Saturday, June 29, 2013
The Davidson County Republican Picnic with video and report
Wine in grocery stores won big with 71 percent of the vote in the Davidson County Republicans' straw poll. The annual picnic with the early polling marks summer politics for the party. Attendance was down with no major elections until 2014..
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was voted both first and second choice to win the Presidential Primary. Close behind Cruz was Sen. Rand Paul.
Charlie Tygard and Kenneth Eaton were neck and neck to become Nashville's next mayor as either voters first or second choice. Republican political consultant Mark Rogers announced straw poll results from the podium.
Mayoral hopeful Bill Freeman's 11 percent vote as first choice and 15 percent vote as second choice prompted Rogers to exclaim, "Bill Freeman's a major Al Gore donor!"
Sen. Steve Dickerson brought his rock band "No Good Deed" to entertain. Stacy Reis-Snyder spelled him with a country sound during lunch. Adam Nickas from the state party and Davidson Chairman Robert Duvall emceed the event. Recognition went to past President Kathleen Starnes, County Convention Chairman Jim Gotto and Barbara Outhier, The Winfield Dunn award went to Outhier for her work for the party.
A path to citizenship within immigration reorganization was voted down 60-40 percent. A close vote of 51 :"yes" to 49 "no" on expanding the power of the mayor and council over education
This excellent report and video is the work of Dur Fuller. I lifted it from Youtube. You can find her blog at Dru's Blog.
GOP Summer picnic 2013
 |
| Stacy Ries Snyder performs |
 |
| Senator Doctor Steve Dickerson rocks the house at GOP picnic |
About a dozen people had booths promoting everything from energy independence, to 2nd Amendment rights, to Stop the BRT, to Save the Fairgrounds, to education reform. The event was short on speeches and presentations, but was a great time of just socializing and visiting with old friends. There was drawings for door prices and good music performances by Steve Dickerson and Stacy Snyder.
I think about 150 to 200 people attended but I did not get a report of ticket sales, so I really don't know. There was a straw poll and I took good notes of the results and then lost the notes. I know that in the Presidential preference poll Ted Cruze and Paul Rand were the big winners. For the next Mayor people liked Kenneth Eaton and Charlie Tygard. Those who voted in the poll overwhelming favor wine sales in grocery stores and they do not support the proposed immigration reform.
The Perfectibility of Man is next Conservative Fusion selection, June 17
From Gene Wisdom organizer of The Conservative Fusion Book Study:
The next meeting of the Conservative Fusion Book Study will be June 17th at 7PM. For location, log in at the facebook site to receive notification or email Gene Wisdom.
One of the core differences between conservatism and liberalism is in their views of the nature of man. Along with a view in the goodness of man, liberals tend to also believe in the mutability of the nature of man, that they, using the power of government, can mold and improve man's nature. Passmore's analysis looks at the history of that idea. It is my hope and goal that by better understanding the grounding of our opposing mindset, that of liberalism, we become stronger and better-informed conservatives. The book is published by Liberty Fund and can be purchased there (at www.libertyfund.org, click on Books, search from there) or at Amazon.com.
This Nashville-area Conservative Fusion group is dedicated to meeting and discussing, from a conservative, libertarian, or Constitutionalist perspective, ideas of public policy, political philosophy/worldview, and intellectual influences. Not about activism or partisan politics/electioneering (though important) or discussing organizational et ceteras. The name comes from the post-WWII conservative effort of "fusion" which sought to bring together the burgeoning strands of traditionalism, libertarianism, and anti-Communism. Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley, Jr. are perhaps the best-known personifications of this ideal. (Visit us on Facebook.)
The next meeting of the Conservative Fusion Book Study will be June 17th at 7PM. For location, log in at the facebook site to receive notification or email Gene Wisdom.
One of the core differences between conservatism and liberalism is in their views of the nature of man. Along with a view in the goodness of man, liberals tend to also believe in the mutability of the nature of man, that they, using the power of government, can mold and improve man's nature. Passmore's analysis looks at the history of that idea. It is my hope and goal that by better understanding the grounding of our opposing mindset, that of liberalism, we become stronger and better-informed conservatives. The book is published by Liberty Fund and can be purchased there (at www.libertyfund.org, click on Books, search from there) or at Amazon.com.
