Category: Tea Party

I’m A Hobbit

I’m A Hobbit — John McCain, yesterday, July 27,  quoted a dig at Tea Party members made in the Wall Street Journal saying:


The Republican House that failed to raise the debt ceiling would
somehow escape all blame. Then Democrats would have no choice but to
pass a balanced-budget amendment and reform entitlements, and the tea-party Hobbits could return to Middle Earth having defeated Mordor.

This is the kind of crack political thinking that turned Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell into GOP Senate nominees.”

I’m not one of the conservatives who hate John McCain. He showed sagacity in his push for “the surge” in Iraq and political courage in  his outspoken yet ignored warnings about the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac meltdowns.

But even leaving aside the obnoxious and pointless digs at a couple of decent women who were motivated by love of nation to enter the political arena at much personal cost to themselves, he and the Wall Street Journal are dead wrong.

It is not the “Republican House” that has failed to raise the debt ceiling. The Republicans who control America’s House of Representatives are more than willing to raise the debt ceiling. They have passed a plan that raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion to $16.7 trillion.

It was McCain’s fellow senators that voted to kill it.

And not raise the debt ceiling.

McCain’s fellow senators are unwilling to cut the gravy train to the government-connected, which it should be noted includes greedy rich things Goldman Sachs and General Motors. This is what motivates the Sharron Angles and Christine O’Donnells and the rest of us Hobbits to get politically involved.

You are a decent guy Senator and I do wish you were the president but you have your guns turned in the wrong direction.

And something else Senator, a Hobbit like Miss O’Donnell would never have caved into threats from Wall Street fat cats and vote for TARP a month before a presidential election.

 

I’m A Hobbit

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa — Independence Day in Springfield Pa was kicked off in traditional hometown fashion — from the high school, down Saxer Avenue to Memorial Park on Springfield Road — with a parade featuring churches, fire trucks, community groups, antique cars and, of course, lots of kids on bicycles.

Here are some scenes from it:

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

 

The Delaware County Patriots were among the participants

 

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

Among the many red, white and blue bicyclists.

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

A series of homemade floats honoring all four branches of the military.

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

Special transportation for the Republican Party.

 

July 4, 2011 In Springfield Pa

Richard Dreyfuss WPHT Civics Lesson

Richard Dreyfuss  has his heart in the right place but his mind remains mostly stuck in the left one. Richard Dreyfuss WPHT Civics Lesson

The man  who won the 1978 Best Actor Oscar for The Goodbye Girl and might be best known for his role as Matt Hooper in Jaws described to a crowd of about 700 at The National Constitution Center, June 8, his plan to return the teaching of civics to its proper place in the nation’s schools.

The event was hosted by WPHT 1210, now calling itself “Talk Radio WPHT” instead of “The Big Talker”.

It was moderated by WPHT’s Dom Giordano.

Dreyfuss said the germ for the idea for what became The Dreyfuss Initiative occurred during the 2000 election when “the court stopped the election process”.

This brought one loud, derisive snort of laughter from a member of the audience.

Dreyfuss continued saying “All my friends targeted Bush as the enemy.” He became convinced, however, that it was the ignorance of his friends and of the American public that was what allowed such a thing to happen.

Anyway, Dreyfuss was eventually hired for a stage show in England from which he was quickly fired after it was discovered that he wasn’t being falsely humble when he said he couldn’t sing or dance.  While between jobs he “trolled for work” and found it lecturing on history and current events.

At this point he became aware of a dearth of understanding by citizens as to how their governments work. This was even more true of Europeans than Americans, he said.

So began the Initiative which has pointedly politically diverse board of governance — noted pollster Frank Luntz is a director and Scott Faulkner, who was the Reagan-Bush campaign’s national director of personnel in 1980 and was elected by the Gingrich Congress to be the first Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1995 is executive director.

Faulkner, in fact, shared the stage with Dreyfuss in Philly.

Dreyfuss lecture rambled  with occasional shots at George W. Bush, Fox News and Rupert Murdoch. After stridently blaming Fox for harming the political discourse, Giordano suggested he add MSNBC to list. Dreyfuss considered for a moment then agreed.

