Showing posts with label Maryland My Maryland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Maryland My Maryland. Show all posts
What Happens If You Ask The School Board A Question?
|
Labels:
Edjumucation,
Maryland My Maryland,
Perky Little Tyrants,
the republic
You get forcibly removed from the room and charged with assaulting a police officer. Michelle Malkin has more details from other eye-witnesses. Essentially, at a meeting in Baltimore County about the Common Core curriculum, the county superintendent and various others would not take any but soft-sell questions.
This is a good visual for progressivism: rule by experts. The little people who dare to question are considered not citizens entitled to a hearing and an explanation, but little bugs getting in the way of progress. The audience appears to be on the guy's side -- he's applauded and there's some shouting in his defense. But they really should have all stood up and demanded he be allowed to ask his question.
If Common Core is so fabulous, how come its proponents aren't EAGER to answer any and all questions?
Fellow Marylanders, this is how eager your elected officials are to hear from you and serve you. Spread that video widely.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Heckuva Job, O'Malley
|
Labels:
Maryland My Maryland
Great, though depressing, piece in WaTi about Maryland's looming bankruptcy. I especially love the part where the "Doomsday budget" which was supposed to impose all these draconian cuts actually expanded the budget.
The despot's heel is on the shore
Maryland, my Maryland.
He's serving as your Governor.
Maryland, my Maryland.
Public spending in the Old Line State has risen steadily over the last several years, at an average of 5 percent annually, while population increased less than 1 percent. Contrary to lawmakers' claims, this year's ominously named "Doomsday budget" didn't actually cut spending. Maryland's budget ballooned by $3 billion this year to $37.1 billion. Deficits are equally massive, weighing in at $1.8 billion in 2012 and $1 billion in 2013.Not that I'm surprised. I only bring it up to say the kids and I are working on a parody of the state song. Our opening line goes like this:
Those gaps were all filled with temporary fixes, leading to an increase in the public debt to almost $28 billion, a burden of more than $14,000 to each Maryland resident.
The despot's heel is on the shore
Maryland, my Maryland.
He's serving as your Governor.
Maryland, my Maryland.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Election Day
|
Labels:
2012,
marriage,
Maryland My Maryland
I'm on pins and needles of course. Have a good feeling about the day but polls all still say it's razor close. No line at my polling place at lunch time.
I love election day! I love the civic feeling of it.
As for ballot question #6: I've editorialized, I've blogged, I've testified before the House of Delegates, I've lobbied, I've gathered petition signatures, I've arranged two voter education workshops and spoken at a third, I've volunteered and recruited volunteers, I've donated to the advertising, I've nagged, I've annoyed my Progressive facebook friends, I've prayed, I've fasted, I've voted and now I'm off to work the polls until they close.
So for the record, if marriage is defeated in Maryland, it's YOUR fault.
Just kidding. Whatever happens, it's been a fruitful campaign. Some much needed intellectual space has been created in two areas, and there's been spiritual fruit in a third.
1) Paul Ryan & the JP II-era bishops on the one hand, and the HHS mandate on the other, have opened some space for honest discussion of how best to meet our moral obligations to the poor. For the past 30 years that's been a conversation Catholics couldn't have because as soon as you raised a question the Social Justice bullies shouted you down. Now everyone serious in the Church is re-thinking the relationship between Church and federal programs.
2) The President's radicalism, particularly against marriage, has opened some space for blacks to distance themselves from the Democratic party. Not suggesting we'll see much of that this cycle, but it will bear fruit down the road. (I wish you could have met all the black Republicans at our poll -worker training for marriage volunteers last night; you'd have hope! Not that I think the GOP is so great -- it isn't, esp in Maryland. But the real hope for race relations lies in freedom to think for ourselves rather than voting by racial block, so the expansion of the freedom to be a minority who isn't a Democrat is a move towards genuine solidarity.)
3) Christian unity. Nothing fuels the ecumenical movement like the social questions. The friendship and trust and mutual prayer together among all the Christian churches --and also Orthodox Jews and Muslim groups-- will not disappear tomorrow, no matter what happens at the polls.
I love election day! I love the civic feeling of it.
