I found out that our lovely City Council has once again lost it's flipping mind.
It seems the council has authorized the mayor and the city manager to apply for a more than 600,000 dollar grant to extend the day care facilities at the community center.
Like nearly every grant the city has gone after in the last few years, this will additionally obligate the tax payers to some 200,000 or more in additional taxes to provide the matching funds to complete the project.
Aside from the tax burden, the city is using your money to compete against another business here in town. it is also using tax monies from townspeople to subsidize operations for the benefit on non-city residents.
According to the City Manager, we need to do this because it is free money. Shouldn't the city try to help profit generating (and therefore tax paying) businesses over the non-profit community center that already receives more than 100,000 from the city coffers?
If your property taxes go up to cover the part that isn't free money, is it free to you, or is it free to him.
What do you think?
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Swine Flu Preparedness
Citizens of our town: Heed this message!!
There are new outbreaks of the Swine Flu found in NJ this morning. Please take your reasonable precautions, including:
1. Get your flu shots if you are over age 50 or under age 15. (this vaccine will not prevent Swine flu, but will increase your resistance to regular seasonal flu)
2. Make sure you use a hand sanitizer when coming into contact with others
3. Cover your mouth when coughing or sneezing
4. Wash your hands particularly after coming into contact with some one who exhibits any symptoms of the flu.
If you want additional information, please go to www.cdc.gov/swineflu/key_facts.htm
Please post your comments or incidents here, in addition to getting prompt medical treatment if you suspect exposure.
I have contacted the Hospital for additional comment and offered them the ability to post specific material here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0XdQ--ming
There are new outbreaks of the Swine Flu found in NJ this morning. Please take your reasonable precautions, including:
1. Get your flu shots if you are over age 50 or under age 15. (this vaccine will not prevent Swine flu, but will increase your resistance to regular seasonal flu)
2. Make sure you use a hand sanitizer when coming into contact with others
3. Cover your mouth when coughing or sneezing
4. Wash your hands particularly after coming into contact with some one who exhibits any symptoms of the flu.
If you want additional information, please go to www.cdc.gov/swineflu/key_facts.htm
Please post your comments or incidents here, in addition to getting prompt medical treatment if you suspect exposure.
I have contacted the Hospital for additional comment and offered them the ability to post specific material here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0XdQ--ming
Friday, April 24, 2009
Richie Thompson redux?
A story comes to mind of the protests so many people in town made of Richie Thompson's probation sentence.
It further comes to mind how Todd Nienhueser has been given such relatively favorable coverage by the Telegraph staff since his arrest and subsequent arraignment on significantly more serious charges involving a 15 year old boy.
I did a little background checking and it seems that the telegraph has become a haven for people associated with Mr. Nienhueser, most notably through board affiliations with a group he was president of for more than ten years.
According to my research, Nienhueser has claimed the box he was having a sexual relationship with was 19. It turns out the boy was 16 at the time of his arrest, and may have been 15 at the commencement of the sexual acts.
Whether Nienhueser is gay or not is irrelevant. His former position as a school teacher should be cause for concern as he works around young people every day and should have known the difference between a 15 year old boy and a 19 year old man.
I would have a difficult time believing his story and it looks like Sidney has a new sex offender to add to it's ranks. I honestly believe that Nienhueser should plead guilty and save the people the time and effort of convicting him and let us all put this behind our collective selves.
Maybe the local paper could write it's part and try to determine what, if any, impact this situation has had on the children and parents he used to teach.
What do you think?
It further comes to mind how Todd Nienhueser has been given such relatively favorable coverage by the Telegraph staff since his arrest and subsequent arraignment on significantly more serious charges involving a 15 year old boy.
I did a little background checking and it seems that the telegraph has become a haven for people associated with Mr. Nienhueser, most notably through board affiliations with a group he was president of for more than ten years.
According to my research, Nienhueser has claimed the box he was having a sexual relationship with was 19. It turns out the boy was 16 at the time of his arrest, and may have been 15 at the commencement of the sexual acts.
Whether Nienhueser is gay or not is irrelevant. His former position as a school teacher should be cause for concern as he works around young people every day and should have known the difference between a 15 year old boy and a 19 year old man.
I would have a difficult time believing his story and it looks like Sidney has a new sex offender to add to it's ranks. I honestly believe that Nienhueser should plead guilty and save the people the time and effort of convicting him and let us all put this behind our collective selves.
Maybe the local paper could write it's part and try to determine what, if any, impact this situation has had on the children and parents he used to teach.