And Dreyfuss did not, this evening, do the civic-minded thing and consider the claims he was spouting as facts. In describing one of the sins of America he said that 90 blacks a month were lynched for 100 years which would mean that there were a 108,000 blacks lynched during the Jim Crow era.

According to the Tuskegee Institute, there were 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites lynched in this country between 1882 and 1968.

Still, Dreyfuss truly expressed love for this country. He said it was the best in history and warned that if we did not start taking the teaching of this seriously it would not last the 21st century.

Dreyfuss showed respect for the Tea Party giving one questioner who identified himself as a member of a New Jersey group much praise and encouragement. He also singled out Republican congressmen Darrell Issa and Speaker John Boehner as being the only political figures who have given him support.

Of the 20 or so persons who lined up to ask Dreyfuss questions only five got to ask them due to the length of Dreyfuss’s answers.

Also, Giordano said that the meeting was being streamed live although it was not broadcasts over the air on WPHT due to the Phillies-Dodgers game. The Phils won 2-0, by the way, behind Cole Hamels’ pitching, a Ryan Howard home run and a Shane Victorino triple.

Dreyfuss expressed criticism about the entertainment now being provided by Hollywood. He said the only movies being made involved “teenaged angst about vampires” or “self-congratulatory” exercises in technology like Avatar.

The Independence Hall Tea Party Association passed out flyers after the event advertising “The Energy Independence Day Tea Party” which will be held on Independence Mall, 1-3 p.m., July 4. It will feature Giordano, Ambassador John Bolton, The Honorable Anna Little, businessman Joey Vento, the 286 Band and include a debate about energy.

The event is free.

There will be an after-party featuring soft drinks and hor dourves. Cost is $20 and reservations are required. Call 215-690-4043.

Also there will be a pre-event lunch. Stay tuned for details.

Co-sponsors are the Cherry Hill Tea Party and the Diamond State Tea Party.

Richard Dreyfuss WPHT Civics Lesson

Barletta Bans Recordings At Town Halls

Barletta Bans Recordings At Town Halls — Newly minted coal-country congressmen Lou Barletta (R-Pa11) and Tom Marino (R-Pa10) have sparked fears they have gone Potomac by instituting recording bans at recent town hall meetings.

Barletta has denied the claim saying the event at which he banned personal recordings was a  “private” meeting.

To which he had opened to the old media who of course were given permission to record.

The congressmen’s actions were motivated by orchestrated attempts by Democrats to infiltrate the town halls with unruly disrupters whose antics would be recorded and placed on the YouTube in the hope it would indicate widespread grassroots opposition to Republican policy.

It was an effort to mimic action in 2009 and 2010 by Tea Partyers which led to big Republican gains last November.

What should be remembered, however, is that it wasn’t the angry protestors who made the Democrat incumbents look bad but their responses to them. The incumbents, perhaps most famously Arlen Specter,  were recorded being abusive, mocking and dismissive to them, after which they arrogantly ended constituent meetings completely.

If Barletta and Marino follow that path they will be one-termers.

If they, however, let them obscenely and abusively vent and are judicious in their response the strategy will backfire badly on the Democrats.

The Republicans simply have to make sure they have their own recordings to put on YouTube.

It remains to be seen if they are smart enough to do this.

Barletta Bans Recordings At Town Halls

David Mamet Conservative Conversion

David Mamet Conservative Conversion — David Mamet, revered playwright and screenwriter whose works include American Buffalo, The Verdict, Wag The Dog, and Glengarry Glen Ross, and whose work Speed -the-Plow was called a “tone poem” in the old media in the days when it ruled, has declared himself a conservative.

Mamet promotes his just released book, “The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture,”  by saying “My interest in politics began when I noticed that I acted differently than I spoke, that I had seen ‘the government’ commit sixty years of fairly unrelieved and catastrophic error nationally and internationally, that I not only hated every wasted hard-earned cent I spent in taxes, but the trauma and misery they produced…”

He has shown himself to be a disciple of the brilliant Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, and a defender of Sarah Palin.

