Goffstown Soapbox

Saturday, June 18, 2005

Food for thought 3

Been very busy lately but here is a nice quote to think about.

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles."
Patrick Henry

Saturday, May 21, 2005

They are at it again

Hi, been a little Busy lately, and have had little time to get my thoughts out of my head.

Our wondrous and magnanimous state government is at it again.

They have been busy these last couple of weeks legislating away the rights of the people. The latest bill to get by the senate was a helmet law for bicycles under age sixteen, not motorcylces mind you bicycles. As if the police don't have enough to do already now they will have to write tickets to 15 year olds for not wearing a helmet. Lets get real here!! The parents are not the ones to decide if the child should wear the helmet, it now the states responsibility. I only heard one state senator that spoke out against this law. He said it was just another extension of the nanny state, and he is right. The senators for this bill all claimed it would save the state money in medical bills picked up by the state. I see this as another way for the state to make money, to fund other crazy ideas like this one.

The next item they tried to pass was a state ADA act fashioned after the glorious ADA Act passed during the Clinton Administration. This act goes a little farther though. Any employer with six or more employees must either make accommodations for the handicapped or explain to the state why it would not feasible or prudent to do so. It would have put a lot of people out of business. Look at it this way, have you ever seen an electrician, carpenter, security tech, dry wall hanger, or heating and AC tech. in a wheelchair. If this law had not stalled with a 12 to 12 tie vote in the senate, companies that do this type of work in the state would have to justify not making their business accessible to the handicapped. Thankfully this bill has stopped, but I am sure we will see it again real soon.

Then, we have the new easy pass system. Yahoo!! They are trying to take the token discount from commuters, 50 percent, and lower the discount for easy pass users to 30 percent. Does this make any sense to you? I do not understand this logic. If you do not use easy pass you must now pay the full price of the toll. And the easy pass user get his transponder for 5 bucks and a 30 percent discount. The transponder costs forty dollars, so the state is willing to take a loss of thirty five dollars just to entice users of easy pass. Flawless logic isn't it? The real kicker is there is going to be only one easy pass lane at the the toll booth stations and the rest are cash and exact change. Why would any one use easy pass? Tokens are so much easier you actually have at least six cash lanes to choose, making the traffic move quicker. I can just see the problems, imagine getting stuck in a line trying to get to a cash lane but you have to wait for a line of cars to go through the easy pass lane. I don't really have a problem with easy pass, for people that want to use it, the state should not absorb a loss implementing it. If a person wants to use easy pass, they should pay for the transponder in full. 30 percent discount is fair after the transponder is paid off. And the discount should not apply to out of state easy pass users.

Saturday, May 07, 2005

The Lefts Latest Buzz Word

"Dominionist", "Dominionism": Ominous words aren't
they? You almost expect the bogeyman to jump out of
the dark corner. That is the idea behind these words,
to scare people.

The strange thing about these words is that they do
not exist in Noah Webster's dictionary, or any other
dictionary for that matter. These words were made up
by people that want to demonize someone they disagree

I "googled" the word "dominionist" and got 19000
hits. ninety five percent of those hits were from left
leaning secularists.

These people are secularists and leftists. I looked
these up and they are in Webster's dictionary.
Secularist means: Religious skepticism or
indifference. and Leftist means: Belief in or support
of the tenets of the political left.

"Dominionist' is the latest buzz word for the left
leaning secularist to use against the "religious
right", conservatives, and people that are
constitutionalists in order for them to seem evil or
misguided. It is used to bludgeon and destroy anyone
that does not subscribe to their belief in the
collective. It is used to put down the free thinker.
It is used against anyone that believes in an absolute
right and wrong.

The people that bring us this word "Dominionist", are
the same people that believe we went to war with Iraq
for oil. They believe business and free markets are
evil. They believe in the redistribution of wealth.
They believe that health care should be managed by the
government. They think "it takes a village" to raise
a child. They have feelings on political issues,
instead of thoughts.

I noticed that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia,
a constructionist, and Chief Justice William
Rehnquist, an "old school" conservative, have been
lumped into the dominionist category.

