Image via Wikipedia

My grass was very dry and brown at the beginning of the summer this year. My wife asked me to do something about it, but I told her I turned on the sprinkler system. There’s nothing more I could do about it than that. It’s not my fault the grass is so brown. It must be some other problem over which I have no control. And, besides, it’s grass! It’s supposed to grow when it has water. But it turns out I was wrong.

For starters, I had the system set to run for ten minutes every three days. Now, if you’re reading this, I can assure you of one thing: You’re not grass. But even with that impediment, you are smart enough to know that in the high desert area of Front Range Colorado, grass must receive a healthy dose of water from sprinkler systems to survive. And 10 minutes every three days is just not enough. So I increased it to about 30 minutes every three days which had worked well in the past. But I had a second problem.

You see, I didn’t take the time to check the sprinkler heads to make sure they were in alignment. I went out to a particularly dry part of the front yard wondering why it was so brown. So I turned on the sprinkler system and–lo and behold!–the sprinkler head was turned askew. Well, I straightened that puppy out and the grass started to green up a bit. Same thing in the back yard too on the far right corner. So I adjusted the sprinkler head and wow! Results! It turns out that grass does grow if I keep the system in shape.

Based on this experience, I’ve come to the conclusion that Harry Ried is a lot like me. Now, I have to admit here that I just turned to my trash can, thinking I would get sick. But I cannot ignore the reality. I have the same it’s-not-my-fault disease with my grass that he has with the economy.

You see, Harry Ried is not to blame for the present state of the economy. He turned on the water back in 2009 with the stimulus package , but that darned George Bush really messed things up so badly he couldn’t do any better by now. Those brown spots in the economy are proof that the yard he inherited had already been trashed by the previous owner. But what Harry seems to miss is that it is the nature of economies to grow as long as the watering system is in proper shape.

You see, you need to use sprinkler heads in order for the grass of the economy to grow. Throwing money at infrastructure projects, for example, is like taking a bucket of water you just got from the spigot on the side of your house and dumping it on your lawn and expecting it to turn green. Only the grass in that one place may turn green and only for a short period of time. But all the rest of the grass turns brown. And you can’t keep running back and forth to the house refilling the bucket. You’ll get too tired and you have no method for spreading the water evenly across the entire lawn.

And what if the pipes in the sprinkler system have dirt in them. This is like regulation which gunks up the the sprinkler heads. You need a clean system for the water to flow properly. And you can’t turn the sprinkler heads in just one direction. They all must work in unison covering every part of the grass with an even spray or else you’ll have brown spots in the lawn. Economies don’t react well to similar approaches in government policy. Everyone must win or the whole system falls apart.

Harry Ried’s Washington, DC is a corrupt system which rewards only those whom he sees as worthy of his support. If you can put up the money or provide a few perks, Ol’ Harry will give you what you need. If you’re a big bank, well, as long as you allow us to demonize you, we’ll give you “too big to fail” status and protect you from destroying yourself. If you’re a car company with a lot of union workers, we’ll bail you out and give your stock to the union. If you allow your workers to unionize, we’ll praise you and give you preference in government contracts. If we can get your vote, we’ll give you a handout of some sort. But if don’t vote for us, we’ll not only withhold the handout, we’ll tax you more. And rich people are mean and cruel, but the middle class union worker is one of the gods.

The problem is, the grass of our economy is brown in most spots. And no matter how many times Harry Ried keeps running back to the Treasury Department to get a bucket of cash, he can’t get the economy back on track. And as long as interest group/voting bloc politics continues to dominate the policies coming out of Washington , we’ll have patches of brown just waiting to grow if only the caretakers would get the system in shape.

But Harry Ried can’t be bothered with such ideas.

NOTE: The Constitutionalist Today remains a publication that prints a variety of grassroots opinions from liberty group leaders, conservative politicians, and “we the people.” Jim Pfaff is one of our regular contributors, and we were happy to print his opinion on the recent news about Dan Maes (which originally appeared on his blog, opiniontimes.com). As the disclaimer that appears below every article states, submissions do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Constitutionalist Today. Indeed, TCT’s editorial board has endorsed Maes and stands by that endorsement; the decision to publish this article was made entirely based upon our commitment to publish differing opinions that reflect the grassroots.

Dan Maes

I officially announced today my opinion that Dan Maes needs to get out of the race for Governor right away and allow a credible Republican candidate to take on John Hickenlooper in November.

A major theme of the political environment of 2010 is “integrity.” Dan Maes became the GOP nominee because many Republicans doubted the integrity of Scott McInnis when they found out about plagiarism in the water report he submitted to the Hasan Foundation a few years ago. McInnis admitted the mistake and paid back the Hasan’s. But he paid the price of defeat because in the mind of Republican voters, they want to know they can fully trust their candidates. Dan Maes was the beneficiary by default.