As for ballot question #6: I've editorialized, I've blogged, I've testified before the House of Delegates, I've lobbied, I've gathered petition signatures, I've arranged two voter education workshops and spoken at a third, I've volunteered and recruited volunteers, I've donated to the advertising, I've nagged, I've annoyed my Progressive facebook friends, I've prayed, I've fasted, I've voted and now I'm off to work the polls until they close.
So for the record, if marriage is defeated in Maryland, it's YOUR fault.
Just kidding. Whatever happens, it's been a fruitful campaign. Some much needed intellectual space has been created in two areas, and there's been spiritual fruit in a third.
1) Paul Ryan & the JP II-era bishops on the one hand, and the HHS mandate on the other, have opened some space for honest discussion of how best to meet our moral obligations to the poor. For the past 30 years that's been a conversation Catholics couldn't have because as soon as you raised a question the Social Justice bullies shouted you down. Now everyone serious in the Church is re-thinking the relationship between Church and federal programs.
2) The President's radicalism, particularly against marriage, has opened some space for blacks to distance themselves from the Democratic party. Not suggesting we'll see much of that this cycle, but it will bear fruit down the road. (I wish you could have met all the black Republicans at our poll -worker training for marriage volunteers last night; you'd have hope! Not that I think the GOP is so great -- it isn't, esp in Maryland. But the real hope for race relations lies in freedom to think for ourselves rather than voting by racial block, so the expansion of the freedom to be a minority who isn't a Democrat is a move towards genuine solidarity.)
3) Christian unity. Nothing fuels the ecumenical movement like the social questions. The friendship and trust and mutual prayer together among all the Christian churches --and also Orthodox Jews and Muslim groups-- will not disappear tomorrow, no matter what happens at the polls.
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Maybe. Maybe. YES! Maybe. NO! Hell No! & NO!
|
Labels:
2012,
Maryland My Maryland
Not that you asked, but since it's usually impossible to find guidance on Maryland ballot questions, I'm going to tell you how I plan to vote on our SEVEN ballot questions and you can vote with me or cancel me out as you see fit. (In previous years, lacking better info, I've found it helpful if I couldn't figure out what the issue was to at least get a handle on who was supporting it.)
There are 7 questions. I have strong opinions on questions 3 (Yes!) 5,6,7 (No!) and am "meh" on questions 1,2,4.
Questions 1 & 2 require judges of the Orphans' Courts in PG and Baltimore Counties respectively to be Maryland attorneys in good standing with the state bar. This kind of measure seems to come up every year and I don't understand why it's an issue. Always half wonder if it's some kind of lawyer's trick to exclude other eligible professions from judgships, but where there's corrupt local government, I suppose it's good that folks at a minimum not be disbarred for some reason. The local GOP is supporting these two measures; don't know the Dem position.
Question 3 Oh, hell yes. Speaking of corrupt local government, we've recently been treated to the spectacle of convicted criminals maintaining their offices. This changes the removal process for elected officials so when they're convicted or plead guilty they immediately lose their seats. As long as we're going to keep electing corrupt clowns, at least we can toss them out when their wives are caught with thousands of dollars of cash billowing out of their brassieres.
Question 4 Maryland Dream Act. Still pondering this one, but leaning towards voting for it, in deference to the Maryland Catholic Conference, which is supporting it. Dems are for, GOP is against. Unlike national and other state Dream Acts, this one is narrowly drawn. It allows the children of illegal immigrants -- kids who were brought here through no fault of their own and have been educated in our schools, have no criminal record, and can show proof of paying taxes in MD-- to pay in-state tuition rates at Maryland State Schools. They can't take slots designated for Maryland residents; they have to compete with other students for out-of-state positions. But if they win them, they pay in-state tuition based on their having paid taxes here. That seems like basic fairness to me, and I don't see that it encourages further illegal immigration. If we enforce our immigration laws for the parents, this will be a humane and relatively minor accommodation for a single generation of kids.
As readers here know, I want regulation of the border and penalties for coming here illegally. But I also want us to change our laws to alter the incentives so that immigrants want to come here legally because it doesn't take years and riches to do so.
I've become hardened in this view since reading John Mueller's brilliant Redeeming Economics. One of the tangential points he makes is that in a sense the economy abhors a vacuum. Since people tend to migrate in their twenties, if you want to know what the total immigration rate (legal + illegal) is going to be, just look at total fertility rates twenty years earlier -- or for shorthand, look at the abortion rate 20 years ago. (This is no mere assertion; he demonstrates it empirically with charts comparing the two figures.) He says that economic pressures being what they are, there's no way to stop people filling the vacuum you create by failing to have your own children. You just have to decide as a nation whether to create a way for immigrants to come legally or not.
