Why North Dakota can’t afford to vote Democrat, not even for dog catcher

north_dakota_wayIt’s that time again, when Democrats don folksy apparel and adopt phrases like “The North Dakota Way” and “working with both parties”. Don’t fall for it. Don’t vote Democrat, not even for dog catcher.

Even Senators Conrad and Dorgan (now retired after decades of damage) started small. Decades later they were North Dakotans on paper only, maintaining shoebox apartments in Bismarck to stay eligible for reelection. Their final legacy: casting deciding votes for Obamacare, legislation wildly unpopular with North Dakota voters, then retiring to multimillion dollar East Coast homes near their lobbyist cronies. Was that the “North Dakota Way”?

Then we elected the “Independent Voice™” for North Dakota, Heidi Heitkamp, who has since voted with her Democrat Party puppet masters 97% of the time according to Congressional Quarterly. We should have seen that one coming.

Democrats never actually campaign on what they stand for. Where are the campaign ads saying they support Obamacare, amnesty for illegals, the right to abortion, or gun control legislation? The ads promising to punish big corporations and advance the homosexual/transgender agenda? Conspicuously absent, but Democrats are beholden to people who want these things because their votes are guaranteed. Deception and feel-good rhetoric are required to get yours. Guess who they’ll serve.

The deal-breaker issue for me will always be religious liberty.  The candidates at the top of the Democrat ticket are hostile toward people of non-Muslim faith, no matter what they say.  At best, they claim to support your “right to worship”, which slyly confines religious liberty to your church building or (for now) your home.

Find an issue that’s popular in North Dakota, and Democrats are on the wrong side of it. Compare their campaign marketing to their behavior once elected. A Democrat elected to local office this year could cast the deciding vote for disastrous federal regulation in twenty years. We can’t afford to advance their dangerous ideology based on platitudes and deception.

Gonna try not to be a part of the scheme

peaceful_protest

I’m trying to refrain from posting any further comments on the tantrum south of town. Why?

Although they’re engaged in illegal activity down there and the whole thing seems to be pressure-cooking toward violence, it is presently a war being waged primarily on social media (this weekend’s violence notwithstanding). I’m not going to feed the drama.

I try to avoid friends who treat social media like their diary and act out their own personal online soap opera. Likewise with this situation.

Meanwhile, this nonsense has very real consequences. My law enforcement family and friends are subject to very real threats, stoked by online hyperbole and lies. They and their families have had to change their names on social media due to stalking and threats from the “peaceful protesters”. I’ve seen Photoshopped imagery and reckless, incendiary online accusations against authorities which even Snopes has discredited with a mocking tone. As a result of this online campaign, the possibility of further and greater violence continues to increase.

I’m convinced that this whole thing is being orchestrated by professionals who know exactly what they’re doing, and I’m not going to be a tool for it by hurling things back and forth in this arena.

Fargo Forum group attempts to whitewash sexual activist ban

forum_whitewash1Boy, the sexual activists were angry once sanity prevailed and SB2279 was defeated in the House.  Their social media was replete with f-bombs and the like, and the Fargo Forum group was ready to hop into the action with its inflammatory front page attempting to “shame” legislators who did the right thing.  Well, it didn’t end there.

Apparently a coffee shop in Fargo decided to have its own tantrum and ban legislators who voted against SB2279.  The ironic part is that the same legislators who were banned totally agree with the shop’s right to deny service to whoever they want!  That kinda took the wind out of the sails of the movement and proved the point the opponents of SB2279 are trying to make, so the activists had to do a “we were just kidding” backpedal job.  The Forum was more than happy to oblige.  Too bad for them there’s that Internet.

forum_whitewash2Here’s the original article from April 3rd at 6:48pm.  The link is here.  If they remove it or rewrite it, the PDF is here.  Note that while the idea is referred to as absurd, only to make opposition to SB2279 seem similarly so, there is no mention that the ban is a joke or “mockingly declared”.  The article claims:

Effective immediately, if you’re among those who voted against Senate Bill 2279 you’ll be shut out completely from the Red Raven.

