“The President of Non-Specifics” By David Pring-Mill

LD- Contributor

I.                 Advantageous Ambiguity

   In the President’s Weekly Address on March 10, 2012, Barack Obama stated, “You and I both know that with only 2% of the world’s oil reserves, we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices – not when we consume 20 percent of the world’s oil. We need an all-of-the-above strategy that relies less on foreign oil and more on American-made energy – solar, wind, natural gas, biofuels, and more.” This rhetoric is superficially appealing, but the President’s claims aren’t entirely accurate. The Institute for Energy Research says that Obama is creating the impression of scarcity by focusing on the technicality of proven oil reserves whilst neglecting to mention that the United States has enough recoverable oil for the next 200 years. Although I agree with the President that we need to encourage American ingenuity and switch over to alternative energy sources, there needs to be a transitional period. Nikola Tesla once said that it is only a matter of time until “men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.” I believe that innovation will yield phenomenal gains for the energy needs of mankind, but I also believe that brilliance can be broken down into incremental progress.

   Obama characterizes other politicians as having “three-point plans for two-dollar gas: drill, drill, and drill some more.” And in an ideal situation crafted to Obama’s political preferences, we could immediately switch to alternative energy and he wouldn’t have to worry about disappointing the environmentalists whose votes he needs for reelection. But in the necessitated interim, perhaps it’s better to make temporary environmental compromises than it is to remain in business with Middle Eastern dictators whose beliefs and regimes are antithetical to American values. Instead of contorting our foreign policy and watching gas prices rise, let’s tell dictators to take a hike. Let’s expand U.S. drilling significantly enough to independently enable a realistic transition to alternative energy. Obama has expanded drilling, but not to the required extent. If the history of human progress is any indicator, energy research will plod forward, and out of that process, the next Tesla will emerge with an invention that will eclipse the methods detailed in Obama’s all-of-the-above strategy - but until then, our nation must be prepared and self-reliant.

   President Obama’s argument is intellectually dishonest in that it dually misrepresents our national oil resources - (there are 1,442 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil) - and misrepresents the readiness and viability of so-called alternative energy. A half-billion dollar loan from the federal government to Solyndra certainly didn’t produce results. There is a very pernicious edge to government’s eagerness to find and facilitate an alternative energy solution. For instance, government policies of industrialized nations promoted and subsidized biofuels. This caused the deaths of nearly two hundred thousand people. Expanded demand for grain harvest increased food prices globally, which resulted in mass starvation amongst the poor. And the U.S. alone spent more than $20 billion on ethanol subsidies.

   Barack Obama’s willingness to ignore factual realities and overpromise a swift, idealistic solution is reminiscent of past behavior. When he was running for President, Obama said that he would immediately shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, even though doing so struck others as logistically infeasible. It’s now 2012, and Gitmo is still there. “President Obama is still trying to shut down Gitmo as soon as possible, it's just turning out that it's not possible,” said Democratic strategist Joe Trippi. This statement is an inadvertent riddle - if someone is trying to do something as soon as possible but they know that it is impossible, what is their ETA on completion?

   This is a president who relies upon ambiguity to ingratiate himself with the electorate, routinely offering the semblance of solutions to worsening and very real problems. Barack Obama won election in 2008 after his campaign relentlessly emphasized the non-specifics of “hope” and “change.” After his 2011 State of the Union, Obama was criticized for failing to offer a specific and comprehensive plan for debt reduction. In his 2012 State of the Union address, he utilized more nonspecific rhetoric while seemingly courting centrist and independent voters who have been drawn towards the libertarian ideals being espoused in the GOP primary. The President said, “I’ve ordered federal agencies to get rid of regulations that don’t make sense.” I’ll give the President some credit here - not literal financial credit, of course, given the economic precedent - and assume that this statement was a rhetorical oversimplification of his actual directives. The President’s rhetoric deliberately averts the mention of concrete objectives that, if specified, may have to be pursued.

   If Obama had actually issued instructions of such flustering vagueness, the results would be unpredictable because agencies might then scramble to make their regulations comply with Obama’s comprehension of what makes sense - and that comprehension frequently isn’t correlated with reality. For instance, Obama thought that it made sense to brag about the results of his decision to bail out the auto industry, but his boasts slyly ignore the fact that although Chrysler may be rebounding, it was also sold off to Fiat, an Italian company, after being bailed out by American taxpayers.

