Warriors for Warriors Marathon

Operation Enduring Freedom.

Our soldiers are fighting for our freedom. They have seen their brothers fallen on the battlefield, they have heard their cries of pain, terror, and loss over the radio, and they have felt levels of pain and emotion we may never quite understand or experience. We owe them our support.

Below are two websites where you can show your support for our brave men and women fighting for our freedoms in Afghanistan. Remember the reason they are deployed to Afghanistan in the first place: September 11. Remember where you were, and at what moment your heart stopped for a second, or perhaps plummeted to your very core when you embraced the reality of the most vicious attacks on American soil and the perished lives of over 3,000 innocent people of every race, age, religion, and ethnicity. Remember the anger, fury, and fear that radiated across our nation. Remember, too, how quickly our flag presented itself everywhere - in homes, stores, on rooftops, cars, and buildings - all for the purpose of coming together as a nation.

This initiative emerged with warriors raising funds for fellow warriors, initially beginning on board the USS Roosevelt, which is now on its return home from Afghanistan after 6 long, hard months abroad. Servicemen supporting their own is a wonderful tradition where common ground is shared, respected, and understood, but support should not stop there. We can not and should not isolate the citizens in showing support for OUR servicemen as well, including our strongest ally, Great Britain.

Below is an email written by one of our "own," seeking support for the cause. Lt. Mhley has kept me abreast of his efforts along the way, and this email describes his initiative in a personal, authentic manner.

Family and friends, During the 5 months that our carrier and air wing have been supporting our troops in Afghanistan, we've been through the most difficult of situations with mainly British and American soldiers. We've helped them when under attack from Taliban, we've heard the cries of their wounded over the radio, we've mourned when an attack killed one of their brothers. During our time on station, 105 Coalition lives were lost, including 51 American and 29 British. As a tribute to the fallen, a few of the aviators out here are hosting a fundraising relay-marathon on the carrier's flight deck this Saturday to raise a worthy donation for the US Wounded Warrior Project and British Help for Heroes organization. We intend to present both donations in person on our way home. Many of you ask what you can do to help me endure these 7 months. Well, I'd rather you donate a few dollars to this event than send another box of chubby Oreos. We've raised about $2500 from the 200+ runners signed up so far. Many more to go in coming days. If anyone you know back home wants to donate, please reply and I will happily pass my bank routing number / checking account number to allow a donation via funds transfer. Below is the email we sent to our squadron about the effort, as well an info sheet. Thanks so much for your consideration. Looking forward to being back home next month! Very Respectfully, LCDR Mark Mhley VFA-213 / USS Roosevelt

Please scroll down below to donate just a few dollars to the cause. There are two different websites available. Each fund, one for the British forces, the other for US forces, goes towards recovery for injured soldiers, as well as those who have fallen at the arms of their fellow brothers. The money provides support for individuals and their families in literally every way necessary. Show your patriotism, show your support. Donate a few dollars to those risking their lives for our country.

Thank you.

US Wounded Warrior Project

UK Help for Heroes

Congressmen Murtha & Morgan Confronted with Real American

WV House Member Craig Blair on Drug Testing

http://www.notwithmytaxdollars.com/

One man, one vote, not in West Virginia

Kanawha County is the most populous county in the state with 200,073 persons as recorded by the 2000 census, but has an unfair advantage in state government. Not because of its population, but because of multi-delegate districts where each citizen gets to vote for two state Senators and in some cases seven house members, whereas most of the state gets to vote for only one senator and one delegate each election cycle. The citizens of Kanawha County, and some other counties to a lesser extent, have more representation in the legislature than most.

Most citizens of the state are only represented by two state Senators and one House member, if you live in Charleston you are represented by four state senators and seven house members. This puts the citizens in most other parts of the state at a disadvantage when requesting help from their state Senators and Representatives, when compared those living in Multi-delegate districts.

Why is this bad? Consider something simple. You live in a single delegate district like most of us and you want a pot hole fixed on the state highway near your home. You can call on two senators and one delegate to push the Department of Highways to make the repair. Now if you live the Kanawha County’s 30^th Delegate district, then you have a distinct advantage to get your pot hole fixed. You can call on four senators and seven delegates to motivate the DOH to make the needed repairs. The odds are 11 to 3 in favor of the Kanawha voter getting preferential treatment in state legislature under the current system, and that is just not fair.

