Why wait for the Republican primary in April? The Tea Party’s not!

With New York’s Republican primary not taking place until April, it had occurred to me that the whole dog and pony show might be a moot point by then. Would there even be more than one candidate left in the race, I wondered?

Well, apparently some of the Tea Partiers have had similar thoughts, and have decided that they’re not going to wait.

The TEA Parties in Western New York are not waiting for the Primary in NY State, we are having our own Tea Party Caucus. So far caucuses are being held here in Erie, Niagara, Orleans, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Monroe, Orange, Broome, and possibly Wyoming, Gennessee, Long Island, Staten Island and all points in between. We know more will be jumping on board.

Read more over at Albany’s Insanity.

If anyone knows of a caucus being held in Central New York (especially in the counties of Onondaga, Cayuga, and Oswego), please let me know, so that I can spread the word!

Read Full Post »

Homeschooling, Libertarians, and Shakespeare

You would think, from the title, that this would be some sort of in-depth diatribe that dissects my basic cultural beliefs.

Not so much.

(But that alliteration was quite snazzy, was it not?)

Actually, this is my 150th blog post here at Pages Left Unturned.

In honor of this, I am going to post… humour. Because… err… I was going to post it anyway, and it wasn’t until I logged into WordPress that I realized what a special number it was going to be. To which I say: “Down with monumental blogging numbers!”

…or something.

Oh, I know! “Occupy 150!” Eh-heh.

Mostly, I just wanted to share a couple of amusing things that have come across my screen of late.

Exhibit A:

Exhibit B:

Exhibit C:

That is all.

Read Full Post »

Food freedom in NH..?

It’s really too bad that we’ll never see this in New York. Then again, even if New Hampshire passes this bill, the Feds are likely to trample on it anyway, since they have no regard for the tenth amendment and haven’t for generations now…

Edit:
It makes me even more skeptical that the states will succeed with such moves of sovereignty when I read articles that discuss Obama’s movements in the past three years and his further attempts to streamline government. Normally I would welcome “streamlining,” but with his track record, I wouldn’t trust the man to streamline a mosquito. Mark my words, this is going to be about consolidating power and money, not dispersing it.

Read Full Post »

Santorum and Paul debate pro-life law: federal or state?

I have to say, last night’s debate in SC is the first one I have actually enjoyed. Maybe that has something to do with the fact that it drives me up the wall when a question is addressed to all of the candidates, and only half of them are allowed to answer before they move on to the next question. Maybe. That said, it must be easier when there are only four of them, because they actually did a good job of it last night.

Now then. I like Santorum and Paul. I thought Romney was oily four years ago, and still do. Gingrich… just rubs me the wrong way, aside from the fact that I don’t really trust him. He’s witty, sure, and seems to be a great “debator” – but they elected the last President merely because he could “speak like a president,” and look where that got us.

Anyway. Santorum premuch went after Gingrich and Romney, for the most part focusing any attacks entirely on them. But he and Paul did get into a lively exchange about abortion when Santorum pointed out that Paul only got a 50% rating from some group that looks at how politicians have voted on legislation, etc regarding pro-life endeavors.

(To which my father chimed up in the background, “That doesn’t necessarily mean anything; it all depends on what was attached to said legislation.” Hear, hear!)

So, they basically went roundy-round about federal pro-life laws versus state pro-life laws and whose jurisdiction it technically falls under, and such. Santorum fell on the side of federal, and Paul, as usual, fell on the side of state, arguing that abortion is a violent crime, and we already let states have jurisdiction when it comes to handling other violent crimes, such as murder or burglary.

I found the whole exchange interesting, especially when it was pointed out that law follows morality, not the other way around. I don’t know that I’ve ever heard a politician argue that you have to change the heart if you ever have a hope of changing the law, although I have heard it on many a pro-life website…

Anyway. I came across this in my RSS feed today, and after watching Santorum’s incredulity over Paul’s remarks last night, I’m a bit incredulous myself.

Santorum attacked Paul at CNN debate for leaving abortion to states, but look what he said in 2003…

The Daily Paul only excerpts his last paragraph, but if you click through, you can read the whole interview.

Back then, he argued that things like sodomy and abortion were states’ issues rather than federal ones. ‘If they want it in their state, they can have it… in their state,’ basically.

…what changed, Rick?

Edited to add:

For those of you who may have missed the debate but would like to catch up on it, I believe you can find it at CNN.com.