So if that's the case -- you can't stop people-- it's better to find ways to assimilate them. Of course, I'd feel better about the whole thing if we were sending these kids to Ashland or Hillsdale for assimilation rather than UMd.
On the other hand, while the law itself doesn't trouble me, I fear its passage sends the signal that we're not serious about immigration enforcement. And I'm not sure why the state of Maryland should prefer illegal immigrant children over, say, citizens of New Jersey. And as indicated above, the likelihood of many of these kids being radicalized in Latino and Womyn's studies courses is high. And it annoys me that the local bishops are pushing this hard when marriage is on the ballot, as if there were an equivalence in the issues' importance.
So I'm thinking about it.
Update: Upon consideration, I will have to vote against. Giving the tuition break necessarily means U Md will take in less in tuition, which means either taxes or tuition for all citizens will go up. That's an injustice. But the worse injustice is that the state of Maryland is collecting the taxes of illegal aliens at all (though granted it does so because documentation is offered fraudulently. It's wrong to take tax monies from people who aren't citizens and aren't really going to receive the protections of citizens. That's exploitative. So, while the measure is going to win handily without me and I respect the good intentions of the MDCathConf on this, I think it's actually a contribution to what the Catechism calls a "structure of sin" and I can't in conscience support it, hard though I tried.
Question 5 No. As discussed here previously, a "yes" vote upholds a gerrymandering plan so absurd the local press are mocking it and even the local Democratic party isn't taking a position on it. Not only does it eliminate GOP congressional seats, it dilutes the minority vote by taking a heavily black/Hispanic area and sprinkling it into several districts -- enough to guarantee Democratic seats (and notably Sen. Sarbanes' son's seat), but diluting minority strength. Why blacks don't rise up and boot the Democratic party out I cannot understand; they are shown no respect, even on the "diversity" terms I don't believe in but the Democratic Party supposedly upholds.
Question 6 Emphatically no. Redefines marriage and in no way protects religious liberty (in fact the statute expressly excludes from protection what we might loosely call "apostolates" run by Church groups). A "yes" vote is a vote to remove the words "man" and "woman" from the state definition of marriage and to subject those who don't wish to approve homosexual unions to harrassment lawsuits and treatment as pariahs before the law. A "no" vote is a vote to maintain man-woman marriage. (Donate for advertising or volunteer to work the polls Tuesday at www.marylandmarriagealliance.com.)
Question 7 Allows slots and table games at National Harbor. Both party establishments are behind the measure. I'm not anti-gambling per se but will vote against this because they're putting it in P.G. County -- a cynical effort to make money off the backs of poor blacks and hispanics in a county where family breakdown is already rampant. They want a new casino up county? Be my guest. But this is just vile. Plus it just gives more money to the local government for unspecified projects. More $$ for this government will go for mischief. So: NO. Keep National Harbor safe, wholesome and family oriented.
There are 7 questions. I have strong opinions on questions 3 (Yes!) 5,6,7 (No!) and am "meh" on questions 1,2,4.
Questions 1 & 2 require judges of the Orphans' Courts in PG and Baltimore Counties respectively to be Maryland attorneys in good standing with the state bar. This kind of measure seems to come up every year and I don't understand why it's an issue. Always half wonder if it's some kind of lawyer's trick to exclude other eligible professions from judgships, but where there's corrupt local government, I suppose it's good that folks at a minimum not be disbarred for some reason. The local GOP is supporting these two measures; don't know the Dem position.
Question 3 Oh, hell yes. Speaking of corrupt local government, we've recently been treated to the spectacle of convicted criminals maintaining their offices. This changes the removal process for elected officials so when they're convicted or plead guilty they immediately lose their seats. As long as we're going to keep electing corrupt clowns, at least we can toss them out when their wives are caught with thousands of dollars of cash billowing out of their brassieres.
