DPI candidate Potter calls ND “terribly embarassing”, served as Socialist Workers Party elector, gave false information to IRS

One of Rob’s readers at SayAnythingBlog.com pointed out an interesting detail about Tracy Potter, the failed gubernatorial candidate who’s looking for another foot in the door of North Dakota politics: he served the Socialist Workers Party in the 1970s. People who don’t pay much attention to politics are probably tired of the term “socialist” after the past four and a half years, but this one’s documented.

Potter’s name appears under the Socialist Workers Party in the Official Abstract of Votes Cast for the “terribly embarrassing” state of North Dakota (more on that later) issued by the ND Secretary of State’s office in 1976. You can download a PDF of this document by clicking here.

Potter was serving on behalf of Peter Camejo, author of “Racism, Revolution, Reaction, 1861-1877. The Rise and Fall of Radical Reconstruction” (boy, if that doesn’t sound like the last four years!). Camejo was the candidate of the Socialist Workers’ Party, a party of former Communists and other radicals. Is this who you want running the Department of Public Instruction?

Click for full-size image (new window)

By the way, Tracy Potter doesn’t appear to be a fan of children escaping the womb, either. In a 2007 Bismarck Tribune article he’s quoted as calling North Dakota “terribly embarrassing” for its predominant pro-life stance on abortion. Sounds about right for a leftist. You can download a PDF of this article as well by clicking here.

Strike three: you may not know it, but your land probably falls inside the new Northern Plains Heritage Area, an enormous chunk of land in central North Dakota that Tracy Potter got designated with the help of then-Senator Byron Dorgan. It allows for millions of dollars of your money to be distributed to dubious groups, many of which do NOT have your property rights at heart.

Potter lied about this thing from the get-go, including the fact that his Fort Abraham Lincoln Foundation lied on its tax records. It claimed that it had not paid to lobby Congress on its behalf (PDF available here), when in fact lobbying firm Greystone Group disclosed that it had performed lobbying services for Potter’s Foundation “in excess of $10,000” (PDF available here).

So…here we have a documented leftist radical from a Socialist party; one whose rabid pro-abortion views clash with those of the majority of North Dakotans; and a proven deceiver and advocate against the property rights of North Dakota citizens. Is this the person you’d like to have running the organization in charge of teaching your little kids? I think he views this as a prime indoctrination opportunity.

Potter’s opponent, Kirsten Baesler, has received the endorsements of just about everybody under the sun, from varied ideological standpoints as well. They include:

The Fargo Forum, Bismarck Tribune, Grand Forks Herald, and Dickinson Press;

US Senator John Hoeven, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, Fmr Governor Ed Schafer, Governor Jack Dalrymple, ND Senator Judy Lee, Tax Commissioner Cory Fong, and ND Reps. Kathy Hawken, Mark Sanford, and Al Carlson;

Organizations such as the ND Education Asssociation, ND Family Alliance, ND Farm Bureau, and ND Association of Realtors

The choice is obvious: elect the radical with a proven history of disdain for North Dakota, dubious associations, and outright deception…or elect an experienced educator and administrator who has garnered support from the gamut of organizations, media, and elected officials.

Don’t put a 60’s throwback radical in charge of our kids’ education. Vote for Kirsten Baesler as DPI Superintendent!

Democrat campaign signs on US Govt. property? Maybe the Army Corps of Engineers is a fan

As I drove past this building over the weekend, I spotted something interesting. The building itself, by the way, sits on 12th Street in south Bismarck. It’s signed as an office for the Army Corps of Engineers, hardly a favorite government agency up here in former Flood Country. After all, an email trail seemed to indicate that they were warned in advance of 2011’s devastating Missouri River flood but failed to act. But I digress…there was one strange feature of this federal facility that seemed a little odd to me.

This United States government property seems to be home to one of the largest Heidi Heitkamp campaign banners I’ve ever seen. Isn’t that a strange feature for a government building? I’m no expert on campaign law, but that seems a little fishy to me.

Don’t worry, the entire Class Envy Trifecta is there: the sign also boasts a Taylor for Governor sign and a Gulleson for Senate as well. Apparently the Democrat candidates are popular with the Army Corps of Engineers?

The very same fence, surrounding the lot for the building pictured at the top of this post, also has some other signs on it – and they look like this one. This fence is United States Government Property. That means if you or I were messing around on it, we’d face a stiff penalty and probably criminal prosecution. So why is it being used to promote Democrat candidates for political office? If there’s a valid explanation for that, I’d love to hear it.

Here you go: all the signs arrayed on the same section of fence. Don’t trespass, but DO vote Democrat. That is apparently the message one is supposed to retain after passing by the United States Army Corp of Engineers office in south Bismarck. In the background on the right is the Army Corps of Engineers sign.