Read Full Post »

Ron the PoTAEto, Meet Rick the PoTAHto…

It’s really rather unfortunate that these two don’t seem to like each other, since I would consider them my “top two” at the moment. I mean, I disagree with both of them on aspects of their foreign policy (which seems slightly ironic, I suppose, since they are at pretty opposite ends of the spectrum on this)… but when it comes to moral issues, I’m pretty sure I can get behind them.

I still think Paul has Santorum (or any other candidate) beat, hands-down, when it comes to Constitutional issues and abiding by our founding documents, but I don’t know that I agree with bringing home 100% of our troops. The ones in obscure countries that we’ve had bases at arbitrarily since WWII? Heck, yes. Bring them home. You can gather intelligence without the bureacracy and taxpayer-funded bases there.

Israel? I’m not sure where I stand there, as a Christian, reflecting on God’s promises, and whether they still apply to the “nation” of Israel as such in modern times, etc. I mean, there are verses that touch on a blessing for those who bless Israel, etc, but… modern day Israel is a 20th century creation. You certainly can’t argue that America was blessed as a nation because they’ve “supported Israel” when, hey, America’s been in a downward spiral since before the new Israel decided to plop itself down on the map, ye ken?

I certainly don’t side with Bachmann on the Israel thing (although I like her for certain other stances). The girl’s got such a crazed look in her eyes when she talks about them that makes me wonder… if Israel jumped off a bridge, would you, too, Michelle? Like I said, I’m just not sure I can jump on the whole “Israel is God’s Nation” bandwagon, because I haven’t studied the promises enough to know if I believe that they still apply to Israel as a nation or if God’s focus is the body of Christ, ie, Christians, when it comes to that sort of things these days. (All my non-Christian friends are probably scratching their heads and saying, “Wha–?” right now thanks to my lapse into Christianese, and for that I apologize.) I mean, Jews used to circumcise to identify themselves as followers of God’s law, and we don’t culturally do THAT any mo– oh, wait. Yeah, we do. Except that modern circumcision is a far, far cry beyond what Biblical circumcision was ever meant to be… which I wish I had known before giving birth to a son, but that’s neither here nor there at this point. Suffice to say, Biblical circumcision was never the practice that we know it as today. (Can I just state now that that is NOT a topic I ever thought I would be discussing on my blog?)

Moving right along…

Foreign aid? Heck, yeah. Cut it. I disagree with Santorum on this one. I don’t think our bureaeucracy needs to be taking money from its citizens to give to other bureaucrats who are then supposed to give it to their citizenry. A) it never gets to the people it’s supposed to, b) let us choose where we want our money to go in the first place.

Anyway… I am equal parts distraught over their dislike for each other (because I would have loved to see the two of them together on a ticket) and amused by the attempts to point out why the other “might not be as pro-life as they seem.”

Read the article here: Santorum, Paul Compete To Prove Pro-Life Credentials | Fox News

“Ooooh, you voted once FOR a bill that provided for money to go to Planned Parenthood!”   …even though the money was specifically not supposed to go to abortions. (I’m not saying I LIKE that he voted for it, I’m just pointing that out.

“Ooooh, you voted AGAINST legislation that would have provided for it to be a federal offense for the injury of an unborn child in a violent crime!”  …yes, because he supported that the amendment should provide that an unborn child is a PERSON, but believed that enforcement of said amendment should be left up to the government of the states rather than to the Feds.

Boys, boys. Let’s calm down. You’re all so used to pointing fingers that you can’t even tell when you are actually allies on an issue! Now, Romney… go ahead. Point fingers there. The guy was proudly pro-choice until he decided to run for president in ’08… and that was unfashionable, so he had to change his mind. Just like he’s changed it about everything else he’s ever stood for. I’m surprised he can agree with himself on his own name, when it comes down to it…

Oh, and did you hear? McCain is endorsing Romney.

…what? This IS my surpised face!

Read Full Post »

This is making my head hurt…

So… apparently Congress disagreeing with the President is rebellion now. Checks and balances? What a quaint idea.

Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. told The Daily Caller on Wednesday that congressional opposition to the American Jobs Act is akin to the Confederate “states in rebellion.”

Jackson called for full government employment of the 15 million unemployed and said that Obama should “declare a national emergency” and take “extra-constitutional” action “administratively” — without the approval of Congress — to tackle unemployment.

“I hope the president continues to exercise extraordinary constitutional means, based on the history of Congresses that have been in rebellion in the past,” Jackson said. “He’s looking administratively for ways to advance the causes of the American people, because this Congress is completely dysfunctional.”

