Wednesday, April 11, 2012

The Case against Thom Tillis

Many, including myself, were surprised that Paul Stam was not elected Speaker of the House. Stam had been a conservative stalwart in the house for many years and many thought that he would lead the conservative revolution in Raleigh after the GOP took both houses of state government. We were wrong. Thom Tillis emerged from out of the shadows and was elected Speaker. Much about Tillis was unknown. We knew that he had had a successful private sector career and that he was in charge of the House GOP Election Committee. Other than that, he appeared to be a mystery.
Yet this past session opened up the eyes of conservatives to the fact that Thom Tillis is a moderate establishment republican who is not about changing the culture as he is tweaking it to his own designs. My friend Brant Clifton who runs the website posted a story about how Richard Morgan is the political "godfather" of Mr. Tillis.

Let me list some of these issues that we conservatives have with Speaker Tillis.
1. The GOP lead House and Senate let the gas tax cap expire. Now the House did come back and take action after the heat got turned up but the fact that Speaker Tillis let the cap expire in the first place is enough for concern.
2. Thom Tillis has stated that he feels the Marriage Amendment will eventually be overturned. This negative and ridiculous statement leads many to question whether he truly supports the amendment at all.
3. The lack of urgency when it comes to reducing the size of government. Speaker Tillis seems comfortable with doing the typical establishment plan of shifting money around and not changing the culture of spending and waste. He also seems very lax when it comes to immigration reform which we desperately need in this state.
4. His unheralded connection to the corrupt Richard Morgan.
When you take into account his background with Richard Morgan, some very questionable decisions in this past session, and his apparent disdain for conservatives, it must be clear that if we want to truly change the culture of government in Raleigh, than we need a new Speaker of the House. Someone who will tackle the issues of reforming our tax code, reforming education, cracking down on illegal immigration, and reducing the scope and influence government has in our daily lives. That someone, at least right now, isn't Thom Tillis.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Gingrich is angling

Newt Gingrich, after his impressive win in South Carolina, has only won one state since. His home state of Georgia was a must win and he did win it. Yet after winning SC he failed to capture the conservative banner that was ripe for the picking. Rick Santorum has taken up that banner, and is clearly the conservative answer to the more moderate Mitt Romney. So the question is, why is Newt still in the race.
He is hoping to win Louisiana, other than that he has very few contests in which he appears to have any hope of winning. It appears that the longer this goes on that the possibility of Romney not achieving the magic number of delegates to win the GOP nomination outright gets closer to reality. That means that we will see a convention where dealmaking will be the word of the hour.
To this observer, it seems like Gingrich is possibly angling for three things. First, he is trying to stay in the race to prevent Romeny from achieving the needed delegates as revenge for the negative campaign Romney started in Iowa. Second, could be that Gingrich is trying to spoil Santorum's chances as the conservative choice because Santorum is the "junior partner" as he has stated. Thirdly, he could be angling for a cabinet post or even the Vice presidency in a Romney administration, which would be offered to get Gingrich's delegates.
Either way Gingrich is angling for things outside of victory. He should get out and let Santorum and Romney fight it out the rest of the way. This is about conservative victory, not vendettas, grudges, or cabinet posts which are the only reasons Gingrich has to stay in the race.

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

To frack, or not to frack?

     The fracking debate has been heating up with opponents and proponents jockeying for public support. The tree huggers, liberals, and democrats have all decried the action of fracking in North Carolina as dangerous and hazardous for North Carolinians and the environment. Energy companies, capitalists, and many conservatives view the process as a job creator, an economic spark, and a good use of resources. Moore County State Rep. Jamie Boles is traveling up to Pennsylvania with other legislators to view fracking up close and personal. It will be interesting to see what his opinion will be. And even Washington is getting on the debate with Rep. Brad Miller trying to suck up to the environmental community by helping out liberal director Josh Kelly, who was removed from a public hearing  for "disorderly conduct". Kelly is the director of "Gasland", a film that is critical of fracking. If it helps, the film is nominated for an Oscar so it is not conservative. Many are wondering, what is the truth about fracking and should it be done in North Carolina?
     This is the process of fracking as told by

Simplified Steps In Hydraulic Fracturing

1. Water, sand and additives​ are pumped at high pressures down the wellbore.
2. The liquid goes through perforated sections of the wellbore and into the surrounding formation, fracturing the rock and injecting sand or proppants into the cracks to hold them open.
3. Experts continually monitor and gauge pressures, fluids and proppants, studying how the sand reacts when it hits the bottom of the wellbore, slowly increasing the density of sand to water as the fracturing progresses.
4. This process may be repeated multiple times in “stages” to reach maximum areas of the wellbore. When this is done, the wellbore is temporarily plugged between each stage to maintain the highest water pressure possible and get maximum fracturing results in the rock.
5. The fracturing plugs are drilled or removed from the wellbore and the well is tested for results.
6. The water pressure is reduced and fluids are carried up the wellbore for disposal or treatment and re-use, leaving the sand in place to prop open the cracks and allow gas and oil to flow.

