Northwest Indiana Politics

We need America back...and we need Lake County to be rescued from the crooks.

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Sun, 12 May 2013 07:14:00 +0000

Why has the criminal Democratic Machines ruled North Lake County for decades? You think a County Income tax is anything but a grab by crooked politicians from Gary and East Chicago and Gary to continue to fund their scams by stealing it from South Lake County. The only way to save Lake County and Indiana is to fix Washington and Indiana as well as Lake County, too. We need to be smart and fight. Be smart and fight. Be smart and fight!!!

Obama Versus the Founding Fathers

There is perhaps no other American president who stands in such stark contrast to the US Founding Fathers than Barack Hussein Obama. By almost every measure, his reign of error is completely at odds with what the Fathers envisaged.

Whole books could be written about Obama’s demolition job on the American vision, his desecration of the US Constitution, and his utter disregard for the basic principles upon which the nation was founded. In fact, they already have been written.

So let me here just focus on his latest act of blatant anti-Americanism. On Sunday he delivered a commencement address at Ohio State University. In it he said this: “Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works; they’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”

Now isn’t it odd that a president who seems to be doing his best to turn America into a PC dictatorship should tell these graduates to not listen to those who warn about these very things? This is of course the exact opposite of what the Founding Fathers said.

America of course was established as an act of resistance to tyranny. And this right to be wary, to be on guard, to be vigilant, and if need be, to resist tyrannical rule, was at the very heart of the thought and practice which went into America’s founding. Consider just a few – of many – representative quotes:

-“Rebellion to tyrants is Obedience to God.” Benjamin Franklin
-“A government is like fire, a handy servant, but a dangerous master.” George Washington
-“It has been said that all Government is an evil. It would be more proper to say that the necessity of any Government is a misfortune. This necessity however exists; and the problem to be solved is, not what form of Government is perfect, but which of the forms is least imperfect.” James Madison
-”The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.” Thomas Jefferson
-“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Thomas Jefferson
-“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson
-“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then.” Thomas Jefferson
-”The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” Patrick Henry
-”If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants.” William Penn
-”…no civil rulers are to be obeyed when they enjoin things that are inconsistent with the commands of God…. All commands running counter to the declared will of the Supreme Legislator of heaven and earth are null and void, and therefore disobedience to them is a duty, not a crime.” Jonathan Mayhew

These sentiments could not be further afield from those expressed by BHO. He seeks a submissive, compliant populace which asks no questions, dares not rock the boat, and slavishly does whatever their political masters tell them to do. The Founding Fathers would be rolling in their graves to hear such idiocy.

Ben Shapiro has just commented on this. He says, “Government, in Obama’s view, is the great guarantor of rights. Never mind that government – yes, government in America – has routinely stripped its citizens of rights. Never mind that state governments stripped black people of their basic personhood for decades, enshrining slavery with the help of the federal government. Never mind that for a century after slavery, state governments, with the silent assent of the federal government, enshrined Jim Crow. Never mind that the federal government stripped thousands of Japanese citizens of their rights during World War II and the unborn of their rights in 1973.

“None of that matters to Obama. He said, ‘This country cannot accomplish great things if we pursue nothing greater than our own individual ambition.’ The Founders believed, to the contrary, that government’s job was to protect our most basic rights so that we could pursue the individual dreams and ambitions that truly make America great – the dreams and ambitions that created Edison and Ford, Jobs and Gates.”

He concludes: “Obama’s rhetoric here is more than perverse — it is supremely dangerous. American rights cannot be removed by a limited government. They can be, and have been, removed by a government actively seeking to remove rights. The Founders knew that. That’s why the system they set up was designed to check interest against interest, to prevent consolidation of power in any one branch or any one person. The Founders were skeptical of government and feared government tyranny. That’s why they rebelled against the British crown. And that is why the system of checks and balances they created – a system that has gradually been overthrown and replaced by leftists from Woodrow Wilson to Obama – was designed to stop such tyranny through complexity and balance.

“A people that does not fear government oppression is not a free people. It is a subject people. A people that believes that the government somehow invariably guards rights is not an American people – it is a Rousseauian rabble prepared to accept the yoke of tyranny. God gave us rights. The Founders gave us a messy system of government to allow the government to protect those rights while preventing the government from usurping them. Worshipping government achieves neither of those purposes.”

And Gary DeMar asks these questions: “Would Barack Obama have spoken out against Stalin or Hitler before their governments degenerated into full-orbed tyrannies? Would the President have supported the Polish Solidarity movement over against the Communist tyranny?

“Would he have joined the 52 signers of the Declaration of Independence? Here’s the opening paragraph: ‘When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.’

“In fact, the signers of the Declaration described the king of England as a tyrant: ‘The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world’….

“The Second Amendment prohibits the Federal Government from forbidding people in the various states from ‘keeping and bearing arms’ for ‘the security of a free state.’ It is the duty of the states to protect its citizens against the usurpation of their constitutional rights. Ours is a slow moving tyranny. An iron fist in a velvet glove.”

We have nothing to fear from a citizenry zealous to defend freedom and guard against tyranny. But we do have very much to fear from a president who criticises such people, and claims their concerns are simply unfounded.

www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/us/politics/obama-tells-ohio-state-graduates-hes-optimistic.html?_r=0

townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2013/05/08/will-tyranny-ever-come-to-america-n1590337

politicaloutcast.com/2013/05/president-obama-sometimes-tyrannies-do-lurk-around-the-corner/

There will be an income tax in Lake County

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Fri, 10 May 2013 15:19:00 +0000

The County Commissioners opted not to veto the Council's income tax (1.5%) and now Lake County becomes the final county in the state to adopt an income tax.

Thoughts?

Just in from Indianapolis

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:28:00 +0000

For Immediate Release

April 25, 2013

GOVERNOR PENCE CALLS AGREEMENT FOR 5 PERCENT INCOME TAX CUT AND INHERITANCE TAX REPEAL “GREAT VICTORY” FOR HOOSIER TAXPAYERS

“Today Hoosier taxpayers won a great victory. The agreement reached between our administration and legislative leaders will be the largest state tax cut in Indiana history. The combination of a 5 percent individual income tax cut, inheritance tax repeal and additional tax relief for businesses is the right tax relief at the right time and will give a much needed boost to working families, small businesses and family farms.

I am grateful for the leadership of Senate President Pro Tem David Long, Speaker Brian Bosma and other key fiscal leaders for working diligently with our administration to craft this historic package of tax relief. Their efforts demonstrate the commitment of the General Assembly to put taxpayers first.”

Chavismo

noreply@blogger.com (Michael T. Stulac) — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 17:50:00 +0000

We in this blog, and almost all conservatives on the whole, try to win the electorate over by convincing them of the bare, dry facts. Liberals tug at the heartstrings and try to win with emotion. Conservatives also aim for consistency in their candidates and officials, and readily throw out those who let them down with their personal behavior as well as public voting record. Liberals don't care what the person is like as long as they get their liberal points advanced.

This is shown often in Region politics. A sitting Lake County surveyor had the FBI raid his office and copy all of his records, and he waves it away saying, "It's important for everyone not to jump to any conclusions. This is not the first time the FBI has been in a governmental office here, nor will it be the last time, I'm sure."[1] He wins reelection handily. A person who the county Democrat chairman begged to get off the ballot due to the controversies surrounding her barely lost the county race for Assessor.[2] Over the state line, Jesse Jackson III (with his $43,000 Rolex watch) easily won re-election to the U.S. Congress in spite of his lack of campaigning since he was in the nuthouse during the race.[3]

Do conservatives miss the boat by trying to win people with facts rather than charisma? Why can't we find someone who we know backs our take on the issues while at the same time make the voters swoon? Bueller? Where are you, Bueller?

Watching the fuss and fluster over the Hugo Chavez funeral got me thinking about this. In spite of the litany of destruction his policies effected, a huge contingent of the population loves him still. Read this short list and visit the source at [4] for the homework. Venezuela:

Is the second world's unfriendliest country toward visitors and tourists (1st. unfriendliest, Evo Morales' Bolivia) World Economic Forum Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2013.

Is at the bottom in global competitiveness, 126th of 126.

Is the fourth from the bottom in Economic Freedom (Ahead of Zimbabwe, Cuba, and North Korea, but behind Eritrea) - 2013 Index of Economic Freedom.

Ranked 165 of 176 in perceived corruption (Ahead of Iraq but behind Haiti. Haiti!!)

Ranked 117 of 179 in press freedom (Ahead of Nepal but behind Macedonia).

Ranked an average of 89 of 97 of 8 factors defining Rule of Law. In the Criminal Law factor alone, it ranked at the botom, 97 of 97.

Major drug-transit country, facilitated by pretty much all of the above.

A liberal gets these results, and yet is worshiped to where they're looking to embalm and display him so he could still be there for the people who he ~~ruined~~ loved. Liberals ruined Detroit and Gary with unopposed policy setting, yet only a liberal can win in those cities. A conservative can beat a liberal like a rug over every issue, yet it does not win him or her the election. Biden can make gaffes three times a week and it's ok, but the biggest gaffe Palin made she did not even make, and it's held against her for life: Tina Fey on Saturday Night Live in a skit said, "I can see Russia from my house."

How can one be a conservative, yet win like a liberal?

Bibliography:
[1] Times article about the Surveyor's raid
[2] Times article about Carol Ann Seaton
[3] Mr. & Mrs. Jackson charges
[4] Vivicat blog post with the list

Is the United States a Nation of Frogs?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:55:00 +0000

My friend Solomon P. (aptly named) recently wrote an essay and I would like to present it to you. We certainly have a lot of frogs and sheep in this nation but that is not all...if we had more lions, this nation would not stand for the boneheads and users and good old beltway boys that populate our government! Solomon identifies seven animals that typify the population of our nation.

Nation of Frogs?

The other day I saw an old and a bit overused analogy about how we don’t notice our rights being eroded and our wealth being stolen, because it’s happening so slowly, the analogy compared us to frogs in a pot.

I disagree with this analogy I believe that just as we have many points of view, we have a myriad of different animals to choose from when it comes to comparing our nation.

First there are the Sheep-

Sheep are lead to the slaughter with no hesitation. These are the ones out yelling; “raise my taxes, take away my guns, and do it for the children.” They have no idea about freedom or wealth or economics or even the true sources of crime.

Next we have the Hermit Crab-

He seeks refuge in his shell of ignorance. He doesn't want to be bothered with politics, and insists he can’t change anything anyway. He doesn't understand that many of our forefathers felt the small and insignificant at one point or another in their life and they broke free from the insignificance only to construct the greatest nation on the planet. He also doesn't realize that by doing nothing, he’s doing just what his enemies need him to do, as they push him further into insignificance.

Next we have the Pig-

This guy makes a lot of noise but in all reality is very lazy. Not only is he lazy but often finds himself in the mire of the left whilst he thinks only of himself. He waits for his government check every month while talking on a tax payer funded phone to his friends and neighbors and refuses to even try to work, after all he shouts there just aren't any jobs to be had. Often times the pig is illiterate and teaches his offspring to be the same.

Number 4 is the Parrot-

Here is an animal that loves to be heard, and loves to repeat that which others tell him. The problem with the parrot is that he can’t really think for himself and his source of information is tainted by liberal spin. One week he’s worried about Sequester and the next he’s worried about banning guns, never looking past the diversions and never repeating anything worth hearing.

Eagles are next on the list-

These beautiful birds are the envy of the natural world held aloft by an economy never seen in the history of the world, but most of them don’t realize that with the winds of chance they will soon plummet to the ground and become extinct, at least here in the USA. There wealth may allow them to stay elevated beyond that of the average animal down here but when that’s been taxed away, that’s when that real pain begins.

Next is the Lion-

Lions are become far rarer every day. Lions are self sustaining, independent and above all else leaders. They know no one else will give them the lifestyle they want so they have to go get it, themselves. They are innovators and industrialist thriving despite the negative spiral the politics of today. They roar the truth of Individual liberties and the responsibility everyone has to themselves and to their family. Lions are not happy with mediocrity they are constantly striving to better their lot as they eye the next prey. Lions feed on truth and innovation.

Finally we have the Jackals-

These are fierce and ugly, but they are mere scavengers and only hunt when there are no carcasses to pick clean. They have a little bit of fight in them but when face to face with a lion they will back down more often than not. Jackals are known for a conniving attitude. They will write laws they are above. They despise the truth for it doesn't further their lifestyle. Do not be fooled, just because they haven’t turned toward you drooling in angst and hunger as tax dollars dwindle, doesn't mean they won’t. Jackals run in packs to keep outsiders from exposing them. They pass bills that are overly complicated so as to impose their will in a malicious manner. They use diversion, subversion and propaganda to build the pile of taxes higher and higher. Bitter from birth, they will not rest until they have all the spoils they are entitled to.

Roar if you are a lion.

Solomon P.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you believe you have the right to succeed, good for you! If you think you deserve to succeed, you are mistaken. There is no right to be fed or housed or to receive medical care. No one deserves the government to support them. The amount of people in this country who think otherwise is appalling!

So I would say there is also the Wolf - The same people who are taught to expect the government to care for them are the ones who do not believe they could care for themselves. So they accept living in a run-down apartment or trailer and perhaps sell drugs, prostitute themselves, rob houses, play the numbers and other underground economy activities typical of the poor parts of cities and large towns. Really, if we pay women to have children but punish them if they marry, do we expect the traditional family model to thrive in the ghetto? Do we expect fatherless children to succeed in life? Why do you think gangs prosper? It isn't just the peer pressure, it is also the concept that a gang is kind of a family unit. Gangs actually rule areas of some cities near my location. I know areas the police try to avoid and will warn people to stay away from in Chicago and Gary for certain.