So in the Denver Post on September 1st, 2010, we find out that the Kansas Bureau of Investigation could find no record to support Dan Maes’ claim that he served as an undercover agent. Maes subsequently removed the claim from his website.

I spoke with the Dan Maes campaign today, and I was told that “this incident took place 25 years ago” and is irrelevant and a distraction. I was told it is mere an attempt by some to bolster the campaign of Tom Tancredo. Really? A 48-year-old man makes a false claim this year about his police duties 25 years ago, and we are supposed to pass that off as an attack by the media on things in the past. In my opinion, this is not at all different than Scott McInnis’ plagiarism problem. And now the entire case for Dan Maes to be the GOP nominee for Governor is gone.

When you add to this the numerous other fires that have arisen out of the Dan Maes campaign—the largest ever campaign finance fine in Colorado history of $17,500; an unsigned check to pay back a $300 cash donation which exceeded the $100 cash donation legal limit; his assertion that he would immediately upon becoming Governor fire 2000 state employees when he must obtain legislative approval to do so; the wild claim that a Denver bicycle program would “threaten our liberties” by bringing in United Nations control of the city—it brings us to one conclusion: Dan Maes needs more seasoning before he is ready to take on the job of Governor. And he should pull out of this race in time to allow a credible candidate to emerge and defeat a similarly weak John Hickenlooper .

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

(by Heather Bachman)

Although America has already shown a historic height of dissatisfaction regarding our current President, the most alarming rejection is recently coming from a very surprising sector of politics: members of his own party.  In a recent White House meeting, the nation’s democrat governors grumbled against the recent legal attack on Arizona for their newest immigration enforcement law, S.B. 1070. Discussing it Democratic Governor Phil Bredesen said, “Universally the governors are saying, ‘We’ve got to talk about jobs ‚’ and all of a sudden we have immigration going on.”

While the statement may bring a sigh of relief to some who are happy to see that at least our state leaders know what really needs attention, deeper within their rejection of the lawsuit, you see nothing but the dangerous hunger of the liberals. Despite this lawsuit being an example of a nation attacking itself from within in an already challenging time, it wasn’t the action that the governors are snubbing but the timing of the action so close to November of 2010.

It is not problematic that the lawsuit involved an already-approved federal law which a state government saw being unused and decided to activate it for their and the nation’s safety, but the timing of its announcement and proceedings is dangerous.   Already the words “Democrat” and “incumbent” are dire terms when it comes to the pending November Elections.  It seems now, at least to the democrats, the phrase “immigration lawsuit” may be joining the anti-electoral mix for their reasons however and not the right ones.

Despite the aggression being felt from within their party, the fight against Arizona not only continues on but may be increased.  At the same time of the meeting, Attorney General Eric Holder stated during an interview that yet another lawsuit is in the process. It was further said that the additional legal action will be regarding prospective racial profiling that may occur by following the law.  This is despite the law actually dictating against racial profiling and, as said before, saying nothing more than what a disregarded federal law had already established.

It is not the timing of the lawsuit Democrats up for re-election should worry about but the lawsuit itself as well as the related attacks from speeches against Arizona to prospective additional lawsuits.  A recent Quinnipiac University poll stated 51 percent support SB-1070, 45 percent believe it is a step to reduce illegal immigration and 76 percent oppose any and all boycotts against Arizona .  Hence, it is the lawsuit that is the error, not the timing.

Why are they not against the lawsuit as a whole? Because they see the polls and the people who are outside of their office doors ready to vote against them in November. It is not just Obama which will be rewarded by amnesty but all Democrats.  Hence, once again the Democratic Party has shown us once again they have no problem being against us as long as at means the possibility of re-election.   Whether it’s the fact that the nation is literally attacking one of its own or the timing of the announcement and proceedings, the only real action we are seeing is a continuation of a frivolous lawsuit from people who claim to be the party of the Americans.  While they may scream that they know what we need in the end, actions speak louder than words and their current activity screams one word and one word only: AMNESTY.

On today’s The Jim Pfaff Show, I talked with Economist Paul Prentice , Ph.D about the current state of our economic system, the effects of government action in managing an economy and the moral case for capitalism.

It’s always an excellent discussion with Paul because he takes a libertarian approach based on the Austrian School of economic theory which is what I also hold. But he comes from a Judeo-Christian perspective on the justice and morality of markets and market forces.

The rights of individuals to undertake their personal activities with limited influence by government is a biblical as well as a strong economic principle. Paul and I always have an interesting and enlightening discussion on these topics. You’ll find it difficult to pull away from this podcast.

