Friday, June 16, 2006

 

Questions for the Lt. Governor Candidates

These are my questions for the Lt. Governor candidates. Those readers who would like to add to these questions may submit them in the comment section. Some may be added to the main page.

The candidates will be emailed for their answers. Responses will be posted in their entirety without editing.

Questions:



1) Hypothetical - The Governor will be out of town for three weeks. In his absence, you are the acting Governor. What would you try to accomplish with your new-found, albeit temporary, power?

2) We all remember the spike in fuel prices when hurricane Katrina shut down many of the refineries in New Orleans and hurricane Rita struck the Beaumont and Lake Charles region. Would you recommend the building of refineries in Arkansas? What measures would you take to protect Arkansans from future energy spikes?

3) Arkansas' production of students with a Bachelor's Degree is statistically comparable to other states of similar size. However, our retention of those students is dismal. What measures would you promote to retain these high value students?

 

Questions to the Candidates for Arkansas Attorney General

I have a few questions for our Attorney General candidates. If you have a question you would like to pose, put them in the comment section and I may add them to the list. As the candidates respond, this post will be updated with their exact quote. While I may personally lean to one candidate over the other, I believe in being honest when reporting information. Both candidates have my promise of fairness and honesty.
Questions:
1) Considering the high cost of education, is there a legal way for the State of Arkansas to provide an education for the children of American citizens without having to provide the same educational opportunities to the children of illegal or undocumented aliens?
2) With the rising cost of electricity and natural gas, what recourse do Arkansans have, given that utility companies must seek approval for rate hikes?
3) Hypothetical Question - A popular mayor in a mid-sized city takes some money under the table for a project and is found out. His voting tendencies run along the same lines as your party and he has been beneficial to candidates from your party in the past. What actions do you take?

Thursday, June 15, 2006

 

Another Bill In the White House?

http://drudgereport.com/flash7.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5485274

Watch Out For the Man From Albuquerque

As stated within this blog, and in response to John Brummett's assertion that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee, I hereby restate that Bill Richardson WILL be the Democratic standard bearer. And this means trouble for the Republicans.

Governor/Ambassador/Presidential Advisor Bill Richardson is an enigma that the Republicans have not faced in several decades. He has real conservative leanings on immigration and some fiscal policies. So too, he stands with the liberal wing of his party on civil rights and legalizing drugs. On issues dealing directly with business and personal responsibilities, his position is uniquely moderate. Combine these positions with the fact that he is respected by numerous world leaders with whom he built relationships during his years as an ambassador for the Clinton Administration.

While we are still two years out from the final primaries for President and it is yet to be seen which Republicans will arise, the Democrats have a robust race already gathering with the likes of Senator Clinton, Trial Lawyer extraordinaire John Edwards, and 2004 loser John Kerry tearing up the Iowa cornfields. Al Gore is making noises of running again as well. All of these candidates are solidly liberal and it will end up being a race to see which one can grab the rabid liberal base. But then there is Richardson. As a respected - one of the few - member of the party with a position that will grab the conservatives and moderates in the party, he will stand alone at the end of the day.

Where he poses the problem for Republicans is in that his positions are moderated enough to make getting the ever important undecided vote nearly impossible. Both parties will receive their base 30-35%, and then will fight over the voters in the middle. Richardson only makes that fight tougher. A Hillary, Little John or Big John campaign would have a definite lean in favor of well spoken conservative candidate in a general race. The Dems surely remember '92 and will look for someone who has a legitimate chance. That chance will be Bill Richardson.

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

 

Scientists Flunk Gore

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=d0235a70-33f1-45b3-803b-829b1b3542ef&p=1

Tom Harris, of the National Post in Canada, takes on former VP Al Gore and his mock-u-mentary on the climate in a recent (June 7) column. Harris interviews and quotes experts in the related fields of climatology, paleogeophysics, of insects and infectious diseases, and physics and atmospheric science. What these experts have to say about Gore's conclusions is remarkable. Basically, they refer to his film as "science fiction."