The hearts of the passionate and courageous 20-somethings do sometimes  evolve to be guided by the wise brains of the 50-somethings and this appears to be what has happened in Mamet’s case.

But is Mamet now a “conservative”? Words are roundly abused for political machinations. Liberals once  advocated a society with minimal government, not speech codes, racial set asides and taxpayer funded abortions. Liberals were once the ones who defended the “little guy” and not pharmaceutical companies or salmon.

And conservatives? Once they were the ones who demanded a king and a state church. Is that what they want now? Because they want to allow Bible readings in schools? It is cruelly ironic to note that it is the “conservatives” who are the ones fighting a book banning.

Further it should be noted that teaching that our rights are God-given i.e. “endowed by our Creator” gives not only permission but obligation to oppose those in authority when they violate those rights.

It is the exact opposite of seeking a king and state church.

Unlike those who want to give government agencies ever more arbitrary and increasing power.

It’s time to scrap the labels “conservative” and “liberal”. The new ones should be “Freedom and Prosperity” and “Regulation and Rationing”.

The Kennedy Democrat is the same as the Reagan Republican who is the same as the Tea Partyer.

One suspects that Mamet’s values haven’t changed merely that he willed
himself to pull back the curtain and look at the man behind it.

Anyway, welcome aboard David Mamet.

David Mamet Conservative Conversion

 

David Mamet Conservative Conversion

Adolph Says Vote Likely On Pa. NoBamaCare Bill

The man accused of bottling up a bill that would make much of Obamacare hard to enforce in Pennsylvania told the Delaware County Patriots, Thursday, May 19, that it will likely come up for a vote this year.

State Rep. Bill Adolph (R-165), who chairs the House Appropriations Committee has been accused of sitting on HB 42 by Tea Party activists. The bill has been tied up in Adolph’s committee since Feb. 8.

HB 42, introduced by Matthew Baker (R-68) on Jan. 19, says A law
or rule shall not compel, through penalties and fines, directly or
indirectly, any individual, employer or health care provider to
participate in any health care system.

It also specifically
says that an individual or employer may pay directly for lawful health
care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for
doing so; and specifically allows  health care providers to accept
direct payments without penalties. It also prohibits state law enforcement and regulatory agencies from
participating “in compliance with any Federal law, regulation or policy”
that would compromise the “freedom of choice in health care” of any
resident of the state.

Adolph told the group, which met at Knights of Columbus hall in Newtown Square, that the biggest budget problem facing the state was the expiration of federal stimulus money. He said  last year’s $28 billion budget contained $3.1 billion of the fed dollars.

The $27.3 billion budget proposed by Gov. Corbett places a heavier burden on the state taxpayers despite it being smaller. House Republicans have tweaked the budget by easing some of the cuts the Governor had made to education while adding cuts to welfare. Adolph said the House budget gives state higher education 75 percent of what it had gotten last year, while Corbett would have cut the outlay in half.

Adolph said that the House budget actually ends up being few hundred thousand dollars less than the Governors.

Concerning the questions fielded by Adolph — and HB 42 was one — he said:

— He supported in principle privatizing the state-owned liquor stores but would not commit to any specific legislation as the “devil was in the details”.

— He supported giving school boards the power to furlough teachers for economic reasons. He, however, ducked the other half regarding his position on ending the requirement that school districts and municipalities pay prevailing wage for renovation and construction projects.

–He is not familiar with the First Suburbs issue which is starting to be discussed in Tea Party groups and appears to be an attempt to use government programs such as Section 8 housing to economically “diversify” Philadelphia’s older suburbs in accordance with the preferences of academics and activists.

–He supported abolishing the inheritance tax.

–He voted for and supports HB 1330, which expands the state’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit, and that he was only aware of the highlights of SB 1, the school choice bill bottled up in the Senate. He said he supports school choice in principle.

–That teachers should not be allowed to strike.

— He supports voter ID.

— He believes in state sovereignty.

— He supports cutting the size of the state legislature.

The only matter on which he incurred the crowd’s wrath concerned state pensions, and his unwillingness to condemn former State Sen. Bob Mellow’s $300,000 pension in significantly vociferous terms. He said Mellow’s pension plan had been grandfathered from before 1974, and that he should get it. He did not seem to get that it may fairer and more just to change the terms of an old poorly conceived contract rather than make a widow who was not party to it lose her home trying to fulfill it.

