Archive for April 8th, 2008

Liberal Ideology

April 8, 2008

1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by documented cyclical changes in the earth’s climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV’s.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make ‘The Passion of the Christ’ for financial gain only.

12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and A.G. Bell.

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried is because the right people haven’t been in charge.

18. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

20. You have to believe that illegal Democrat Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States.

21. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy.

22. You have to believe that it’s okay to give Federal workers the day off on Christmas Day but it’s not okay to say ‘Merry Christmas.’

Stolen from Gunny Bob at http://www.850koa.com/pages/gunnybob.html

S. 2739.

April 8, 2008

 

From: Gun Owners of America [Gun_Owners_of_America@capwiz.mailmanager.net]  
Sent: 4/8/2008 1:13:56 PM
To:
Subject:

“Make-Or-Break” Day On Your Right To Carry A Gun For
Self-Protection In A
National Park
— Tell your Senators to vote against “Cloture” on the Parks Bill

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

What happens tomorrow — Wednesday, April 9, 2008 — will probably determine
whether or not you will be able to carry a gun in a national park.

The first key vote will be a vote to cut off debate on the motion to take up
the “alternate” version of the “parks bill.” That
bill is S. 2739.

Why, you might ask, is such an arcane procedural vote so important?

To answer that question, it is necessary to look at a little history:
Earlier this year, the first “parks” bill came onto the
Senate calendar. It
was not a good bill: In terms of private property rights, it was one of the
biggest federal land grabs in American history. In addition, it would grant
another liberal anti-gun congressman to the Mariana Islands.

But Senator Tom Coburn was able to use the Senate rules to secure a right to
offer his gun amendment to that first bill — an amendment which would
affirm your right to carry a firearm for self-defense in most national
parks.

The Senate Democratic leadership was terrified. If presidential candidates
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were required to cast an anti-gun vote on
the eve of the presidential election, it could arguably cost Democrat states
like Tennessee, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arkansas, and New
Hampshire in November.

So Democratic leader Harry Reid (D-NV) came up with a plan: He would kill
the bill on which Coburn had the right to offer his gun amendment. Instead,
he would bring up a similar bill — but one on which Coburn had not secured
a parliamentary right to offer the gun amendment. Once the new
“alternate”
gun bill was pending, Reid would add so many amendments that the Coburn gun
amendment could not be offered.

So, to recapitulate: The “alternate” parks bill — S. 2739 —
exists for
one reason and one reason only: to block consideration of a Coburn
amendment to allow you to use a gun to defend yourself in a national park.

ACTION: Tell your Senator to vote against cloture on the motion to proceed
to the parks bill. You can use the pre-written message below and send it
as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm (where phone and fax numbers are also
available).

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

What happens on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 will probably determine whether or
not Americans will be able to carry a gun in a national park.

The key vote will be a vote to cut off debate on the motion to take up the
“alternate” version of the “parks bill.” That bill
is S. 2739.

This “alternate” parks bill exists for one reason and one
reason only: to
block consideration of a Coburn amendment to allow Americans to use a gun to
defend themselves in many national parks. Coburn had secured the right to
offer this amendment to the original bill, S. 2483.

The procedure which is being used to shut out gun owners is not only unfair;
it is sneaky and underhanded.

Please do not let it succeed.

Gun Owners of America has told me it will rate this vote as a gun vote.

Sincerely,

HABITAT STAMP SALES BENEFIT WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE RECREATION

April 8, 2008

Outdoor enthusiasts who purchase a Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stamp are beginning to see a return on their investment.  The Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) announced today that more than 19,000 acres have been set aside for wildlife and wildlife-related recreation since the DOW started selling Habitat Stamps two years ago. 
 
“What we have seen so far is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Dan Prenzlow, a DOW liaison on the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stamp Committee.  By combining money collected from habitat stamp sales with grants from Great Outdoors Colorado (GoCO) and other sources, the DOW is working on dozens of other projects that could protect up to 65,000 more acres of wildlife habitat in the near future.
 
Some of the wildlife habitat was purchased by the DOW, but most of it is preserved through permanent conservation easements that protect important winter range and migration corridors for deer and elk.  Other acquisitions and easements have set aside critical land for sage grouse and opened up fishing access for anglers.
 
The habitat stamp program was started in 2006 as a way to preserve and enhance wildlife habitat.  Sales averaged $3.5 million in the first two years. That money was used to match a variety of grant programs to leverage more than $38 million for habitat protection efforts in Colorado.
 
The habitat stamp program is overseen by a nine-member citizen’s committee appointed by the Governor.  The committee has reviewed dozens of proposals to protect critical wildlife habitat.  Each proposal receives a thorough review and is ranked according to its merits.  Final approval comes from the Colorado Wildlife Commission.
 
“The habitat stamp program was set up to benefit the wildlife of Colorado for future generations,” said committee chairman Mark Smith of Center, Colo.  “Our selection process is designed to protect the greatest number of species possible. As stewards of our resources, the committee’s goal is to ensure our grandchildren and their grandchildren will be able to enjoy Colorado’s natural resources.”
 