   Obama also thought that it made sense to name Joe Biden as VP, describing him as “a leader who is ready to step in and be president,” even though Biden had spent many Senate sessions declaring his brazenly offensive plan to effectively segregate Iraq along ethno-religious lines. Biden’s justification for this morally reprehensible idea lies in Iraq’s history - at one time, prior to being cobbled together by Britain in the 1920s, the region was comprised of three separate vilayets under the Ottoman Empire. The irrelevance of the Vice President’s historical pretensions is immediately apparent upon applying the Golden Rule. How would we feel if China invaded the U.S., committed strategic blunders during the implementation of a new government, and then decided to quell our violent discontentment by reverting America back to an earlier version? Would women and blacks lose their civil rights? Would lands be returned to Mexico? There is nothing prudent or admirable about trying to turn the clock back on an occupied territory in order to divide its peoples.

   The ill-conceived appointment of Biden as VP illustrates some measure of Obama’s judgment, or lack thereof. Therefore, if Obama had any actual intent of lessening regulations, one can only wonder which regulations would be discarded and which would be retained. However, the President is insincere in his effort to court libertarian-leaning voters. Instead of demonstrating political courage by advocating for the removal of regulations about which there is partisan disagreement, the President referenced a recently abolished regulation that classified spilled milk as an oil spill. Unless a lactose intolerant member of Congress has a fear of out-of-control milk and wants this regulation reenacted, there is no controversy here, and no courage on the President’s part.

II.               Is Obama Copying Answers?

     Seeking to extend his reign of ambiguous rhetoric and definite big government, Obama has adopted a consistent line against his Republican opponents - he has labeled them “the party of no.” While giving a speech that further propagated his 2% oil reserves myth, he described his opponents as naysayers who “don’t believe in the future and don’t believe in trying to do things differently.”

   Yet if you listen to the 2012 State of the Union in full, it is apparent that Obama is aware that the GOP is not the party of the no. He has been watching the GOP primary debates and taking notes, and he is now attempting to appropriate Republicans’ more appealing ideas for his own administration. Compare the following quotes:

“If you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“We need to cut the capital gains tax in half which others have proposed but for manufacturers   we need to give a five-year window where we cut it to zero. We want to encourage people to set up jobs here in America. ”

- Santorum, June 13, 2011

“Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“If I'm president of the United States, I'm making it very clear, I love free trade. I want to open markets to free trade. But I will crack down on cheaters like China.”

- Romney, November 9, 2011

“It is time to turn our unemployment system into a re-employment system that puts people to work.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“All unemployment compensation should be tied to a job training requirement.”

- Gingrich, January 16, 2012

“I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration. That’s why my administration has put more boots on the border than ever before.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“Well, the first thing you need to do is have boots on the ground. We've had a request in to this administration since June -- or January of 2009 for 1,000 border patrol agents or National Guard troops, and working towards 3,000 border patrol. That's just on the Texas border. […] For the President of the United States to go to El Paso, Texas, and say that the border is safer than it's ever been, either he has some of the poorest intel of a president in the history of this country, or he was an abject liar to the American people. It is not safe on that border.”

- Perry, September 7, 2011

“Tear down regulations that prevent aspiring entrepreneurs from getting the financing to grow.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“The entrepreneur in America, the small businessman and woman, they're looking for a president that will say we're going to lower the tax burden on you and we're going to lower the regulation impact on you, and free them to do what they do best: create jobs.”

- Perry, September 7, 2011

“I’m a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed, that government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more.”

- Obama, January 24, 2012

“We don't need the government running our lives.”

- Paul, September 7, 2011

   With what degree of sincerity is Obama parroting his opponents? Until Obama ties this rhetoric to actual legislative proposals, it can be safely assumed that this is another ploy relying upon non-specifics. Obama referred to a recent upward trajectory in the manufacturing sector when he said, “The CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home,” but he glossed over a more complex reality by selectively saying “business sense.” Master Lock CEO Jon Heppner’s decision was prompted by higher labor and logistical costs in Asia - and our strategy for ensuring the resurgence of an industry cannot be contingent upon external factors beyond our control. The President utilized additional characteristic non-specifics when he stated, “Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.” Business leaders have not outsourced these jobs due to a lack of inquisitiveness or patriotism. They outsourced manufacturing to avoid a lack of profit. Does anyone really believe that the majority of CEOs are suddenly going to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., increase their production costs, and deal with American unions and regulations because Obama vaguely promised to lower the manufacturing tax in his reelection rhetoric?