Of course, being Democrats, they can’t help but play North Dakota’s own version of the race card. Heidi for Indian Country…as though she’s the only one who’ll represent them. YAWN. I suppose it comes with the territory of being a Democrat. By the way, where does she stand on Abortion? The last I heard, that was NOT “the Indian way.” Heidi seems to be completely silent on that issue – not a mention of it at all on her website’s “Issues” section. Note the US Government work trucks in the background.

Another look at this building’s sign shows a blank panel. Does that mean there are two offices available in this space? Perhaps the Democrats have a campaign center here. Did Harry Reid or some other influential Democrat down in Washington DC set them up with a location inside United States Government property? After all, that’s how it is signed.

So is the United States government providing inappropriate campaign support to Democrat candidates? I’m pretty sure there’s a law somewhere that indicates that federal government property can NOT be used to campaign purposes. In the photos above, it’s obvious that the property is being simultaneously declared US Government property and hosting campaign banners for the state’s three most prominent Democrat candidates. The whole thing looks a little questionable, and I think we North Dakotans could all use some answers.

Obama the lame duck

You wouldn’t know it as a consumer of the mainstream media, but there was a TEA Party rally in Bismarck this week. In fact, it was only one of several held on Constitution Day; rallies were also held in Fargo, Grand Forks, Jamestown, Minot, Dickinson, and Williston on Tuesday.

My little guys and I attended with our cameras. They started out taking pictures of flags and the capitol but soon discovered a bug. No, not a glitch – an actual insect, and a large one at that. That pretty much captured the attention of both little boys until one stomped on him.

It was encouraging to see Governor Dalrymple in attendance, listening intently to the scheduled speakers and concerned citizens who participated in open mic sessions. I eyeballed the signs and banners displayed but knew instantly that this little girl’s was my favorite: the lame duck. It was my boys’ favorite too, I believe…after they got to pet the duck!

Photoshop play gone viral

So I was practicing some work avoidance here at home the other night and fired up Photoshop as I’m prone to do… a few minutes later I’d made the above graphic. I posted a small version of it on my blog’s Facebook page and didn’t think much of it.

The next thing I know, my Facebook metrics are on the uptick: in almost no time at all I’d had thousands of people “talking about” the graphic – this means sharing, commenting, liking, whatever. At the moment it’s at 7,288 with 2,385 direct shares. I guess I struck a chord somewhere.

One other diversion I came up with was this one for Heidi Heitkamp, who is on record as cheering the Obamacare debacle that this state dislikes at around a 70% rate. Send this one to your Catholic friends, particularly the ones who didn’t know that they’re now paying for all kinds of things their church calls anathema.

There’s plenty of material out there…the next time I’m trying to avoid tidying up my home office I’ll probably brainstorm a couple more.

Does waddling around in a hoodie exude an air of competent leadership?

I had to do a double take during the Independence Day parade in Mandan last week. This photo I took shortly afterward pretty much says it all. How professional does a candidate of any persuasion look in a hoodie, baseball cap, and dark shades? In what way could that possibly portray competent leadership?

That’s how senate candidate Heidi Heitkamp took to the street to push the same duplicitous campaign strategy North Dakota Democrats have employed for decades: class envy, campy talk of a nebulous “North Dakota Way”, and saying one thing here while acting like good little leftist lap dogs back in Washington, DC.

I feel compelled to clarify that no, I’m not mocking Heidi’s looks. This is about attire. I think anyone pursuing a position of leadership should dress for public appearances like they’re applying for the job…every time.

For instance: despite their poor performance as representatives of North Dakota, you could count on Dorgan, Conrad, and Pomeroy to put on a nice flannel or farmer-ish shirt and a new set of jeans or khakis when they came back to North Dakota to act all “local.” Whichever handler allowed Heidi to go parade walkin’ with the Unabomber get-up, however, should be given a different assignment.

One other item in this photo speaks volumes about the Democrat candidate for senate: trying to distribute treats from an empty bucket. I can’t think of a better way to portray the bloated federal bureaucracy with Democrats in charge. Maybe there’s a float from China nearby waiting to loan her some candy to distribute to the hoi polloi in an effort to buy votes.

Happy Independence Day, you extremists

So far we’ve had all the right ingredients for a great Independence Day…the day off from work, the Mandan parade in its entirety, a nice long nap, and a great evening planned.

Point of order, though: I do appreciate all the salutations and greetings today, but rather than saying, “Happy 4th!” I would delight in hearing, “Happy Independence Day!” After all, that’s what today is about, regardless of where it happens to have landed on the calendar.

By the way, on this day which rings true the message of individual liberty in the heart of all red-blooded Americans, it caught my attention that people who are “fiercely nationalistic” or “reverent of individual liberty” are labeled as terrorists by a new study on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security (link opens as PDF in new window).

