TrishAndHalli.com

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.

About

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

Archives

Categories

Pages

Blogroll

Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations


Jerry Sproul, CPA
ThoughtfulConsideration.com

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

Richard Larsen: What Conservatives Can Learn from Liberals

January 28th, 2016 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

There are tactics and characteristics of the American left that conservatives would be well advised to emulate. Until these lessons are learned, conservatives will likely continue to struggle at the ballot box, and liberty will be but a noble afterthought.

Perhaps the most critical lesson to learn is that politics, and governance in general, is incremental. The ebb and flow of the political environment and the mechanics of governance move incrementally, either toward liberty and constitutional principles, or toward centralized planning and governmental hegemony. Every piece of legislation, policy statement, regulation, executive order, election, and every judicial decision moves the nation, a state, or a community slightly one direction or the other. It rarely moves all the way to one extreme or the other.

Many conservatives tend to look at each of the above events as an all-or-nothing proposition. If they can’t have absolute 2nd Amendment rights, it’s all wrong. If they can’t have completely free markets, the system is corrupt and it’s no good. If a candidate doesn’t agree completely with their perspective, they’re evil and cannot be supported, and they’re simply the “lesser of two evils.”

The long-term perspective significantly shapes incremental adaptation. Liberals seem to have a more long-term view of the process, and realize that each political victory is a rung on the progressive ladder. Too many conservatives suffer from severe myopia, mistakenly believing that if they can’t jump to the top of a ladder in one jump, they’ve failed, or that other conservatives have failed them if they can’t, or don’t, make the jump to the top minus the intervening steps.

This tendency places some conservatives in the unenviable position of never being satisfied with anything. Since they can’t have things just precisely the way they want them to be, they will forever be unsatisfied, and politically unfilled. Liberals, generally, seem to relish each minor victory and recognize any politically incremental movement for what it is – one step in the process.

When we realize that every election and every other political activity takes us incrementally toward liberty, we begin realizing that each minor move to constitutionality and liberty is a victory, however small. And rather than bemoaning the failure to leap to the top of the ladder, relish the small victory, and gear up for the next battle for the next incremental triumph.

Closely related is persistence. When liberals don’t get what they want, they keep pressing ahead, until at last they persevere. When HillaryCare failed in the 90’s, the issue was placed on the back burner until they could muster the political clout to pull it off with the 2010 edition – ObamaCare. The old aphorism, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again,” should be the mantra of conservatives. Don’t give up, don’t give in, and if we fail, then try again until we succeed.

Liberals are masters of the compromise. In foreign affairs, they’re willing to concede large swaths of political ground for minor gains. For example, they assure a nuclearized Iran in 10 years, for little more than the appearance of having achieved a great deal for the U.S. But when it comes to domestic affairs, it’s just reversed. They will concede hardly anything in exchange for massive concessions from Republicans. This art is obviously a learned trait, and one that has thus far eluded conservatives. Until they can learn to at least meet halfway on issues of principle, conservatives will forever be the political doormats in American politics. Acquiescing and caving totally to the left not only emboldens the left, but it alienates conservatives from their political base and ideological constituency.

Granted, part of the lefts success in this regard is due to the fact that they have the media to advance their narrative. When congress presents a budget and the president threatens to veto it, liberals and the media all blame congress if the government is shut down for not presenting a budget the president can sign. If it’s vetoed, the president shut government down, not congress! Conservatives must learn to control the narrative, and shape the story in a way that ascribes blame where it belongs. President Reagan was able to do this, even without the alternative media that’s available today.

The left is organized, mobilized and energized at the grassroots level in such a way as to capitalize on technology and social media. Conservatives have come closer to creating a genuine grassroots organization with the emergence of the Tea Party. But even that is fragmented, sometimes regionalized, and parochial in nature. Until conservatives learn to master grassroots organization and mobilization, we’ll always be playing second fiddle.