   Santorum has made the idea of eliminating the manufacturing tax his signature issue. And although I strongly disagree with Santorum on social issues, he is correct on this particular issue. This is a sector of the economy that has taken a huge hit as a result of globalization, and that globalization has led to the dehumanization of foreign workers, as evidenced by the recent reporting on the atrocious worker conditions at Apple manufacturing plants in China. Many economists are quick to justify this kind of exploitation by asserting that foreign workers would have it much worse if we did not have the good sense to exploit them. But if economists and corporate decision-makers genuinely cared about poor people in Third World countries, they wouldn’t idealize a process that effectively enslaves these people and generates profits off their suffering. Instead, they would support organizations such as Heifer International and help these people to feed themselves sustainably.

   If we want to revive the manufacturing sector in our country, maintain recent gains, and be able to create and purchase our goods on terms consistent with Americans’ moral and religious values, drastic measures must be taken. Would we prefer to employ Americans in the manufacturing sector and have the manufacturers’ profits go untaxed, or would we prefer to lose the industry, exploit foreign, impoverished peoples, and put Americans on welfare instead of employing them? This is the paradigm that was conspicuously missing from Elizabeth Warren’s viral quote in which she earnestly rebuked a tax-opposed factory owner who couldn’t argue back due to the fact that he was a fallacious rhetorical construct. But it must also be noted - regulations and unions will likely continue to make it more expensive to manufacture here as opposed to abroad, even with reduced or eliminated manufacturing taxes, which is why the onus is on consumers to imbue the “made in USA” label with a competitive advantage by consistently favoring American-made products in instances in which it is financially feasible to do so.

   Unfortunately, the President of non-specifics has consistently neglected attempts at jobs creation that do not necessitate the incurrence of huge government expenditures. He jeopardized the Keystone XL oil pipeline in order to ensure that he does not offend the environmentalists at his party’s base. In his SOTU, Obama said, “There’s never been a better time to build, especially since the construction industry was one of the hardest hit when the housing bubble burst. Of course, construction workers weren’t the only ones who were hurt. So were millions of innocent Americans who’ve seen their home values decline.” If construction workers and innocent Americans alike are hurting, why employ construction workers on public works projects enabled by the taxation of other suffering Americans if construction workers could instead be employed by a legitimate private sector project?

   No longer can non-specifics be allowed to cover up the President’s lack of integrity. Large banks created securities so that they could bet against them. Wachovia actually engaged in money laundering with drug cartels that routinely decapitate the people of Mexico, and for this, the bank was penalized by being made to pay a fine that constituted less than 2% of their annual profits. Bank of America fraudulently robo-signed its customers’ signatures in order to force them into foreclosure. When these corrupt banks were bailed out with taxpayer money, Obama considered it to be “unpopular but necessary.” When the President signed the NDAA for 2012 and compromised Americans’ civil liberties, he added a signing statement indicating that he strongly disagreed with aspects of what he was signing - but he signed it anyway.

III.             Bipartisan Problems, Independent Solutions

   The Bureau of Public Debt has revealed that the President of non-specifics increased the debt more in three years and two months than his predecessor did over the course of two terms. Instead of enabling purposeful private sector projects, this President prefers to further increase our national debt with stimulus packages so that construction workers can build things that don’t need to be there. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels observed, “The federal government now spends one of every four dollars in the entire economy; it borrows one of every three dollars it spends.” And both parties caused this predicament. The two-party monopoly under which we all live is ineffective yet institutionally enforced by mechanisms such as ballot access laws and gerrymandering. If we don’t want politics to be a sport, we need to stop picking teams and pretending we’re on them. We are not Democrats, we are not Republicans. We are Americans.

