America is in the midst of a raging cultural and spiritual war. Forces of Good, Light, Conservatism and a Judeo-Christian Worldview daily battle the forces of Evil, Darkness, Socialism, False Religions and Philosophies. A Good Choice is on the frontlines exposing evil across America’s political and social spectrum.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously today in favor of the conservative anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, allowing the group to proceed with a First Amendment challenge against an Ohio law criminalizing "false" political speech. The case of Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus arose during the 2010 congressional elections when the Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) announced its intention to oppose the reelection campaign of Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) by purchasing billboard and radio ads describing Driehaus' vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as tantamount to supporting "tax-payer funded abortion." In response, Driehaus filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission charging SBA List with seeking to spread political lies about him. Driehaus' lawyer also sent a letter to the billboard company, threatening a similar complaint. The company promptly refused to run the SBA List ads. In the meantime, SBA List was hauled before the Ohio Elections Commission, which ruled against it on a party-line vote. By this point, with the congressional election impending, SBA List's political speech had been effectively suppressed by the state of Ohio. So SBA List filed suit in federal court, charging the Ohio speech law with violating its First Amendment rights. In a surprise twist, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled in favor of the state, holding that SBA List did not have standing to file suit because it could not demonstrate "an imminent threat of future prosecution." Today, by a vote of 9-0, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled that decision and held that Susan B. Anthony List must be allowed its day in federal court. "The threat of future enforcement of the false statement statute is substantial," declared the unanimous majority opinion of Justice Clarence Thomas. What's more, Thomas wrote, "the specter of enforcement is so substantial that the owner of the billboard refused to display SBA's message after receiving a letter threatening Commission proceedings. On these facts, the prospect of future enforcement is far from 'imaginary or speculative.'" The decision in Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus is available here.
I attended the Tea Party day at King’s Island in Mason, Ohio last weekend.
There was a lot of traffic so it took a long time to get to the gate and get parked. There were apparently liberal protesters with signs standing by the road as I was waiting in traffic. One had a picture of George Washington and said “Coffee Americans”. Another had a picture of what appeared to be the back of Steve Chabot’s head. I couldn’t read the message underneath it.
There were booths with representatives from various organizations including the Ohio Project, End Ohio's Estate Tax, the Libertarian Party, and others. There were many interesting speakers at various venues. I shook hands with Charlie Earl, the Libertarian Party candidate for Secretary of State. I also saw and got some information about Dr. Michael Pryce, the independent candidate for U.S. Senate.
As I walked around the park, I saw some displays with skeletons. Forgetting the proximity of the Halloween holiday, I wondered if the displays were meant as a warning that that is what would happen to us if Cap and Trade and passes and we forget to use only energy efficient light bulbs. Some skeletons had more than one head or more than two arms. I wondered if that was meant to warn us that we would only be allowed to eat the “Frankenfoods” produced by the multinational agricultural corporations who heavily donated to Obama’s campaign. I also saw some little kiddie ride in which the kids got into their cute little cars which slowly moved along a track. I thought, will these be the only cars that all but the elites in Washington would be allowed to drive?
There was a forum for “serious Tea Partiers”. The speakers were obviously either pure libertarians or close to it. The first speaker was that guy who does the instructional videos for petition circulators on the Ohio Project website. He talked about monetary policy, with a bent against the existence of the Federal Reserve. I agreed with everything he said.
The second speaker basically had a bent towards the idea that the courts are our main recourse in the fight for freedom. He mentioned that the Supreme Court at first struck down Social Security under FDR. Then someone raised their hand and asked if it wasn’t wrong that the judge struck down California’s law against gay marriage. The speaker responded that he basically thought that the decision was a reasonable interpretation of the due process clause of the 14th amendment and that conservatives should embrace using the courts as means of riding ourselves of unnecessary government restrictions. He seemed to be very knowledgeable, and I agree with him about striking down Social Security and that other grievances could be addressed through the courts, but he was out to lunch on the gay marriage question. Briefly, “equal protection under the law” does not apply to people who commit acts of wickedness. The California law does not discriminate against people with immutable characteristics, but provides that no special protection or benefits be given to those who claim some kind of same-sex marital status. And as I have said many times, the ratification of the 14th amendment is more than a little suspect. The libertarianism of the speaker seems to have blinded him to both the truth of the Scriptures and of the Constitution.
