bike, he told the girl HOW to push the pedal. The girl tried and tried. Then after about a 30 seconds, the bike started to move. Not only did she move it, but the boy was able to coach her to keep it moving. He became her cheerleader, chanting "You can do it!" and "Good job!" The two continued down the street with the girl giggling and the teenager cheering all the way. I am not sure who was more excited, the "Wanna-be Rapper" or the cute little girl, but they both rode down the road with the broadest smiles I have seen in quite a long time.

Sometimes we judge people before they have a chance to show their true colors. I was guilty of such sins on this morning. I assumed the boy was a typical punk. Turns out he was a sweet, caring, brother. After seeing this display of kindness, I realized how cynical I have become. It never crossed my mind that this teenager could be a good kid. This was a great reality check for me, and I thought it might be for you as well.

Next time you see or meet someone, stop and think of what YOU might be thinking that will get in the way. What walls have you put up without having any facts? Did you give this person a fair shake, or did you act as I did and prejudge them? Everyone deserves a fair shake; extend a friendly hand with an open mind.

Barack-O-Nomics 101

Barack Obama has again been kind enough to show me my place. While addressing his "age appropriate sex education" ideas, (for kindergarten children?!?) he took a pop shot at conservatives. Though he wanted us to know that Americans are "... generally decent people..." he felt the need to tell us conservatives that we "...listen to the wrong talk radio..." (video Last 60 seconds contain the comments) Considering I do not agree with on.. ah.. hmm... ANYTHING that he stands for, I guess he was referring to me. If you are reading this post and listen to my show (1590 WSMN Sunday's 6-7), then he must be referring to you as well. But then again, Barack does think we are "basically decent people," sort of like Hillary is "likable enough." Well, I am proud to be generally decent even if I listen (or host) the wrong kind of talk radio. Thank you Barack Obama.

Thank you for condescending to those of us who do not want to pay more of our hard earned dollars. No I do not agree with you, and yes I would LOVE to see you FAIL. Nothing would please me more during this presidential election than seeing you lose. That doesn't make me wrong, but it does make me an opinionated individual who believes, rightfully so according to your VP candidate, you are going to cost me more money. No I do not make 250K annually; my family does not even make 100K. But if you're taxing the corporations, their revenue will be reduced. When a company's profit are decreased, the cost for their products typically go up. In other words, this cost is typically passed onto the consumer (you and I).

One more economic point, Barack wants to give tax breaks to 95% of Americans. Not tax payers, but Americans. Sounds good, but let’s look at some examples.

1. About 50% of all tax revenue is paid by the top 5%. Maybe they can afford higher taxes, but what does their tax bracket look like? The people in the top 5% pay about 50% of their gross income. Could you afford to pay 50%? I can't, but then again, I am not making 300k. Most people, who actually pay taxes, pay 25-30% of their gross income in taxes. Quick math for you using arbitrary numbers (not actual figures):

Gross=250k 50%Taxes=125k Net=125k
Gross=150k 30%Taxes=45k Net=105k

So a person making 150k brings home 20k less than a person who makes 300k. So if I net 105k, and I want to net 20 k more per year, I need to make 100k more per year gross? That's 80% of my increase GONE in taxes.

Another way to look at this is for a person to make one third more, they have to spend 80% of their increase on taxes. I am not kidding, this is reality. Even if my example is based on incomes that could be the same tax brackets, it is a fair assessment of the way tax brackets percentages work around the tax bracket break.

2. What did I mean “actually pay taxes?” Out of the 95% that Barack wants to give tax breaks to, many are not paying taxes. No joke, they pay nothing in taxes. Either they are not working (maybe a welfare recipient), they make so little that they get a refund of 100% (or more), or after all deductions are figured in, they receive a refund that equals the taxes they pay. Want a couple of examples?

Family A - Single mom with 3 kids. Makes 20K annually, Pays 6k in taxes. Tax time comes, and she is head of household, 3 children on her taxes, Earned Income Credit, deductions for child care, Transportation write-offs, etc. Refund check = Taxes paid out. 100% refund.

Family B - Married couple who owns a business and has no kids. Tax write-offs for toilet paper, office supplies, computer supplies, automotive expenses, advertising, tax preparation costs, etc. Gross income 60k., taxes on income 18k. They receive a rebate 100% because they can write off ANYTHING so long as they can prove it is used for business purposes. They can even write off part of their rent or mortgage, if they have a designated area that they use for “business.” Yes, if a corner of one room is used for the business (accounting, storage, etc.) and nothing else, you can write off a percentage of your housing cost. (Ask an accountant if you do not believe me)

So how exactly is Barack going to lower taxes for these people? THEY ARE NOT PAYING TAXES!!!!! What are you going to lower? Do you give them free money? Where does that free money come from? Who gives you the money to pay them? Oh wait, you need to take more money from the tax payer so you can pay the tax payer more money? HUH?!?

Of course not! Don’t be silly! He is going to end tax cuts for the oil companies and businesses. A great idea!! Let's make it more expensive for the oil companies and businesses! Companies would never try to raise their prices to recoup the cost of tax increases... WRONG! Yes, the government will get more tax revenue from the companies. But when the increased cost comes down the line, WE pay for the increased cost to the companies!! Thank you Barack for costing us MORE MONEY! Please do not buy into the half-truth Barack is spreading. The part he left out you learn in economics 101; increased cost has to be recouped in product prices, or by cutting staff. (Higher unemployment sound good to anyone? How about lay-offs?)

But Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden was kind enough to show me the flaw in my logic. (video) He told me that if I was concerned with higher taxes and didn't want taxes to go up, I was not being patriotic. I just need to be more patriotic and pay more money that I don't have, or I am just not patriotic enough.

Well, I guess I don’t want to be more patriotic, just ask my thinning wallet.

Gibson's Ass Kicked BY A GIRL!

Before anyone decides to jump on me for the post name, understand how I view Charles Gibson before you start you ranting. Mr. Gibson is one of those good liberals who (supposedly) believes that women are equal. So under this presumption, Chuck decided to viciously discredit Sarah Palin. Figuring that he is a good liberal who treated Sarah with proper respect by hitting her with tough questions, he did his best to nail Sarah to the wall. He made one big mistake; he assumed Sarah would not be able to handle the Great Media God, Charlie Gibson. Can you say, "oops?"

