I got run over  by a bus, and its name was Jeff  Cragg.  Now before anyone gets all excited, let me state the motto here at Delaware Right, ” we can disagree without being disagreeable”.

I am not sure how many people reading this where actually at the Sussex County GOP monthly meeting, so I will have to take some time to set up what led to my being run over by, or maybe a better term is thrown under the bus.

You see, it may be hard for some of you to believe, but I have been known to ruffle some feathers, usually of  Dodo birds, but sometimes I even ruffle the feathers of people I respect and admire.

I did not go to the meeting with any intention of having a disagreement with Mr. Cragg, but that was how my night ended. You see Mr. Cragg was invited to be the guess speaker at this month’s meeting, his selected topic was to talk about Delaware Right and the goal of the project. For those who may not know, Mr. Cragg is one of the founding members of the project, and one would have to say he is in charge.

Mr. Cragg along with several other people, whom I both respect and admire, came to me and asked me to be the first blogger of a team we are still putting together.  (Side note, the fact that I was the first and only blogger, has led some people to assume that either the blog is my own, or that I am the lone voice of Delaware Right. Neither is true.  I do not own the blog or the site, I merely blog here at the pleasure of those who do. I do not speak for Delaware Right, my voice is but one voice in a growing conversation. I have in the past attempted to make this clear, but some of the little brains still don’t get it.)

So back to being invited to blog here at Delaware Right.  The people who invited me had read my past writing, I could only assume. I would think, that they had read my interaction with visitors to the sites I have written on in the past. I can only assume that this is why I was asked to be the first person to blog here.

So imagine my surprise last night at the meeting when Mr. Cragg was challenged during his talk, by none other than one of our regular visitors here, William Christy, but I was more surprised  by Mr. Cragg’s response to that challenge.

It seems as though Mr. Christy chose last night, in the middle of the meeting, to lodge a complaint about his treatment by other commenters here at Delaware Right.

Okay, another side note, sorry.

 Mr. Christy complained that he had his feelings hurt by other commenters here, he stated that he had been libeled, threatened and called mean names. Obviously Mr. Christy was kidnapped, taken away to a secret location and forced to log in on a computer, and under the  threat of some vile, nasty deed, was forced to comment on this blog. He was so frightened that he continued to come back to this blog under threat, to comment here. I can only imagine the nightmare his life must have been, to force him to perform these acts, so against his personal will.  Really? Shut the front door!!  No one forces anyone to come here, no one forces anyone to return here, and certainly, no one forces anyone to comment here and inject themselves into the conversation. But to Mr. Christy and others who CHOOSE to come here, one bit of advice, put on you big boy and girl pants before you do, and don’t whine when someone takes a shot at you. One thing that seemed to bother Mr. Christy in particular was when another commenter used the phrase “maternal unit”. Mr. Christy labeled this a direct attack on his mother. Really? This is the intellectual equivalent of, “YO MAMMA!”.  Again folks, learn to take a joke. If not, move on, go back to those other echo chamber sites, where you all set around all day saying the same things until you all believe that you are the only ones who are right, ever.  If you can’t take the give and take of a blog, it may be, because you have an inflated sense of self-worth. Trust me on this one, I know a thing or two about it.

So this brings us to the part where I and Mr. Cragg ran afoul of each other. After Mr. Christy was allowed to make unfounded and I must say childish accusations, calling me by name when stating the above listed offenses, Mr. Cragg, in my opinion proceeded to throw me under the bus, with statements about the blog such as, “well we have made some mistakes”, “we have stumbled a time or two”.  Even though I am not the voice of Delaware Right, I have been the only blogger up until now, so I could only assume he was speaking of me. Let me just say, in my opinion I have made no mistakes, I have said exactly what I have meant to say and stand behind every word. This is one of those differences I will speak of further, a little later.

So, a little like Arnold Horshack, I began waving my hand around (without the  ooo! ooo! ooos!) to be recognized so I could respond to the inflammatory accusation that Mr. Christy had leveled at me and the site. Mr. Cragg first attempted to ignore me, good luck with that Jeff, then he allowed me two seconds to respond, big of you Jeff. After I had clarified that the accusations that Mr. Christy was making, did not come from me or anyone else at Delaware Right, but from another commenter, Mr. Cragg made what he may have seen as a funny joke about being the principal at the kindergarten.

Okay side note,  this is where I needed my big boy pants. I took that personally and had reached the part of the evening where I needed to leave, and so I did. In what can only be described as a display of anger.