Conservatives tend to be more defensive and reactionary, rather than aggressively proactive. We have constitutional principles – American principles – as our ideological foundation. Rather than sitting back and defensively trying to protect and preserve them, we’ve got to learn to be proactively advancing and bolstering them. Just as in sports, defense alone can’t win a game. There’s got to be an offense scoring points in order to win.

Liberals don’t seem to care how liberal their fellow ideologues are. They just care if they claim to be liberals, and if they subscribe to their broad dogma. Conservatives are often too consumed with whether one is “conservative enough,” or a “true conservative.” Consequently, we spend more time fighting amongst ourselves, pointing fingers, making accusations, and casting aspersions than we do in fighting the real enemies of liberty. A house divided against itself cannot stand, and as long as conservatives engage in this internal civil war, we will remain our own worst enemies. We can only succeed when we’re united.

George Washington claimed, “Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth.” America’s plant is withering, and if we’re to save it, we need to start working proactively together as freedom’s stewards.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: More is Revealed…

January 28th, 2016 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Operation Rescue provided more background information on the grave injustice playing out in Houston, where undercover investigators are facing criminal charges – but the baby butchers walk.

The first thing we learn is that the Grand Jury impaneled by DA Devon Anderson never even took a vote on whether to indict Planned Parenthood for violations of federal statutes like the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. (Despite video evidence that Houston Planned Parenthood doctors engage in such practices in order to harvest more valuable organs and tissue). In fact, it is not clear that the Grand Jury in Houston was even presented with evidence about potential wrong-doing by Planned Parenthood officials.

We suspect that Ms. Anderson’s true agenda was to protect the Abortion Industry. From the beginning of her “investigation” she indicated that she would be looking closely at the behavior and methods of the undercover reporters who stunned America with their findings.

Despite being appointed by Gov. Rick Perry to the post, Ms. Anderson has a rather questionable past with respect to the Abortion Industry.

In 2013, Operation Rescue brought a complaint in Houston against an abortionist named Douglas Karpen. They uncovered a pile of evidence showing that Karpen was operating a practice very similar to that of Kermit Gosnell: killing babies after birth by snapping their necks. Turns out that the attorney who defended Karpen (Chip Lewis) is a close personal friend of D.A. Anderson – and a major donor to her political campaigns.

Just as interesting: Anderson assigned the same female deputy to run the Planned Parenthood grand jury as botched the Karpen grand jury. (Karpen walked away from those 2013 charges).

It seems quite obvious that justice is going to be a very difficult thing to find in Houston. Hopefully Governor Abbott will have greater success at the state level.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: The Chicago Way

January 26th, 2016 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life
Along with most Americans, we were shocked to hear that Planned Parenthood of Houston has been “exonerated” by the Houston DA – while the investigators will face criminal charges. Is this not a perfect example of the corrosive effect of legalized abortion upon our legal system?

We are a long way from Houston, and do not know the Houston D.A., Devon Anderson. We don’t know her politics or position on abortion. But we do know that she has an attorney working in her office who also serves on the Board of Planned Parenthood – Houston, the very organization Anderson set out to “investigate”.

The pressure Planned Parenthood is bringing to bear on the noble souls who exposed their butchery-for-profit scheme is unbelievable. It demonstrates the Mafioso-like ethics which animate Planned Parenthood: Just a week or so ago, they brought suit in San Francisco against David Daleiden, leader of the Center for Medical Progress. It is the second lawsuit filed by the Abortion Industry to silence Daleiden, and to prevent America from being confronted with the ugly truth about legalized abortion.

In response to the criminal actions by the Houston D.A., Mr. Daleiden issued the following statement:

“The Center for Medical Progress uses the same undercover techniques that investigative journalists have used for decades in exercising our First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and of the press, and follows all applicable laws…. Planned Parenthood still cannot deny the admissions from their leadership about fetal organ sales captured on video for all the world to see.”

That is a fairly careful, if pointed statement. No doubt, Mr. Daleiden’s response was drafted with help from his attorney since he must now mount a criminal defense.