During my long life, I have spent time living in the ghetto and also spent a couple of years walking the mean streets seeking to give the gospel of Christ to anyone who would listen. There are a lot of kids who think that, unless sports or music can take them to fame and fortune, the only thing to do is join a gang and be a banger for the rest of their lives. Some of them attempt to do both at once. I promise you that there are many more murders in Chicago than the official totals. There are people living in places the city doesn't know about and there are plenty of people who wind up in landfills, unreported deaths by gangsters of one stripe or another. I am not even mentioning the old-fashioned organized criminals who are like leeches on the typical big city Democratic Machine and "wet their beaks" through intimidation. These folks know how to do it while looking legitimate.

Go ahead, check out any big city with an entrenched Democratic Machine running things. Chicago may be the most effective of them all, as they manage to let the big animal keep enough blood to be effective. But places like Gary and Detroit are, well, you would almost have to see it to believe it. Detroit has a population of wild dogs that have actually become speciated enough to be identifiable. They resemble the Wild Dog of Africa! Detroit and Gary have many places where buildings are crumbling, any power is being used is stolen from the power company, dogs and gang-bangers run the streets and God help you if you get lost and drive into the area. If you are spotted, you may not live to see another day. More likely you will be deliberately smacked by a vehicle and, when you get out to exchange insurance information you will be robbed.

There should be a special place in hell for Lyndon Baines Johnson and everyone who helped him craft the Great Society legislation that created a mass of pigs and sheep in the inner cities. Now walking tall and looking for trouble, the wolves that are inner city gang-bangers run in packs and feed off of the sheep and pigs and any other animal weak enough to be defenseless against them. Now imagine how many good people are stuck in the inner cities and try so hard to raise their children right? Burdened by tax foolishness if they are married, sending kids to schools where few teachers give a rip, looking for a way to afford to get the heck OUT OF THERE!

I do my best to inform the sheep and pigs and crabs and get the parrots to THINK for once. Eagles think they do not have anything to worry about so rarely do they deign to even read something like an obscure worldview blog. I am usually fighting the parrots and jackals. I am a lion. I work for my living, I have built my own business despite a couple of horrific accidents that would have allowed me to go on the government dole. I have not even considered it and only use the handicapped moniker to allow me to park right in front of stores. I believe this nation was founded by lions and every man and woman in the USA ought to be lions!

However, there are lions who disagree with me, I do not mean to say a "Progressive" or a "Darwinist" cannot be a lion. I believe any such lions will eventually come over to my side because I am for traditional morals, the Constitution of the United States, capitalism and innovation and against a strong central government but rather believe that more power should go to the state and local governments. Lions tend to be individuals who cherish the freedom to succeed and are willing to work for it. So my hope is all the Lions will eventually join forces and become Kings of the Jungle again, and in doing so returning power to the people = One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all...with power distributed to the States and Local entities as the Founding Fathers had envisioned us.

I think Solomon only missed one other animal:

The Hyena - They are opportunistic and carnivorous and love to eat what another animal has caught by outnumbering the predator and chasing him away. One on one, a lion will defeat a hyena and so would a leopard or a tiger. But a pack of hyenas can chase away outnumbered big cats.

Washington, DC has a lot of lions, but they also have a lot of jackals and hyenas...and parrots. There are also the jackasses but everybody knows there are going to be a lot of them in politics! Hmm, I suppose there are jellyfish because some politicians I know have no backbone? In any event, while this post is a bit off the subject, consider for yourself what the USA has become. We were once a nation populated by lions, but the other animals have reproduced much faster than the lions and therefore the gullible and the uncaring have helped begin the destruction of the greatest nation ever to exist on this planet.

Kevin Tracy on why you should be a Republican

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:49:00 +0000

A three part series that some of you may have missed this month, all three worth reading and pondering:

Why Libertarians Should Vote Republican

Why Young Voters Should Be Republicans

Why Union Workers Should Vote Republican

Love him or hate him, his writing draws debate and conversation to the surface.

Charley Reese's Final column! Food for thought...

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 23:49:00 +0000

Charley Reese's final column for the Orlando Sentinel... He has been a journalist for 49 years. He is retiring and this is HIS LAST COLUMN.

This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!

545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese

"Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.)

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. [The House has passed a budget but the Senate has not approved a budget in over three years. The President's proposed budgets have gotten almost unanimous rejections in the Senate in that time. ]

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ..

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!"

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

Hat tip to this link

The Fiscal Cliff or Sky is Falling Syndrome

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:30:00 +0000

As all the news networks and tax planners will be focused on the so called fiscal cliff for the next 48 hours, I thought it might be nice to take a deep breath.

First, we missed the end of the world on December 21st, the one the Mayans projected ... and we will skip this end of the world too.   Sure it makes for good news content, and gives otherwise slow news days something to crow about.   But the fiscal cliff is a made up event, made up by the very people who are acting all upset about trying to find a solution - The President and The Congress.

There's no way from Indiana to guess if the Republicans will blink and cut a last minute deal, or if the Democrats will give a little and accept a deal in the next 48 hours.   I hope neither side gives in, and they drive off the cliff! I see almost no way possible that we'll ever get real cuts in the size of the federal government without this round of cuts.   We need the cuts more than we need to protect earners over $250,000 annually.

The economy is already improving, housing of course is going to lead the way on job creation, and small businesses will create the remaining. Big businesses are becoming less important once again to the economy.   Entrepreneurs need only some measure of confidence to go out and borrow, raise funds, and start new businesses.   I am one such entrepreneur, finally looking to start a company in 2013. And I am not thinking even a small amount about the $250,000 income level tax problem ... I'd love to have that problem in 2013!

Let's all take a deep breath and accept that cuts are important, caps on spending even more so, a constitutional amendment to balance the budget would be a dream for all of us.   The dollar will improve in strength, causing gasoline to drop in price. Interest rates will be maintained, even too low in my opinion, to protect housing and auto sales.   And cutting pay-offs to farmers by the way is a good thing.   $7 milk is another sky if falling exaggeration ... there is still such a thing as supply and demand.

Time to raise interest rates

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 16:05:00 +0000

{EAV:7dc4b9afdd1e6a5a}
Sounds crazy doesn't it?

But, with the recent strengthening of the economy, including true job growth finally, and the need for dollar strengthening, I would firmly propose that the Fed get ahead of the inflation curve now and begin raising rates slowly.

This will signal to the world that the economy of the most important economy in the world is on the rise
This will firmly restrict inflation looking forward
This will begin to reduce the pressure on the dollar and let it move to free floating

Feel free to disagree, or get all upset about the role of the Fed, but real estate is beginning to recover and rates are too low actually right now. It's time for rates to begin their natural tendency back toward 6% on 30 year mortgages.

What say you?

First post-election thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 12:51:00 +0000

In no particular order, and perhaps an edit will come later today when all the details become more clear.

It would appear voters and citizens actually want divided government. In choosing mainly Republican Governors and then re-electing President Obama they seem to signal that gridlock and the checks and balances of our constitution feels safer.
No one comes out of last night with a mandate. Not the President, not Congress, not any individual state leader. We are a nation that is split very close to 50/50 on the hard questions of policy ... but not necessarily vision. It feels like we agree on a vision of limited government, it's just that some want to use government to get us through the bumps and others want it out of the way.
At the local level the Democrats basically ran the table in Porter County, even though the statewide trends went Republican and the legislators elected are for the most part Republican. Again voters seem to be signalling an interest in divided and balanced government. But something more, negative campaigning at the local level probably backfired. More on this in future posts about policy in NW Indiana, but negative campaigning doesn't work as well when we all know each other in a small community.
We stand ready for a dramatic recovery, similar to Clinton second term and Bush Jr first term. Watch for deals to finally be cut that reduce deductions and regulations. Watch for education funding at the state level to be contentious as inner city schools get cut and closed. Watch for job creation to drive the middle class back into the arena of public thought, they weren't there this year, they were focused on paying bills.
For me and my house, we're watching closely the real estate and construction markets now. Watch for a dramatic recovery in housing as rates are still low, taxes in Indiana are capped, home prices are almost too affordable, rents are too high, and it's been 5 years since this sleeping giant industry woke up and started hiring. When they do it will be big.

Your Indiana Ballot 2012 and the Candidates for a Brighter Future!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 21:08:00 +0000

This is the link to view your sample ballot

https://indianavoters.in.gov/PublicSite/Public/FT1/PublicOnBallotSearch.aspx

This election is too important to be fooled again.  Four years of failed Statism in Washington DC should have taught us to toss out the President and all who agree with his disastrous economic and foreign policies, his dictatorship via regulatory agency fiat and his dangerous agreements and giveaways involving terrorists and drug gangs.

Mitt Romney is a serious man who has made helping people and building businesses, organizations and even the State of Massachusetts and making them work for 38 years.   He's saved an Olympics, governed a Blue State as a Republican, pulled failing companies out of the red and into the black. He has given away multiple millions of dollars to help his fellow man.   Mitt Romney is used to being the guy who has to make the tough decisions and lead from the front and not behind.   Barack Obama proved that his lack of experience and horrific vision of what America should be made for a toxic concoction that has poisoned our economy and our position in the world as leaders.    Mitt Romney can fix these mistakes and get us on the right path again.

Paul Ryan is a math whiz and a budgetary expert who will be a fantastic VP. He is absolutely driven to do the right thing for the sake of his country.   Paul Ryan, like Mitt Romney, has character and a very strong desire to help people without forsaking his principles and to work with others to find concensus rather than compromise. His sincerity and lack of bluster will be a welcome change from the fellow filling the office at the moment.

A Romney/Ryan win benefits all Americans who believe in the American Dream and want a chance to succeed.   Read up on the five point plan of Romney and Ryan to create more jobs and see their stands on the issues at this site.  ISSUES!

Jay Leno will have to find a new source of punchlines when both Obama and Biden leave the White House. But we can live with that!

New York Daily News joins growing number of newspapers switching endorsement to Romney

Published November 04, 2012

FoxNews.com

One of New York’s most influential and traditionally Democratic media organizations pulled a stunner Sunday when it reversed its 2008 endorsement of Barack Obama to join the New York Post in endorsing Mitt Romney.

“Four years ago, the Daily News endorsed Obama, seeing a historic figure whose intelligence, political skills and empathy with common folk positioned him to build on the small practical experience he would bring to the world’s toughest job,” the endorsement in part states. “We valued Obama’s pledge to govern with bold pragmatism and bipartisanship. The hopes of those days went unfulfilled.”

The endorsement also ticks off a list of reasons for why the daily tabloid is backing Romney in 2012 – including smaller paychecks, fewer jobs and higher subway fares and gasoline prices.

“America’s heart, soul, brains and muscle -- the middle- and working-class people who make this nation great -- have been beset for too long by sapping economic decline,” the editorial continues. “So, too, (have) New York breadwinners and families.”

Beyond the rhetoric, the paper backs up its decision with a salvo of numbers after the 2008 financial crisis – including a 7.9 percent national jobless rate and nine million fewer jobs.

The paper also points out the hometown crowd, with some of the most well-educated and well-paid residents in the country not spared.

The median household income for a New York family dropped by $54 a week over that period, the paper also points out.

The Daily News joins nearly a dozen other major U.S. newspapers in switching endorsements from Obama to Romney, according to the University of California, Santa Barbara’s American Presidency Project.

Only one newspaper, The San Antonio Express-News, which endorsed the Republican presidential nominee in 2008, Arizona Sen. John McCain, has switched to endorsing Obama, according the survey.

The 11 papers, according the study, that also switched to Romney are:

The New York Daily News

Long Island Newsday

Houston Chronicle

Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Orlando Sentinel

Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel

Nashville Tennessean

Des Moines Register

Illinois Daily Herald

Los Angeles Daily News

Los Angeles Press-Telegram

Richard Mourdock is a man of principle who has fought Barack Obama in court and won. He's dedicated to putting an end to that economy toxin known as Obamacare. His opponent, Joe Donnelly, has been Barack Obama's yes-man for the last four years. A vote for Donnelly is a vote for Obamacare, the HHS Mandate that is an attack on our 1st and 10th Amendment rights and likely a vote to eroder our 2nd Amendment rights as well. It is not surprising that the marathon-running Mourdock has the energy to take on the Beltway Boys. It will be surprising if we all fail to see what a statesman Richard Mourdock actually is...despite Obama's pilfering of Indiana Pension funds during the Chrysler Bailout scandal, Mourdock left the State of Indiana in great fiscal health, with a strong return on investments, a surplus in the State coffers and an office that worked together like clockwork with the rest of the Indiana leadership. Joe Donnelly? Other than vote for whatever Obama has approved, just what has he done for Indiana worth mentioning?

I have spent a good deal of time talking with Richard Mourdock and he is impressive! He knows the Constitution better than our President and he loves this State and Country with all of his heart!

Just take a look at all of his endorsements!!!

Here is his You Tube page

Mourdock, Pence and Romney/Ryan to keep Indiana on the right track and get America back on track!

Mike Pence will pick up where Mitch Daniels left off and keep moving Indiana forward to jobs and opportunites with a balanced budget and a AAA credit rating!

