Colorado State Senator John Morse has conceded the recall election! This is a victory for Representative Government.
While the media kept saying this recall was about the gun laws he pushed, it was more about the way he went about it. He quashed dissent, refusing to allow pro 2nd Amendment citizens to testify against the laws during Senate debate. He refused testimony from Colorado Sheriffs who opposed the bills. He described phone calls and emails from citizens opposing the bills as "toxic." He chose to represent New York Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama in the Colorado Senate instead of the people of Colorado.
Not only that, but throughout the recall process, he used (or allowed others to use) every trick in the book, from lying robocalls to lawsuits to avoid facing the voters in a recall election. An honest representative of the people would have welcomed a chance to take his case directly to the voters, but not a tyrant like John Morse.
John Morse was derelict in his duty to represent the voters in his own district, and now he has paid the price.
The people of Colorado have spoken and on behalf of the citizens in your senate district, Mr. Morse, YOU'RE FIRED!
Mayor Bloomberg, let this be a lesson to you. Keep your New York nose out of Colorado politics. We don't want your liberal nanny state policies here in the West where we value liberty, self sufficiency and a government that keeps its nose out of our business and its hands off our God-given rights.
A blog about Christianity, the Second Amendment, Liberty, and anything else I happen to find interesting at the time.
Showing posts with label Colorado. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colorado. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Thursday, March 14, 2013
BSA Leadership Standards Letter
Mr. Downing,
I was in attendance at the leadership standards meeting tonight. I think it was obvious from the crowd where our Council constituency stands on the issue, and that any policy change allowing open homosexuals in Scouting would result in a large number of Packs and Troops to be dissolved by their sponsoring organizations. If Councils are already feeling a financial pinch when BSA is only *considering* a policy change, what will happen when half their sponsoring organizations end their relationship with BSA? How many people will have to lose their jobs then? How different will it be if only 5% (one PTO) dissolve their Pack? As you said, either way there will be painful realities to deal with, but which one will be the most devastating? While BSA is non-sectarian, I believe one gentleman pointed out that 70% of sponsoring organizations are religious in nature, and of those, 70% are conservative. I believe that number will be much higher here in the Pikes Peak Council.
I am the Wolf Den Leader for Pack 55, sponsored by the Evangelical Christian Academy (ECA), and represent 7 of the 8 families in my den, who have all come to me individually and as a group saying that if the BSA changes their policies regarding homosexuals, we will have no choice but to leave Scouting. I am glad that ECA's superintendent was there tonight to explain that they are officially waiting to see what policy changes come, but I think he was also clear that a move in the wrong direction would make it very hard for ECA to continue to sponsor the Pack. I was very serious when I told him, publicly, that there are viable alternatives to the BSA if the BSA abandons its core principles. (I don't care if there are 3.2 million Girl Scouts being indoctrinated by Planned Parenthood and the liberal Media Matters news organization, my daughter is one of 16,000 American Heritage Girls learning to be a God-honoring, patriotic young woman.)
As was stated tonight, Scouting begins and ends with God. Scouting's core principles are why we joined, and why I want to see my sons, a 7 year old Wolf and a 3 year old Tiger (don't try to tell him he has to wait until first grade!), go on to earn their Eagles. I am in Scouting to raise my boys to be God-fearing, patriotic, honest, courageous, upstanding men, but if Scouting abandons the core of those principles and the Source of all that is righteous, holy, and good, how can we stay? If BSA gives in, it will eventually go the way of the rest of the world. Instead of being a light in a dark place, raising up the next generation of leaders, the BSA will be just another service organization. All of the wonderful, proven benefits of Scouting will slowly but surely erode and eventually fade away.
From a purely practical standpoint, I was glad the Doctor who spoke near the end brought up the statistic that just 3% of the population produces 30-40% of pedophiles. Homosexuals have significantly higher rates of domestic violence (gay on gay), depression, suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, venereal diseases, premature death, and the list goes on. Children raised by homosexual parents have significantly higher rates of depression, suicide, violence and earlier sexual experimentation than children raised by heterosexual parents. It is not a healthy lifestyle. Read the studies produced by the homosexual community. The numbers tell a dire story, but they falsely conclude that their problems are due to discrimination and societal pressure. We can't deliberately expose our children to a destructive, unhealthy lifestyle, and greatly increased risk of coming into contact with pedophiles. It is completely irresponsible to do so.
This is all part of an open war by militant homosexuals against traditional morality. They make no secret that making organizations like the BSA conform to their values, to force the rest of us to accept their immoral, unhealthy and dangerous behaviors as the new normal, is their ultimate goal. They do not want simple acceptance - to live and let live; they are working hard to indoctrinate everyone they can and to force us, through argument, legislation, litigation and intimidation, to agree with them. Please do not give in. Do not give up. Stand up for what is right, and for what the BSA has stood for since its founding. Let them come. We will take our lumps and fight the good fight, but at least we will be doing what is right. Don't let Scouting cease to be Scouting. If it does, we'll have no choice but to look for alternatives.
Respectfully,
Jeff Odegard
Wolf Den Leader
I was in attendance at the leadership standards meeting tonight. I think it was obvious from the crowd where our Council constituency stands on the issue, and that any policy change allowing open homosexuals in Scouting would result in a large number of Packs and Troops to be dissolved by their sponsoring organizations. If Councils are already feeling a financial pinch when BSA is only *considering* a policy change, what will happen when half their sponsoring organizations end their relationship with BSA? How many people will have to lose their jobs then? How different will it be if only 5% (one PTO) dissolve their Pack? As you said, either way there will be painful realities to deal with, but which one will be the most devastating? While BSA is non-sectarian, I believe one gentleman pointed out that 70% of sponsoring organizations are religious in nature, and of those, 70% are conservative. I believe that number will be much higher here in the Pikes Peak Council.