We prefer the statement issued by Congresswoman Diane Black (R-TN):

“It is a sad day in America when those who harvest the body parts of aborted babies escape consequences for their actions, while the courageous truth-tellers who expose their misdeeds are handed-down a politically-motivated indictment instead.”

Amen.

We are going to have to hold Mr. Daleiden in prayer, and we are going to have rise, as a community, to help support him as he works his way through the legal harassment Planned Parenthood has laid for him.

In the meantime, we must also not lose heart: Gov. Abbott (R-TX) is vigorously pressing a state-led investigation into Planned Parenthood’s activities, which may go a long way toward correcting this blatant injustice at the hands of Ms. Anderson. He said today that the antics in Harris County will have no impact on the state’s determined investigation into Planned Parenthood.

And we can also take heart by remembering the words of the prophet Isaiah, who faced incredible levels of social corruption in his day:

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil … who acquit the guilty for a bribe, but deny justice to the innocent … for they have rejected the law of the Lord Almighty and spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel. Therefore the Lord’s anger burns ….” (Isaiah 6:20 -25).

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

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

Rep. Tom Loertscher: House Highlights Jan. 24

January 24th, 2016 by Halli

Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Bone

Probably the hottest topic discussed around the legislature this last week, was all of the issues that are going to appear on our agenda soon. Even though several issues were discussed by various groups, not much actually came forward at least in a way we could begin introducing legislation. What will more than likely occur is that all at once we will have much on our plate and then we might hurry too fast getting things done.

I was asked last year and this to participate on what has been fondly dubbed the CEC Committee. The CEC stands for change in employee compensation and in other sectors they call it employee raises. The purpose of the committee is to recommend to JFAC (budget committee) what state employees should be paid in the next fiscal year. After much discussion and three different hearings on the matter and five different motions, the committee recommended that the governor’s proposal for salary increases be adopted.

What that translates into is a 3% across-the-board raise for state employees in the coming year and in addition the state will pick up all increases in employee health insurance costs. I thought there was a better motion out there that would have given a 2% across-the-board raise and then move the pay policy closer to the private sector by using the other 1% and have that pickup the increase or at least part of the increase in health insurance costs.

That decision was made very early in the morning on Tuesday and I had the privilege of reporting the result to House leadership and committee chairs in their regular weekly meeting. Because of the CEC meeting I arrived a little late and found that they had been discussing the governor’s budget and all kinds of brake lights were coming on in the room. The memory banks were alive with what occurred around this place in the year 2002, when a 13% increase in spending took place in spite of a 6% increase in revenues being predicted. That led to the longest session of the legislature in 2003 trying to find a way to close the budget gap created by overspending and revenues coming in at less than the 6% that had been forecast. So it looks like there is some caution being expressed and reservation about spending at a level that exceeds what we project for revenue increases. Alarm bells are beginning to come on for some.

We had the privilege of listening to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Jim Jones and I have to say that his talk was somewhat refreshing from others I have heard from the court. He had just finished his presentation to the Senate and as he began his comments in the house after we had waited for a few moments for his arrival he said, “I’m sorry that you were waiting for me so long but there was some windbag over in the Senate that prevented me from getting here any sooner.”

Representative Batt, the State Affairs Vice Chairman, spends a lot of time doing the rules review for the agencies that come before the committee. She discovered that two different agencies had written two sets of rules concerning the same matter. What was even more interesting was that neither agency knew what the other was doing. Her comment to me was that at least you would think they would talk to each other.

I received a call from the inventor of powdered alcohol who lives in Arizona. He sounded a bit unhappy about the bill that was introduced to ban the product. He wants to come to Idaho to testify before the committee. We’ll try not to hurry through this one or put it off too long.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Property Rights, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: Grieving for a Hurting Nation

January 22nd, 2016 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Today marks the 43rd year in which America has been shackled by an edict which allows for the mechanized destruction of some 4,000 innocent babies every day. The official total is something like 58 million babies lost to abortion – but that figure understates the carnage by a considerable degree.