Mike Pence, Sue Ellspermann, Greg Zoeller and Tony Bennett. They will keep the Indiana momentum going with a balanced budget, job-friendly legislation, continued educational excellence and adherence to the State and US Constitution!

Joel Phelps is the last candidate I will mention today. He is the American Dream personified, a humble young man who has been dedicated to succeeding the right way, with the moral fibre of a young Abraham Lincoln or Daniel Webster and yet with a winning personality that makes you wish he and Jennifer and the boys lived next door. I do believe that Joel and his campaign manager, Steve Wolff, were taken aback in July when I asked them why people in Lake County were not hearing from him or about him. Now I understand.

Joel Phelps didn't have the money of a Pete Visclosky. No lobbyists to bankroll his campaign. No rich millionaire dumping in money from afar. So he had to marshal his forces and put in the full bore all out 120 days to victory tour. July, August, September and October. Joel Phelps has seemed to be EVERYWHERE since the beginning of July. Parades, rallies, meetings, fundraisers, fairs, exhibitions, meet-and-greets, dinners, luncheons, breakfasts...

But nationally, men like Matt Kibbe of FreedomWorks have recognized the potential in Joel Phelps, that he can be a statesman and not just a politician. I see it in him as well!

Meanwhile Pete Visclosky has been nowhere. He would not even have the decency to respond to an invitation by the Gary Pastors Ministerial Association to debate Joel Phelps!!! Visclosky claims to represent Gary and Northwest Indiana and he won't even show up?

Joel and Jennifer Phelps!

From the Joel Phelps for Congress Website
Industrial Engineering is the science of designing efficient processes, and eliminating waste from existing operations. Joel excelled at his craft and served as President of the Purdue Chapter of the Institute of Industrial Engineers. He earned a merit scholarship for his work in the field, and helped prepare coursework in MTM (motion time management). He accomplished all this, while working full time as a process engineer for Whiting Crane Company. There he developed new processes and designed the factory layout for a new 250,000 square foot manufacturing plant Whiting Crane built in Monee, Il.

Over the years, Joel has continued to apply his talents and tireless work ethic in managing multiple projects and ventures. He has owned and managed small businesses. He has been successful in a commercial glazing firm for the last 6 years managing multiple monumental project sites simultaneously. Including the construction of hospitals, corporate headquarters, and many high-rise construction ventures in Chicago.

Joel resides in Portage, Indiana, in a home he built for with his wife Jennifer, and three boys Jordan (14), Joshua (10) and Jakob (5). Jennifer is a beautiful, sharp, talented woman who is a success in her own right. Prior to meeting Joel in 2004, she earned a bachelors degree in nursung and her RN license from Indiana University while raising two baby boys as single mom. Joel was blessed with the opportunity four years ago to adopt Joshua and Jordan, making the Phelps family official.

Porter County Predictions Thread

noreply@blogger.com (ValpoElite) — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:37:00 +0000

Similar to fantasy football and NCAA bracketology, the long enjoyed tradition of predictions in elections. Please share yours as well. Tom told me no foul language or personal attacks in getting this started this year.

President - Indiana will go to Romney. On the national front I predict Romney picks up Florida and North Carolina, but loses in a close one due to Ohio and Wisconsin going to Obama.

US Senate - Mourdock really messed things up by talking rape, a third rail if there ever was one in the politics of gender. Picking Donnelly and thus the Democrats retain control of the US Senate.

US Congress - Visclosky in the 1st and Walorski in the 2nd

Governor - Pence by 20 points, run away! But not enough to save Mourdock. His coatails of course will pull through the GOP Attorney General and Schools Superintendent.

Locally, County Commissioner - Laura Blaney in a close one. Local GOP tried mightily to connect Blaney to Obama and locally to Whitten but in the end she is known to be conservative, pro-business and not all that liberal. The fumbling four mailer was funny, and perhaps for some voters reminded them of a time not that far in the past when democrats had total control and really messed up county government.

Council - Graham, Hoffman, and the only real surprise pick Wszolek. Joe W. has worked the hardest and is probably the only candidate that will have a bullet vote group.

What are your predictions? Anyone in Lake or Laporte County want to venture similar predictions?

Gerrymandering is gone - Niemeyer, Slager and Fine are here. Three good men to represent Lake County downstate in 2012!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 07:13:00 +0000

No, Gerrymandering is not a new board game and Niemeyer, Slager and Fine are not a law firm. But does it get your attention? First the law firm that is not - Rick Niemeyer, Hal Slager and William Fine are the Republican candidates for the Indiana House who want to represent your interests when they go down to Indianapolis for legislative sessions.

Now that disctricts are drawn according to common sense, each man represents a clear constituency and area.

Rick Niemeyer for District 11

Rick with grandchildren and naturally a big smile

Rick is running in my district, having been serving as a Lake County Councilman and fought to hold the line on spending and extravagant projects while in office in the County for two years after serving for 23 years as a trustee and assessor while also running a family business. His son, Randy, is a Town Councilman and a darned good singer as well!

Among his endorsements are: Indiana State Pipe Trades Association; ALF-CIO Northwest Indiana Building & Construction Trades Council; Indiana State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police; Indiana Right to Life, Farm Bureau, NFIB (National Federation of Indepedent Business); Indiana Manufacturing Association and some others...and me!

He even gets the endorsement of the NWI Times!

As a Cedar Lake resident and involved in the community, I know that Rick is a lifelong resident here and knows our needs and concerns because he shares them and so do his family members. He is the obvious perfect candidate for our district!!!

William Fine for District 12

Munster Community News seems to agree that William Fine is the best candidate to displace Candelaria Reardon. Munster Democrat Reardon has sought to get credit for work done primarily by Republican Ed Solliday on the House Ways and Means Committee to get funding for the Little Calument River levee project. William Fine is a longtime area resident, attorney-at-law whose practice is centered around small businesses, real estate matters and the jots and tittles of leases and contracts - exactly the kind of knowledge to help the Greater Munster/Highland areas of District 12 attract and keep businesses and do things legally and neatly the first time around.

Your next Representative with your next Governor? That would work!

William Fine gets a Peer Review Rating of 5 out of 5 in Business Law. You cannot do better than five out of five...So for professionalism and experience and for good old-fashioned networking with fellow legislators and downstate officials, William Fine is the qualifed candidate for this position!

The NWI Times profile for William Fine.

Bill and family having a Fine time (yes, that is corny)

Hal Slager for District 15

The Indiana House Republican Campaign Committee says the following about Hal:

"Hal Slager is a 1981 graduate of Butler University and is a Certified Public Accountant.
As a CPA he worked for a local accounting firm, and then went into corporate accounting with Melvin Simon and Associates (retail real estate development and management). He joined Trico Graphics in late 1983, where he advanced the company into electronic publishing, and in 1996 established the company in design and internet production. Hal then established Triangle Equities LLC, for real estate development and management in 1997. This company manages a private
portfolio of residential and commercial property. Outside of his businesses, Hal is a Town Councilman in Schererville Indiana. He is married and has two sons. In November, Hal will run against Democrat Thomas O’Donnell in open seat District 15, which falls entirely within Lake County."

Hal Slager has an extremely informative website right here.

Hal Slager is a proven leader for Northwest Indiana.

Hal’s experience in local government, as a business owner in marketing and real estate management, and training as a Certified Public Accountant is a powerful combination of skills to represent us in the Statehouse. He helped his community navigate a poor economy and continue improving services – the same expectation we should have of our state government.

Go to his site to view the Video for Hal Slager with wife Carol

While Hal is proud of his professional and community accomplishments, he is a family man first. His wife, Carol, is a pharmacist and his college sweetheart – both graduates from Butler University in Indianapolis. Their sons, Ryan and Colin, are now students there as well.

Hal Slager is a runner and a man of many accomplishments. A CPA, a business owner. a veteran of working together on the Town Council and assuming leadership roles? Again, the kind of skillset we want to see in a man that Lake County sends to Indianapolis to work for us and for the good of both his constituents but also for the good of all of Indiana. We really need Hal Slager working for us downstate. Please thoughtfully consider his record and give him your vote!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More about Gerrymandering

Artificially constructing districts to accumulate votes rather than to represent the people or area was begun in the USA in the late 18th Century, but it was a radical 1812 configuration in the State of Massachusetts that was compared to a dragon or salamander and, when added to the name of former Governor Eldridge Gerry, the district-that-resembled-a-beast was dubbed "Gerry-Mander."

image from FairVote.org

Gerrymandering was a commonplace means by which the ruling party in any area would redistrict their part of the country to benefit them. Eventually laws were enacted that put limits and legal language in place, supposedly using the US Census to fairly divide up States by Congressional and State House and Senate districts. In 2001 the Democrats were still keen on keeping alive the spirit of the Gerrymander. But Senator Sue Landske (R - Cedar Lake) and the redistricting committee made sure that districts would be sensible and not bizarre. Mission accomplished in the Spring of 2011!

When the previous census was taken and Democrats ruled the State, they drew oddly-shaped districts that made no sense to the eye but were designed to get as many Democrats elected in a Republican State as possible. You can read the dictionary definition here.

Look at the difference between 2001 (above) and 2011 (below), when the map was redrawn more logically:

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/maptools/maps/boundary/legislative/2011/congressional.pdf

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/maptools/maps/boundary/legislative/2011/house.pdf

Candidates I really like - Dr. Ron Johnson for State Representative District 19

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 05:24:00 +0000

I believe in the character, the intelligence and the integrity of Dr. Ron Johnson. I would trust him with the future based on what he has already done in the past and the values by which he lives out his life day after day. I enthusiastically and emphatically endorse Dr. Ron Johnson for District 19, for the good of the people and the State of Indiana as well!

Dr Ron Johnson at the State Republican Convention

Ron Johnson? I knew him before he really began taking on multiple responsibilities, back in the days when I was still playing games with teenagers and young men and we'd do things like play basketball against each other. I can tell you that, back in the early 90's that Ron could drive the ball to the basket with authority and had a pretty decent outside shot as well...and was a pretty good defender, too. But you don't care about basketball, do you? Well, it actually it applies. Basketball requires talent and teamwork and passion to excel. In the case of church basketball teams or leagues, it involves working with young people. When I last played on a court with Ron, I was the oldest guy in the league and ran the point. Ron was the youngest guy on his team, but he was his team leader as well despite his youth. I hope he forgives me, but he and his wife and family are loving and kind and genuine and they understand that is okay to have FUN sometimes!!! So here is a picture of them clowning around...

That pretty lady next to Dr. Ron is Marion, his wife.   If you know families, you see a lot of love here!

Over the years since I first met him, Dr. Ron Johnson has become a respected and influential leader very involved in his community as his talent, his ability to work with others and his passion and dedication have made him to be a role model for young people and adults alike.   Fairly early along the way, he and his wonderful wife, Marion, decided the world needed more Johnsons.   They certainly succeeded, did they not? I cannot look at that picture, above, without smiling and I cannot look at it without seeing the love and the leadership and the goodness that a great father and mother must exhibit in order to raise good and joyful citizens. You see, your wife and kids know who you REALLY are. You think maybe everyone in that picture loves and respects Dr. Ron Johnson? Is there any doubt?

Now Dr. Ron believes that the community needs a man like him to represent them during legislative sessions in Indianapolis. His life is a good one, he doesn't need new responsibilities.   But he sees the need to serve and he is answering the call. He believes that the Indiana way of balanced budgets and opportunities to succeed and freedom to try - the sound foundation of the United States as expressed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Indiana's own Constitution - the basis for the State of Indiana's AAA credit rating and growing economy despite the growing Federal deficit and overwhelming tax burden will be the formula for success in trying times. But he can say it better for himself...from his website!

District 19 State Rep Candidate Dr. Ron Johnson

Welcome from Dr. Ron Johnson

Welcome to Dr. Ron Johnson for State Representative web site. This page is designed to help you get to know and understand Dr. Ron's love for our community, families, and businesses. Ron believes Indiana's best days are still ahead. As our next state representative, Dr. Ron will focus on the things that unite us rather than things that divide us. Ron knows we can get our economy moving, but first we must have new leadership with fresh ideas to meet the challenge.

Dr. Ron believes in the "American idea" designed by our founding fathers. Dr. Ron understands that our Constitution is a living document that is for "We the People" and not a expiring or evolving document that many of our current legislators have treated it as such. Indiana is a leader in economic development and has created a template for the rest of the country to follow and Ron will help Indiana maintain and grow that status. Dr. Ron knows that our greatest asset is human ingenuity and will lead the way to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Please join us in supporting Dr. Ron Johnson for District 19 State Representative!

This is his facebook candidate site.

This is the link to the post I made recently that highlighted Dr. Ron's stirring speech made at the Lake County Courthouse for the October 20th "Stand Up for Religious Freedom" Rally.

Dr. Ron Johnson with Cy Huerter and Congressional candidate Joel Phelps on October 20th

Read up ABOUT this man on his website here!

I am going to repeat what I said at the beginning...

I believe in the character, the intelligence and the integrity of Dr. Ron Johnson. I would trust him with the future based on what he has already done in the past and the values by which he lives out his life day after day. I enthusiastically and emphatically endorse Dr. Ron Johnson for District 19, for the good of the people and the State of Indiana as well!

Even the NWI Times endorse Jerry Tippy!!! So do I!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 04:53:00 +0000

EDITORIAL: We endorse Tippy in GOP commissioner's race

When the left-leaning NWI Times endorses you, then you have either given up your conservative roots OR you have impressed people...and man, Jerry Tippy has impressed people! He has impressed me!!!