I am the Wolf Den Leader for Pack 55, sponsored by the Evangelical Christian Academy (ECA), and represent 7 of the 8 families in my den, who have all come to me individually and as a group saying that if the BSA changes their policies regarding homosexuals, we will have no choice but to leave Scouting. I am glad that ECA's superintendent was there tonight to explain that they are officially waiting to see what policy changes come, but I think he was also clear that a move in the wrong direction would make it very hard for ECA to continue to sponsor the Pack. I was very serious when I told him, publicly, that there are viable alternatives to the BSA if the BSA abandons its core principles. (I don't care if there are 3.2 million Girl Scouts being indoctrinated by Planned Parenthood and the liberal Media Matters news organization, my daughter is one of 16,000 American Heritage Girls learning to be a God-honoring, patriotic young woman.)
As was stated tonight, Scouting begins and ends with God. Scouting's core principles are why we joined, and why I want to see my sons, a 7 year old Wolf and a 3 year old Tiger (don't try to tell him he has to wait until first grade!), go on to earn their Eagles. I am in Scouting to raise my boys to be God-fearing, patriotic, honest, courageous, upstanding men, but if Scouting abandons the core of those principles and the Source of all that is righteous, holy, and good, how can we stay? If BSA gives in, it will eventually go the way of the rest of the world. Instead of being a light in a dark place, raising up the next generation of leaders, the BSA will be just another service organization. All of the wonderful, proven benefits of Scouting will slowly but surely erode and eventually fade away.
From a purely practical standpoint, I was glad the Doctor who spoke near the end brought up the statistic that just 3% of the population produces 30-40% of pedophiles. Homosexuals have significantly higher rates of domestic violence (gay on gay), depression, suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, venereal diseases, premature death, and the list goes on. Children raised by homosexual parents have significantly higher rates of depression, suicide, violence and earlier sexual experimentation than children raised by heterosexual parents. It is not a healthy lifestyle. Read the studies produced by the homosexual community. The numbers tell a dire story, but they falsely conclude that their problems are due to discrimination and societal pressure. We can't deliberately expose our children to a destructive, unhealthy lifestyle, and greatly increased risk of coming into contact with pedophiles. It is completely irresponsible to do so.
This is all part of an open war by militant homosexuals against traditional morality. They make no secret that making organizations like the BSA conform to their values, to force the rest of us to accept their immoral, unhealthy and dangerous behaviors as the new normal, is their ultimate goal. They do not want simple acceptance - to live and let live; they are working hard to indoctrinate everyone they can and to force us, through argument, legislation, litigation and intimidation, to agree with them. Please do not give in. Do not give up. Stand up for what is right, and for what the BSA has stood for since its founding. Let them come. We will take our lumps and fight the good fight, but at least we will be doing what is right. Don't let Scouting cease to be Scouting. If it does, we'll have no choice but to look for alternatives.
Respectfully,
Jeff Odegard
Wolf Den Leader
Labels:
Colorado,
Colorado Springs,
First Amendment,
Scouting
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Open Letter to Colorado State Senators
Senator _________,
Please do not cave in to pressure from outside the state to pass gun control legislation that has been historically proven to do absolutely nothing to reduce gun violence! Colorado is a Western state with a long history of firearms used for self-defense, hunting, sport shooting, teaching youth responsibility and confidence and respect for the outdoors, and many other worthwhile uses. Please do not throw away our God-give rights, expressed in the 2nd Amendment and the Colorado State Constitution.
There are many emotional arguments used to support these gun bills, but the cold, hard facts tell us that these measures will be completely ineffective in reducing gun violence. The Clinton-era 1994 Assault Weapon Ban did nothing to reduce gun violence.
HB 1224: bans magazines with a capacity of more than 15 bullets. Magazines owned prior to the ban can be kept but cannot be transferred, sold, etc.
HB 1226: prohibits concealed carry on public college campuses.
Respectfully,
Jeff Odegard
Colorado Springs
------------------
Friends of Freedom,
Here is the contact information for the State Senators currently involved in the discussions in Denver:
These Senators need to hear from you today via phone AND e-mail. Please be respectful and factual. Additionally, please read this post from the Colorado Senate News and sign the online petition here.
Senate President John Morse (SD11)
(303) 866-6364; john.morse.senate@state.co.us
Senate Majority Leader Morgan Carroll (SD29)
(303) 866-4879; morgan.carroll.senate@state.co.us
Senator Angela Giron (SD03)
(303) 866-4878; angela.giron.senate@state.co.us
Senator Jeanne Nicholson (SD16)
(303) 866-4873; jeanne.nicholson.senate@state.co.us
Senator Lois Tochtrop (SD24)
(303) 866-4871; lotochtrop@aol.com
Senator Cheri Jahn (SD20)
(303) 866-4856; cheri.jahn.senate@state.co.us
Senator Andy Kerr (SD22)
(303) 866-4859; andy.kerr.senate@state.co.us
Senator Gail Schwartz (SD05)
(303)866-4871; gail.schwartz.senate@gmail.com
Senator Mary Hodge (SD25)
(303) 866-4855; mary.hodge.senate@state.co.us
Please do not cave in to pressure from outside the state to pass gun control legislation that has been historically proven to do absolutely nothing to reduce gun violence! Colorado is a Western state with a long history of firearms used for self-defense, hunting, sport shooting, teaching youth responsibility and confidence and respect for the outdoors, and many other worthwhile uses. Please do not throw away our God-give rights, expressed in the 2nd Amendment and the Colorado State Constitution.
