I am for term limits, baring legislation I will try to impose them at the ballot box. 10 years maximum at any level of government.
US Senator – John Heiderscheit (Libertarian Party) I like Sen. Grassley but I just can no longer vote for him, too long in office.
US Representative – Brad Zaun (Republican Party)
Governor & Lt. Gov. – Johnathan Narcisse & Richard Mariar (Iowa Party) Branstad has more than 10 years as Governor and I don’t see a lot of difference between him and Culver. Narcisse is a fighter and believes in the best things for our children and Iowa.
Sec. of State – Matt Schultz (Republican Party)
Auditor of State – David Vaudt (Republican Party) His last term.
Treasurer of State – David Jamison (Republican Party)
Sec. of Ag – Bill Northey (Republican Party)
Attorney General – Brenna Findley (Republican Party) Tom Millers second time around has had some good points but still just too long in office.
State Representative – No vote – Scott Raecker (Rep.) has been in for 11 years, just too long.
Co. Treasurer – Mike Adams (Republican Party)
Co. Recorder – Eric Zingler (Republican Party)
Co. Attorney – No Vote – Sarcone has been in too long but has no one running against them.
Judges – I’m voting no on all of them to allow Branstad (if he wins) to have the ability to put in new people if he chooses.
Constitutional Questions
1 – Water and land legacy – No Vote- It wants to set up a 20 million dollar fund, we don’t have the money.
2 – Constitutional convention – No Vote – Even with problems our state constitution is the best we can do and has remedies for any problems we have.
Public Measure for Prairie Meadows
Yes – I would like for the casino to be private but the county has been too involved to get out now.
Showing posts with label iowa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iowa. Show all posts
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
"They knew who I was." – Rep. Boswell
Hopefully that will be how we remember Rep. Boswell, as a name, as a footnote. As for how he represented the 3rd District it was very unremarkable. He has had no reason to be remarkable, the independent vote has asked nothing of him and just falls in line and re-elects him every 2 years. When asked what his 16 years as a congressman has produced his claim was a veteran’s bill to help with suicide issues after serving, don’t get me wrong they need all the help we can give veterans. He also mentioned live stock legislation attached to a farm bill, but after 16 years that is an awful long time to only be able to mention 2 pieces of law when he personally has collected 1.6 to 2 million in salary as a congressman. If he is defeated next week what type of pension will he receive? The only one who has benefited from our relationship with Leonard Boswell is Leonard Boswell.
It is time for a change. Brad Zaun has his own issues like all of us do, and as a people we have struggled with financial and personal issues, he too has been there. As a Councilman, Mayor and State Senator Brad Zaun has always been an honest broker and a man who has been available and in touch with his community.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Boswell vs. Zaun Iowa Dist. 3
10/25/2010
Neither candidate did anything to hurt themselves, however, no one did anything to help themselves either and that is bad news for Brad Zaun. He is 28 years younger than the Congressman and should have shown a lot more energy and be able to respond more quickly to things like, when Boswell said he was not worried about challengers, I would have said "because you have taken the Independent and Democrat support for granted and don't even try any more."
Most of Boswell's responses were typical main line Democrat. There was absolutely nothing that he said that Barney Frank or Pelosi would disagree with. Brad was very vanilla too, maybe an attempt to win some moderate votes. His one point he did bring home was Boswell's promise to 3 terms and a need for change in D.C. Boswell's response was to tell us he and his seniority is the thin red line between Iowans and congressman from other states that would control everything. Of course those are Democrats so there wouldn't be any difference.
They did agree that we need more boarder security, with no details, and employers need to be held more responsible for hiring illegal immigrants.
I will update as I review my notes.
Neither candidate did anything to hurt themselves, however, no one did anything to help themselves either and that is bad news for Brad Zaun. He is 28 years younger than the Congressman and should have shown a lot more energy and be able to respond more quickly to things like, when Boswell said he was not worried about challengers, I would have said "because you have taken the Independent and Democrat support for granted and don't even try any more."
Most of Boswell's responses were typical main line Democrat. There was absolutely nothing that he said that Barney Frank or Pelosi would disagree with. Brad was very vanilla too, maybe an attempt to win some moderate votes. His one point he did bring home was Boswell's promise to 3 terms and a need for change in D.C. Boswell's response was to tell us he and his seniority is the thin red line between Iowans and congressman from other states that would control everything. Of course those are Democrats so there wouldn't be any difference.