This Nashville-area Conservative Fusion group is dedicated to meeting and discussing, from a conservative, libertarian, or Constitutionalist perspective, ideas of public policy, political philosophy/worldview, and intellectual influences. Not about activism or partisan politics/electioneering (though important) or discussing organizational et ceteras. The name comes from the post-WWII conservative effort of "fusion" which sought to bring together the burgeoning strands of traditionalism, libertarianism, and anti-Communism. Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley, Jr. are perhaps the best-known personifications of this ideal. (Visit us on Facebook.)
The Supreme Court’s Marriage Decisions by the Numbers
From the Heritage Foundation:
The morning after two important—and troubling—Supreme Court decisions in the Proposition 8 and Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) cases, here’s the lay of the land. The important takeaway: The marriage debate is every bit as live today as it was yesterday morning…and that means it’s time to redouble our efforts to stand for marriage across America. Some key numbers following the decisions:
50 The number of states whose marriage laws remain the same after the Court’s marriage decisions.
38 The number of states with laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. That includes California, where the scope of today’s Prop 8 decision beyond the specific plaintiffs will be the subject of ongoing debate and, most likely, further litigation.
12 The number of states that can now force the federal government to recognize their redefinition of marriage. The Court struck Section 3 of DOMA, which means that it must recognize same-sex marriages in states that redefine marriage.
1 The number of sections of the Defense of Marriage Act struck down yesterday (Section 3). Section 2, which ensures that no state will be forced to recognize another state’s redefinition of marriage, is still law.
0 The number of states forced to recognize other states’ redefinition of marriage.
The important news you may not be hearing is that the U.S. Supreme Court did not redefine marriage across the nation. That means the debate about marriage will continue. States are free to uphold policies recognizing that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, so that children have a mother and a father.
States will lead the way even as we work to restore clear marriage policy at the federal level. And in the states, support for marriage as the union of a man and a woman remains strong.
Still, the Court should have respected the authority of California citizens and Congress. On DOMA, the Court did not respect Congress’s authority to define marriage for the purposes of federal programs and benefits. The Court got federalism wrong.
On Proposition 8, the citizens of California who voted twice to pass Prop 8 should have been able to count on their Governor and Attorney General to defend the state’s constitution. That’s what democratic self-government is all about.
Now more than ever, we need to make it clear why marriage as the union of a man and a woman matters—for children, for civil society, and for limited government. As citizens, we all need to be prepared to make the case for marriage. That’s why we at Heritage have worked with allies to produce a booklet called “What You Need to Know about Marriage.” Download your free copy at TheMarriageFacts.com.
The morning after two important—and troubling—Supreme Court decisions in the Proposition 8 and Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) cases, here’s the lay of the land. The important takeaway: The marriage debate is every bit as live today as it was yesterday morning…and that means it’s time to redouble our efforts to stand for marriage across America. Some key numbers following the decisions:
50 The number of states whose marriage laws remain the same after the Court’s marriage decisions.
38 The number of states with laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. That includes California, where the scope of today’s Prop 8 decision beyond the specific plaintiffs will be the subject of ongoing debate and, most likely, further litigation.
12 The number of states that can now force the federal government to recognize their redefinition of marriage. The Court struck Section 3 of DOMA, which means that it must recognize same-sex marriages in states that redefine marriage.
1 The number of sections of the Defense of Marriage Act struck down yesterday (Section 3). Section 2, which ensures that no state will be forced to recognize another state’s redefinition of marriage, is still law.
0 The number of states forced to recognize other states’ redefinition of marriage.
The important news you may not be hearing is that the U.S. Supreme Court did not redefine marriage across the nation. That means the debate about marriage will continue. States are free to uphold policies recognizing that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, so that children have a mother and a father.
States will lead the way even as we work to restore clear marriage policy at the federal level. And in the states, support for marriage as the union of a man and a woman remains strong.
Still, the Court should have respected the authority of California citizens and Congress. On DOMA, the Court did not respect Congress’s authority to define marriage for the purposes of federal programs and benefits. The Court got federalism wrong.
On Proposition 8, the citizens of California who voted twice to pass Prop 8 should have been able to count on their Governor and Attorney General to defend the state’s constitution. That’s what democratic self-government is all about.
Now more than ever, we need to make it clear why marriage as the union of a man and a woman matters—for children, for civil society, and for limited government. As citizens, we all need to be prepared to make the case for marriage. That’s why we at Heritage have worked with allies to produce a booklet called “What You Need to Know about Marriage.” Download your free copy at TheMarriageFacts.com.