   If you want to cause change in America, don’t vote for a politician who disingenuously used the word “change” as a campaign slogan - change the actual system. Support open primary initiatives. It is time for the American people to chip away at a political establishment that polarizes attitudes and stifles objectivity. It is the duty of the American people to alter the actual apparatus of our electoral processes to further empower democracy, and it is imperative that we remain resolute in that effort, instead of being reluctant adherents of one man or one party.

David Pring-Mill is a writer, independent filmmaker, and activist. He lives in New York City. He can be contacted at pringmill [at] gmail.com.

Follow Dave’s tweets at http://www.twitter.com/davesaidso

GOOD GOVERNMENT AT STAKE

At the University of Chicago last week, the leader in the race to become the Republican nominee for President of the United States said, “I don’t mean to be flip with this, but I don’t see how a young American can vote for a Democrat.’’ Mitt Romney cheerfully apologized to anyone who might find such a comment “offensive,’’ but went on to explain what young people need to consider if they are thinking of voting for Democrats.

The Democratic Party “is focused on providing more and more benefits to my generation, mounting trillion-dollar annual deficits my generation will never pay for,’’ Romney said. While Democrats are perpetrating “the greatest inter-generational transfer of wealth in the history of humankind,’’ Republicans are “consumed with the idea of getting federal spending down and creating economic growth and opportunity so we can balance our budget and stop putting these debts on you.’’

The government’s record-breaking debts “are not frightening to people my age, because we’ll be gone,’’ Romney argued, but “they ought to be frightening to death to people your age!’’ He regretted not doing a better job of getting that message across to younger voters. “You guys ought to be out,’’ Romney insisted, “working like crazy for me and for people like me: conservatives, who want to keep the cost of government down and give you a brighter future.’’

Despite efforts to breathe life into the local Democratic Party, Liberty County has been jumping out of the Democrats boat for several elections. Young and old people alike have been voting more and more for Republicans in local elections as years of questionable behavior by Democrats holding office has made the last fifteen years sound to discerning ears like a steady inevitable “here we come” drumbeat for Republicans. The same concerns that Romney expresses about the country should be on people’s minds as they look at the future of this county.

Unfortunately, but very predictably, Liberty County has more complicated things to consider at the polls than Romney’s simplistic “vote Republican and get rid of the tax and spenders” advice. Local politicians have switched parties and some of the switchers are not what Republicans should want. Incompetent Democrats like Henry Patterson switched last election and have had four years to stain the law and order image Republicans like to project. The majority of officeholders who have switched have simply been like Patterson and tried to go where the votes are and there has been no principle involved in their decision. But there have been a few with conservative beliefs who switched to get away from the poor behavior of local Democrats and to try and coalesce with newly elected Republicans to solve budget problems.

Particularly frustrating for conservatives who have been actively working for change for any length of time in Liberty County are the people who show up to run as Republicans who have either worked against the local Republican effort or they have been in position to help and they have sat on their hands and not lifted a finger. The best example of that is seen in the District Attorney’s race. Karen McNair is far and away the best prepared to become Liberty County’s next D.A. and she has been working to elect other local Republicans for years. In contrast, Logan Pickett has the least experience of any prosecutor in the courthouse and though his family has spent part of their wealth and influence in statewide and national races, they have done nothing but help Democrats locally – until now.

One thing Liberty County voters can be proud of. We have pierced the veil of those in power who told all of us it would “always be this way”. We have, at least for this period of time in our history, responded the way Benjamin Franklin hoped we would when he was asked if we know we have got – a Republic or a Monarchy at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Franklin said if we could keep it, we would have a system of government where every man had a say, not one like it was in England where Kings and Queens and Dukes and Duchesses told us how things were going to be.

Young people ought to be willing to fight for that in any generation.

FOLLOWING THE MONEY

In his unsuccessful bids to be the state representative from this area, records reveal Eddie Shauberger received contributions of well over a quarter of a million dollars. Far and away the majority of this money was from a few large donors rather than receiving small donations from people around the district. It is interesting to go back and look at some of those donations in light of Shauberger’s multiple run-ins with the law.

In October 2002, records show something of special interest to those who have witnessed Shauberger’s strange public life. That was the year that the Tom Delay scandal happened. TRMPAC allegedly was used to funnel illegal corporate donations into the campaigns of Republican candidates for State Representative. Records reveal Eddie Shauberger’s campaign received several thousand dollars from TRMPAC that year.