They did agree that we need more boarder security, with no details, and employers need to be held more responsible for hiring illegal immigrants.
I will update as I review my notes.
Monday, August 2, 2010
A President in Iowa? Don't know.
I remember seeing a news release that President Bill Clinton was coming to Iowa to fund raise for our 3rd District representative Leonard Boswell. Then the news just ended. Last report was that on July 25th the 42nd President of the United States was going to be in Warren County for a fundraising event for the Congressman. I searched the Des Moines Register website for any news on that event. I only found that it was going to happen. I went to the Boswell for Congress website and found nothing! I even looked at the Congressman’s own website for the House of Representatives and nothing.
I e-mailed the Congressman’s campaign and got a reply that had an attached flier. It was being held at an individual’s home. Fair enough but surely a congressman would play up the fact that a President was campaigning for him and would get every piece of free publicity he could get. Yet nothing was reported. Even today I searched the Des Moines Register for an “after action” report on the event and no news. I don’t know if the event occurred as was told to us. The only report was a July 23rd blog by the Des Moines Register and it was short and only reported to be, “The event is closed to the public and the press.”
I e-mailed the Congressman’s campaign and got a reply that had an attached flier. It was being held at an individual’s home. Fair enough but surely a congressman would play up the fact that a President was campaigning for him and would get every piece of free publicity he could get. Yet nothing was reported. Even today I searched the Des Moines Register for an “after action” report on the event and no news. I don’t know if the event occurred as was told to us. The only report was a July 23rd blog by the Des Moines Register and it was short and only reported to be, “The event is closed to the public and the press.”
Monday, May 31, 2010
IOWA GOP Dinner and my rant
Last Wednesday (May 26, 2010) I attended the First Annual Robb Kelley Victory Club Dinner, who is Robb Kelly? (Bio) I was interested in going because Newt Gingrich was the keynote speaker. As a bonus all three of the major Republican candidates for governor and four of the candidates for Iowa’s 3rd district gave a 5 minute speech.
All of the speeches played to the fundamentals of Conservatism with some Republicanism in there too. I distinguish the two because there are subtle differences that the casual viewer might not see.
Unlike the view of conservatism by the left, it is not a belief in preserving everything of the past. Which they would point out racism, slavery and woman’s suffrage. They must be thinking about Democrats when they talk about those issues as it was the party of slavery and discrimination of minorities in the south until the 60’s when they had a conversion or a “born again” moment and much like an alcoholic or a smoker who has now quit or a person who has suddenly found god, unless you see the world through their eyes you are just wrong and evil.
Conservatives see that the founders of this country had it mostly right the first time. It is a travesty that they had to compromise on slavery in order form a “more perfect union” but their sin was paid in blood 80 years later during the civil war. What conservatives do see a truly right about the constitution and the founders is that rights do not descend from government but from God. Even if you don’t believe in God you must believe that there are rights you have that are yours and not given to you by others. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are outlined in the declaration of independence. The pursuit of happiness as Gingrich pointed out is the pursuit of wisdom and wealth. Furthermore that the states have rights that the federal government cannot change, the tenth amendment state’s this very clear,
” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This is why states can have different laws on similar issues such as the death penalty, and why it is okay for states to decide if they will allow gay marriage. Of course I say this with the understanding that the people or the legislature of those states make the law as outlined in each states constitution and not the court system of those states or the US supreme court system or its appellate courts. Abortion, gay marriage, death penalty and other laws should be state issues and not federal issues. But that is for another blog.
Republicanism is for those who only love the game of politics, chalking up wins and losses are more important for this group of people rather than staying true to a core belief system. Not that there isn’t wiggle room on many issues but on some issues you must be willing to shut down government because there is no compromise. This group of people sometimes referred to as “RINO” (Republican’s in name only) will not only give away the farm but will switch parties to maintain their power, not what is best for the citizens they represent.
Back to the fund raiser:
Of the 3rd district candidates only Mark Rees underperformed. He might have had a good message but with no energy to push it I got bored. Much like an Econ professor I had, I needed to ingest caffeine for the 5 min speech to not have my mind wonder off.