Each voter from Kanawha County is represented by 12% of the West Virginia Senate, yet each voter in the rest of the state is only represented by 6%. That is unfair representation. The House of Delegates is just as bad while in most of the state each voter is represented by 1% of the House, in Kanawha’s 30^th District each voter is represented by 7% of the House, in Raleigh’s 27^th District each voter is represented by 5% of the House, Monongalia’s 44^th, Logan/Lincoln’s 19^th, and Harrison’s 41^st have 4%. There are a few three and two delegate districts, but the majorities are single delegate districts.

Consider that in one of the growth areas of the state Berkeley County each voter is only represented by one delegate, 1% or the House, and two Senators, 6% of the Senate. This gives each voter in Berkeley County a clear disadvantage in representation Charleston when compared to Kanawha County or some of the others with multi-delegate districts. Consider that this arrangement should be unconstitutional under West Virginia’s constitution which states; “Article II, 2-4. Equal representation; Every citizen shall be entitled to equal representation in the government, and, in all apportionments of representation, equality of numbers of those entitled thereto, shall as far as practicable, be preserved.”

West Virginian’s current system also appears to violate the 14^th Amendment to the US Constitution. Section 1 of the amendment states; “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The US Supreme Court has already interpreted the “Equal Protection Clause” to extend to voting districts. In the 1963 case Grey v. Sanders the court held, 8 to 1, that State elections must adhere to the one person, one vote principle. Justice William Douglas wrote the majority opinion stated, "The concept of political equality...can mean only one thing—one person, one vote".

As it stands right now one person, one vote only applies to some West Virginian’s while others get more than one vote. If you live in Martinsburg you get to vote for one Delegate to represent you and one Senator, if you live in Charleston you get to vote for seven Delegates and two Senators to represent you. It is time that we change West Virginia’s legislative districts. Where each voter is represented by only one delegate and two senators, so that the districts are fair and come in line with both the state and US Constitutions.

Junk Science

In doing research recently, I came across a series of letters written to West Virginia Governor William Glasscock. They came from Major Leonard Darwin, famous scientist and son of evolution pioneer Charles. These letters invited Governor Glasscock to send a representative from West Virginia to the First International Eugenics Conference.

This conference sought to study the science behind racial degradation and propose legislative solutions to the problem that many of them believed threatened mankind. Was this a group of nutcases? No. The list of vice presidents of the society included Winston Churchill (soon to be head of the Royal Navy), Gifford Pinchot (chief conservation advisor for President Theodore Roosevelt), and many other esteemed names from both sides of the Atlantic.

What kind of legislative solutions could come of such a meeting? Eventually eugenics resulted in programs that sterilized the mentally challenged and even the chronically poor. The idea was that their inferior genes retarded the growth of mankind. Such ideals are not compatible with a democratic society because they undermine the concept that every one is free and equal under the law.

Of course we know that eugenics is junk science, a flawed field studied by well-meaning and intelligent people who observed natural phenomena and came to a horribly wrong conclusion. National Socialist Germany followed these ideas to their logical end.

In our time, junk science again rears its ugly head. This time the issue is what used to be called global warming. Now, after a bitterly cold winter, it has transformed to "climate change." Well-meaning, and some not so well-meaning, people have concluded that any shift in the earth's climate is A) artificial, and B) disastrous. Never mind that drastic shifts have occurred since the fall of Rome making the earth both much warmer and much colder than today. Surprisingly A) man survived and B) George W. Bush did not cause any of it.

Junk science threatens to destroy our prosperity and take away economic freedoms. If the United States follows the British model, electricity and other costs are expected to eventually skyrocket over 55%, leading to the loss of more manufacturing. Luckily, Senator Byrd stood up recently against legislation based upon unproven science that would destroy West Virginia's coal industry. How much damage will anti-capitalist left wingers do to individuals, business, and our country if junk science, just as in the days of eugenics, is allowed to prevail?

Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government

The Road to Serfdom (a Potomac Highlands Conservative Book List Selection)

As World War II wound down, socialists throughout Europe looked to use the crisis to create a new economic order. Britain's Labour party combined with socialists around the continent planned to implement large scale changes in health care, employment rights, and power granted to labor unions.

Friedrich A. Hayek wrote The Road to Serfdom as a warning to the democratic world that embracing socialist economics means sending one's country down a path of diminishing freedoms. His theme is that socialists may be people of goodwill, but their policies lay the foundation of totalitarianism. Nazism and fascism are not the opposite of socialism, but the next logical step. The mania for planning embraced by leftists on every level will "unwittingly produce the very opposite of what we have been striving for."

When the economy is planned, it removes freedom from the hands of individuals and concentrates it into the hands of government officials. Whereas power was previously diffused among different and opposing elements in society, thus keeping a balance of interests, it now makes the government the overriding interest. Concentrated power threatens most basically the right to private property, identified by our Founding Fathers and their inspirations as the most basic guarantee of freedom.

Planning reduces and eventually eliminates from the system the element of competition. Competition ensures that the strongest and most efficient survive. Competition encourages advances in technology and methods, creating savings that benefit society. Competition is the only method that does not require coercive or arbitrary intervention of authority. It merely needs a referee to call fouls.

Socialist planning my begin in the legislature in communities, states, and countries that fall for the sales pitch of leftism. However, by its very nature, democratically elected assemblies cannot plan. Elected officials reflect their constituencies. Therefore the next step lies in the creation of planning boards that have no accountability to the people. They gain more and more power over time and never answer to voters. This lack of accountability means that they may defy the people's interest with impunity.

In a free market capitalist system, the government has very little direct interest or stake in the economy and can therefore act impartially. When planning and intervention take over, the government becomes an actor with overwhelming coercive power. Since the government must defend its interest, all in the name of society, it attacks free market institutions. This subverts one of our most cherished rights, rule of law, in favor of arbitrary government action.

Here is the problem. Plans always fail. You cannot succeed with a planned economy. Either you must revert to free markets, or face the possibility of disaster. When that disaster comes, according to Hayek, the people demand a strongman to lead them out of the mess.

To me, Obama's policies have not been coherent enough to successfully advance socialism. What we have seen is the reintroduction of mercantilism. This was the British economic system of intervention, preferences, and prejudices that led freedom loving Americans to rebel. This sort of response would also bring forth the strong man Hayek described.

Either way, the gain of government power directly causes a loss of individual freedom. How far this goes is up to the American voter. A Republican Congress is necessary to roll back the bizarre and half witted measures advanced by the Obama Administration.

It Can Happen Here As Long As Nancy Pelosi Runs the Show

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/11/italian-bloggers-cal.html

At the risk of giving Congressional lefties any ideas, it is necessary to point out the attempt by the Italian government to license bloggers.

Italy's Parliament is seeking to get control of the country's network of free speakers on the Internet. Apparently the persistence of organized crime along with economic problems does not occupy enough time.

Europeans have a different view of rights than British and Americans, traditionally. Britain and the United States believe that rights come from God or nature and should be curtailed as little as possible. Other Europeans believe that rights are things that the government allows the people to do. A major difference of perspective separates these two conceptions of liberty.

Italy is currently controlled by a government labeled "right." It must be noted that in Italy, free market advocates are lumped in with those who pine for a watered down Mussolini. The fact that Mussolini resembles more the Communists than the capitalists apparently makes little difference.

The move is a mistake. Bloggers only stand to gain attention when their freedoms get threatened. Also, how does one patrol the internet?

Finally, it can happen here. Look at the aborted move to contain conservative talk radio. Look at the personal attacks on Rush Limbaugh. Left wing Democrats differ from plain old liberals in that their regard for the law and liberties is minimal. They want to banish conservative opinions from the air and prosecute President Bush. Conservatives must remain vigilant and not give in when the threat materializes.

I am now the liberals target

Many of you watched my appearance in a piece on "Hannity's America" on Fox News last Thursday night. The response has all been positive, but with any political discussion there are opposing views. That is what great about our country, we have the First Amendment, guaranteeing our freedom to discuss the matter openly.