Also of interest, when reading Influence Explorer campaign donor analysis are three donations of more than $10,000. Two of Shauberger’s large donations come from the Palmerez brothers. These brothers are the same ones Shauberger made all kinds of allegations towards when he was charged with a felony involving business dealings with them. Speculation that after a few years of bitter dispute, Shauberger and his long time friends have rejoined forces with each other to conspire against Ray Akins, have neither been confirmed or disproved.

Also a $10,875 is credited toward Richard Pegues, the County Chairman at the time. When Mr. Pegues was asked about this donation he appeared surprised.

“I tried to help Republican candidates in any way I could, but I never donated that kind of money to anyone. Why does my name appear on there? I don’t know. What was Eddie’s involvement with Congressman DeLay? These kinds of questions can best be answered by the candidate.”

There would be nothing illegal about donations from Pegues or the Palmerez brothers as long as they were not corporate donations. Pegues owned no corporation. Like the Palmerez brothers however, Pegues has parted company from Shauberger, but unlike them, he continues to have serious concerns about the man he thought he knew well.

“I don’t know if he has changed or if I was just always blinded by our friendship from church. It is like he has a list of people he that he feels he needs to exact revengeon. It appears he will use any means necessary. This is far from our pact to work to elect good conservatives tolocal offices,” Pegues said.

(Citation) Shauberger campaign finance link

On Dick Cheney- MSNBC's Ed Shultz, a human garbage bag...

Liberal talk show host Ed Schultz would like to take the heart of former Vice President Dick Cheney —who is recovering from his fifth heart attack — and “rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him.”

On his radio show Wednesday, Schultz mocked conservatives who have attacked him for going after the health of the former vice president.

“You’re damn right, Dick Cheney's heart's a political football,” Schultz said in remarks recorded by the media blog Radio Equalizer. “We ought to rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him."

Schultz, host of “The Ed Show” on MSNBC, said that he was glad Cheney “didn’t tip over” because “he is the new poster child for health care in this country.”

“How come Dick Cheney’s health care isn't being dropped?” Schultz asked. “Do you realize that if you had five heart attacks, hell, you wouldn't get past two heart attacks and they’d dump you.”

“But because you're a war criminal and because you are on the take from Halliburton ... you can get the best health care on the face of the earth,” Schultz said.

Ed Shultz you are disgrace to humanity.  Dick Cheney is a great American with more moral fiber and courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body.

For you to besmirch and disrespect a man with serious heart problems, you are a mere shell of a human being.

Liberty Dispatch and its supporters wish the best for Vice President Cheney and you should know you are appreciated and respected.

Contributor, Ray Akins

LD Public Service Post

LETTER TO LD: IF ROMNEY GETS THE NOMINATION

Let’s put preferences aside and talk about the scenario most likely to occur as we move forward in the contest for who will serve as the nation’s President for four years beginning in January 2013.

Every Republican I know says they will support whoever wins the Republican primary against Barack Obama. They almost all say the same thing – we can not afford four more years of Obama. But if Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum can’t gather enough votes to stop Romney, the chances of holding onto the White House by liberals are nearly 100%.

“How can you justify saying such a thing when gas prices and the economy and unemployment and so many other important things about this country are in such unacceptable shape?” a reasonable person might say.

The un-played card in this whole thing will be played if Romney challenges Obama. And it may not always appear to be played by Democrats. Some of the most conservative people in this country will be encouraged to worry about a Romney Presidency. When computers are booted up after the primary and google has a rush of people wanting to know more details on Mitt Romney’s Mormonism they will be greeted by things like the following list of ten most weird things about Romney’s beliefs:

10) The earth was created near Kolob over a period of 6000 years (six "days" in Kolob time), and then flung to its present solar system after the fall of Adam
9) There are many gods (also see #4)
8) Joseph Smith taught there is a Heavenly Mother.
7) Jesus, all angels, Lucifer, all demons, and all human beings are originally spirit brothers and sisters.
6) Defining marriage as between a man and a woman… or even between one man and one woman... does not preclude an individual man from having a 'marriage' with more than one woman (e.g. Russell Nelson, an LDS Apostle, is currently sealed to two women).
5) Heavenly Father had physical sex with Mary to sire Jesus' human body.
4) Heavenly Father had a Father, who had a Father, who had a Father.....
3) The Bible is corrupt...but the exact corrupt parts have never been identified...even though the LDS prophets have had a direct line to God since 1830.
2) Heavenly Father changes his mind when enough human pressure is exerted (e.g. blacks getting priesthood, earthly polygamy ending, etc)
1) Polygamy is still practiced and will continue to be in the hereafter. Mormon men may be sealed to more than one wife today....only one at a time. [Edited for accuracy]