First let me state, that anything that Mr. Christy had to say, did not cause me to leave, I can rebut any of his bogus claims. The reason I left was because, had I stayed, I would have ended up having a heated discussion about Delaware Right, a discussion that should not have been held in public, and certainly not while I was angry, so I chose the lesser of two evils and left.

I am sure that my departure left Mr. Cragg embarrassed and even angry as well. I apologize to him and  to all who were present, well almost all.

We here at Delaware Right have taken the motto, “DISAGREE WITHOUT BEING DISAGREEABLE” to heart.  And if any clearer demonstration was needed, then last night should be a shining example that we here at Delaware Right are not in lock-step on every issue, or even on how to deal with certain situations that arise in dealing with the day-to-day running of the site.

Mr. Cragg and I have two very different views on how to handle people such as Mr. Christy and others.  Mr. Cragg and I both feel that the conversation should have many voices and many view points.  Where we differ, is that Mr. Cragg feels that we should not ever ruffle a feather, that we should not point out the bad behavior that is slowly killing the conservative movement, he feels that he can co-opt even the most fringe elements of that movement.

I on the other hand, feel that even though we want as many voices in the conversation, to be a part of it, you must show some common sense. You must be adult, if you are going to be a part of the adult conversation.

Think of it like this.  At Christmas, large families will often have the adult table and the kid’s table. This is so the adults can have an adult conversation. If you have kids at the adult table the adults spend all their time dealing with the kids and their behavior.

It goes something like this, ” no Jimmy, you can’t have wine, Marry stop touching Bobby, put the knife down David, don’t put peas up your nose Billy”. So instead of having an adult conversation, the adults spend all the time trying to settle the kids down, until the adults finally send the kids away from the table, and of course the kids go, all the while complaining that it isn’t fair.

WOW! Does that sound familiar?

This in my opinion and this is my opinion only, this  is exactly, THE,  major problem  within the conservative movement in general and the GOP in particular. The people who are genuinely seeking solutions to issues are spending so much time dealing with the behavior of the “CHILDREN”, that they have no time to address the issue.

It goes something like this, “no it’s not unconstitutional, no we can’t force our faith on others, Marry stop touching Bobby, no you can’t have a posse”.

It’s like this, we have invited the neighbors over for an evening to discuss the problems of the neighborhood, but we can’t, because the kids are running around the table screaming and yelling, about it not being fair that the one got to play the video game longer than the other one.

Mr. Cragg feels that we can simply talk nice to the children and they will suddenly stop yelling and screaming.  Personally I think its time to send them out of the room.

Mr. Cragg and I have had this conversation, we disagree. We may continue to disagree, but we will continue to have the conversation.  We will agree to disagree, without being disagreeable.

If this is going to be our motto, then we must live it, before we can show others.

The following is a letter to the editors at Delaware Right from one of our regular commenters, Water Pirate.

Prohibition,

Common Sense

and

The Flying Spaghetti Monster

On Thursday night I traveled to Bridgeville for the 35th district’s Town Hall Meeting.  I Went because my Senator,  Brian Pettyjohn would be one of the speakers.  There was a lot of talk concerning issues specific to the 35th district, and the vote on the death penalty repeal.  That business consumed the lion share of the time allotted, but I got to ask the question to the panel that I had gone to ask

The question I asked was ” What is the Caucus doing to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and posses firearms, specifically, turning back the Governors gun bill initiative?”.  I was pleased and disappointed with the answer.  The short answer was ” Everything we can, but we are in a super minority.”.  Being in a super minority means that even if every R voted against the bills, they would still pass.  We are simply outnumbered in all 3 branches of the state government.

The political landscape/mine field,  here in Sussex County, is a stark reminder to the rest of the state that there really is an opposing viewpoint to be considered.  Sussex County’s Rs are not going to be enough.  In my opinion there are 3 factions in play here as the title of this post implies and it transcends any letter following a voter’s name.

Lets start with prohibition.

This country has a long history of prohibition that simply failed, failed, and failed.  The country’s experiment with alcohol, and the never-ending war on drugs, are the examples that come to mind first.  In both cases a demand for the product led to an increase in organized crime for the sole purpose of supplying the public with prohibited goods.

Next the flying spaghetti monster.

This group thinks that any regulation, or move by the government or state is a call to arms, literally in defense of the broadest possible interpretation of the law.  It is the polar opposite of prohibition.  A call for a society that teeters on the brink of anarchy at all times.

That leaves common sense.

Common sense is what compromises the rest of us attempting to conduct ourselves in a law-abiding society, exercising our rights, while protecting the rights of others, all in a responsible manner.

