Thursday, June 29, 2006
PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you all. Please be seated. Mr. Prime Minister, as I said on the South Lawn, we are delighted to have you here in Washington. The Prime Minister and I have got a very friendly relationship. We've just had two hours of discussions. We talked about a lot of areas of mutual concern. I've reminded the Prime Minister -- the American people, Mr. Prime Minister, over the past months that it was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship. After all, 60 years we were at war -- 60 years ago we were at war, and today we talked about North Korea, and Iran, and Iraq, and trade, and energy cooperation (emphasis added).
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Jacob never really gave a good reason why one should vote for him, just why they should vote against Cannon....
Cannon explained why he should be re-elected...
That did it....
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Besides, won't it be fun to find all the errors of the new electronic machines?
Monday, June 26, 2006
"You made some surprising claims just before the convention that "the entire sheriff's office (including Sheriff Tracy)" endorsed Gary Anderson (see email thread below). But, surprisingly, the endorsement only carried eight names of people from the sheriff's office, none of which was Sheriff Tracey himself. In your reply (also below) you said that Sheriff Tracy himself would be seconding the nomination at the convention. But he did not."
Well, Dave, I wonder if this from www.truthinpolitics.us references this.
"In a last ditcheffort to keep an incumbent as County Commissioner candidate in office, members of the GOP leadership pressured a county employee to refrain from nominating the leading challenger. They uinsunuated that this County employee would experience difficulties with his proposed budget if he followed through with his plans to nbominate the challenger."
Dave, I put two together and WE CAN DO BETTER!
Sunday, June 25, 2006
All county level Party officers including the County Chair, Vice-Chair, Treasurer, Secretary; and the five Appointed Officers; must show pre-convention and primary neutrality toward Republican candidates for public office where Republican opposition exists. Such things as, but not limited to, written endorsements, the use of officers' names in campaign literature, and letters to the editor favoring one Republican candidate over another are prohibited for these officers until the Party has chosen a nominee for the office in question.
Anyone care to file a complaint? Oh wait, they don't take those seriously and throw them out.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Friday, June 23, 2006
Now I think, barring an act of God (or Satan: Jacob's bad luck: Is it . . . Satan?) Chris Cannon will be re-elected.
So, in honor of Jacob's most recent comments in the Deseret News
Third District congressional candidate John Jacob responded Thursday to a widely circulated rumor about past gambling habits by saying he has never been addicted to gambling.
Jacob, who is challenging five-term incumbent Chris Cannon in Tuesday's Republican primary, also said he erred on the campaign trail when he repeated incorrect information that inflated the number of illegal immigrants at the state prison in Gunnison.
The multimillionaire said he played Texas Hold 'Em and 21 card games during a few trips to Las Vegas to attend shows and the National Finals Rodeo. He said he believed the trips took place between 2000 and 2002. He also said he played for entertainment because a traveling companion enjoyed gambling.
Anyone want to put a wager on it?
Yesterday and today Truth in Politics has received many calls of support. The employment history that Garr Judd's has been trying to hide from the public is no longer a secret. Additional former employers of Garr Judd have stepped forward to re-confirm and verify that he attempted and/or succeeded in illegal activities while under their employment.
Former employers and business associates, Danielle Moore, Ken Merrill, Mike Carter, Larry Myler and others have all confirmated that the accusations put forth in this report are factual and true.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Within two days last week, House Majority Leader John Boehner changed from sunny optimism about prospects for passing an immigration bill this summer to a bleak, negative outlook. The reason was that Boehner got the word from House Speaker Dennis Hastert.
Boehner on Tuesday was upbeat in addressing a breakfast forum at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which supports a guest worker program. He indicated he would resolve differences between the restrictive House bill and the much more liberal Senate bill by the Fourth of July.
But at a closed luncheon Wednesday at Charlie Palmer's restaurant, attended by financial contributors to House Republicans, Boehner declared that the immigration bill was all but dead. That change followed Boehner's conversation late Tuesday with Hastert, who made clear he did not want to pursue the issue that splits the Republican Party.