There are many emotional arguments used to support these gun bills, but the cold, hard facts tell us that these measures will be completely ineffective in reducing gun violence. The Clinton-era 1994 Assault Weapon Ban did nothing to reduce gun violence.
HB 1224: bans magazines with a capacity of more than 15 bullets. Magazines owned prior to the ban can be kept but cannot be transferred, sold, etc.
- Limiting magazine capacities do very little to impact the speed that someone can shoot a semi-automatic weapon. Sheriff Ken Campbell of Boone County, Indiana performed a test with both an experienced and inexperienced shooters, and proved that limiting magazine capacity had almost no impact on their ability to shoot 30 aimed rounds.
- Changing a magazine, even for an inexperienced shooter only takes 1-3 seconds. (Experienced shooters can change a magazine in less than a second.) This does not give a victim enough time to see that the gun is out of ammunition, make a decision (under extreme pressure) to act, and attack the shooter before he inserts the magazine and the weapon is working again.
HB 1226: prohibits concealed carry on public college campuses.
- According to firearms researcher John Lott, “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.” That means 23 of 24 mass shootings occurred in gun free zones, or more accurately, "Victim Disarmament Zones."
- Attempted mass shootings in areas where guns are allowed almost never make it to the point of becoming a mass shooting. Santee, CA (2001), Appalachian School of Law, 2002, Pearl High School, MS (1997), Edinboro, PA. (1998), New Life Church (Dec 2007), Winnemucca, NV, 2008, Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio (Dec 2012)
- None of the anti concealed carry predictions of "OK Corral" shootouts have happened. Those who pursue concealed carry permits are far more law-abiding than the average citizen.
- This issue has already been decided by the Colorado Supreme Court, and students want concealed carry.
- A US Department of Justice report "Firearm Use by Offenders," reports that criminals only directly purchase 13.9% of the weapons used in crime. The rest come from friends and family (39.6%) or illegal street purchases (39.2%). It is already a federal crime (with a 10 year sentence) for straw purchases.
- Increasing fees is just a tax on law-abiding gun owners. It serves no purpose for reducing gun violence.
- Criminals, already intent on committing a crime, will not bother to find an FFL to transfer a weapon from a family member, friend, or their illegal street seller. This law will have no effect on gun violence.
- The law is poorly written, excluding extended family members like uncles, aunts, nieces, nephews, etc. It places an undue burden on people who want to loan a gun to a friend for hunting season or to take to the range to try out before buying one him or herself. This will cause innocent people to be charged with "illegal transfer of a firearm."
- Training for concealed carry permit holders is important, but modern teaching methods have shown that online education is completely effective. As long as the online training meets the educational content and testing standards, there is no reason to disallow it. Online training is currently acceptable for driver's safety courses, K-12, college and graduate work and a number of other topics. Why should the classroom portion of any firearms training be any different?
- This law would have no impact on gun violence, but would only make it more difficult for some people to receive a carry permit and so be able to defend themselves.
- A more sensible requirement would be to add a live-fire requirement for permit applicants to demonstrate basic competency with their firearm of choice.
- First, lawsuits of this type have historically a very poor chance of success. Manufacturers cannot control their products once they leave their facilities.
- If this is a sensible law, then automobile manufacturers should be held liable for all traffic fatalities (which kill far more people annually than guns), swimming pool and bicycle manufacturers should be liable for drownings and accidents involving their products too, since their products are more likely to accidentally kill someone than a gun.
Respectfully,
Jeff Odegard
Colorado Springs
------------------
Friends of Freedom,
Here is the contact information for the State Senators currently involved in the discussions in Denver:
These Senators need to hear from you today via phone AND e-mail. Please be respectful and factual. Additionally, please read this post from the Colorado Senate News and sign the online petition here.
Senate President John Morse (SD11)
(303) 866-6364; john.morse.senate@state.co.us
Senate Majority Leader Morgan Carroll (SD29)
(303) 866-4879; morgan.carroll.senate@state.co.us
Senator Angela Giron (SD03)
(303) 866-4878; angela.giron.senate@state.co.us
Senator Jeanne Nicholson (SD16)
(303) 866-4873; jeanne.nicholson.senate@state.co.us
Senator Lois Tochtrop (SD24)
(303) 866-4871; lotochtrop@aol.com
Senator Cheri Jahn (SD20)
(303) 866-4856; cheri.jahn.senate@state.co.us
Senator Andy Kerr (SD22)
(303) 866-4859; andy.kerr.senate@state.co.us
Senator Gail Schwartz (SD05)
(303)866-4871; gail.schwartz.senate@gmail.com
Senator Mary Hodge (SD25)
(303) 866-4855; mary.hodge.senate@state.co.us
Labels:
Colorado,
First Amendment,
second amendment,
self defense
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Jesus is Risen!
Today we celebrate that Jesus, the long-awaited Jewish Messiah rose from the dead on a Sunday morning almost 2,000 years ago. The Resurrection changed everything! Eleven disappointed, doubting, scared, heart-broken disciples, greeted by Mary's unbelievable news, were transformed in a short time into fearless, unwavering, bold apostles, sent into the world with the Good News that sinful men can be redeemed and transformed. Jesus' Resurrection validated all that He ever taught and did. It was the final proof that He was the Son of God, the Second Person of the Trinity.
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul, another eyewitness to the Risen Messiah, wrote that if Jesus had not risen, Christians would be the most pitiful people on earth, lying about God, without hope, lost and foolish. (Funny how many think that way anyway!) Christianity would have died before it was born. The disciples would have gone back to fishing, farming and tax collecting, and all would have been forgotten. Instead, 10 of the 11 died martyrs' deaths and the 11th, John was imprisoned for his faith. All died courageously testifying that they had seen Jesus alive after He was crucified.
