Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.


Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.





Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations

Jerry Sproul, CPA

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

David Ripley: Steven Ricks Censured by GOP

April 29th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Perennial candidate Steven Ricks was officially censured by the Ada County GOP on Tuesday night for his audacity in filing a lawsuit against the State Republican Party. The lawsuit has been chewing up time and money for nearly one-and-a-half years, and stems from Rick’s misuse of the GOP logo during his last failed campaign in 2008.

His lawsuit against the Republican Party comes despite his ostensible status as a district chairman of the GOP.

To make matters worse, Ricks attempted to embroil Idaho Chooses Life in his bizarre lawsuit. He presented us with a five-page subpoena last year, seeking to gain access to emails, documents, personal correspondence and board minutes. Nor were we alone. He vendetta extended to two other organizations who did not support his last campaign – the Idaho Realtors and the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry.

All three organizations responded by going to court. We asked Judge Timothy Hansen to protect this ministry from Ricks’ blatant harassment and abuse of the legal system.

Judge Hansen issued a decision on our motion last week. He blocked Rick’s subpoena, finding that his quest posed a serious threat to the constitutional rights of Idaho’s pro-Life community:

“…Plaintiff [Ricks] has provided the Court with no compelling reason for the disclosure of the information he seeks. As a result, he has failed to meet his burden of proof and the Court therefore finds [giving Ricks access to this] information would have an impermissible chilling effect on the associational rights of the members … of Idaho Chooses Life.”

This decision is a big relief. The threat posed by Ricks’ vendetta could have led to a scenario where confidential information about the ministry was laid bare not just to Mr. Ricks but to the Abortion Lobby itself.

This whole episode raises profound doubts about Ricks’ claim to being “pro-Life”, and additional questions about his judgment and obsession to gain political office.

Once again, he is a candidate for the state senate, challenging Sen. Russ Fulcher in the Republican Primary next month. His victory would be a big set-back for the pro-Life movement at a time when we face serious problems as a result of ObamaCare being imposed on the states.

But even if he doesn’t win, he has already seriously hurt the movement. Thousands of dollars and many hours have been wasted in dealing with his unseemly ambition – resources that should be going into advancing the cause.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General | No Comments »

Andi Elliott: Imagine

April 27th, 2010 by Halli

I smiled upon receiving a “Motion to Dismiss” from Prosecutor Dunn regarding my bogus “trespassing by agency” charges BUT reading the totally fabricated “reasons for dismissal”, blood shot out of my eyes! We filed an “Objection”.

And then I heard “Tom from Menan” today on Idaho Up Close state that the rumor in Menan (where Sheriff Olsen lives) is that the Sheriff’s Department threatened to arrest Torres if he didn’t file charges against me.

Imagine if this “rumor” was actually true… it would dovetail perfectly with what Troy Jackson (charged with felony grand theft) told me when I met him in Idaho Falls. He said Torres stated that he didn’t charge me; it was the Sheriff. Imagine what if Torres didn’t know what he was signing.

Imagine why only MY citation was served and not the citation that Torres signed against Ch 3.

Imagine that at my last trial, the Deputy Prosecutor tells my attorney that the only reason they proceeded was because it was “Andi”.

Imagine too that Dunn calls a radio show host in NY telling her that he is “biased” against me and calls me a “hillbilly” from “Tennessee”.

Just imagine that Olsen called me a few years ago and told me that I was an un-welcomed newcomer, to butt out of animal welfare, and that I didn’t understand how things were done in Idaho.

Imagine why animal cruelty charges haven’t been filed against Raul Torres? Can you also imagine that ” a deal was struck”?

Andi Elliott
For the Love of Pets Foundation

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Politics in General | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Dangers of Extremism

April 26th, 2010 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Earth Day is a great time to reassess our impact on the environment and our commitment to protect the earth. We all can be a little more cognizant of our impact on, and appreciation for the Earth’s environment. The day also affords a time to reevaluate the hazards of extremism, the notion of taking noble concepts too far in implementation.