Insurgents Fall In GOP State Races; Dem Battle Close

The Philadelphia Common Pleas Court judges who actively sought Tea Party support fell handily  to the endorsed candidates in the Republican Primary state judicial races.

With 97 percent of the returns tallied, Paula Patrick was trailing Harrisburg attorney Vic Stabile  361,772 votes  to 190,231 in the Superior Court race, while Paul Panepinto had 167,455 votes to Anne Covey’s 386,751 in the Commonwealth Court race.

The 15-member Superior Court is the intermediate appellate court for civil and criminal cases from county Common Pleas Courts. The nine-member Commonwealth Court is the
intermediate appellate court for issues involving taxation, banking,
insurance, utility regulation, eminent domain, election, labor
practices, elections, Department of Transportation matters, and liquor
licenses.

On the Democrat side, party-endorsed Kathryn Boockvar, a private attorney known for her work with activist groups, was leading Barbara Behrend Ernsberger 300,389 votes to 297,635 to be the Commonwealth Court candidate.

On some local notes, incumbent Springfield (Delco) 6th Ward Commissioner Bob Layden appears to have held off a challenge from former commissioner Jim Devenney, who resigned after a minor scandal involving family memberships to the township swim club. The unofficial tally is 437 to 396.

And Tea Party activists Lisa Esler and John Dougherty 3rd will be on both party ballots in this November’s Penn Delco School Board race. Elections are being held for five seats. Cross filing is allowed in Pennsylvania school board races which means that in this fall’s race ticket totals will be combined to determine the winners.

Mrs. Esler had the most votes of six candidates on the Democrat side with 424, and had the third highest tally out of seven candidates on the GOP side with 1,239.

Dougherty had the most votes on the GOP side with 1,534 and the second highest total on the Democrat side with 377.

The candidates who won on both tickets — additionally Kevin Tinsley and Kimberly Robinson — while having a significant advantage do not have a guaranteed victory. Lewis Boughner appears to have failed to win on the Democrat ticket while James S. Porter 2nd appears to have failed to win on the Republican one, so there will be six people seeking five seats. It is in the realm of possibility that a person appearing on just one ballot will be among the top five votegetters.

In Newtown, embattled supervisor Linda Houldin was crushed 1,732 votes to 480 votes  in her GOP primary by former Marple Newtown School Director Edward C. Partridge. Partridge had sought Tea Party support.

Answering Tea Party Objections to SB 1


Ed Note: According to Tea Party activist Teri Adams, the question and answers noted below were from the newsletter of the Unite PA, Lancaster and are not intended to reflect a “Tea Party” consensus.
 

Citizen’s Alliance for Pennsylvania has written a response to the objections of some Tea Party groups to SB 1, which is the pending school choice legislation in Pennsylvania.  After Sunday’s debate hosted by The Independence Hall Tea Party Association, however, it seems many of the concerns are moot matters as there is very little Tea Party opposition in principle to school choice and that the objections to SB 1 involve simply scope and mechanics which are likely to be addressed when the bill gets to the House.

 

For instance, Chris Freind, one of the most vocal and articulate critics of SB1, said Sunday that he didn’t think the bill — even as is — would be found to be unconstitutional and would likely save the taxpayers money.

 

So let’s get the bill out of the Senate and into the House, and shine it into a gem and save all the children from the burning building to use Pastor Joe Watkins analogy.

 

Anyway hat tip Bob Guzzardi for  the CAP response which follows:

 

 

Answering TEA Party Objections to SB 1

Several TEA Party groups in Pennsylvania have banded together
to declare opposition to SB 1, listing their grievances with the
legislation.  While their heart is in the right place, their reasons for
opposing SB 1 have flaws. Herewith, a point-by-point refutation:

1. TEA Party Objection: Is SB 1 constitutional?
PROBABLY NOT but the state will find a way to subvert the constitution
by funneling money through the General Fund and using case law to defend
its premise.  Article III, Sec 15.