Flavius Josephus, the Jewish General who tried unsuccessfully to defend Jerusalem from the Romans in AD 70, became a historian and wrote about Jesus and the early Christians. Tacitus, a first century Roman historian also wrote about the beliefs of the early Christians. Neither one was a Christian, and both were critical of the early Christians, but they both verify Jesus' existence and the belief of early Christians that He was the Jewish Messiah, that he performed miracles and that he rose from the dead.*
The Resurrection changes everything. Because of it, Christians know that Jesus is God, that everything He taught is true, that there is salvation in no other name, that Christians who have died will rise again, and that we do not have to fear death, because Jesus conquered both sin and death, and will give eternal life to any who trust in Him for salvation. Let the critics try and say He never existed. Let atheists and agnostics question the reliability of the Scriptures. Let a sinful world reject the Gospel because accepting it would take away the pleasure (and pain) of their sin. I know that my Redeemer lives! It's like a bright, white, fresh, snowy morning in the mountains. Freedom is a wonderful thing. The Resurrection changes everything!
-----------------------
* While I have little doubt that the Testimonium Flavianum was altered by later Christian editors, the core message from Josephus, believable as a Jew writing on the subject, was that the earliest believers held as fact that Jesus was the Messiah, did miracles, was crucified on a Roman cross and rose from the dead on the third day.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Mid Term Elections 2010
Here are my election picks for the Midterm Elections this year. Hunting season is keeping me from posting my reasoning. The only one that really needs explanation is Tancredo. Dan Maes has discredited and disgraced himself on many fronts and needs to drop out of the race to allow Tancredo to beat Hickenlooper. That's the only way we'll have a conservative governor, and the only way to keep the Democrats in the Colorado legislature from ramming their agenda down our throats.
US Senator: Buck
US Rep: Lamborn
Governor: Tancredo
Sec. State: Gessler
Treasurer: Stapleton
Republicans for the rest
Amendment P – Games of Chance - AGAINST
Amendment Q – Temporary Location of State Seat of Government - FOR
Amendment R – Exempt Possessory Interests in Real Property - FOR
Amendment 60 – Property Taxes - AGAINST
Amendment 61 – Limits on State and Local Government - AGAINST
Amendment 62 – Application of the Term Person - FOR
Amendment 63 – Health Care Choice - FOR
Proposition 101 – Income, Vehicle and Telecom Taxes and Fees - AGAINST
Proposition 102 – Criteria for Release to Pretrial Services Programs – AGAINST
County 1A – Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Prohibited in Unincorporated Areas - FOR
County 1B – Term Limits for 4th Judicial District DA - FOR
County 1C – Term Limits for County Commissioners - FOR
County 1D – Term Limits for other County Offices – FOR
Colorado Springs 2B – City Retention of $600,000 of excess revenue for infrastructure – FOR
Colorado Springs 2C – TOPS Limit on Trails and Open Spaces Maintenance – AGAINST
Colorado Springs 300 – Strong Mayor Proposal - FOR
View the El Paso County November 2010 Sample Ballot.
Do your civic duty. Vote!
US Senator: Buck
US Rep: Lamborn
Governor: Tancredo
Sec. State: Gessler
Treasurer: Stapleton
Republicans for the rest
Amendment P – Games of Chance - AGAINST
Amendment Q – Temporary Location of State Seat of Government - FOR
Amendment R – Exempt Possessory Interests in Real Property - FOR
Amendment 60 – Property Taxes - AGAINST
Amendment 61 – Limits on State and Local Government - AGAINST
Amendment 62 – Application of the Term Person - FOR
Amendment 63 – Health Care Choice - FOR
Proposition 101 – Income, Vehicle and Telecom Taxes and Fees - AGAINST
Proposition 102 – Criteria for Release to Pretrial Services Programs – AGAINST
County 1A – Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Prohibited in Unincorporated Areas - FOR
County 1B – Term Limits for 4th Judicial District DA - FOR
County 1C – Term Limits for County Commissioners - FOR
County 1D – Term Limits for other County Offices – FOR
Colorado Springs 2B – City Retention of $600,000 of excess revenue for infrastructure – FOR
Colorado Springs 2C – TOPS Limit on Trails and Open Spaces Maintenance – AGAINST
Colorado Springs 300 – Strong Mayor Proposal - FOR
View the El Paso County November 2010 Sample Ballot.
Do your civic duty. Vote!
Labels:
Colorado,
Colorado Springs,
First Amendment,
politics,
second amendment
Monday, August 9, 2010
Colorado Governor and US Senator
OK, so life got away from me. It's election eve, and most of the people following this have already voted by mail, so here is the short and sweet version.
Colorado Governor:
In the words of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (who I like), I "cannot in good conscience give members and gun owners a strong recommendation for this race." McInnis has handled the whole plagiarism issue very poorly, and has a weak record on gun rights. Maes really came across as a nutjob with his comments on the UN International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) program in Denver which is providing bikes to reduce pollution. After a little digging, I found little on the ICLEI program, but it does look like your typical UN socialist program, so maybe he's on to something. They did, after all, put Iran on the Commission on Women's Rights. So, if Dan Maes doesn't like the UN, all the better.
I don't like any of the candidates all that much, but I'm voting for Dan Maes. I just hope he can prove to the rest of Colorado that he's not a conspiracy theorist wacko nutjob.
US Senator from Colorado:
Ken Buck keeps "stepping in it" with his high heels and cowboy boots comments, and he's had some ethical questions, but if you dig a little deeper, at least his heart was in the right place. (That's cynicism, for those of you who don't get it.) Jane Norton, however, sealed the deal for me by getting support from John McCain. I can't stand big government McCain. Plus, when your website for your governor's race leads with "Ken Buck said what?" and a video of your opponent's (albeit very bad) attempt at humor, you must not have any serious issues to run on.