Apparently someone realized that this probably wasn’t going to go well, predictably so.  After the news story about the ban aired on the Forum’s TV stations, someone probably figured out that this wouldn’t bode well for the cause, and an article published online shortly thereafter by the Forum group paints the stunt in an entirely different light:

forum_whitewash3Here’s the article from later that evening at 7:31pm.  The link is here.  If they remove it or rewrite it, the PDF is here.  In it, the ban has now become a ‘ban’, and it is being portrayed as something totally different:

  • “mockingly declared”;
  • “satirical”;
  • “a joke”;
  • a “fake embargo”;
  • a “satirical, political statement”

Right.  Kinda of reminds me of that Seinfeld clip where George quits his job in a spectacular fashion, then realizes that he’s made a mistake. Mr. Costanza acts like nothing ever happened, he was “kidding”, and that he can’t believe that anyone would have thought he was being serious:

So, which was it – coordinated media effort to keep the agenda plodding forward, or simply sloppy reporting from a historically biased media source?  Either the Forum group got it wrong in the first report or they had to help whitewash the ban after that report hit the air.  The timeline leads me to believe that this was intentional.  The person interviewed at the coffee shop made no mention of it being anything other than a serious ban in the original article despite being quoted four times.  The attempt to walk it back came later.

The fact of the matter is that the tiny minority of sexually disoriented persons in North Dakota and their vocal activists do not reflect “North Dakota values” as they proclaim, and in fact want a one-way street of discrimination and intimidation of people who don’t think the way they do or condone their choice of behavior or lifestyle.  Too bad.  They can try to have these little temper tantrums and even get left-wing media to amplify their ranting, but that doesn’t change the fact that individual liberty prevailed this time.

Fargo Forum proves that SB2279 was about intimidation

260748399-The-Forum-Friday-April-3-cover-originalThis is the “objective journalism” we get from the birdcage liner known as the Fargo Forum.  It proves what I’ve been saying all along: SB2279 is about intimidation.  Here they attempt to “shame” legislators who voted against this abomination for their vote to uphold religious liberty.

Rep. Boschee also made a veiled threat during the floor debate in the House chamber today, when he pointed toward the homofascist attacks on Indiana and Arkansas in the wake of religious liberty legislation being passed in those states.  He implied that the same sort of thing would befall North Dakota if they didn’t fall into lockstep with the other states currently being bullied and extorted into catering to 2.3% of the US population.

This is the “love” and “equality” you find from the sexually disoriented.  They talk a good game when they emote their way through committee hearings and even floor discussion, but what it comes down to is unparalleled vindictiveness.  That’s what SB2279 was all about.

So, I hopped into Photoshop to correct the cover of the Forum:

260748399-The-Forum-Friday-April-3-cover-accurateSB2279 had so many problems simply in its mechanics or lack thereof, but the “big picture” really is that this legislation has a well-documented track record as a blunt instrument used to persecute persons of faith.  The proponents tried to make it about “housing and employment”, but this legislation is most prominently used to go after Grandma when the convictions of her faith lead her to decline providing flowers for a homosexual “wedding”.

Stay classy, Fargo Forum.  No wonder you’re a dying breed.

Tribune article features quote highlighting one-way liberal “logic”

tribune_012215Tinfoil-hat liberal groups are active as ever in North Dakota, and they were in full batscat-crazy mode this week at a hearing for modifying the state’s legal levels of TENORM (technologically enhanced, naturally occurring radioactive materials if I remember correctly).  At the forefront is the Dakota Resource Council.  One of their minions made a comment that caught my eye immediately.  According to the Tribune:

Kathryn Hilton, of DRC, challenged the Argonne study because it used computer models instead of testing radioactivity levels from affected sites.