A day like today is one in which we should take stock of the price being paid by this great nation for legalized abortion. The great scandal of organ harvesting revealed last year is an alarming sign of the darkening of America’s soul. Of course it is ghoulish to imagine Planned Parenthood chopping babies in the back room in exchange for Lamborghinis. Yet we must ask: Where is all the money coming from?

Behind the curtain of Planned Parenthood scandal is the mountains of money being spent to procure organs and tissue from tiny human beings who could not defend themselves. Presumably “respectable” companies and institutions are using these babies as organ farms to pursue research that once would have been widely denounced as clearly unethical. Does not the silence point to a coarsening of the American conscience?

Yet there are signs of awakening, as well: The U.S. Congress has finally had its fill of financing America’s largest abortion provider. The number of abortion clinics is at an historic low. Planned Parenthood is having serious trouble recruiting new abortionists. And the number of pro-Lifers continues to grow.

That strength will be on display today as the national March for Life takes place in the midst of a big winter storm. Snowflakes or not – tens of thousands of Americans will stand up for those who cannot defend themselves. That march offers the nation an invitation to repentance, to healing, to real freedom. May the Lord amplify those voices raised today and awake a people in need of healing.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Martin Luther King and His Far-reaching Impact

January 21st, 2016 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Some people take umbrage at the fact that Martin Luther King, Jr. has a holiday dedicated to his remembrance, while none of our founders, or even presidents, do. I am not among them. In many ways, MLK epitomizes the founding principles the nation was based on, for they, along with his theological convictions, comprised his core belief system.

As we celebrate the 87th anniversary of his birth, acknowledgement of his contributions to civil rights and peaceful demonstration for just causes is just a portion of what the man represented. His insights on freedom, work, selflessness, and morality apply equally to all Americans, regardless of political orientation, race, or creed.

Perhaps that was the key to his enduring legacy – not just that he advanced civil rights, but that he taught and expounded precepts that transcended the great social divide of his time. Perhaps there is as much for us to learn from those teachings in transcending and bridging the divisions of our time.

To him, everything revolved around freedom. “I say to you that our goal is freedom, and I believe we are going to get there because however much she strays away from it, the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be as a people, our destiny is tied up in the destiny of America.” This may seem ostensibly a self-evident truth, but the concept is increasingly foreign to too many of us as we look continually to government for solutions, at the expense of individual liberty to choose and to act.

He also stated, “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” When we realize that much of what’s done in the name of government is oppressive to freedom, it’s increasingly evident that as an electorate we must needs rise up in opposition to freedom-inhibiting laws and regulations, and demand redress.

“Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom,” he declared on another occasion. Individual and universal freedom was everything to him, without regard to ethnicity or other contradistinction. He advocated freedom, as opposed to government programs that diminish the freedom to build, achieve, to be rewarded for those achievements, and to succeed.

He often talked about how critical it was for all Americans to have a job. To him, a good job was ennobling, and built character. “All labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance and should be undertaken with painstaking excellence.” A working society was a free society, for without work, one becomes the ward of the state and loses their individual freedom to become and do.

He was so critical of those whose entire focus was on themselves and their own self-interests. And he made no distinction between the personal and the private; the political and the individual. Said he, “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.” And as if to underscore this notion, “Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.” Clearly those who engage in identity politics for their personal aggrandizement are not looking at the greater good for society and America.

He always emphasized doing, and acting on principles. It wasn’t enough to echo the refrains of freedom, one had to work for them. And at times he seemed to echo the sentiments of Edmund Burke, the English philosopher who said “All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing,” King’s version was, “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.” How can one claim ownership of great precepts, and not be willing to act on them?
“When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Clearly, to King, all lives matter!

The Reverend was a highly principled man, driven by truths and fundamental values. He referred often to those values. “If we are to go forward, we must go back and rediscover those precious values – that all reality hinges on moral foundations and that all reality has spiritual control.” Some of those values were the very foundational principles upon which the nation was founded, that he found lacking in their application to all American equally.