Rebuttal:  To which constitutional attorneys should we turn to
answer this question: PSEA labor union attorneys or the premier
conservative/libertarian public interest law firm, the Institute for
Justice, and their Pennsylvania partners?  The latter have directly
testified to the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1.   

In short, the Pennsylvania State Constitution states, “No money
raised for the support of the public schools of the Commonwealth shall
be appropriated to or used for the support of any sectarian school.”
State General Fund revenue does not meet this definition as it is not
raised for the purposes of funding public education.  School district
property taxes are raised for this purpose and that is why Senate Bill 1
involves only state funding for private schools, and not local tax
property revenue.

Pennsylvania case law
permits the transfer of funds to parents for the purposes of exercising
school choice.  In other words, because scholarships are given to
parents who then makes school choices, this money is not being given
directly to private schools. Furthermore, Pennsylvania’s General Fund
already includes line items directly funding private school students.

Finally, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will have jurisdiction
over any legal issues or concerns of constitutionality, though voucher
programs have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

2. TEA Party Objection: Does SB1 increase the size
and scope of government?  YES, there will be a new department acting
independently, hand picked by the Governor and accountable to
themselves.

Rebuttal: There is no new “department” being created, nor is it
unaccountable.  It will be an unpaid “Educational Choice Board” within
the Department of Education tasked with the responsibility of
implementing, administrating, and overseeing the $75 million EITC
program and the $25 million voucher program.  This neither increases the
size nor expands the scope of government but provides the vehicle
through which more choices will be given to more children trying to
escape the public school system.

3. TEA Party Objection: Does SB1 take property ($) from one person and give it to another without their consent? YES, ‘Vouchers’ will be provided to only low income families, of whom generally do not pay school tax.

Rebuttal: Do you currently “consent” to the $26 billion we spend
on the public schools today?  How about the $19,634 the taxpayers pay
for a public school kid in Pittsburgh?  And how much do families in
these failing school districts pay in taxes today for this massive
education subsidy?  Unless the TEA Party is advocating abolishment of
public education altogether, money is going to be taken from you for
that purpose; at least with SB 1, your tax money will bear portability
and flexibility, which will result in more efficient usage of it, which
in turn will result in savings to you.  

The reality is that taxpayers are already footing incredibly
expensive bills for failing schools and subsidizing low-income
families.  The question then is how do we stop funding failure and start
leaving that money with its rightful owners.  SB1 does this.

Not only does SB1 allow kids to use a voucher to find a better
school, it costs on a fraction of what we are currently paying for
failure.  In Harrisburg, where the taxpayers are paying $17,675 per kid
for failure, the voucher would be worth $8,498.  So a kid uses only half
as much taxpayer money to attend a better school.  This is good news
for the taxpayer.  Of course, it is now incumbent on the Harrisburg
school board to return the remaining $11,136 to its rightful owners—the
taxpayers.  And there is a much better chance of getting nine school
board members to return that money to its citizens than there is in
getting the 253 members of the General Assembly to do it.

SB1 is truly the antithesis of the concern inherent in this objection. 

4. TEA Party Objection: Is SB1 transparent and provide oversite? 
NO, the Education Opportunity Board reports directly to the Governor,
is appointed by the governor and accountable to themselves.

Rebuttal: Where is the lack of transparency and oversight?  The
Educational Choice Board is simply the manager of the legislatively
created program.  Where else and how would you do it differently?

5. TEA Party Objection:  Will SB1
cause a reactionary increase in the cost of non-public
schools?  YES. SB1 will necessarily cause “bloated and more expensive
private education”.  How much does PA spend on higher education?
“State government spends nearly $2 billion annually on higher education. For the 2010-11 fiscal year, state spending is being maintained with the help of $249 million in federal stimulus money. But that spigot will be turned off in June 2011.”  Funding for Grants to Students has increased $55.7 million or 16 percent since 2002-03.   Higher
education provides a cautionary tale of how public subsidies can drive
up the cost of education. State legislatures and the federal government
have provided increasing subsidies to both public and private
universities for decades. The universities then use the subsidies to
spend more on salaries and programs, ultimately raising university
expenses and the call to raise tuition, generally answered with more
subsidies. Wringing their hands about a politically induced college
affordability crisis, politicians have continued to increase subsidies.
Lawmakers should be concerned that the same phenomenon could occur in
K-12 education. (In other words, the non-public schools would have NO
restraint in raising their tuition fees, making it more expensive for
EVERYONE – Why would they leave the money on the table – they won’t!).

