Finally, A Sign of Life in Harrisburg
Finally, there’s a sign of life in Harrisburg.
Tonight I attended the candidates debate between Democrat Rob Teplitz and Republican John McNally. It was held at the MidTown Bookstore, owned by leftist activist Eric Papenfuse. While his business can’t be hurt by hosting these debates (a bunch have been held there in the past), Eric still gets kudos for opening his doors to the community as a common gathering place. Thank you, Eric.
Kudos also go to Alan Kennedy-Shaffer, the founder of Harrisburg Hope, the convening organization. Alan puts a significant amount of his own time into these efforts, and the community benefits. Way to go, Alan, thank you.
As a former candidate, the format allowed me to ask a question of each candidate, and I did. Alvin Q. Taylor, also a former state senate candidate for the Democratic Party, was also allowed to ask a question, but he got in about ten questions each for McNally and Teplitz. Maybe they were more accusations than questions.
My question for Rob Teplitz: “Knowing that our individual Second Amendment civil rights are a big part of Central Pennsylvania’s culture, including both Democrats and Republicans, do you support more gun control efforts, or more crime control efforts?”
Teplitz disavowed knowing much about guns, because he has had little exposure to them, he said. He said the question posed a false set of choices, because the correct answer is both, not necessarily gun control versus crime control. Teplitz said that he supports hunting and the hunting culture, and that guns should not be in the hands of felons, domestic abusers, or children.
Liberals always mistakenly equate the Second Amendment with “hunting,” and they mistakenly equate gun control with crime control, but that last group he listed caught me by surprise. Like me and like a huge number of the children in Dauphin County, my own kids have been raised with a gun in their hands. Each of my three children has been shooting guns off the cabin porch since they were three or four years old. Nina asked for and received a rifle for her 12th birthday, and when she turned 14, she asked for a handgun. With an arsenal of knives already in his responsible possession, 9-year-old Isaac is almost ready to get his own gun. That kid can shoot.
To say that guns don’t belong in the hands of children is foolish. That is exactly where guns belong so that kids can learn how to use them properly. Like sex education before it, we need mandatory gun safety education in all schools.
To say that the beloved Second Amendment is about hunting is also silly. The Right to Bear Arms is enshrined in all of the state constitutions as well. It is about individual liberty, not duck hunting. Teplitz should take a page out of the Casey or Holden play books, answer his NRA questionnaire, and seek out an NRA A rating, but I doubt he will.
My question for John McNally was, ” As immediate past-chairman of the Dauphin County Republican Party and a quintessential Party insider, you received unprecedented financial and logistical support from the Republican Party and elected officials in your primary campaign against two other fellow Republican candidates this spring. Knowing that you owe your success to their intervention, just how much will you actually be able to maintain independence from party leaders, as you say you will in your ads?”
Thinking quickly on his feet while turning beet red, McNally said that it was me who had sent him an email right after the April 24th election “thanking” him for splitting the vote, as though I had somehow magically won the primary. McNally got it all wrong factually, but give that guy credit for both thinking on his feet and trying to turn back around the pointed question. He just might be a politician yet.
[My April 24, 2012 email to John McNally was sent at 10:33 PM and says “John, Congrats. You owe me for splitting the vote! Good luck against Taylor.”]
I gave him a raised fist pump, which he acknowledged, and he was then off to the races, accusing Teplitz of being a bigger insider and of taking more special interest money, etc etc etc. Give McNally credit for not answering the question, too. Most candidates who duck the question look foolish, but McNally attacked his opponent with such gusto that the audience was carried along with it. I like to think it was me he was really thinking about as he vented real frustration on poor bewildered Rob Teplitz. And while we are pitying people, pity the poor bewildered Republicans who voted for “the conservative outsider” John McNally (the consummate liberal Republican insider), whose campaign literature set new records for blatant horse hooey. Hand it to him, he sold himself as right, left, up down, green, red, blue and yellow all at the same time to the same people, and he got away with it. Talent like that, lying or not, requires earnest recognition. You got it goin’ on, John!
About 80% of the debate was about education, 5% about character flaws, and the remaining 15% was about other policy stuff, like abortion, racial politics, political funding, and who gets to own the fiery crash Harrisburg educational system and $350 million incinerator debt. It was a good debate.