So why does this post point out that Sarah, a "girl," kicked Chuck's ass? Like I stated before, Chuck is supposedly a good liberal. Personally, I think he walks both sides of the line. I really believe Chuck didn't think a woman would be skilled enough to stand toe to toe with him. I knew Sarah could handle this joker, but what I did not know was how badly she would kick his teeth in. Forget John McCain, where was this woman back in the primaries?!?

Mr. Gibson (to be referred to as "Glib-son" and other variations on his name from here on) entered this interview with an agenda. This was supposed to be the one interview that shot the Palin effect to hell. Instead, Sarah shot Glib-son's credibility to hell. One of the best examples was when Glib-son decided to twist Sarah's words and stated,

"You said recently in your old church, our nation leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from god... are we fighting a holy war?"

Obviously, Chuck did not do his homework. That is not what Sarah said. Let me quote Sarah:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them our on a task that is from god."

Now sometimes the written words are not enough to explain, but if you listen to both Glib-son and Palin (Click here), you will hear clearly that Sarah is saying her church should pray that our leader is sending our troops on a task that is from God. In other words, pray that god is on our side, pray for God to protect our troops. As she said, "Let us pray that we are on God's side." Sarah's response was perfectly phrased to disarm Glib-son, but he didn't concede! He actually tried again to discredit her on this topic! Glib-son states:

"But you went on and said there is a plan, and it is God's plan."

Again, Sarah backs herself up by stating that she believes that there is a plan for this world and that it is a plan for good. In other words, she does believe God has a plan, and God's plan is good. She did not claim to know God's plan. Is this not obvious? What's the problem Chuck? You think God should have a plan for evil? This one was a T.K.O.! Chuck, stay down! NO! He is getting up.... He is punch drunk and swings wildly!!!

"But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?"

Oh my God! Are you serious Chuck? If you have not seen this interview, you need to go to ABC and see this pathetic interview... um rather attempted character assassination. I think this can be considered a body check, and Glib-son should stay down on the ice. But he doesn't. He gets up and comes back for more butt kicking....

This was not Glib-son's only screw up (are you surprised? I'm not), just my favorite. Where else did Glib-son throw the facts out the window? How about my second favorite self-inflicted wound, the Bush Doctrine? Chuck asked what Sarah thinks the Bush doctrine is. She knew she was being baited, and walked very carefully around the landmine that was laid for her. She quickly asked, "In what respect, Charlie?" Chuck said the Bush Doctrine "September 2002, before the Iraq war." She stated that she felt President Bush, "attempted to... rid the world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation..." and admitted mistakes were made, but new leadership allows us to try to do things better.

For some reason, Chuck acquired foot-in-mouth disease. He stated that he felt the Bush Doctrine is that, "We have the right of anticipatory self-defense and we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us." Though Sarah handled it perfectly and put Chuck in his place, I want to focus on the Glib-son factual inaccuracy.

Charles Gibson's futile attack on Sarah using his "NEW" take on the Bush Doctrine of 2001 was based on his ability to change facts that he stated! His exact words in 2001 were a perfect compliment to Sarah's! "...He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated." (Charles Gibson, 09-21-2001). So the moron was wrong about his own words in 2001. Let me bang my head against the wall as you continue reading....

You know I love Wikipedia. Not a perfect source, but a great place to find the sources to back up the facts. Wikipedia is not the place to find facts, but the cited excerpts are. "The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves..." (-Wikipedia). This is prior to the invasion of the Iraq war. The Iraq war started in March of 2003.

Now this is not Chuck's first rodeo. There really is not any excuse for his inability to ask questions that are pertinent while being accurate. His lack of accuracy is what I found most humorous, and therefore I have shown you how slanted this interview really is. The only other ploy Glib-son tried to use was asking the same question over and over to try to get a different answer. This is nothing new, and I do not begrudge him for trying. It was pointless and wasted a lot of time, but it did give Sarah the chance to reaffirm her standpoint.

The Iran and Israel questioning was a perfect example of this monotonous questioning. I have paraphrased the conversation below. You will have to listen to the interview (ABC edited interview) for the exact words.

Chuckle Head: What if Israel felt threatened and needed to take out Iranian nuclear facilities?

Sarah: We are friends of Israel and we should not second guess the measures Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

Chuckles: If we wouldn't second guess (Israel), and they decided they needed to [take out Iranian nuclear facilities] because Iran was an existential threat, would we be cooperative or agreeable?

Sarah: We cannot second guess what Israel has to to do to secure its nation.

Laughing boy: If Israel felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?

Sarah: We cannot second guess the steps Israel takes to defend itself.

Strike three Chuck, you're OUT!

Jennifer Horn Runs Away With the Nomination

Just a quick update on the 2nd Congressional race...

Congratulations Jennifer Horn.

This was the first time I was actually at a campaign headquarters while the votes came in. There was no up and down, nor where there any out bursts of cheering and clapping like you typically see on television, but there was plenty of positivity and and happy faces. Why, you ask? Not once was Jennifer behind Bob Clegg. To make up for the lack of drama on the floor, we talked about the other races, November elections, and other political items on our minds.

Starting at 8:30 pm. Jennifer Horn was up 46-28 with 5% reporting, and she held the lead all evening. The closest Bob Clegg came to taking the lead was when he was trailing by 3%. This was a good thing for us who support Jennifer, but it made for a quiet evening waiting for her to arrive. Most of us knew it was over at about 9pm, but no news networks called it until 10:30.

Around 10, people were getting antsy. Many of us started pacing, shifting in our seats, and walking in and out of the building. We were not bored, nervous, or even concerned. Simply put, we were anxious. We all knew it was over and Jennifer had won, but the news networks would not call it, and Bob Clegg seemed to miss what we all knew.

When Jennifer walked into the room, the crowd exploded. She spoke about November and beyond. She outlined the direction she expected to take once she hit Washington, and spoke in detail about her major goals (I know I am going to miss some points here) such as energy independence, term limits, lowering taxes, and much more.

Granted, politicians say a lot, but with Jennifer...
Word is bond.

"The Little Green Men Took My Daughter! I Swear!"

Casey Anthony claims to have dropped her daughter, Caylee, off with a babysitter on June 9, 2008. Funny thing is, when she went to pick up her precious little girl from Zenaide (Zani), the babysitter, Caylee and Zani were nowhere to be found. The initial reaction from a responsible parent would be to call the police. Oh no, not Casey! She decides to wait a little while to see if Zani might have taken a walk… a 5 week long walk….

