I have been a Republican since I was 18 years old except for a brief period between 2002 and 2006 when I was a member of the Libertarian Party.  When I came back to the GOP I was treated like a traitor and still get snide comments even today from members of the GOP.  There are plenty of former Democrats that have joined our party and some have even been elected to office and hold positions in party leadership.  This letter isn’t about that but I did feel the need to just get it off my chest while I was writing.

The GOP won both houses in NC in 2010 and it was a sweet victory.  I was excited about what all could be done and was looking forward to some much needed change in NC.  It didn’t take me long to realize that what we had was just more of the same.  The economy is still in shambles and our Legislators found it more important to discuss same sex marriage and not letting teachers pay their union dues via payroll deduction.  Personally I care more about the economy and my tax rate than I do if two men get married and teachers join a union.  My family comes first and I must provide for them.  By letting two people of the same sex enter into a contractual agreement does not harm my family in any way but the extra $120 that I am going to be forking over in new gas taxes will.  I am also ashamed and disappointed in the way the new regime handled the redistricting. For as long as I can remember the GOP always wanted a non-partisan or bi-partisan committee to work on redistricting.  As soon as they had control all of a sudden that was a “bad idea”.  They campaigned on drawing fair and impartial districts but from the look of it they just did what the Democrats have been doing for the last 100 years.  This year everyone of them is up for re-election and will be asking us to send them back to Raleigh.  As of right now I don’t have a reason to send them back to Raleigh and unless they do something in the up coming session to fix the broken economy I will be casting a vote for every Libertarian candidate I can.

First post with it…

bradandbritt:

It’s a stone cold miracle: Barry Manilow (hearts) Ron Paul

So the NC legislature is in special session spending $50K per day in these economic  times to put out some great legislation.  They are discussing Senate Bill 514 originally known as “Nutrient Management Plan Only For NSW.”

Here is the original text of the bill:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT to provide that a nutrient management plan shall not be developed, adopted, or implemented for surface waters of the state unless those waters have first been classified as nutrient sensitive waters.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1.  G.S. 143‑215.1 is amended by adding a new subsection to read:

“(c7)     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a nutrient management plan shall not be developed, adopted, or implemented for surface waters of the State unless those waters have first been classified as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW) under rules adopted by the Commission.”

SECTION 2.  S.L. 2005‑190 is amended by adding a new section to read:

“SECTION 4A.  This act shall not be construed to authorize the development or implementation of a nutrient management plan for surface waters of the State unless those waters have first been classified as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW) under rules adopted by the Commission.”

SECTION 3.  This act is effective when it becomes law and applies to nutrient management plans that have not been approved by the Commission prior to that date.

Not a very large or important item of legislation.  But apparently someone decided it would be better to completely rewrite the bill and even change the name to “Defense of Marriage” it may as well have been titled “Restricting Freedoms”.  

Here is the text of the new bill:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO PROVIDE that Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1.  Article 14 of the North Carolina Constitution is amended by adding the following new section:

“Sec. 6.  Marriage.

Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.  This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.”

SECTION 2.  The amendment set out in Section 1 of this act shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the State at a statewide election to be held on the date of the first primary in 2012, which election shall be conducted under the laws then governing elections in the State. Ballots, voting systems, or both may be used in accordance with Chapter 163 of the General Statutes. The question to be used in the voting systems and ballots shall be:

”[ ] FOR           [ ] AGAINST

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.”

SECTION 3.  If a majority of votes cast on the question are in favor of the amendment set out in Section 1 of this act, the State Board of Elections shall certify the amendment to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State shall enroll the amendment so certified among the permanent records of that office.

SECTION 4.  The amendment set out in Section 1 of this act is effective upon certification.

SECTION 5.  This act is effective when it becomes law.

Makes ya go hummm….  Why is this so important?  It’s stuff like this that will cost the GOP seats in Raleigh just two short years after they got control.  Why spend time on this when there are so many other things that truly need fixing?  What a waste and I am disgusted and fed up with this type of BS.

got to Tumbl more.

Ron Paul is correct that Freedom is taking responsibility for yourself and accepting the consequences that come with it.

shortformblog:

producermatthew:

Several members of the audience shouted their approval when CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul if he’d rather let a 30-year-old man in a coma die due to lack of health care coverage over mandating health insurance for American citizens.

“Congressman, are you saying society should just let him die?” Blitzer asked.

Though several members of the audience shouted “Yeah!” Paul responded “No.”