Friday, June 28, 2013
Thoughts on the Supreme Court's rulings on gay marriage
I am disappointed and appalled at the Supreme Courts rulings on gay marriage. If twenty years ago someone would have said that one day two men could marry I would have thought they were nuts. I would have thought that had as about as much chance of happening as polygamy being legal, or incest, or a person marrying their dog. As Merle Haggard sang, "We are going downhill like a snowball headed for hell." Below are the opinions of some of my friends and local prominent people. Rod
Ken Jakes, citizen activist: The Supreme Court has once again slapped the face of every Christian Citizen of the Land that I love, the United States of America. Our Founding Fathers Created each document with Judo-Christian Faith and heritage that separates Our Country from the rest of the world. Our Forefathers would have been appalled to even imagine that the Supreme Court could take Our Cherished Documents to arrive at the conclusion that a marriage between two women or two men would be acceptable and defined within the word marriage.
Lets just be clear as it gets. The Holy Bible is very clear that a marriage is a sacred union between a man and a women and homosexuality is a sin. The Supreme Court has once again made an attempt to shred the very fabric of my Christian Faith and those who uphold the Christian Faith in this Nation. In my Faith, my heart and soul, and my morality as a Christian American the Supreme Court has disgraced the Majority of the Nation and the Supreme Court should be disgraced. Regardless what the Supreme Court states a marriage to be, I hold the sacred meaning of the Lord my God to be the only acceptable way of life and I refuse to let the ridiculous decision of the Supreme Court to change my views.
Dear God Please Help Our Nation.
Daniel Horwitz, recent graduate of Vanderbilt Law School where he served as the Vice President of Law Students for Social Justice, and a contributor to this blog: I’m thrilled that the Supreme Court has now come one step closer to acknowledging what the overwhelming majority of young Americans know already: that any law that draws a distinction between citizens on the basis of their sexual orientation should be considered presumptively invalid. I’m similarly pleased to see the Supreme Court recognize that Federal laws which delve into regulatory arenas that are traditionally reserved to the states ought to be met with a greater degree of skepticism. At the same time, however, I’m saddened that so many members of faith organizations that preach loving-kindness and tolerance continue to adhere to the erroneous belief that extending civil marriage equality to same-sex couples will somehow undermine the sanctity of traditional or religious marriages in any way.
Tim Skow, Host of First Tuesday: Throughout the long Judo-Christian history our country was founded upon, faith teaches that marriage is the blessed union of a man, a woman and our Lord. During that same time, Government(s) typically administered contractual relationships between consenting parties. I am sorry to see the verbiage and meaning being erased between what our Lord considers marriage and what various levels of Government consider as a contract or "union" between consenting adults.
I submit, call such contracts, agreements or "unions" what they are..."Civil unions"....and leave the intent and understanding of "marriage" to mean what it means. Sadly, in this case we let the Liberals define the verbiage war on their terms... and in this case, the Liberals won.
Representative Sherry Jones, Nashville Democrat: Today was a victory for the dignity of men and women across the country who wish to enjoy equal protection under the law. Most Tennesseans agree that couples in a loving and committed relationship deserve to be treated equally.
Beth Campbell, member of the Executive Committee of the Tennessee Republican Party: I was disappointed that the US Supreme Court sent the Gay marriage issue back to the lower court in California thereby nullifying the will of the voters who passed Prop 8. So much for the "will of the people"!
Robert Duvall, Metro Councilmember; Chair of Davidson County Republican Party: Appalled!
Pat Carl, First Vice Chair, Davidson County Republican Party: I don't know if you heard Governor Huckabee's radio show Wednesday. His
response to the Court ruling on gay marriage was "Jesus Wept". I
thought those 2 words really summed it up.
Kathleen Starnes, former Chair, Davidson County Republican Party: I am speechless, but so sorry that such a small portion of society has such a large voice. I am very sad that the government ignores the vote of the people instead supports the vote of the government.
Dr. Sam Boyd, Pastor, Forest Hills Baptist Church: Remember 6/26/2013......America already under God's discipline for abortion and its support of anti-Israel entities (among other things) .....now has redefined marriage and unleashed an invitation for increasing divine judgement....... If Jesus and His affirmation of Biblical truth is for real, He as God, cannot and will not sit back and allow an arrogant, immoral America to prosper as they mock eternal truth.......
Rep. Marsha Blackburn says she is disappointed.
"We're still looking at the opinions and the dissents and the positioning on [the ruling]," the Tennessee Republican said on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"You can say on one hand, yes, they struck down DOMA, and on another, it looks as if they're coming out big-time for state's rights. So of course I'm disappointed in it. I support DOMA and would like to have seen that stand. I fully believe in marriage as being between one man and one woman."