Question 4 Maryland Dream Act. Still pondering this one, but leaning towards voting for it, in deference to the Maryland Catholic Conference, which is supporting it. Dems are for, GOP is against. Unlike national and other state Dream Acts, this one is narrowly drawn. It allows the children of illegal immigrants -- kids who were brought here through no fault of their own and have been educated in our schools, have no criminal record, and can show proof of paying taxes in MD-- to pay in-state tuition rates at Maryland State Schools. They can't take slots designated for Maryland residents; they have to compete with other students for out-of-state positions. But if they win them, they pay in-state tuition based on their having paid taxes here. That seems like basic fairness to me, and I don't see that it encourages further illegal immigration. If we enforce our immigration laws for the parents, this will be a humane and relatively minor accommodation for a single generation of kids.
As readers here know, I want regulation of the border and penalties for coming here illegally. But I also want us to change our laws to alter the incentives so that immigrants want to come here legally because it doesn't take years and riches to do so.
I've become hardened in this view since reading John Mueller's brilliant Redeeming Economics. One of the tangential points he makes is that in a sense the economy abhors a vacuum. Since people tend to migrate in their twenties, if you want to know what the total immigration rate (legal + illegal) is going to be, just look at total fertility rates twenty years earlier -- or for shorthand, look at the abortion rate 20 years ago. (This is no mere assertion; he demonstrates it empirically with charts comparing the two figures.) He says that economic pressures being what they are, there's no way to stop people filling the vacuum you create by failing to have your own children. You just have to decide as a nation whether to create a way for immigrants to come legally or not.
So if that's the case -- you can't stop people-- it's better to find ways to assimilate them. Of course, I'd feel better about the whole thing if we were sending these kids to Ashland or Hillsdale for assimilation rather than UMd.
On the other hand, while the law itself doesn't trouble me, I fear its passage sends the signal that we're not serious about immigration enforcement. And I'm not sure why the state of Maryland should prefer illegal immigrant children over, say, citizens of New Jersey. And as indicated above, the likelihood of many of these kids being radicalized in Latino and Womyn's studies courses is high. And it annoys me that the local bishops are pushing this hard when marriage is on the ballot, as if there were an equivalence in the issues' importance.
So I'm thinking about it.
Update: Upon consideration, I will have to vote against. Giving the tuition break necessarily means U Md will take in less in tuition, which means either taxes or tuition for all citizens will go up. That's an injustice. But the worse injustice is that the state of Maryland is collecting the taxes of illegal aliens at all (though granted it does so because documentation is offered fraudulently. It's wrong to take tax monies from people who aren't citizens and aren't really going to receive the protections of citizens. That's exploitative. So, while the measure is going to win handily without me and I respect the good intentions of the MDCathConf on this, I think it's actually a contribution to what the Catechism calls a "structure of sin" and I can't in conscience support it, hard though I tried.
Question 5 No. As discussed here previously, a "yes" vote upholds a gerrymandering plan so absurd the local press are mocking it and even the local Democratic party isn't taking a position on it. Not only does it eliminate GOP congressional seats, it dilutes the minority vote by taking a heavily black/Hispanic area and sprinkling it into several districts -- enough to guarantee Democratic seats (and notably Sen. Sarbanes' son's seat), but diluting minority strength. Why blacks don't rise up and boot the Democratic party out I cannot understand; they are shown no respect, even on the "diversity" terms I don't believe in but the Democratic Party supposedly upholds.
Question 6 Emphatically no. Redefines marriage and in no way protects religious liberty (in fact the statute expressly excludes from protection what we might loosely call "apostolates" run by Church groups). A "yes" vote is a vote to remove the words "man" and "woman" from the state definition of marriage and to subject those who don't wish to approve homosexual unions to harrassment lawsuits and treatment as pariahs before the law. A "no" vote is a vote to maintain man-woman marriage. (Donate for advertising or volunteer to work the polls Tuesday at www.marylandmarriagealliance.com.)
Question 7 Allows slots and table games at National Harbor. Both party establishments are behind the measure. I'm not anti-gambling per se but will vote against this because they're putting it in P.G. County -- a cynical effort to make money off the backs of poor blacks and hispanics in a county where family breakdown is already rampant. They want a new casino up county? Be my guest. But this is just vile. Plus it just gives more money to the local government for unspecified projects. More $$ for this government will go for mischief. So: NO. Keep National Harbor safe, wholesome and family oriented.