What do you think?
Politics of Torture
The Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Congress are at it again. From interrogation memos to calls by Nancy Pelosi for truth commissions, we are setting chilling precedents in how we defend ourselves against our enemies.
The release of information describing the techniques used to gather information from high-value terrorists after 9/11 has created a firestorm of controversy. Despite advice from 5 current or former CIA directors, the President, and his Attorney General Eric Holder, brought forth memos, classified as top secret under the Bush Administration, which show the methods and how they were to be carried out.
The memos were designed to obtain legal clearance for the techniques (commonly referred to as 'enhanced interrogation') so the CIA operatives and others in the field knew the boundaries of acceptable behavior while trying to gather intelligence at an incredibly difficult time in our history. The Justice Department, as well as high ranking members of both parties were apprised of the techniques as well as the information gained from their use, but now, the new President and Justice department, along with Democratic leadership on the hill seek to criminalize the advice which led to the implementation what they are now calling 'torture.'
Obama, who history will remember more as a Neville Chamberlain for his policies of appeasement, has done more to harm Americans in his first 100 days than every president has done to help in the history of our country. The oath of office clearly states that he will defend the constitution and this country above all else, including political party, or his master George Soros.
If 5 CIA directors cleared told Obama not to release the information, it should be clear that there was no partisan play involved on their part. Though I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of Leon Panetta, I respect the courage he displayed in going against his boss over this issue. What we now have will be second guessing of techniques we can use, the possibility that we will back out of other techniques in the future and we have clearly told our enemies what they will be subject to in the future. I completely agree with assessments made which cite the chilling effect the threat of prosecution will have on field operatives and agency attorney's who will be less likely to execute on policies they have been given clearance on out of fear.
Sec. Clinton, speaking before a Senate Committee was asked whether she would agree with Dick Cheney's request to release additional memos, detailing what positive information was obtained through the interrogations. She quipped that Cheney wasn't a reliable source, which prompted Dana Rohrahacher (R-Ca) to chide her that he wasn't asking her opinion of Dick Cheney and that she should answer the direct question or risk losing credibility with the Senate.
It is clear that interrogations produced credible intel which foiled a second massive attack on Los Angeles. It is also clear that the Democrats are increasingly operating like Hugo Chavez and are seeking to utilize the power of the US government to go after political opposition, the very opposition which guarantees their freedom to do what they do today.
We continue to slip into a morass that will become increasingly difficult to get out of. The more people passively accept what your government is doing without question, the fewer rights you will have in 12 months or 24 months down the road.
What do you think?
The release of information describing the techniques used to gather information from high-value terrorists after 9/11 has created a firestorm of controversy. Despite advice from 5 current or former CIA directors, the President, and his Attorney General Eric Holder, brought forth memos, classified as top secret under the Bush Administration, which show the methods and how they were to be carried out.
The memos were designed to obtain legal clearance for the techniques (commonly referred to as 'enhanced interrogation') so the CIA operatives and others in the field knew the boundaries of acceptable behavior while trying to gather intelligence at an incredibly difficult time in our history. The Justice Department, as well as high ranking members of both parties were apprised of the techniques as well as the information gained from their use, but now, the new President and Justice department, along with Democratic leadership on the hill seek to criminalize the advice which led to the implementation what they are now calling 'torture.'
Obama, who history will remember more as a Neville Chamberlain for his policies of appeasement, has done more to harm Americans in his first 100 days than every president has done to help in the history of our country. The oath of office clearly states that he will defend the constitution and this country above all else, including political party, or his master George Soros.
If 5 CIA directors cleared told Obama not to release the information, it should be clear that there was no partisan play involved on their part. Though I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of Leon Panetta, I respect the courage he displayed in going against his boss over this issue. What we now have will be second guessing of techniques we can use, the possibility that we will back out of other techniques in the future and we have clearly told our enemies what they will be subject to in the future. I completely agree with assessments made which cite the chilling effect the threat of prosecution will have on field operatives and agency attorney's who will be less likely to execute on policies they have been given clearance on out of fear.
Sec. Clinton, speaking before a Senate Committee was asked whether she would agree with Dick Cheney's request to release additional memos, detailing what positive information was obtained through the interrogations. She quipped that Cheney wasn't a reliable source, which prompted Dana Rohrahacher (R-Ca) to chide her that he wasn't asking her opinion of Dick Cheney and that she should answer the direct question or risk losing credibility with the Senate.