Jerry behind Mike Pence and next to Dr. Ron Johnson at Lake County. How many movers and shakers can you name?

Jerry and Joel Phelps talking to Greg Zoeller, among others...

When the election cycle began, I met Jerry Tippy and found him to be an agreeable fellow. Then as went to other events, I would see Jerry there and soon we probably both began looking for each othertif there was a Lake County event of consequence because Jerry was there. When the parades were marching, there was Jerry Tippy. When Summerfest was in full gear there was Jerry Tippy day after day. At rallies and banquets and fund raisers I would find Jerry Tippy. He had the radical idea that all government entities should have budgets and that they should be balanced. His years of business acumen taught him that common sense and transparency helps prevent graft and fraud.

Yes, Jerry Tippy was there with us at the Lake County Victory Center!

As we grew friendly, he shared his vision of transparent County government and agreed that having budgets and salaries posted online for all to see would be a refreshing change from the secrecy of Lake County Government. His first concern was making sure budgets would be balanced and that any huge projects like the Ethanol Plant would be vetted before voting. He discussed the need to have transparent bid processes. By the time September rolled around I was sure a County Board of all Jerry Tippys would fix a LOT of Lake County woes. But we can only vote for one Jerry Tippy for Lake County Commissioner rather than return Gerry Scheub to office YET AGAIN!

Jerry at one of several parades this year

We need a man who is opposed to a 1% County Sales Tax or Income Tax. Individual towns, cities and townships can handle their own business without growing government. Jerry Tippy is against the tax.proposals. While going to events all over the area, I only saw Jerry's opponent one time, when Gerry Scheub called the 4th of July "Dependence Day" while making an announcement in Cedar Lake at the lakefront. Freudian slip? Scheub does not seem to come out to the events that matter or he has learned to disguise himself pretty well. He doesn't seem to get out in public much in Lake County, not in the places I go anyway.The courts located him, however, and found Gerry Scheub in a matter of a conflict of interest:

Court removes Scheub from future quarry hearings

By Carrie Napoleon Post-Tribune correspondent September 30, 2012 12:02AM

Updated: November 1, 2012 6:37AM

Excerpt:

"FOWLER — Lake County Commissioner Gerry Scheub, D-Crown Point, will have to recuse himself from any Lake County Drainage Board proceedings for the Singleton Quarry, according to court orders.

Benton County Circuit Court Judge Rex Kepner last week issued an order agreeing with the VanKalker Family Limited Partnership’s contention that Scheub was biased and prejudiced against the proposed Singleton Quarry in southern Lake County in his pursuit of an environmental impact analysis for the project and his opposition to it. The judge selected arbitrator Rich McDevitt, a Merrillville lawyer with the McDevitt Mediation Center, to sit in Scheub’s place..."

Gerry Scheub voted for a "budget" that may be as much as 13 million dollars in the red! He and other Democrats also dodged a controversial vote on a trash to ethanol plan that has been blowing up in their faces! Read about it for yourselves...MEETING ARTICLE.

Sure, the Democrats just HAPPEN to schedule a fundraiser that would conflict with the meeting to deal with the Powers Energy Snafu? So the vote would not happen until AFTER the election? I am shocked, SHOCKED! Then they could do as they pleased? Right now the idea of the trash-to-ethanol plan was not backed by actual research and demonstrations of working technology. Democrats don't want to pay the political price for their mistakes this year. They hope by next election you will forget all about it. DON'T!

Why have engineering jobs to be done in the County been outsourced to companies from outside County lines...like Indianapolis, for instance. What, are there no engineers or surveyors in Lake County? Going forward, any planning or drainage or architectural work needed in Lake County should go to Lake County firms first! For shame on the decisions of the past giving work to other companies in other counties while our unemployment remains high! For shame on nepotism being part of the hiring process rather than qualifications!

We need a responsible voice on the County Board to consider this entire Powers Energy initiative, as Earl Powers has not found financing to even build the facility, let alone demonstrated it would actually work! Jerry Tippy will be asking questions before casting a vote! If Lake County can turn trash into treasure, we need to make sure we find the right company with the right technology and the financial backing to do it! If smart money does NOT back Powers Energy, why should we? Jerry Tippy's 25 years in business are the experience we need right now, not a career politician like Gerry Scheub!

ABOUT JERRY TIPPY from Jerry Tippy...

About Me

This year, my wife Chris and I are celebrating 24 years of marriage, and our son Matt just completed his third year at Ohio State.

In 1993, I moved my steel fabrication business and my family to Schererville. Since that time we have enjoyed being involved in the community and calling Schererville home.

We are members of St. Michael Church, and Matt graduated from St. Mike’s in 2005. I spent years coaching baseball and soccer, being a scout leader, and eventually, taking the position of vice president of Schererville Baseball. In 2002, I took an interest in local government, and by 2005 earned an appointment to the Schererville Plan Commission. I wanted to make sure Schererville remained appealing to local businesses and a vibrant community for families. I ran for town councilman in 2007, won my race, and have been honored to serve the citizens of Schererville since 2008.

It has not been an easy time to be a councilman in Lake County. Budgets are very tight due to the loss of revenue caused by poor economic conditions and the frozen levy imposed on town government by the state legislature. I am proud to say that Schererville has not only survived, but thrived under these conditions. We approved a balanced budget every year since my election to the council. We made the hard decisions necessary and cut more than $1M from our budget to stay in balance. We reorganized to create efficiencies, cut unnecessary overtime, and created an incentive program that encouraged employees to save money.

At the same time, we were able to make many improvements in the town utilizing creative financing opportunities. We brought our waste water treatment plant into compliance with IDEM. We created a new Comprehensive Town Plan replacing the twenty-year old existing plan. Our Police Department achieved CALEA accreditation and started a new volunteer program (VIPS). We implemented a plan to upgrade and repair our park facilities including the construction of phase one of the Pennsy-Greeenway bike trail. These are just some of the highlights. Through hard work and creative use of tax dollars, more can be accomplished for less.

Professional Experience                                                                Community Involvement
Schererville Town Councilman (2008-present)                              Member of St. Michael’s Church (1993-present)
Schererville Town Council President (2010)                                    Member of Schererville Lions Club
Schererville Plan Commission (2005-2007)                                    Schererville Business Owner (1993-2002)
Business and Project Manager for over 25 years                             Schererville Baseball Board and Coach (2000-2002)
General Manager at Synergy Steel Structures                                 Asst. Cubmaster – Pack 504 (1998-1999)

Today I wrote a letter. Richard Mourdock is man of character. So is Andy Horning. Richard's enemies? Not so much!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:02:00 +0000

What did Richard Mourdock actually SAY?

PRESS RELEASE: Andrew Horning: In defense of Richard Mourdock

Contact:Andrew Horning

(812) 585 0504 cell

andy@horningforsenate.com

Late last night on his facebook campaign page, Libertarian candidate for US Senate Andrew Horning posted the following statement regards Richard Mourdock's comment on abortion during last evening's Senatorial debate (http://www.facebook.com/HorningForSenate):

"I should probably just shut up about Mourdock's Moment and let votes come my way without standing in the way. I have nothing to gain and at least a little to lose by speaking my mind.

But I'd be a lousy man and I wouldn't sleep tonight if I were to withhold my thoughts on this. So, I must defend Mr. Mourdock, at least in this one little way.

You probably don't know how hard it is to stand up before cameras in this tense situation and try to say what you mean, and not say anything stupid. To do this with a clock ticking, and only a minute to be specific, clear and intelligible, is apparently impossible.

All of us slipped now and then.

God Knows that I certainly said things I wish I could retract, and didn't say much of what I'd meant to. In a minute, I could only formulate a thought and start to articulate it before the timekeeper's red STOP sign came up.

I want people to vote for me, of course. But I sure don't want anybody to vote for me based upon Mourdock's supposed gaffe for at least a couple of reasons:

1. That sort of hair-trigger reactive politics is a fair-sized chunk of flaw in human behavior that makes politics so inevitable, ugly and dangerous.

2. I understand what he meant, and... well...

I personally know women who'd been raped, and had abortions. While I don't personally know any women who'd been raped and bore the child, I've certainly heard plenty of stories of such women. And the only regrets I've heard are from the former group. I know many women who didn't have abortions were blessed beyond their hopes by their beautiful child – a child who was, after all, innocent of the brutality of her or his conception.

Everybody who knows me knows that my core philosophy of anti-aggression flows into a pro-life stance as well. While I insist upon constitutionality in my politics, and understand that most of the abortion debate should properly be argued at the state level, my personal feelings are far more like... Mr. Mourdock's.

While I would not unconstitutionally craft federal policy in this matter, I do agree with Mr. Mourdock that, if you have any notion of a deity at all, then God's Mercy could be seen in the birth of a child. No matter what else may have happened up to that point.

I'm sorry if that offends people who might have come my way by way of Mourdock's words. But I don't want anybody to vote for me under false premises or hasty judgments.

I've got to stand on my principles; which means I've got to defend my principles all the time. No matter how those chips may fall."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So I had to write to this man of honor and thank him!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Andy,

Today I read your defense of Richard Mourdock.

Andy, I am a Republican because I am a conservative and I do not believe any third party candidate can win. It bothers me that so many great Americans make the futile attempt to form and build one. If it could be done, I would be among the first to jump on the bandwagon. There are many Republicans I cannot in good conscience vote for and that is a sad fact! If Ron Paul ran for President, he would siphon off enough votes to give Obama the title of King of America for another four years. Thank God Ron is a man of his word! Anyway I am an American, a veteran and a conservative before I slap on any party labels. Just to be clear?

I know many Republicans of great personal character, such as Joel Phelps and Marlin Stutzman and Richard Mourdock, all of whom I call friends. I am sorry John Hostettler has left politics, as he is a man of honor and a guy who really knows his Constitution as well.

My vote remains with Richard Mourdock. But you have earned my admiration. Thank you for being honest and forthright! I am so sorry that Libertarians cannot find the way to work within and improve the Republican Party, because it needs more cleaning and more men and women of character. But this is America and we all do it the way we think best. I do hope I meet you someday!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Wall Street Journal is also defending Richard Mourdock thusly:

In Defense of Richard Mourdock

It is his Democratic opponent who is engaging in Akin-style sophistry.

By JAMES TARANTO

With less than two weeks to go before the election, the left is anxious to talk about abortion, and you can see why. To be sure, Gallup found in May that Americans are considerably likelier to describe themselves as "pro-life" than "pro-choice" (50% to 41%), so it hardly seems a winning issue. But it's likely less of a losing one than President Obama's economic and foreign-policy record.

Gallup also found that 77% thought abortion should be legal at least "under certain" circumstances, whereas only 20% thought it should be "illegal in all" circumstances. Thus pro-abortion liberal Democrats are ever on the lookout for Republican office-seekers who seem to be among that 20%, in hopes of winning votes from the plurality who are "pro-life" but with qualifications.

Such an opportunity arose in Indiana last night, in a debate between Richard Mourdock, the GOP candidate for U.S. Senate, and his Democratic opponent, Rep. Joe Donnelly. Mourdock was asked the hypothetical question of whether it should be legal to abort a child conceived in rape. National Review's Katrina Trinko quotes his answer: "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God. And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."

Inevitably Mourdock has been likened to Rep. Todd Akin, the Missouri Senate nominee, who was disowned by most fellow Republicans after he attempted to answer the question in August. Trinko rejects the comparison:

I'm not sure why Mourdock thought it would be helpful to bring up God in this context; personally, as someone pro-life and religious, I think when talking about something as painful as pregnancy in the case of rape, it's best to talk about how the unborn child is a human being, regardless of the horrific circumstances of conception, and leave aside politically irrelevant speculation about what God does and doesn't do.

But nor do I see his comment being equal to Akin's. Akin, asked about abortion in the cases of rape, responded, "If it's legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." That comment was offensive because it implied there was illegitimate rape, and suggested (erroneously) that almost never would a raped woman become pregnant.

Republicans seem to agree. Although some, including Mitt Romney, have made clear they do not share Mourdock's view, the Hill reports that Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, chairman of the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, is vigorously defending him. Cornyn was quick to drop Akin.

Associated Press

He's not Akin.

Is Mourdock's comment less offensive than Akin's? Probably, though it is a subjective question. Some may be offended by what they see as Mourdock's presumptuousness in inferring God's will--or by his mentioning God at all. And in our neighborhood at least, there are lots of people who are offended that anyone, especially a man, would disagree with their opinion on abortion.

As an analytical matter, however, Mourdock's statement is entirely defensible, whereas Akin's is sophistry. And it turns out that Mourdock's Democratic opponent, in seeking to capitalize on the remark, is engaging in Akin-style sophistry.

Mourdock gave a straightforward and thoughtful answer, if an impolitic one, to the question that was posed, one that made clear he appreciates its (albeit only hypothetical) moral gravity. Akin, by contrast, attempted to avoid the question by arguing that it was irrelevant.