Regrettably, Earth Day has evolved as a Holy Day for many environmental devotees, as explained by Paul Rubin in the Wall Street Journal this week. He points out that environmentalism creates a group identity and self-importance for many people that supplants or at the very least, is deemed important to their spiritual identity. “It is this identity-creating function that environmentalism provides. As the world becomes less religious, people can define themselves as being Green rather than being Christian or Jewish.”

This is where grassroots movements become scary and truly divisive. When they reach the “religious zeal” level, they can do much more damage than they do good. They are more divisive than they are inclusive. They become more confrontational and emotional than they are logical and principle oriented. They lose the moral clarity of their very existence and believe that their objectives of bringing awareness to their concerns justify whatever means they may implement to do so.

The religious zeal of environmental “theology” has led to the proliferation of extremists groups firmly steeped in the Machiavellian idea that the ends justify the means. In 2005, the FBI stated that, “The No. 1 domestic terrorism threat [in the United States] is the eco-terrorism and animal-rights movement.” Groups such as Earth First, Greenpeace, Earth Liberation Front, and Animal Liberation Front are labeled as “eco-terrorists” by the FBI. Even the “Unabomber,” Theodore Kaczynski, was so classified since he was motivated by environmental concerns. These are extremists.

Such groups and individuals have used arson, malicious destruction of property, bombing, and tree spiking to advance their causes. But rather than earning respect and support for their causes, they have alienated law-abiding mainstream society by their practices, and have even lost support among those who ideologically agree with them.

This is much less likely for those who identify with the constitutional and moral imperatives of the Tea Party movement which grows numerically with every spending bill and legislative power grab out of Washington. This is a mainstream grass-roots movement comprised of members all across the political spectrum, except the far left.

Our fears of government encroachment on individual liberty and exorbitant spending are empirically well founded, and the cause for dissent, which until now has been advocated and even praised by the left, is justified. The Tea Party movement should never advance to “extremist” status, which would only serve to justify the mainstream media and the administrations’ characterization of us and cause disillusionment and alienation from mainstream America.

Some reports have surfaced that are intended to reflect badly on the movement. A few of those reports have been substantiated, but most have not. Some have actually been traced to infiltrators within the movement to intentionally sully and tarnish the cause.

An Associated Press story two weeks ago detailed the efforts of Jason Levin, founder of the Levin said he has recruited people across the country to infiltrate the movement. His objective is to “attempt to dismantle the Tea Party by accentuating the least attractive qualities of some of its members.” He elaborated, “Do I think every member of the tea party is a homophobe, racist or a moron? No, absolutely not. Do I think most of them are? Absolutely.” He couldn’t be more wrong!

The Administration could even be behind some of the infiltration of the movement, headed by Cass Sunstein, head of Obama’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. As reported by, in 2008 Sunstein wrote a paper advocating a “stealth” infiltration of anti-government groups to “increase citizens’ faith in government officials and undermine the credibility of conspiracists.” Such a tactic would certainly be consistent with the “community organizing” mentality of the White House.

The ultimate goal for fiscal conservatives, regardless of party affiliation, should be to vote in new candidates who reflect their beliefs. The rallies and demonstrations only have efficacy if they bring about a change in the spending mentality. The way to stop the spending madness is to change the mindset in D.C.

Zeal in any cause is good when it’s principled, as the Tea Party movement is, for it’s based on founding principles. Without principle, zeal becomes an excuse for lawlessness and abuse of the very precepts we hold most dear, and leads to despicable behavior as typified by Levin and environmental extremist groups. Such conduct is counterintuitive to those of us who respect and seek to uphold the Constitution. If we’re extremists, so were George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Politics in General | No Comments »

Idaho Chooses Life Press Release: Endorsement of Raul Labrador for Congress

April 24th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

ICL announced today that it has endorsed State Rep. Raul Labrador in his bid for the 1st District congressional nomination.