“President Obama tends to idealize — and rightfully so — Abraham Lincoln, who looked at states in rebellion and he made a judgment that the government of the United States, while the states are in rebellion, still had an obligation to function,” Jackson told TheDC at his Capitol Hill office on Wednesday.

“On several occasions now, we’ve seen … the Congress is in rebellion, determined, as Abraham Lincoln said, to wreck or ruin at all costs. I believe … in the direct hiring of 15 million unemployed Americans at $40,000 a head, some more than $40,000, some less than $40,000 — that’s a $600 billion stimulus. It could be a five-year program. For another $104 billion, we bailout all of the states … for another $100 billion, we bailout all of the cities,” he said.

Read the rest over at The Lonely Conservative…

People like this make my head hurt.

Read Full Post »

Due process? Huh? What’s that? We don’t need that…

Okay… I know that there are those amongst my friends and extended family who will look at this and say, “Oh, well, he was a terrorist, so…”

…HE WAS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. Bill of rights, anyone? How about due process?

There are those who are going to say, “Well, he was dangerous, we couldn’t bring him in, we had to assassinate him.”

…then why won’t they even deign to present the evidence to us?

The murder of Americans: Existence of secret kill lists now admitted by lawless White House

Read the dialogue at the end. They’re refusing to present the evidence to the American people, to a judge, so on and so forth. At least in the past if a government agency assassinated someone, they had the sense to deny and cover up because they knew it was unconstitutional. No more. It’s right out there in the open.

When are We The People going to wake up?

If I were on a computer rather than on my cell phone, I would go look up the quotes regarding the concentration camps in WWII. You know, the “they came for this group, and I was not part of it, so I did not speak up; then they came for this group, ankd I w as not part of it, so I still did not speak up. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up for me…”

Something along those lines. Oh, and the Thomas Jefferson one, I think it is… “Those who forsake liberty for safety deserve neither” is it? I’ll have to look thenm up later to get them exact, but the WordPress app on my cell phone isn’t really the best place for it.

Read Full Post »

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

Like the author of this article said, just when you think you can’t get any more cynical about the bills they pass…

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

Is anyone else twitching five kinds of sideways at this?

Read Full Post »

What Are You Into – September 2011

Am I the only one wondering where September went? This will be my second month participating in SortaCrunchy’s “What Are You Into”. You can see last month’s here.

On My Nightstand

Yeah, I’m still reading Simplicity Parenting. Bad me. I’ve been on a bit of a “light reading” bent lately and just haven’t gotten much farther into this book. Also on my nightstand is Cornelia Funke’s Inkdeath, since I finished Inkspell during the 600+ miles driven for vacation, and the intervening time spent in Maryland. I also picked up several books while in Maryland. We stopped in at a church’s thrift store when they were having an end-of-season sale. And all of their books were free. Yep, free. One of the ones I picked up was Babyhood, a memoir by Paul Reiser on being the parent of a baby. And. It. Was. Hilarious. Seriously, go read it.

Want to Read

Yeah. The same books as last month, minus Inkspell. Oh, and those books I picked up for free at the thrift store? They include Edges: Human Ecology of the Backcountry, which reaches out to the agrarian in me. Speaking of agrarian, I ordered myself a new copy of The Unsettling of America: Culture & Agriculture because it’s been a good four years or so since I read it the first time and in all my relocating I seem to have lost my original copy. I also received a copy of The Handmaid’s Tale via PaperbackSwap, so we’ll see how that goes. Like I said, I’ve been doing a lot of “light reading” lately when it comes to books, which is a change for me in recent days. I think it has something to do with how “heavy” a lot of the things I’ve been following online have been, but we’ll get to that later.

T.V. Worth Watching

We just finished Season Seven of House, M.D. This saddens me, as the first episode of Season Eight just aired on television this past week. That means I’ve got about a year until it comes out on DVD, Le sigh. On the bright side, Season… Seven? I think?… of Bones releases on Netflix next week, so that’s happy.