Rep. Chuck Fleischmann: "While the Supreme Court's ruling was disappointing to me personally, I will continue to believe in the importance of traditional marriage. The marriage debate will continue at the state level, and it has been my experience that the vast majority of Tennesseans believe, as I do, that marriage is between a man and a woman. (link)
Sen. Lamar Alexander said the opinions were correct in that they left the decision on whether to recognize same-sex marriage to individual states. "The Supreme Court's decision preserves the right of states to define marriage and for that definition to be respected by other states, and that's the way it should be."(link)
Senator Jack Johnson post on Facebook: "I cannot understand how any American can be happy about the fact that five individuals just overturned the will of the American people as reflected by their duly and constitutionally elected representatives. I'm sad that the majesty of our republic has been degraded, but my proud support for the sanctity of marriage will not waiver."
Richard Upchurch, scholar and blog contributor, writes: It seems to me, the
court is confirming that marriage is entirely in the
jurisdiction, thus in the domain and discretion of the states, thus the
decision not too surprising. However Kennedy's phrase about "the
dignity of same-sex marriage" suggests the court has bought into a kind
of pop social radicalism that undermines what is most basic in the
pre-political constitution of society and will follow such pop social
radicalism wherever it may lead. So I agree, it doesn't look like good
news---either for us conservatives or for the country.
US Congressman Jim Cooper is pleased: WASHINGTON – Rep. Jim Cooper (TN-5) praised today’s Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and Prop 8 and issued the following statement: "I'm pleased with today's Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and Prop 8. Equality under the law should apply to all Americans, and now we're one step closer towards fulfilling this promise."
Russell Moore, president of the Nashville-based Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said he was not surprised by the court's ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act, per se, but he was surprised by the "sweeping language" used by the majority.
"It grounds the decision in equal protection and uses language of human dignity that has far-reaching implications," he said. "...Ultimately it's headed toward challenging the way states define marriage." (link) “This decision demolishes the myth that orthodox Christianity represents some kind of moral majority in this country." (link)
State Sen. Jim Tracy (R-Shelbyville) ... was troubled by the ruling, saying the nation was built on what he
called the traditional family. "There are detrimental forces in our culture that reject or do not
recognize the importance of the traditional family unit in our society
and those forces won today," Tracy said. (link)
David Fowler, former State Senator and President of Family Action Council of Tennessee wrote in a statement. "In Tennessee, marriage will remain the unique, timeless, and universally defined relationship involving a man and a woman that provides the optimal environment for the well being of children.
Lets just be clear as it gets. The Holy Bible is very clear that a marriage is a sacred union between a man and a women and homosexuality is a sin. The Supreme Court has once again made an attempt to shred the very fabric of my Christian Faith and those who uphold the Christian Faith in this Nation. In my Faith, my heart and soul, and my morality as a Christian American the Supreme Court has disgraced the Majority of the Nation and the Supreme Court should be disgraced. Regardless what the Supreme Court states a marriage to be, I hold the sacred meaning of the Lord my God to be the only acceptable way of life and I refuse to let the ridiculous decision of the Supreme Court to change my views.
Dear God Please Help Our Nation.
Dr. Sam Boyd, Pastor, Forest Hills Baptist Church: Remember 6/26/2013......America already under God's discipline for abortion and its support of anti-Israel entities (among other things) .....now has redefined marriage and unleashed an invitation for increasing divine judgement....... If Jesus and His affirmation of Biblical truth is for real, He as God, cannot and will not sit back and allow an arrogant, immoral America to prosper as they mock eternal truth.......
Rep. Chuck Fleischmann: "While the Supreme Court's ruling was disappointing to me personally, I will continue to believe in the importance of traditional marriage. The marriage debate will continue at the state level, and it has been my experience that the vast majority of Tennesseans believe, as I do, that marriage is between a man and a woman. (link)
Sen. Lamar Alexander said the opinions were correct in that they left the decision on whether to recognize same-sex marriage to individual states. "The Supreme Court's decision preserves the right of states to define marriage and for that definition to be respected by other states, and that's the way it should be."(link)
Richard Upchurch, scholar and blog contributor, writes: It seems to me, the
US Congressman Jim Cooper is pleased: WASHINGTON – Rep. Jim Cooper (TN-5) praised today’s Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and Prop 8 and issued the following statement: "I'm pleased with today's Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and Prop 8. Equality under the law should apply to all Americans, and now we're one step closer towards fulfilling this promise."