The third speaker talked about local issues. Specifically he talked about consolidation of the jurisdictions and getting rid of longevity pay for public employees as cost savings measure. I don’t really have much of an opinion one way or another on these issues. When they started talking about teachers, I thought why not just get rid of the public schools? In this age of modern technology, children can learn at home through e-schools. We no longer have to build multimillion dollar buildings for education. Its not necessary to pay so many teachers nearly six figure salaries to do what any responsible parents could do at home.
But I was most interested the candidates forum. Seth Morgan, the former candidate for state auditor, was the moderator. He pointed out a Democrat spy in audience who was filming the event. But he said go ahead and let him film--we have nothing to hide.
Steve Chabot spoke first. I missed most of what he had to say because I was misinformed about the location. But I didn’t really care because I’ve already made up my mind that I’m going to pass again on the congressional election, barring some dramatic repentance on Chabot’s part for his war and DHHS votes.
The next speaker was Dave Yost. He was the one who beat Seth Morgan after having switched from running for attorney general to auditor under pressure from the Ohio Republican Party chairman Kevin DeWine, so that his cousin Mike DeWine would have no opponent in his primary. Booooo! I guess I agree with about everything Yost said in the forum, but the cowering to Kevin DeWine was not mentioned. I recall some statement about not making “across the board” cuts, but rather cutting out things we really don’t need first. Fine, I agree with that, but what does that have to do with the state auditor’s office?
The final speaker was Robert Owens. Not long after he began speaking, I noticed that the Democrat guy with the camera stopped filming. It happened at about the time that it was mentioned that Robert Owens was not a Republican, but a Constitution Party candidate. No need to get any dirt on him, he has no chance of winning, and in fact could pull votes away from DeWine and give the Democrats a win. Well, I am hoping come Election Day that there is big surprise for both the Republicans and Democrats in the Attorney General race. With all the miracles that have already happened in the primaries, who knows? Anyway, Robert Owens, who looked a lot fatter than I expected, asserted his pro-life position unequivocally by stating that it is the role government to protect the unborn by making all abortions illegal. When Seth Morgan asked Robert about why there was a need to run against Mike DeWine, Owens confidently pointed out that Mike DeWine has a “zero” rating from the NRA on second amendment issues. Owens also said that he was the only candidate in the race who would use the power of his office to protect Ohioans from being forced to purchase health insurance.
At the end of the forum, I lost a lot of respect for Seth Morgan. That he gave Yost a pass is fine--his sin is rather small. But Morgan then rolled over and endorsed John Kasich and Rob Portman (who were not even present). They are corrupt, warmongering, Planned Parenthood funding shysters. And with Kasich being in bed with Lehman Brothers, that puts the icing on the cake. I might compromise and (against my better judgment) vote for Yost for Auditor. But since there is definitely no real pro-life candidate in the governor’s race, I’m definitely going to leave that one blank. I will either vote for Pryce or Deaton in the U.S. Senate race. I wish that Deaton had run for governor instead. That would have made the choice easier.
In conclusion, I had a mixed reaction to the Tea Party at King’s Island. It is good that they got a lot of signatures for the Healthcare Freedom Amendment and that some people were educated about various political subjects. But there was a lot of misinformation too.
Along with the Ohio Healthcare Freedom and State Sovereignty Amendments, there is also a referendum to completely repeal Ohio’s Estate Tax. It has just received an endorsement from the Ohio Christian Alliance. The estate tax has hurt Ohio’s economy! We need to get enough signatures by the end of this month to get something good on the ballot for a change! Go to http://www.endohioestatetax.com to help with this effort!
Election day is only a week away, on Tuesday, November 3. See below for information on the 3 statewide ballot issues that would amend the Ohio Constitution. The Ohio Constitution is a document created for the purpose of protecting the liberty of all Ohioans. Before we consider changing this document, let us always be sure that we are voting to protect liberty!