Movies I’ve Seen

Sweet Land – “Banking and farming don’t mix.” So says the protagonist a couple of times during this film. I love that he still farms with horses, while his neighbor gets the “Biggerbetterfaster” (also known as a tractor), and so on and so forth. Basically? It’s a cute love story surrounding a German mail order bride and her attempt to integrate into post World War I rural America. Granted, the film’s “socialist” was a “rabble-rouser” at a property auction, and in the way he was protesting the bank selling off this farm, they made him seem like a positive character… but a socialist, I fail to see him as. The movie didn’t really flesh out what its opinion here was – it seemed to approve of agrarian ways, and felt a bit negative about the idea of industrializing agriculture by always seeking the newest technology, and going into debt to do it (hence the whole property auction thing.. but if I say more, it will spoil it for you)… neverthelesss, it still had a pretty good message, and I enjoyed it.

Hachi: A Dog’s Tale – Richard Gere. Loyal Akita. Yeah, I cried. But then, I’m a sap like that. Heck, I cried at the trailer, so…

Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil – Um, yeah. I had my doubts, since… it’s a sequel, and sequels tend to be poorly made. It didn’t fail to disappoint on that count. We finished it, and I thought, “Hm. That was a waste of time.” Do yourself a favor. Get the original Hoodwinked. It’s actually.. original. And has amusing music (the sequel does not). This … was just an attempt to get everyone to buy it because it had the same name and the “same” characters, thereby cashing in on the name of it. There was not storytelling involved. They went the way of the Disney sequel. Shame on them.

Things I’m Following:

Like I mentioned earlier, I think my reading fare has been lighter because the rest has been heavier. As you might have noticed in my latest link roundup, I’ve been following the battle of food rights, and the presidential election, as well as dwelling, praying, and worrying about the possibility of a move next year. As a follow-up to the whole “you don’t have a right to produce or consume food of your choice” fiasco, there have been some positive developments. For example, in Los Angeles County, there is a proposal coming before the County Board of Supervisors that would greatly protect the food rights of the citizens of their county.

As submitted to by Vonderplanitz to the Board of Supervisors, it is a “Resolution recognizing the rights of individuals to grow and consume their own food and to enter into private contracts with other individuals to board animals for food.”

The resolution concludes, “Be it resolved that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors supports, endorses, and encourages the recognition of the right and freedom of people to raise their own food, including food derived from agricultural animals, for the enjoyment of themselves and their families, either by their own investment and labor or through the assistance of others through contractual arrangements.”

I’ve contacted David over at The Complete Patient regarding getting a copy of the full resolution, and he’s put me in touch with someone who can hopefully do so. Our regional newspaper just ran an article yesterday about the pros and cons of raw milk, and what with the whole Wisconsin climate, and now this… I am thinking that the time might be ripe to submit a similar proposal to the officials in my county here in upstate New York. Granted, it’s New York, and politics here are… well, they smell. Strongly. And not of coffee. But, I have hope. Whether it will entail simply passing along the proposal with a letter, or perhaps starting petitions and gathering signatures, I am not sure yet, but I will keep you posted on that front. Like the food movement itself, I am thinking that the food rights movement just might be able to get its foothold by starting locally.

Around the Farm

• The chickens are spending more time in the coop, what with the colder weather – less pasture time and more kitchen scraps.
•  Queenie the Muscovy has decided that it is the perfect time of year to set on a clutch of thirteen eggs.
• I’m doing a lot of fence repair at the farm where I work, getting winter pastures ready for the Shires.
• I’m still trying to sell our Kiko/Boer corss buck, BamBam, in the hopes of downsizing for the winter.
• We had our first frost last night.

Looking Forward to Next Month

Well, really, it’s this month, because I’m a slacker an didn’t post at the start. But October? I’m looking forward to the change of the leaves, and The Wee Goon turning seven months old. Ehm. That’s about it. I think it will be a “quiet” month. (Watch me regret that statement.)

Read Full Post »

Keeping Politics Out of the Pulpit: Should We?

This constitutes ‘one of those things’ that I just assumed ‘had always been that way’. Or rather, I had never really thought about it. It just was.

But did you know?

Did you know that the whole keep-politics-out-of-the-pulpit/tax-exemption thing only dates back to Lyndon Johnson and the aptly named (wait for it)… Johnson Act (creative, I know) of the 1950s?

Yeah. Makes you think.

Or, at least, having watched America: Freedom to Fascism, which is in part an expose on the 16th Amendment, the Federal Reserve, and the IRS, it makes me think.

Just sayin’.

So what are your thoughts? Does the government have the authority to take away those rights in exchange for tax-exemption? (Then there’s the whole argument about the constitutionality of income taxes versus corporation taxes, et cetera, but I’m typing this on my phone so I can’t really delve into that right now to the extent that it deserves…)

Read Full Post »