That argument was unsound because it was based on an unfounded empirical premise, one that is generally understood to be false--namely that rape never causes pregnancy, or does so with such infrequency as to constitute a negligible problem. (There is some evidence, though it is far from conclusive, that this is the opposite of the truth: As the Washington Post reported in August, "one provocative study" in 2003 "found that a single act of rape was more than twice as likely to result in pregnancy than [sic] an act of consensual sex.")
Largely lost amid the hubbub over Akin's Orwellian phrase "legitimate rape" was its logical centrality to his flawed argument. He evidently knew there were counterexamples that would disprove his premise, so he resorted to the "No-True-Scotsman Move," described by the philosopher Anthony Flew in his 1975 book, "Thinking About Thinking: Or, Do I Sincerely Want to Be Right?":

Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again; and, this time, finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing." . . .

The No-true-Scotsman Move . . . is an attempt to evade falsification: a piece of sleight of mind replaces a logically contingent by a logically necessary proposition.

In Akin's formulation, the fact of pregnancy rules out the possibility of a "legitimate rape," thus disposing of the whole difficult question by pretending through "sleight of mind" that it does not exist.
Donnelly, seeking to capitalize on the kerfuffle, "put out a statement attacking Mourdock," the Hill reports:

"I think rape is a heinous and violent crime in every instance," Donnelly said in the statement. "The God I believe in and the God I know most Hoosiers believe in does not intend for rape to happen--ever. What Mr. Mourdock said is shocking, and it is stunning that he would be so disrespectful to survivors of rape."

Donnelly is engaging in some sleazy innuendo here. Mourdock's assertion about what "God intended" clearly referred to conception ("when life begins"), not rape.

But what's interesting about Donnelly's statement is that he claims to agree with Mourdock's central premises: that God exists, and that unborn children are human beings worthy of legal protection (or, as the Hill puts it, Donnelly "is also against abortion rights"). Donnelly differs from Mourdock only in reaching the opposite conclusion on the specific question of a rape exception.

That position could be coherently defended on various grounds. One might, for example, conceive of abortion in such cases as akin to justifiable homicide. Or one might offer a purely pragmatic argument: that abortion is wrong in all cases, but only a law with such exceptions is politically attainable.

Donnelly, however, is as dismissive of the question as Akin. He professes a belief in God yet appears never to have grappled with the problem of evil. Surely "the God . . . most Hoosiers believe in" is omnipresent, yet he is somehow AWOL, in Donnelly's theodicy, anytime a woman is raped.

As a matter of practical politics, this may sink Richard Mourdock--though on this subject, we are particularly skeptical of the instincts of coastal elites, including our own. Middle American attitudes toward abortion are very different from those where we live. Even Akin has defied media predictions by keeping the Missouri race a "toss up" in the Senate rankings at RealClearPolitics.com and elsewhere.

But it does Mourdock an injustice to lump his thoughtful response to the question in with Akin's specious one. And it would be a shame if Donnelly made it to the Senate by making an argument that is as unsound as Akin's and demagogic to boot.

A Sorry Display

You could have seen this one coming. The press's so-called fact checkers are continuing to call Mitt Romney a liar for repeating, in Monday's debate, his assertion that President Obama began his term with an "apology tour."

Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post asserts that "the claim that Obama is an apologist for America actually began to take shape shortly after he became president." After giving some examples cited by the president's critics, Kessler then asserts: "In none of these cases does Obama actually use a word at all similar to 'apologize.' "

Note how silly this "rebuttal" is in light of the first sentence of Kessler's own that we quoted in the preceding paragraph. In that sentence, Kessler does use a word similar to "apologize"--"apologist"--but he uses it wrongly. An apologist, as per Merriam-Webster, is "one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something." That's exactly the opposite of how Romney and other Republicans are characterizing Obama.

In any case, you don't have to use the word "apology" to apologize. Blogger Jeryl Bier has an ingenious illustration of the point, playing off this Obama quote:

While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. . . . So I'm here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout my administration. The United States will be willing to acknowledge past errors where those errors have been made.

Bier asks us to "re-imagine that statement in another context":

Barack: Michelle, . . . I have at times been disengaged, and at times I sought to dictate my terms. . . . So I'm here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout our marriage. I will be willing to acknowledge past errors where those errors have been made.

Michelle: Thank you, Honey, I appreciate the apology.

Barack: I didn't apologize.

Bier thinks "most wives" would expect an apologizing husband to adopt a more supplicatory tone. But there's no doubt that his intent in the imaginary dialogue is to satisfy her demand for an apology, and a denial that he apologized would be totally out of place.
Two Papers in One!

"The first step in restoring real stability to the economy is to lower the debt levels through what the researchers call "orderly debt reduction." An example of that would be mortgage modifications. The second and more important step is to reduce income inequality by raising wages, possibly by strengthening collective bargaining. Income inequality and high household debt are not the only explanations of the financial crisis. But the researchers make a compelling case that greater equality and lower debt could make future crises less likely."--editorial, New York Times, May
"The causes of income stagnation are varied and lack the political simplicity of calls to bring down the deficit or avert another Wall Street meltdown. They cannot be quickly remedied through legislation from Washington. The biggest causes, according to interviews with economists over the last several months, are not the issues that dominate the political debate."--David Leonhardt column, New York Times, Oct. 24

More links at the site, if you are interested? Anyway, Richard Mourdock is not advocating rape, he is simply saying that all human life is precious and we must NOT make the baby pay the penalty for rape by sentencing that innocent life to death! Abortion is baby-killing, period! Long lines of couples waiting for babies to adopt would agree. Have the child and give him or her away if you do not want that baby but do not inflict capital punishment on our unborn citizens!

"Stand Up for Religious Freedom" ? Actually Rallying for ALL Freedoms!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 05:29:00 +0000

The picture above? Left to right - Dr. Ron Johnson, Pastor of Living Stones Church in Crown Point and candidate for State Representative for District 19, Lake County Right to Life VP Cy Huerter and then the candidate for US First Disctrict Congressional seat Joel Phelps...all three part of the "Stand Up for Religious Freedom" rally held at the Lake County Government Center on October 20th. Times article link.

(The FIRST rally. The second and hopefully even bigger one is scheduled for this Saturday, the 27th at 10 AM in Crown Point's Town Square. More below)

I have known Dr. Ron Johnson for several years (since back when I could still play basketball), have worked with Len Reynolds and Cy Huerter oftentimes, learned to know and love Joel Phelps...men who work hard to make a difference, willing to work hard to preserve the precious thing that Benjamin Franklin warned us might be hard to do:

"A Republic, madam, if you can hold on to it!"

- Benjamin Franklin, responding to a lady in a crowd, who, at the close of the Constitutional Convention, called out, "Mr. Franklin! What kind of a government have you given us?!"- Sept. 17, 1787

The photo below is from the previously linked Times news article by Susan Brown.

The Times did get the count (over 200 people) pretty close to right.  Quotes in the article were correct.  But the person assigned to write the "cutline" (caption for picture) was clueless.   It was not an "anti-abortion rally!" Do you even see the word, "abortion" on any of those signs? No!!!

The rally in Crown Point was part of a nationwide rally (in over 140 cities) concerning the attack on the Constitutional rights of the American citizens.   Perhaps you have read Declaration of Independence and read these words?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

We two-hundred plus citizens gathered to protest the attack on our God-given rights!   They called us "anti-abortion." We are Pro-Life and Pro-Constitution! Abortion is the murder of our most vulnerable citizens, so we do protest that!   But the HHS Mandate violates both the First and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution - The Bill of Rights!   We were gathered to protest the attack on the first right granted to all citizens - to freely practice our religion!   If we believe murdering babies in the womb is wrong, we'll say so. If the Congress and the President try to make us PAY for baby-murdering or force hospitals and clinics associated with faith groups MURDER those babies, then it is the government that breaks the law.   Thus we gathered to state this vehemently and clearly!

There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts. - Ronald Reagan

The above clip is from the Democratic National Convention. Democrats think that we belong to the government and that the Constitution can be toppled by undermining the foundation. In case you don't know what THAT foundation is, re-read the quote from the Declaration of Independence!

The picture above? Dr. Ron Johnson, Pastor of Living Stones Church in Crown Point and candidate for State Representative for District 19 with a few of his fellow attendees at the rally.

Among the speakers were priests, pastors, organization officials, candidates for public office and an author and Democrat, Woodrow Wilcox, who eloquently stated a case many Democrats find themselves making as they view the 2012 election -that he was going to vote the pro-Obamacare bums OUT! He makes a reasoned case for overturning Obamacare on AmericanClarion.com - ObamaCare Ignores Religious Freedom but I will give you a small part of his impassioned plea:

"I say that these Democrats from Indiana who voted for Obamacare, and any Democrats or others who voted for or who now support Obamacare, should be expelled from the Congress in this election," said Woodrow Wilcox, the author and Democrat from Griffith. "Slaves do not have the right to refuse to do work because it violates their religion..."

Wilcox then made the case that being forced to purchase insurance by the government and being forced to pay for or take part in euthanasia or abortion effectively makes the US citizens slaves to the government. "Every politician who is PRO-OBAMACARE is PRO-SLAVERY!"

"We own the government, not the politicians!" Joel Phelps reminded the crowd.   Phelps is running against long-time Democrat Pete Visclosky, who did vote for Obamacare and kept voting to keep it going. Visclosky has firmly declared that he will back Barack Obama's Healthcare Mandate.

Dr. Ron Johnson gave an inspiring speech! He had a fistful of notes but the wind picked up and he spoke from his heart and mind rather than trying to read from his prepared remarks.   I believe he said some profound things, first quoting some Founding Fathers -

"No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority." - Thomas Jefferson, Founding Father and President

"Consciences of men are not the objects of human legislation." - Governor (and Constitution signee) William Livingston

"Security under our constitution is given to the rights of conscience..."A Federalist Papers author and first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay

Then Dr. Ron made these key points:

God is the source of our liberty
Our duty to God precedes any duty we have to the State
Government exists to secure God-given, inalieanable rights
Therefore, the right to religious liberty must be protected by government

So many fine speakers, such as Lake County Right to Life President Len Reynolds and several clergymen and Indiana Knights of Columbus pro-life director Michael Velasco made stirring remarks. But it was a priest from the former Yugoslavia and another from Romania who really caught my attention.   Both men recalled growing up under communist tyranny, being threatened with imprisonment and being fined and tossed into jail and offfered bribes to "spy" on their congregations. Both were horrified at finding that here, in America, these kinds of oppression were beginning to sneak up on us.

The wind made some notes a victim and since I only remember the first names of these two gentlemen, I will add their full and official names and titles later.   But now I have a question for you.

ARE YOU GOING TO LET AMERICA BECOME A TYRANNICAL SOCIALIST COUNTRY OR NOT?   IF NOT, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?
OCTOBER 27th at the Crown Point Courthouse in the square.    Citizens of this area are going to peacefully gather, as allowed by the Constitution, and we are going to have speakers remind us all of the state of the nation and the stakes in this election!   It begins at ten o'clock Saturday morning.   Surely you can take two hours away from home Saturday morning, before college football kicks off, and not only hear exactly what Obamacare does and will do to you and yours but also see that, when it comes to being patriotic, the labels concerning churches and organizations don't matter. The Coalition for Religious Liberty was formed to protect all religions from those in government who do not respect and/or understand the Constitution.

Catholics and Protestants and Non-Denominational and Orthodox and all sorts of other worshippers were there on the 20th.   There were Republicans and Democrats and Independents and Libertarians.   Most of us were of voting age, but a few youngsters were there with parents.   No one asked you what you believed in, we just all gathered and some of us held up signs and we listened and applauded and shouted "YES!" or "NO!" at appropriate moments.

I'll close with an excerpt from the book,  When A Nation Forgets God written by Dr. Erwin Lutzer, the pastor of Moody Church for 30 years.   Dr. Ron quoted these words:

“I lived in Germany during the Nazi Holocaust. I considered myself a Christian. We heard stories of what was happening to Jews, but we tried to distance ourselves from it because what could we do to stop it. A railroad track ran behind our small church and each Sunday morning we could hear the whistle in the distance, and then the wheels coming over the tracks. We became disturbed when we heard the cries coming from the train as it passed by. We realized that it was carrying Jews like cattle in the cars. Week after week the whistle would blow. We dreaded to hear the sound of those wheels because we knew that we would hear the cries of the Jews in route to a death camp. Their screams tormented us. We knew the time the train was coming, and when we heard the whistle blow, we began singing hymns. By the time the train came past our church, we were singing at the top of our voices. If we heard the screams, we sang more loudly and soon we heard them no more.” And then the eyewitness shared with Pastor Lutzer, “ Although years have passed, I still hear the train whistle in my sleep. God forgive me, forgive all of us who called ourselves Christians and yet did nothing to intervene.”

Will you do nothing?

or

Will you join us at the Crown Point Square at 10 AM Saturday morning?

Speech by Woodrow Wilcox, Democrat, On October 20th!

The Fears of Pete Visclosky...including Joel Phelps...

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 04:28:00 +0000

If you happen to begin to tap Peter Visclosky (D-Ind.) into Google, one of the first choices with be "scandal" and it involves earmarks given to PMA Group, a lobbying firm that has since disbanded. The FBI did subpoena documents from Visclosky's office, but the OCE later abandoned the case against Visclosky and a few other legislators. So Pete Visclosky isn't afraid of the Office of Congressional Ethics anymore. But that doesn't mean that he does not have fears. Oh, he has fears!!!

1) Pete Visclosky Fears Joel Phelps

Joel with wife, Jennifer, and their boys.

First, it is apparent that Pete Visclosky is afraid of Joel Phelps. He is SO afraid of Phelps, or more to the point, so afraid of DEBATING Joel Phelps, that he has blown off the very nearly entire Gary Community of Ministers!!!