Liberals will have a field day discussing religion, but the clincher for them will be that evangelicals who have never voted for anyone but a Republican for President, will express so many doubts that people who have waited for nearly four year to oust Obama will not show up on Election Day.

The intolerance that liberals are guilty of and that they project so consistently on Republicans will finally seem to manifest. Christian Republicans will be turned off by perversions Mormons promote concerning the Bible and all of the crazy made up myths from Joseph Smith forward. They won’t vote for Obama and they may even appear in polls to be holding their collective noses with the intention of backing Romney. But enough of the rabid conservative his voter will be sedated by revelations about Mormonism to give Obama second term.

Obama’s “Christianity” a la Reverend Wright will end up trumping a Mormon Romney when the card is played. And grass roots Republicans will once again regret that the wheelers and dealers in the party pushed a less conservative candidate forward to run in the general election. They will spend four years watching the country under perform and thinking about the greatness we could have achieved had a Santorum/Rubio administration been the source of leadership from 2013 forward for 16 years.

Concerned Republican Voter

Local Radio Station's Defense of Admitted Crimes

Bill Buchanan's KSHN radio Gram: (aka slander sheet)

"Groce: Prior to the federal government’s request to have all charges against Lee Groce dropped in October last year, the former Liberty County Commissioner signed what is called a Pretrial Diversion document. The document says, in reference to Lee Groce “you also unconditionally accept responsibility for knowingly and willfully making false material statements to FBI agents”. Sources close to Lee Groce said he agreed to the pretrial diversion admitting he made the statement to investigators but not that he knew those statements to be false. October 27th, 2011 Federal Judge Ron Clark signed the order for dismissal on all charges against Lee Groce."

It appears Bill Buchanan is casting a net over Liberty County to defend prior commissioner Lee Groce from his agreed admitted guilt. If Lee Groce did not agree with the FBI's charges, why did he agree to the FBI's and US Attorney's evidence and admissions of guilt by his signature/acknowledgment?

This is further direct evidence of Bill Buchanan's use of his radio station to protect his admittedly guilty friends and attack his political enemies and news competition.

Shame on you Bill Buchanan!

GROCE INJUSTICE

If recent media reports are correct and former County Commissioner Lee Groce signed a document attesting to the fact he “Did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation” in the infamous Liberty County FEMA fraud case, then why would anyone consider allowing taxpayers money to pay Groce’s legal bills?

The government may have agreed to drop all other charges against Groce and they may have given him a deferred sentence of 12 months and ordered to perform 40 hours of community service. But are we missing something here and there is some common sense reason that Groce’s plea-bargain should lead to more disrespect of the taxpayers of this county by trying to force Liberty County to pay a bill for $85,000 for the legal fees he incurred while fighting the indictments against him.
Media reports describing advice from the Attorney General’s Office and Robert L. Hobbs, the attorney in charge of the U.S. Attorneys Office in Beaumont to our County Attorney, aside … Is there no one who is going to protect the taxpayers of this county after a crime has been committed against them?

Considering the statement coming back from that request for advice from the US Attorney’s office and Liberty County Attorney Wes Hinch- “ Groce acknowledges his culpability on multiple points ... though the pending indictment will be dismissed, the situation could hardly be characterized as exoneration.”

Perhaps it is time for Liberty County’s District Attorney’s office to do what many felt they should have done in the beginning. Continued concerns about the selective prosecution by the attorneys in the D.A.’s office will not be tempered - as Groce sends taxpayers a bill and reminds us that the good ole boy system may be close to being gone, but nowhere near forgotten.