Saturday, November 03, 2012
Vote No on Maryland Ballot Question #5
|
Labels:
2012,
Maryland My Maryland
This local report explains perfectly why. The journalist files his report from a street corner that lies in THREE districts.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Vote No on #6
|
Labels:
2012,
marriage,
Maryland My Maryland
Here are two ads cut for Maryland Marriage Alliance to prevent the redefinition of marriage in the state.
The first is on why marriage is important. The second addresses the threat to religious liberty and free speech posed by the redefinition.
Good, no? If you'd like to see them on the air --so that Referendum #6 is defeated on November 6th-- please donate to the Maryland Marriage Alliance pronto.
Or call the MMA to volunteer (lots of poll workers needed) or download your voter materials and yard signs.
No reason to lose this one unless we are silent. Today I spoke up on Facebook -- not because I delight in annoying my Progressive friends, but because I realized I was a little afraid to, and I decided that was exactly what the bullies are counting on.
The first is on why marriage is important. The second addresses the threat to religious liberty and free speech posed by the redefinition.
Good, no? If you'd like to see them on the air --so that Referendum #6 is defeated on November 6th-- please donate to the Maryland Marriage Alliance pronto.
Or call the MMA to volunteer (lots of poll workers needed) or download your voter materials and yard signs.
No reason to lose this one unless we are silent. Today I spoke up on Facebook -- not because I delight in annoying my Progressive friends, but because I realized I was a little afraid to, and I decided that was exactly what the bullies are counting on.
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Think We've Got Our Marriage Referendum
|
Labels:
marriage,
Maryland My Maryland
18,000 signatures due tomorrow; 57,000 due in June. Number of signatures turned in yesterday? 113,000 announced here. Final # 122,000+ not counting signatures collected over the weekend. By the deadline there may be three times as many signatures as necessary...and they said it couldn't be done in Maryland.
Pastor Derek McCoy of the Maryland Marriage Alliance makes the announcement.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Same Sex Marriage Fall-out
|
Labels:
2012,
marriage,
Maryland My Maryland
MD. Delegate Emmett Burns -- who is also a pastor and testified eloquently before the MD House of Delegates earlier this year in opposition to the redefinition of marriage -- told his Church last weekend he will no longer support President Obama and predicted he would lose the election.
Curtsy to Hot Air for the video. Ed Morrissey writes there:
Here's anecdotal support for that. A friend volunteering at Maryland Marriage Alliance headquarters overheard some African American volunteers discussing the president's stand. One woman came in and announced loudly to no one in particular, "Well, President Obama has sold his soul for votes!"
If Republicans had any sense, they'd make like our MD senate candidate Dan Bongino and capitalize on the opportunity to make inroads. People will listen. At least a margin of people will listen. Even alleged noted "racist" Sen. Jesse Helms always managed a certain percentage of the African American vote simply because he never wrote it off and always campaigned in black communities too.
This will be a disaster in places like Maryland. No one expects the congregants of Pastor Burns’ church to run out and vote for Romney, but they’re going to be a lot less enthused about Obama — and a lack of enthusiasm in his base will put an end to hopes of a second term. Maryland is a safe state for Democrats under normal conditions; it last went Republican in 1988, and Obama won it by 25 points in 2008. However, the same reason for that large margin of victory shows the risk for Obama, which is that 30% of the vote in the state comes from the African-American community that Pastor Burns and others serve.
Here's anecdotal support for that. A friend volunteering at Maryland Marriage Alliance headquarters overheard some African American volunteers discussing the president's stand. One woman came in and announced loudly to no one in particular, "Well, President Obama has sold his soul for votes!"
Later I asked this lady if she thought his support of homosexual marriage would sway a lot of people. She said she didn't know what she would do, because she didn't like Romney so she'd probably not vote. Today another lady came in expressing consternation, but said she didn't know what to do because "Romney wants to fire people."
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Maryland's AG: "Don't Worry, No One's Votes Will Count!"
|
Labels:
Court's In Session,
marriage,
Maryland My Maryland
I spent eight hours at my parish over the weekend helping gather signatures to put marriage on the ballot in Maryland this fall (I am a trained "petition circulator" and trainer thereof). The process is interesting on a number of levels and once I got over my fear and distaste for being the official face of homophobic bigotry in my parish and neighborhood, kind of fun in that you get to meet and talk to a lot of different kinds of people.
A couple of quick observations.