Rebuttal: This is an “apples and oranges” analogy that ignores
what happens in a marketplace.  Higher education does not operate on a
portable voucher system and colleges do not have publicly elected school
boards that can control costs.  

Kids using vouchers in private
schools will make up only a fraction of the student body.  This means
that many more parents will be paying some level of tuition.  Any
“reactionary increase” would drive out paying customers—many of whom are
already subsidizing others who may be getting tuition assistance.
Indeed, if low-income students use vouchers—and are no longer in need of
receiving subsidized tuition by those paying the full tuition
rate—tuition could actually go down, rather than up.

6. TEA Party Objection: Does the
SB1 Voucher Program treat all citizens of the Commonwealth equally?  NO,
only low-income families will benefit from the voucher program.

Rebuttal:  The current system doesn’t treat all citizens equally,
but SB1 does make sure that those who need immediate assistance most
get it.  A family of four, earning less than $29,000 would qualify.
Should the voucher be made available to everyone, regardless of income
or school district?  Absolutely.  But no bill has been introduced that
makes the voucher universal.

But SB1 also includes an important increase in the Educational
Improvement Tax Credit scholarship program, whereby a family of four
earning $84,000 would qualify to receive scholarships to attend their
school of choice.  This income level is nearly the double the statewide
average, and clearly benefitting a majority of school-age children.

7. TEA Party Objection:  Does SB1
invite government intrusion into the Private Sector?  YES, Section 2502,
(2) the non-public school is in full compliance with all Federal and
State laws.

SB1 does not require any private school to participate and submit
to any new rules included with the law.  It should be noted that the
Christian, Catholic, and evangelical schools have all been involved in
the crafting of SB1.  There is nothing that prevents the government form
intruding on private schools today.  Eternal vigilance is the price of
liberty, so we must always keep the wolves at bay.

8. TEA Party Objection: Does SB1
address the root cause of the problem or identify the anticipated result
of the solution? NO, there is no mention of what is prompting this
bill.

Rebuttal: The root cause of the problem is the union monopoly of
public schools, kids and teachers.  The union runs our Communistic-type
system and it cannot be dismantled in one election cycle.  It would be
great to do this overnight, but the power and wealth of the unions is
too great today. We must undermine them piece by piece until we the
people can reclaim our tax money, our kids, and our schools.

School choice, even in small bites, is the key to prying off the
unions’ grip on our kids and schools.  They know it, and it’s why they
are spending millions to defeat SB1.  It is troubling, to say the least,
that liberty-loving folks don’t see this and aiding and abetting the
enemy in this fight.

9. TEA Party Objection: Is the
General Assembly providing for the maintenance and support of a thorough
and efficient system of public education to serve the needs of this
Commonwealth?  APPARENTLY NOT because they have introduced SB1 to put a
Band-Aid on a corpse  This is a Big Government solution using tax payer
money reaching into the private sector, where zip code and economics are
being used to determine eligibility.

Rebuttal: So your solution is to keep funding the “corpse”?  As
demonstrated above, SB1 actually begins to REDUCE spending in the
government school system.  Instead of giving the failing system in
Harrisburg $17,675 per kid, the taxpayers would pay for a voucher of
only $8,498 to actually give the child an education.  We then have to
demand that the school board returns the remaining $11,136 to its
rightful owners—us.  How is this a “Big Government solution”?