I am voting for Brad Zaun, A) he was the only one working the crowd before the speeches, but B) I have known him for over a decade as he was councilman and mayor of Urbandale and has only had a proven track record on good government.
Side note: Gibbons, the most fit I’m sure ran from the back of the room to the front to give his speech. I mention this because Gov. Branstad hustled up to the podium from about 30 feet away which I believe was an attempt to show youthful energy, only to notice a slight out of breath moment during a few of his first words.
The three governor candidates gave good speeches, I may have switched from Vander Plaats to Rod Roberts as he was impressive but I had not heard him speak before. I’ve seen Vander Plaats over the last 15 years give a number of speeches, all very good but I don’t know if he can win in November. I know Branstad can win but he is a retread, had similar solutions as our current governor has and I don’t believe he is a conservative but just a Republican who represents a winning team from the 80’s & 90’s.
Second Side note: Dinner was a typical hotel rubber chicken meal, nothing interesting and with a German chocolate cake for dessert (which I did not have) I thought a shot of insulin was needed to go with it. Much like the speeches given that night which were rich with “Conservatism” I don’t know if it was the real stuff or just something to make you think you had something sweet.
Newt “effing” Gingrich, was all I remember him to be. This makes the Newt of 2006 to 2008 all the more confusing. Why he was doing things with Hillary Clinton and acting like a Republican instead of the red meat conservative I remember from the 90’s and last Wednesday’s speech makes me wonder what is going on. His information has always been top notch but the delivery has changed, again. I don’t know if he is gearing up for a 2012 run and this is a way to connect with the “tea party” and conservative base or if this a real Gingrich.
It is okay to change your style depending on who you are talking too. I would expect a different tone when talking to the plus 65 crowd vs. the under 35 crowd but only as long as you are consistent in the message. Don’t tell seniors you are okay with Social Security only to denounce it to the younger crowd, not that Newt has done this.
“Nothing can so alienate a voter from the political system as backing a winning candidate.” – Mark Cohen
Chris Mendelsohn 2010
All of the speeches played to the fundamentals of Conservatism with some Republicanism in there too. I distinguish the two because there are subtle differences that the casual viewer might not see.
Unlike the view of conservatism by the left, it is not a belief in preserving everything of the past. Which they would point out racism, slavery and woman’s suffrage. They must be thinking about Democrats when they talk about those issues as it was the party of slavery and discrimination of minorities in the south until the 60’s when they had a conversion or a “born again” moment and much like an alcoholic or a smoker who has now quit or a person who has suddenly found god, unless you see the world through their eyes you are just wrong and evil.
Conservatives see that the founders of this country had it mostly right the first time. It is a travesty that they had to compromise on slavery in order form a “more perfect union” but their sin was paid in blood 80 years later during the civil war. What conservatives do see a truly right about the constitution and the founders is that rights do not descend from government but from God. Even if you don’t believe in God you must believe that there are rights you have that are yours and not given to you by others. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are outlined in the declaration of independence. The pursuit of happiness as Gingrich pointed out is the pursuit of wisdom and wealth. Furthermore that the states have rights that the federal government cannot change, the tenth amendment state’s this very clear,
” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This is why states can have different laws on similar issues such as the death penalty, and why it is okay for states to decide if they will allow gay marriage. Of course I say this with the understanding that the people or the legislature of those states make the law as outlined in each states constitution and not the court system of those states or the US supreme court system or its appellate courts. Abortion, gay marriage, death penalty and other laws should be state issues and not federal issues. But that is for another blog.
Republicanism is for those who only love the game of politics, chalking up wins and losses are more important for this group of people rather than staying true to a core belief system. Not that there isn’t wiggle room on many issues but on some issues you must be willing to shut down government because there is no compromise. This group of people sometimes referred to as “RINO” (Republican’s in name only) will not only give away the farm but will switch parties to maintain their power, not what is best for the citizens they represent.
Back to the fund raiser:
Of the 3rd district candidates only Mark Rees underperformed. He might have had a good message but with no energy to push it I got bored. Much like an Econ professor I had, I needed to ingest caffeine for the 5 min speech to not have my mind wonder off.