It is clear that interrogations produced credible intel which foiled a second massive attack on Los Angeles. It is also clear that the Democrats are increasingly operating like Hugo Chavez and are seeking to utilize the power of the US government to go after political opposition, the very opposition which guarantees their freedom to do what they do today.
We continue to slip into a morass that will become increasingly difficult to get out of. The more people passively accept what your government is doing without question, the fewer rights you will have in 12 months or 24 months down the road.
What do you think?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Socialism is here!
Treasury Secretary Frodo Geithner indicated today that banks such as Chase and Goldman Sachs will have to wait before being able to pay back TARP funds received under the Bush administration last year.
There are a number of banks, who seemingly are in a long line to pay this money back in order to get out from under the oppressive control of the government, but the catch is that the whole of the financial system must be healthy enough to sustain growth.
This presents a problem in that banks who are solvent enough are being illegally (in my opinion) restrained in their trade due to circumstances that may not be in their control. The value of the shareholder's stock and the confidence people have in the company is now going to be called into question.
If a bank is able to pay the TARP money back and the government denies the request, does the bank still have to pay interest on the funds?
We continue each day to hear about the little nickel and dime take aways the government is giving us under the guise of helping us help ourselves. We cannot afford this kind of help and it would be nice if those who sat on their hands last election would get out and make their frustrations known.
What do you think?
There are a number of banks, who seemingly are in a long line to pay this money back in order to get out from under the oppressive control of the government, but the catch is that the whole of the financial system must be healthy enough to sustain growth.
This presents a problem in that banks who are solvent enough are being illegally (in my opinion) restrained in their trade due to circumstances that may not be in their control. The value of the shareholder's stock and the confidence people have in the company is now going to be called into question.
If a bank is able to pay the TARP money back and the government denies the request, does the bank still have to pay interest on the funds?
We continue each day to hear about the little nickel and dime take aways the government is giving us under the guise of helping us help ourselves. We cannot afford this kind of help and it would be nice if those who sat on their hands last election would get out and make their frustrations known.
What do you think?
Worst possible answer ever?
Miss California was either the top contender or the second top contender for this week's Miss USA pagent. In the final round of interviews, Gay celebrity blogger Perez Hilton asked Carrie Prejean whether or not same sex marriage should be made legal in the other 46 states.
Prejean's answer was a little muddled, but she basically made two points. She thought it was great that we live in a country where you can choose same sex marriage or not, and that her personal believe, based on her upbringing was that she felt it should remain between a man and a woman.
Perez Hilton went ballistic, sabotaging her chance in the finals, and he gave interviews afterward calling her a bitch and the C-word, saying it was the worst answer ever given in a pageant interview question ever.
He probably doesn't remember remember Teen Miss South Carolina's rambling befuddlement on the value or something of US education as an explanation why American Teens can't pick South Africa out on a world map.
My take on the Miss USA pageant this year was that the question should not have been there to begin with. It should not have been asked by a gay Californian who obviously felt betrayed by prop 8's passage last year. He obviously had an axe to grind and he came to the California contestant with it sharpened to a keen edge.
My take on it is that the government should get out of the business or regulating marriage and let it go back to being a religious thing. The government should realize that civil unions, whether by commitment ceremonies or church marriage ceremonies are going to open up certain legal avenues for all people and that is fine by me. Two men or two women who "marry" are not married from the concept of a spiritual legacy as told in all religious texts. Who cares if they call themselves married or not. It doesn't affect me or any other married person in the least.
What it does do is to further erode the foundational basis for our country. It is but one more step in our slouch to gomorrah.
What do you think?
Prejean's answer was a little muddled, but she basically made two points. She thought it was great that we live in a country where you can choose same sex marriage or not, and that her personal believe, based on her upbringing was that she felt it should remain between a man and a woman.
Perez Hilton went ballistic, sabotaging her chance in the finals, and he gave interviews afterward calling her a bitch and the C-word, saying it was the worst answer ever given in a pageant interview question ever.
He probably doesn't remember remember Teen Miss South Carolina's rambling befuddlement on the value or something of US education as an explanation why American Teens can't pick South Africa out on a world map.
My take on the Miss USA pageant this year was that the question should not have been there to begin with. It should not have been asked by a gay Californian who obviously felt betrayed by prop 8's passage last year. He obviously had an axe to grind and he came to the California contestant with it sharpened to a keen edge.