I really do not want to report the news here, but I would like to give some background information. Four weeks after Caylee disappeared, her grandmother asked her mom where Caylee was. The Grandmother was getting suspicious as she had not seen her granddaughter in a number of weeks. Grandma told Casey that she would go to the police if Casey did not. A week later, Casey reports her daughter is missing. If you’re doing the math, it has been five weeks since the disappearance of Caylee.

So the police end up arresting Casey, and Casey has been sitting in jail. During her stint in the joint, she has refused to see various family members at different times, stuck to her ludicrous story about some phantom babysitter that no one has meet or can find, and generally acted in a manner that screams “Pay attention to me! I don’t want you asking about Caylee, pay attention to me.” The drama queen actually said she didn’t understand why everyone was so focused on her daughter, and followed it up by asking why people were not concerned with her. Well, we are concerned with you, that is why you’re in jail.

I don’t mean to be callous, but I want the police to find the body of your daughter so they can charge you with the murder you committed. Sorry folks, but my gut feeling is this psycho killed her own daughter. Blood and hair fiber were found in her car and trunk, the officer who is in charge claimed the car smelled of decomposition…. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to connect these dots. My only hope is that the District Attorney’s office charges her for First Degree Murder and puts her away for life.

Now there is an alternative. Caylee could have been kidnapped and held for ransom. I doubt it for a number of reasons. First, what can the family offer a kidnapper? They do not seem to have money. Second, with the amount of attention this case has drawn, a kidnapper would probably give up by now. Third, someone should have seen Caylee by now. She has been missing for over two months. With all the media coverage, if Caylee is alive, someone should have seen her.

This is what I am getting to; how can a parent do something like this to their child. I have a hard time understanding abusive parents, never mind killer parents. I can not understand how a parent could EVER cause pain (abuse) to their own flesh and blood. How people turn out this way is a mystery to me. People like this should be put to death. Yes, I do advocate for the death penalty, and this is a case where it should be used. I don’t want to hear about her “scared childhood” or how she “needs help.” The only help Casey Anthony needs is help into the electric chair.

Global Warming Update: so maybe we're not going to die?

For anyone who listened to our show last Sunday (July 13th), you know that I did a brief monologue on global warming and detailed the differences between the RSS MSU temperature system and data; and the GISS/NOAA system and its data. Until recently, the readings between the two (or three, depending on whether you actually consider the NOAA numbers separate) have been pretty similar.

The GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) is a branch of NASA that is involved primarily with tracking climate data. The NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) has, among its other duties, to warn of weather hazards to boaters and news agencies. It should be no surprise that the NOAA also tracks global historical weather data. The sensors these two groups use to gather their temperature data have been a topic of concern lately because they've started to differ substantially from another trusted source - the RSS MSU system.

MSU stands for Microwave Sounding Units and it works by measuring microwaves emitted from the Earth and extrapoling very accurate readings from any part of the Earth (and at any altitude) that it can see at that moment. An ever-growing number of scientists are now proclaiming this to be the most accurate system of all.

Why? Because it's not subject to local influences which could alter the data, that's why. Reports (largely overlooked) have circulated for years that the GISS and NOAA sensor data was being altered by poor implementation. It seems that when the system was put into place in the 60's the original specs set up by the designers called for the sensors to be put into metal boxes coated with a special whitewash that would reflect heat from the sun. In 1978 though, the rules were changed (presumably to save money) to allow the boxes to be painted with white latex paint. Obviously, the paint doesn't reflect the sun's heat nearly as well.

Enter Anthony Watts, a young meteorologist who read about the change and wanted to find out if it mattered. He located where the nearest sensor was and drove out to see it for himself and to his shock, he discovered that the sensor box was at the top of a lightpole in the middle of a parking lot... something that would surely throw the data off. He then watched as the afternoon sun set and the light came on. Since the sensor was directly above it, he concluded (correctly) that the equipment could not possibly be relaying reliable numbers.

To make a long story short, he recruited dozens of people and set up a website at surfacestations.org which he uses to gather measurements on these sensors to determine whether they are being influenced by outside heat sources. As of now, he and his team have surveyed just under half of the stations in the US and a brief rundown of his results is as follows:
* 18% of the stations had a heat source within 30 meters (1 to 2 degrees C variation)
* 56% of the stations had a heat source within 10 meters (2 to 5 degrees C variation)
* 13% of the stations had a heat source within 2 meters (5 to 10 degrees C variation)
* In all, 87% of the stations had a heat source too close for reliability.

I myself would probably have never heard of Anthony Watts & co. if it were not for new information coming to light revealing that the MSU numbers for 2007 differed from those of the GISS/NOAA data set. While the latter ranked 2007 as being tied with 1998 as the 2nd warmest year in the past decade, the MSU numbers ranked it as only 9th. It was this disparity that caused climatologists around the world to take a second look.

Here's the yearly temperature average rankings:

	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007
RSS MSU:	1st	--	--	7th	3rd	4th	6th	2nd	5th	9th
GISS/NOAA:	2nd	--	--	7th	3rd	4th	6th	1st	5th	2nd(tied)

The real story here however should be that the Earth is actually cooling (or at least plateaued) when you look at the graph for the past 10 years. Skeptics will naturally declare that 10 years is an unreasonable sample size and that not too much should be read into that. Keep in mind though, that we're told the Earth is warming based on a sample size not much greater; 23 years by the scientific community's reckoning.

But is a little over decades of warming even a trend? The story of the 20th century tells us that this has happened before and it will happen again. From 1918 to 1940 we had a warming trend about like the one we've seen recently, and from 1940 to roughly 1965 it cooled. A plateau of cool stability then carried us through the mid-70's until we began the latest upward temperature trend.

Check back soon - I'll have a part 2 on global warming ready in a week or so.

- Scott

Is This Exxon Mobile's Fault Too?

Oil prices have come down over the past three days. Oil is still over $130 a barrel, but it is down about $14 since the close on Monday. That's a heck of a slide. The way I figure it, even if oil comes back about $5 over the next 3-5 business days, gasoline prices should be dropping in about 4 -8 days.

Ok, is that as confusing to read as it was to write? Let me bullet this for you:

Monday: 1 barrel of oil about $145
Thursday: 1 barrel of oil about $130
1 gallon of gasoline about $4

My guess is that if oil stays under $140 for the next week, on Friday of next week (or Monday of the week after), gas prices should come down a few pennies.