Secularism has permeated our society so much, that
not only should politicians not be morally guided by
their religion or beliefs. Doctors and pharmacists
should also check their religion and morals at the
door when they come to work. The doctor or pharmacist
is a private citizen, they have the same rights as you
or I. They take an oath to do no harm, not give up
their beliefs. A small business, a family owned
Pharmacy or even a independent doctor's office, has
every right to do business how they please and run it
according to their religious beliefs if they wish to
do so. If your doctor or pharmacist does not agree
with you or your beliefs, you can always find one that

Did you know, when you check into a hospital no
matter how serious or minor, you are always asked your
religious faith? So, you can be treated by a doctor of
similar faith if it matters to the person being

Secularists believe that evolution or Darwinism
should be the only thing taught in biology class. The
evolution theory is only a theory and as yet unproven
with empirical scientific evidence. We have yet to see
a new species evolve from an old one. They complain
that we can't include "Intelligent Design" because it
is not a scientific theory. In effect evolution theory
is also a religion which means, at its simplest,
believing in something with no proof. I believe both
should be taught as theories, not as fact.

Most, not all, secularists subscribe to moral
relativism, meaning there is no right or wrong only
shades of gray. No good or evil only victims and

These secularists would have you believe we are only
a step away from becoming a theocracy. When in truth
we are only a step away from becoming a complete
socialist state. Their ideals hold more true to the
ideals of socialism, than democracy.
Democracy is not a correct statement, we are in truth
a constitutional republic with democratically elected

Secularists would also have you believe that our law
is not founded on Judeo-Christian values. Our
constitution was written with this in mind. English
common law is the foundation of our adversarial system
of law. English Common law is firmly founded on these
principles. Common law was brought here during the
colonial period, so it should not be surprising that
it has become entrenched in our law.

Christians, Conservatives, and Libertarians are all
calling for a return to the principles this country
was founded upon. To leave the socialist agenda
behind, and move forward with a true republican form
of government.
For the individual to take responsibility for himself,
not the government. To quit governing with feelings,
and return to reason.

After, writing all this I came up with a little test,
because you might not fit into progressive secular
society, and might be ostracized. I borrowed a little
bit from Jeff Foxworthy, I hope he forgives me:

You might be a Dominionist if:

If you believe in a strict interpretation of the
constitution, you might be a dominionist.

If you believe government should return to its
constitutional foundations, you might be a

If you go to church more than two times a year and
vote, you might be a dominionist.

If you believe in Creationism, you might be a

If you believe taxes should be lower, you might be a

If you believe judges should not use foreign law as
guide for adjudicating cases, you might be a

If you believe government should take less of a roll
in your life, you might be a dominionist.

If you don't have a collectivist mentality, you might
be a dominionist.

If you don't leave your morals at home, you might be
a dominionist.

If you believe in absolutes, such as right and wrong,
you might be a dominionist.

If you own a gun, you might be a dominionist.

So, if you agree with or subscibe to any of these
statements watch out. You might be next to have this
"Domininionist" label thrown at you.

"Redneck" would also have fit, because that is how
religious and conservative people are portrayed by the
left. I know you have heard it: close minded country
bumpkins who are undereducated and don't get modern
progressive life.

Isn't it odd that I used ten different "ism" and
"ist" words, in a political or idealogical context,
and all of them are defined in Webster's dictionary?

I come from a line of thinking that; words mean
things. The politically correct crowd is always trying
to redefine or create words with new meanings.

Sunday, May 01, 2005

Social Security Disinformation

The most recent edition of the Goffstown News
contained a letter titled:
  • Bush's plan for Social
    Security is gambling with the future
  • .

    There is so much disinformation circulating,
    concerning this subject. And this letter is either
    part of that campaign or from someone that is poorly
    informed as to the crisis this nation is facing.

    Let me begin by stating three indisputable
    1)Social Security will be paying out more than it
    brings in 2017.
    2)Social Security will be bankrupt by 2042.
    3)Bush's plan does not affect people 55 or older.
    There is no denying these facts.