My take on it is that the government should get out of the business or regulating marriage and let it go back to being a religious thing. The government should realize that civil unions, whether by commitment ceremonies or church marriage ceremonies are going to open up certain legal avenues for all people and that is fine by me. Two men or two women who "marry" are not married from the concept of a spiritual legacy as told in all religious texts. Who cares if they call themselves married or not. It doesn't affect me or any other married person in the least.
What it does do is to further erode the foundational basis for our country. It is but one more step in our slouch to gomorrah.
What do you think?
Monday, April 20, 2009
Shielded Liability?
It seems that Idaho State is in the process of creating a law that would shield companies who allow employees to store guns in their vehicles while on company property.
I ask the question, what if someone went off the deep-end and left the building, went to their car and came back with a loaded weapon and went all postal? Do you think that the Government should shield a company that willingly allowed people the kind of access to a potentially deadly weapon from civil recrimination?
Being a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, I don't believe that the government should be involved in gun restrictions which infringe upon those rights. The phrases "reasonable restrictions," or "common sense limits" are by definition, infringements on these rights.
There is a difference in this case. By creating a shield law, the Government of Washington State will in effect create a benefit beyond the Constitution by denying due process to those who might be harmed as a result of an illegal use of an item which was lawfully stored.
What do you think?
I ask the question, what if someone went off the deep-end and left the building, went to their car and came back with a loaded weapon and went all postal? Do you think that the Government should shield a company that willingly allowed people the kind of access to a potentially deadly weapon from civil recrimination?
Being a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, I don't believe that the government should be involved in gun restrictions which infringe upon those rights. The phrases "reasonable restrictions," or "common sense limits" are by definition, infringements on these rights.
There is a difference in this case. By creating a shield law, the Government of Washington State will in effect create a benefit beyond the Constitution by denying due process to those who might be harmed as a result of an illegal use of an item which was lawfully stored.
What do you think?
Friday, April 17, 2009
Tea Baggin?
MSNBC, CNN, ABC and NBC all made off-color references to those who attended Wednesday's Tea Party rallies to protest government bailouts and high taxes. The reference to teabaggers or teabaggin is a sexually suggestive reference that doesn't need to be further described here, but it is enough to say that the mainstream media has once again sunk to a new low (pun intended) and perhaps an oversight review should be provided before such reckless and irresponsible references are launched on the public airwaves.
"The Guardian"
"The Guardian"
Lack of coverage
Hello and welcome to an independent and open view of the politics and policies that affect the local community of Sidney, Nebraska and the surrounding county.
The purpose of this Blog is to detail attention to the various activities which have meaningful impact on your lives, your taxes and your responsibility to be a good citizen. I will attempt to do what the local news media outlets refuse to do, which is openly cover all of the news that may cause you to pay higher taxes or fees and to give those of you who wish to participate in a more open and responsive form of discourse.
Your local elected and appointed officials will also be encouraged to participate or respond to your questions of facts presented herein and hopefully, a more direct form of accountability will result from the efforts of all who participate.
I will be soliciting additional writers and regular columnists who will bring many divergent views to the table and hopefully a strong representative sample of our community. If you or someone you know would like to participate, please email guardianofsidney@gmail.com for and invite. For safety and security reasons, you must make me aware of who you are, but rest assured, your identity will remain confidential as long as you choose to keep it so. It is the ideas and discussion I am after. Let's do our best to make everyone aware of what we expect from our local community.
Sincerely,
"The Guardian"
Good luck and good reading.
The purpose of this Blog is to detail attention to the various activities which have meaningful impact on your lives, your taxes and your responsibility to be a good citizen. I will attempt to do what the local news media outlets refuse to do, which is openly cover all of the news that may cause you to pay higher taxes or fees and to give those of you who wish to participate in a more open and responsive form of discourse.
Your local elected and appointed officials will also be encouraged to participate or respond to your questions of facts presented herein and hopefully, a more direct form of accountability will result from the efforts of all who participate.
I will be soliciting additional writers and regular columnists who will bring many divergent views to the table and hopefully a strong representative sample of our community. If you or someone you know would like to participate, please email guardianofsidney@gmail.com for and invite. For safety and security reasons, you must make me aware of who you are, but rest assured, your identity will remain confidential as long as you choose to keep it so. It is the ideas and discussion I am after. Let's do our best to make everyone aware of what we expect from our local community.
Sincerely,
"The Guardian"
Good luck and good reading.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Promises
he president broke his... no new taxes to anyone making under 250k per year promise today by signing a democratic sponsored law increasing tobacco taxes by some 60+ cents per pak. During the campaign, he vowed... "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." The cold irony is that he wants more people to smoke so he can pay for healthcare costs for children and others... how ironic..... He needs more people to get really expensive illnesses so he can pay relatively cheap healthcare bills... Where is the logic.