Russell Moore, president of the Nashville-based Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said he was not surprised by the court's ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act, per se, but he was surprised by the "sweeping language" used by the majority.
"It grounds the decision in equal protection and uses language of human dignity that has far-reaching implications," he said. "...Ultimately it's headed toward challenging the way states define marriage." (link) “This decision demolishes the myth that orthodox Christianity represents some kind of moral majority in this country." (link)
David Fowler, former State Senator and President of Family Action Council of Tennessee wrote in a statement. "In Tennessee, marriage will remain the unique, timeless, and universally defined relationship involving a man and a woman that provides the optimal environment for the well being of children.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Metro Council Agenda for July 2 is now available.
The Metro Council Agenda for July 2 is now available. If you will wait, I will read if for you, it you can't stand the suspense, here it is.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Lamar Alexander Says Minimum Wage Should Be Abolished
WASHINGTON, Huff Post Politics - Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the ranking Republican on the Senate's
labor committee, said in a hearing Tuesday that he would prefer to see
the minimum wage abolished.
Alexander's
declaration came amid a back-and-forth between a witness from the
conservative Heritage Foundation and Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and
Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). The trio had been debating what kind of impact a
higher minimum wage would have on a theoretical worker, and it seemed
Sanders wanted to know whether the witness opposed raising the minimum
wage or having a minimum wage at all.
"There
are some conservatives who do not believe in the concept of the minimum
wage," Sanders said to the witness, James Sherk, a labor policy analyst
at the think tank.
"Let me jump in," Alexander then said. "I do not believe in it."
The policy debate had been lively, with interruptions all around, and Sanders grew excited at Alexander's interjection.
"So we have a ranking member," Sanders responded. "Alright! There we go!"
Sanders turned to Alexander.
"So you do not believe in the concept of the minimum wage?"
"That's correct," Alexander responded.
"You would abolish the minimum wage?"
"Correct." (read more and watch the video exchange)
My Comment: I am proud of Senator Alexander for showing the courage to speak the truth. The minimum wage cuts off the bottom rung off of the ladder. Every time the minimum wage is raised, it makes it harder for people to enter the labor market. With an increase in the minimum wage low-end jobs are replaced with labor saving devices or simply eliminated. Without a minimum wage, we would have people pumping gas for you and carrying your groceries to the car. It is better for one to have a job that pays $7.25 an hour than not have a job that pays $7.50 an hour.
Irving Kristol's The Neoconservative Persuasion topic of Conservative Fusion
It is tonight. Join us.
From Gene Wisdom:
From Gene Wisdom:
Neo-cons. Those nasty
neo-conservatives. Suspect to many conservatives of other stripes,
whether traditionalist, libertarian, paleo, or crunchy con,
neo-conservatives have been described as liberals who were mugged by
reality. They are often, however, both misunderstood and
misrepresented. Many are labeled by another bugaboo--"Straussians"--by
people who haven't read the first word of either neo-conservatives or
Leo Strauss. While their premises are often quite different they share
many policy views of other conservatives and have learned lessons, from
liberal policy failures, that many conservatives know implicitly.
Irving Kristol is perhaps the original neo-conservative. This month's
focus for Conservative Fusion Book Study is The Neoconservative Persuasion, a collection of Kristol's essays. The study is an excellent opportunity to better understand neo-conservatism.
Conservative Fusion was
originally a group started through Meetup.com. We have now moved to the
next step, dropping the Meetup association and re-forming as a Facebook
Group. Join us for this study and future meetings!
This meeting will be at the home of Rod and Louella Williams on June 26th at 7PM. A Meetup automatic posting stated it would be June 19th. the correct date is June 26th. Please RSVP to Gene Wisdom, hvillenavy@yahoo.com .
Comment from Rod: If you order the book for overnight delivery, you can still get it in time. I ordered mine on amazon and paid one penny, plus shipping! I don't know if the library has a copy or not. This is an important work and enjoyable reading. If you can get the book and can't read it all then start with the essay, "What is neoconservatism" and the essay "The neoconservative persuasion." If you can't read the book, but would like to come listen to the conversation, you can come on. I would be glad to have you. My home is conveniently located off 8th Ave South near Wedgewood. Reply to Gene at the above email for the address.
This meeting will be at the home of Rod and Louella Williams on June 26th at 7PM. A Meetup automatic posting stated it would be June 19th. the correct date is June 26th. Please RSVP to Gene Wisdom, hvillenavy@yahoo.com .