He was not a perfect man. None are. Yet he advanced a commitment to “moral foundations” and “spiritual control” which he saw as critical for society as a whole, and can only be accomplished by each of us dong our part.

I think he would concur with General Douglas MacArthur, a great student of history, who declared, “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

Although an icon of the civil rights movement, Martin Luther King was not single-dimensional. He called upon all citizens, regardless of ethnicity, religious convictions, or socio-economic status, to do their part for the benefit of society and the country. It’s wholly fitting to have a holiday dedicated to his memory and teachings. And the nation would be better off if more effort were expended in adherence to his precepts.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Rep. Tom Loertscher: House Highlights, Jan. 17

January 17th, 2016 by Halli

by Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Bone

Due to all of the press reports that have been circulating before the legislative session started this year I have been repeatedly asked if this would be a short session. My response has been that you can’t use short and session in the same sentence.

As is the case every year the first thing on the agenda is to hear from the governor. He spoke more optimistically than some years especially in light of revenues that have been coming in stronger than expected. He outlined a robust increase in education spending both in K-12 and higher education, somewhere in the $150 Million range. He also put an item in his budget to create another community college to replace Eastern Idaho Technical College in Idaho Falls. Given that it will require local voters to approve such a move, and given that it has failed locally in the past it will be interesting to see how that would come to pass.

One of the more creative things he proposed is a four year freeze on tuition for college students. Can you say “administration nightmare?” The devil is always in the details.

After the speech each year he has a punch and cookie event in his office for all legislators. I told him that he had outlined pretty ambitious budget plans and he said, “Tom, we have the money.” While that may be true, reversals can happen very fast and some I have talked with want to make sure we don’t overdo it.

Leadership decided to have a training session for all of us entitled “Civil Discourse.” They began the meeting by telling us that this did not mean that we are not civil in how we do things in Boise. Even if we do behave civilly with each other and the public we can always stand improvement. I found it helpful while others around this place not so much. We’ll see if we learned anything as the session progresses.

State Affairs this week lived up to its reputation by introducing a ban on powdered alcohol and by not introducing a bill for the Public Utilities Commission. There are not many who have heard of powdered alcohol but our liquor control people are telling us it is becoming a problem. As for the PUC bill, it will be back in some form.

Other items that are out on the horizon but not yet drafted are a couple of ideas for constitutional amendments, so called constitutional concealed carry legislation, on-line voter registration, horse racing, and some other liquor issues. Needless to say there is no shortage in the number ideas for new laws around these halls.

So how long will the session be this year? The honest answer is that no one knows for sure. The only thing we are required to do by our constitution is to adopt a budget and it must be balanced. But I can promise you that there will be somewhere in the neighborhood of three hundred new laws to consider, and thankfully not all will become law.

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Independent Voters, America Needs YOU!

January 15th, 2016 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

The final word to escape the lips of William Wallace of “Braveheart” fame was “Freedom!” The scene still today sends chills down my spine, and arouses a profound sense of gratitude for the freedoms we have in America, even with their gradual erosion that we’ve witnessed over the past 240 years. Even as William Wallace was willing to give his all for freedom, so likewise Republicans in America are generally committed to the ideological foundation of our republic: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We implore independent voters to side with the cause of liberty and individual freedom.

With that said, the Republican Party is no more monolithic than the Democrat Party is. There are elements within both parties that are more or less conservative or progressive. Those of us who are more conservative align ourselves ideologically with the classical liberals of the 18th century who founded this nation, again based on the Lockean Creed and embedded in our founding documents. These are the principles that have made America unique, and it is our conviction that this legacy must be perpetuated for the republic and American exceptionalism to survive.

As classical liberals, we acknowledge that the more government grows and encroaches into our individual lives, the more our individual freedom and liberty is diminished. It was this principle that Benjamin Franklin referred to when he stated, “Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.”

