Column for May 3, 2012

It is not all that unusual for me to be stuck in a hotel room instead of being with my family at night.  I occasionally have to travel for my job, and thankfully it is not an every week thing.  Though I would much rather be at home with my toddler saying “Hold me, Daddy!” because he is a bit jealous of the new baby and enjoying a home cooked meal with my family, this is a small sacrifice that I have to occasionally make in order to keep and properly execute my position of employment.  How is all of this relevant?  Well, it relates to the frustration my wife and I experienced this past weekend.

We were shopping for some household essentials, and we were not sure how we were going to pay for all that we put into our shopping cart.  I understand being on a tight budget.  I have gone through periods of lean times.  I have gone through periods of abundance, as well.  My wife has not been working for three years now, and we are minus an entire paycheck each and every pay period.  However, we decided that we would suffer through anything we had to in order to allow her to stay at home and raise our children rather than her work to have just enough to pay some day care center employees do it for us.  Add to that the high utility bills in Selma, a mortgage, car payments, and now a monthly payment for an expensive new air conditioning system, and we have a tighter than desired monthly budget.

Ahead of us in line at the checkout was a couple with at least one infant (that is all I saw at the time) paying for their groceries with three separate transactions.  The first was a WIC voucher, the second was paid for with a food stamp card and a little bit of cash, and the third was yet another WIC voucher.  My wife and I just looked at each other in wonder.  We had three children with us and a full grocery cart.  We had to come up with a method of paying for our own groceries and there we were helping pay for the groceries that were purchased in front of us as well.

Add to that the frustration that the couple were definitely “English as a Second Language” class candidates of most likely questionable legal status, and we were all the more frustrated.  According to the Center for Immigration Studies (as long ago as 2004), the costs of food stamp, WIC and free school lunch programs to "illegal alien households" costs approximately $1.9 billion per year.  I almost wanted to follow Julio and Maria home and let them serve us supper.  After all, we helped pay for it.  As we were leaving the checkout lane, what did we see behind us?  Another couple with a food stamp card in hand to tender payment for the cart load of groceries.  I am reminded of a quote I read recently from one of our Founding Fathers.

"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects.  It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general.  Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."

~ James Madison, Speech, House of Representatives, during the debate "On the Memorial of the Relief Committee of Baltimore, for the Relief of St. Domingo Refugees" (January 10, 1794)

My wife and I attend a church congregation in Garner.  It is a bit far to go for worship services, but we chose that group of believers out of relationship and preference.  We have been overwhelmed with the graciousness of our church family yet again, who love to bless people in that congregation with meals whenever someone is sick or has a newborn baby.  Others have been blessed as well, going through the loss of a family member.  That is what the Body of Christ is supposed to do to minister to one another.  Locally, there is a church right down the street from my house that gives away groceries every Thursday to people in need.  I just wish I didn’t see some of the same cars and people there week after week, still in need.

As James Madison realized, it is the job of the Church to provide such charity, not necessarily that of the government.  As I am away from my family as a result of being willing to work some long hours and make some small sacrifices in order to feed my family, I am also reminded of the Bible verse in 2 Thessalonians3:10 “... if any would not work, neither should he eat.”  Nonetheless, I am still frustrated in seeing others eat at the expense of others every time I go to the grocery store.

Column for April 26, 2012

Have you been listening to the radio ads, watched some of the TV ads, or seen the roadside signs for this political campaign season?  I was amused by several candidates and their claims or position statements.  Quite frankly, I don’t know how some of these candidates can possibly run on their positions.

I often drive through Harnett County.  James Clark of Dunn is one candidate for state legislature that has some of the absolutely worst campaign signs I have ever seen.  First, they are very busy, meaning that there is far too much printing on them to be able to read while driving down the road.  What I was able to see was “support Obama”.  That means that he is basing his candidacy for state office on his willingness to be complicit with the socialist agenda of the current regime in charge of the national government.  Apparently, turning America into a socialist paradise and usurping the power of the very governmental body for which he is seeking membership is just fine with him.  I almost wish that I lived in Harnett County just so that I could vote against such stupidity.

Just as stupid, in my opinion, was the claim by one candidate running as a conservative, also for the North Carolina House.  Jim Fulghum (House District 49) is a neurosurgeon and a Tea Party favorite.  I am all in favor of a candidate that is conservative and is opposed to the whole Obamacare agenda.  However, Fulghum is running on the platform of opposing Obamacare while running for office at the state, not federal level.  Obamacare is a national government program and legislative act, not a state act.  Therefore, to campaign on the concept of fighting national health care is ludicrous to me.  Oddly enough, his web site says nothing about being against the abhorrent health care law, but that is about all that has been in his advertising thus far.

The only way that a North Carolina legislative body can combat something like Obamacare is to pull a move like South Carolina did prior to the Civil War and say that in North Carolina, Obamacare is null, void, and no law.  That is exactly what is being done in Missouri right now.  Their state house has passed Missouri House Bill 1534.  That bill states “The general assembly declares that [the law] exceeds the power granted to Congress under the United States Constitution and therefore is not law, but is altogether void and of no force.”  Personally, I agree with that quote from the Missouri bill.

I have been surprised to see some of the signs both pro and con regarding Amendment One on the ballot May 8^th.  Amendment One, as you may know, is a proposed amendment to the North Carolina constitution.  If approved, the proposed measure would amend Article 14 of the North Carolina Constitution by adding a new section containing the following:

"Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.  This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts."

Though I have been extremely busy with a newborn, work, medical procedures, and life in general, I have offered to serve as a county coordinator for one organization in support of Amendment One, since there is not one in Johnston County.  So far, nothing has transpired on that front.  I suspect that this close to the election, nothing will happen.  I am having a hard enough time getting yard signs at this point in support of Amendment One.  For what it is worth, I have seen far more signs in support of Amendment One than in opposition to it.

What amazed me were the signs I have seen in opposition to Amendment One.  One sign in particular is in the front yard of a Presbyterian church elder.  Some people simply don’t mind being apostate, even believing that they are virtuous in their beliefs of acceptance of things totally antithetical to the faith they espouse to uphold.  I, for one, fear God more than man on an issue like this.

With politicians like Bob Etheridge, Barack Obama, Senator Kay Hagan, and Governor Beverly Perdue in declared opposition to Amendment One, I find that sufficient reason to make me want to vote for it.  I have seen absolute hateful, lying garbage and false claims from those opposed to Amendment One.  A common lie is that it is a civil rights issue and that the rights of many would be abridged.  No, there is no such right to homosexual marriage in North Carolina as it is, with state legislation prohibiting it.  This would merely codify that law as a constitutional provision.  I am fine with that concept, since it is harder to overturn a constitutional provision than a state law.

This election year is sure to be one of the most important in my lifetime and will determine the fabric of American values for generations to come.  Our American culture will either be reaffirmed or rewritten.

Column for April 19, 2012

Recently, I got some feedback from a friend of mine on an old column that I wrote a few years ago and that I used as fodder last month for a television commentary.  I discussed the idea that the founding fathers of this nation debated and considered requiring property ownership as a pre-requisite to voting rights.  The idea was that since at the time, the primary taxation method was that on property, only those who actually own property are the ones who should be able to vote for those who would set taxes upon it.  That is a concept that I truly like for municipal and county voting, since that is the primary method of taxation at those levels of government.  Furthermore, I believe that those who receive a government check for their subsistence other than via employment should not be able to vote for those who set our national taxation rates.

I made the comment, “I am under no illusion that we will ever see such qualifications for the right to vote in this nation, state, county, or town.  I would settle for having all who would cast a ballot considering the good of the whole population rather than their own dependencies.”  For that, my friend chastised me saying, “Vote with the good of the whole in mind?  Think of the collective? This is what the left wants, collective thought.  I know it was a slip, but BAD TROY!  Self-interest is good, big government is bad that leads to those voting for more government and stuff.”  I knew what he meant, and he knew what I meant.  I agree that self-interest is what drives capitalism and for men to advance themselves, their communities, and their families.  This led to an interesting conversation.

I said to my good buddy, “Yes, the good of the whole.  When one votes with only the paradigm that “I want what I can get from the public treasury”, it is what the big government progressives want.  When it is the concept that even if I don't benefit the greatest from the public largesse but can take responsibility for my own actions and if everyone else does the same, that is the public good.  When taxes are lower for all, that is the public good.  When politicians don't rob responsible citizens and give it to those who won't work, that is the public good.  When the opportunity of all to succeed through the capitalist system is the goal of government rather than equality of outcome, that is the public good.”

We had a brief back and forth from there, with him saying “I know what you meant however it could be inferred as the collective good i.e. the state over the individual.”  I wrapped up my end of the friendly debate by saying, “When I wrote it (some time ago, actually.  It was an old column from a few years ago), I figured that the context of the statement was pretty much, "Stop trying to mooch off us taxpayers by voting for welfare supporting filii illegitimi!"”  The Latin expression was substituted as a euphemism for the vernacular term I actually used.

When I speak of the collective good, I am not using an “it takes a village” communistic mentality.  Even though not everything government does may be in my personal best interest, it can be for the best of all citizens.  Second President John Adams wrote in a letter to Mercy Warren exactly 236 days ago to the day of my writing this column (April 16, 1776), “Men must be ready, they must pride themselves and be happy to sacrifice their private pleasures, passions and interests, nay, their private friendships and dearest connections, when they stand in competition with the rights of society.”

In theory, government is supposed to operate toward certain ends.  In the Bible, the Apostle Peter wrote, "Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good." (1Peter 2:13-14, ESV)  Paul affirms this concept in Romans 13:1-4, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.  For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.  Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.  For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.  Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?  Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.  But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.  For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. “  

I have to admit, though, that with a government that does not properly praise those who do good but rather creates and environment whereby many sponge off those who actually do good, this is a difficult thing for us that are being crushed by taxes and bad government.

Column for April 12, 2012

It is the day after Resurrection Sunday as I am writing this, and I am thinking about Tuesday morning when I will get to hold my newborn son in my arms (past tense as you read this).  Here I am almost 44 years old and my bride and I are having another baby.  I commented on my Twitter account on Sunday, as we were anxiously awaiting little Benjamin’s arrival, “Today we celebrate a vacated tomb. Sharon and I hope to soon celebrate a vacated womb.”  Just today we got the news that our doctor wanted to schedule the delivery of our baby on Tuesday morning.

To give you an idea of where my thought process was going, earlier in the wee hours of the morning, I had written on my Facebook account, “I was woken up by a coughing fit (I think that my bronchitis is coming back) and laid awake for a while thinking about my next newspaper column and TV commentary. Yeah, I write those things in my head several times before ever typing them out.  I figured since I was up and needed my inhaler [prescribed for the recent bout with bronchitis], which was at my desk, I would sit and check online stuff.  The whole time I have been thinking about the impending birth of Benjamin, whose due date is just over a week away. I kept thinking about God's love, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, and how he loved me enough to give his daughter to me and entrust me with my family. This picture [that I shared online] was taken on our wedding day and is perhaps my favorite ever of Sharon and [my stepson] John.  Matthew was conceived the next day, and now baby Ben is almost here.  What an amazing journey it has been to have gotten here.  John has grown so much since this photo.  Lord, may I become the man you want me to be, the father I need to become, the husband I desire to be, and the son you have re-created me to be.  Thank you, Father God, for your grace, your love, your patience, your mercy, and your salvation through Christ, my risen Lord.”

I have given a lot of thought over the years about the values I want to teach my children.  I have my personal convictions, and some of them I will not push upon other people outside of my family, since they are just that, personal convictions.  I don’t mind sharing them, however.  I disagree with many of my contemporaries on some things, even with how one celebrates Resurrection Sunday (I don’t even really like calling it Easter).  I am amazed at how many churches, for instance, sponsor an Easter egg hunt.  I don’t equate the handling of pagan fertility symbols like colored eggs or cute, fuzzy bunnies with the risen Christ.  Nor do I personally find it glorifying to Him.  However, I am not about to condemn those who do celebrate as such. 

I don’t teach my boys about Santa Claus and I cringe when well-meaning people ask my children if “Santa has been good to them this year”.  I will teach them that what began as a great remembrance of a man of faith has been twisted into a fairy tale of commercialism and magic.  Santa will take on the same relevance as Shrek in an animated movie.  I just have a problem telling my children that there is a man who can break into everyone’s house across the entire world in just one night; that he knows when we are sleeping, knows when we are awake, and knows when we are bad or good.  I cannot in all good conscience ascribe attributes of deity (as my theologian buddies would say, incommunicable) to a mere mortal.  If I can lie to my boys about a mythical individual, whom they will eventually disbelieve, how can I expect them to believe in an omniscient God whom they also cannot see (shopping malls and parades with posers in red uniforms excluded)?

I have a hard time teaching the existence of a Tooth Fairy when teaching that Tinkerbell is only a cartoon character.  I have a hard time with teaching the existence of an Easter Bunny and yet teach the truths of Christianity over animism, and that Bugs Bunny is just a cartoon.

Again, these are only my personal thoughts and convictions, and I am not going to condemn anyone who promotes mythical holiday characters.  Every major holiday these thoughts come to mind, and especially now, since my baby boy is about to arrive.

 

Column for April 5, 2012

I was just commenting on Facebook (find me there at user name troylaplante) about how the one race in the upcoming election in which I have not decided for whom I will vote is the District 7 (now that we have been redistricted and out of District 2) Congressional primary.  David Rouzer, a man who has a track record of fairly conservative voting in the NC State Legislature, and Ilario Pantano, a former Marine from New York who relocated to Wilmington and ran last election against liberal Democrat Mike McIntyre are our two conservative choices.

Native North Carolinians, in general, still have a heckuva bias against people who have relocated from the North.  I ran across this, and still do my own self.  I have lived here more than half of my life, was born further south than most local rednecks, and have views that are more in line with North Carolina secessionist leaders from the 1860’s than those of most people around these parts.  And yet, I am still called a Yankee.  Sometimes I hear the occasional carpetbagger allegation.  Pantano seems to be getting that latest epithet.  He is being called an opportunist for running for Congress in North Carolina.  Sure, the name Illario Pantano sounds like something straight out of “The Godfather” trilogy, but then again, the name LaPlante sounds like some French frog straight out of Quebec, which it actually is.

Pantano has received a lot of media attention for an Article 32 hearing (military equivalent of grand jury session) for pre-mediated murder.  None of us were present, so we don’t know what happened.  What we do know is that the military legal session found no justification for the case to go to a trial, and that Second Lieutenant Ilario Pantano was honorably discharged a year later.  What I do know is that he seems to be a conservative and claims to be my brother in Christ.  Those facts make this combat veteran just fine in my book, unless there are other facts of which I am not aware.

So, on the one hand, I have the choice of someone with a track record in a state legislature, which is not a bad thing to have for reference.  Then again, Barack Obama was a state legislator before running for a US Senate seat.  That is absolutely not reflective upon David Rouzer, only an observation that state legislature voting records don’t always matter to all voters.  The good news is that Rouzer seems to be conservative, which is why I supported him in his state level candidacy, and his voting record seems to reflect that.  On the other hand, we have a man who is seemingly a bit more radical in his stances (I often like radicals), and having read his platform of ideas, have a hard time disagreeing with him.

I find it interesting that the www.house.gov web site still shows Renee Ellmers as my Congressional representative, which she technically is.  Since the redistricting seems to be effective for the next election, I guess that I am still in District 2 and not yet in District 7.  District 2 is oddly shaped.  The old District 7 was shaped like one would expect.  I am still a bit stymied about how Johnston County and other surrounding counties got bundled in with the coast.  I did a lot of hunting online for an accurate map of the new Congressional voting districts and found old material, for the most part.  I did find news and commentary by various newspapers, but nothing concrete.  Probably the best description of the new district was found on the NC 7th Congressional District Republican Party web site: “The new 7th Congressional District covers much of southeastern North Carolina, including all of Bladen, Brunswick, Columbus, Duplin, Johnston, and Sampson Counties, most of New Hanover County and parts of Cumberland, Hoke, Lenoir, Pender and Robeson Counties.”

With my job, I frequently travel up and down the highways through all of those counties.  Brunswick County is two and a half hours travel time from my home in Johnston County.  New Hanover County (Wilmington) is a two hour drive.  When I think of voting districts, I would have never equated Wilmington and Shallotte with Smithfield and Selma.  Go figure.

I had originally thought to write about the upcoming ballot referendum for NC Constitution Amendment One, for which I am fully supportive.  What spurred my rambling about the Congressional race was the offer by Rouzer supporters to get a campaign sign for my yard, which I did for Rouzer when he ran for the state legislature.  I then gave the matter thought about how I had not decided for which candidate I am going to vote yet.  That is a rarity for me.

Column for March 29, 2012

The Wake County Board of Commissioners deserves credit for showing courage and common sense by a majority of its members.  Recently, they voted 4 to 3 to pass aresolution supporting North Carolina House Bill 351.  That bill was vetoed by Governor Perdue, but would have been a great step in our state towards eliminating voter fraud.  House Bill 351 would simply have required that voters show a valid identification when going to the polls to cast a ballot.  There has recently been talk of an attempt to override the governor’s veto.  That would be an excellent opportunity to bring common sense to elections.

The big argument against the idea of requiring identification in order to vote is that it would deter people from voting by intimidating old people, and that poor and young people would not have the means to obtain the required identification.  I’m sorry, but this has got to be the most specious argument I have heard in a long time.  If you are elderly, then you most likely have had some form of identification for a long time.  If you are young, you probably have or are going to attempt to obtain a driver’s license.  If you are poor, you still have the need of bank services and transportation to get and use what little money you do have.  When I was poor, and I was for years, I still worked a job, drove myself to work, and cashed the tiny paychecks I received.  I have been working since age 15 and have had a driver’s license since age 16.  Do those who make this fallacious argument really expect me to believe that someone who is poor cannot scrape up the one time investment of ten dollars to obtain even a state issued identification card?

Our old friends at the state NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Crazy People) have sent letters to county governments warning against passing local versions of voter ID laws.  Of course they are playing the race card, as usual, claiming that voter ID laws disenfranchise potential voters.  The real motivation is to stop the prevention of voter fraud.  Without requiring an identification to cast a ballot, people who are not registered to vote, are not qualified to vote, or want to vote multiple times may have a chance at doing so; and of course, voting to support their socialist agenda.

I have to show or carry identification when traveling outside the country, in order to drive a car, to board an airplane, when getting certain pharmaceuticals, when applying for a job, when opening a checking account, when applying for a credit card, when registering a car at the DMV, when seeking medical attention, when donating blood, when purchasing a firearm, when buying automobile insurance, when getting a marriage license, when purchasing a house, when renting an apartment, when purchasing alcohol, when opening an IRA, when establishing electrical service, when writing a check, when getting a library card, when checking into a hotel, or when applying for a passport.  So the NAACP means to tell us that their constituency never does any of that?  Just recently, I had to provide ID to my employer yet again to comply with government regulations for I-9 forms and the E-Verify system.  I have been at my job for over 17 years, have gone through this same procedure numerous times, and yet I had to provide valid ID yet again.  It’s no big deal.

The voter ID bill in North Carolina would require one of eight valid forms of ID.  If someone can’t come up with just one, then they are either too stupid or too irresponsible to cast a ballot.  During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, it was highly debated about requirements for voting.  The requirements were not as simple as being a certain age and just showing up at the polling place.

Arguments against voter ID laws also include the premise that voter fraud is rare.  I would contend that voter disenfranchisement is even rarer than voter fraud.  It is just common sense that if we exalt the concept of “one man, one vote” and fairness in elections, we would take every reasonable measure to ensure that voter fraud is eliminated, that those not qualified to vote do not vote, and that the person voting is who they claim to be.  There is no requirement that you actually cast a ballot.  If you don’t want to show a simple form of identification to validate your vote, then you do not deserve to be able to vote.  Politicians and pundits that oppose voter identification laws simply want to make it easier to perpetuate fraud and their agenda, plain and simple.

Column for March 22, 2012

I have long been a proponent of repealing the 17thAmendment to the US Constitution.  That amendment reads, “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.”  That amendment was ratified in April of 1913, and most of us cannot remember the national senate being otherwise.  Well, prior to 1913, Senators were chosen according to Article I, section 3 of the Constitution which states, “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.”  There is a big difference.  The original method of selecting Senators meant that the Senate was beholden to the individual states that created the federal government.  Since 1913, Senators have been directly responsible to the general population as is the House of Representatives.  There was great wisdom in the original method of selecting U.S. Senators.  The Senate was to look after the interests of the states, not the people.  The House was to look after the interests of the people, not the states.  It was a great balance.

