Opinion

$200,000? That’s Chump Change!

This makes one wonder, under what rock has this sap been living?

An ArtPrize finalist has vowed to give away any prize money he might win because of his opposition to the conservative politics of the DeVos family, who fund the competition.

Steve Lambert of Beacon, N.Y., in line to possibly win the $200,000 grand prize, has vowed to give away any potential award to a gay-and-lesbian organization, the LGBT Fund of Grand Rapids, as a political statement.

MORE

Steve has not a clue, and the fool and his money soon part. Whatever. Besides, we’ve known all along who already has the unofficial “Art Prize” trophy.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

You Betcha! (18)Nuh Uh.(3)

WTF! Now it’s Speed Cameras?

Yet another good argument for a part-time legislature.

“I signed on to this bill because it was presented to me as something to protect the safety of children,” Sen. Jones continued.

MORE

AbsurditiesThat is perhaps one of the dumbest walk-backs I’ve seen in a long, long time. Hello? Who was the sponsor of the bill? Senator Jones, your village called the offices of RightMi.com looking for their missing idiot. Please return to your district ASAP.

You Betcha! (26)Nuh Uh.(1)

Is the drug trade truly violent?

Before I get started, let me say this: A LOT OF DRUGS OUT THERE (including legally prescribed pharmaceuticals) ARE A BAD, BAD, BAD IDEA AND YOU SHOULDN’T USE THEM, TRY THEM, OR OTHERWISE GET INVOLVED WITH THEM. (See: Heroin, Cocaine, Crack).  Many drugs are bad, mmmmmkay, kids?

That aside, I’ll go on…

Yesterday I had lunch with one of my colleagues.  He’s a younger, very logical, well reasoned guy.  His father is a State Trooper.  That is to say, he’s probably grown up with the idea that the state (that is, a general term for Government) and maybe even the drug war are good things.  Along the way, we got talking about crimes and how I believe the only true crimes are crimes that involve a victim (crimes against person or property).  This lead into a talk about the drug trade.

One argument he brought up in support of Federal and State prohibition policies was: well, the drug trade is inherently violent and that’s why we need to keep prohibition.  Then I asked him: Why is the drug trade violent?

Let me ask you, the reader, the same question: Why is the drug trade violent?

You Betcha! (9)Nuh Uh.(9)

Ready for some Common Core©?

Anybody care to make a gentleman’s wager that li’l Jeb has a room reserved at the hotel Dick and Barracuda Betsy™?

And, more news on their control game: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/09/Stotsky-What-Does-That-Common-Core-Copyright-Mean
TwoOdiousAssholes

You Betcha! (38)Nuh Uh.(3)

Candidate Rick Snyder (2010) vs. Gov. Rick Snyder (2012) On Guns

Originally posted on MIOpenCarry.org (Reposted with permission)

According to OnTheIssues.org, in 2010 then gubernatorial candidate Rick Snyder’s campaign website contained the following in regards to whether or not he would support the 2nd Amendment and the rights of gun owners:

“In one word: absolutely. I actually own three guns myself. I have a 12 gauge shotgun and two .22 rifles that I use for target shooting. I believe the 2nd amendment also protects the right of citizens to have a gun in their home to protect their family and property. I also support the rights of gun owners to responsibly carry their gun, as long as they have attained the legal permit. While I’m not an avid hunter, I support the industry and believe it plays an important role in our economy and quality of life. It also can have a valuable environmental conservation impact and I would work to streamline the processes so that hunters get better customer service from the state and local governments. We have a long tradition in our state of supporting gun rights and the hunting industry in Michigan and I would continue to support that tradition as Governor.”

Now there are two big problems with the highlighted portion. The first problem is that rights and permits are mutually exclusive. A right, by definition, is something that belongs fundamentally to everyone, as opposed to a permit which gives you the ability to do something you could otherwise do. The second problem is that when Gov. Snyder was given the opportunity to backup his words he folded.

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

Limerick Laureate

From the "no, seriously, we should really, really, really, consider a part-time legislature" files.

pscholkaWhy stop at creating a poet laureate position?

Such important matters to tend to in Lansing.  Would-be candidate for house leadership Al Psholka is the ONLY Republican to co-sponsor HB5853. From Capitol Confidential:

“Now there’s a concept worthy of a poem.

*The measure has 12 Democratic cosponsors and one Republican, Rep. Al Pscholka, who also is maneuvering to be the next Speaker of the House. The Democrats are Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Jon Switalski, Henry Yanez, Scott Dianda, Jeff Irwin, Tim Greimel, Tim Kelly, Marcia Hovey-Wright, Adam Zemke, Sam Singh, Andrew J. Kandrevas and David Rutledge.”

A poem?

Perhaps not.  Maybe instead, a limerick?

There once was a Rep name of Psholka
A champion of liberal Polka
“A Poet” He said,  “Would put me ahead”
For a leadership post, he’s a Joke-a

I want that appointment.