Included in the follow-up policy wonk questions were angry denunciations, plaintive pleas, and weirdo whining for legalized pot from a yenta from Brooklyn wearing a tye-dyed tee-shirt and an explosive Jewfro. It was a really good debate.
Me? I enjoyed sitting with local coroner Graham Hetrick and sharing observations. I also really enjoyed asking McNally the one pointed question he will ever get in his career.
Because taking risks, making sacrifices, and facing adversity builds character, I really want to see the Republican Party stay the hell out of primary races, and let the candidates stand on their own two feet. I want to be able to vote for people who have strong character, chiseled out of hard work, taking bullets, and drinking buckets of crap. Sadly, this race does not include anyone meeting those criteria.
But Alvin Q. Taylor, running his uphill write-in campaign, he IS a character, and as with many other disenchanted Democrats and Republicans around here, he just might get my protest vote.
What a Fall Day for Middle America
What a Fall day to remember.
Flag football with Son and his team, including a Kids vs. Parents game that the parents lost, to the kids’ supreme pleasure.
Bought and then replaced the battery in my daughter’s car.
Split the last of the oak and stacked most of it.
Gathered the loose oak bark and piled it around the magnolia tree, where Viv wants good bark mulch.
Viv clipped long grass around the stone wall out front and put away lots of lawn stuff that’s been around for a few weeks, with Nina’s help, including piles and piles of brown oak leaves.
This is the typical, pleasant life of Middle Americans all over the country on a beautiful Fall day. It’s a way of life that most Americans take for granted. It’s a way of life fully in Obama’s cross hairs, as he seeks an America where “everyone gets their fair share.” That forced redistribution of wealth is now and will continue to end the Middle American lifestyle.
How pleasing it is to see both Gallup and Rasmussen polls showing Romney pulling ahead of Obama nationally and in the swing states. Obama is claiming just seven states now, and that’s not many. This election is looking like it might be a blow-out, as Middle Americans realize just how much everything they take for granted is under assault and at risk with the Obama administration.
Who Won the VP Debate?
Last night USA VP Joe Biden and US Congressman Paul Ryan debated for the VP position.
Plenty of pundits weighed in during and after the debate, including me, and I won’t re-hash that here. We sent out several real-time tweets about Biden’s rude behavior and NPR reporter Martha Raddatz’s anti-Ryan aggression. Raddatz was supposed to be an aloof moderator, but as would be expected, she represented her NPR credentials to the T. She interrupted Ryan 31 times and was named by CNN commentators as “the third debater.” Raddatz is a demonstrated partisan Leftwinger, an activist posing as a news reporter.
Biden brought artificial passion, which is in demand after Obama’s catastrophically bad performance at last week’s presidential debate. Despite Biden’s disrespectful behavior, his constant laughing, interrupting, obnoxious sneers and running commentary, he did appeal to a certain group of highly partisan Democrats who are looking for a sign of life.
Ryan was both reserved and serious, and a little lackluster. Voters want real passion, real interest in the issues, a genuine drive for action. Ryan did not demonstrate that kind of passion. That is a hall mark of political insiders.
Neither candidate won, but if Ryan was too quiet, Biden was too goofy. He reminded people of a nervous person who is laughing out loud to appear confident, when inside he is not. And the Obama campaign has reason for losing confidence: The national polls are demonstrating a slow and steady turning of the American voter, away from the Obama Administration and toward the Romney-Ryan campaign. A majority of Americans are now supporting Romney, and the former swing states are lining up behind Romney. A greater question is this: After losing this election, will liberals admit the inferiority of their beliefs?
Surprisingly, to Me Anyhow, Romney Wins Round One
Mitt Romney is a heck of a nice guy, a good guy, an accomplished guy.
He has more competence in his pinky than Barack Hussein Obama has in his whole body. He is genuinely friendly.
But Romney is not known for being a toe-to-toe fighter, a brawler, or a passionate advocate for core American principles.
But last night, enough of all those attributes aligned for long enough for Romney to clearly outshine Obama in the first presidential debate.
Obama was petulant, smirking, arrogant, and glaring. He seemed bored, and above it all; all he needed to do was check his watch (George Bush Sr., 1992), or sigh dramatically (Al Gore, 2000), and he would have fully conveyed his displeasure at being at a debate, defending his policies.