Pete Visclosky has not even had the courtesy to respond to the invitation from

The Baptist Ministers Conference of Gary & Vicinity and the Catholic Diocese of Gary!

Here is the press release:

Phelps Accepts Congressional Debate Invitation

Visclosky Fails To Respond To Debate Invite

(Portage, IN) – Joel Phelps, nominee for the US House of Representatives, today formally accepted an invitation from the Baptist Ministers Conference of Gary & Vicinity and the Catholic Diocese of Gary to participate in a Town Hall style debate against incumbent Representative Pete Visclosky. The invitations were sent to both candidates last week.

Phelps enthusiastically responded to the invitation saying, “It’s fantastic that these organizations have offered to hold such an event. I think it’s important for voters in the 1^st Congressional District to have the opportunity to ask questions and hear an unfiltered comparison of Visclosky’s record in office against the fresh ideas I have to grow the Region’s economy through job creation and bi-partisan cooperation with local community leaders.”

The co-sponsors proposed the Town Hall style debate be held either October 18 or October 25. As of today, Representative Visclosky has not responded to the invitation.

Phelps adds, “To date, Representative Visclosky is the only incumbent in the State of Indiana not to agree to even just one debate against their challenger. After nearly 30-years in Washington, the people of Gary and the 1^st District are owed a visit back home from Representative Visclosky and deserve answers to their questions about the future before November 6.” Phelps says, “I’m ready to debate on the date, time, and place of his choice … whenever he can make time to visit Indiana.”

In the proposed debate format, each candidate would be allowed a 2-minute opening remark, 1-minute responses to questions posed by audience participants, and a 5-minute closing remark. The debate would last approximately one hour at a location to be determined. The event would be open to the public as well as print, radio, and television media.

Joel Phelps is the Republican nominee to represent Indiana's 1st Congressional District in the US House of Representatives. This is his first political race in an effort to unseat career politician Pete Visclosky, who has been in office since 1985. Phelps, who grew up in Hammond and now lives in Portage, is a successful business leader and entrepreneur. He graduated from Purdue University with a degree in Industrial Engineering.

For more information or to schedule an interview, contact Scott Sands at 317-496-7268.

Joel Phelps with a few of his biggest fans!

2) Pete Visclosky fears the informed voter!

I still remember the Town Hall meetings that Pete Visclosky held when Obamacare was being discussed. It so happens that a group of us used our resources wisely so that one or two of us managed to be at several Town Hall meetings. In every single venue where we attended, Visclosky and his handlers tried to turn the event into a monologue by Visclosky and allowing few, if any, questions. But we did not stand for that behavior. At the Cedar Lake meeting, we demanded that Visclosky stop his speech and answer questions about Obamacare. We read right from the bill itself and Pete was unable to explain what those passages meant nor could he defend the bill when challenged for a good reason Indiana residents would even want out Tenth Amendment rights violated.

At other venues he was usually forced to take questions and he always demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Obamacare bill as well as really having no good reason to vote for it. But Barack Obama and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi wanted it passed, so Pete voted for it.

Have you noticed that Pete holds a LOT fewer Town Halls now?

Pete Visclosky did NOT know what was in that bill. But he voted for it and voted against repealing it.

We came to meeting after meeting to demand that Pete Visclosky vote "NO" on Obamacare and yet he defied his constituency and supported it. In fact, Pete Visclosky has been an absolute rubber stamp for the liberal agenda and an absolute job-killing machine for Northwest Indiana. Look around you. What do you see when you drive through North Lake County? Empty factories, crumbling houses, trees and weeds overtaking properties where once people with a job lived. But so many of those jobs are gone and Pete Visclosky doesn't care. Don't believe me?

The US Chamber of Commerce has a rating system to rate candidates as friendly or unfriendly to job creation. When looking at Pete Visclosky they gave him an unbelievably bad score! Pete Visclosky gets 32 per cent!!! By comparison, Todd Rokita gets 94 per cent! Mike Pence and Dan Burton got 88 per cent. The only Congressman from Indiana more hostile to job creation and retention than Pete Visclosky for 2011 was...the null set. Nobody was as bad as Pete!!!

Pete Visclosky is the worst-ranked Indiana Congressman by the US Chamber of Commerce when considering job creation or retention. Worse than Joe Donnelly. Worse than Andre Carson. Dead last among Indiana Congressmen!

Whither Obama goest, Pete doth follow

Pete Visclosky is afraid you will find out what he stands for and will vote him out. So he spends a lot of money to get voted in. Which is why...

3) Pete Visclosky fears your money!

From a study of campaign spending efficiency in In the District one elections, Pete spent $3.96 per vote to defeat Mark Leyva rather easily in the last election. This year, with all the lobbyists and liberal boosters hoping to keep Pete in office, he has a massive amount of money to spend compared to Joel Phelps. From the linked site:

"During the current 2011-2012 election cycle, Visclosky has taken in more than $508,000 in net contributions but spent about $478,000 in net operating expenditures. His campaign has underspent its contribution income by 6.0%, a total of $30,249. Phelps has had only $4378 in net contributions in addition to $6324 of his own funds. His net operating expenditures of $6336 are lower than his total intake by about 40.8%. Visclosky received only 59.2% of the total votes cast between the Democrat and Republican primaries. Each of his votes was accompanied by net funds of about $0.72. That means $511.10 per percentage point. In contrast, Phelps’ 24.1% of the total votes between the two primaries represent net funds of $0.25 per vote or $181.45 per percentage point."

Pete Visclosky has been in office since 1985! Since he was elected, the Berlin Wall fell and the Iron Curtain became kaput. Harry Potter was discovered, became a phenomenon and faded. Pete kept getting elected. Hard rock gave way to Big Hair bands. Rap happened. Grunge happened. Alternative happened. Pete was still in office. The Chicago Bears have won one Super Bowl and lost another. From the Super Bowl Shuffle to Everyday I'm Shufflin' we've had Pete around. There is no Pest Control for Congressmen, so it is up to you and your wallet. Visclosky has the Democratic Machine to fund his reelection machine.

You have to get involved to eradicate the Visclosky stranglehold on the area! Joel Phelps needs MONEY! He needs Facebook likes, he needs tweets, he needs people talking to their friends about the election but especially JOEL PHELPS NEEDS YOUR MONEY! Because if Joel Phelps can get his message out, people will have a chance to compare him to the worst Jobs Congressman in Indiana's delegation and vote Visclosky OUT!

4) Pete Visclosky is afraid of his record

Pete Visclosky grew up in Gary, Indiana. His father was mayor of Gary! Pete claims to be a man of the people who grew up with familiarity of the life of the working man. So why is it that the steel industry has nose-dived and Gary has fallen to pieces while Pete Visclosky just keeps on going to Washington, DC and schmoozes with the Beltway Boys and lobbyists?

Visclosky's record is revealed by OnTheIssues.org .

http://www.ontheissues.org/IN/Peter_Visclosky.htm

You can see all of his votes and what stands he takes. Check out this excerpt and YOU tell ME if Pete Visclosky stands for you or not? Meanwhile, a candidate who DOES represent Northwest Indiana named Joel Phelps needs your help to put an end to a record like this one, below:

VoteMatch Responses (Click here for VoteMatch quiz)
VoteMatch Question & Answer (Click on question for explanation and background)	Based on these stances: (Click on topic for excerpt & citation)
Favors topic 1: Abortion is a woman's right (+2 points on Social scale)	Rated 30% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 1 Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1 NO on banning federal health coverage that includes abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1 NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1 YES on banning partial-birth abortions: Opposes topic 1 NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad: Favors topic 1 NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes: Favors topic 1 NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info: Favors topic 1 YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life: Strongly Opposes topic 1 NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime: Favors topic 1 NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions: Strongly Favors topic 1 YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1 YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2: Require hiring more women & minorities (-5 points on Economic scale)	Rated 94% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2 Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2 Stronger enforcement against gender-based pay discrimination: Favors topic 2 Honor the 100th anniversary of the NAACP: Favors topic 2 NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions: Favors topic 2 YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges: Strongly Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3: Same-sex domestic partnership benefits (+5 points on Social scale)	More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3 Rated 75% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3 Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays: Favors topic 3 NO on banning gay adoptions in DC: Favors topic 3 NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3 NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman: Strongly Favors topic 3 YES on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation: Strongly Favors topic 3 YES on enforcing against anti-gay hate crimes: Favors topic 3
Opposes topic 4: Teacher-led prayer in public schools (+2 points on Social scale)	Rated 30% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4 Rated 83% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4 NO on giving federal aid only to schools allowing voluntary prayer: Strongly Opposes topic 4 YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror: Strongly Favors topic 4 NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration: Opposes topic 4 NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance: Opposes topic 4 YES on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance: Opposes topic 4
Strongly Opposes topic 8: Death Penalty (+5 points on Social scale)	YES on replacing death penalty with life imprisonment: Strongly Opposes topic 8 NO on making federal death penalty appeals harder: Strongly Opposes topic 8 YES on maintaining right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals: Opposes topic 8
Opposes topic 9: Mandatory Three Strikes sentencing laws (+2 points on Social scale)	Rated 20% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes: Strongly Favors topic 9 Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9 NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime: Opposes topic 9 YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.: Strongly Opposes topic 9 YES on expanding services for offenders' re-entry into society: Opposes topic 9
Strongly Opposes topic 10: Absolute right to gun ownership (-5 points on Economic scale)	Rated F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 10 NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1: Strongly Opposes topic 10 NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse: Strongly Opposes topic 10 NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Strongly Favors topic 5: More federal funding for health coverage (-5 points on Economic scale)	Rated 78% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5 YES on giving mental health full equity with physical health: Favors topic 5 YES on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids: Strongly Favors topic 5 NO on repealing the "Prevention and Public Health" slush fund: Strongly Favors topic 5 NO on the Ryan Budget: Medicare choice, tax & spending cuts: Favors topic 5 NO on establishing tax-exempt Medical Savings Accounts: Favors topic 5 NO on subsidizing private insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage: Favors topic 5 NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs: Opposes topic 5 NO on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits: Favors topic 5 NO on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients: Favors topic 5 NO on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay: Strongly Favors topic 5 YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5 YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility: Favors topic 5 YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5 YES on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program: Favors topic 5 YES on regulating tobacco as a drug: Favors topic 5
Opposes topic 6: Privatize Social Security (-3 points on Economic scale)	Rated 89% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6 YES on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox: Opposes topic 6 NO on reducing tax payments on Social Security benefits: Opposes topic 6 YES on raising 401(k) limits & making pension plans more portable: Favors topic 6
Strongly Opposes topic 7: Parents choose schools via vouchers (-5 points on Economic scale)	Rated 92% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7 NO on reauthorizing the DC opportunity scholarship program: Strongly Opposes topic 7 NO on vouchers for private & parochial schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7 NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools: Opposes topic 7 YES on environmental education grants for outdoor experiences: Opposes topic 7 YES on $40B for green public schools: Opposes topic 7
Strongly Favors topic 18: Replace coal & oil with alternatives (-5 points on Economic scale)	Preserve Alaska's ANWR instead of drilling it: Favors topic 18 Rated 70% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Favors topic 18 Rated 83% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18 Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on tax incentives for renewable energy: Strongly Favors topic 18 NO on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18 NO on opening Outer Continental Shelf to oil drilling: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol: Strongly Favors topic 18 NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels: Strongly Opposes topic 18 YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18 NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries: Strongly Favors topic 18 NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on investing in homegrown biofuel: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC: Favors topic 18 YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation: Strongly Favors topic 18 YES on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets: Favors topic 18 NO on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution: Opposes topic 18 YES on $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers program: Favors topic 18
Opposes topic 19: Drug use is immoral: enforce laws against it (+2 points on Social scale)	Rated -30 by NORML, indicating a "hard-on-drugs" stance: Strongly Favors topic 19 NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests: Strongly Opposes topic 19 NO on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC: Strongly Opposes topic 19 YES on more funding for Mexico to fight drugs: Favors topic 19
Opposes topic 20: Allow churches to provide welfare services (-3 points on Economic scale)	YES on responsible fatherhood via faith-based organizations: Favors topic 20 NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks: Strongly Opposes topic 20 YES on instituting National Service as a new social invention: Opposes topic 20
Strongly Favors topic 11: Make taxes more progressive (-5 points on Economic scale)	Rated 20% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11 Rated 100% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11 NO on eliminating the "marriage penalty": Favors topic 11 NO on $46 billion in tax cuts for small business: Favors topic 11 NO on Tax cut package of $958 B over 10 years: Favors topic 11 NO on reducing Marriage Tax by $399B over 10 years: Favors topic 11 NO on eliminating the Estate Tax ("death tax"): Favors topic 11 NO on making the Bush tax cuts permanent: Strongly Favors topic 11 NO on providing tax relief and simplification: Strongly Favors topic 11 NO on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Favors topic 11 YES on paying for AMT relief by closing offshore business loopholes: Strongly Favors topic 11 YES on extending AMT exemptions to avoid hitting middle-income: Opposes topic 11
Favors topic 12: Illegal immigrants earn citizenship (+2 points on Social scale)	Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration: Strongly Favors topic 12 Rated 17% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12 NO on more immigrant visas for skilled workers: Opposes topic 12 NO on extending Immigrant Residency rules: Opposes topic 12 NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment: Strongly Favors topic 12 YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project: Strongly Opposes topic 12 NO on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Favors topic 12
Strongly Opposes topic 13: Support & expand free trade (-5 points on Economic scale)	Maintain anti-dumping restrictions against foreign importers: Strongly Opposes topic 13 Rated 20% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13 Tariffs against countries undervaluing their currency: Opposes topic 13 Review free trade agreements biennially for rights violation: Strongly Opposes topic 13 Impose tariffs against countries which manipulate currency: Opposes topic 13 NO on 'Fast Track' authority for trade agreements: Strongly Opposes topic 13 NO on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China: Strongly Opposes topic 13 NO on withdrawing from the WTO: Strongly Favors topic 13 NO on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement: Strongly Opposes topic 13 NO on implementing free trade agreement with Chile: Strongly Opposes topic 13 YES on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement: Favors topic 13 NO on end offshore tax havens and promote small business: Favors topic 13 NO on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13 YES on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization: Opposes topic 13 NO on promoting free trade with Peru: Opposes topic 13
Favors topic 15: Expand the armed forces (-3 points on Social scale)	Rated 89% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15 YES on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill: Favors topic 15 YES on deploying SDI: Favors topic 15 YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan: Strongly Favors topic 15 YES on continuing military recruitment on college campuses: Favors topic 15 YES on restricting no-bid defense contracts: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Favors topic 16: Stricter limits on political campaign funds (-3 points on Economic scale)	YES on banning soft money and issue ads: Favors topic 16 NO on banning soft money donations to national political parties: Opposes topic 16 YES on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions: Favors topic 16 NO on restricting independent grassroots political committees: Favors topic 16 YES on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Strongly Favors topic 14: The Patriot Act harms civil liberties (+5 points on Social scale)	YES on Veto override: Congressional oversight of CIA interrogations: Strongly Favors topic 14 YES on requiring FISA warrants for wiretaps in US, but not abroad: Strongly Favors topic 14 NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps: Strongly Favors topic 14 NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent: Strongly Favors topic 14 NO on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight: Strongly Favors topic 14 NO on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant: Strongly Favors topic 14 NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Favors topic 14
Favors topic 17: US out of Iraq & Afghanistan (+2 points on Social scale)	No contact & enforce sanctions on Iran until threat is gone: Strongly Opposes topic 17 Boycott & sanctions against Iran for terrorism & nukes: Opposes topic 17 Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program: Opposes topic 17 YES on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan: Strongly Favors topic 17 NO on authorizing military force in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17 NO on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date: Strongly Favors topic 17 YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days: Strongly Favors topic 17 YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq: Favors topic 17