While we acknowledge the need for some security as a safety net for some in society, we believe that freedom is ennobling and the ability to achieve or fail develops character and is good for all, individually as well as collectively as a society. Consequently, we resist expansion of government power and incursion into, and control over, our lives.

We believe that in a representative republic we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and that our elected officials are beholden to the will of the people to act in our collective best interests, rather than catering or pandering to select groups or special interests. Thomas Jefferson is often quoted saying, “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” While the attribution may be in question, the logic isn’t.

We maintain that the Constitution purposefully delineates the limited powers of government in order to maximize individual freedom and liberty. Consequently, we are supportive of the constitutional functions of government, and logical and progressive levels of taxation in order to support them. We support logical, protective regulation, but reject centralized planning and government intrusion into every aspect of our lives at the expense of our liberty.

We are supportive of rational levels of taxation to pay for the services we demand of government, but acknowledge the factual consequences of diminished return the higher taxes are. And as the former Council of Economic Advisors Chairman Christina Romer has proven, for every $1 collected in taxes, there is a diminution of GDP (Gross Domestic Production) output of $3. Taxes, then, should be kept as low as possible to maximize growth of the economy and provide us individually with maximum financial freedom.

We want the economy to grow, not just for the improvement of our station in life, but because we need more than 120,000 new jobs created each month just to keep pace with population expansion. And more than that is needed to start picking up the gap of those who are underemployed, who, based on the Department of Labor’s U6 report, currently stands at 10%.

This kind of job expansion can only occur with a healthy, thriving private sector, that rather than being demonized by Washington and inflicted with senseless regulation and micromanagement by government bureaucrats, is fostered and facilitated by prudent policy and regulation. Ronald Reagan said, “The best welfare program is a job,” to which we would qualify further, a “good job.”

We adhere to fundamental fiscal principles, that the government should be beholden to the same financial restraints that we as individuals are, and that we shouldn’t spend what we don’t have. We maintain that it’s illogical to presume that spending two times more than you receive in income or revenue is sustainable and that believe that unrestrained spending threatens to bankrupt the nation and raze the republic.
We believe in free market economies, not only because they work, but because they afford the most freedom to hard-working Americans. Government can serve a legitimate role in protection of citizens and their property, but should not have power to micromanage our health care, our energy use, or our commercial activities.

Thomas Jefferson succinctly stated, “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.” We hold that to be a self-evident truth.

Right now we have a federal government that is neither wise nor frugal, but to that end we strive for a reversal at the national level, and an improvement in state and local government as well. To effect such change, it is imperative that independents consider not just the personalities of presidential and congressional candidates, but the broad principles at the base of their ideologies.

If the republic is to survive as intended, it will be because a majority of the 39% of independent voters decide that it’s worth saving, and vote accordingly. We would invite a thorough examination of the issues and the candidates, and a resolve to make logical, cogent decisions on how to vote that will facilitate a return to common sense governance, and a resurgence of commitment to the principles upon which the nation was founded. America’s founding principles made her great; she can be so again!

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

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Hillary Clinton’s Declared War on Minority Babies

January 15th, 2016 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

In celebration of Planned Parenthood’s early and passionate embrace of her candidacy, Hillary Clinton immediately responded with a gush of promises to move their agenda forward if she is elected.

Among her commitment: Repeal the Hyde Amendment restriction on using tax dollars to directly pay for abortions.

Here is her quote:

“Any right that requires you to take extra measures to access it is no right at all. Not as long we have laws on the books like the Hyde Amendment making it harder for low income women to exercise their full rights.”

This revelation of Clinton’s radical agenda requires serious reflection because the implications are many.

The first thing we must note is that the Clinton/Planned Parenthood agenda on tax-funding abortions helps reveal the true motives behind President Obama’s drive to impose their “contraceptive” mandate on Americans. The press to impose “free contraceptives” is but the first round in a larger agenda. They want free abortions as well. We see all across the nation a coordinated drive to conflate “abortion rights” with guaranteed access to abortion.