Now here is my question. Is the DROP in gas prices going to be blamed on Exxon Mobil also, or is Exxon only at fault when the price goes UP? Actually, I am going to put up a poll right above the pod casts. Let's see what you think.

Oh, and let me throw up a prediction... I haven't had a prediction in a while, and I haven't been correct on a prediction since the Republican Primary. But this has been on my mind for a while and I just want to share my feeling with you.

Something (oil related) is going to be attacked by terrorists (surprise surprise) in the Middle East and magically oil prices are going to $175 a barrel. This should happen before Israel attacks Iran at the end of this year. If I am wrong and Israel attacks first, we will see $175 a barrel by March of next year. Be prepared for $5-6 a gallon by summer next year.

Blast from the past

Considering this is an election year, I thought you might like to remember why we typically vote for Republicans:

Ronald Reagan 1984 election

A friend of mine in Conway, NH. reminded me of this site. I forgot about all the good (and old) stuff on retrojunk.com this is where I found the Reagan commercial.

If you comment there, just let them know I sent you!!

Enjoy,
Myke

Primary Language

Why is it so important to most of us to have a primary language? I thought long and hard about how I was going to write this post. I was going to raise hypothetical’s, approach the topic from the points made on the air, and also tried starting fresh with this topic. None of this worked for me. The reason I ended up writing this post about a “private” conversation is because during our last radio show, I was asked about this topic off the air. There was a “fly on the wall” who thought it would be a good idea to jump in while my co-host and I were discussing the next topic on “Live.”

Her argument was simply that the government should not change the constitution to make the people do anything. Specifically, she referenced having a primary language. She phrased her argument to say that the founding fathers intended the constitution to be a bit more open for the people, not to dictate to the citizens. For this reason, we should not amend the constitution to make English the primary language. She further stated that we, as American, are superior to other governments, and because we are better, we don’t need to have legislation to state our primary language. Her next key point was that if I get my ballot in English, then why am I complaining.

No, I did not unload on her with both barrels. I was actually quite polite about this, allowed her to state her case, and plainly answered her retorts with as few words as I could. To be honest, she didn’t really interest me, just annoyed me. I think she was more interested in finding an argument than a discussion.

As to her three main points, I agree with her first and second point. There is no reason for a constitutional amendment that states we must speak English here in the United States. Personally, I think that would be wrong. Etiquette should be the guiding light as to the language you speak while you are here in the United States. If you are in a room of people who speak only German and you turn to a friend and start talking in English, your being rude. Thus, socially acceptable behaviors should be the guiding factor here. Either you’re a rude jerk, or you’re a polite “socialite” who has chosen to speak with respect. No law should dictate manners. She and I seem to agree here, though she seemed to think she was arguing this point with me.

In my opinion, the founding fathers were not looking to dictate to the people of the United States. Honestly I think the founding fathers wanted a document to use as the skeleton for laws and guidelines to be build on. The idea that English is the primary language is not skeletal in nature; it is more of a supporting clause to our culture. By having everything done at the federal, state and local levels in one common language, you remove the cumbersome task of translation, and the mistakes of interpretation. For example, if a Senator from Washington State sets forth a bill in Mandarin, and a Senate office in Maine translates it to Spanish, then it is voted on in English, there is much room for error. Just ask a person in Iran about the English version of the Qur’an. See if they think the translation to English is pure enough to be used in their Mosque.

Now here is where she and I separate. I think the United States is a great country. I enjoy the fact that my ancestors came here to root their families. I am also pleased that the FIRST GENERATION of my family learned English and assimilated. Then again, immigrants of the early 1900’s came to America to be American, not to make America the country they left (as some people from specific cultures are trying to do). But I digress. We are not superior to anyone. There are things that we may be better at, and there are things that we enjoy about our country. But this doesn’t make us superior to anyone. Who makes the best electronics? Who makes the best car? Each of us has our own opinion in these matters, and one line of thinking is not superior to the other. So how can we, Americans, be superior to another culture?

To be honest, there are parts of other cultures that i feel are BETTER than ours! Go to Germany, speak English and you will be treated like a tourist. Now LIVE in Germany, speak English and try to survive… Not so easy. Fair enough, German is the language, and you must know German to BECOME a German. I also like Mexico’s immigration laws. If you steal into their country, they kill you. I think this is fair, don’t you? (Yes I am being facetious) But seriously, if you going to wage your argument on the premise that we are superior, maybe you should start thinking about Nazi Germany, or Stalin.

Superiority doesn’t even come into question here. This is all about consistency and efficiency. Do I care if you speak another language? Yes and no. Yes, because it shows me that you have a useful skill. No, because it doesn’t really matter to me unless I need a translator or tutor. Things should be consistent within the government. My president should not be addressing the country in any language other than English. If you want to hear the Presidents words in another language, then you should have it translated like they do on the Spanish channels. Congress should never address any proposal that is in any language other than English. You will NOT try to pass a law in MY NAME that I can not understand. Further, no ruling should be made in the name of the people in a language that can not be understood by its citizens.

One last thing; I want to reiterate something I said to the “fly on the wall” that started this baseless argument:

It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to pass a law, ruling, policy, or raise an issue in a language that the citizens can not understand. You must be proficient with English to be a citizen. THAT is why English should be the primary language.

Barack’s insane, oh my God!

Let’s start with an intelligent quote:

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and the is a loyalty to the American people.”

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Now we delve into the stupidity spoken 101 years after:

“…you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish.
You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual.”

 Barack Obama 2008 (video to follow)

Did Barack have an ice cream headache when he gave that speech in Powder Springs, GA.? I should be thinking about how my children can “become” bilingual? First off, don’t tell ME how to raise my kids. I have a sixteen year old honors student, a very bright eleven year old, and a precocious seven years old. Excuse me, Mr. Obama, but last I checked, we speak English here in the United States. If my child would like to take Spanish, that’s their choice.

Barack has slid, yet again, back into his comfort zone… The far left (even MSNBC admits Obama is SOLIDLY in the top 20 three years in a row). On July 8^th, he stated that he does not understand why people are calling for “English only” in the United States. Well Mr. Obama, we have something in common. IF people were calling for “English only,” I would not understand the sentiment either. Yet I believe you were talking about people like me. People who want the United States Government to operate in English. People who want to continue the requirement for citizenship that states you must learn English.