    Something must be done about this now or no one that
    has payed into social security will receive anything
    from it.
    That is a bad return on an investment, don't you
    If it is looked at logically social security is not
    secure and won't be unless something is done. People
    also seem to have lost sight of what social security
    is, it is a retirement supplement to defray the costs
    of living with no active source of income. --Read the
    Social Security Act sometime, it is very interesting
    If the "baby boomers" and seniors will quit acting so
    infantile, they will see that by the time their
    children and grandchildren retire, those generations
    will be paying for huge for increases in the Social
    Security tax and cuts in benefits. Are they so selfish
    that they can't see that their children and
    grandchildren will exist just to pay Social Security
    This is a very unfair burden to the younger
    generations. I know I don't want my daughter paying
    50% or more of her income to Social Security.
    What does this quote have to do with Social Security?
    "We've seen wiped-out retirement funds; from Enron and
    Lucent to Healthsouth and WorldCom: Millions of stock/
    retirement dollars evaporated." This has nothing to do
    with Social Security, these are 401k's etc. I believe
    anyone who invested in these companies signed
    something to the effect of: their investment is not
    guaranteed a profit and could lose money. They did not
    decide how your Social Security money is invested.
    These companies or companies like them will not be
    running our personal retirement accounts. These
    companies' executives are being investigated, charged
    and convicted for the crimes they committed.

    President Bush misspoke about the the T bills. T bills
    were an incorrect term. This is what I believe he was
    trying to convey.

    Congress for years now has been taking money from the
    social security trust fund and using it for the
    budget. And they(Congress) have issued worthless
    IOU's, because Congress has no intention of paying the
    money back.

    The private stock market is not a risky gamble. It is
    a gamble, but life is a gamble. Take a look at the
    long term growth of the stock market. It has grown
    consistently and steadily in the last 50 years.
    Yes, there economic downturns but they are short lived
    and sporadic. All in all a good vehicle for long term
    investment. If it is looked at with the short term in
    mind it is quite volatile. But retirement is being
    discussed here and the long term model should always
    be considered, not the short term.

    President Bush's plan for Social Security might not be
    the best plan. It is the only plan I have heard, and I
    have yet to hear one idea from the opposition. Instead
    of bemoaning how wrong Bush's plan is, why not put
    some viable alternatives on the table for discussion.
    And by alternatives I don't mean tax increases.
    All I keep hearing is how we can't change the
    cornerstone of FDR's New Deal.

    Personally, I would like to see the Social Security
    Act, the Welfare Act and any other entitlement act
    repealed. Congress and the President have no
    constitutional authority to enact legislation for the
    express purpose of taking money from one group and
    giving it to another. This power is not enumerated
    once in the Constitution. If all this was cut from the
    budget, deficits would be non-existent.

    Published 05/05/2005 in the Goffstown News
    M Loveless

    Friday, April 29, 2005

    EZ Pass in NH

    I found this article in the Union Leader this morning.

  • Complicating E-ZPass:Make the switch already

  • It goes on about how tokens are an obsolete technology, and how NH is behind the curve for electronic toll collection.
    EZ pass is a great technology. Tokens should not be done away with yet.
    People should realize that there are draw backs to this technology as well. First is there could be a computer glitch at the toll booth and the toll is not subtracted from the account, triggering a ticket for not paying a toll. The next draw back is with the data collected from the EZ Pass. Did you know that that can tell if you were speeding?
    It is a real simple process, when you enter the toll booth it subtracts the toll and stamps it with a time and date, the same thing happens when you leave the toll road. They then compare the two times and can determine how fast you traveled from point A to point B. Cute huh!! So now you can be fined for speeding with out a police officer present. What if the clocks are our of synchronization at the two toll booths? It does happen.
    Do people really want this kind of intrusion into their lives?
    The government will also know exactly where you are or at the least where you go.
    EZ Pass is just another way to tax people through the back door. And I for one would rather the toll collection system stay in the stone age.
    The reason for the delay in implementation is the highway dept. wants to get rid of the discounts for commuters. Which is bad in the long run, more traffic will be diverted to side roads and then they will not be collecting as many tolls and may consider raising them. Not very smart is it? And if the EZ Pass is discounted after a few years they will decide that they are not making enough so the eliminate or reduce the discount.
    All in all there are a lot of problems with the EZ Pass system.

    M Loveless

    Wednesday, April 27, 2005

    Goffstown Budget Insanity

    Hi all, I was just rereading the articles that had passed during the last town meeting. Also was reading a history of past tax increases. And have been completely amazed at the slow incremental increases to the tax rate for this town.

    It is high time the voters of this town stand up to this ever increasing taxation. This town needs to get back to the basics and leave the fluff alone.
    The town is approving budgets well beyond the actual estimates of revenues; -2004: $14,828,949 and 2005:$16,161,550 - That is 2 million dollar increase in just one year.