Like the Governor's race, I can't really endorse any of the candidates, but I'm going to vote for Ken Buck, just to tick off the big-government RINOs who support Norton.
By the way, on the Democrat side, I'm cheering for "I'm not taking PAC money(anymore)" Andrew Romanoff. Bennett doesn't care what the voters think and I want him out. With Romanoff's past habits of taking PAC money, it should provide good fodder for whoever wins the Republican nomination.
Colorado Governor:
In the words of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (who I like), I "cannot in good conscience give members and gun owners a strong recommendation for this race." McInnis has handled the whole plagiarism issue very poorly, and has a weak record on gun rights. Maes really came across as a nutjob with his comments on the UN International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) program in Denver which is providing bikes to reduce pollution. After a little digging, I found little on the ICLEI program, but it does look like your typical UN socialist program, so maybe he's on to something. They did, after all, put Iran on the Commission on Women's Rights. So, if Dan Maes doesn't like the UN, all the better.
I don't like any of the candidates all that much, but I'm voting for Dan Maes. I just hope he can prove to the rest of Colorado that he's not a conspiracy theorist wacko nutjob.
US Senator from Colorado:
Ken Buck keeps "stepping in it" with his high heels and cowboy boots comments, and he's had some ethical questions, but if you dig a little deeper, at least his heart was in the right place. (That's cynicism, for those of you who don't get it.) Jane Norton, however, sealed the deal for me by getting support from John McCain. I can't stand big government McCain. Plus, when your website for your governor's race leads with "Ken Buck said what?" and a video of your opponent's (albeit very bad) attempt at humor, you must not have any serious issues to run on.
Like the Governor's race, I can't really endorse any of the candidates, but I'm going to vote for Ken Buck, just to tick off the big-government RINOs who support Norton.
By the way, on the Democrat side, I'm cheering for "I'm not taking PAC money(anymore)" Andrew Romanoff. Bennett doesn't care what the voters think and I want him out. With Romanoff's past habits of taking PAC money, it should provide good fodder for whoever wins the Republican nomination.
Labels:
Colorado,
First Amendment,
politics,
thoughts
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Colorado Treasurer
The Republican candidates for Colorado Treasurer are Walker Stapleton and JJ Ament. Both are fiscally conservative. Stapleton has experience as a CFO in private industry. Ament has been a consultant to various state treasurers. The biggest deciding factor, for me, between the two is that Stapleton recently said that he thought that voter-approved tax increases would be a good idea for getting the state out of our budget mess. Ament opposes the idea, and so do I. The way out of the budget crisis is to eliminate wasteful spending, cut unnecessary programs and enable private businesses to grow, thus increasing tax revenues (which is caused by reducing tax rates: liberals don't understand that low taxes in a thriving economy produce more tax revenue than high taxes in an anemic economy). El Paso County voters crushed the last two requests for tax hikes, and I don't see the sentiment changing any time soon. Use OUR money (it belongs to the taxpayers, not to the government!) wisely and efficiently, and not for all your pet political projects, and ONLY then come and ask us for more. If you have a good plan for it, and we see the need, we might actually entrust you with it.
JJ Ament understands this, and that's why I'm voting for him.
JJ Ament understands this, and that's why I'm voting for him.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
El Paso County Sheriff
According to the El Paso County sample ballot, there are four contested races in the 2010 Republican Primary on August 10th. They are:
US Senator
- Ken Buck vs Jane Norton
Colorado Governor
- Dan Maes vs Scott McGinnis
Colorado Treasurer
- JJ Ament vs Walker Stapleton
El Paso County Sheriff
- Terry Maketa vs Jake Shirk
In my short series, I'll work the list from bottom to top, which will leave the most hotly contested races until last. To be honest, I didn't even know the Colorado Treasurer was a contested race until I looked, so we'll look at that race next time. In the meantime, the Gazette has published a voter guide.
Terry Maketa and Jake Shirk have much in common, and much to commend them. To be honest, I think either one would be a good sheriff. First, they both support Vermont/Alaska/Arizona-type firearm laws for Colorado, namely that no license or permit of any kind should be required to carry a concealed firearm, but Shirk has made it part of his platform, while Maketa only brought it up when questioned in an interview. Both support a Colorado version of the excellent Arizona Immigration Bill. Both believe that Medical Marijuana is here to stay, but agree that abuse should be prosecuted. Shirk goes a bit further, stating that he voted against the dispensaries, but will uphold the Colorado law. Maketa did not specify his personal feelings on the law. I think he's just playing it safe politically. Of course, with no Democratic challenger, why would he feel the need to do that?
I think Maketa has a stronger position concerning not removing sworn deputies from the El Paso County Jail, as Shirk stated he intends to pursue, but I really like Jake Shirk's promise to publish the Sheriff's Department budget on the web. It is a big step toward a more open government. In addition, Maketa's April accusation that Shirk, a 35 year law enforcement veteran (vs. Maketa's 23 years), lacked experience left a bad taste in my mouth. As you will see in upcoming posts, I really don't like politicians who play dirty, and even though the sheriff's race has been pretty tame compared to others, when two candidates are this closely matched, the one who plays it clean will earn my vote. Add a very strong 2nd Amendment stance and a commitment to open government, and I'm sold.
I'm supporting Jake Shirk for El Paso County Sheriff.