Well Barack, don’t forget where you are. This is the UNITED States of America, and, as much as you might hate to hear it, "applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language." (Quoted from US Citizenship and Immigration Services website) Deal with it. We like it this way, and we want it to stay this way. Keep in mind, the key word was UNITED. People like me want legislation to define the official language as English simply to ensure that things remain united and uniform. I don’t care what language you speak in your own home. If “Xhosa” is your cup of tea, please, by all means.

Voting has become cumbersome with the various “language” ballots (Thank you for the example California), and it would be perfectly legal and justified to offer ballots in ONLY English. Remember the requirements for citizenship; must speak, read, and write English! Only citizens of the United States may vote in national elections and primaries. Now, Mr. Obama and friends, please tell me why I should allow ballots to be passed out in other languages? Do you NOT understand the difference between assisting and enabling?

Fact: ONLY US citizens may vote in the Presidential election.(thank you PA and TX)

Fact: To become a citizen you must speak English.

My last words on this:
As a private citizen, the Government should NEVER mandate that I must write or speak in ANY other language.

And one last opinion:
It is rude to speak another language in front of others if it is not the common language of the land. This is to those French people who sit on the stoop and talk “nineteen to the dozen” in French. (Yes I am French.)

I am going to ensure that you all can read and hear what raised my temperature. I don’t want anyone to second guess the words coming out of Barack’s mouth here, so not only did I put up a video, but the words have been written under the video. Please read along as you listen to this 1 minute clip from his speech.

"I ah I I don’t understand when, people are going around worrying about, we need to have English only.
They they wanna pass a law, we want just, ah, we want English only.
Now I agree that, immigrants should learn English.
I agree with that. But, but understand this.
Instead of worrying about whether, ah immigrants can learn English they’ll learn English you need to make sure, your child can speak Spanish.
You should be, thinking about how can, your child become bilingual.
We should have every child, speaking more than one language.
Yo its embarrassing, its embarrassing when when ah, eu when Europeans come over here.
They all speak English they speak French they speak German, and then we go over to Europe, an an ah wah ah all we’s can say is, merci beaucoup ... Right?"

Ok, if you haven’t found humor in Barack’s words say the title of this post with the same accent and "swing" that you say Barack’s full name with.

Temperature Gauge Live is on the air!

You and I have been waiting for this day to come. Looks like it is just around the corner. Yes, Temperature Gauge is going live. I have been putting together advertising spots, and "learning my lines," (who knew there would be acting involved?!?) and it looks like we go live on the 6th of July. My show is going on every Sunday, and I look forward to talking with you all.

Just to clue you in as to why this is taking so long, I have to "sell" my show. Basically I have to convince local businesses to buy advertising on 1590am WSMN. The advertising pays for my air time. If I have had the pleasure to meet you before, you might know I am not a sales person. My own failings have been holding me back. But somehow I managed to do it thanks to you. You gave me the backbone I needed to get this done.

Either way, The important thing is that we are going live! I will update with air time later this week, (if I can get on the internet from my hotel) but it should be 7pm every Sunday. This is a basic trial for me. I am in it for 10 weeks, and longer if the live show takes off! I will be waiting on your phone calls at 883-9900.

Temperature Gauge Live on 1590am WSMN
Sunday evenings from 7-8
(603) 883-9900
Streaming at wsmnradio.com

Call or email me... What's your temperature?

The missing post... I weep for our country.

(This post was actually written on the 11th, but I lost it. I am also searching for one more)

In social circles, I try to never bring up politics or religion. Sooner or later, someone has an opinion about something political, and then they turn to me. “So what do you think, Myke?” Of course I can’t just ignore the question, and they want to know my feelings on the matter. So I sit back, take a breath and launch into a dissertation regarding the subject at hand. Unfortunately, the recent subject at hand was the attacks on 9-11, or should I say the “conspiracies of 9-11.” (put on you waders, this gets deep)

Let’s get this squared away from the beginning; you and I both know the attacks on 9-11 were terrorist attacks. If you think the U.S.A. attacked itself on that day, please stop reading and do not EVER reproduce (We can not afford anymore idiots in the world, we are over our quota). Science and common sense has proved that I am right about 9-11.

Why would an American ever claim that we attacked ourselves? Who in their right (or left as the case may be) mind could ever believe we could do something so horrific to anyone, never mind ourselves? What kind of sick and twisted person would ever want to crash a plane of civilians into a building of civilians? But then again, I did have this argument with a kid in his 20’s just a few weeks back. He swore up and down that we blew up our own buildings and murdered the people on the planes.

His take on it was that we “…used explosives in the World Trade Center buildings, and hijacked our own plane.” The proof was that “…the buildings fell straight down.” Of course my first question was “Are you a %&$*-ing moron?!?!” I followed such eloquence with the hard facts of the case. The buildings did NOT fall straight down, they toppled slightly. Second, we know that as the floors collapsed, they displaced what was ON those floors and sent it to the easiest exit; the window. The “plumes of smoke,” as he called them, were nothing more than dust particle, papers, and parts of building and furniture being forced out the windows.

The reason I bring this up is simple. This kids in his twenties, and he will be helping steer this country over the next few decades. His vote is going to affect how we live our lives. This ignorant fool, who doesn’t know the facts, and has no desire to be educated, is going to decide my future? If this doesn’t scary the hell out of you, let me try this; President Barack H. Obama. You see, this idiot… who plagues my nightmares… “will vote for Barack, because Barack stands for change.” (Yes, the moron even told me so.) He doesn’t know what Barack is going to do in Iraq, with healthcare, taxes, or any other political issue. But he knows Barack stands for change. Ahh, come again?

When did we lose track of our sanity? Was it just bad parenting that lead to this worldly ignorance? Was it too many drugs in the 60’s and 70’s (and apparently 80’s)? Could this be the product of single parent households? Or is it that we just don’t care about ourselves enough to educate ourselves on the world around us. Very few of my Democrat friends can explain to me what their party is going to do for our country if Barack wins the election this year. Even less can explain how the Democrats can be beneficial to the United States this election cycle. They all have learned the mantra, though. Change for ’08. I weep for our country.

Bartender… another shot please….

John who?

So I finally heard a commercial about Jean Shaheen that was not by Jean. I was had just took a left into traffic, and as I shifted my car, I must have hit the volume up button on the radio. An announcer comes on and states how Shaheen promised us that as Governor, she would not allow new taxes in New Hampshire. I rolled my eyes and shifted into 3^rd gear. I thought to my self, “Wow, already lying to the public…” But then the tone changed slightly, and the announcer starts to remind us of the truth. I was so surprised that I mis-shifted 4^th gear.