Image via Wikipedia

(by Heather Bachman)

It is not news to hear that we are in an environment of bias which is fueled by our mainstream media. It is not even news when we hear that people who speak truth are pushed down by this sector. However, a recent situation has forced us to not only see the strength of this realization but also the danger. Can a Glenn Beck rally turn the tide?

Tomorrow, Glenn Beck will be having a rally to influence and enhance the honor of this nation in one of its most tumultuous times since the Great Depression. Almost immediately it has to come to the defense of itself via the media. Even supposedly conservative hosts such as Joe Scarborough are attempting to wonder the reasoning behind it actually using the world “bewilderment” in a tweet discussing the segment. Ignoring real news such as a liberal legislator wanting to question conservative groups’ funding against the 9–11 Mosque and not the funding of it’s prospective creation, rambles continue on to figure out the events’ reasoning and no recognition of the actual chance to revive the nation and remind us of who we are.

Today, we actually live in a time where uniting for the good of the nation becomes cause for threatening debate instead of full fledged celebration that we are a nation which can do this type of thing even in times of turmoil. Even the selection of the date, the anniversary of Martin Luther King ’s Speech and same location, was under attack when in reality it is this type of event which King professed himself: Celebrating this nation and our ability and freedom to recognize it. A Glenn Beck rally captures that very spirit.

As a 20-Something year old conservative woman in New York, home of many recent rallies, it scares me that events at our nation’s capitol to profess exactly what we were made for can be attacked. In fact, it is this fear which leads me to politics in the first place as well as many of my colleagues. However, despite any attack or negative response no matter what the prospective strength of this negative reaction, even in times of turmoil we show the true errors of our ways which must be revised not only for our nation’s sake at this point in time but also for us to thrive at all. I just hope this event and the actions within it and the participants begin erasing these situations as soon as possible. If only for our nation’s sake.

Image via Wikipedia

I talked recently with Sandra Solin, Executive Director of the Coalition for Colorado Jobs. Votes using a secret ballot for union organizing will be a thing of the past if the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) passes in Congress. This bill would allow union organizers to come on the workplace site and personally interview every employee to gain their support for establishing a union. The problem is, this process is done publicly under EFCA proposed guidelines, and the union will be able to keep the results of this open survey and use it to encourage those who say “no” to change their vote to a “yes.” Well, “encourage” is really not the best term to use here. Intimidation will ultimately be the result of union organization efforts in the future if EFCA passes.

We are encouraging Senator Michael Bennet to stop being coy about his support for EFCA. If he supports it, say so. If not, announce it now so that this legislation will be officially dead. It gives all the benefits to unions and takes away the right to a secret ballot from employees. And, of course, it puts employers in a weaker bargaining position. Union organizing efforts should be fair and free from the types of intimidation that would occur if EFCA passes.

You might think it is a bit heavy-handed to use the term “intimidation,” but it’s not. Unions bring in billions of dollars every year in dues payments from organized labor. They expend hundreds of millions of dollars in union dues every election cycle. And union executives make loads of money in salaries. Organizers have in some ways more at stake than employees in keeping and growing union membership so that they can maintain their jobs and increase the income needed to support their large organizations.

Not convinced? Check out this video:

Image via Wikipedia

There’s one thing Ann McElhinney would like to accomplish nowdays: she’d like to make good on a challenge from the Hollywood left. She’s looking to get that James Cameron interview on the schedule, but it seems James Cameron doesn’t want to play even though he said he wanted to call out climate “deniers” publicly.

The Hollywood Reporter chronicled the anger of the most successful director in Hollywood history in their James Cameron interview on March 24, 2010:

The “Avatar” director was equally unsparing in his comments about those who don’t accept global warming as fact.

“That’s right,” Cameron said. “I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads.”

Turning more serious, he added: “Anybody that is a global warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their a** I’m not sure they could hear me.”

Wow! James Cameron is mad. And he’s not going to take it anymore.

So, Ann McElhinney from Not Evil Just Wrong decided to take him up on his offer. She worked with his people to set up a debate on the topic of global climate change and address the claim that those who disagree with him are not “deniers” (an ungly word which conjures up images of those who are Holocaust deniers) as the Hollywood Reporter reported in their James Cameron interview.

James Cameron ran away from the debate. After Cameron agreed to the debate in Aspen, Colorado, he backed out after repeated concessions by Ann and the other organizers (Andrew Breitbart and others) made at the request of Cameron’s people. Then finally, Cameron called the whole thing off.  It is hypocrisy.

I talked with Ann on the show today, and she made a passionate case for the moral foundations of capitalism. She rejects the notion that the use of energy or the entrepreneurial drive are evil in any way. And she challenges James Cameron to bring it on and come back to the table and debate the issue.