Peter Visclosky is a Hard-Core Liberal.
Click here for explanation of political philosophy.
Click here for VoteMatch quiz.

Presidential Debate Live Blog

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:42:00 +0000

Will be posting live over the next 90 minutes, feel free to engage in the comments.   My own opinions are just that, mine, and you are welcome to yours provided they can be stated without vulgar language or incitement to violence.   Thanks

7:50 p.m.    Who do you think has the most to gain or lose tonite? I actually think Governor Romney has the most to lose if he isn't as strong as the last debate. The expectations game plays in favor of President Obama after his faulty start two weeks ago.

7:55 p.m.    I guess no one will be able to ask the pizza question, was a great promotion idea! Town Hall format doesn't work well for either candidate actually. Would guess Obama will be loose and try using humor.

8:00 p.m.    I will also be watching #debates on twitter, this appears to be the chosen tag and Fox reports 8,600 tweets per minute already.   Now we start.   Candy needs to refrain from clapping into the microphone. That's all I'm gonna say about her ...

8:03 p.m.    College student who wants to know what the future President will do to get them a job after they graduate. (My own personal opinion of course being that this isn't the President's job) 50% of college kids that graduate won't have a job? Romney was average on that first question. Obama takes first shot "... when Governor Romney said we should let Detroit go bankrupt ..."

8:08 p.m. What about long term unemployed? Romney: The President's policies haven't put Americans back to work. Unemployment would be 10.7% if included people who've dropped out of workforce. He says his plan would add millions of jobs and create those jobs. Returns fire on Detroit comment, by bringing in Chrysler and other business BK's. Obama: Says that's just not true. Governor Romney doesn't have a 5 point plan, he has a 1 point plan. Good line. Something about the peeps at the top get a better deal than everyone else.

8:11 p.m. Romney tries to retort, but Candy cuts him off. She held the line better than Lehrer. Gas prices question. Obama takes some additional solid shots, the one on coal was a good one. Romney will want to defend himself and may have to take time from next question to do so. Realistically both candidates are dodging the questions and shooting at each other. " ... cutting licenses and permits ... how much ... disagreement and dissention ..." Nice!

"You'll get your chance in a moment ..." Touche!

8:20 p.m. These guys are getting heated and not enjoying each other at all. Fun

8:21 p.m. President shoots himself in foot, first big lie. The price of gas wasn't low in 2008 because of the recession, it was low because there was more oil and a strong dollar. Steve Doocey just posted on twitter that it only took Obama 19 minutes to blame Bush.

8:24 p.m.   Rates and credits question could be quicksand for Romney. Many people want to keep their deductions and credits, even if they get a rate cut.   Call us greedy. Romney prattles on, but doesn't screw it up. Obama says basically I said what I would do, and I did it. (problem is none of that worked). So now he talks about the wealthy need to pay more. Wealthy of course is a little odd, since many of those people are actually small business owners and the key job creators. Slap them, slap us.

Sorry ... got bored all by myself. Lol

My FB post:

Dear America " ... you can't handle the truth." The truth is the last four years were poorly managed, no matter how much the current crew wants to blame Bush. The truth is small businesses and real estate are still on the sidelines, and without them we can't get those 5 million jobs. We need both and it will take tax cuts, regulation reduction, and a little positive thinking. This President doesn't agree ... he needs to retire and make a bunch of money writing and speaking and paying taxes.

Mourdock Yes, Donnelly No! Important Voting and Candidate Information for Porter and Lake County..

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 21:10:00 +0000

Farther down on the page is important voting information for Porter and Lake county residents. Please use your right to vote and do so responsibly? Know the candidates and what they stand for and be sure you understand which direction those candidates want to take the country. Forward to Socialistic Statism or Upward to jobs, energy, and opportunity along with downward to the number of government agencies and employees and regulations. Choices this year are quite clear. Democrats are aligned with the Obama agenda, Taxmageddon and Obamacare. Republicans are believing that Romney and Ryan know business and budgets and how to get the economy moving again.

Votes have consequences! In 2008, Indiana voters made some obvious mistakes. When you look at the price of fuel and heating/cooling and the prices of food and other necessities, you know that we are in trouble. Then you look at the massive and continually growing national debt, caused by government spending by the Obama team in Washington, you realize that the Hope was only for the Democrat cronies and the Change was from a Constitutional government to an Executive branch ruling by fiat and deliberately breaking the law! Have you had enough? Because Barack Obama wants to continue to move FORWARD! His idea of forward may not be what you and I would want?

Forward to WHERE and WHAT?

Did you know? Cook Medical, located here in IN, announced it is scrapping plans to build 5 new plants because of the Medical Device tax that is being imposed through Obamacare. Congressman Joe Donnelly voted for Obamacare. Joe Donnelly voted to scrap thousands of JOBS! We don't need Joe Donnelly hurting American JOBS anymore!

Joe Donnelly has said "yes" to big government and the Obama agenda and "no" to responsibility.

So let's say no to Joe Donnelly and yes to the qualified candidate, Richard Mourdock!

Obamacare has kept small businesses from expanding beyond 49 employees due to the penalty imposed on businesses concerning health care coverage. Obamacare is nothing more than a wedge to separate Americans from their Constitutional freedoms and their money and also their quality of life. It was a bill that was so big and complex that no one who voted for it actually knew everything it would do. But they knew it would ruin our economy and grow government! When the government provides health care, costs increase and quality of care plummets. It is the story in Europe and in Canada. It is important to vote out every Democrat and elect every Republican to make Lake County government responsible to the people rather than special interests and cronies. It is important to vote out every Democrat and elect every Republican to allow the economy to grow, energy to be utilized and Obamacare dismantled and completely repealed!

Richard Mourdock was a great success as our State Treasurer. He understands business and he understands budgeting, because here in Indiana we balance our budget. Joe Donnelly doesn't seem to know much other than if Obama is for it, so is he! 'Nuff said?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Picture of the Day!

This sign was posted on an 18 wheeler at Intersection of M40 and Blue Star near Saugatuck, MI. Courtesy of The New Boston Tea Party.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Porter County GOP

Your link to find your polling place

Your Porter County Republican Candidates

From the Post-Tribune:

CHESTERTON

GOP candidates night is Oct. 24

Porter County Republicans, in coordination with all Porter County Republican precinct organizations, will host a candidates night at 7 p.m. Oct. 24 at the Westchester Library Service Center, 100 W. Indiana.

Republican candidates who are on any Porter County ballot, along with current precinct committeemen, volunteers, officeholders and interested Republicans, are encouraged to attend.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now the latest LAKE COUNTY GOP NEWSLETTER

Welcome to the Lake County GOP

October Newsletter

Written by LCRCC
Sunday, 14 October 2012 01:32
Richard Mourdock with LCRP Chair Kim Krull Well here we go again! Six more Democrats indicted last month. We just had Democrat Coroner convicted for public corruption and not even sentenced yet and the US Attorney send out more indictments. We the people are the only ones who can put competent men and women in office. It is our duty to vote and to vote for the most qualified person. In Lake County it is our duty as voters (even if you may have always voted straight Democrat or split your ticket) to put people in on a local level who will provide oversight, do not have a history of machine politics, and who have a proven record of good ethical behavior. I believe our Republican Candidates fit all the criteria we need to start removing the bad stigma from Lake County’s name. We will started voting on October 9^th. All absentee in person voting sites with operational days and hours can be found here. You can find your polling location, see who’s on your ballot, and also print off an absentee vote by mail request form by visiting www.indianavoters.com. Thank you to all the City and Town Chairmen who have filled their poll workers. The clerks and judges are the first protectors of free and fair elections. Cards will be mailed soon for training dates and location. Please follow us on Twitter @LakeCountyGOP and Facebook and also check our website www.TheLakeCountyGOP.com for all events and volunteer opportunities. Had enough? VOTE REPUBLICAN! Kim Krull Chairwoman Lake County Republican Party

Important Voting Information!

Written by LCRCC
Wednesday, 10 October 2012 01:40
Review Candidates on Your Ballot, Print an Absentee Ballot Request Form, or Find Your Polling Place In-Person Absentee Voting Locations

Richard Mourdock. Replacing Barack Obama's favorite Republican with Indiana's champion of the people!

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:44:00 +0000

Richard Lugar lost his bid to be re-elected to the Senate to Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock. One might say that we have the opportunity to replace Barack Obama's favorite Republican with the man who fought Obama tooth-and-nail in the courts to protect Indiana pensions from being raided by one of Obama's myriad boondoggles. Yes, Barack Obama took money from Indiana Pensions to give to Union cronies (not the rank-and-file) and other unsecured creditors during the so-called Chrysler Bailout and the President broke the law to do it.

Joe Donnelly, the Democrat who is running for Senate against Richard Mourdock, is on record for voting for Obamacare and being a tax-and-spend Democrat in agreement with the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda that has given this nation four years of recession, skyrocketing debts, high unemployment, rising fuel costs and seen the USA's once-impeccable credit rating drop from AAA (for the first time since 1917) to AA-plus to AA to now facing an AA-minus rating.

Here is how Donnelly has been rated by watchdog groups who keep track of voting on spending bills in Congress:

Donnelly’s ratings from the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) & Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW):

NTU Score CAGW Score

2008:              16% (F)         13% (Hostile)
2009:              21% (D)         10% (Hostile)
2010:              17% (F)         13% (Hostile)
2011:              28% (D) 22% (Hostile)

Now here is the story of Richard Mourdock and Indiana Pensioners versus Barack Obama's illegal Chrysler Bailout:

Statement by Richard Mourdock on Reid-AFSCME Ad

Brose McVey

October 2, 2012

Indpls – (Oct 2). The campaign of U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock released the following statement in response to a new television ad, paid for by Harry Reid’s Majority PAC, AFSCME and other Donnelly allies:

“The Indiana way is to do your duty and to stand by your neighbor. In this case, I was bound by my oath and by principle to stand up for retired teachers and police officers, and for Hoosier taxpayers,” said Mourdock. “The Obama administration was prepared to take these folks’ life savings,” said Mourdock, “and I wasn’t going to stand by and let that happen, without a fight."

Eric Holcomb, Chairman of the Indiana Republican Party commented, “This was about standing up for the rule of law and having the character to do so. As Governor Daniels has said in interviews and in his book, Richard Mourdock showed us what real leadership looks like. It is typical form for Senator Harry Reid and Congressman Joe Donnelly to mislead voters, as they are desperate to run from their own failed bailouts.”

Cathy Caldwell, a retired teacher from Noblesville, was thankful for Mourdock’s leadership and commented, "It's very alarming to see bankruptcy law reversed so that secured bondholders are no longer protected. It was very refreshing that our Treasurer, Richard Mourdock, would stand up for us."