US Senator
- Ken Buck vs Jane Norton
Colorado Governor
- Dan Maes vs Scott McGinnis
Colorado Treasurer
- JJ Ament vs Walker Stapleton
El Paso County Sheriff
- Terry Maketa vs Jake Shirk
In my short series, I'll work the list from bottom to top, which will leave the most hotly contested races until last. To be honest, I didn't even know the Colorado Treasurer was a contested race until I looked, so we'll look at that race next time. In the meantime, the Gazette has published a voter guide.
Terry Maketa and Jake Shirk have much in common, and much to commend them. To be honest, I think either one would be a good sheriff. First, they both support Vermont/Alaska/Arizona-type firearm laws for Colorado, namely that no license or permit of any kind should be required to carry a concealed firearm, but Shirk has made it part of his platform, while Maketa only brought it up when questioned in an interview. Both support a Colorado version of the excellent Arizona Immigration Bill. Both believe that Medical Marijuana is here to stay, but agree that abuse should be prosecuted. Shirk goes a bit further, stating that he voted against the dispensaries, but will uphold the Colorado law. Maketa did not specify his personal feelings on the law. I think he's just playing it safe politically. Of course, with no Democratic challenger, why would he feel the need to do that?
I think Maketa has a stronger position concerning not removing sworn deputies from the El Paso County Jail, as Shirk stated he intends to pursue, but I really like Jake Shirk's promise to publish the Sheriff's Department budget on the web. It is a big step toward a more open government. In addition, Maketa's April accusation that Shirk, a 35 year law enforcement veteran (vs. Maketa's 23 years), lacked experience left a bad taste in my mouth. As you will see in upcoming posts, I really don't like politicians who play dirty, and even though the sheriff's race has been pretty tame compared to others, when two candidates are this closely matched, the one who plays it clean will earn my vote. Add a very strong 2nd Amendment stance and a commitment to open government, and I'm sold.
I'm supporting Jake Shirk for El Paso County Sheriff.
Labels:
Colorado,
Colorado Springs,
First Amendment,
politics,
second amendment
Thursday, July 29, 2010
2010 Colorado GOP Primaries
The Colorado GOP primaries will be held August 10th, and I have decided to post my political decision making and generate some discussion. My goal is to post every few days with my thoughts on the individual races, then on or about August 8th, post my list for the election.
Some of the primary races are really turning nasty. The attack ads, political missteps, and tongue slips are getting pretty tiresome, and the GOP is fighting amongst themselves while squandering the best chance we have at stopping an out of control Federal Government. Some races are easy to decide, but others have been really hard, with me having to reconsider my early leanings due to the political nastiness and the diarrhea-of-the-mouth from some candidates.
My preference is for candidates who are small-government, tax cutting, fiscally conservative, morally conservative, liberty-minded people. I, like so many others, am tired of being hoodwinked by big-government Republicans (RINOs*) or candidates whose first priorities are lining their own pockets and doing whatever it takes to get re-elected. I'm not a dyed-in-the-wool Republican. I'm an old school conservative who leans Libertarian (but not all the way)**, and a Constitutionalist that believes in a limited Federal government, limited to providing a strong national defense, maintaining some semblance of order between the states and generally leaving me and my local government alone. I love the Lord Jesus, I love my family and I love my country, in that order. Government exists to serve the people and protect their lives, liberty and prosperity, not the other way around. I will not give up essential liberty to gain temporary security.
My main issues this year are:
Reversing Reckless Government Spending: The Federal Government is spending out of control, and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, on the verge of bankrupting the country. Colorado is doing a little better, but is addicted to handouts from the federal government. Locally, the Colorado Springs government still thinks it's their money, not that of the taxpayers.
Reversing Government Corporate Takeovers and Bailouts: They bought Fannie, Freddie, AIG, and Government Motors, and now passed a bill allowing the Fed to takeover any business they deem "too big to fail." We need free markets and competition, not government control of industry. That is Socialism. Capitalism works, Socialism fails. Read your history books (the unrevised ones...).
Government Accountability to the Voters: I don't want to silence special interest groups (I support some of them!), but I want my elected officials to answer primarily to the voters. I don't know how to do this, but I'm very tired of patronizing form letters from my Senators when I have serious, well-reasoned arguments against their positions. Term limits across the board!
Securing Our Borders: How many years has it been since 9/11/2001 and we still haven't built a fence on our southern border? Democrats think illegal immigration is a massive voter registration drive, while drug smugglers, human traffickers and terrorists come and go at will, and all the Federal Government can do is sue Arizona for taking steps to help enforce FEDERAL Law?
The Protection of Essential Liberties: Read the Bill of Rights. Freedom of religion, the right to keep and BEAR arms, protection from unreasonable search and seizure, government only has the powers given to it by the Constitution. Understand that those Amendments place limits on the Federal, local and state governments, and protect us from tyranny.
Repealing Obamacare: It is unconstitutional to force me to buy a product. I don't want the government or insurance companies in the room when I talk to my doctor. It's none of their freakin' business, and the health care free market will work much better without government interference.
There are no perfect candidates, but some are clearly better than others. I don't want to vote for one just because it's perceived that the other doesn't have a chance against the Democrats. It's time for conservatives to stand on principle and let the GOP know that we've had it with moderate, wishy-washy, politically correct candidates. I never want to have to hold my nose and vote for a John McCain again!
Stay tuned!
* RINOs - Republicans in Name Only, or Democrats in elephant's clothing. (So what do you call all the all-out Socialists running as Democrats?)
**Two issues keep me from becoming a full-fledged Libertarian. First, their isolationist foreign policies are horribly misguided in our global economy and dangerously naive about threats like Islamic extremism, drug cartels and organized crime, and old-style communist states. Second, as a Christian, I cannot adopt their Utopian "live and let live" philosophy on moral issues like abortion and legalizing dangerous drugs.