Well, USA and liberty, if lovin’ you is wrong…I don’t wanna be right. The report above tries to mask its claims against such people by qualifying them as accompanied by preparing to retaliate violently. That brings me back to one of Clint’s Rules of Reality (heretofore unpublished, lest be it labeled a “manifesto”:

“Your home is a ‘residence’ until the government wants to come in; at that point,
regardless of size, location, or construction, it becomes a compound.”

My point is that, if you satisfy the requirements of *gasp* thinking the wrong sort of thoughts, it won’t be too hard for someone to make the short leap to branding you as dangerous…as long as you’re on the wrong side of the ideological spectrum.

This isn’t the first time people who oppose abortion, people who put stickers on the back of their trucks, people who attend Tea Party rallies (but not Occupy Wall Street), or people who support Ron Paul (among whom I am not one) have been branded as dangerous and possible terrorists…and it won’t be the last. I just wanted to inform you that if this day has brought to mind a swell of national pride and love of liberty, look out: you may have just become an enemy of the state…at least while Hope™ and Change™ are the bywords of the day.

Oh yeah…I was on Rush last week

In a little spur-of-the-moment thing, while stirring a pot of pasta at home, I picked up the phone and dialed 1-800-282-2882. To my surprise, I found myself talking to Mr. Snerdley, and I chimed in with my take on Measure 2. Last week Rush mentioned North Dakota and Measure 2, pointing out that people are way too worried about government getting enough money and not worried enough about keeping their own. That may be the case for some out there, but I had an alternate viewpoint to present, one on which I’ve elaborated here on the ol’ Blog before.

I didn’t get a chance to make one point: if Measure 2 had simply said, “State, county, and local governments may not levy, impose, or collect taxes on property” I would have voted an enthusiastic YES. That would have accomplished the job and allowed the legislature to react accordingly. That would give plenty of time for debate as to how to react and allow for the legislative process to work through any unexpected issues in the process.

Measure 2, however, nosed the issue into a constitutional corner. By prescribing what I call the “magic formula” method of the legislature to fund local government, the measure went too far…irreversibly so. In that case, if adjustments needed to be made, they could only be done by another constitutional measure. What a mess. It also worked retroactively, allowing no time for debate on specifics.

I spoke to a friend who was a huge proponent of Measure 2 from the beginning, and he told me that Measure 2 was simply “too long.” He’s the one that opened my eyes to the possibility above, that it should have simply done away with property taxes and stopped there. Instead, by codifying a solution for property tax replacement into constitutional law, it became a lesson in what I call “bad mechanics” and doomed itself to failure.

Anyway, you can check out the brief transcript of the Rush segment here. Not my most eloquent minute and a half, but at least I didn’t screw up my first nationwide radio appearance.

Civil disobedience. And here’s how to vote today (Yes, No, Yes, No)

North Dakota has on its books a law which clearly infringes upon First Amendment protections of political speech. In Century Code 16.1-10-06 the law states,

Any person asking, soliciting, or in any manner trying to induce or persuade, any voter on an election day to vote or refrain from voting for any candidate or the candidates or ticket of any political party or organization, or any measure submitted to the people, is guilty of an infraction.

The display upon motor vehicles of adhesive signs which are not readily removable and which promote the candidacy of any individual, any political party, or a vote upon any measure, and political advertisements promoting the candidacy of any individual, political party, or a vote upon any measure which are displayed on fixed permanent billboards, may not, however, be deemed a violation of this section. (Download as PDF)

Not only does this farcical law violate protections on free speech, but it also doesn’t apply equally to all – ie, people with stickers on their car or “permanent” signs. The fact that this law even addresses such exemptions indicates that someone in the legislature realizes how ridiculous, unenforceable, and downright unconstitutional it is.

Of course, it doesn’t apply to Democrats buying gas cards or big screen TVs for people or giving college students free rides and pizza, does it? Well, it looks like they eventually stopped the pizza thing when people found out what they were doing. I never heard of anyone actually being charged with a misdemeanor pursuant to Section 16 of the North Dakota State Century Code, however.

I took down my yard signs as we’re all warned to do, simply because I want to use the parts for a project I’m working on in the Garage Majal. Here in my “digital yard”, however, allow me to assert my political opinion as protected by the First Amendment:

Measure One: This is a clear YES. It says that as a politician I can’t arrange to have a government job created, then later on assume that job. I also can’t arrange to give a government job a disproportionate raise and then later assume that job. No-brainer.