“We’ve had the honor of working with Raul for a number of years now, and appreciate his integrity and commitment to pro-Life principles,” said ICL Executive Director David Ripley. “What separates the candidates running for Congress is Labrador’s proven value under fire.”

Labrador has served in the Idaho State House of Representatives since being elected in 2006. During that time he has earned a 100% pro-Life voting record.

This past session, Labrador was co-sponsor of two key pieces of pro-Life legislation.

“Labrador provided leadership in answering the threat of ObamaCare,” Ripley said, “which is the most dangerous advance of abortion since the Roe v. Wade decision.”

Labrador was one of the House leaders who brought forth the Idaho Health Freedom Act, which is the basis for Idaho’s court challenge to federalized health care.

Then he assisted Idaho Chooses Life in getting a strong conscience protection bill enacted into law.

“Conscience protection for doctors and nurses is part of a larger strategy to resist death panels and the rationing of health care for seniors and vulnerable Idahoans,” Ripley added.

The Board of Idaho Chooses Life reviewed candidate answers to an extensive survey on pro-Life issues. Labrador, Vaughn Ward and Harley Brown all scored well on the questionnaire. The other candidates did not respond.

“We acknowledge the candidates’ positions on critical pro-Life issues,” Ripley said. “But we’ve learned through hard experience that there is just no substitute for being there. Raul has stood his ground time after time, when politics and the Abortion Lobby have exerted tremendous pressure to abandon principle.”

“Our endorsement is meant to honor Raul Labrador’s record and service to Idaho,” Ripley concluded.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General | No Comments »

Thursday’s Halli & Friends Features Darrel Deide, Idahoans for Choice in Education

April 21st, 2010 by Halli

Be sure to tune in to Halli & Friends Thursday at 8am for an interesting conversation with Senator Darrel Deide, chairman of Idahoans for Choice in Education. Sen. Deide has a unique perspective on the laws governing education in Idaho, and will discuss ways to increase choice for parents seeking alternatives to traditional government schools.

All Halli & Friends episodes can also be heard on demand at, while the most recent can be heard on the player on this page.

Posted in Education, Idaho Legislature | No Comments »

David Ripley: Conservatives May Face Tough Primary

April 21st, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

As the primary election gets ever closer, we are becoming concerned about a relatively low turn-out among rank-and-file conservatives.

There is plenty of anger among voters – but it is an anger waiting to explode against liberal Democrats, the allies of Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. And the thing about anger is that it’s mighty – but negative. The challenge facing conservative legislative candidates on the ballot next month is turning that negative energy into a positive energy. Will rank-and-file conservatives turn out in strong numbers to protect their friends?

In other words – if conservatives sit on their resentments waiting for a crack at Walt Minnick, they may find a number of legislative friends mysteriously absent from the general election and next year’s Legislature.

The danger is heightened by the fact that liberal Democrats are mobilizing to take full advantage of Idaho’s ridiculous Open Primary System.

Union members at the IEA are hopping mad about budget cuts to schools and, potentially, their paychecks. They want to dump those conservative legislators they see as blocking their demand for a big tax increase next year.

Just last week, the Idaho Public Employees Association – representing disgruntled state employees – published a newsletter instructing their members on the how and whys of “strategic cross-over voting”.

Here is a startling quote:

“Voting in the primary is the best way to influence a party’s platform, and it is a great way to bring about change. Idaho primaries are open primaries. That means you don’t have to register as a member of a party.”

Wait, there are additional details provided for the more dim-witted of their readers:

“Here’s a possible scenario: You’re leaning toward the Democrat in the general election, but the Democrats don’t have a contested primary in your district. So you vote for the Republican that most closely represents your views and that person wins the primary …. But then in the fall you realize that the Democrat still looks better to you, so you vote for the Democrat.”

If rank-and-file Republicans do not participate next month, it will not take many Democrat cross-over votes to flip a number of crucial legislative elections.

That portends not only tax increases next session – it will mean a devastating blow to the pro-Life movement.