Obama was anything but presidential.
At a rally today, Obama was heard on the radio saying that the Romney at last night’s debate was not the same Romney that Obama has been describing in his attack ads, including the one that Obama himself backtracked from because it was an outright lie.
Why didn’t Obama say that to Romney last night? Is he afraid to actually debate him?
Those who watch Obama’s personality and analyze his background would not be surprised if Obama is actually physically afraid of Romney. One of the most telling photos of any president was the one taken in the White House war room, as the Bin Laden raid unfolded. Obama is seen cowering, obviously afraid. The man simply lacks courage.
Those who know my political beliefs know that I was not a big Romney supporter. Without rehashing them now, suffice it to say that his strong points can also be his weakest points.
Last night, however, Romney gave me cause to open my wallet and make a donation to his campaign, something I had been reluctant to do after the anti-conservative Rule 15 fight on the RNC floor.
Mitt, you earned my support.
Benghazi: The Twelve Dollar Word for Screw-Up
Benghazi: The Twelve Dollar Word for Screw-Up
By Josh First
September 20, 2012
Benghazi is the Libyan city where America maintained an embassy. By long settled international law, an embassy is sovereign soil, an inviolate extension of the nation that owns it.
So the recent attack on the United States embassy there was an attack on the United States. All-out wars have begun over similar incidents. It is as serious an international incident as can happen.
So what happened after the attack? Our current government blamed a United States citizen who had exercised his First Amendment right to make a purported expose movie about Islam. That is, although the attack occurred on September 11th, an important American holiday due to catastrophic Muslim attacks against American citizens, our elected officials (Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice) continue to ignore the evidence.
And the evidence is now clear that the attack was planned long in advance by heavily armed terrorists, one of whom was released by the Obama Administration from Guantanamo Bay prison.
Because bigger political purposes are served by blaming America’s free speech rights, these elected officials continue to ignore the evidence that undermines their public statements.
If lying to the public got Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton impeached, then why isn’t Obama in hot water? Obama is not getting heat from the mainstream media, because they agree with his blame-America thinking. His contempt for American freedoms is on display. His willingness to use the office of the presidency to name and abuse individual citizens for political gain undermines the office he now holds, but in the interest of expanding government power, his friends in the mainstream media will always look the other way.
Benghazi is now a twelve dollar word for a screwed up situation, both abroad and at home, and nothing is a bigger screw-up than a lying, deceitful president who undermines the Constitution he was elected to uphold.
www.joshfirst.com and on Facebook
Reporter Christine Amanpour: America is Extreme, Not the Muslims
Gotta read it to believe it: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/13/Christine-Amanpour-Thinks-West-Extreme-Not-Islamists
Obama Attacks First Amendment, Defends Islamic Murderers
If you had a question about where Obama’s loyalties lie, you could read his small, short, and shocking statement about attacks on US embassies and staff.
“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”
In other words, America’s First Amendment is at fault, not the violent and cruel behavior that led to a documentary film about Islam. Islam is based entirely on mocking, debasing, and exterminating all other religions and especially Christianity and Judaism. The Koran is filled with hate speech towards everyone else. But Obama doesn’t call them on that. No, instead he defends the Islamic imperialists who are tearing apart, burning, and bombing US embassies and killing our staff there. If you needed proof that, no matter where Obama was born, he’s not an American, this statement is it. Obama loves violent Muslims and hates free speech.
Please do your best to boot him out in eight weeks.
September 11th, A Day of Remembrance, Reflection & Resolve
September 11th, A Day of Remembrance, Reflection & Resolve
September 11, 2012
By Josh First
September 11th is an American day of national remembrance and reflection. We remember the attacks on our defenseless civilians by Muslim terrorists, who used our freedoms against us on this day.
We reflect on American heroism, an innate trait seen most graphically on Flight 93, now memorialized at the crash site in Somerset County, Pennsylvania (which I had the honor to help create, leading the first two years of real estate protection there with the National Park Service, Somerset County, the local townships, the Families of Flight 93, PBS Coals, CONSOL Energy, the Mellon Foundation, and others, not to mention the many supportive landowners).
Should the American character of inclusiveness be continued in a way that invites these kinds of attacks? An inclusiveness at any and all costs?