Issue 1. A proposed constitutional amendment to authorize the state to issue $200 million of bonds to provide compensation to veterans of the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
From Andy Meyers, military veteran and OFA Defense Policy Analyst: "As a veteran of The Persian Gulf War and understanding the good intent of Issue 1, borrowing approximately $294 million (with interest according to OBM) to pay cash bonuses to veterans of the Middle East conflicts does not make sound financial sense. As insensitive as some may think this is, I can assure you it is not. The Department of Veterans Benefits already has numerous programs to help veterans and their families transition into civilian life such as loans for housing, GI Bill, vocational training and survivors benefits to name just a few. I was one of those veterans who did just that, and I appreciated the assistance I received from those programs that are already established. In light of these difficult financial times for our nation, the state of Ohio and its citizens, this proposal would seem inappropriate and fiscally irresponsible at this time. As a veteran who served proudly with honor, and continues serve in a non-military capacity,I will vote NO on Issue 1and hope my fellow veterans will do the same."
Vote NO on Issue 2: Farm Bureaucracy Creation
Issue 2. A proposed constitutional amendment to create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board to dictate policy to the farming industry by establishing and implementing standards of care for livestock and poultry.
Many supporters of this issue regard it as the lesser of two evils, and fear that without Issue 2's passage, even more stringent regulations from animal rights groups might be proposed in the future. However, these animal rights groups have already stated that even if Issue 2 does pass, they still plan to pursue more restrictive regulations. Therefore,Issue 2 will not prevent these future harmful attempts, which we will need to oppose as they are proposed. However, Issue 2 WILL create a panel of unelected bureaucrats with the power to significantly impact agriculture in Ohio, particularly small farmers. Big Agribusiness strongly supports Issue 2, as it will allow big money to influence farm policy, which will almost certainly prove harmful to small farmers and consumer food choices. Ohio agriculture does not require additional government regulation to continue selling safe products. Creating this panel will only drive up the costs of compliance for farmers, and raise prices for consumers. There are free-market alternatives to this proposed government bureaucracy; groups are already working toward creating a system of voluntary farm standards by which farmers can prove that their treatment of animals is humane.
The Ohio Liberty Council has posted an excellent video from a recenttown hall discussionwith arguments from both sides of Issue 2. We recommend reviewing the information they present.
Also, big money has been pouring in from special interests and out of state groups to pay for a very costly Yes On Issue 2 campaign. We have pulled some of the data from the SOS website and placed it in aspreadsheet. We recommend looking over the list of contributors to help make a decision about whether this proposed board will protect us from special interests or be controlled by them.
From Clint Ziegler, farmer and OFA Agriculture Policy Analyst: "As a third generation farmer in Ohio, I believe that farm management decisions should remain on the farm, not within an appointed board of livestock "experts". Creating a new bureaucracy to set standards will force many small farms out of business, which will limit consumer choices. Industry standards should not be controlled by government force, but rather by consumers with their wallet. Placing a third party between the consumer and producer will increase the cost of our safe and local food that we already enjoy without a livestock care board. I will vote no on issue 2."
Vote NO on Issue 3: Casino Monopoly
Issue 3. A proposed constitutional amendment to allow casinos in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus and Toledo. From Kathleen Jagodnik, OFA Communications Director. "While the I support the right of entrepreneurs to open new businesses, unfortunately Issue 3 involves the state to an unacceptable degree. Issue 3's passage would change the Ohio Constitution so that only these 4 casinos could be built and operated by specific authorized casino operators, thereby granting monopoly power to these operators. Issue 3 would also ban all other casino gaming, including "casino nights" offered by churches, fraternal organizations, and other charities, which would augment these casino operators' monopoly power.I will vote NO on Issue 3. "
"The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitable he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is apt to spread discontent among those who are."
For a Conservative Ohio State House of Representatives
Monday night I witnessed a civil debate between two persons vying for the vacant seat of a term-limited state representative in Ohio’s 90th District. The debate was held in a vocational school in Mount Vernon, Ohio. It was attended by approximately 75 people. One of the candidates mentioned that it was the best attended gathering of all held for this office in this election cycle.