I am voting for Brad Zaun, A) he was the only one working the crowd before the speeches, but B) I have known him for over a decade as he was councilman and mayor of Urbandale and has only had a proven track record on good government.
Side note: Gibbons, the most fit I’m sure ran from the back of the room to the front to give his speech. I mention this because Gov. Branstad hustled up to the podium from about 30 feet away which I believe was an attempt to show youthful energy, only to notice a slight out of breath moment during a few of his first words.
The three governor candidates gave good speeches, I may have switched from Vander Plaats to Rod Roberts as he was impressive but I had not heard him speak before. I’ve seen Vander Plaats over the last 15 years give a number of speeches, all very good but I don’t know if he can win in November. I know Branstad can win but he is a retread, had similar solutions as our current governor has and I don’t believe he is a conservative but just a Republican who represents a winning team from the 80’s & 90’s.
Second Side note: Dinner was a typical hotel rubber chicken meal, nothing interesting and with a German chocolate cake for dessert (which I did not have) I thought a shot of insulin was needed to go with it. Much like the speeches given that night which were rich with “Conservatism” I don’t know if it was the real stuff or just something to make you think you had something sweet.
Newt “effing” Gingrich, was all I remember him to be. This makes the Newt of 2006 to 2008 all the more confusing. Why he was doing things with Hillary Clinton and acting like a Republican instead of the red meat conservative I remember from the 90’s and last Wednesday’s speech makes me wonder what is going on. His information has always been top notch but the delivery has changed, again. I don’t know if he is gearing up for a 2012 run and this is a way to connect with the “tea party” and conservative base or if this a real Gingrich.
It is okay to change your style depending on who you are talking too. I would expect a different tone when talking to the plus 65 crowd vs. the under 35 crowd but only as long as you are consistent in the message. Don’t tell seniors you are okay with Social Security only to denounce it to the younger crowd, not that Newt has done this.
“Nothing can so alienate a voter from the political system as backing a winning candidate.” – Mark Cohen
Chris Mendelsohn 2010
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
No one goes Hungry in my America!
© WithComment.com
You are no longer hungry, just "Food insecure" "According to a report released this month by the US Department of Agriculture, roughly 35 million Americans had difficulty feeding themselves in 2005 and of those some 10.8 million went hungry."
WithComment – Orwell would be sad to see such talk. To change the name of being hungry to “food insecurity with hunger” may put it under homeland security in the future. It is hard to believe that with the number of overweight children and adults in this country that this is much of an issue. Our cities are full of lunch kitchens that haven’t closed since FDR was in charge. I’ve got to believe that a large percentage is homeless people who have a high percentage or the mentally ill. Either that or supermodels that are doing it to keep their jobs.
I think we need to adopt a skinny person. With the other 270 million of us too fat (I among them) we can teach these people how to stop doing meth and how to do Krispy Kreme. They need to learn to start taking their meds and start going to “Old country buffet” America’s know how to eat and we need to teach those how don’t how to do it too.
To paraphrase Pres. Reagan, “America is a shining buffet upon a hill.”
*No donuts were injured in making this observation.
Chris Mendelsohn
reply@withcomment.com
For more comments visit www.withcomment.com
You are no longer hungry, just "Food insecure" "According to a report released this month by the US Department of Agriculture, roughly 35 million Americans had difficulty feeding themselves in 2005 and of those some 10.8 million went hungry."
WithComment – Orwell would be sad to see such talk. To change the name of being hungry to “food insecurity with hunger” may put it under homeland security in the future. It is hard to believe that with the number of overweight children and adults in this country that this is much of an issue. Our cities are full of lunch kitchens that haven’t closed since FDR was in charge. I’ve got to believe that a large percentage is homeless people who have a high percentage or the mentally ill. Either that or supermodels that are doing it to keep their jobs.
I think we need to adopt a skinny person. With the other 270 million of us too fat (I among them) we can teach these people how to stop doing meth and how to do Krispy Kreme. They need to learn to start taking their meds and start going to “Old country buffet” America’s know how to eat and we need to teach those how don’t how to do it too.
To paraphrase Pres. Reagan, “America is a shining buffet upon a hill.”
*No donuts were injured in making this observation.
Chris Mendelsohn
reply@withcomment.com
For more comments visit www.withcomment.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)