The moral case for capitalism is the most critical issue of our time. And it holds within it the key to maintaining our freedoms under the Rule of Law and expanding the blessings freedom brings to individuals around the world. Ann McElhinney makes a passionate and persuasive case for doing just that.

Yesterday I had Jason Worley on the program who heads up the Broomfield 9/12 group. Jason has a regular job marketing steel products by day, but a year and a half ago decided it was time to do something about the direction of our country. So he began to go to Tea Party events and then suddenly, he was starting a liberty group himself.  He has done an excellent job. You’ll want to hear his story and insights straight from the front line of movement to take our country back.

We also want to encourage people to join us at the 9/12 rally this year on September 13th at the State Capitol in Denver.  It’s the We ARE the People Rally.

Janine Turner

Jason and I also invite people to The Broker Restaurant on September 13th at 2:30pm (after the rally) to attend an elegant VIP Reception with Janine Turner, Actress, Activist, and Keynote Speaker at the rally. S. E. Cupp, political commentator and author of Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack On Christianity, will also headline the reception.

Besides a great time with Janine and S. E., the reception includes hors d’oeuvres, sweets, a drink ticket, lively discussions with other VIP’s and more. Dress is casual, as many people will be coming directly from the Rally.

S. E. Cupp

This fundraiser may be THE Conservative Social Event of the year.  We hope to see you there.

Register here.

If you cannot attend but would like to contribute to the success of our cause, please select a “Can’t Attend But Will Donate” Ticket and enter your donation amount.

The funds collected for this event will help pay the costs of the rally and provide a bit of seed money for the 2011 Rally. We are committed to Returning America To Its Roots and we ask for your support.

Podcast: Play in new window

Tom Tancredo was on The Jim Pfaff Show yesterday. Tom’s sudden entry into the Colorado Governor’s race by leaving the Republican Party and running as the American Constitution Party candidate has thrown Colorado’s elections into a whirlwind. He says that the reason he made this move was because of the weakness of Scott McInnis (whom he was supporting until he jumped into the race) and Dan Maes.

Is this the best way to address his concerns, though? In my opinion it’s the wrong way to go about this. And Tom Tancredo’s candidacy assures a victory for John Hickenlooper in the Fall. A recent Denver Post poll show’s Tom splitting the vote with the GOP nominee whomever it will be. Where will the votes come from for him to win in November as a third party candidate? Not from Democrats, that’s for sure. And he’ll need a lot of money to overcome the disadvantages third party candidacies bring.

Some local pundits are questioning the move too. Former State Senate President, John Andrews, calls the McInnis/Maes race for the GOP gubernatorial nomination a “Scotch verdict, an agnostic shrug of ‘not proved.’” And he believes it is highly unlikely that Tom Tancredo can get a plurality in a three-way race. “Tom is my friend but won’t get my vote.” This sentiment won’t go away in the Republican Party where Tom must siphon off enough votes to have any chance of winning.

I, with John Andrews, share a friendship and belief in the man, Tom Tancredo. But I strongly disagree with this strategy because it writes the outcome in favor of Hickenlooper.

Tom Tancredo discusses the following with me on this podcast:

• Why he decided to leave the Republican Party to get into this race
• How he thinks he can win if the GOP nominee drops out. You won’t expect his answer.
• Whether he would stay in the race if a strong replacement to the GOP nominee emerged.

Join me for this special podcast with Tom Tancredo. The link is above this post.

Image by McInnisForColorado via Flickr

Scott McInnis gave a very impressive interview on my show today. Take some time to listen, and I think you might re-think your opinion of him after.

As we approach the August 10 primary in Colorado, the GOP nomination for Governor has become more competitive than anyone could have imagined. After the withdrawal of Josh Penry earlier this year, former Congressman Scott McInnis was clearly the odds-on favorite to win the nomination. And he has been leading strongly in the polls ever since. But recently, the Denver Post pointed to plagiarism in a report Scott McInnis produced as part of a grant from the Hasan Foundation. And there have been calls for Scott to remove himself from the race.

In light of all this and with the primary nearing, I asked Scott McInnis to come on The Jim Pfaff Show today to discuss this and other issues. We covered a lot of ground:

• Plagiarism: Scott addresses the issue of plagiarism and explains what happened and what he has done to address the problem.
• Colorado Energy: Scott laid out a specific plan for energy development in Colorado.
• Jobs: To that end, he discussed the connection of energy and jobs.
• TABOR: He discussed his plan to uphold the Taxpayers Bill of Rights.
• Immigration and sanctuary cities.
• Abortion: He addressed the challenge of Jason Salzman of Huffington Post who pointed out that Scott didn’t have a 0% NARAL rating in Congress as Scott had claimed. You’ll want to check out Scott’s revealing statement about his stand on abortion.

Use the link above and listen to the podcast and then give your comments below.