Help us spread the word: Let’s get out and vote on May 25th.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

Don’t Miss Bryan Fischer and Rep. Erik Simpson Interviews On Demand

April 20th, 2010 by Halli

Today’s Halli & Friends program features excellent interviews with two great men.

The first is Bryan Fischer, former director of the Idaho Values Alliance, and now director of Issue Analysis for Government and Public Policy at American Family Association. He discusses nationalized health care and its dangers, potential conservative presidential candidates, and Idaho issues.

Representative Erik Simpson, R-Idaho Falls, gives an excellent summary of the 2010 Idaho Legislature and offers predictions for the state’s revenues and future.

Both interviews are must-hear radio! Listen on demand with the player on this page, or at

Don’t forget to tune in live from 8-9am MDT, Monday through Friday.

Posted in Idaho Falls Issues, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Making America Less Safe

April 19th, 2010 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

We are now more vulnerable as a nation due to an inscrutable Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) last week from the administration. President Obama’s NPR pledged that the U.S. “will not conduct nuclear testing, and will seek ratification and entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty,” “will not develop new nuclear warheads,” and “will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations.”

By so doing, it also eliminates the protection to the country afforded by what Defense Secretary Robert Gates calls “calculated ambiguity.” Attempting to explain the move, Gates said, “If a non-nuclear-weapon state is in compliance with the nonproliferation treaty and its obligations, the U.S. pledges not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against it.” Instead, such an enemy “would face the prospect of a devastating conventional military response”—even if that enemy “were to use chemical or biological weapons against the United States or its allies or partners.”

To put the new NPR in perspective in simple terms, it’s like George Washington admitting that he would not use cannons against any foe who claimed they didn’t have cannons, (whether they really had them or not, as long as they said they didn’t have any), in retaliation for an attack on colonial America.

Proclaiming to the world, our enemies and our allies, when we will and won’t use our nuclear arsenal, is a seriously flawed policy that places the country more at risk. Secretary Gates alluded to that, even as he attempted to explain away the NPR as cited above.
Ronald Reagan understood the importance of ambiguity regarding nuclear deployment, and the imperative of the U.S. maintaining peace through strength. He said in 1983, “Since the dawn of the atomic age, we’ve sought to reduce the risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking genuine arms control. Deterrence means simply this: Making sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States or our allies or our vital interests concludes that the risks to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our strength. Weakness only invites aggression. This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works.”

The NPR coincided with President Obama’s agreement with Russia to reduce nuclear arsenals by 30%, which is a step toward his promise in 2008 to “rid the world of nuclear weapons.” Since that will never happen, it’s tantamount to domestic gun control efforts to make guns illegal so that after law-abiding citizens are disarmed, the only guns remaining are in the hands of criminals and thugs. If we disarm, you can bet Iran and North Korea will not.

Of course all this plays very well with the “blame America first” crowd. Those who, apparently like Obama, think America is to blame for if not all, at least most, of the problems of the world. Those who think if we dismantled our arsenal, every other country would follow our “moral” lead, are delusional. Rogue nations like North Korea (which already has them, confirmed through seismological and spectral analysis) and Iran (which is on the verge of having them) would be undeterred and unfettered in their misuse.

Which brings us to the Presidents’ summit at the White House this week where he said, “The prospect of nuclear terrorism is the single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and long-term.” If he truly felt that way, he wouldn’t be telegraphing to the world, especially our avowed enemies, our nuclear deterrence strategy, reducing our deterrence stockpiles, refusing to fund development of advanced deterrence technology, eliminating funding for a missile defense shield, and allowing the terrorist states of North Korea and Iran to continue unabated in developing their nuclear programs.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was obviously not impressed and mocked the new policy. He declared, “American materialist politicians, whenever they are beaten by logic, immediately resort to their weapons like cowboys. Mr. Obama, you are a newcomer. Wait until your sweat dries and get some experience. Be careful not to read just any paper put in front of you or repeat any statement recommended.” It appears he was not motivated to abandon his nuclear ambitions by Obama’s idealism. The miscreants of the world never are.