Properties protected though the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stamp Program as of April 10, 2008:

  • Conejos County: Kendrick Parcel, 200 acres, fee title, in-holding at existing La Jara Creek SWA, big game winter range and trout fishing. $400,000.
  • El Paso County: Ramah Reservoir, 158 acres, fee title in-holding at existing SWA, warm-water fishing and waterfowl access. $120,000.
  • Grand County: Wolf-Taussig, 3,140-acre easement, big game winter range. $3.5 million.
  • Gunnison County: Miller Ranch, 1,604 acres, fee title, big game winter range and migration, Gunnison sage grouse habitat and public access. $6.5 million.
  • Lake County: Hardeman Property, 1.25 miles of Arkansas River, perpetual fishing access and bighorn sheep winter range. $99,000.
  • Moffat County: Raftopoulos Two Bar Ranch, 3,184-acre easement for big game winter range and greater sage grouse protection, including 2,400 acres hunting access and fishing stream access in the Cold Springs Mountain area. $1.7 million.
  • Rio Blanco County: Berryman Ranch, 2,905-acre easement, big game winter range and migration. $2.5 million.
  • Rio Blanco County: Lunney Mountain, 2,027-acre easement, big game winter range and sharp-tail grouse habitat. $1 million.
  • Rio Blanco County: Wenschoff Ranch, 525-acre easement, big game winter range and migration, greater sage grouse habitat. $1.2 million.
  • Routt County: Adobe Ridge, 561-acre easement, big game winter range and migration, sharp-tail grouse habitat. $480,000.
  • Routt County: Circle 8 Ranch, 637-acre easement, big game winter range and migration, sharp-tail and greater sage grouse habitat. $472,000.
  • Routt County: Wolf Mountain, 2,711-acre easement, big game winter range and migration, sharp-tail and greater sage grouse habitat protection, and trout fishing. $1.75 million.
  • San Miguel County: Baker Ranch, 1,249-acre easement, big game winter range and migration, Gunnison sage grouse habitat.  $850,000.
  • San Miguel County: Elk Creek Ranch, 350 acres, fee title, big game winter range and migration, Gunnison sage grouse habitat. $924,000.

 
The Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stamp was created by House Bill 1266 during the 2005 legislative session.  The bill authorizes the sale of the stamp from 2006 through 2010, with an option to continue past the 2010 deadline with authorization from the Colorado Legislature. 
 
HB 05-1266 mandates that 60 percent of the money collected must be spent on big game winter range and big game migration corridors. The remaining money can be used on other habitat types critical to wildlife in Colorado, including wetlands, riparian, shortgrass prairie, and forest land projects.
 
“There are many wildlife species that benefit by protecting big game habitat,” said Prenzlow. “Bears, mountain lions, bighorn sheep, hawks, eagles, and a variety of grouse, waterfowl songbirds and other mammal species will benefit from the habitat stamp program.  Protecting the land that is used by big game goes well beyond just helping the deer and elk herds in the state.”
 
The habitat stamp costs $5 with the purchase of each hunting or fishing license up to a maximum of $10 per year. People who do not hunt or fish can purchase a stamp for $10.25 which includes the Colorado Search and Rescue fee.  Anyone between the ages of 19 – 64 is required to have a valid Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stamp to enter a DOW managed State Wildlife Area.
 
Habitat stamps can be purchased wherever hunting or fishing licenses are sold, as well as on the DOW’s Web site at www.wildlife.state.co.us or by phone at (800) 244-5613.
 
 
The Colorado Division of Wildlife is the state agency responsible for managing wildlife and wildlife habitat, as well as providing wildlife related recreation and maintaining a balance between human activities and wildlife.  Funding for the Division of Wildlife comes from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses and the habitat fees collected in conjunction with those sales.  The Division does not receive tax dollars from the Colorado general fund.
 

Florida Pondering TABOR-esque Law

April 8, 2008

Jon Caldara from “The Independence Institute” posted this the other day. Reprinted with permission, and some commentary.

  1. Tabor only gave you back money that the state took in excess from your paycheck.
  2. Tabor is what kept Colorado’s head above water when the rest of the country went broke during the last economic down turn.
  3. Those big returns assured that you didn’t underpay taxes and all the untoward things that go along with that.

Florida Pondering TABOR-esque Law

Posted by Jon Caldara on Apr 03 2008 | Government Largess

Want to help Floridians enjoy the benefits of TABOR type legislation? Well, all you have to do is write one email outlining how TABOR has positively effected your life. Here is the low down from Amy Oliver:

“Our conservative brethren in Florida need our help and time is of the essence. Right now TABOR type legislation is being debated by a special Constitutional committee comprised of 25 private citizens, not elected officials. They have the power to put a positive version of TABOR on the ballot as a proposed amendment to the state constitution. The proposal is called the “Taxpayer Protection Amendment” or CP-45. The vote will be on Friday so if you could take just a few minutes to email (email address is below) Florida’s Constitutional committee about how TABOR has been beneficial in Colorado and send this email/suggestion along to some of your friends to do the same it would help both Florida and Colorado.
The ideal letters should be personal testimonials of how a revenue cap and voter approval has helped them. They don’t even necessarily need to mention the word “TABOR”, since we’re marketing this proposal as ‘different from TABOR’. Basically, if citizens can communicate that TABOR has been beneficial to taxpayers and the state that is the objective.

Please send an email to:
frier.nancy@leg.state.fl.us

Thank you for your help.”

Your input is critical because as Ben DeGrow points out, the opposition will be in full on spin and distort mode. Do you blame them? How difficult the task to argue against citizens keeping more of their own money.

SOURCE: http://caldara.i2i.org/?p=161#comment-323