Well, now…wait a minute.  Someone should point out to Ms. Hilton that, according to her fellow advocates, computer models are gospel.  That’s what they’ve been insisting for twenty years or more in order to advance us toward global socialism (the only purported cure for global cooling warming climate change).

The only way one can “prove” that American SUVs are causing global cooling warming climate change is by programming computer models to say so.  That assumption is “baked in” when the simulations and models are first constructed.  That’s how scientists can be so confounded at the lack of warming which their models predictably foretold, yet bears no correlation to the actual data.

In other words – no, in Kathryn Hilton’s words, computer models are not the same as actual observations and data…two things that don’t bear out the AGW (American-made Global Warming) theory.  Yes, theory.

Just this week I was engaged in a discussion where it was pointed out that none of these liberal positions have a leg to stand on in that they have to constantly violate their own precepts in order to adapt their “logic” to fit the premise of the day.  If the liberal mind was made into a city, it’d be an impossible place to navigate since there would be no two-way streets.  This single quote, while largely unnoticed, is a perfect example.

Holy cow – I just got my mind changed to vote NO on Measure 7

Measure 7 is something that has come up on the ballot before in North Dakota: removing the requirement that all pharmacies must be owned by a licensed pharmacist.  This time it seems like it may really have some momentum.  I just got my mind blown in such a way that I have switched from a lifelong YES vote on this to a sound NO.  Why?  The answer will blow you away.

First, let me say that I believe that anyone who wants to operate a business in North Dakota should be able to do so.  I’ve always believed that, and it’s been the core principle behind my opposition to North Dakota’s pharmacy laws.  I’ve voted in favor of changing this every time it’s come up on the ballot.  This time around, however, I was wavering a bit, and I don’t know why. Something just didn’t seem quite right.  More on that later.

I’d classify most pro-Measure 7 folks in three broad categories:

  • Those who believe in freedom to open and operate a business, no matter who you are (this was me);
  • Those who believe that all medications are going to become cheaper because of more competition;
  • Those who stand to profit from the measure.

Like I said, in principle I would have voted yes simply because of the first item.  I’m not so sure that prices will come down as the second group of people believe.  But the third one is the one that didn’t make sense until today.

CVS operates pharmacies in the state.  White Drug does, too.  I bought most of my Atari cartridges and lots of my Star Wars action figures in an Osco.  So what gives?  Why do the “big box” stores claim they can’t operate here?  The answer is so simple and so complicated at the same time that it would never have occurred to me until Matt Evans wrote about it on my friend Rob’s blog.

In that article, Matt pulls back the curtain and reveals that there is no free market in this matter.  The big box stores negotiate with insurance companies for the ability to get certain medications covered, with state regulations giving them the muscle.  This artificially distorts the market, obviously.

So what happens if Measure 7 passes?  The “big box” stores go straight to the insurance companies, negotiate the same thing with them as they do in other states, and the next time you want to get your prescription covered you find out that it won’t be – unless you go to Big Box Pharmacy.

Naturally this stinks for a number of folks:

  • My favorite pharmacist, who gives GREAT prices and personal service;
  • Senior citizens who are on Medicare Part D and have to abide by it;
  • People who don’t live within 25 miles of Big Box Pharmacy and who’ll have to drive to one to get covered medications.

No wonder the bigs have been pouring millions into this issue: rather than it being a matter of free markets, it’s a matter of rigging the game in their favor!  In the guise of making more free, open competition available to drive prices down for the consumer, it’s actually a way to subvert the free market using the state-regulated insurance industry as a crowbar to leverage things in their favor.

I went from a 100% principled YES in this matter to a 100% NO in a matter of seconds after I read this.  If a YES vote would result in true freedom of competition and no protectionism, I’d cast it…but it would do exactly the opposite.