Measure Two: This is ill conceived and a clear NO, even though I want property taxes abolished. If it had simply said, “North Dakota government entities may not derive income from the levying of a property tax.” and left it there, I’d be urging everyone to vote yes. In this case, however, the proposed measure does some very BAD things:
– It places spending decisions in the hands of one large, central government;
– It puts fiscal responsibility in the hands of a state legislature which hasn’t exhibited any such responsibility since the Schafer administration;
– It requires the legislature to make a “magic formula” which will somehow “properly fund” all North Dakota cities and towns, no matter how great or small, no matter how flooded or oil-rich;
– It will create a need for full-time legislators. Right now they serve part time and for little money. Imagine if it became a full-time job, doling out your money to whoever lobbied them the best? That’s how the United States Congress ran off the rails!
– Codifies itself into the Constitution, where it can not be modified without another Constitutional ballot measure. What to do in the mean time?

Again, if Measure 2 simply said “No more property taxes” and left it up to the legislature to react within its means, I’d be on board. As it stands, it pulls the rug out from under them while also handcuffing them at the same time. It’s a recipe for disaster.

Measure 3: Again, a clear YES. This measure simply restores protections for faith and religion which have gradually been eroded by the federal government. It has passed legal muster after examination by entities at Harvard, Stanford, Notre Dame, U Virginia, et al. It sets a legal standard by which people are protected from new laws which would, for instance, force photographers like me to photograph homosexual “weddings” against our convictions. No, it doesn’t mean I can beat my wife or marry a twelve year old. And remember, its financial support comes from close to a million dollars in blood money from the abortion factories at Planned Parenthood.

Measure 4: This one is convoluted, but vote NO to KEEP the UND Fighting Sioux Logo. The administration of UND and the State Board of Higher Education have been nothing but misleading in this regard, claiming that we wouldn’t be allowed into the NCAA Big Sky Conference when we’ve already been ratified members for over a year. They’re still claiming the sky will fall on UND athletics when they’ve been playing under sanctions already without ill effect. We need to stand-up for out of state liberal politically correct” types who think they know more about what’s offensive to Indians than the actual Native American tribes themselves, which have never been allowed to meet with them!

There we go. Since I’m not a Democrat, I’m now a dissident and a criminal. But wait, I did take down my yard signs as ordered! If you feel so moved, please click on the Donate link to the right and chip in some bail money. After you do so, please go to the nearest poll – remember, the polling places have CHANGED for many of you, and you can find your new polling place here. Vote YES, NO, YES, NO, and sit back to watch the TV stations try to beat each other with the best election coverage. See you when I get out.

Some important Measure 3 information: PDF download and short video

With the estimated amount of blood money poured into North Dakota by abortion factory “Planned Parenthood” organizations approaching one million dollars, you can imagine there’s plenty of misinformation bouncing around out there. Of course, it’s all put out there by the pro-abort propaganda mill who see faith and religion as their primary adversary. No shocker there.

An informational sheet has been put together answering some direct questions that should probably address any concerns one might have about Measure 3. Those concerns would most likely be brought on by the disinformation campaign waged by the pro-abort bunch.

Click here to download the short one-page PDF file.
If you have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed, you’re good to go. It may take a little bit for the program to load, but the file should download reasonably quickly. Click on the icon below to download the free Adobe Reader if necessary.

Now onto the video. This addresses some of the same disinformation sneaking around out there but can actually give more background:

There you go. This measure basically provides protection against people passing laws to stifle faith and religion, a war which is being waged heavily here in North Dakota right now, and does not do any of the weird things the pro-abort groups claim it does. Please vote YES on Measure 3.

Surprise: Abortion groups put FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS in blood money against Measure 3. UPDATE: It’s now being reported as $700,000.

Measure Three, on the ballot this primary season, is sometimes referred to as the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment. The key word in this title is “Restoration” as the measure seeks to restore protections for people of faith that have been slowly stripped away by the federal government. Similar measures have been passed in twenty-seven states,

Opponents of the measure claim it’s going to legalize wife beating, denial of medical care, and all sorts of other things that it will not do. They clearly have a vested interest in limiting religious freedom in North Dakota. Who’s the group who has the most to lose from strong religious protections in North Dakota? Easy: the abortionists.

If you click on this link on the Secretary of State’s Office website, you’ll be able to find a list of who’s bankrolling the opposition. It’s exclusively “Planned Parenthood” (wow, what a sterile misnomer) groups from North Dakota and elsewhere.

You can also download the PDF here (I’m hosting a copy on this blog) to examine it for yourself.

If you haven’t paid close attention to the Measure 3 debate, let this one fact smack you square between the eyes: the ones spending the huge money opposing it are people who support killing children. That single fact should be enough to convince you to vote in support of this measure in the June primary.

UPDATE: According to this article, the amount now is around $700,000. That’s a lot of blood money! They want to stop the only barrier remaining to their infanticidal death cult.