According to the Center for Defense Studies, “The message being sent to the rest of the world is that the United States finds nuclear deterrence distasteful and wants to get out of the nuclear weapons business….The result may be a more volatile and dangerous world.”

Columnist and former Carter administration official Charles Krauthammer explains, “Nuclear doctrine consists of thinking the unthinkable. It involves making threats and promising retaliation that is cruel and destructive beyond imagining. But it has its purpose: to prevent war in the first place…A nuclear posture is just that – a declaratory policy designed to make the other guy think twice. Our policies did. The result was called deterrence.”

Referring to the new Obama policy, Krauthammer continues “This is quite insane. It’s like saying that if a terrorist deliberately uses his car to mow down a hundred people waiting at a bus stop, the decision as to whether he gets (a) hanged or (b) 100 hours of community service hinges entirely on whether his car had passed emissions inspections. Apart from being morally bizarre, the Obama policy is strategically loopy. Does anyone believe that North Korea or Iran will be more persuaded to abjure nuclear weapons because they could then carry out a biological or chemical attack on the U.S. without fear of nuclear retaliation?”

You don’t have to be a foreign or military policy expert to see the flaws in this nuclear posturing. Common sense would lead anyone to realize that America is weakened when we promulgate our weapons usage policy, and inflict self-imposed limitations with our deterrent system. We are now more at risk now than we were a week ago, to the very thing Obama said constitutes our greatest threat.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Minnick & the Tea Party Manifesto

April 19th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Most folks were shocked to learn that the national Tea Party Express decided to endorse Idaho’s Walt Minnick – including Walt Minnick. After all, the combustion of grassroots Americans driving the tea party movement is largely aimed at an arrogant Democrat majority in control of Congress.

As Vaughn Ward correctly pointed out, Walt Minnick is partly responsible for putting Nancy Pelosi in charge of the most arrogant Congress in history.

Yet the endorsement of Minnick makes sense from a different perspective: Last week the Tea Party Express issued its “manifesto” or statement of principles. Called the “Contract From America”, it demands a new national leadership which is fiscally responsible.

It offers a ten-point plan intended to defend the principles of Liberty, Limited Government and Economic Freedom.

The document is sound – as far as it goes.

The problem is that it does not contain a moral vision for the nation; specifically it fails to call for the defense of Life – which obviously precedes any meaningful talk about liberty or economic prosperity. Their endorsement of Walt Minnick is the first poisonous fruit of a politics decoupled from moral and spiritual principles.

Tea Party Express is, seemingly, unconcerned about Walt Minnick’s rabid support of abortion – including a consistent demand that taxpayers pay for abortion at any time, for any reason.

Now we know that many people involved in the Tea Party movement are pro-Life. And we also recognize that economic freedom is rooted in moral principle.

But an agenda for governance which fails to account for God’s Natural Law – particularly His demand that we protect the gift of Life – can easily run amok. The worship of money is, after all, identified in Scripture as a form of idolatry.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General | No Comments »

Remember to Tune in the Halli & Friends at 8am MDT, Monday thru Friday

April 18th, 2010 by Halli

Yes, Halli & Friends, heard on , is now airing at 8am, Mountain Daylight Time, each weekday.

If you missed some of the recent shows, be sure to listen on demand at the same website, or with the player on this page. You’ll want to hear Mark Hansen, running for reelection as Bonneville County Treasurer, and his challenger, Janet Trujillo. Chick Heileson has weighed in recently, too, as has Wayne Hoffman, Idaho Freedom Foundation, and Don Crist, author of “What Can I Do: After the Tea Party”.

Upcoming guests include Bryan Fischer, American Family Association, Carolyn Nicolaysen, preparedness expert, legislators and many others.

If you’re in the vicinity of eastern Idaho Falls, tune in to Minuteman Radio 1610 AM for Halli & Friends at the same time.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

« Previous Entries

Copyright © 2oo6 by Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting