July 2008 Archives

In the same Daily Sun article as here, the reporter had news on the Democrat picnic (which was excised from the report on this site.  However, Democrat Deb Reynolds attempted to tell her fellow Liberals that it really didn't matter - it wasn't their fault.

Uh-huh - sure it isn't!  From yesterday's Daily Sun (P 4):

To the Editor,

In the Sun article published 7/28 (Mars v. Venus: Dems & GOP forming battle lines over fiscal and social issues), Democrat Senator Deb Reynolds remarked about the 17.5% rise in State spending under Democrat control being under Republican attack: “It’s not true,” she exclaimed. The senator insisted that “new” spending measures added up to “barely 3-percent”, with the rest of the increase caused by “things we had no control over”, like the cost of state employee insurance benefits.

You know, I'd love to be able to do my family budget the same way this Democrat Senator does for NH taxpayers. Imagine, only being concerned with “new” spending – while ignoring increases in the “fixed” spending that they've helped to create. Sorry, but non-discretionary spending IS part of the overall budget (after all, you are forcing us to pay for it, right?) even if she wants us to ignore that little-bitty fact.

Like all State spending, everything budgetary can be controlled – the Democrats simply chose not to. After all, with control over all branches of government, the Democrats can choose to control funding, expenditures, programs, and staffing – they chose not to. They could change the law and issue executive orders to control how they use your tax money – but they chose not to. Instead, they chose to spend more, not less. I challenge her to show us anywhere in the budget where Democrats chose to spend less, not more.

NH families have to be concerned with ALL of their spending, especially that spending forced by government taxes. Unlike Senator Reynolds, they know how to prioritize their spending and cut where and when necessary when revenues do not meet expenditures. They know what is really important and what is not for their hard earned money and their family budgets. They know that “fixed” costs have to be managed as well as the discretionary costs. And when needed, the former gets cut, too. And that, managing money, is a traditional NH value.

Skip Murphy
Gilford Town Republican Chair
(Cross-posted over at GraniteGrok)

Reposted from GraniteGrok: (also on PolitickerNH, and from the NH GOP daily eblast)

The 'Grok is a conservative blog - no doubt about it.  The philosophy that drives us includes individual responsibility, limited government, free markets,adherence to the Rule of Law and property rights, and an open and transparent government that is frugal with taxpayer money. Government can not, and should not, try to be all things to all people.  It does not include the over reach of the cloying collective of the Nanny State and the spend-with-no-constraints attitude that seemingly has invaded both the national and NH scene.

We are also Republicans as that party comes closest to the above ideal.  That said, this blog, GraniteGrok, is known for holding Republicans to account for not only their words but for their actions as well.  Our motto is "spank'em when they're wrong, and thank'em when they are right."  We support like minded people who not only say the words but put them to practice and live them.

This morning, we get to thank a Republican that we have come to know as we cover the cultural and political scene (especially here in NH).  During our time in the blogosphere, we have watched an extremely  hard working, well spoken, knows all the issues type of guy that shows how to make a dollar stretch to the max in getting his message out.  Coupled with a brevity of speech that makes us envious in getting out a maximum message (without sounding like a sound bite machine) and the ability and willingness to always be working at Internet speed has impressed us.  He lives his campaign motto of "I may be outspent but I will never be outworked" as he seems to be in all places at once.  His conservative foundation has rung a friendly bell here at the 'Grok.

We are proud to announce that in NH's 2nd Congressional District, we are supporting

Grant Bosse

for the U.S. House of Representatives.  This is in no way a negative reflection on his competitors - we believe that any of his competitors would be a huge improvement over the current holder of that seat.  We just feel that Grant epitomizes the philosophy, the work ethic, and the knowledge of  the Internet that tomorrow's candidates will need - but he is doing it today!

We ask our readers who live in NH's Congressional District Second District to give Grant a very close look.  If you feel that government should supply your every (or even most) need, he's not your guy.  If you believe that we owe all that we are and have to government, he's not your guy.  If you believe that government knows more than you do about taking care of your family, he's not your guy.

If you feel that government is more often the problem rather than a solution, that it costs more than it should, that government is slowly taking your freedom away via taxes, regulations, and laws - then HE'S YOUR GUY!

Please vote Grant Bosse in the Republican primary in September.  Then vote again for him in November and take the seat away from Paul Hodes (you remember him - the guy that tried to take on the Moms of Fury - and lost!). 

From the Laconia Daily Sun (7/28, P1 et al)

Mars v. Venus: Dems & GOP forming battle lines over fiscal and social issues
By Ed Engler
 

Its hard for most people to get worked up about politics in the middle of a brief New England Summer so it was no surprise that the number of people who showed up at local Republican and Democratic gatherings a Sunday ago could be measured in 10s and not in hundreds. The folks who attended a kick-off event for Republican Greg Knytych’s campaign for the N.H. Senate at the Weirs Beach Community Center and, later in the day, at the annual Belknap County Democratic Party picnic at the Opechee Park Clubhouse are among the real die-hards.

Many of them were party officials and candidates.

Though almost exclusively “preaching to the choir”, the candidates had a chance to polish their public speaking skills and sound the themes that will dominate the local political discussion this fall.

The content of the speeches also dramatized that, to borrow a phrase, Republicans are from Mars and Democrats from Venus — or is it the other way around — for it at times is hard for a neutral observer to imagine that people who share the same general, American space could be so different.

The Republicans are on the outs in Concord for the first time since since the 19th Century. It has been that long since the Democrats have occupied the governor’s office and controlled both the Senate and the House at the same time.

“Now they have a record to run on,” Republican operative Sam Pimm of Concord encouraged the 15 or so people gathered for pulled-pork sandwiches and Kellerhaus ice cream at Knytych’s gathering, signaling the GOP’s aim to counter-punch against what they see as readily apparent Democratic failures.

Specifically, speaker after speaker blasted Democrats for increasing spending at the state level for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 by 17-percent and agreeing to borrow $80-million to fulfill the constitutional obligation to balance the state budget.

Knytych, who represents Ward 1 on the Laconia City Council, told friends he wants to go replace Sen. Kathy Sgambati in Senate District 4 because, “I want to stop this irresponsible spending”. “We don’t have a budget problem,” he said of the action to borrow millions, “we have a spending problem . . . (state) revenues are increasing, just not enough (to cover expenditures).”

The first-time candidate for state office scoffed at Democrat suggestions the state is facing a budget deficit that could run into the hundreds of millions because they were unaware of the likelihood of a national economic downturn when the two-year budget was drafted in 2007. “They knew,” he said. “They just didn’t care.”

Former Congressman Jeb Bradley of Wolfeboro, who is running to get his old First District job back, sounded another familiar theme when he predicted all the spending in Concord, left unchecked by Republicans, was going to lead to an income tax.

Democrats have been flooding the Letters to the Editor for a while without much of a Republican response.  Well, that is now starting to change.  Dave Horvath is no longer willing to let those Letters be free publicity for ideologies that we know to be wrong.  His latest missive is here (others over at GilfordGOP.org) - c'mon folks, join him!

Once again, Dave takes on the illogic of the left, proceeds with logic!  From the Laconia Daily Sun (7/28, P5):

To the editor,

Last week, Senator John McCain spoke very passionately, eloquently and adroitly as he addressed questions on Veteran’s medical care from the N.H. Veterans delegation. His concerns and solutions included better medical attention and helping the homeless veterans. There was no doubt in my mind that his words were sincere. The audience in Rochester concurred. Senator McCain’s history of military service and sacrifice is unimpeachable.

The surge in Iraq has succeeded and I am personally glad that Obama has crawled out from his hiding hole, with his new found courage and freshly grown anatomical parts, and is taking this pilgrimage to the Middle East. Some say that he left the country out of fear that Jesse Jackson wanted to harvest these new appendages. This is his fi rst trip in three years. John McCain has been there eight times. John McCain is one of the prime reasons that we even had the surge and its subsequent success. Obama cannot even acknowledge that it was successful militarily and politically. However, as it was billed as a fact finding trip, most wise people would wait until they landed and actually talked to the generals before offering the results of the investigation.

Obama thought it necessary to remove from his website any reference to his two-year opposition to the surge prior to embarking. Why? So now I am asked to go to his website and see how he cares for our military and our veterans. You are trying to convince me that Obama is not the arrogant elitist that has shown open disdain for our troops and steadfastly voted against funding them. Words have meaning. It helps to convince me if they are not changed constantly as Obama does his.

Once upon a time politics ended at the waters edge. Gore, Kerry, Reid, Clinton, Pelosi, et. al. have created a new political art form in their overseas excursions and the blame President Bush, blame America first mantra. Obama has had ample opportunity in the recent past to meet with our Generals, specifically General Petraeus, in Washington. He chose not to. When his prime sponsors, the far left radical, Moveon and DailyKos, ran the “General Betray Us” infamous ad in collaboration with the “New York Times”, Obama could have joined with most of our senators and congressmen and denounced this ad. He opted out. How does Obama’s “fight the smears" site address these truths?

Obama has not held one Senate meeting, let me repeat that, not one meeting, on Afghanistan affairs and he is the chair. Today, he tried to take credit for the financial pressure that has been exerted by the U..S against Iran, claiming it was his banking committee’s efforts. He is not on that committee. Today, he said Iran is a grave threat. He used to say it was a puny country. A year ago he wanted to meet with Iran’s leaders without “preconditions”. He has been waffling ever since. Truth or smears?

Senator John McCain was accurate and honest with his assessments of Obama and most defi nitely justifi ed in making these criticisms. Most people recognize that Obama is not qualifi ed to lead this nation in any capacity.

Cathy Merwin is correct. We need to start paying attention to the truth. I would suggest that she differentiate between truth, talking points and opinion. There is only one set of facts from which truth can be derived.

David R. Horvath, Sr.
Gilford

And who, pray tell, invoked this righteous missive - look after the jump!

Date:              July 22, 2008
Contact:          Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party
                      603-225-9341 office, 603-520-5450 cell


CONCORD – Fergus Cullen, Chairman of the New Hampshire Republican party made the following statement today:

“Barack Obama’s comments about the surge last night either display a profound misunderstanding of what’s happening on the ground in Iraq or an inability to admit mistakes when it might hurt him politically. There is only one candidate in the race who has always put the national interest ahead of his political ambition, and that’s John McCain.”

Last Night, Obama Said That Even Knowing What He Knows Now, He Would Not Have Supported The Surge:

Obama Told ABC's Terry Moran That, Despite The Progress That Has Occurred In Iraq, He Would Not Have Supported The Surge. Moran: "'[T]he surge of U.S. troops, combined with ordinary Iraqis' rejection of both al Qaeda and Shiite extremists have transformed the country. Attacks are down more than 80% nationwide. U.S. combat casualties have plummeted, five this month so far, compared with 78 last July, and Baghdad has a pulse again.' If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you -- would you support the surge?" Obama: "No, because -- keep in mind that -" Moran: "You wouldn't?" Obama: "Well, no, keep -- these kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult . Hindsight is 20/20. I think what I am absolutely convinced of is that at that time, we had to change the political debate, because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with." Moran: "And so, when pressed, Barack Obama says he still would have opposed the surge." (ABC's "World News," 7/21/08)

 
When The Surge Was Announced, Obama Said It Would Not Work And Would Potentially Increase Sectarian Violence In Iraq:

In January 2007, Obama Said He Did Not Know Of Any Middle East Expert Or Military Officer That Believed That The Surge Would "Make A Substantial Difference On The Situation On The Ground." Obama: "We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality -- we can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don't know any expert on the region or any military officer that I've spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 1/14/07)

 
Obama: "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse." (MSNBC's "Response To The President's Speech On Iraq," 1/10/07)


After The Surge Was In Effect, Obama Said It Had Potentially Worsened The Situation In Iraq:

In July 2007, Obama Said The Surge Had Not Worked In Iraq. Obama: "Well, actually, I think there was a very serious debate, and it's based on some fundamental differences. I think reasonable people can differ on this issue because there are no good options in Iraq. We should not have gone. At this point we have bad options and worse options. But we are facing a choice. My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now." (NBC's "The Today Show," 7/18/07)

In November 2007, Obama Said The Surge Has Not Worked, And Had Potentially Worsened The Situation In Iraq. Obama: "Finally, in 2006-2007, we started to see that, even after an election, George Bush continued to want to pursue a course that didn't withdraw troops from Iraq but actually doubled them and initiated a search and at that stage I said very clearly, not only have we not seen improvements, but we're actually worsening, potentially, a situation there." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 11/11/07)


A Year After The Surge Was Announced, Obama Admitted That It Had Improved Security And Claimed That He Always Said It Would Do So:

In January 2008, Obama Claimed That He Always Said That Increasing The Number Of Troops In Iraq Would Improve Security. Obama: "Now, I had no doubt, and I said at the time when I opposed the surge, that given how wonderfully our troops perform, if we place 30,000 more troops in there, then we would see an improvement in the security situation and we would see a reduction in the violence." (Sen. Barack Obama, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 1/5/08)

In February 2008, Obama Said That It Was "Indisputable" That Violence Had Been Reduced In Iraq." CNN's Campbell Brown: "Senator Obama, in the same vein, you were also opposed to the surge from the beginning. Were you wrong?" Obama: "Well, I think it is indisputable that we've seen violence reduced in Iraq. And that's a credit to our brave men and women in uniform." (Sen. Barack Obama, CNN/ Univision Democrat Presidential Debate, Austin, TX, 2/21/08)  

 
Despite Admitting That The Surge Had Reduced Violence, Obama Said That "We Don't Need More Spin About How The Surge Is Succeeding":

In May 2008, Obama Said "We Don't Need More Spin About How The Surge Is Succeeding." Obama: "We don't need more spin about how the surge is succeeding in doing what it was supposed to do which is to get the Iraqi's to stand up and take responsibility for their own future, so we can start sending our troops home." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Town Hall, Rapid City, SD, 5/31/08)

 
Obama Recently Admitted That The Surge Has Improved The Situation In Iraq:

In July 2008, Obama Said He Was "Pleased To See The Reductions In Violence That Have Occurred" In Iraq. Obama: "Now, that does not detract from the extraordinary work our troops have done. They have performed brilliantly throughout the process. And obviously, I am very pleased to see the reductions in violence that have occurred over the last several months. There's no doubt that because of their heroism and their outstanding work, we had the opportunity to salvage the situation in Iraq." (Sen. Barack Obama, Interview With Military Times, 7/2/08)

PolitickerNH: By Brian Lawson

A UNH poll contains good news for U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes (D-Concord) but show trouble for U.S. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-Rochester).

According to The Granite State Poll, Shea-Porter is losing to former U.S. Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro) 46 percent to 40 percent. However, the same poll has Shea-Porter beating Bradley's primary rival, former Health and Human Services Commissioner John Stephen 42 percent to 36 percent.

Bradley enjoys a 48 percent favorable rating, while 62 percent of voters say they do not know enough about Stephen. Shea-Porter is viewed favorably by 35 percent of voters and 32 percent view her has unfavorable.

In the 2nd Congressional District Hodes holds substantial leads over state Sen. Bob Clegg (R-Hudson) and Jennifer Horn (R-Nashua).

Hodes leads Clegg 44 percent to 25 percent and beats Horn 43 percent to 23 percent.

Both Clegg and Horn remain unknown to most voters. 62 percent of voters do not know enough about Clegg and 77 percent say the same about Horn.

The poll did not match Hodes up against either Jim Steiner (R-Concord) or Grant Bosse (R-Hillsboro).

(Charts over at GraniteGrok)

PolitickerNH.com:
By Brian Lawson

A new poll has former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D-Madbury) leading U.S. Sen. John Sununu (R-Waterville Valley) by four points, that puts Shaheen within the poll's margin-of-error of 4.3 percent.

The Granite State Poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, shows Shaheen beating Sununu 46 percent to 42 percent. UNH's last poll in April had Shaheen leading Sununu 52 percent to 40 percent.

The poll also shows that 72 percent of voters are still trying to determine which candidate to vote for in November.

Sununu has a favorability rating of 52 percent, while Shaheen is viewed favorably by 53 percent of voters.

(See the poll results over at GraniteGrok).

From Townhall.com - Paul Jacobs:


Is there any governmental goofiness Democrats won’t support?

Having abandoned limited government, Democrats are left with mere prejudice as a guide: As long as a program uses the power of the federal forces in Washington, and, in at least some backhanded way, increases that power, it just “must” be good.

There’s one exception, I guess — when Republicans think of it first.

So, what’s next?

Charity. Governments now duplicate a lot of charitable efforts. But charities remain somewhat independent. For too many politicians, that’s a bug, not a feature.

When Alexis de Tocqueville visited American shores on his 19th century sociological survey, he was astounded at how vibrant Americans were regarding charity and social betterment. See a problem? Then do something. Americans formed committees. Societies. Projects. They went to work. They accomplished things.

Now, though, after years of government usurpation of many of those causes, and the creation of a vast Leviathan state that Tocqueville did not witness this side of the Atlantic, our voluntary community sector seems weak. But that may be an optical illusion, in comparison with the old days . . . and with that very same federal government. In any case, it is said that Americans increasingly “bowl alone”; and, alone, become increasingly disengaged from their communities, their neighborhoods, etc.

The solution?

Join a local group, take to the soapbox, ring doorbells, hold festivals and bake sales and seminars? Publicize your cause using the new tools of the Internet . . . or that retro mimeograph machine you bought for 50¢ at the flea market? Raise money, and direct it to specific goals? Lead by example?

No. That wouldn’t do. Can’t have anything like that! Why, such techniques might actually smack of good ol’ American can-do-edness.

What we need, apparently, is more government.

Why? Well, ask Barack Obama, the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for the presidency.

His solution is to bureaucratize charity

Trying to take lessons from the Teflon / do nothing Gov?  And the press is beginning to notice! 

From Fergus:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date:                July 17, 2008
Contact:           Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party
                        603-225-9341 office, 603-520-5450 cell
 


CONCORD –   The Nashua Telegraph recently reported on Jeanne Shaheen’s campaign strategy of avoiding taking positions on major policy issues, noting that she is short on specifics, never veering too far from the talking points fed to her.

During her campaign for U.S. Senate, Shaheen has already refused to offer specific details on major issues and has rebuffed requests from the media to provide opinions on recent national security legislation and a landmark Supreme Court case. New Hampshire voters are also waiting for her to explain why she has refused to support legislation that will increase funding for the state’s acute care hospitals by over $20 million per year.

“Jeanne Shaheen’s decision to duck many of the major issues in this campaign shows her complete lack of political courage and inability to make any statements beyond her standard talking points issued by Washington insiders,” said New Hampshire GOP Chairman Fergus Cullen.

“Her unwillingness to answer simple questions about her positions reminds Granite Staters of the mediocrity and failed leadership that epitomized her six years in the corner office. It’s no surprise that Jeanne Shaheen wants to avoid a discussion on the issues given her history of election year flip-flops and her legacy of increased spending and higher taxes,” said Cullen.

Jeanne Shaheen Has Refused To Take Positions On Major Policy Issues:

The Nashua Telegraph: "[T]his is the posture Shaheen will take for as long as she can: Keep her own specifics to a minimum, except on those issues she believes are in her favor…In the meantime, the mantra is to keep this campaign in full metal jacket, attack mode against the incumbent… She tipped that strategy quite clearly during a Concord Monitor editorial board meeting late last month." ("State House Watch: Three Bills Waiting For Action” The Nashua Telegraph, 7/13/08)

The Eagle Tribune Reports That Jeanne Shaheen Failed To Take A Position On The Recent Supreme Court Ruling Affirming Second Amendment Rights: "U.S. Sen. John Sununu's office released a statement saying the Supreme Court ruling got ‘it right.’ Former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen did not return calls asking for a comment." ("N.H. residents, GOP politicians applaud high court gun ruling," The Eagle Tribune, 6/27/08)

The Keene Sentinel Also Reports That Shaheen Also Refused To Comment On The Ruling: "New Hampshire’s Washington delegation was nearly unanimous in its delight. Republican U.S. Senator Judd Gregg said the ruling was ‘a historic moment,’ adding, ‘I applaud the court’s ruling.’ Republican U.S. Senator John Sununu said the ruling ‘gets it right.’ All the candidates we heard from applauded the decision. We didn’t hear from Governor John Lynch or Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen, however.” (Editorial, "Firearm Clarity?," The Keene Sentinel, 6/30/08)

Jeanne Shaheen Refused To Say If She Would Vote For Or Against The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) According To The Nashua Telegraph: "Presidential candidate Obama is still stuck in some hot water with his liberal base for voting to support the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act legislation that gives retroactive immunity to telecommunication companies that cooperated in the wiretapping President Bush approved after the Sept. 11 attacks…So how would [Jeanne Shaheen] have voted? We’re still waiting for an answer to that question, posed Thursday afternoon." ("State House Watch: Three Bills Waiting For Action” The Nashua Telegraph, 7/13/08)

Good Afternoon

I just wanted to give you an update on some happenings with Team McCain and the Victory 08 effort. If you can make a phone bank of the town hall meeting please contact the individuals listed below.





                                            Suite 3007




 




 

You are formally invited to attend the official Kick-Off Event of the Knytych 4 Senate campaign. This event will run from 1 - 3 PM on July 20th.

This is a free event and there will be Pulled Pork Sandwiches, Chips and Corn. There will also be Ice Cream courtesy of the Kellerhaus.

I have invited the candidates for the 1st Congressional District, NH House candidates from the towns in the 4th NH Senate District (Alton, Barnstead, Belmont, Gilford, Gilmanton, Laconia, New Durham, Strafford and Tilton) and many of the residents of these towns. This will allow you the opportunity to meet with the others that are running for office in our area and to hear why I can win this election.

I look forward to seeing you there.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                         CONTACT: Stefani Zimmerman
July 14, 2008                                                                                       (603)792-2008


Manchester, NH – U.S. Senator John Sununu (R-NH) issued the following statement today on President Bush’s decision to lift the executive ban on offshore exploration:

“The President’s decision today to lift the executive ban on offshore exploration is a good first step towards lowering energy prices and reducing our dependence on foreign sources of oil. With oil at over $140 per barrel, the time to act is now. For too long the liberal special interests have blocked every reasonable attempt to increase domestic production. Only politicians as out of touch as Jeanne Shaheen have maintained their opposition to these common sense energy policies despite the increasing financial burden on New Hampshire families and small businesses. I have supported and will continue to support a balanced approach using the best and cleanest technology to produce more energy here at home. A balanced approach, including new domestic exploration in addition to conservation and renewables, is the only way to bring down prices and make America more energy independent.”

By Rep. DAVID HESS
For the Monitor
July 13, 2008 - 12:00 am

No matter how hard they try, Democrats in Concord just can't sugarcoat their tax, borrow and spend policies of the last two years. A case in point is the recent opinion piece authored by House Speaker Terie Norelli ("Republicans left costly problems for us to solve," Monitor Forum, June 25).

Despite the harsh accusations, half-truths and just plain misstatements, she can't turn this year's budget disaster into an M&M chocolate.

Let's look at the facts. First, state spending. In the 2006-07 biennium, general fund appropriations totaled $2.71 billion. Under the leadership of the Democrats this session, that figure jumped to $3.19 billion; that's an increase of $475 million, or 17.5 percent. This money is raised from taxes and fees paid by you, the taxpayers of New Hampshire.

So how are the Democrats planning to pay for this? First they raised no less than 15 taxes and fees, including a second increase in the cigarette tax in two years. They also found new things to tax, such as charitable games of chance, cigars, registry of deed filings, court filings and many more.

But that wasn't enough to correct the deficit, so they decided to bond $90.5 million to pay the state's current expenses. They did that in a single, hurry up "special" legislative session that ended at midnight June 5 - all without referral to a committee, without a public hearing and with inaccurate information and misrepresentations
on the House floor.

Bonding school building aid

The history of this issue is particularly disturbing. In early May, the governor proposed bonding $80 million in school construction aid to help pay for the budget deficit. After a hearing before a joint House-Senate committee, this proposal was unanimously rejected - with the House Democratic leadership leading the charge. Then, barely three weeks later, during our midnight special session, and without a word of explanation or justification, the Democratic leadership did a 180-degree turnaround and passed this bonding on a straight party- line vote.

Not only that, but they threw in another $20 million in bonding to boot, all with no public hearing or any public input whatsoever. So much for the democratic process.

And what about some of the other misleading comments in Speaker Norelli's piece? Yes, indeed, the State House roof was leaking in the spring of 2007, but it was the previous Republican House that passed the appropriations to fix it.

As for the vaunted retirement plan fix, the House did - unanimously, and on a voice vote - pass an excellent bill that was fair to retirees, current employees, employers and taxpayers alike, only to see the big public employees' unions dismantle it in the Senate. In the face of extreme union pressure during the committee of conference, the House Democratic leadership backed down on virtually every major point. So we will be back trying to fix this again next year.

10-year highway plan

Finally, the 10-year highway plan. The Democrats didn't fully fund that either. In fact, when Commissioner Charles O'Leary presented the plan, he realistically asked for a six-year plan, which was unanimously endorsed by committee Republicans because it was fully funded, honest and straightforward in its design. Again, the Democrats chose smoke-and-mirrors legislation.

Maybe if Speaker Norelli and House Democrats were less concerned with blaming Republicans and appeasing the governor, but instead concentrated on doing the work of the people, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.

(Rep. David Hess of Hooksett is the deputy House Republican leader.)

From the McCain NH campaign, a note to those that wish to assist:

Town Chairs, 

 

My name is Ben DiSesa and I am writing to you on behalf of the McCain campaign from the Manchester Office on 250 Commercial Ave, Manchester, NH.  We are strongly involved in gathering volunteer support for McCain and as you probably know, just opened the office last week.  We now need volunteers to come down and help to organize volunteer events.  We are also opening up offices around NH and are going to need dedicated people to staff them.  My cell phone number is (603) 978-5710, my email is Ben@nhgop.org, and you can contact me at anytime if you have any questions about what you can do to help McCain and other Republicans get elected.  With only 120 days left until the election, we can't stress enough how important it is to build a strong support network of volunteers.  Starting tonight at 5 pm people will be coming to the Manchester office and anything you can do, either by volunteering yourself, or giving this information to people who you know can help, would be appreciated. 

We need volunteers as soon as possible!  Thanks,

 

Ben DiSesa

Victory Campaign Staff

603-978-5710

Ben@nhgop.org

The general public has been led by the MainStream Media ("MSM") that the economy is going to blazes in a handbasket.  Problem is, not so fast! 

Recession is defined as two fiscal quarters with negative growth.  The problem for the Democrats is that this past quarter's number is about 0.9% growth - and 0.6% the quarter before.  While nothing to heartily rejoice about, there IS NO RECESSION!  Yet, the Democrats keep harping on it and promising to place even more taxes on it (that policy seems to be working REAL well in Michigan, isn't it - the Dems HAVE created a recession in that state with their policies).

The old saw used to be that full employment in the US labor pool was reached at an unemployment rate of 5%.  So, if we're in a recession (albeit, unemployment is a slight lagging indicator), we should see local percentages well above that, right?

Again, not so fast!  From Fosters:

ROCHESTER — The unemployment rate for the United States rose to 5.2 percent in May from 4.8 percent in April, and most New England states reflected this trend. Joblessness in Massachusetts rose from 3.9 percent to 4.7 percent, for instance, and in Rhode Island, the rate went up from 6 percent to 7.2 percent.

The unemployment rate in New Hampshire and Vermont, however, went down in May. Vermonters now have a jobless rate of 4.6 percent, and in the Granite State the latest figure is 3.8 percent (down from April's 3.9 percent), which places it as the 13th lowest out of 50 states. A year ago, in May 2007, New Hampshire's unemployment rate was 3.5 percent.

Do you think that having low taxes has something to do with this (start shaking your head up and down!)?  So, how did Belknap County fare in May?

Belknap County         3.8 percent,
Carroll County           3.9 percent
Rockingham County   4.2 percent.
Strafford County        3.6 percent

And some of the the towns?  April unemployment rates as follows:

Alton	4.1
Barnstead	3.6
Belmont	3.5
Farmington	4.2
Gilford	3.5
Gilmanton	3.8
Laconia	4.4
Meredith	3.6
New Durham	3.7
Ossipee	5.5
Rochester	4
Sanbornton	2.9
Strafford	3.6
Tilton	3.4
Wolfeboro	3.1

Employment sectors: May

Construction         Employed 29,100 people in May.
                            Up 2,400 over April
                            Up 500 a year ago.

Manufacturing      Employed 77,800 people

          Up 200 over April
Note: the steady hemorrhaging of factory jobs that has been a feature of this decade seems to have been staunched.

Retail Trade         Employed 97,500 people in May.
                            Up 1,200 over April
                            Up 500 a year ago

Wholesale Trade   Employed 28,900 people in May.
                             Up 400 jobs over April 

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
                            Employed 38,000 people in May.
                            Up 200 over April
                            Up 600 a year ago

Health Care and Social Services
                            Employed 82,300 people in May
                            Up 200 over April
                            Up 2,600 a year ago

Still, perception is reality - we need to get out the message that the economy, while not as robust as before, is still not in a recession.