“I practiced medicine for several years,” Paul said. “The churches took care of them. We never turned anyone away.” [CNN]

We incorrectly stated earlier that Ron Paul reacted with an “awkward silence.” This isn’t correct; as you can see in this video, he clearly said “no” before the audience started yelling. Our apologies. Thanks to ProducerMatthew for being fantastic and getting this video up ten minutes after the debate.

1. I wanted to try blogging again.

2. I am now.

I love you too.

I work part time as a mechanic at a small local amusement park. It is a decent and fun part time job on most days and I enjoy fixing things as a general rule.  We have a go kart track and that is where I spend 90% of my time welding the metal bands on the track and keeping the karts running.  When I don’t have anything “down” I usually observe the karts and see if there are any problems or if there is one that is too slow or too fast.  Today I was watching and a lady had lost her cell phone on the track while the track was open.  She stopped and proceeded to unhook her seat-belt and was beginning to get out of her kart.  I told her to remain seated and that someone was retrieving her cell phone.  After she got it back I asked her how much she had paid for that phone.  She replied that it was about $125.  I then asked her if she knew the cost to fix her leg if someone had hit her while she was walking across the track.  Her reply was “Medicaid will take care of it”.  I was floored at first but then realized that this has become the mentality of many Americans today.  They don’t think about the fact that there are people that work and pay taxes to cover these things.  This lady did not care if she got hurt because she knows that the government will take care of her.  I don’t qualify for Medicaid and even if I did I am not sure that I would take advantage of it.  This is a major problem and unfortunately I don’t have a solution to the problem.  Well, actually I do have a solution to the problem.  It’s called eliminating the programs that cause this mentality.  Let’s cut off the government teet that people like to suck on and maybe they will get of their buts and go to work and take care of themselves for a change.  I know that some of my big government loving friends will reply to this with “what about people that NEED the programs”.  I have an answer for that as well.  Just because something is noble and good does not mean it is something the government should be involved in.  It is still theft to take from one man against his will and give it to someone else regardless of the reason.  Theft is wrong on all accounts.  Thanks for reading and I welcome all comments.

If you have time to read the full article http://www.lastagetimes.com/2009/08/a-1945-code-of-ethics-for-theatre-workers-surfaces/ 

If not then just read these simple rules.

1. I shall never miss a performance.
2. I shall play every performance with energy, enthusiasm and to the best of my ability regardless of size of audience, personal illness, bad weather, accident, or even death in my family.
3. I shall forego all social activities which interfere with rehearsals or any other scheduled work at the theatre, and I shall always be on time.
4. I shall never make a curtain late by my failure to be ready on time.
5. I shall never miss an entrance.
6. I shall never leave the theatre building or the stage area until I have completed my performance, unless I am specifically excused by the stage manager; curtain calls are a part of the show.
7. I shall not let the comments of friends, relatives or critics change any phase of my work without proper consultation; I shall not change lines, business, lights, properties, settings or costumes or any phase of the production without consultation with and permission of my director or producer or their agents, and I shall inform all people concerned.
8. I shall forego the gratification of my ego for the demands of the play.
9. I shall remember my business is to create illusion; therefore, I shall not break the illusion by appearing in costume and makeup off-stage or outside the theatre.
10. I shall accept my director’s and producer’s advice and counsel in the spirit in which it is given, for they can see the production as a whole and my work from the front.
11. I shall never “put on an act” while viewing other artists’ work as a member of an audience, nor shall I make caustic criticism from jealousy or for the sake of being smart.
12. I shall respect the play and the playwright and, remembering that “a work of art is not a work of art until it is finished,” I shall not condemn a play while it is in rehearsal.
13. I shall not spread rumor or gossip which is malicious and tends to reflect discredit on my show, the theatre, or any personnel connected with them-either to people inside or outside the group.
14. Since I respect the theatre in which I work, I shall do my best to keep it looking clean, orderly and attractive regardless of whether I am specifically assigned to such work or not.
15. I shall handle stage properties and costumes with care for I know they are part of the tools of my trade and are a vital part of the physical production.
16. I shall follow rules of courtesy, deportment and common decency applicable in all walks of life (and especially in a business in close contact with the public) when I am in the theatre, and I shall observe the rules and regulations of any specific theatre where I work.
17. I shall never lose my enthusiasm for theatre because of disappointments.

I have been having heated debates on freedom in an online message board.  The debates have covered economic and personal freedom between Democrats and Republicans.  I have figured out that both sides want to restrict freedom in one way or another.  This post will give an insight on what the debates have been about and how I have responded.

The proposition that CEO’s earn more than their “fair share” represents a view that people should not be allowed to determine the conditions of their own personal relationships. Although the commenter aimed his remarks at prohibiting arrangements between people relative to there employment, it is, in principle no different than prohibiting arrangements between people in regard to their sexual relationships.