As State Treasurer, Mourdock was responsible for management of the Indiana State Police Pension Trust, established to hold and manage State Police officers’ pension funds. And, when he decided to file a successful suit against the federal government’s actions, his case was joined by the pension funds for retired teachers and for “Major Moves” as co-plaintiffs. The ruling of the Supreme Court in favor of Mourdock’s position can be found at:
http://www.in.gov/tos/files/SupremeCourtDecision01152010.pdf

In order to protect Hoosier tax dollars, Mourdock negotiated a $2 million cap on legal fees, saving the State over $1 million in expenses.

Mourdock’s actions were the subject of comments by Governor Mitch Daniels, who in an interview with the Evansville Courier Press, dated June 11, 2009, said "I think it was one of the most principled and gutsy things I've seen an elected official do in a long time." In that interview, Daniels, whose administration had responsibility over the other two pension funds involved in the case, went further by saying, “I don’t know how anyone could disagree with the principle of what he was doing.”

See the entire story at http://www.courierpress.com/news/2009/jun/11/chrysler-challenge-stirs-storm/
Mourdock argued that the federal government’s use of so-called “TARP” funds was clearly illegal and that this action overturned 150 years of bankruptcy law practices. And, while the Court ultimately sided with Mourdock and vacated a lower court opinion, they were silent on critical aspects of the argument.

Governor Daniels commented on the opinion. “The courts ducked,” Daniels said. “Not a one of them said a word about the Indiana position being wrong. They couldn’t. He was in the right.”

Fact Sheet on Chrysler Case

How did Indiana become involved in the Chrysler bankruptcy case?

Three state funds (two pension funds and a transportation fund) invested a combined total of $42.5 million in First Lien Debt of Chrysler LLC in 2008. Indiana bought this debt at a discount of around 44 cents on the dollar. At the time, Indiana’s portfolio managers estimated that at this price and lien position, the move would afford Indiana a good likelihood of recovering its investment if Chrysler was forced to enter bankruptcy.

An excellent summary of the facts of the case can be found on pages 3-16 of Indiana’s Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court: http://www.in.gov/tos/files/In_re_Chrysler_LLC_Cert__Petition.pdf

Why did Indiana object to the Obama Administration’s Chrysler bankruptcy plan?

Instead of following established bankruptcy law and practice, the Obama Administration sought to use its financial and political clout to circumvent the right of first lien debt-holders to be paid first before other classes of creditors. When the Obama White House succeeded in bullying the large TARP-recipient banks and other lenders to drop their objections, Indiana filed an objection to preserve its rights.

What were the main legal principles involved in the case?

The main objections Indiana raised at the bankruptcy court level were:

1) The proposed plan misused the Section 363 sale provisions, which are only allowed for liquidation, to accomplish a sham reorganization in order to provide more value to unsecured creditors (such as the UAW VEBA) than were provided to secured creditors like Indiana.

2) The use of billions of dollars in TARP funds to facilitate the 363 “sale” to the federal government was illegal as the TARP statute passed by Congress was very clear that TARP funds were appropriated only for the purpose of assisting “financial institutions.” Chrysler LLC did not fit the definition of a financial institution, therefore, the use of this money violated the Appropriations Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

If the law was violated, why did the courts allow the “sale” of Chrysler to proceed?

The lower courts conveniently side-stepped the substantive issues raised by Indiana and defeated its claims mostly based on a lack of standing. This lack of standing was predicated on the bankruptcy court’s finding that Indiana would have received less value for its debt via liquidation than it would under the proffered plan. This conclusion was a legal fiction, however, for the following reasons:

1) A bankruptcy process that normally would have taken months or years was rammed through the courts in a matter of weeks. This intentionally compromised Indiana’s ability to establish its own case, call expert witnesses, or present its own evidence of Chrysler’s true value. Indiana’s attorneys were given a mere 6 days to review over 385,000 pages of documents and only 4 days to conduct 23 separate depositions, most within 48 hours of the sale hearing.

2) Chrysler’s “expert,” Robert Manzo, was paid for his liquidation analysis on a contingent fee basis which provided that he would personally receive $10 million if the 363 sale occurred. In his testimony, he attributed value to only two of Chrysler’s then-40 current and projected product lines, relied exclusively on 2008 performance numbers (the worst year in history for the U.S. auto industry), and utilized low valuation multiples for which he could point to no precedent. Despite Indiana’s objections, the bankruptcy court fully credited his testimony and adopted his low-ball valuations.

What was the ultimate outcome of Indiana’s appeal and why does it matter for future cases?

Although the finality of the “sale” of Chrysler’s assets rendered much of Indiana’s claims moot, Indiana did petition the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari on September 3, 2009. In an unusual move, the Supreme Court granted the cert petition, but instead of scheduling the case for oral argument, the Court immediately vacated the decision of the lower court and awarded court costs to Indiana. While the mootness of the claims post-sale had left Indiana without a monetary remedy, Indiana did “win” the case in the sense that the lower court’s opinions were rendered null and void as future precedent. This was an important victory for the rule of law and the rights of secured creditors.

# # #

So the State Treasurer who earned over $1.3 billion in investment income for taxpayers and successfully expanded the state’s college savings plan and returned an average of 10% of his budget back to the Treasury each year, the man who stood up to Barack Obama's illegal pilfering of Indiana pensions and the man who is continually piling up new endorsements for Senate is the man I will be voting for on November 6th. For the sake of Indiana, we need a Hoosier who will represent Hoosiers and not the Big Government Democrats who have begun to make America into something entirely different than the Republic our Founding Fathers envisioned!

Who won the debate?

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 15:39:00 +0000

A real quick post this morning, I've been writing on other sites for clients and really haven't had the chance to post much about the Presidential race at all.

First, when the media agrees the Republican Romney won the debate, it must have been a rout. I watched CNN and even the hard core liberals acknowledged that Romney was on message and beat the President.

Second, the President is no fool. He has almost $1 billion at his beck and call to try and change your opinion of his policies or Romney's. It's probably time for normal Americans to determine for themselves whom they want as President for the next four years. In my case although Romney isn't perfect, and for sure is a little too moderate, I choose him over four more years of this rough road we've been on.

Third, it's becoming increasingly hard to blame George Bush for the problems. Most of the problems right now have been created by the spending and lack of management discipline of this administration. They aren't showing any discipline at all, merely running for a job because they want to stay in power.

Now onto the next debate and of course I expect the President will do much better and many in the press will celebrate his return to popular form. Good for him, but last night we may just have seen how he really thinks and acts, the real guy. A guy that I'd love to hang out with, to argue with, to tell his theories are just plain wrong ... but a guy that is basically tired and who's ideas didn't work. He'll make a ton of money as a former President.

Public Education and Change Aversion

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:14:00 +0000

A good friend of mine, Dr. Thomas Ho, in Florida is asking for more input and dialogue in one arena most averted by politicians these days. Many local and state politicians will say publicly that we need to focus on education, but of course the details are few and far between. Where is the legitimate debate, one that garners specific change? Why is the teaching establishment change adverse, or are they, is it really that some of the changes are for show?

Should we promote full school choice?
Charter Schools?
Allow students to use their own ipads/laptops at school?
Hold teachers accountable for test results?
How do we grade teachers?

Is it even good education to "teach to the test?"
Should sports be publicly funded, or pay as you play?
Redistricting and consolidation for efficiency
Appointed or elected school boards

I'm sure there are more, was just trying to promote civil dialogue ... check out Dr. Ho's blog and original article to join the conversation.

Northwest Indiana Political Thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Dalton) — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 11:27:00 +0000

Four years ago I was posting furiously on this very space, with the thought in mind that I could write some assistance for then-candidate John McCain.   My wife noted just yesterday that I just don't seem to be all that engaged in the election this year.   So, by way of explanation first and perhaps some catharsis second, my open thoughts on the next 50 days.

I am personally going to vote for Mitt Romney, I have no interest whatsoever in another four years of President Obama. His fiscal policies are foolish and remind me often of the stuff that college kids cook up when they have no basis in reality, but lots of starry eyed theory. This week he has dropped the ball multiple times in foreign policy, and frankly he's been lucky that in three years this is the first time he had to deal with problems overseas. If Israel decides to deal with Iran themselves in the next month, Obama will once again embarrass us by falling all over himself to apologize to our enemies.

That's it ... no more vitriol or active campaigning for me. I won't be putting out a sign or connecting to bloggers all over the country. Romney is a bit boring I agree, and I don't love the fact that he's Mormon. I would personally prefer a man or woman who has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. But he's more conservative fiscally, he's a successful businessman, and he's much more apt to defend the United States.

In Indiana, I will continue to support my long time friend Mike Pence in his race for Governor. I am excited to have the chance to actually vote for someone in the 1st Congressional race in Joel Phelps. I'm practical, it may take a couple election cycles to rid ourselves of Pete.   I was vocal in support of Richard Mourdock over Richard Lugar in the primary, and of course will vote for Mourdock over Donnelly for the US Senate seat.   Donnelly was so weak in his own South Bend Congressional district, he was hoping to win an easy race for Senate since he couldn't hold his own seat.

I will take the time next week to write about the local races, the ones that frankly have meant a whole lot more to my business and my family recently.   This page does not endorse candidates, we made that decision a few years back when we were threatened by a Republican candidate with a lawsuit ... wow! But I am quite happy for any of our editors to take the time to tell us who they are personally voting for and why.

Steve
Editor Northwest Indiana Politics

Should the military get to vote? Should Barack Obama be accountable?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanVet) — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:13:00 +0000

Two big stories - the military being disenfranchised and the Obama interactive online painting. Painting first...click on the link to see and interact with the painting, which is introduced by the youtube video...

The most amazing painting I have ever seen is found HERE!!!!!

Obama Lawsuit Could have Disastrous Effects on Military Voting Rights

Why are 15, non-partisan, veterans groups opposing President Obama’s lawsuit against an Ohio law that allows military personnel three extra days to vote before Election Day? The President’s campaign claims he is merely trying to extend voting rights. The reason these military groups - representing hundreds of thousands of veterans - oppose the President is because his claim is just plain false.

Despite what the Obama re-election campaign says in press releases about wanting everyone to have the chance to vote, what they are stating in court – where it counts – could have disastrous consequences for the voting rights of the men and women of our Armed Forces.

It is important to lay out the facts. There are two statutes regarding early voting, both of which were amended recently by the Ohio legislature. The first statute sets the deadline for early voting as the Friday before Election Day, giving most voters 32 days within which to vote early, in-person. The second statute extends in-person absentee voting through Election Day for military personnel, an additional three days of in-person voting.

President Obama’s re-election campaign argues in federal court that giving military personnel these three extra days to cast their in-person absentee ballot is “entirely arbitrary” and has “no legitimate justification" in the law because doing so “treats similarly situated Ohio voters differently.”

If a federal court were to buy into the Obama campaign’s basic argument, that military voters do not deserve any special treatment in voting laws, then it could have disastrous effects on military voting rights, not just in Ohio but everywhere in the country.

If successful, Obama’s legal argument against special voting privileges for members of the military could eviscerate longstanding precedent for military voting rights. And it is why 15 military and veterans organizations have intervened in court seeking to uphold this law. As their brief notes, “The Obama campaign’s and Democratic National Committee’s argument that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to afford special consideration, flexibility, and accommodations to military voters to make it easier for them to vote in person is not only offensive, but flatly wrong as a matter of law.”

These military groups are exactly right. The Supreme Court has long held that the military is unique, “a specialized community governed by a separate discipline from that of the civilian,” in part because “‘it is the primary business of armies and navies to fight or be ready to fight wars should that occasion arise.’”

For years, federal law has recognized the unique challenges of the military and enacted legislation giving the men and women of our armed services special rules and privileges to ensure that they have every opportunity to cast their ballot. Ohio has simply applied these same constitutional principles to early in-person absentee voting to give military members three extra days to vote before Election Day.

As one federal court put it, “How and where [members of the military] conduct their lives is dictated by the government. The vote is their last vestige of expression and should be provided no matter what their location.”

Not only is the Obama re-election campaign legally wrong, they are factually wrong as well. Obama’s team actually argues in its brief that the recent changes made by the duly elected legislature of Ohio “create two classes of Ohio voters.” First of all, that’s just not true.

Even in 2008, “Ohio law provide[d] separate application processes for different classifications of absentee voters,” i.e. one for a military absentee voter and one for “a ‘regular’ absentee voter.” Of course, no one, including the Obama campaign, had an issue in 2008 with treating military and “regular” voters differently. The only change Ohio enacted was to the deadline for in-person voting. The assertion that Ohio created a new class of voters is just plain false.

Finally, while the Obama re-election campaign is claiming to the media that he wants to extend voting to everyone for the three-day period preceding the election, this lawsuit is unlikely to accomplish that. If the court were to accept his legal argument that military voters deserve no special treatment under the law, the court would be faced with two options: rewrite the statute that cuts off early absentee voting at the Friday before Election Day or strike down the statute that providers three extra days for military personnel.

If the court believes Obama’s argument that military personnel deserve no special treatment, the court is far more likely to strike down the statute granting that right than it is to rewrite an entirely separate statute. Courts do not write statutes; the legislature does.

It is critical that we not allow President Obama’s statements to the media to cloud what exactly he is arguing in court (remember he promised the American people that ObamaCare wasn’t a tax and then had his lawyers argue that it was a tax to the Supreme Court). What Obama’s lawyers are arguing in court is far more important than the spin that his campaign is trying to place on it to the public, and if it goes uncheck, it could severely limit the voting rights of our brave men and women in uniform.