If taxpayers pay this bill, is it the result of a D.A.’s office that sits on its hands when a case is presented against political allies while they freely accept cases that are of no interests to the people of the county when it is a political enemy? If that happens, it is a gross injustice to the taxpayers of this county and it shouldn’t be tolerated. Why would any self-respecting lawyer work in a department with such practices going on, then turn around and run for public office?

IF ROMNEY GETS THE NOMINATION

Let’s put preferences aside and talk about the scenario most likely to occur as we move forward in the contest for who will serve as the nation’s President for four years beginning in January 2013.

Every Republican I know says they will support whoever wins the Republican primary against Barack Obama. They almost all say the same thing – we can not afford four more years of Obama. But if Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum can’t gather enough votes to stop Romney, the chances of holding onto the White House by liberals is nearly 100%.

“How can you justify saying such a thing when gas prices and the economy and unemployment and so many other important things about this country are in such unacceptable shape?” a reasonable person might say.

The unplayed card in this whole thing will be played if Romney challenges Obama. And it may not always appear to be played by Democrats. Some of the most conservative people in this country will be encouraged to worry about a Romney Presidency. When computers are booted up after the primary and google has a rush of people wanting to know more details on Mitt Romney’s Mormonism they will be greeted by things like the following list of ten most weird things about Romney’s beliefs:

10) The earth was created near Kolob over a period of 6000 years (six "days" in Kolob time), and then flung to its present solar system after the fall of Adam
9) There are many gods (also see #4)
8) Joseph Smith taught there is a Heavenly Mother.
7) Jesus, all angels, Lucifer, all demons, and all human beings are originally spirit brothers and sisters.
6) Defining marriage as between a man and a woman..or even between one man and one woman...does not preclude an individual man from having a 'marriage' with more than one woman (e.g. Russell Nelson, an LDS Apostle, is currently sealed to two women).
5) Heavenly Father had physical sex with Mary to sire Jesus' human body.
4) Heavenly Father had a Father, who had a Father, who had a Father.....
3) The Bible is corrupt...but the exact corrupt parts have never been identified...even though the LDS prophets have had a direct line to God since 1830.
2) Heavenly Father changes his mind when enough human pressure is exerted (e.g. blacks getting priesthood, earthly polygamy ending, etc)
1) Polygamy is still practiced and will continue to be in the hereafter. Mormon men may be sealed to more than one wife today....only one at a time. [edited for accuracy]

Liberals will have a field day discussing religion, but the clencher for them will be that evangelicals who have never voted for anyone but a Republican for President, will express so many doubts that people who have waited for nearly four year to oust Obama will not show up on election day.

The intolerance that liberals are guilty of and that they project so consistently on Republicans will finally seem to manifest. Christian Republicans will be turned off by perversions Mormons promote concerning the Bible and all of the crazy made up myths from Joseph Smith forward. They won’t vote for Obama and they may even appear in polls to be holding their collective noses with the intention of backing Romney. But enough of the rabid conservative his voter will be sedated by revelations about Mormonism to give Obama second term.

Obama’s “Christianity” a la Reverend Wright will end up trumping a Mormon Romney when the card is played. And grass roots Republicans will once again regret that the wheelers and dealers in the party pushed a less conservative candidate forward to run in the general election. They will spend four years watching the country under perform and thinking about the greatness we could have achieved had a Santorum/Rubio administration been the source of leadership from 2013 forward for 16 years.

IT AIN’T OVER YET, FEMA FRAUD CASE BACK IN THE NEWS

Continuing to differentiate herself from the other traditional longtime media, Editor Vanessa Brashier should be complimented for covering the continued saga and downfall of longtime Democrat and former County Judge Phil Fitzgerald. It is not her job to prosecute him or to defend him (like the local radio station seems to think is there job), but the paper is fulfilling the role traditional media around here has been found lacking in heretofore.

To read her paper’s story on the most recent ruling in federal court please go to:
http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/cleveland/news/former-liberty-county-judge-will-go-to-trial-for-fema/article_52ebab06-8ff3-5753-9468-5d24a066bf25.html

Liberty Dispatch is left wondering if stories about Fitzgerald and former Commissioner Lee Groce demanding that all of their attorneys’ fees be paid by the taxpayers of Liberty County had an influence on the feds handling of the most recent negotiations with the Fitzgerald. Whether it did or not, I hope some of our public officials are standing guard against further injury to the taxpayers in this case.