Comment from Rod: If you order the book for overnight delivery, you can still get it in time. I ordered mine on amazon and paid one penny, plus shipping! I don't know if the library has a copy or not. This is an important work and enjoyable reading. If you can get the book and can't read it all then start with the essay, "What is neoconservatism" and the essay "The neoconservative persuasion." If you can't read the book, but would like to come listen to the conversation, you can come on. I would be glad to have you. My home is conveniently located off 8th Ave South near Wedgewood. Reply to Gene at the above email for the address.
James DeLanis appointed to County Electiion Commission, replaces Jim Gotto.
James DeLanis, an attorney at Baker Donelson has been appointed to serve on the Davidson County Election Commission, replacing Jim Gotto who resigned in protest of the treatment of former Election Administrator Albert Tieche.
School board approves 4 charter schools, rejects 2
The Tennessean, June 26th, 2013 - Metro Nashville school board members followed the advice of their
charter school czar Tuesday and approved four of the six charter schools
that want to open for the 2014-15 school year.
Like all charter school discussions, however, the meeting was not without friction. (link)
Like all charter school discussions, however, the meeting was not without friction. (link)
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
First Tuesday guest July 2, Stephen Fincher
From First Tuesday:
1ST TUESDAY members and friends,
1ST TUESDAY members and friends,
First... let me apologize for being tardy getting the invite to you for our guest, Congressman Stephen
 |
| Congressman Stephen Fincher |
Some of you know its been a more-than-tragic time for multiple families and friends of mine. ....
As you know, Washington DC continues to be ALL-A-BUZZ
with ever more information coming on multiple fronts. Congressman
Fincher will be a wealth of 1st-hand insights and information.
MORE coming next week, but in the mean time let me encourage you to secure your seat via our 1ST TUESDAY website ASAP ! www.1sttuesdaynashville.com
AS MANY of you will recall, our normal meeting room at Waller is undergoing a renovation. SO.. we are meeting in the 26th floor room that holds on 70 seats. IN SHORT.. it will be those 1ST to SECURE their seat(s) who get to join us !
As USUAL... we will meet at The Offices of WALLER LAW -- 511 Union.. 26th floor for this special event ! ... Doors open at 11AM for Coffee and Social time.. Lunch
will be at 11:30AM and program starting promptly at NOON.. Lunch is
$20 for MEMBERS and $25 for Guests.. a waiting list will be started once
we hit 70 RSVPs.
Lunch for those on the waiting list who do get join us will be $25 and collected at the door.
MORE info soon !
Thanks again for you patience... and please keep Kim and our other friends in your prayers in the days.. ahead.... [ "BIG Guy".... you will be missed ]
See you July 2nd !
Tim Skow
Host of 1ST TUESDAY
School Board to vote on Charter Proposals tonight
The consideration of charter school proposals is the only thing on the School Board agenda tonight. The Metro School Board produces good agenda's. To learn about the charter school evaluation process and more about each school, see the agenda at this link.
The staff recommendation regarding The Thurgood Marshall School of Career Development is to deny.
The staff recommendation for KIPP Nashville College Prep Elementary is to approve.
The staff recommendation for Valor Collegiate Academy is to approve.
The staff recommendation regarding The Thurgood Marshall School of Career Development is to deny.
The staff recommendation for Explore! Community School is to deny.
The staff recommendation for Rocketship Education Tennessee is to approve.
The staff recommendation for Nashville Academy of Computer Science is to approve.
The staff recommendation for KIPP Nashville College Prep Elementary is to approve.
The staff recommendation for Valor Collegiate Academy is to approve.
Monday, June 24, 2013
It is time to pass immigration reform
Until tonight, I was undecided about how I felt about the proposed Senate immigration
bill. Without Hoeven-Corker, I knew I was opposed to the bill as written by the gang of eight but was hoping it could be amended to make it better and I believe Hoeven-Corker does that.
I have read numerous opinion pieces and analyses and news reports about the bill and have wavered back and forth on whether or not it is good bill. Tonight I watched the debate between Senator Bob Corker and Senator Jeff Session on CSPAN and was persuaded that this is a good bill, with the proposed amendment, and we need to move forward with immigration reform. Some of the organizations and people I respect continue to oppose the bill and I am reluctant to disagree with organization such as the Heritage Foundation, but I must. Maybe, the bill is not perfect, but it is a good bill. It greatly increases security on the boarder and imposes five "triggers" that must be fulfilled before immigrants now hear illegally can be granted green cards. If those things are done then the earliest illegal immigrants could get a green card would be ten years from now.