    But that is not the kicker for this, estimated revenues are only $7,981,900 this year, and last year $7,159,170. If we keep spending like this this town will be broke very soon. Town budgets should not be run on a deficit. Very fuzzy math going on if you ask me. The operating budget should not be higher than the estimated revenues for the year period. It is time to start cutting spending. One easy way to curtail this growth of the budget is for the voters not to approve it in the first place. By not approving the budget spending is frozen at the last year's level; stopping the need for a tax increase. Then it is time for the people to hold the town governments feet to fire to find ways to reduce spending back to where the town is operating within its means.

    On to other waste of tax dollars, we have been spending roughly 1.8 million dollars per year for road improvements. That is also for last year as well. What improvements have been made? Several dead end streets were repaved, when it was not needed at the time. A small section of Shirley Hill Road was repaved. The roads that actually need repair have been neglected over the past two years. I expect better planning and use of these dollars when it costs 1.8 million a year. It is a waste to repair a road that does not need it.

    Another waste is appropriating $15000 for the Goffstown Main Street Program. Towns should not be susidizing non profit organizations. This for the non profit to do by raising money through donations, sales etc. $15000 adds up quick. If townhall wishes to help this non-profit they should consider tax breaks and other things that do not affect the pocket book of the taxpayer. The taxpayer should not be forced to susidize an organization.

    The school budget and spending must also be brought under control. The people cannot support the constant increases from the School district. They could have come up with a better way to implement kindergarten for starters. Especially after having it rammed down our throats by a few people. There are many areas of their budget that could also be reined in to stop the constant raising of taxes. Another way to curtail the costs of schools is to make the school board a nonsalaried position. The board members also need to remember they are not spending their money they are spending our money. There is no need for a capital reserve fund, if they have money left over from their budget it should be redirected back to the taxpayers of this town and taxes adjusted so they do not overcharge again.

    Common sense will go a long way toward making this town affordable and livable. Lack of common sense and respect for the hard working people of this town will lead to sky rocketing taxes, a town going broke, and people moving away from the town.
    M Loveless

    Florida has done something right for once

    I was reading the news this morning and found this article:
  • Florida Governor Signs Deadly Force Law

  • It is amazing a law like this had to be passed by the legislature there, but it is a start. Did you know the we( the citizens of New Hampshire) have always had the right to defend our property and lives from the time we ratified our state constitution? We were so obsessed with the right to defend ourselves we had it written into our constitution, not once but twice. I am very surprised that other states were not concerned with this.

    The idea of having to retreat from someone threatening your life is an absurd notion. People tend to believe we only need the police department to protect its citizenry. When has a police officer been around to actually stop a crime as it is happening? The police are a reactionary force, always arriving after the crime has happened. Then they get around to the work of bringing the criminal to justice. This is fine and they should continue this work, but if a person is surprised what is he to do?

    The gun control nuts are already speaking out against this law. Say it will "create a "Wild West" mentality in public, where residents may shoot first and ask questions later." Why not shoot first and ask questions later? If some breaks into my house they will be met with a hail of gunfire, then I will ask why they broke in. And the answer is simple, they broke in to either do me and my family harm or they were going to steal my stuff( which I work very hard for).

    If you ask me I would opt for the wild west mentality. Crime will be reduced, because the burglar, mugger etc. will not know if he is going to die.

    So hats off to Florida.

    Sunday, April 24, 2005

    More Food for Thought

    Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an in tolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer!

    -- from Thomas Paine's Common Sense

    I was on a website rereading Common Sense. And Thought this would be a fitting quote to post.
    Did you know that the schools really don't spend any time on this old pamphlet? I asked my daughter about it the other day and she did not even know what I was talking about. I guess it is too radical for the nanny state to teach to the moldable minds of today's children.
    I also found out that they do not really teach the Constitution. Ohh, they go over the basics and then pick and choose from the Bill of Rights. I asked my daughter about this and she could only tell me about the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th. After hearing this I decided to have a talk with this teacher. When I confronted her about this her reasoning was the rest were not as important and she had limited time to cover the material. (Needless to say I went off the deep end on this). I explained to her that all ten of the Bill of Rights was all important and all children should learn them. Many brave men fought and died for the rights laid out in the Constitution, and it is a disservice to those brave souls to do anything other than teach it in its entirety.
    I ended up getting nowhere with this teacher. I wrote letters to principal, school board, and any one in a position of authority to no avail. Then I set my daughter down and we read the constitution in its entirety and I explained what every article meant, and I hope it has stuck with her.