You Betcha! (11)Nuh Uh.(0)

About That “Michigan First” Line of Crapola

The level of Terri’s cognitive dissonance is just staggering. Perhaps, it’s time for another friendly reminder?

Folks, I’m big enough to admit when I make a mistake. When referring to Terri Land Hibma as a dunce, it truly is an insult to dunces everywhere.

You Betcha! (22)Nuh Uh.(1)

Rick Snyder on Gun Free Zones

I wish it weren’t true, I really do, but here’s the thing: the reason we still have gun free zones in this State is Gov. Rick Snyder.

Let’s review the political landscape in Michigan.  Michigan’s legislature is divided into two chambers: A senate and a house.

The Michigan Senate is made up of 38 members (26 Republicans and 12 Democrats – As of this writing).  The Michigan Senate has had this composition since January 1, 2011 and this composition will remain in place until the end of December this year (2014).

The Michigan House is made up of 110 members (59 Republicans, 50 Democrats, and 1 “Independent” Democrat – as of this writing).  The Michigan House has had this composition since January 1, 2013 and this composition will remain in place until the end of December this year (2014).  Between January 1, 2011 and through December, 2012 the composition was 64 Republicans and 46 Democrats — 9 votes short of a supermajority (66%) of Republicans.  The latter amount represents the composition when SB 59 was passed in 2012.

Let’s talk about SB 59, as ultimately passed by the legislature.  SB 59 would have (in brief):

  1. Overhauled the process to get your CPL to make getting your CPL much simpler, with one person (your local Sheriff) being solely responsible for issuing your CPL or facing financial penalties in Court for denying you without a lawful reason (as specified in MCL 28.425b)
  2. Force the CPL Issuer to grant a person who completed a nominal amount of additional training an exemption to the Concealed Pistol Free Zones outlined in MCL 28.425onearly eliminating concealed pistol free zones in Michigan.
  3. Made it illegal to open carry a firearm in a location described in MCL 28.425o.

While the third point rightfully posed some controversy in Michigan’s second amendment community, especially open carriers, Michigan’s “Big 3” (Michigan Open Carry, Inc, Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners, Michigan Gun Owners) Firearm organizations voted (via their Board of Directors) to Support SB 59 as it ultimately passed and urged the Governor to sign it.

Ultimately, Gov. Rick Snyder decided to veto SB 59.  He didn’t veto it because he’s so pro-gun he opposed making it illegal to open carry in a 28.425o zone, no…not at all.  In fact, that language was added to the legislation at the Governor’s insistence.  Rather, the Governor opposed SB 59 because (according to his veto letter) he wanted to weaken preemption:

“While we must vigilantly protect the rights of law-abiding firearm owners, we also must ensure the right of designated public entities to exercise their best discretion in matters of safety and security,” he said. “These public venues need clear legal authority to ban firearms on their premises if they see fit to do so.

So all those publicly owned pistol free zones described in MCL 28.425o?  Snyder wanted them to be able to ban guns, contrary to the State’s preemption law outlined in MCL 123.1102.  Senator Mike Green, lead sponsor of SB 59, refused to cave into this final demand of the Governor to weaken preemption, so the bill passed as it did and the rest is (as they say) history.

Senator Mike Green Later reintroduced SB 59 in the next (current) session as SB 213.  Sadly, SB 213 has gone nowhere because the Governor doesn’t want to address/eliminate Pistol Free Zones.  Since the Governor is a Republican (like a majority of the State House and Senate) the Republican majorities won’t take up the issue.  After all, many of the members do not want to further embarrass/alienate their parties Governor on the matter prior to an election.  Many of these members are counting on their Governor’s support during the election season (both the Primaries and the General Election) to help them get re-elected.  Fearing the Governor will withdraw his support from fellow Republican members who pass legislation supporting the elimination of 28..425o zones, the legislature has sat on SB 213.  Would this be the same if the Governor didn’t belong to the same party as a majority of the state legislature?

To answer that question, let’s look at history of previous legislature and Governor.  In 2006 the legislature passed Michigan’s version of “Stand your Ground”, the Self Defense Act of 2006.  Not wanting to alienate gun owners prior to the November election of 2006, Governor Granholm signed the law in July of 2006.

This political situation aside, it’s possible SB 59’s veto would have been overridden.  SB 59 passed on final passage with the following support, House: Yeas 68 Nays 41; Senate: Yeas 27 Nays 11.  In the Senate a 2/3’s majority to over-ride a veto is 26 votes.  In the House it is 74 votes.  In other words, the Senate had enough votes and the House would have only needed to flip 3 votes.  Of course, given fear of losing support of the Govenor, the legislature wouldn’t over-ride the Governor’s veto even if the votes were there.  This recently happened in Missouri where the Republican Legislature overrode the Democrat Governor’s veto on pro-gun legislation.

In fact, even the Liberal Huffington posts seem to suggest gun free zones are a bad idea.

You Betcha! (17)Nuh Uh.(0)