HB 35 is a step in the direction of common sense.  Called a tepid victory by one side, and tyranny by the other.  Those with common sense and who are law-abiding, do not have a problem with it.  If the contents of HB 35 are the pathway to legal gun purchases,  guess what? Lawful persons will follow that path.  It is a step to keep guns out of the hands of those who are not lawful, or unstable.

#37 was stricken already and that is a good thing.  The author appeared to throw his staff under the bus on that one, but the truth is that the bill was a sloppy piece of legislation.  I believe that we need not repeat the lessons we have,  and are still learning about prohibition.  Further the capacities of magazines and whether a gun has a protruding fore grip has nothing to do with its lethality.  The operator is what makes a gun lethal and it is that fact we need to address.

Now onto the super minority.

If we want to apply common sense in terms of the Governors initiative it is going to take the people who occupy the space in the political spectrum, that are in the middle.  Because calling them moderates infuriates so many people on the right and left, I prefer to call them ” The common sense, rank and file “.  This issue, like so many others, should transcend the letter following your name on your voter registration card and you should decide based on common ground, and common sense.  I get the opportunity to speak with about 10 people a week who I do not know,  through my occupation.  I asked all of them the same question about guns and ammo and magazines.  The response is overwhelming as to the action they want taken.  They want  responsible ownership by those who are not criminals, and stiffer penalties for those criminals who choose to own and use guns.

I guess the question of what is responsible comes next.  I have heard a lot of common sense ideas put forward, and frankly I am okay with most of them.  Some of them are: mandatory gun safes,  training programs, and licensee.  So talk to your friends, coworkers, and neighbors and ask them to support common sense, not prohibition, and not lawlessness.  Urge them to call their representatives and tell them that they support them for choosing common sense,  not voting the party line if they do not agree with it.

Without common sense prevailing, the rights of those of us who are law-abiding, will be diminished as we sit back and watch another failed experiment in prohibition, at our expense.

My views and opinions are mine alone as observed from the bridge of my ship.

Water Pirate

My apologies to the flying spaghetti monster for sullying it’s good name and reputation by using its name to describe the actions of others.

What has happened to politics here in Delaware and the nation?  Why have we reached a point of constant stalemate? It seems as if nothing gets done to actually help the lives of the average citizens of the state, or the nation.

Oh! Sure we get laws to allow people to receive needles to feed their addictions, we get laws that allow more people to gamble away their family’s future. We get laws to legitimize certain  life styles. Or we get laws that would impose one person’s faith upon another person, we get laws that would take away one person’s right in favor of another person’s right.

What we now receive from our government, is an endless number of legislative attempts to buy the votes of single issue, single-minded voters.  Our elected officials and political candidates are so busy trying to figure out which of the multitude of single issue sub groups out there will bring them the most votes, that they have lost the vision of the bigger picture of running for office, and more importantly, of actually governing in a manner that benefits the most people, not simply the bare minimum of a majority to win an election.

So how did we get here?

Some would say it is the amount of money involved in the political process of today that has corrupted the process. I would say that this is definitely a part of the problem.

In reality though it is a circular  problem. At some point, and I am not sure when, the process became an attempt at getting elected simply for the sake of being elected. The high-minded ideals of being elected so as to actually serve the people was lost. At this point the people and their needs as citizens became a secondary consideration to the need to be elected.

This caused the political calculations to reign supreme over the needs of the people. So politicians began calculating which issue would buy them the most votes. They started calculating which issue would lose them the most votes. No where in these calculations is the benefit to the citizens as a whole entered into the equation.

Now of course it is a political reality that to govern, one must first win, and to win one must appeal to that bare minimum of a majority. I get it. Does this mean that our leaders cannot do this by appealing to the people on issues that affect all of us? Instead of playing the single issue game?

As I said though, this is a circular problem, it is not just the politicians who have caused this problem, the citizens themselves have added to this problem.  By demanding that elected officials pander to their single issue, be it abortion, or gay marriage, these sub groups demand lock-step, one hundred percent, check list politics from their candidates and those who are elected. In doing so, they force the officials to attempt to spin issues, tell half-truths, to work to never offend even the offensive.

We live in a representative republic, and that means that it is a partnership between the governed and the government. If the people demand, then the government will react. So it is the responsibility of the governed to be responsible in their demands, for as the old saying goes, “be careful what you wish for!”.

Let’s face it, we have gotten to this point mainly due to human nature. It is human nature to be a bit selfish in our wants and desires. This includes our political wants and desires. So it is not surprising that we as a state and a nation have evolved into a people who seek only those things that would directly benefit our own lives, and are unwilling to tolerate, or pay for, the things that benefit others.