It outlined how Jean proposed new taxes, AND raised property taxes. I forgot that in New Hampshire we pay the third highest property taxes. The Announcer was kind enough to remind me of this while also stating that the taxes she proposed would have cost the New Hampshire business owners hundreds of thousands of dollars. (Say that 10 times fast!!) As interesting as this was, I started to think, “Why would John Sununu use this as his political add?” Then the final line of the commercial came, and it was NOT a John Sununu commercial. In fact, it wasn’t even a commercial from the Republican Party; it was a third party spot!

Now I don’t mean to sound like a broken record, but where the hell is John in all of this. I really hope he is not intending to ride in at the last moment and scoop up all the votes he needs. His opponent has been out of sight long enough that many people forgot what she was like as Governor. There is no way he can pull this off unless he starts putting his name out there, and starts hitting the streets again. I am sorry John, you might be the incumbent, but you don’t have squat against Shaheen right now! Too many people have forgotten that you’re even in Washington at this point. You are about to lose us another chair in Washington.

Look, John, unless you intend to step aside and allow someone else to run in your place, get your rump out there and show us what you got! Just for the heck of it, I have asked some people what they thought about John Sununu. Too many times, people asked me, “Wasn’t he a congress person or something?” I don’t know John, does this sound good to you? It doesn’t sound good to me. If this was the political climate I was looking for, I would move to France and let the government have my paycheck (where you could be paying over 55% back in taxes). John, Stop sending ME emails and DO SOMETHING!

Lamenting

Bitter sweet feelings passed over me today as I recycled my "Mitt '08" signs. It was difficult for me to remove the eight foot long Romney banner from the side of my house, but I was tired of explaining that I still feel Mitt is the man for the job. I finally gave in and admited that I have little choice but to vote for John McCain yet again. It has been a few years since I was anticipating his name on a ballot, but this fall I will again be checking the McCain box.

To be honest, this is not a new revelation for me, I know I would vote for McCain this fall. I was indignant, the thought of voting for a man who I felt was second best. "Well, bite the bullet," I told myself. "John moved from third to second best after South Carolina..." I rationalized. "... then second to first once Romney dropped out." Yes, I know Huckabee was still in the race at that point, but I couldn't rationalize Mike as viable... for anything... even janitor. (harsh words, but not as harsh as Mike's words towards and against his fellow Republicans.

So here we are, with what appears to be an Obama VS McCain contest in a few short months. Now it's time to decide who would be the best candidate to lead our fair country. To me, the choice is clear; John McCain. Why, you ask? Let me highlight two key points:

1. Barack wants to... Damn, what does he want to do? Change... ok, got it! He wants to change Washington!!

2. Who cares about number one. Any new President is a change. Do you have anything else for us?

What is your plan for our future, Mr. Obama?
(insert dead air here)
How do you plan to spend my tax dollars?
(enter "ummm" sound here)
How do you plan to pay for the national health care your proposing?
(Enter the "well, you know" sound clip here)
If you pull out troops in Iraq, how do you plan to deal with the fallout cause by the vacuum we leave behind?
(Play cricket sounds here)
When the vacuum is filled with terrorist, how do you plan to protect us from your mistake?
(...... Thank you for coming everybody! And remember, together we can. Change you can believe in!! Have a good night!)

Ah, yeah... This guy wants to run my country... Like I said, Bitter sweet. I am going to have to vote for McC-amnesty instead of my man Mitt (bitter), but I know John is the best choice for '08 (sweet).

Why I Love the Democrats... Today

As a conservative, let me say thank you to Hillary Clinton. Your current course of action has been uplifting to me. Mathematically I could not see how you expected to win. Granted, a pledged delegate does not have to vote the way of the people they represent, but do you honestly think a “pledged delegate” would change their vote from Barack? True, he has no experience, and looks like an intern on the debate stage, but I think the Democrats are more interested in keeping the votes where they belong. There are many good reasons for the Democrats to “stay the course” and nominate Barak Obama. Here’s one off the top of my head… “To give the Republicans a better chance to win.”

Alright, let's consider this for a moment; Hillary is out because she does not have the delegate count necessary to win the nomination. After losing yesterday, she decides on some abhorrent speech about choosing the right leader and blah blah blah. Typical Hillary rhetoric that does not truly congratulate the obvious winner, and further divides the Democrat Party. (Oh and also makes me happy!)

I wish I could explain to you why she has not said those beautiful words; “It has been a great run, and I thank all my supporters for bringing me this far. Now it is time to stand as one and…. (Insert rhetoric here)” Is she going to drag this out to convention? This might work for her, but the only way she can steal this is to buy, bribe, and cheat votes out of Barack pledged delegates. On the other hand, what delegate in their right mind would ever vote against their pledge? Think about how bad a presidential candidate must be for a delegate to vote against their pledge! I can't think of a time when a pledged delegate has ever voted against their constituents’. I mean CRIPE!!! THEY PUT CARTER UP ON THE STAGE!!!!! (I rest my case)

So Barack is the nominee, and he will have to face John McC-amnesty. There are only two options for the conservatives; first the conservatives MIGHT fear another Jimmy Carter and come out in force. Second, we might just stay home and try to drink the next four years away. To be honest, I think I am going to do parts of both.

Let's get drunk and vote! Another shot there, bar tender!

Violated... In My Own Home!

I feel violated. I was just accosted by the putrid image of Jean Sheehan yet again. I knew the commercials were coming, but I was hoping I would be spared the constant reminder of her Governorship. I understand that she is trying to unseat an incumbent and reminding us that she was Governor is a great use of name recognition. The problem is that too many people who are hearing the name from years past may vote for her because they remember the former Governor (her name not her term). Not all of us actually research the candidates before we vote. I know some people who have voted for a candidate because the “signs were pretty,” or “he looked pretty rugged.” (Ok, I know, not the brightest bulbs.)

This is going to sound strange, but I knew the full name of the person I was NOT voting for the second I started writing. It took me about two lines before I could remember John’s first name. I don’t know what is worrying me more, the commercials of Jean Sheehan or the lack of commercials from John Sununu. Maybe it’s the fact that John’s name slipped my mind; not a good sign. How could I forget the name of my representative? Then again, how many advertisements have you heard for John Sununu?