Either the people in a relationship have the authority to establish the conditions of their relationship (liberty) or someone outside the relationship has the authority those conditions (mastery).  In principle, all relationships between contracting, consenting people are personal, irrespective of the nature of those arrangements.  It is inconsistent to abhor intrusion into relationships taking place in the bedroom, while embracing intrusion into relationships taking place in the boardroom, or vice versa.

While the two major parties advocate intrusion into the personal affairs of individuals, the camps differ in their selection of where intrusion is proper and where it is not.  The two major parties are adept at morally justifying their selection of intrusions while condemning those selected by their opponents. Laws that intrude into the personal affairs and contractual arrangements between people include those that regulate the conditions of marriage (same-sex, multiple partners, interracial0, conditions of employment (wages, hours, benefits), and conditions of commerce (prices, quality, products, services).

One may find the personal relationship between two people to be repulsive or strange and view certain employment arrangements to be deplorable.  One my be appalled at the arrangements people make to exchange goods or services. However, beyond our displeasure when considering the personal affairs of others, we should ask: To whom do these affairs belong, them or me? Once we forcibly intrude into the way others choose to live their lives, we open our doors to intrusion from those who don’t particularly approve of the way we choose to live ours.  Therefore, it behooves us to stay out of personal affairs of others, lest we unintentionally invite them to intrude into our own personal affairs.

Ref: “Inclined to Liberty” Louis Carbini

The events yesterday that led to the senseless death of 6 people and the serious wounding of a sitting United States Congresswoman have really opened up some debate.  Less than 24hrs after the shooting people are already in heated discussion from gun control to Sarah Palin.  I can tell you that Sarah Palin had nothing to do with the shooter going crazy and more gun control laws would not have prevented it either.  We must keep in mind that there are responsible free and sovereign individuals that own guns and are members of the Tea Party and other groups that would never do such a thing nor promote such a thing.  While addressing this tragedy I hope the leaders keep freedom in mind and refrain from any knee jerk actions that will in the long run destroy freedom.  These are my thoughts and opinions and I welcome yours as well.

We can not afford to have Robin Hayes as Chairman of the GOP.

There has been some heated debate on the Dimitri945 Facebook page about the AZ Immigration bill.  There seems to be a consensus that this is a good idea.  Well, I want to explain why it is a bad idea and I won’t use the so called “liberal” talking points to do so I will use a Conservative argument.  Please read the entire article before you comment.

Conservatives and Tea Party folks speak of freedom so that is the avenue I am going to take with showing just haw bad it really is.  A natural person  has unalienable rights.  Just as The Declaration of Independence states “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  So by breaking down this portion of Thomas Jefferson’s words we come to understand what freedom really is. 

We.  Meaning the body of people assembled in the colonies at the time of the writing. 

hold these truths.  The facts that are going to be presented in the following message.

to be self-evident.  Obvious, well know, Requiring no proof or explanation.

that all men. There has been some debate as to what Jefferson was speaking of but he truly was speaking about all men.  2/3 of the original text of the Declaration was removed after debate and a great portion of that dealt with the King being the main proponent of slavery.  So all men means everyone.  Not just white men or property owners but everyone.

are created equal. There is none higher than anyone else.

that they are endowed by their Creator.  Meaning they are given by God.

certain unalienable rights.  Rights that can not be taken away by man.

that among these are life. You have a right to live.

liberty.  Ultimate freedom

and the pursuit of happiness. To live your free life as you see fit as long as you are happy.

Now taking this and transferring it to modern day understanding this is the conservative view point.  A free and sovereign individual is not just someone born in the United States, every person born in the world is a free and sovereign individual and they also have rights that have been endowed by their creator.  People have the right to travel and live where they choose provided they do not harm anyone else.  If a person wants to live in the United States then why should we have laws to prevent that?  We should welcome anyone who wants to come provided they do not harm anyone else while they are here.  If they want to come and sit under a tree and chew on straw they have that right provided they don’t ask me or anyone else to fund their adventure.  The conservative answer should be to eliminate government programs and shut off the golden *** that not only immigrants but American Citizens are sucking on.  Don’t pass laws to restrict freedom pass laws to promote freedom and restrict taxpayer handouts.   I could write more but I think this pretty much sums it up in a nut shell.  Feel free to ask me to go into further details if you don’t understand something.

Same ole same ole will be the result of 2011.  2010 was an OK year for me for the most part. Other than my mother getting cancer it was pretty much the same as all the other years.  I am thinking I will just treat tomorrow like another day and tonight not as a reason to drink but just another night I drink…