Make sure you read Matt Evans’ post on Say Anything.  It’s a real eye opener.  Cast your NO vote to stop government-enforced cronyism from coming between you, your pharmacist, and your prescriptions.  Otherwise the next time you want to support your local pharmacist, you may be doing it with your own money instead of the insurance coverage you already paid for.

Why North Dakota can’t afford to vote Democrat – even at the local level

north_dakota_wayIt’s that time again, when Democrats don folksy apparel and adopt phrases like “The North Dakota Way” and “working with both parties”. Don’t fall for it. Don’t vote Democrat, not even for dog catcher.

Even Senators Conrad and Dorgan started small. Decades later they were North Dakotans on paper only, maintaining shoebox apartments in Bismarck to stay eligible for reelection. Their final legacy: casting deciding votes for Obamacare, legislation wildly unpopular with North Dakota voters, then retiring to multimillion dollar East Coast homes near their lobbyist cronies. Was that the “North Dakota Way”?

Then we elected the “Independent Voice™” for North Dakota, Heidi Heitkamp, who has since voted with her Democrat Party puppet masters 97% of the time according to Congressional Quarterly. We should have seen that one coming.

Now Erin Oban, wife of the Democrat Party’s executive director, uses similar rhetoric. She doesn’t mention this affiliation; in fact, her website’s devoid of issues entirely. Her opponent’s site has a very clear list of where she stands on important issues and she votes as she promises on these issues.

Democrats never actually campaign on what they stand for. Where are the campaign ads saying they support Obamacare, amnesty for illegals, the right to abortion, or gun control legislation? The ads promising to punish big corporations and advance the homosexual agenda? Conspicuously absent, but Democrats are beholden to people who want these things because their votes are guaranteed. Deception and feel-good rhetoric are required to get yours. Guess who they’ll serve.

Find an issue that’s popular in North Dakota, and Democrats are on the wrong side of it. Compare their campaign marketing to their behavior once elected. A Democrat elected to local office this year could cast the deciding vote for disastrous federal regulation in twenty years. We can’t afford to advance their dangerous ideology based on platitudes and deception.

Heidi Heitkamp for Abortion…so much for the Independent Voice for North Dakota™

heidi4abortionQuick rundown: Democrats want to force Christian employers to pay for abortion and “birth control” drugs that abort a pregnancy.  Many resisted.  The Supreme Court sided with the employers in the “Hobby Lobby” case.  Vowing to proceed with infanticide, Heidi Heitkamp’s party decided to push through a new law to specifically counter that decision.

Guess who voted “Yea” for cloture on this bill?

heidi_adBut wait a minute!  Didn’t the self-proclaimed “Independent Voice™ for North Dakotans” say in her campaign ads, “I’ll only answer to you.”?  Yes, that’s exactly how she ended the ad portrayed above.  That’s how she portrayed herself throughout her campaign: go check out her TV ads for yourself…they’re all online.

North Dakotans oppose abortion.  That’s never been arguable.  We send people to our state legislature who oppose it as well (aside from pockets of Democrat party dominance).  On our behalf they have passed multiple laws and resolutions defending life in the womb, and we continue to re-elect them.  I think it’s pretty clear what the citizens of North Dakota, whom Heidi Heitkamp claims to represent regardless of “partisan politics”, believe on this issue.  Yet she sides with her Democrat cronies consistently.  In fact, she sticks with President Obama 97% of the time, and it’s been documented.

Heidi Heitkamp is a liar.  This prompted me to make  the following graphic a while ago:

heidi-howClick on the image for a full size version.  Download and share!

Back when the “What I really do” meme was big in the net, I was able to come up with this in a matter of minutes; Heidi makes it easy.  It illustrates perfectly how the Independent Voice™ really pulls a fast one on North Dakota.

Fortunately, the Republicans were able to stop the Democrats this time; the pro-abort Dems were unable to get enough votes for cloture on S2578..  They won’t give up, though, and how they’ll be shrieking about “partisan politics” and how they tried in their valiant effort for “reproductive rights™” to raise more liberal campaign donations.  Business as usual.