We as a people, have come to the conclusion, that it is a zero-sum game. That for one side of a debate to gain,  the other side must lose. In some cases this is naturally true. But does not have to be true in every case.

Too many citizens have also lost the vision of the bigger picture. They no longer see themselves as a part of the state, or the nation. They simply see themselves as members of some small single issue sub group, be it gun owners, or pro-choice advocates, or any number of single issue groups.  And in doing this, the citizens have forced in large part, the politicians to react, because remember this is a representative republic, and so if the citizens demand this behavior, is it surprising that the politicians represent those views? I think not.

This is why I believe we are seeing a deterioration  of the political process.  Far too many citizens are demanding this check list form of government.

These citizens want, no demand, that every candidate, for every office, meet some arbitrary check list, that meets their own personal views. If a candidate strays from this check list on even a single view, on a single issue, then they are cast overboard in favor of the next politician who will spin and tell half-truths to gain that bare minimum of a majority. The voters have become so intolerant of opposing views, that they have forced their representative to be just as intolerant.  This intolerance has gotten to be so prevalent that any form of compromise on the part of an elected official with the other side of a debate, is seen by the voters as a complete sell out, and these politicians are then targeted for retribution in the next election.

While I understand that not all voters will be able to see the larger picture of why it is often necessary to compromise with your opposition,  there is a faction of voters out there that just don’t care. These voters are on both sides of the political spectrum, call them liberal or conservative, right-wing or left-wing, Democrat or Republican, this faction of the voting citizenry are completely opposed to any form of compromise with their fellow citizens. They demand of elected officials a form of government that allows only one side to gain in any debate or settlement of an issue.

Unfortunately, it seems as if these citizens are always the loudest, if not the most numerous among us. They are the shouters, they are the people who show up at meetings and threaten, not only elected officials and candidates, but their fellow citizens.  They are constantly crying, “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”, they attempt to convince as many people as possible that the world will end if there is compromise on even a single view of a single issue.  They seek not to work for the benefit of all citizens, or even a majority of citizens, they seek only to move their narrow-minded agenda forward, and will mow down any and all who stand in their way with verbal abuse and threats of retribution.

So is it any wonder that our politicians reflect this behavior when running for office, and when governing?  Politics has always been a bit of a blood sport, but the true art of politics is compromise that leaves both parties feeling as if they have made a gain. We no longer understand that art. Too many people are demanding that our politicians take no prisoners. That to win, the other side must be totally destroyed on every front.

The problem with that mentality is that  we as a people no longer recognize that while yes, the two major parties in Delaware and the United States, have opposing views on how to solve the problems and issues facing the people, there is no reason why they cannot work together to solve them, as long as the end goals are the same. To ensure that the people have the opportunity to achieve life, liberty, and happiness.  But to do this, the people must first understand they are not the only people in the world, and that to compromise in order to move the flag of your agenda, does not necessarily mean that your opponent’s flag must be moved backwards. To think this way is what is systemically wrong with politics today.

We see the political process as a battle ground where one side must push back the other side in order to make a gain, when we as citizens of the same nation should se it as a race, where each contestant is moving in the same direction and the goal is to end up in the same place. And that place should be to ensure that the United States of America and the state of Delaware are the freest, safest, strongest, most productive places to live. To do this, we as citizens, must learn at times, to put aside our personal check list, in favor of what is best for our fellow citizens.

Has Your State Stolen Money From You?

Listeners often call my radio program saying their state stole money from them, or they received a letter warning them of the impending theft.

The lucky ones get a letter.

Jeff Rogatz tells News Journal reporter Jonathon Starkey of his youngest son’s education account, kept at the brokerage firm Charles Schwab. One month, the account held $2,500. The next month, the balance was zero.

Nate Beeler / Columbus Dispatch (click to view more cartoons by Beeler)

Rogatz placed a call to Charles Schwab. A spokeswoman admitted that the firm “escheated” Rogatz’s money to the state.

“I don’t really pay that much attention to the statements. I just happened to look at it this time,” Rogatz admitted to Starkey.

States around the country are changing the rules of claiming abandoned property. Why? Because they want to take the money in the life insurance policy your grandmother never cashed or collected. They really want to keep the millions of dollars corporations leave unaccounted for.

I spoke with Council on State Taxation (COST) President Doug Lindhom about this. COST tracks business tax issues and Lindhom warns states are decreasing the holding periods for your property. The holding period is the amount of time your state tax collector perspires, waiting until he can steal your money. States never considered your money to be “abandoned property” unless it languished for 5 or 7 years. Now they’re reducing it to 3 years. So, if you have a savings account, college brokerage account or any money that just sits quietly minding its own business, you’d better not miss that letter that’s supposed to go out, or your kid’s college money is now a stranger’s state college grant.