First. I always say (and am not alone in saying) that support for traditional marriage is stronger than polls reflect because of the "spiral of silence" effect. That's sociology talk for people who think their position is unpopular keeping mum and people who think they're winning talking more and more so that neither side has an accurate sense of where people actually are. My parish is pretty much "Maryland" writ small: middle and working class, mixed races, warm family and community ties, deep residual Catholicism, equally deep Democratic Party and union ties. There's a recent influx of young families who are better catechized and more theologically Conservative and a sizable Nigerian immigrant community, but still the bulk of the community is Boomer and Boomer-educated Catholics. I expected more hostility to the petition drive than there was -- and was pleasantly surprised by who and how many folks signed.
The GOP sucks. While witnessing signatures after the Nigerian community Mass in our parish, I had a number of conversations with naturalized citizens who are highly committed to the defense of life and marriage and quite savvy about the likelihood activist judges will inhibit the referendum process. When I made an announcement at each Mass about how the process would work, most people listened politely or looked down so as not to reveal their thoughts. The Nigerians applauded me and asked God to bless their sister -- I guess they're not used to white people being for traditional marriage. Yet they are all registered Democrats (part of the signing process involves looking people up on voter rolls -- that's how I know). No excuse for that except incompetence; there is nothing about these people's culture and attitudes that fits with the Democratic Party.
Speaking of bought judges, I beg you to watch and publicize the final three minutes of our State Attorney General's comments to Equality Maryland last year. Starting at about minute 5, he gives his prediction of how the referendum process will go. Notice that he expects the referendum to get on the ballot and he expects traditional marriage to win "because the machines don't work." (I don't know if I am more offended by his assumption that the only way marriage would triumph is because of the machines not working or by how cavalier he is about the machines not working -- it is not his #1 priority to ensure a clean election?) He assures his audience that they need not worry about the will of the people, because Gov. O'Malley has appointed judges who will overturn the referendum.
And finally, you might think about sending some $$ in the direction of Maryland Marriage Alliance to fend off this kind of stuff. And if you're a Maryland voter whose church or civic group isn't sponsoring a signature drive for the referendum follow that MMA link to have the petition sent directly to you home. Act by May 19th.
A couple of quick observations.
First. I always say (and am not alone in saying) that support for traditional marriage is stronger than polls reflect because of the "spiral of silence" effect. That's sociology talk for people who think their position is unpopular keeping mum and people who think they're winning talking more and more so that neither side has an accurate sense of where people actually are. My parish is pretty much "Maryland" writ small: middle and working class, mixed races, warm family and community ties, deep residual Catholicism, equally deep Democratic Party and union ties. There's a recent influx of young families who are better catechized and more theologically Conservative and a sizable Nigerian immigrant community, but still the bulk of the community is Boomer and Boomer-educated Catholics. I expected more hostility to the petition drive than there was -- and was pleasantly surprised by who and how many folks signed.
The GOP sucks. While witnessing signatures after the Nigerian community Mass in our parish, I had a number of conversations with naturalized citizens who are highly committed to the defense of life and marriage and quite savvy about the likelihood activist judges will inhibit the referendum process. When I made an announcement at each Mass about how the process would work, most people listened politely or looked down so as not to reveal their thoughts. The Nigerians applauded me and asked God to bless their sister -- I guess they're not used to white people being for traditional marriage. Yet they are all registered Democrats (part of the signing process involves looking people up on voter rolls -- that's how I know). No excuse for that except incompetence; there is nothing about these people's culture and attitudes that fits with the Democratic Party.
Speaking of bought judges, I beg you to watch and publicize the final three minutes of our State Attorney General's comments to Equality Maryland last year. Starting at about minute 5, he gives his prediction of how the referendum process will go. Notice that he expects the referendum to get on the ballot and he expects traditional marriage to win "because the machines don't work." (I don't know if I am more offended by his assumption that the only way marriage would triumph is because of the machines not working or by how cavalier he is about the machines not working -- it is not his #1 priority to ensure a clean election?) He assures his audience that they need not worry about the will of the people, because Gov. O'Malley has appointed judges who will overturn the referendum.
And finally, you might think about sending some $$ in the direction of Maryland Marriage Alliance to fend off this kind of stuff. And if you're a Maryland voter whose church or civic group isn't sponsoring a signature drive for the referendum follow that MMA link to have the petition sent directly to you home. Act by May 19th.