Some of the quotes from this article:

As is typical of our favorite prep school flunky, Al Gore never lets facts get in the way of his version of the truth. Now, he wants to train 1,000 fellow flunkies to carry his message to the world. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060613/en_nm/environment_gore_dc)

Speaking of fellow flunkies, Former President, and admitted liar, Bill Clinton just couldn't let Gore get all of the attention. An Associated Press story on Breitbart.com claims Clinton is blaming the Republicans for the serious spate of hurricanes that have hit Florida over the last 22 months. (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/12/D8I6VEOO4.html)

Hmm. If only Billy Boy had signed the Kyoto agreement none of this would be happening. NOT.


Monday, June 12, 2006

 

Official English Polls 85%, Reid Still Clueless

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/June%20Dailies/EnglishAsNationalLanguage.htm

Rasmussen Reports has released a poll which states "Eighty-five percent (85%) of Americans believe that English should be the official language of the United States." Fifteen percent of Americans are either opposed or have no clue. This poll does not claim English-only, just that it should be the official language. This would make English the language of business, education, etc. Nowhere does it state that other languages must be abolished or forgotten.

"Making English the nation's official language is favored by 92% of Republicans, 79% of Democrats, and 86% of those not affiliated with either major political party." Talk about a bi-partisan issue. There is no reason this should not pass. With these numbers, English-only could be a Constitutional Amendment. Hmmm.

I guess Senator Light-Headed Harry Reid (D-NV) must be in that 15% considering his response when the Senate passed legislation to make English the official language. Reid considered the measure "racist" thereby making him a minority in the minority of the minority party.

Interestingly, those respondents over 40 polled in favor of English-only with 91%. That would be the group that has actually put their education into practice. Those with less life experience, under 40, polled at 78%.

Considering how accurate Rasmussen has been in the past several election cycles, I would think the liberal mantra on inclusion will have to be amended to exclude several leading language candidates.

 

More Random Thoughts

OH! Blow it out your trunk!
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060612/D8I6KKJ00.html

PETA, no that's not People Eating Tasty Animals, is protesting the Los Angeles Zoo over the death of Gita the elephant. It seems that the non-evolved group blames the zoo and its director, John Lewis, for poor Gita's demise. According to the AP story, the average life span of elephants in captivity is 42 years. Gita lived to the ripe, old, elephant age of 48. Perhaps Gita should have been returned to the wild where poachers could have shot and killed her years ago. PETA would like that, wouldn't they?

Cola Wars Part Deux
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=390171&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=

First, they legislated against God in the schools. Then, they legislated against tobacco in public. Now, soda pops are in their cross-hairs. Oh! The inhumanity of it all.

"Doctors will this week declare war on America's soft drinks industry by calling for a 'fat tax' to combat the nation's obesity epidemic," Britain's Daily Mail reports. Further, they call for "the amount of salt added to burgers and processed foods to be halved." WHAT!!! Less salt on my burger? Ok, ok. Just don't mess with my french fries or it will be considered an act of war.

Liberal Concerns are Killing US Soldiers
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MILITARY_HUMVEES_ROLLOVERS?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

Only a few months ago, liberal pundits stated that President Bush and the Republicans did not care about the American soldier because of the lack of armor on the military humvees. Now, we find that the added armor is getting more soldiers killed and wounded.

"An analysis of the Army's ground accident database, which includes records from March 2003 through November 2005, found that 60 of the 85 soldiers who died in Humvee accidents in Iraq - or 70 percent - were killed when the vehicle rolled, the newspaper reported. Of the 337 injuries, 149 occurred in rollovers," according to military reports and the Dayton Daily News.

While the safety of our soldiers should be foremost on everyone's mind, we should not overburden them with armor to the point that they are easier targets or the armor itself kills them. A rush to blame has led to an error in design and our soldiers are paying the price.

If the Democrats on the far left are correct in blaming Bush and the Republicans for the soldiers death for lack of armor, then the same liberal Democrats are to blame for the deaths of at least 85 soldiers and the injuries to 149 others. Personally, both ideas are ridiculous. War is hell and always will be. However, there are times when war is a necessary evil and soldiers and civilians will die. That has always been a part of human history. It always will be. Touchy-feely emotions will never change that. So let the soldiers fight, let the military decide what armor is necessary, and let the politicians stand pat once the war is started.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?