In the advertising industry, “branding” is a term that basically refers to making an advertisers name stick in you head. This method of advertising basically puts a product (Jean) in your face, and repeats the facts they want you to remember (Jean did this or that… Governor). You would think the Republican Party would be sinking money into John’s campaign, posting his face on your T.V. every 15-20 minutes. Considering my slight memory lapse, the average voter probably forgot John is a Senator. Last time I saw his name in print was some energy bill 2-3 months ago!

So where are the radio commercials, flyers, and billboards? (Ok, I know flyers are for the recycle bin, and people don’t pay attention to billboards….) But there has not been any attempt to get his name out yet! Where are the Republicans, and why is Sununu asleep at the wheel? Is he running for reelection, or sitting this one out? At this point he’s about a lap down and loosing ground.

This is my point; with John down in the “polls,” Jean running adds every 30 minutes on Comcast, John and his staff really need to get on the ball. If they don’t act quickly, proposes some prolific legislation, or…. ANYTHING!!!!!, this is over before it even begins. Today, if you ask people who they would vote for Jean Sheehan, or John Sununu, you might get an answer, but you might also get a “John who?” The problem for John is what I call the “What have you done for me….lately?” syndrome.

In this “ADHD” style political world, I can not help but ask these questions; “Where is the Republican Party?” ” When is John going to run?” and the all important, “Is it already too late?”

I hate to say it, but it may already be over for John. Cheer up though; I was wrong about Hillary and Rudy….

The Weapon of Choice

So your down at a pub off Main Street, when in comes a Yankee’s fan. What is the proper response?

a. Talk sports

b. State the facts that prove the Red Sox are a better team

c. Run the bastard over with your car

Well, after last week, we all know the correct answer is “C,” run the bastard over. Nashua has just received its new summer past-time thanks to Ivonne Hernandez. It’s a simple way to waste some excessive time (like life in prison at the taxpayers’ expense). Just go to a bar, have four beers, then get in your car and “scare” a fan of another team by running them down with your car. Then you can claim it was an accident in court (though you already have a record) and face second degree murder charges…

If you can’t tell, I am a bit upset with this. I don’t care if alcohol impaired her judgment, this woman got into her car with the intention of aiming her 4-5,000 lb car at pedestrians. Seems to me she also left the area she was arguing in, retrieved her car, and then hunted down the people she didn’t agree with TO RUN THEM OVER! Sounds like intent to me. This is first degree in my book. I may be wrong, but I thought New Hampshire law states that the charges go up then the driver is intoxicated, not down. Unfortunately, the prosecutors decided that because she “didn’t mean” to rundown her victims, this is second degree.

Now here is a creepy though; I think I have had a run in with Ms. Hernandez. If here maroon Dodge Intrepid is the one that had the Yankee symbol on the back window, she is the same one who cut me off then told me I was “number one,” if you know what I mean (finger gestures). I feel lucky today knowing I might have saved my life by ignoring her and letting her act the fool. Who knows, she might have thought I was a Red Sox fan and started ramming my car if I beeped at her.

Basically, what I am getting at is this. We have some very unstable, immature, ignorant people we must share the world with. Therefore we must gauge our actions cautiously. This does not mean we must cower from every shadow, but more that we must think about EVER possible consequence before we act. The two poor people who were run down by this lunatic probably thought they were having a typical Boston VS New York sports debate. Little did they know that they were messing with a ticking time bomb.

When Intelligence Fails...

The whole Reverend Wright situation made me think again about the whole “race” issue. I don’t really think about “race relations” all that much because I never see the “race” part of it. I have friends of many different races, religions, and other “defining” markers. I don’t think of my friends as being one attribute. My friend Garret is Garret, not black or homosexual. Do the attributes of my friends really matter in the whole scheme of things? Yes, because some characteristics design the person, and other no, because some characteristics would not change the person if they were altered.

We all wish that race was not an issue for anyone in this day and age. I personally do not understand why it is an issue now or ever. I may be naive, but the human mind is generally the same from on person to the next, and the blood that courses through our veins created in the same manner. Skin “color” is simply pigmentation of the skin, not a measure of the person.

Cultivation of the person (morals, values, etc.) is what I have found to be important in life. So why do so many things seem to revolve around skin color? Is there a certain lineage that makes one being better than another? Is there a purer bloodline in one race or culture? I found these questions easy to field, the answer is no. There is no “birthright” that makes one person superior to another. Each of us has our own strengths and weaknesses that help shape who we are.

So going back to the good Reverend, I can not help but wonder why he must interject race into the equation. Congratulations, your skin color is different than mine. I fail to see how you could state that I am somehow evil due to my skin tone. What if I was the same person, but my skin tone was darker? Would I still be evil, or would you change your opinion of me? What is the defining line you use when you judge my character? Is it my personality, my education? Could it be that you prejudge who I am simply because of the amount of pigmentation in my skin? I mean no disrespect, but that does seem a bit shallow and dim witted to me. Then again, I could be missing something. Could the good Reverend be correct? Maybe race is a factor and I have not received enough education to understand this concept. Perhaps the amount of or lack of skin pigmentation affects the body adversely.

For some reason, even writing such idiotic statements has made me feel less intelligent. So let us get back to the heart of my argument. The amount of pigmentation in ones skin does not affect the function of the mind, nor the morals and values of the individual. Therefore, to bring race into a conversation about the merits of a person is to be racist. Simply put, I do not care what “color” you are, if you are judging people (group or individual) due to their skin pigmentation, you are shallow indeed. I venture to say you may be racist.

Climate Control (part 1,2&3 combined)

The teacher’s contract issue has been the center of much turmoil for a number of months. With a quick stroke of the pen, it all went away with the exuberance of a snail. Mayor Donnalee Lozeau signed the latest proposed contract without fanfare, a very mature decision.

The atmosphere within the schools has changed dramatically, and the teachers are actually taking kids out for field trip now. Teachers have made themselves more accessible to the students, and there has been talk about the extra curriculum activities for next year. Every student I have talked to has stated that the teachers seem more relaxed that they had been one month ago. In the school, you never would know how recently things have changed.

I have been there, and I have worked there. I have seen the changes taking place. I may have only seen the teachers for a short period of time prior to the contract being signed, but it was long enough to notice the change.