So the amnesty bill will not happen. I was sick and tired of hearing that the House had to compromise and go along with the Senate plan. The question arises, how does this affect the 3rd District race between Chris Cannon and John Jacob? John Fund's article was based on the debate over this bill occurring on, or around, June 27th.
But, here is my favorite quote of the entire debate:
"You all know it's not amnesty." Said John McCain, addressing Vitter (Senator from Louisiana), "Call it a banana if you want to"
I am glad that this amnesty, or banana, bill will not pass. This would have alienated many Conservatives from the Republican Party. We would have no place to go. Could this be a start of a re-alignment with the Republican Party moving leftward and another party coming into play? Probably not.
Friday, June 16, 2006
October 08, 2005
A Victory for Anonymous Blogging
posted by Daniel J. Solove http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2005/10/a_victory_for_a.html
Anonymous bloggers received a great victory this week in a case decided by the Delaware Supreme Court -- Doe v. Cahill (Oct. 5, 2005). The case involved John Doe, who anonymously posted on a blog statements about Patrick Cahill, a City Councilman of Smyrna, Delaware. Doe, in criticizing Cahill’s job performance, noted that Cahill had “obvious mental deterioration” and was “paranoid.” Cahill sued Doe for defamation.
Doe was anonymous, but his IP address could be linked to his postings, and Cahill sought to obtain Doe’s identity from Comcast, Doe’s ISP. Comcast notified Doe that Cahill was seeking his identity, and Doe immediately went to court to prevent the disclosure of his identity. The case reached the Delaware Supreme Court, which concluded that Cahill should not be permitted to obtain Doe’s identity.
The issues in this case are very important. Many of you comment here anonymously; and many comment anonymously on other blogs. Some have anonymous blogs, such as the person pretending to be Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers on a blog or the pseudonymous “Article III groupie,” who maintains the famous blog, Underneath Their Robes. EFF has produced a manual about how to blog anonymously.
What if your identity – and those of the Miers impersonator and Article III groupie -- could readily be unmasked?
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Salt Lake Tribune, April 30, 2006:
[Greg] Curtis has close ties to former Rep. Bryson Garbett, another Republican candidate in Senate District 9. Their relationship caused a stir in 2004 when former Rep Loraine Pace, R-Logan, claimed Curtis, who at the time was House Majority Leader, killed a proposed $8 Million state office building in Logan because it would have hurt Garbett, who owned the building in Logan the state was leasing for office space.
From the Associated Press, March 4, 2004: "Curtis acknowledged that Garbett, a longtime friend and neighbor and a former legislator, approached him after learning of the proposal
for the new office building."
Not really that big of deal, right? Part of the fun of having a friend in elected office is to have them do favors for you, right? However, it's a different story if you paid off your friend. Bryson Garbett gave a donation to the Greg Curtis re-election campaign immediately following the legislative session. And, it wasn't a small amount. It was to the tune of $5,000 on March 26, 2004. (http://globe.utah.gov/allcont/allcont.aspx?CandidateID=2090&sort=name)
Former Senate President Al Mansell, a major force in the Legislature, is retiring, and has handpicked fellow Realtor Wayne Niederhauser as his replacement.
So on one hand you have the Speaker of the House with a preferred candidate and the former Senate President with a handpicked candidate.
So, the decision comes down to voting for a man who did not buy favors from the Speaker of the House (or Majority Leader at the time). The following quote from the Deseret News is why I would vote for Mr. Niederhauser if I lived in Sandy, and I have many family members in the district,: In Senate District 9 in southeastern Salt Lake County, Wayne Niederhauser told his delegates, "I'm a conservative and for school choice. I support vouchers; it just makes sense."
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt defended his extensive use
in recent months of a jet leased to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention for emergency use. Leavitt's explanation for his use of the jet
occurred at a hearing Wednesday of the House Ways and Means Committee.
Moments earlier, Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., had accused Leavitt of using the jet
to "do public relations for the president" on the new drug benefit. Leavitt,
however, said he used the plane in an appropriate manner, and he thanked
lawmakers for making it available. He said he simply could not have overseen the
implementation of the new benefit, plus help prepare states for a potential flu
pandemic, without the use of the plane.