     Opponents say that the process is dangerous because of the potential for groundwater contamination and the possibility of leaks and spills.  For more info on the reported negatives check out this site.
Opponents also say that the economic benefits are inflated and not worth the great risks involved.

     Listed here is an example of an accident that occurred in Pennsylvania, as reported in Popular Mechanics.
     Basically opponents are saying that the economic numbers are inflated because the gas companies will bring in most of the workers from out of state, rather than hire local workers. They contend that the only real beneficiaries are the energy companies and landowners. They also contend that the possibility of contaminated ground water from chemicals and the shale oil itself is enough to outweigh any ecnomic gain.
     Proponents are saying that with a slumping economy, high unemployment, and soaring energy prices that the economic impact will bring relief to all of the above problems. An increase in energy will lower prices, the process will inject money into our economy and will create new job opportunities.
     So what do I think? I think that we should wait to see what the study by the NC legislature says. The process is innovative and seems to be sound. In the economic climate we're in we need to examine all possible ways to create jobs and new industry. The risks are real and they have to be addressed. In a perfect world the report would be favorable and the legislature would put in the safeguards for protecting our groundwater and environment and the process of fracking would move forward. Utilizing our resources, creating jobs, and protecting our environment are not mutually exclusive things. We can do all of the above. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Friday, January 20, 2012

It's not just about beating Obama

     The main objective this election cycle it seems on the republican side is to find the silver bullet to defeat Barack Obama. It is imperative that Obama and his policies be beat. But that is only the beginning of a larger struggle. The first battle, if you will, of a long war.
     Let's say we beat Obama and we take the Senate back, and retain the House and everything is honky dory. Yet we go another four years or even two years and don't fix the problem, this obese federal government. While defeating Obama may help us in the short term, if we do nothing to fix this country's serious problems it will all be for nothing.
     That is why we don't need an establishment guy, or the slickest debater, or the most electable. We need a true conservative in the White House. More than that we need true conservatives in the Senate and the House. We need to take on the tough issues like entitlement reform, immigration reform, balancing the budget, returning education  to the local governments, tax reform, and many other challenges head on with a conservative attitude, message, and policies.
     So when you are watching these debates and thinking about whom you would vote for, think about the actions we need taken. Choose the person who is not only capable of beating Obama, but who is also capable of leading a revolution to return our Government back to it's true constitutional form.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

     Above is a link of the recent news that Speaker Pro Tem Dale Folwell will seek the GOP nomination for Lt. Governor. Many were surprised at the decision not to run again for his House seat and that he would choose an already crowded race. Dan Forest and Tony Gurley are already in the primary race.
     Personally I think that Mr. Folwell is making a mistake. As a conservative I am really impressed with Dan Forest. He has articulated his conservative message early and often. In a race where we already have a good conservative why would Folwell, a conservative himself, muddy up the race?
     Now don't get me wrong. Dale Folwell is a great conservative and a good man. I would rather him take his conservative credentials and challenge Pat McCrory in the primary for Governor. This thought was given to me by a good friend. Folwell has the conservative backing and the money to compete in such a race and it would keep McCrory honest. Many conservatives are still leery of McCrory and a conservative challenger in the race would help to push the former mayor to be true to the conservative base.
      I just hope that the direction from the Governor's mansion on down to the local governments are conservative. We have a real opportunity as conservatives to change the face of NC. To reform and reshape education, lower our taxes, pass tough immigration reform, and actually reduce the size and scope of government itself. Sounds nice doesn't it? We will need men like Dan Forest and Dale Folwell to do it.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Why becoming a Dad has made me more pro-life