There are a lot of things Senator Hoeven does that I don’t like, but in this case I think it’s worth a trip to his Facebook page or email inbox to let him know that this was the right stand for North Dakota.

Unfortunately, having a Heitkamp in the Senate means that the Democrats can effectively cancel out Senator Hoeven’s vote any time they want to.  By splitting our vote, they take North Dakota out of play on any given issue.  Think about that if you ever consider casting a vote for a Democrat Senator in a future election, no matter how many starry-eyed promises of independence they make.

Obama’s North Dakota visit…where did he go?

obama_standingrockIt’s interesting.  A few Fridays ago, “the Preezy” came to North Dakota.  In case you missed it, North Dakota at that time had had the lowest unemployment rate in the nation for 65 consecutive months at 2.6%.  We have prospering energy, agriculture, manufacturing, and even tourism sectors…examples of things going right.  The President didn’t visit the Energy Corridor, any of our so-called Centers of Excellence, or an agricultural landmark such as a farm or co-op.  So where did he go?

The Community Organizer in Chief instead did what community organizers do best: he went to a part of the state that admits 60 percent unemployment and 40 percent poverty, speaking in broad platitudes and offering no solutions, then hopping back on his jet to head for a $32,000 per plate fundraiser in another state.

By the way, life on “the rez” is a perfect example of what happens if you let the federal government intrude upon all aspectsof your life.  This is the liberal Democrat utopia in full effect.  Think I’m wrong?  Look at other bastions of Democrat Party liberalism such as Detroit, which has deteriorated from a bustling metropolis and center of ingenuity & industry into a scene from Sarajevo or Tikrit.

The example doesn’t end there.  In fact, the native peoples have had “single payer health care” provided by the federal government for a long, long time.  You know what the credo is for people in the Indian Health Service system?  “Don’t get sick after June.”  The money simply runs out, and treatment is unable to continue.  Welcome to another Democrat utopia.  Never has there been a more perfect microcosm to demonstrate where the United States will be if Hope™ and Change™ are allowed to reach fruition.  Native people deserve more, the way they’ve been treated over the years is an embarrassment to our nation, and it’s sickening to use them as props.  The scary thing is, instead of helping them, this president and his party want to expand their plight to the rest of the nation…”equally”.

 

bistrib_obama_standingrockBy the way, Chase Iron Eyes dared to make a comment about he would have actually liked to have seen some “concrete plan” from the president…but he got nothing but platitudes and other community organizer rhetoric. You won’t see that comment on the Bismarck Tribune website anymore, because the article has been scrubbed from the Tribune website.  Here’s a PDF of the article before it disappeared.

So, instead of visiting North Dakota’s “energy corridor” to see how land is mined then reclaimed, or how oil is recovered while flaring is reduced, or how North Dakota farmers are feeding the world, he instead went to a place where poverty and misery run rampant because of government policies and dependency upon myriad social programs…and did the one thing he does best: sowing discord while offering no solution.  That is not leadership.

No wonder more people were excited about seeing the plane than the president occupying it.  Can you blame them?

Here’s how you get my vote for City Commission

campaign_signs_29463Disclaimer: This is not a photo of my yard.

I was lucky to stumble upon a yard with these two signs side by side, because these are the two people I recommend you vote for in the upcoming City Commission race.  I’d be happy to explain why.

First off, Mike Motsenbacher has a consistent record as a fiscal conservative, unlike anyone on our current city commission.  He’s been involved with conservative activist groups in town as long as I’ve known him, he’s got business experience as well, and I just plain like him.  You and I can trust him to be prudent in his decision making and not share the same fetishes as the current commissioners.