The security requirements in this bill are things conservatives have asked for for years. These are the security triggers in the Hoeven-Corker amended bill:
Am I persuaded that this will mean no one will ever work in this country who is here illegally or that no one can ever illegally enter the country again? No, I am not. E-verify will not catch everyone. A lot of illegals work for themselves and will continue to do so and evade detection. If you contract for someone to do your lawn care, you are not their employer, you are contracting for a service so some of those self employed people will continue to operate without a green card. Also, documents can be forged and some people will continue to take their chances and hire people without using E-verify and no border can be made 100 effective. Just as the Berlin Wall was not 100% effective in keeping people in, a militarized border will not be 100% effective in keeping people out. So, no system will be absolutely perfect. It will be much better than what we have now however. We now have de facto amnesty and the border leaks like a seive. It is impractical to talk about rounding up and deporting over 11 million people. Think about the logistics of deporting 11 million people. It is just not going to happen. A vote against this bill is a vote for continuing the status quo.
I think some people have been so locked into a position of opposing amnesty that there is no bill that could satisfy them. They will support nothing short of rounding them up and sending them home. For those with legitimate concerns about the bill, there is still room to address those concerns. Tonight after the 67 to 27 procedural vote to move the bill forward, Senator Corker made that point and had this to say:
I think it is time to pass immigration reform. For anyone who wants to read the full text of the bill as amended, follow this link.
I have read numerous opinion pieces and analyses and news reports about the bill and have wavered back and forth on whether or not it is good bill. Tonight I watched the debate between Senator Bob Corker and Senator Jeff Session on CSPAN and was persuaded that this is a good bill, with the proposed amendment, and we need to move forward with immigration reform. Some of the organizations and people I respect continue to oppose the bill and I am reluctant to disagree with organization such as the Heritage Foundation, but I must. Maybe, the bill is not perfect, but it is a good bill. It greatly increases security on the boarder and imposes five "triggers" that must be fulfilled before immigrants now hear illegally can be granted green cards. If those things are done then the earliest illegal immigrants could get a green card would be ten years from now.
The security requirements in this bill are things conservatives have asked for for years. These are the security triggers in the Hoeven-Corker amended bill:
- 20,000 more Border Patrol agents. This would more than doubling the current force.
- $4.5 billion in specific technology and equipment requested by the Border Patrol which would achieve full surveillance of the border.
- 700 miles of fencing must have been completed along the southern border. This doubles the current 350 miles.
- A new electronic visa entry/exit system must be fully implemented at all air and sea ports of entry where U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers are currently deployed. This system will improve the identification of those who overstay their visas.
- E-Verify must be in place by all employers in the country.
Am I persuaded that this will mean no one will ever work in this country who is here illegally or that no one can ever illegally enter the country again? No, I am not. E-verify will not catch everyone. A lot of illegals work for themselves and will continue to do so and evade detection. If you contract for someone to do your lawn care, you are not their employer, you are contracting for a service so some of those self employed people will continue to operate without a green card. Also, documents can be forged and some people will continue to take their chances and hire people without using E-verify and no border can be made 100 effective. Just as the Berlin Wall was not 100% effective in keeping people in, a militarized border will not be 100% effective in keeping people out. So, no system will be absolutely perfect. It will be much better than what we have now however. We now have de facto amnesty and the border leaks like a seive. It is impractical to talk about rounding up and deporting over 11 million people. Think about the logistics of deporting 11 million people. It is just not going to happen. A vote against this bill is a vote for continuing the status quo.
I think some people have been so locked into a position of opposing amnesty that there is no bill that could satisfy them. They will support nothing short of rounding them up and sending them home. For those with legitimate concerns about the bill, there is still room to address those concerns. Tonight after the 67 to 27 procedural vote to move the bill forward, Senator Corker made that point and had this to say:
“This vote provides strong bipartisan support for an amendment that unquestionably strengthens border security and moves us toward solving the immigration problem that we have struggled with for decades. There are certainly provisions in the underlying bill that can be improved, but it is my hope that tonight's overwhelming vote will lead to the passage of a strong bipartisan bill out of the Senate later this week."One of the things I think many Republicans are concerned about, but hesitant to admit, is that they fear that eventually adding 11 million new voters to the rolls will be that many new votes for Democrats. I understand that concern, but with it being l0 years before these illegal immigrants can get green cards and be eligible to begin the process of becoming citizens, I do not assume that they will all be Democrats. During the first ten years they will not be eligible for welfare. I think they have a strong work ethic and I do not think they will automatically become Democrat voters supporting the welfare state. I think Republicans can compete for the vote of these immigrants once they become citizens. I believe our values of individualism, economic opportunity, and limited government can be sold to anyone who has not already been socialized to be welfare dependent.