Let’s skip – for a moment – the dark moral consequences of Clinton’s radical position.

Consider the rationality of the Clinton/Planned Parenthood argument: A constitutional right must be obtained for the citizen by the government. This would be akin to arguing that, since the 2nd Amendment guarantees Americans the right to bear arms – the government is required to purchase guns and ammunition for every citizen desiring a weapon, but who feels they cannot afford a firearm and the ammunition necessary to use same. (Imagine the Democrat response to such an absurd demand!)

But, of course, the pro-Life community’s defense of the Hyde Amendment is not based on saving tax dollars. It is based on the obvious fact that taxpayer funding of abortions means more abortions.

So the direct implication of Clinton’s demand for “free abortions” is a substantial increase in the number of abortions occurring in America. That cannot be disputed. That is evil.

We credit Rush Limbaugh for seeing that this policy push by Clinton has even darker practical implications. “Free abortions” means tax funding abortions for poor women through the Medicaid program. A disproportionate share of women on Medicaid are minorities. Thus, one of the unavoidable consequences of Clinton’s cry for more abortions is the destruction of even greater numbers of black and brown babies.

Here is how Rush Limbaugh framed the matter earlier this week:

“Here’s Mrs. Clinton promising free abortions, which is an incentive for Medicaid recipients. Now, if a Republican came out and said this, the first person erupting like a jack-in-the-box would be the Reverend Jackson, followed closely by Al Sharpton. They would both be screaming that this is tantamount to racial genocide, that this Republican is giving away abortions to the poor, and they would say, ‘We all know who the poor are’….”

But here we have the self-anointed champion of minorities pushing for a radical policy change that will actually lead to greater decimation of the black and Hispanic communities in America, and Democrats across the nation applaud. How shameful.

We will take this matter even further: At this point in her career, Hillary Clinton has become indistinguishable from her heroine, Margaret Sanger. Now Mrs. Clinton is too smart to use the hateful rhetoric of the Planned Parenthood founder – which means she is plenty smart enough to know that her rabid support of abortion will achieve the goals articulated many decades ago when Sanger proudly sought to weed out the human race of undesirables.

Sound too harsh? Comparing Hillary Clinton with Margaret Sanger?

Consider this: When Hillary Clinton received the Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood in 2009, Clinton said that she was “in awe” of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger. And she is much too smart, too educated, not to be fully aware of Margaret Sanger’s contempt for minorities and the poor; or Sanger’s admiration for authoritarians like Hitler and Stalin willing to use their police powers to impose anti-Life policies upon their peoples.

At all hazards, Hillary Clinton must be stopped from following Barack Obama into the White House. Within months, she will make Obama’s awful abortion record look like some kind of pro-Life march.

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

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

David Ripley: Cruz Wins Idaho Straw Poll

January 15th, 2016 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

A straw poll was held in Boise this past weekend around the meeting of the Idaho GOP Central Committee. The party hosted a reception on Friday evening, and Texas Senator Ted Cruz won 40% of the votes cast by party leadership. A total of 143 votes were cast.

Marco Rubio came in second, with 18% of the votes cast, followed by Donald Trump at 13%. Ben Carson also finished in double digits (11%).

Following the vote, the Cruz Campaign in Idaho issued a statement, in which State Treasurer Ron Crane said, “Ted Cruz has a proven record of not wavering or ducking the tough battles, and he stands with Idahoans and Idaho values by opposing Washington’s reckless spending and infringement on our rights.”

And just yesterday, Operation Rescue issued a statement stating that the national pro-Life organization will be supporting Ted Cruz for president in upcoming GOP primaries and caucuses. In doing so, OR President Troy Newman argued that Cruz “is the most solid, dependable and trustworthy pro-Life hero running for president. And he can win.”

Idaho will hold its first-ever Presidential Primary on Tuesday, March 8th.

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

« Previous Entries

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