Before the contract was signed, I found it fairly easy to slip into the teachers areas unnoticed. While “eavesdropping,” I heard some interesting conversations. One of the most memorable went a little something like this:

T1: So. Do you think they will sign?
T2: I hope so. I don’t want to strike.
T1: Yeah. Gotta do what you gotta do.
-pause-
T2: So… ahh… How do we do this?
T1: Do what?
T2: Shhhhh… (whispered) here comes a sub.
-pause-(another substitute entered the room then left)
T2: Okay, now how do we do the strike thing.
T1: I don’t know, I’ve never done this before either.
-pause-
T2: Well, hopefully they sign it
T1: If they don’t, we strike until they give us everything we want…
T2: Yeah…(then while walking away) whatever…

Because I carry the same badge the teachers carry, I have found that they don’t notice me quite as often as I thought they would. Sometimes I hear things that I shouldn’t. But right along I have been telling people that not all the teachers wanted to strike. This does not mean that those teachers are innocent I am just restating what I have said in private conversation. If a teacher acted against our children (like I have listed so many time before) then it does not matter if they wanted to strike or not, they are still guilty.

So do I cut the teachers a little more slack now that the contract negotiations are finished? No, I just allow them a little more breathing room. There are good teachers and there are bad teachers. Now that the teachers are not acting as one to destroy our children’s future, I will only be ripping into those who continue to be a waste of tax dollars.

A Stupid Mistake

Due to an error on my part, nothing has been posted on my site for a few weeks. I just wanted to say thank you to the person who finally sent me this email:

Myke,

I was just wondering if you were ok. You’re not sick again, are you? I noticed you haven’t written in a month and I know that’s weird. You always seem to have an opinion on everything. I never saw anything about the teacher’s contract and was wondering how it panned out. Drop me a line and if you need some help just ask.

Thank you for the concern, but I am alright. It seems my new software has not been functioning properly. I do not actually look at my web page, and everything is done via publishing program. It was my own fault for not checking my page.

Much of what I wrote will not make sense if I just repost it. I will be rewriting my previous blogs, and combining a couple of them. I think I can weave most of my work in with very few glitches.

Again, I am sorry for not looking at my own page. I assumed my programs were posting and reporting to me correctly. Starting right now, 8:22pm on Monday April 21, 2008, I am going over my previous (non)posts and revamping them. I think I can sum it all up in three posts.

Crossing my fingers and thanking you all for the support (even when I let you down),

Myke

Exploitation and Extortion… NTU’s Favorite Tools

I have been quiet as of late, due to the collapsed lung and other issues, but I think I can make up for my absence. I think I want to open up my favorite can of worms, the Nashua Teachers Union contract negotiations. We are called cruel, heartless, and frequently have our intelligence questioned if we disagree with the teachers union here in Nashua. So let me once again put my neck on the line, and call it like I see it: The Extortion artist are at it again.

Last year, a great number of teachers found religion and observed "Good Friday." Amazingly, there are quite a few teachers who no longer observer "Good Friday". School was right on time, and all the "religious" teachers of last year seem to care very little for their "Christianity" this year. I find this rather insulting as I am a Christian (practicing…. Meaning I haven't quite gotten it right yet) who would never use my religion as a bargaining chip for personal gain. Actually, I would never use another person's religion for my gain either. I find it appalling that the teachers are able to work this year on "Good Friday." But then again, why would they have to exploit "Good Friday this year? Instead, the union has stated they are going to strike as of March 31, 2008. At least this time they had the stones to call it a strike.

I think we should let them strike, but make sure we get the right message out first. If the correct spin is put on this issue, the teachers union will look like the aggressor and the city of Nashua will not look like such monsters. The Nashua Left-o-Graph, better known as the Nashua Telegraph, has been printing only pro-NTU stories. The Citizens here believe the teachers are getting screwed, and this is the only way to fight back. The problem is the reporting is not balanced. The telegraph has refused to talk about the issues I have raised of the year (Please look at my "No merit for teachers" posts from 2007._

Part of this posting will be an email to the mayor of Nashua, Donnalee Lozeau. The next paragraph is the beginning of the letter. This letter will be sent to Patty Rogers in the Mayors office and to Donnalee herself:

 

03-12-08

RE: Nashua Teachers Union and contract negotiations

 

Mayor Donnalee Lozeau,

First, I do not want the City of Nashua to continue to look like "the bad guy" in this melodrama. Second, The Nashua Teachers Union (from here to be listed as NTU) has gone too far. Third, the Telegraph has been reporting from the pocket of the NTU. With that said, I would like to suggest that you release a statement that puts the blame where it belongs, and also clears the City of the liable suggested within the pages of the Telegraph.

If I may be so bold, I have an idea for how to phrase such a statement. Of course you need not use my idea in any form, but my hope is that you will find valor in my suggestion. I do not feel that the city of Nashua should continue to bear all the blame for the actions (or inaction, if you will) of the NTU. I believe that the NTU believes they can simply push the local government around by spreading propaganda and smearing the local municipal offices. Public opinion is very important, and the NTU is using this to their advantage. Therefore I suggest you take the next step by placing the responsibility where it belongs; back in the lap of the NTU.

My suggestion of such a statement is as follows:

"The city of Nashua is taking every step necessary to ensure the educational process of the Nashua students is not disrupted. We have been, and continue to look for options that would be mutually agreeable to the Nashua Teachers Union and the City of Nashua. We understand that the Nashua Teachers Union has threatened to disrupt the education of the students that the teachers are responsible for. It is unfortunate that the Nashua Teachers Union has used the children of Nashua to force action on the teacher's contract, yet we can not make hasty decisions that could be detrimental to the economics of Nashua. Therefore we will work diligently on a suitable contract for the teachers, but we will not rush to any decision simply because the teachers union has threatened to disrupt our children's school year. The city can not guarantee that the teacher union will be appease before the March 31 deadline, though a valiant effort will be made to ensure the lightest impact on the children of Nashua. We are currently looking to…."

and continue from there. As I am not sure what avenues you have open, I can not continue. But the idea is to place the blame where it belongs. The teachers union is trying to force your hand by using public opinion. Therefore, the best alternative is to find a way to take the "soapbox" out from under them. Let the city know it is the NTU who is threatening the students, not the City of Nashua. Paint the city as an open and flexible unit that is working to find common ground. Allow the teachers union to appear as the impassive, unrelenting, bullheaded aggressor.

If you need to contact me, please feel free to email me at this address or call me at XXX-XXXX

Mychel Elderd

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Nashua, NH XXXXX