Monday, April 23, 2012
In Planned Parenthood's Pocket
|
Labels:
2012,
culture of life,
Maryland My Maryland
Further to my post about the crony capitalist relationship between the Democratic Party and Planned Parenthood, and also further to my enthusiasm for Dan Bongino, GOP senate candidate, please note what incumbent Dem Senator Ben Cardin said upon winning his primary last night.
The people of this state are struggling with unemployment, the rising cost of everything, obscenely bad schools (in spite of the corrupt process that claims ours are among the best in the nation. You think PG County schools are among the best?), taxes galore, the imminent collapse of the economy from debt, and what are Senator Cardin's priorities? Whatever Cecile Richards tells him they are. That, and keeping energy prices high.
After learning he had won, Cardin said he would focus on opposing Republican efforts to undo progress on health care, women’s rights and the environment.Can a position be both tedious and unbelievable?
“I’ve made it clear that that’s not going to happen under my watch,” Cardin said in a telephone interview.
The people of this state are struggling with unemployment, the rising cost of everything, obscenely bad schools (in spite of the corrupt process that claims ours are among the best in the nation. You think PG County schools are among the best?), taxes galore, the imminent collapse of the economy from debt, and what are Senator Cardin's priorities? Whatever Cecile Richards tells him they are. That, and keeping energy prices high.
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
Don't Just Shop, Buy
|
Labels:
2012,
Maryland My Maryland,
The Long Campaign
Well, at least one of my candidates won his primary last night. Dan Bongino is now the GOP candidate to defeat Ben Cardin for a seat in the U.S. Senate this fall. Money-wise the guy's going to have an uphill battle, but if anyone can defeat Cardin he can.
This is footage from his victory party last night. The first nine minutes is hugs and thank yous, which show he's a nice guy, but there's no reason to watch. Tune in for his substantive remarks, though, which ought to resonate with folks in all kinds of blue states like mine.
Pick it up at about 9 minutes in, when he starts talking about what a rough nine months it's been, and how scary it has been for him and his wife for him to quit his job and run for office.
Folks, do we believe in these ideas, or do we just believe in these ideas when the race is convenient to win?Yes, yes, yes and yes. Convictions. A happy warrior. Involves others in the battle, doesn't just swoop in as savior. And doesn't think his ideas are just for people like him. He's going after the minority vote...and he's going to get it, too, with that attitude and those ideas. Enough of it to win.
So what? It's your home.
So let me get this straight. We've lost a few races, we've had a couple bad races, but 1984 Reagan wins. 1988 George H.W. Bush wins. Ellen Sauerbray wins, we all know it [for those not familiar, this was an excellent GOP candidate who had the race for Governor stolen from her]. Bob Ehrlich wins 2002. We have a 30-year history of winning in our state.
Folks, this is our home. It's our fight... It's time for people to step up....
....
We need 20% of Democrats to win, and we're going to get them.
We're going to ask them something they've never been asked: to step out of the ideological box....
The GOP is about ideas ...
We are going to plant a tent in Prince George's County, Baltimore City....and we are going to talk about things that matter....
This is not a sponsored endorsement, but an enthusiastic one: www.bongino.com. Send him some $$ if you can. I'm gonna.
Curtsy: Anthropocon
Dan Bongino
|
Labels:
2012,
Maryland My Maryland,
The Long Campaign
I got a tweet nudging me to tune into a local radio interview with Senate candidate Dan Bongino. He's running in the GOP primary next week to take on Sen. Ben Cardin. OMG where did this guy come from? I know the literal answer: the Secret Service. But I mean the guy is so sharp and articulate, with such mastery of the issues, it's hard to believe he could be a first-time political candidate. He's funny, low-key, walks the line between not taking himself too seriously and never missing a trick (like signing off, "Dan Bongino" so you remember his name), and best of all, he educates voters about why he thinks what he thinks rather than simply asserting positions.
You should have heard his discussion of school choice and later of Paul Ryan's budget (will post the podcast when it's up). I don't know how he's looking for Tuesday, but the guy's going places.
You should have heard his discussion of school choice and later of Paul Ryan's budget (will post the podcast when it's up). I don't know how he's looking for Tuesday, but the guy's going places.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