Democrats are the party of pandering and obfuscation. The death tax, scheduled to depart this earth next year, has been resurrected like a demon from hell. It seems that the Democrats need the money from cold dead hands to facilitate the means to put more of us in early graves.
It isn't too late to send all your elected and appointed officials, at every level the message that 2010 isn't too far away and they will be held accountable for the voracious and careless spending habits they have taken up... Write down how much more Cheyenne county is charging you on a house you cant sell, how much Sidney is charging you for a fire truck it didn't need and how much more we will have to pay for a septic system that will be built new, instead of brought up to spec (that one is about double the original cost).
Democrats are the party of pandering and obfuscation. The death tax, scheduled to depart this earth next year, has been resurrected like a demon from hell. It seems that the Democrats need the money from cold dead hands to facilitate the means to put more of us in early graves.
It isn't too late to send all your elected and appointed officials, at every level the message that 2010 isn't too far away and they will be held accountable for the voracious and careless spending habits they have taken up... Write down how much more Cheyenne county is charging you on a house you cant sell, how much Sidney is charging you for a fire truck it didn't need and how much more we will have to pay for a septic system that will be built new, instead of brought up to spec (that one is about double the original cost).
Hell in a Handbasket
I was perusing the news channels, as my new career as an unemployed propellerhead allows for, and I ran across a news report, It seems a former judge alleges the federal government initiated a requirement to take Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funding regardless of bank viability. The money, proposed under the Bush administration, was demanded to be taken by the bank, or else suffer a multi-year public audit. This act, according to the Judge, amounts to extortion by the federal government. I did a little checking and it seems extortion (more commonly known as blackmail) involves the coercion of a legal entity's free choice by means of the threat of a legal act. In this case, threatening the audit, in the absence of any negative issues with the bank was used as leverage to make them take the funding they obviously did not want.
In the news report previously mentioned, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve both told a healthy bank with some 250 Billion in assets and no sub-prime mortgages or other maladies, that they would be subject to a long public audit if they did not take the TARP money. Administration officials went on to state that such an audit would be very public and embarrassing. The bank president said no, but could not convince his board to reject the threat from FDIC and they subsequently took billions in aid dollars they did not need. The bank was forced to issue a special class of stock which was given to the federal government and now the government under President Obama seeks to impose lending guidelines on who they can lend to and under what conditions.
How much control will the American people cede to an increasingly autocratic regime. There used to be a time where we were self sufficient and were expected to do whatever needed to be done to get our collective house in order. The federal government is out of control and the horizon is getting increasingly darker. The Chinese Government is currently the largest holder of US debt. They are using this money and the interest we are paying to finance their military operations. These operations, among other things, include the development of special weapons systems that are designed to take out aircraft carrier sized ships. We are selling not just our prosperity, but our very freedoms little by little. All the while, President Obama, as did President Bush before, and too busy tuning their fiddle to notice how much damage they have done, and how much he plans to do.
I wonder if Queen Elizabeth gave Barak Obama a guide to building savings in exchange for the lovely engraved iPod he presented her on Wednesday this week.
In the news report previously mentioned, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve both told a healthy bank with some 250 Billion in assets and no sub-prime mortgages or other maladies, that they would be subject to a long public audit if they did not take the TARP money. Administration officials went on to state that such an audit would be very public and embarrassing. The bank president said no, but could not convince his board to reject the threat from FDIC and they subsequently took billions in aid dollars they did not need. The bank was forced to issue a special class of stock which was given to the federal government and now the government under President Obama seeks to impose lending guidelines on who they can lend to and under what conditions.
How much control will the American people cede to an increasingly autocratic regime. There used to be a time where we were self sufficient and were expected to do whatever needed to be done to get our collective house in order. The federal government is out of control and the horizon is getting increasingly darker. The Chinese Government is currently the largest holder of US debt. They are using this money and the interest we are paying to finance their military operations. These operations, among other things, include the development of special weapons systems that are designed to take out aircraft carrier sized ships. We are selling not just our prosperity, but our very freedoms little by little. All the while, President Obama, as did President Bush before, and too busy tuning their fiddle to notice how much damage they have done, and how much he plans to do.
I wonder if Queen Elizabeth gave Barak Obama a guide to building savings in exchange for the lovely engraved iPod he presented her on Wednesday this week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)