The debate was a back and forth between the two candidates. The moderator tossed out the same questions to each candidate on a rotating basis. They had either 2 or 3 minutes to answer. There was also a 1 minute rebuttal period for each candidate.
The debate was kind of a cross between the last McCain-Obama debate and Rick Warren'sSaddleback Civil Forum.
I knew just a few things about the candidates prior to the debate. I left the debate knowing more than I had before. The Democratic candidate, Dwayne Grassbaugh was a farmer, small businessman and college graduate, who is new to politics. His strong point was that he visited each of the 45 townships in the district and felt that this was a good basis on which to build his understanding and representation as a new legislator. On the other hand he revealed that he was endorsed by the Ohio Education Association (OEA) and labor unions. He mentioned several times “green” Ohio, which to me is a catch phrase for over-the-line environmentalism.
On the other hand, Margaret Ann Ruhl, the Republican candidate, said that as having served as city and county auditor for over 20 years she brings an excellent experience and understanding of the government budgeting process to her job as a state representative. She emphasized the need to step up the use of clean coal and encouraging business develop instead of raising more taxes to stimulate growth of the Districts economy and to create jobs. She was not as articulate as was her opponent in expressing her opinions, but had superior ideas positions on the issues and experience.
Some of the topics covered where jobs, energy, health care, education and taxes. The Democrat expressed himself better on the issues. However, the Republican had better ideas. My major concern with the Democrat is with the endorsement of the OEA. I would be afraid that Mr. Grassbaugh would be supportive of the positions of that rabid union over the best interests of the students of Ohio. Based on the debate tonight I feel comfortable in both voting for Mrs. Ruhl and placing her yard sign in my yard, which I had for a few days pending the outcome and performance in the debate.
Here is the local newspaper's, MountVernonNews.com, account of the event.
Two of the nine articles of impeachment allege that Attorney General Marc Dann:
> Obstructed the internal investigation into allegations of sexual harassment in his office
. . .
> Committed acts of gross immorality and knew or should have known that his personal conduct undermined the effectiveness and efficiency of the office.
Following in the failed footsteps of another corrupt Democrat, New York Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, Marc Dann resigned late this afternoon. The Columbus Dispatch newspaper's headline this morning cried out, “Dann denied an exit deal.” Dann must of heard that call loud and clear. The following is an excerpt from the text of the resignation speech given this afternoon a few hours ago by Marc Dann, now the former Attorney General of Ohio. What I included in parenthesis and in capital letters are words that Dann left unsaid in his resignation statement. Matt Patrick, talk show host on WHLO radio in Akron, posted an audio file of Dann’s resignation speech.
“A few days I came before you(THINKING I COULD MAKE THIS SITUATION GO AWAY IF I REFUSED TO DEAL WITH IT AS I SHOULD HAVE)to(MERELY)admit my mistakes(ONLY ONCE IT BECAME KNOWN THAT IT – ONCE I GOT CAUGHT), to take responsibility(THINKING I COULD FOOL YOU STUPID MASSES BY MOUTHING THESE PLATITUDES)and to announce steps is(DISTRACTING AND) giving the Office of Attorney General an administrative backbone(NOT SURE WHAT I MEANT HERE BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT I HAVE NO BACKBONE WHEN IT COMES ON DOING THE RIGHT THING OF MY OWN VOLITION DUE TO LACK OF PERSONAL INTEGRITY AND CHARACTER)worthy of the great legal work we were doing in the Office . . .