Some of the primary races are really turning nasty. The attack ads, political missteps, and tongue slips are getting pretty tiresome, and the GOP is fighting amongst themselves while squandering the best chance we have at stopping an out of control Federal Government. Some races are easy to decide, but others have been really hard, with me having to reconsider my early leanings due to the political nastiness and the diarrhea-of-the-mouth from some candidates.
My preference is for candidates who are small-government, tax cutting, fiscally conservative, morally conservative, liberty-minded people. I, like so many others, am tired of being hoodwinked by big-government Republicans (RINOs*) or candidates whose first priorities are lining their own pockets and doing whatever it takes to get re-elected. I'm not a dyed-in-the-wool Republican. I'm an old school conservative who leans Libertarian (but not all the way)**, and a Constitutionalist that believes in a limited Federal government, limited to providing a strong national defense, maintaining some semblance of order between the states and generally leaving me and my local government alone. I love the Lord Jesus, I love my family and I love my country, in that order. Government exists to serve the people and protect their lives, liberty and prosperity, not the other way around. I will not give up essential liberty to gain temporary security.
My main issues this year are:
Reversing Reckless Government Spending: The Federal Government is spending out of control, and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, on the verge of bankrupting the country. Colorado is doing a little better, but is addicted to handouts from the federal government. Locally, the Colorado Springs government still thinks it's their money, not that of the taxpayers.
Reversing Government Corporate Takeovers and Bailouts: They bought Fannie, Freddie, AIG, and Government Motors, and now passed a bill allowing the Fed to takeover any business they deem "too big to fail." We need free markets and competition, not government control of industry. That is Socialism. Capitalism works, Socialism fails. Read your history books (the unrevised ones...).
Government Accountability to the Voters: I don't want to silence special interest groups (I support some of them!), but I want my elected officials to answer primarily to the voters. I don't know how to do this, but I'm very tired of patronizing form letters from my Senators when I have serious, well-reasoned arguments against their positions. Term limits across the board!
Securing Our Borders: How many years has it been since 9/11/2001 and we still haven't built a fence on our southern border? Democrats think illegal immigration is a massive voter registration drive, while drug smugglers, human traffickers and terrorists come and go at will, and all the Federal Government can do is sue Arizona for taking steps to help enforce FEDERAL Law?
The Protection of Essential Liberties: Read the Bill of Rights. Freedom of religion, the right to keep and BEAR arms, protection from unreasonable search and seizure, government only has the powers given to it by the Constitution. Understand that those Amendments place limits on the Federal, local and state governments, and protect us from tyranny.
Repealing Obamacare: It is unconstitutional to force me to buy a product. I don't want the government or insurance companies in the room when I talk to my doctor. It's none of their freakin' business, and the health care free market will work much better without government interference.
There are no perfect candidates, but some are clearly better than others. I don't want to vote for one just because it's perceived that the other doesn't have a chance against the Democrats. It's time for conservatives to stand on principle and let the GOP know that we've had it with moderate, wishy-washy, politically correct candidates. I never want to have to hold my nose and vote for a John McCain again!
Stay tuned!
* RINOs - Republicans in Name Only, or Democrats in elephant's clothing. (So what do you call all the all-out Socialists running as Democrats?)
**Two issues keep me from becoming a full-fledged Libertarian. First, their isolationist foreign policies are horribly misguided in our global economy and dangerously naive about threats like Islamic extremism, drug cartels and organized crime, and old-style communist states. Second, as a Christian, I cannot adopt their Utopian "live and let live" philosophy on moral issues like abortion and legalizing dangerous drugs.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Please Vote NO on Cass Sunstein
Senators Udall & Bennett,
As you know, Cass Sunstein has been nominated by President Obama to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. I vehemently oppose his nomination and hope that you will agree with me that he holds radical views that are out of step with common Colorado values.
In a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Professor Sunstein said that he wants to ban hunting, and he intends to do it by regulating it out of existence. He is also strongly supports increased gun control, and downplays the 2nd Amendment. Colorado citizens view the rights to bear arms and to hunt as sacred, and modern wildlife management (including hunting) has given us some of the healthiest wildlife populations in history. We need to enforce current gun regulations and remote those that clearly have no effect on violent crime, not create more.
In a 2007 speech at Harvard, he put animal suffering on the same moral scale as human genocide and slavery. On page 11 of "Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions" (2004), he made the bizarre statement that animals could bring lawsuits against people. This could have devastating effects on farming and ranching in Colorado. Grocery prices are high enough without new, insane government regulations giving Bessie the Milk Cow human rights.
In his 2008 book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness” he says that he wants to change organ donation from opt-in to opt-out, which would make the very personal, private choice about organ donation almost no choice at all. Colorado values freedom and personal liberty.
Sincerely,
Jeff Odegard
Colorado Springs
As you know, Cass Sunstein has been nominated by President Obama to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. I vehemently oppose his nomination and hope that you will agree with me that he holds radical views that are out of step with common Colorado values.
In a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Professor Sunstein said that he wants to ban hunting, and he intends to do it by regulating it out of existence. He is also strongly supports increased gun control, and downplays the 2nd Amendment. Colorado citizens view the rights to bear arms and to hunt as sacred, and modern wildlife management (including hunting) has given us some of the healthiest wildlife populations in history. We need to enforce current gun regulations and remote those that clearly have no effect on violent crime, not create more.
In a 2007 speech at Harvard, he put animal suffering on the same moral scale as human genocide and slavery. On page 11 of "Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions" (2004), he made the bizarre statement that animals could bring lawsuits against people. This could have devastating effects on farming and ranching in Colorado. Grocery prices are high enough without new, insane government regulations giving Bessie the Milk Cow human rights.