10. TEA Party Objection:  Is
SB1 Vulnerable to lobbyists and special interests: Any system in which
the government rather than the consumer pays the bills is susceptible to
capture by special interests. Just as teachers’ unions consistently
(and successfully) lobby for higher educational spending to raise
teachers’ salaries, so government-funded vouchers would lead
private school organizations to band together and lobby for larger
vouchers. Since the school organizations would be organized on this
issue, and since parents and other taxpayers are generally not
organized, it is likely that vouchers would increase over time. How
these increases would compare to the rapid growth we have already
witnessed in public school spending is impossible to say. It is
worthwhile to note that when consumers are responsible for paying
their own way, lobbying is no longer possible: the only way you can
lobby your own customers is to offer better services. This is why
competitive market prices are generally lower than public (government)
costs for similar services–existing private versus public schools are a
case in point.

Rebuttal: Government is always vulnerable to lobbyists and
special interests.  That’s why we need limited government and less
wealth redistribution.  SB1 moves us in that direction, not away from
it.  This is also why the lobbyists and special interests are OPPOSED to
SB1, not for it. 

11.  TEA Party Objection:  Is this a bailout for the
NON-public Schools?  YOU DECIDE. The Catholic School System has been
suffering from enrollment decline for over 10 years.  The Archdiocese of
Philadelphia has lost 34,462 students or about 34 percent of its total
school enrollment since 2001, according to figures provided by the Catholic Church.  Private school enrollment down:   http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2009/09/private_school_enrollment_stat.html

Catholic School Enrollment down:  http://www.ncea.org/news/annualdatareport.asp

Rebuttal: A bailout? Hardly.  The overwhelming majority of
private schools are guided by a mission to serve, not make a profit.
It’s the unions who are profiting from the current system that pays high
salaries, unaffordable pension benefits, and premium health care
programs—all at the taxpayers’ expense. By not enacting SB 1 and thus
allowing the current public school monopoly to continue, it is the
public schools and their unions we are propping up and bailout out.

12. Is there a Constitutional financial benefit right now in
SB1 for low to middle income Pennsylvania citizens for
homeschooling/cyber schooling/non-public schooling. Homeschool/Cyber
Schools are not included in the bill.  However, non public schools are.
If a family qualifies under the generous EITC program (Education Improvement Tax Credit) it
is possible to receive financial aid.  However, aid varies based on
the number of children in your household, your income and the non-public
school financial aid requirements that you are applying for.

Rebuttal: SB1 expands educational options for many, many
families.  It may not include everyone.  But it certainly isn’t
contracting anyone’s educational options but is an incremental
improvement that will begin busting up the labor unions’ monopoly of
school tax money, kids and teachers.

13. TEA Party objection: Is it the role of government to create competition in the private sector or public sector?  NO

Rebuttal: The problem is that competition is lacking in the
government education system.  SB1 brings more competition into the
current monopoly situation.  Again, this is why the PSEA/PSBA hegemony
is so vehemently opposed to SB1.  Government hates competition and this
is we the people imposing competition on it.

 



AFP Gives Lesson In Right Blogging


The first event of Sam Rohrer’s tenure as director of the Pennsylvania Chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP) can’t be said to have gone off without a hitch but today’s 8-hour RightOnline Training Seminar ended as a major success.

The event was not held at the Valley Forge Convention Center as scheduled but at the adjacent  Radisson Hotel. A raging windstorms snarled roads throughout Southeast Pennsylvania causing the start to be delayed for late arrivals. Then, just as things got underway, power went out throughout Montgomery County putting, for a couple of hours, the proceedings in the dim glow of emergency lights and making the prepared PowerPoint presentations a moot endeavor.

Using the restrooms at the prestigious facility became a ad hoc cellphone flashlight adventure.

Still, the presenters, many of whose names are recognized throughout the nation, improvised and taught their lessons sans technology at the technology-oriented conference.

And the lights really were on for most the day.

Rohrer’s opening remarks were followed by ones from Steve Lonegan , the former mayor of Bogota, N.J. who ran against Chris Christie in 2009 Republican New Jersey Republican gubernatorial primary. Lonegan is the director of AFP’s New Jersey chapter.

“The once proud Democratic Party of my union grandparents has now become the Democrat Party of government workers,” Lonegan said referring to the turmoil that the Democrats and government workers are now causing by bizarre, angry demonstrations in Wisconsin, which are filled with violent imagery.