Since January, Leavitt has taken the jet on 19 trips to visit more than 90
cities, said his spokeswoman, Christina Pearson.
During the same period, CDC officials said they had used the aircraft to
respond to three emergencies and conduct three training exercises.
The Journal-Constitution reported that during two emergencies, the CDC was
forced to use another plane because Leavitt was using the Gulfstream.
The Fourth of July was traditionally celebrated as America's birthday, but the idea of an annual day specifically celebrating the Flag is believed to have first originated in 1885. BJ Cigrand, a schoolteacher, arranged for the pupils in the Fredonia, Wisconsin Public School, District 6, to observe June 14 (the 108th anniversary of the official adoption of The Stars and Stripes) as 'Flag Birthday'. In numerous magazines and newspaper articles and public addresses over the following years, Cigrand continued to enthusiastically advocate the observance of June 14 as 'Flag Birthday', or 'Flag Day'.
On June 14, 1889, George Balch, a kindergarten teacher in New York City, planned appropriate ceremonies for the children of his school, and his idea of observing Flag Day was later adopted by the State Board of Education of New York. On June 14, 1891, the Betsy Ross House in Philadelphia held a Flag Day celebration, and on June 14 of the following year, the New York Society of the Sons of the Revolution, celebrated Flag Day.
Following the suggestion of Colonel J Granville Leach (at the time historian of the Pennsylvania Society of the Sons of the Revolution), the Pennsylvania Society of Colonial Dames of America on April 25, 1893 adopted a resolution requesting the mayor of Philadelphia and all others in authority and all private citizens to display the Flag on June 14th. Leach went on to recommend that thereafter the day be known as 'Flag Day', and on that day, school children be assembled for appropriate exercises, with each child being given a small Flag.
Two weeks later on May 8th, the Board of Managers of the Pennsylvania Society of Sons of the Revolution unanimously endorsed the action of the Pennsylvania Society of Colonial Dames. As a result of the resolution, Dr. Edward Brooks, then Superintendent of Public Schools of Philadelphia, directed that Flag Day exercises be held on June 14, 1893 in Independence Square. School children were assembled, each carrying a small Flag, and patriotic songs were sung and addresses delivered.
In 1894, the governor of New York directed that on June 14 the Flag be displayed on all public buildings. With BJ Cigrand and Leroy Van Horn as the moving spirits, the Illinois organization, known as the American Flag Day Association, was organized for the purpose of promoting the holding of Flag Day exercises. On June 14th, 1894, under the auspices of this association, the first general public school children's celebration of Flag Day in Chicago was held in Douglas, Garfield, Humboldt, Lincoln, and Washington Parks, with more than 300,000 children participating.
Adults, too, participated in patriotic programs. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior, delivered a 1914 Flag Day address in which he repeated words he said the flag had spoken to him that morning: "I am what you make me; nothing more. I swing before your eyes as a bright gleam of color, a symbol of yourself."
Inspired by these three decades of state and local celebrations, Flag Day - the anniversary of the Flag Resolution of 1777 - was officially established by the Proclamation of President Woodrow Wilson on May 30th, 1916. While Flag Day was celebrated in various communities for years after Wilson's proclamation, it was not until August 3rd, 1949, that President Truman signed an Act of Congress designating June 14th of each year as National Flag Day.
President Truman did the right thing. He did many things right. I suggest that any visit to Independence, MO include a visit to his library. I enjoyed it very much.
Pornography can distort and forever alter people's minds and emotional well being. And it is increasingly clear that pornography is not a "victimless" vice -- it is most certainly a factor in the growing threat internet predators present to our communities and our families.
For too long, federal courts have been creating a dangerous climate for our children by overturning important decisions by state courts to restrict pornography consumption and distribution within their borders.
I have recently introduced legislation that will allow states to combat pornography by limiting the ability of federal courts to reverse state court decisions as to what is obscene material.
The bill states that "no court created by Act of Congress shall have jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to hear or decide a question of whether a State pornography law imposes a constitutionally invalid restriction on the freedom of expression."