States also hire third-party bounty-hunting auditors who scour records of financial firms looking for such “abandoned property.” They will find it because they are paid on a contingency fee; they only get paid when they find money the state can steal.

These laws, known as escheat laws, were put in place by rare and ancient forebears of our current lawmakers in order to return forgotten wealth to its owner or the owner’s heirs.

Known as “public servants,” these freaks of nature conceived of a government that served the people. That’s an odd way of thinking compared to today’s liberals who recognize the true purpose of government is to transfer citizens’ earnings and savings to the government so the government can take care of all your needs.

(Imagine a smiley face emoticon here.)

Delaware leads the way in escheating money. With 64 percent of Fortune 500 companies and 50 percent of all U.S. companies incorporated in the First State, there are hundreds of millions of dollars being siphoned into the state trough. The state takes stocks, uncashed wage checks, expired gift cards and unaccounted-for inventory at companies. For example, Wile E. Coyote Roadrunner Decoy Company might order 5,000 decoys from Acme Decoy Manufacturing every year. Counting on some damage from shipping, Acme regularly ships an extra 100 decoys with no expectation for payment.

Delaware says Mr. Coyote owes the state $40 for each of those freebies as unclaimed property… for the past 30 years! That’s $120,000 for just one supplier! Buck up, pal!

So much for Delaware being “business friendly!”

Delaware also successfully sued Staples, Inc. over unclaimed rebates for large-volume business customers. The value of those rebates must also be turned over to the state.

Imagine that. You give out, say, $1,000,000 in rebates and then the Sheriff says you have to pay the state $1,000,000 because… um… well… just BECAUSE!

How DARE a business use rebates for marketing!

Solution: Elect candidates who promise to increase holding periods to 5 or 7 years, get rid of contingent-fee third party bounty-hunting auditors who work for their own bank accounts, and tax real earnings, not pretend earnings.

Let’s elect candidates who believe your property is indeed your property, replacing those who believe “escheat” must be French for “let’s cheat.”

The following is an announcement from the Facebook page of Sam Chick .

I remember when I was younger, that we kids would always look forward to the Saturday afternoon matinée at the local movie theatre.  Especially in the summer time. There was just something fun and special about going from the bright hot sunlight of a summer day, into the cool darkness of the theatre.

You would buy your box of popcorn, which didn’t require a loan and two references, and a box of your favorite candy, and a soda the size of which would have sent Mayor Bloomberg into cardiac arrest.

Back then the theatres actually had balconies, and of course as a kid you wanted to sit as high up and a far back as you could, so you would race up the steps to get what you perceived as the perfect seat. Hoping that your nose wouldn’t bleed from the heights.

Of course there were all kinds of movies shown at a Saturday afternoon matinée, but the westerns were always the best. Imagine seeing those sprawling cinematic vistas projected upon a screen the size of the side of a barn. Back then movie makers would actually film scenes in which the camera would take long panning shots of the beauty of the landscape, this was before the MTV style of quick pasted together shots dominated the industry.

One of my best memories, is of going to one of these afternoon matinée in 1969 I believe it was, to see John Wayne in the movie, “True Grit”  . This would end up being John Wayne’s only Oscar win for best actor. It was the story of a broke down, drunken U.S. Marshal named Rooster Cogburn, who was hired by a teenage girl seeking the killer of her father,  this role was played by Kim Darby. The two were joined in this hunt by  young Texas Ranger La Boeuf, played by of all people Glen Campbell, who rounded out this little three person posse.

I watched as they tracked down the killer of Mattie Ross’ father, Tom Chaney, who was riding with the gang of Ned Pepper, played by a young Robert Duvall. Pepper was really why both Cogburn and La Boeuf were interested in Mattie’s mission at all, since Pepper had a healthy reward on his head, though each had differing ideas of how to settle this.

It was a story of stirring emotions as the three, at first had a union of convenience, but evolved into a friendship which they ended up depending upon, to not only fulfill their goals, but to save each others lives.

It was a story of a man who, though he had his own personal demons, also had great  personal integrity, and as the title implies, had a great deal of true grit.

These types of people, let alone these types of movies are a rare commodity these days. The days of going to a Saturday afternoon matinée to see a good western with posses and lawmen are gone. The movies today are filled now with loud modern music, even the westerns are often scored with hard rock music. The story lines are no longer about integrity and honor, but about romance and relationships, even the western has been turned into a chick-flick.

So since I can’t find that long ago western of posses and gunmen at a matinée movie theatre, I guess I could just go over to Georgetown.