     My wife Samantha and I are expecting a beautiful baby boy very soon. I can't even begin to describe the emotions that are running through me. I feel nervous because I know that everything will change, for the good, and that it is something that I have never experienced before. I am so excited to see my son. I am so proud of my wife for being so brave and strong, yet still the sweetest woman alive during her pregnancy.
     Unfortunately there is another emotion that I can't help but feel, sadness. Sadness not about our child but sadness for all the lives that are aborted, murdered everyday. Living beings that feel and live, that are terminated before they ever see the light of day. It is a horror that should not be inflicted on the most fragile and helpless of us.
     I have marched in Washington in protest of abortion and have always despised the existence of such a practice. Yet, I didn't realize how strongly I felt in my pro-life stance until I saw my little son squirming on the screen at our first ultrasound. When we later had a 3-d ultrasound and we saw his little hands, feet, and face, the feeling we both felt was unconditional love. I saw the miracle of life and was totally galvanized in my belief that life is a precious miracle from God.
     Every person at every stage of life be it at conception, pregnancy, infancy, childhood, and adulthood is endowed with inalienable rights by the Almighty. This truth is in our Constitution. The first among these is life. The dignity of life is so precious and should be protected by our government. It shows how far we have fallen when the very argument of limiting and even taking away life is legitimized and even sanctioned by our society and government.
     Our economy is in turmoil. Most people are more concerned in this campaign cycle with economic issues rather than social ones. While these concerns are pressing, they are not exclusive one from the other. All of these issues have a common enemy in our tyrannical federal government. The same tyrannical government that has driven our economy into the dirt, that has wasted our savings, and has indebted us to the point of collapse is the same government that sanctions abortions, stifles freedom of religious expression, and propagates the politically correct myths that are at the heart of the moral decay of our nation. Libertarians, Conservatives, Tea Partiers, and all those who believe in our Constitution should unite behind a common goal. To restore the constitutional limits on government, to return government to the people, to encourage freedom of religious expression, to reinsert the principles of free enterprise and hard work, and to protect the values and morals that our nation was founded on. In doing this we will have a booming economy, a strong defense, a smaller government, and more freedom. By restoring our Constitution to it's proper role we will have all of the those things but we will also have the protection for our unborn children that they deserve.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Newt and Perry talking like Socialists

Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry have descended to a new low this past week. They attacked GOP front runner Mitt Romney about his former career at Bain Capital. They are saying that Romney closed down companies and that he was a "vulture" who preyed on weak companies. Some of these companies that were shutdown for various reasons were in South Carolina. Obviously Gingrich and Perry are trying to score cheap political points by exploiting populist anger against Romney. The problem is that these two "conservatives" are engaging in class warfare and are making the same kind of statements that you would expect from Marxists and Socialists.
If Romney, whom I do not support or care for, runs our government like he did at Bain Capital then hallelujah! We need someone who is going to fire people from government and shrink the public sector. Since when is making money and being profitable a bad thing? Gingrich and Perry are sounding like liberal democrats. Free market capitalism is the greatest system in the world because it allows people who work hard to succeed. All of the GOP candidates should be praising Romney for his record of free market capitalism at Bain Capital instead of trying to appeal to baser instincts of voters.
Liberals, Socialists, and Marxists appeal to lower natural instincts like greed and envy in people. That is why they demonize Wall Street, successful people, and those who work hard because it's natural to want what you can't have and to hate and envy those who do have. Gingrich and Perry are doing exactly what Barack Obama is doing.
Newt is angry because he wasn't anointed in Iowa in large part due to Romney's negative ads and is clearly out for revenge at any cost. Perry is just floundering around trying to find any footing to keep his hopes alive. Shame on Gingrich, Perry, and anyone who attacks Romney's career at Bain because they are attacking capitalism and freedom. We don't need a candidate who throws freedom and free market capitalism under the bus for the sake of winning elections.

Why Ron Paul is as dangerous as Barack Obama

There is no doubt that Ron Paul has made an impact on the Republican party in this election cycle. With his pair of second place finishes in both Iowa and New Hampshire, congressman Paul and his avid followers are hoping for more good results in the upcoming South Carolina Primary.
But the truth is this that even with his good domestic policies on the fed, limited government, and individual liberty, Ron Paul would be a disaster as president and if he runs as a third party candidate will ensure four more years of Barack Obama. With his isolationist policies and his incapacity to grasp the threat of radical Islam, I fear that Ron Paul is just as big a danger to America as Barack Obama is.
Barack Obama's socialist polices on the domestic front have crippled our nation and his pacifist policies in the wake of the Muslim Brotherhood's hostile takeover of Egypt and Syria, are a danger to this country and for the sake of this great land I hope that he is a one term president.
On the other hand if Ron Paul is the nominee of the GOP or some third party he would be just as big a disaster. While his domestic/economic policies would be a vast improvement from what we have now, his outdated and ignorant foreign policy would be a disaster and a threat to the peace and stability of the United States.
So under Ron Paul we would not assassinate terrorist leaders, we would not intervene in Iran taking over the straits of Hormuz which would make the price of gasoline at the pumps soar to double digits per gallon, we would not defend Israel, we would not be able to help our ally South Korea if North Korea decided to invade, we would not intervene as Iran makes connections in South and Central America, and you get the picture. Ron Paul's isolationist foreign policy is just as dangerous as Barack Obama's pacifist foreign policy.
So again Ron Paul's ideas on the economy and on the domestic front are great, but his foreign policy makes him unfit for the GOP nomination and if he by some miracle is elected would spell disaster for America in the long run.