I am descended directly from a Revolutionary War Solider that served five years under George Washington's command in the Continental Army. After the war he moved his family from New Jersey to the mountains around Keyser in 1782. I'm extremely proud of my heritage, my nation and my state. My ancestor took up arms against the British to form a nation based on freedom, even though he was only a foot solider, he took that same risk as all the patriots. Ben Franklin said it best at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, "We must all hang together, or assuredly we will all hang separately. " While I'm in no immediate danger of being hung for exercising my First Amendment rights, I do risk alienation from some friends and acquaintances that do not share my views. It is important that we have honest discussions of how government works and also just as important that you stick to your convictions.

Saturday on Facebook I posted a story entitled, "Military demands details on soldiers private guns." It is a story about infringement on the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Now I am a gun owner and strongly believe that everyone should own a gun, but I fully understand that there are people that do not agree. That is their right and it is their right to publicly oppose my view.

In follow ups to my Facebook post about the attack on the Second Amendment, one came from Jim Shumaker in which he said, "Gary ive never heaard you say a positive thing about our country or our state." Now Jim has every right to be opposed to the right to bear arms, but he should attack the message not the messenger. I will be happy to defend why I believe that people should have the right to keep and bear arms and he can explain why he disagrees with me. Questioning my love of state and country doesn't offer an opposing opinion, just a personal attack. In West Virginia and most of rural America where the owning of a gun is as much a right of passage as it is a civil right, it would be hard for Jim to offer an opposing argument that many would agree with.

That being said, the personal attack is something that liberals fall back on when they feel they are unable to defend their position. When a person begins to attack the messenger in an argument, then it typically means they have lost the argument. I would invite Jim to point out to me where it is un-American or un-West Virginian to defend the right to bear arms. For that matter to point out where it is un-American or un-West Virginian to disagree with public policy of any kind. In fact the opposite is true. It is very patriotic, if not a duty, to express your disagreement with government. The Founding Fathers wrote into the First Amendment the right "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" to make sure the United States says a government of the people and by the people.

We must hold politicians accountable. We must challenge them on items with which we disagree. We must hold discussions amongst ourselves and educate ourselves on the issues of the day. If we do not follow politics, then politics will follow us. I invite Jim Shumaker to challenge my positions on the issues. He can make a follow up to this post and I will defend my positions as necessary, but leave the personal attacks at home.

Dateline Washington, 1944.

Imagine if we woke up one day and the history books changed.

Instead of "Patton Rolls Twoards Victory in Europe," headlines and newsreels said "Roosevelt to negotiate with Hitler and Japan. The reaction would be "Say what? Were we not on the cusp of winning?"

Yes, we were. When asked what victory would look like, Franklin Roosevelt earlier in the war said in no uncertain terms that America expected "Unconditional surrender." Yes it took longer, but in the end, we got a Germany led by a democracy stronger than anyone expected. As John F. Kennedy put it later, we were willing to pay any price and bear any burden for democracy.

Now it has emerged that Barack Obama wants to talk to the Taliban. The Taliban! They only harbored and encouraged the enemies of our nation who killed thousands of people. Let's give them the Panama Canal while we are at it. Oops, too late!

The only unconditional surrender Barack Obama understands is that of his own country.

When will we wake up and exhale a sigh of relief with Dennis Hastert still running the House of Representatives and John McCain (or Mitt Romney!) serving as president?

One thing is for certain. I don't see Obama winning the soldier vote (not like he had many of them before.) But this time the Democrats may be able to follow their previous plans to virtually disenfranchise the ones serving abroad.

This is a rambling diatribe and not well thought out. That's because I am mad. What is the purpose of fighting hard and winning a war if some pacifistic Communist is going to cut the United States off at the knees?

Obama wants to be the Old Man Daley (Chicago machine boss) of the United States but he needs to remember something. Daley was a Democrat of the Truman era. He would have nuked teh Taliban before talking to them.

Excellent Op Ed in Times-News

Click here: Keep one locked and loaded, just in case