I think it is time to pass immigration reform. For anyone who wants to read the full text of the bill as amended, follow this link.
Another reason Lamar Alexander and Marsha Blackburn should have voted against the Farm Bill.
In addition to opposing the Farm Bill because it is anti-free market and is welfare for farmers, the Farm Bill should have been opposed because 80% of the $939 billion in the program funds food stamps. If Senator Lamar Alexander, Representative Marsha Blackburn and the rest of the Tennessee Republican delegation, with the exception of Representative John J. Duncan and Senator Bob Corker, could not vote against the farm bill because it is Soviet-style economic planning that distorts production and consumption and adds to the growing deficit, then they should have voted against it because food stamp spending is out of control and widely abused.
Since 2009 the number of people on food stamps has increased from 15 million to 47 million. Part of this is due to the recession and more people became eligible, but most of is is because the eligibility was changed to make people who previously would not have been eligible, become eligible.
While there are times when people do need assistance, food stamps have became a way of life for many people. Along with numerous other welfare and benefit programs, food stamps breeds dependency. They create a sense of entitlement. Also, they are widely abused. People will claim children living with them that don't in order to qualify. They will not report all of their income. The mother getting food stamps does not report the income of the live-in babydaddy. Food stamps are part of the economy of many poor neighborhoods. The going rate in Nashville, the last I heard, was 50 cents on the dollar. A person on food stamps will let someone use their debit card to go shopping and if the bill is a hundred dollars they will pay the person on food stamps fifty dollars.
I have worked in the social services field for years. I have seen the various ways people game the system. Once people are attuned to how the system works, it is not hard to figure out how to get free phones, food stamps, earned income tax credits, extended unemployment benefits and more. Welfare, including food stamps, changes a person's character. People do not think it is immoral to get benefits to which they are not entitled. It make people liars and thieves. The hand-outs create permanent poverty, because poverty is subsidized just enough that it becomes too expensive not to be poor.
If our Republican Senator and Representatives could not vote against the Farm Bill because it is Soviet-style planning, or because it creates government dependence and keeps people in poverty, there is another reason; it creates Democrats. Once people began getting a handout, they want to keep it. They don't know how they could ever get by without it. They feel entitled. The more people that are on food stamps, the harder it will be for Republicans to win elections.
Since 2009 the number of people on food stamps has increased from 15 million to 47 million. Part of this is due to the recession and more people became eligible, but most of is is because the eligibility was changed to make people who previously would not have been eligible, become eligible.
While there are times when people do need assistance, food stamps have became a way of life for many people. Along with numerous other welfare and benefit programs, food stamps breeds dependency. They create a sense of entitlement. Also, they are widely abused. People will claim children living with them that don't in order to qualify. They will not report all of their income. The mother getting food stamps does not report the income of the live-in babydaddy. Food stamps are part of the economy of many poor neighborhoods. The going rate in Nashville, the last I heard, was 50 cents on the dollar. A person on food stamps will let someone use their debit card to go shopping and if the bill is a hundred dollars they will pay the person on food stamps fifty dollars.
I have worked in the social services field for years. I have seen the various ways people game the system. Once people are attuned to how the system works, it is not hard to figure out how to get free phones, food stamps, earned income tax credits, extended unemployment benefits and more. Welfare, including food stamps, changes a person's character. People do not think it is immoral to get benefits to which they are not entitled. It make people liars and thieves. The hand-outs create permanent poverty, because poverty is subsidized just enough that it becomes too expensive not to be poor.
If our Republican Senator and Representatives could not vote against the Farm Bill because it is Soviet-style planning, or because it creates government dependence and keeps people in poverty, there is another reason; it creates Democrats. Once people began getting a handout, they want to keep it. They don't know how they could ever get by without it. They feel entitled. The more people that are on food stamps, the harder it will be for Republicans to win elections.
DAVIDSON COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY PIcnic 11:00 Am, not 11:30
DAVIDSON COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY
Summer BBQ Picnic
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Ellington Agricultural Center
Ed Jones Auditorium
Meet your elected officials and 2014 Candidates - U.S., State and Local
$20/person, $50/family,
$10 for students with valid ID
Former Governor Winfield Dunn
State Senator Steve Dickerson
& his band "No Good Deed"
Door Prizes!
BBQ &all the fixins and
Desserts by French Confection Cakes