But here’s the newcomer (to me, anyway): Duane Pool.  A friend of mine received this letter from him, and I’ve received permission to reprint it.  Upon reading this letter I became instantly convinced that I’m voting Pool for Commissioner in the June election:

 I want to thank all of you for your varying levels of support, influence, council and inspiration leading up to this last week of the Bismarck City Commission Election. I know not all of you a Bismarck residents but thank you anyway. If you are a resident, I encourage you to vote or stop by the City-County building and turn in an absentee ballot if you are not able to vote on Tuesday, June 10th.

This election is about choosing a city commission that reflects your values and values your input. I hope I have shown myself capable of doing so and deserving of your support. I strongly encourage you to watch the League of Women Voters forum on Dakota Community Access or online at freetv.org.

My Core Values:

  • I believe Government should be transparent: The public should be informed and a genuine part of the process both within the Tom Baker meeting room and before the issues gets there. People should have access to information and they should know their input into the process has meaning and influence.
  • I believe in the Democratic Process and I believe in my community: Democracy is a responsibility and participatory process. We are obligated to participate:
  • As Candidates
  • As Voters
  • As Citizens in public meeting and forums.
  • People engaged in the process should be treated with dignity, sincerity and respect.
  • Once elected you still need to honor the will of your constituents, both those who supported you and those who did not since you represent them all.
  • Planning is a key to efficient and sustainable growth: I have been involved in planning for much of the last 15 years. I think as a community we need to really focus on a vision of what we want to be 10 and 20 years from now and plan our community efficiently around that goal. (healthy, growing, safe, educated, happy, economically stable with a good standard of living)
  • Economic growth and efficiency are highly desirable community characteristics: I have taught economics at both the under graduate and graduate levels for over 25 years. Including the principles of economics into public decision making will make for efficient and logical decisions for both the short and long term viability of our community infrastructure as well as business environment.

My personal focus:

  •  Infrastructure to support growth. How and where we plan it, scalability, cost and liability.
  • Public Finance. Government provides services necessary to our safety, security, business and social networks, education, and health.
  • How much service is provided must be balanced with the cost and how we pay for it. Public spending is not synonymous with public investment and we need to assure the public that when we do responsibly spend their tax dollars the services and benefits are necessary and desirable.
  • Existing and future investments must be sustainable from a fiscal perspective.
  • Focus on the future rather than reactionary spending. EX: The Civic Center expansion was denied at the polls, yet the existing Commission voted to spend ~10-15% less on a revised plan. Paraphrasing the City Commissioners rationalized this as “…they voted against the higher cost expansion, not the new proposal…”. Subsequently when the public reacted the Commissioners voted to do a study regarding future Civic-events Center locations, expansion and needs. This was either the cart before the horse (study first then spend based on an informed decision) or a disingenuous attempt to quell the public outcry with no intent to change course. In either case the public will was discounted. If the process were inclusive of a long-term community vision the study would have preceded the decision and the urgency to begin construction would not have overridden an open public process nor blatantly disregarded public opinion.
  • A focus on planning and vision for the future will aid in efficient long-term spending to build and maintain an adequate community infrastructure.
  • Public safety and health: As our community grows, demands on police, fire and public health resources will increase. These services are vital to an attractive and vibrant social and business culture. The culture and economic opportunities in Bismarck are what makes our city attractive and provides the backdrop for growth.

I hope I have your support at the polls on Tuesday!

Respectfully,
Duane B. Pool, PhD.

civic_center_money_6747bThe Civic Center thing struck a chord with me.  I’m a Civic Center employee, but I was firmly against pouring more taxpayer money into the expansion.  I outlined my reasons in a post here.  So were most of the rest of you.  That was not enough to prevent our commissioners and mayor from diverting taxpayer moneys from elsewhere and proceeding anyway.  For that reason, they need to go.  Their cavalier attitude and fetish for downtown, “green space”, and the Civic Center expansion need to be their ticket out of office.  Duane Pool gets it.

I may have some other research to pass along regarding the vote this week (if you early vote) and next.  Stay tuned, and vote Pool and Motsenbacher for City Commish!