“I sincerely (YOU BELIEVE ME DON’T YOU?)viewed it as my fiduciary responsibility to fix the problems on my watch (MORE SPECIFICALLY MY LAWLESSNESS AND MY LAW-BREAKING AND MY BREACHING THE PEOPLE’S TRUST), especially as it concerned my own actions(WHICH AFTER ALL, IT WAS PRIMARILY MY BEHAVIOR THAT WAS BOTH IRRESPONSIBLE AND MODELING TERRIBLE LEADERSHIP FOR EVERYONE IN THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL)Unfortunately(FOR ME, THAT THE DAMAGE I CAUSED IS UNREPAIRABLE BUT I REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT UNTIL NOW), it is now clear that the last step I must take(NOT WILLINGLY, I MUST ADD, I AM BEING FORCED, PRESSURED BY OTHERS EVEN IN MY PARTY)to fix the problem is to resign as Attorney General immediately (I DID MANAGE TO INSULT THE PEOPLE OF OHIO FOR SEVERAL WEEKS BY LOITERING, LINGERING BY NOT RESIGNING BECAUSE IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO – NOT WAIT UNTIL THE DAY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IS INITIATING AN EXTENSIVE INVESTIGATION OF MY OFFICE AND MYSELF AND THERE IS A GROWING NON-PARTISAN EFFORT TO IMPEACH ME.). . . “. . . It has been my priority over the past few weeks(TO REFUSE TO DEAL WITH THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION IN WHICH I GOT MYSELF INTO, HOPING THAT IT WOULD JUST GO AWAY AND)to try to restore those priorities to the forefront of the Office’swork. The vast majority of the 1400 employees of the Attorney General’s Office have been doing outstanding, nationally recognized work(DESPITE THEIR CORRUPT, IMMORAL, UNETHICAL LEADER – LITTLE OLD ME - WHO EVEN ENGINEERED AND ENCOURAGED A SEXUAL HARASSING WORK ENVIRONMENT). . . I thankthem for their incredible service over the past 17 months . . . They deserve(MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT I GAVE THEM AND DESERVE)both to be recognized and to continue their work without the distraction that the political(ACTUALLY, MY MULTIPLE MORAL IMPROPRIETIES AND INDISCRETIONS, FOR WHICH I AM SOLELY RESPONSIBLE)situation that I find myself in has caused them. It is now clear to me(YOU SEE, I AM A VERY SLOW LEARNER)that the only way to protect these (VERY LIBERAL)priorities for the Office of Attorney General and for the people of Ohio(AND MOST IMPORTANT, FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY)is to remove myself from this situation(KICKIN’ AND SCREAMIN’).”
Ohio and its people are better off without Marc Dann. Dann is proof that the Democrats are no different from the Ohio Republicans, who when they gain power are even more corrupt than anything the GOP did. Governor Bob Taft looks like an innocent choir boy compared to the wrong perpetrated by Attorney General Dann. Ironically Dann was swept into statewide office with a lot of other Democrats on the basis of bringing clean government. Today he was put out with the trash . . .
See also my previous articles, which I wrote about Dann here and here.
Ohio Democrat Governor Ted Strickland has only been in office for three months but he has inflicted damage on the citizens of Ohio. First, he did away with the school voucher program. Now the “Reverend” and gilded Governor shows his true liberal leftist colors by removing ALL $500,000 for abstinence-only sex education from his proposed state budget, which he presented to the legislature this week. In doing this he is telling Washington to keep your $23,000,000 federal abstinence-only sex education program funds.
This is quite insane. Governor Strickland is taking programs that work and because they do not fit his political agenda and because he must appease the lunatic elements of the far left including radical anti-American organizations such as the NARAL, National Organization of Women (NOW), the National Abortion Federation (NAF), Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and the teacher unions and others.
Does the liberal Governor not understand that an ounce (or in this case, $500,000 + $23,000,000) of prevention is worth a pound (costs of abortion – babies lives and mothers guilt & shame as well as the 10 times the cost of prevention - $300,000,000 to care for the babies not aborted!) of cure?
Does this leftist Governor understand that the abstinence programs are working, that they are helping to reduce teen pregnancies significantly during the past ten years? In returning to the godless Planned Parenthood hedonistic condom-based sex education there will be a rise in abortions (Planned Parenthoods goal!) as well as increased babies to care for which will become welfare recipients (the Guv apparently doesn’t care or cannot make the connection.)
Wise up Governor Strickland and do the RIGHT thing. Stop playing politics. Stop sacrificing lives and money to advance the leftist-socialist cause. It is not worth it.
TAKE ACTION
Join me in writing and/or e-mailing the Governor, the leader of the state senate, Senator Bill Harris and the leader of the state House of Representatives, Representative Jon Husted to express your desire to see the abstinence-only funding included in this years budget.
Governor Ted Strickland, call 614-466-3555 or contact his office on-line