The point of all this legalese is simple: We in Utah should be able to decide for ourselves what is acceptable and what is not for our families to see, hear, and be exposed to on the internet -- without having a federal judge overruling us and allowing smut peddlers to hide behind a constitutional right intended to protect speech, not harmful and dangerous trash.
Congress has always made clear that it can limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts, starting with the very first Judiciary Act of 1789. In fact, Article III, Section 1, clause 1, of the Constitution provides that "the judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that the ban of "virtual" child pornography was unconstitutional.
For links to news articles regarding this bill and others, please click here.
Battling pornography is something that is necessary and right. There is such a thing as right and wrong. My legislation, fully within the power of Congress, will keep the right to protect our families from the ravages of pornography in the hands of our state courts.
For more information on how you can help me continue this fight in Congress, please go to my website at www.chriscannon.com
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Ok, As I post this the US is trailing the Czech Republic 1-0. Help me understand why the public needs to pay for REAL's soccer stadium. Who does this benefit? Why should public money go to a project that will ultimately benefit Dave Checketts?I honestly want to know. I am opposed to any public financing for stadiums, and I am a huge sports fan!
I looked up an old Deseret News article by Brad Rock on July 12, 2001 that talks about public financing for stadiums:
In the April 2001 issue of The Regional Economist, writer Adam M. Zaretsky addresses the issue of building arenas and stadiums for pro teams. The general conclusion is that public financing of such facilities is risky business."When studying this issue, almost all economists and development specialists . . . conclude that the rate of return a city or metropolitan area receives for its investment is generally below that of alternative projects," he writes. "
He also notes that in metro areas where a stadium was built or refurbished in the previous 10 years, only three showed significant real personal income growth.
In Utah, both the E Center and Franklin Covey Field were built with taxpayer assistance. However, minor league player salaries, staff and operating expenses are lower, and thus the teams usually have an easier time meeting rent. Since World War II, the article states, approximately 140 sports facilities have been built or refurbished; only 14 did not use taxpayer dollars.
One of those is the Delta Center, which Jazz owner Larry H. Miller built with a personal loan. Miller isn't a typical owner. He has said he doesn't believe taxpayers should finance an owner's personal business ventures. For those who complain that Miller is making big dollars off the Delta Center, consider this: Unlike most owners, he took all the risk.
So please let me know why the public should finance this stadium, regardless of location. I think if their name is REAL SALT LAKE, they should play in SALT LAKE. Or they could follow the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and be called the REAL SALT LAKE of Sandy.
Monday, June 12, 2006
I heard a new radio ad by Team America PAC (Tancredo's group run by Bay Buchannan). Can you say dumb? It made statements like: "Chris Cannon says he is against amnesty" and then there is canned laughter. It is awful! Buchannan (whom I think is terrific!) spoke at the GOP Convention on behalf of Merrill Cook and attacked John Jacob the entire time.
Now her organization is attacking Chris Cannon and urging support for John Jacob. Perhaps she should have spoken only against the incumbent and ignored Jacob.
But, I know why she did it; polling was showing it to be a race for second place between Cook and Jacob. So by attacking Jacob they thought they could overtake him and force Chris into a primary.The radio ads in this campaign are downright dumb!
This race is getting more hype from the national media than the rank-and-file people. I consider myself politically active and yet there is not much discussion about this race. Not many signs up in Provo.Is it too early to campaign? No. Early voting starts tomorrow and with an election that only needs a few thousand votes, this one really isn't drawing much attention.
I have included the 2004 primary vote totals (source: National Journal), remember that this had a contested Governor's race in the primary and that also drove people to the polls.
Chris Cannon (R) 27,663 58%
Matt Throckmorton (R) 19,672 42%
My thought is that about 2/3 of the voters who voted in 2004 will vote in 2006. However, if the Senate and House start the conference on the immigration issue around June 27th, this number will increase. Low turnout is dangerous for either campaign, as you need to have a great voter identification to get your people to the polls.
My prediction: Toss-up at this moment, leans towards Cannon.