Based on his experience in both world wars, British leader Winston Churchill quipped after World War II that the Americans wouldn’t show up to a fight until it was almost too late to win it. Will our generation of Americans languish in our non-judgmentalism, uber-inclusiveness, and moral relativism until it is too late?
The “too late” will be when Iran obtains nuclear bombs, which is in the end-process of happening with an American and European acquiescence that is exactly how the West dealt with Hitler before 1940. Pacifists call this avoidable prelude to widespread death “peace,” but what do they call it after the bombs start going off? They call it someone else’s failure.
Many people believe that those Iranian bombs will be directed at Israel only, but Iran fears and hates America more than Israel. To Iran’s Muslim leaders and most of its citizens, America is the epicenter of everything they oppose. It’s a clash of civilizations that they intend to settle with nuclear bombs and that we currently intend to resolve through endless discussion.
America’s porous borders and inability to fight back against Islamic supremacism at home or abroad mean that at least one Iranian bomb will find its way into a large American city. The devastation and economic fallout will be unimaginable. What if two or three bombs are snuck in, and detonated? Is it “peace” to ignore these questions, and is it “warmongering” to ask them?
The oft-quoted historian George Santayana said “Those who forget history are destined to repeat it,” which in the context of September 11th means that Americans who are forgetting what happened that day, and why, will be surprised the next time we experience a huge domestic attack. The problem is that the next attack will be with a nuclear bomb, maybe several, America may not be able to recover from the damage, and we don’t have to be surprised; we can take steps to stop it from happening.
So on September 11th, the modern equivalent of remembering the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, let us not just recall the pain that we felt, but rather also resolve that it won’t happen again. Let us take the small and big steps necessary to ensure that it doesn’t happen again, the personal ones, the professional ones, and the political ones.
Follow us on the web at joshfirst.com and our Facebook page, Josh First for Senate
Ultimate Prosaic: What The Heck Happened to American Made Hunting Boots?
America made the best hunting boots, a fact known as surely as Einstein was the smartest person ever and Raquel Welch was the hottest babe, ever.
Until now. Now, hunting boots by even the most storied makers like Danner and Irish Setter are made in….where else…China.
Call me confused, but let me ask you, Are the Chinese big on hunting? Do they know how to hunt, what to wear hunting, are they gear hounds, etc. ? My sense, apparently now shared by a lot of other American hunters and outdoorsmen, is that the Chinese really do not know hunting or hunting boots. In fact, the Chinese suck at hunting (although I once watched a video of Chinese soldiers happily picking off gentle, unarmed Tibetans who were walking through the Himalayan snows to escape their China-occupied country, so I guess the Chinese are good at murdering, but that’s unrelated to hunting), if their products are any indication.
The proof that the Chinese stink badly at hunting is that they keep on manufacturing hunting boots, and the hunting boots keep on getting returned by increasingly surly buyers. Label says waterproof. Wallet says you just paid $200 for high quality, waterproof boots. Your wet feet say “These ain’t waterproof.” And back to the store they go.
Some guys (and ladies, too), are returning three pairs of the same model before they give up on either that model or on the entire brand. A lot of people seem to be migrating toward spending no less than $300, and easily up to $375, on a pair of hunting boots that they know will not fail them when they are alone, a long, long way from civilization, and dependent on their footwear to get them around and back home at the end.
Does three hundred and fifty bucks sound like a lot of money for hunting boots to you? Holy smokes, it sounds like a lot of money to me. A pair of fancy dress shoes by the best makers rarely go for that amount, even on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. Something is afoot here, friends, and it is not pretty.
On the one hand, a lot of hunters are kvetching about their low-quality boots online and in product reviews. So hunting as a sport is clearly taking a hit. On the other hand, Chinese boot manufacturers are hazing hunters, forcing many of them to spend a small fortune on the only American-made hunting boots, thereby restoring comfort to their feet and honor to our crumbling nation. I am at that point myself, having purchased, worn, and returned several expensive pairs of boots by the most storied names in boot making history.
The question is, with boots this expensive, are guys going to begin comparing boots at camp? That will make me feel quite uncomfortable. The last thing I want is to be associated with effete city slicker behavior. It’s like pollution in a pristine environment. It’s a Chinese plot to destroy hunting, one way or another. God help us.