The first session of seminars followed with noted blogger Erick Telford giving a lesson on basic blogging and Rich Shaftan of Mountaintop Media giving tips on how to handle the press. They were followed by long-time journalist Trent Seibert of Texas Watchdog who described ways citizen-bloggers could do investigative reporting.

It was during Seibert’s talk that the power went out, ruining an elaborate visual display he said he had prepared. This  ironically occurred while he was  pointing out how bloggers caused major grief to Oscar/Nobel/etc. winner Al Gore by exposing his energy hypocrisy.

Still Seibert managed to convey that audits are often overlooked means of exposing government malfeasance that Tea Party activist would do well to mine. He cited several useful websites, including one capable of generating  Freedom Of Information Act letters, whose links AFP would be sending to event attenders.

In describing the new power of blogs, it was either Telford or Seibert who said that it was a Montana blogger who exposed the lies Dan Rather told shortly before the 2004 election regarding President Bush’s Texas Air National Guard Service.  The one who did the exposing was from Georgia and the site on which the exposing occurred was FreeRepublic.Com

With the power out, the agenda was rearranged with talks by Pennsylvania State Rep Jim Cox (R-129) and Lonegan coming next.

Cox noted a big difference between Gov. Tom Corbet and his predecessor Ed Rendell in that while Rendell would have a press conference at the drop of a hat, Corbett has been avoiding them. He said he hoped it was because Corbett was deliberately preparing a case to make to the citizens regarding his plans for the state. Cox said we will know on March 8 when he makes his budget address.

Cox said there were 98 new faces in the State House since 2007 and 110 since 2005 so the chance for real reform is good.

He said there has already been some significant rule changes. Uncontested resolutions — such as those honoring a Little League championship team — can now be voted on in bulk saving the legislators about an hour and a half a week. He also said bills are now going to be almost complete coming out of committee allowing more time to study them and less time for sneaky amendments.

Cox said he is concerned about various plans being aired to shrink the size of the legislature as this would result in representation that is much less responsive to the citizenry.

He said his crusade to abolish property taxes is advancing and a property tax relief caucus has formed in the House which now has 91 members.

Lonegan said that New Jersey led the nation in economic growth from 1776 to 1976. He said it’s now 48th. He said that while The Garden State’s property tax rate was the third highest in the nation by the 1960s it had neither a sales nor income tax. He said that  in 1966 tax a “temporary” sales tax strongly supported by the New Jersey State Education Association was passed to ease the property tax burden. The tax was made permanent in 1970 and raised to 5 percent. Six years later a income tax was added.

Lonegan said the rates continued to rise and that the state now has among the highest sales and income tax rates in the country and the highest property tax rate.

He said the NJEA is now pushing to consolidate school districts “to save money.”

The post lunch seminars featured Ethan Demme of Keystone Conservative talking about social media; Jennifer Stefano of Americans for Prosperity giving advice on the media skills for which she is noted; Telford describing the power of online video; and Shafton explaining how to interpret polling.

The day would down with a panel discussion  consisting of Demme, columnist Chris Freind and New Jersey blogger Rob Eichmann; followed by a talk by Guy Benson of Townhall.com

During the panel discussion Freind noted that he picks on both parties and described how he was harshly critical of Gov. Corbett’s $42 million plan to bail out Aker Shipyard. Lonegan chimed in that Christie just OK’d a $260 million bailout of an Atlantic City casino.

Benson encouraged all Tea Party people to stick to truth and the high road in dealing with their opponents despite the temptation to do otherwise regarding their hypocrisy concerning claims of desire for civil debate.

The event ended with a call by Lonegan for Pennslvania Tea Party members to pressure State House Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Adolph (R-165) into letting HB 42 come to a vote. HB 42 — The Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act — protects the rights of patients to pay directly for medical services, and it prohibits penalties levied on citizens and businesses for declining to participate in a particular health plan.


Tea Party Group To Train Candidates Sat.

American Majority Action is hosting a candidate/campaign manager training event, 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., Saturday, Feb. 5 in the lower level meeting room of the Marple Public Library, 2599 Sproul Road, Broomall, Pa. 19008.

The cost is $45 online or $35 at the door. It includes lunch and refreshment.