In his 2008 book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness” he says that he wants to change organ donation from opt-in to opt-out, which would make the very personal, private choice about organ donation almost no choice at all. Colorado values freedom and personal liberty.
Sincerely,
Jeff Odegard
Colorado Springs
Labels:
Colorado,
human rights,
Hunting,
politics,
second amendment,
Socialist Obama
Friday, June 26, 2009
Please Vote No on Climate Bill
Senators Udall and Bennet,
First, I would like to thank you for your recent vote supporting our right to keep and bear arms, documented in the 2nd Amendment.
Please vote no on the upcoming climate bill. I am a conservationist, outdoorsman, fisherman and hunter. I believe in doing all we can to preserve the environment for future generations. I believe we can accomplish this through responsible land use and common sense legislation. However, this bill is a financial nightmare waiting to happen. I'm concerned about increased taxes which will result in no real impact to the global climate or the environment - only increased taxes and increased government control.
Sincerely,
Jeff A. Odegard
Colorado Springs
Sent to both Senators this morning.
First, I would like to thank you for your recent vote supporting our right to keep and bear arms, documented in the 2nd Amendment.
Please vote no on the upcoming climate bill. I am a conservationist, outdoorsman, fisherman and hunter. I believe in doing all we can to preserve the environment for future generations. I believe we can accomplish this through responsible land use and common sense legislation. However, this bill is a financial nightmare waiting to happen. I'm concerned about increased taxes which will result in no real impact to the global climate or the environment - only increased taxes and increased government control.
Sincerely,
Jeff A. Odegard
Colorado Springs
Sent to both Senators this morning.
Labels:
Colorado,
human rights,
Hunting,
politics,
The Great Outdoors
Friday, May 22, 2009
February 22, 2010 - National Park Day
The president signed a law into effect today (attached to the credit card reform bill) that will allow concealed carry in many national parks. However, because of the language of the bill, it will not take effect for 9 months, even though the sponsors intended for it to be immediately binding. The Interior Department and National Park Service, who hate the idea of free citizens bearing arms, intend to follow the letter of the law and wait nine months.
Therefore, my ban on visiting National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges will continue until February 22, 2010, when the 2nd Amendment will finally also be valid on Federal lands. See you in Rocky Mountain National Park when the snow clears next Spring. And not a moment before.
Therefore, my ban on visiting National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges will continue until February 22, 2010, when the 2nd Amendment will finally also be valid on Federal lands. See you in Rocky Mountain National Park when the snow clears next Spring. And not a moment before.
Labels:
Colorado,
second amendment,
self defense,
The Great Outdoors
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Concealed Handguns Increase in Colorado

According to a report released this week, the number of concealed handgun permit (CHP) applications in Colorado jumped by over 50% last year, and in El Paso County (the Colorado Springs area) went up 87%. (I personally contributed to that number last August!) There are now about 8,400 active concealed handgun permits in El Paso County, about 1.46% of the population, or 1 in every 68 people.
A graph of the monthly application statistics showed spikes in applications immediately following the February 2007 Utah mall shooting, the April Virginia Tech massacre, and the December New Life Church shooting. A Monument (just North of Colorado Springs) area politician also said that the increased number of CHP applications was due to encroachments on 2nd Amendment rights.
Why did I get a permit? Was I scared by the news? Was I upset about my rights eroding before my eyes? Was I on some kind of mid-life crisis, macho paramilitary kick? No, no, and no. (I'm not yet old enough for a mid-life crisis!) I have a family. If something happens, I have the responsibility to protect them. The news has taught me that by the time the police usually show up, it's already over. As an outdoorsman, I enjoy shooting. I'm a hunter. I treasure my constitutional rights. But beyond all that, I know that this world can be an incredibly dangerous place, and I have a wife and little ones to protect. I also have a larger responsibility to my community - not as some sort of vigilante who goes looking for trouble - but as someone who does not hesitate to defend the weak and needy and make our community a safer place. It's also a Biblical responsibility - see Proverbs 31:9; Isaiah 1:17; Luke 11:21 and others. (Don't get on me about the context of the verse from Luke. I know what it is, but the statement of fact still stands!)
All states except Illinois, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia allow their law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns if they jump through the necessary hoops of training, background checks and application fees. (Vermont is unique in that any law-abiding citizen may carry concealed - no permit required!) Everywhere that concealed carry has passed, crime rates have dropped. Criminals have to wonder, "is this guy one of the 1 in 68 here with a permit?" (Or one of those unnumbered libertarian souls who believe the 2nd Amendment is their concealed carry permit!) Is the owner of this home or business armed? It makes them think twice and the crime rate drops.
Concealed carry is a good thing! If you don't already, look into it!
Sunday, October 28, 2007
A hunting I did go...
We got there about 3 in the afternoon, and under cloudy skies drove out to the public land where he'd shot all of his deer the previous couple of years. Not much later, we spotted two mulies running up a hillside 600 yards away. (I've got to get me one o' them fancy range finders like Josh has - 598 yards, to be exact!) We drove around the rest of the afternoon, saw lots of hunters, including one dragging a deer out, but no deer. Then the weather moved in... It began to snow and blow - the first snow I'd seen since moving to Colorado. I was ecstatic. I was even more grateful for Josh's GPS, which led us back to the spot he'd camped the year before despite the disorienting snow and twists and turns of the wagon rut trails we were on. (I've got a Garmin eTrex HC - Vista, Summit or Venture on my Christmas list!)
We got home about dusk on Sunday, and found that Colorado Springs had a couple inches of snow. I missed the kids having their first snowball fight, and was sad about that, but it was wonderful to be home with my family, to see Laura's old friend, and to have great memories of my first Colorado hunting trip. I can't wait to go next year, license and rifle in hand!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)