In another section of the Constitution, “The President...shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur” (ArticleII Section 2).  That is a tremendous amount of power for both the President and the Senate.  Presidents negotiate treaties regularly.  They just do not have the effect of law unless the Senate agrees with a two thirds majority.  Why a two thirds majority?  Because under Article VI, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.  That means that treaties that are ratified by the Senate have the effect of law upon us citizens.  That is done without a bill being passed by the House, the Senate, and being signed into law by the President.

I have been reading up on several treaties that are underway.  If for no other reason than what I am about to write, we need to be careful about electing a president and senators.  Liberal, America hating radicals look for every opportunity to harm American sovereignty.  Sovereignty means freedom.  We the people have it, this nation has it.  But this will change if the following treaties are ratified.

The US, with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, is negotiating for a US participation in an international criminal court.  This would subject American officials to criminal charges if a decision is taken to go to war without the permission of The United Nations and give nations like China and Russia a veto over our sovereignty to declare war.  The power of war is the very essence of being sovereign.

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) has been signed by the Obama administration, and if ratified, would force America to give up half of all royalties it gets from offshore drilling.  We would give that money to the United Nations for them to distribute as they see fit to any nation it chooses, with only a single vote from the US as to where the money will go.  The UN would not earn the money and the recipient nations would not earn the money.  We would simply obligate ourselves into just giving it away.  Sadly, some liberal Republican senators are pushing for this ratification.

The administration is attempting to sign on to a small arms treaty that would force nations to stop the exportation of firearms for private use.  I happen to collect antique military firearms, and from nations like France, Switzerland, and Russia in particular.  This treaty would stop the flow of old military pistols and rifles into America for millions of collectors like me.  It would also open the door for total firearms registration.

There is a treaty that would ban “space junk” under the guise of stopping space debris and litter.  In reality, this would prohibit America from deploying a missile defense system in space.  It is colorfully called the “Outer Space Code of Conduct”.

The “Rights of the Child” treaty is designed to extract money from richer nations (read that America) to go to poorer nations, ostensibly for the purposes of clothing, food, shelter, and education of children.  The fund would be administered by a fourteen member court that would sue nations to that end.  That court is already suing over welfare cuts in England, so don’t think for one moment that it wouldn’t do the same thing here.

As you can see, the passage of treaties is nothing to take lightly and it is often overlooked by those who only focus on reasons like Supreme Court nominees when it comes to consideration of senatorial elections.  The Senate is a powerful body by design.  When a powerful body is complicit with a socialist presidential administration, as we have now, American sovereignty and money, as well as individual freedoms can be taken away or seriously limited.  Vote freedom hating senators and presidents out of office.  For that matter, every freedom hating elected representative you can identify.  Keep and restore American sovereignty and individual liberties.

Self explanatory

Column for March 15, 2012

I love reader feedback.  Sometimes I even get a chuckle out of it.  This week I have been absolutely deluged with reader feedback.  Some have been from a few anonymous individuals that don’t have the courage to stand behind their comments.  Others have been from people who think that they have a moral and intellectual superiority and incessantly bicker.  Either way, my column about Miss Johnston County has by far stirred the most feedback in the almost six years I have been writing this column.

I read with interest the response in the newspaper to my column about Miss Johnston County.  I laughed upon reading it, since it was incredibly hypocritical and fairly stereotypical.  What I will say for Miss Bindhu Pamarthi is that she at least took credit for her own rant.  What I found interesting is that the same allegations she leveled in her letter are some of the same inane drivel I was hit with by people who read my column on the internet. 

When you can’t defend with facts, resort to ad hominem attacks.  That is an old tactic used by many people who defend their positions but can’t really refute anything you are saying.  Miss Pamarthi leveled several accusations, as did each attacker on the internet.  Every commentator had the same thing in common.  They simply missed the entire point and construed their own.  The one common thread is that everyone seemed to think that I claimed that Miss Pamarthi was not legitimately the pageant winner or should not have won the crown.  

That is not so and I fail to comprehend how anyone that actually read the column could have arrived at that conclusion.  One person claiming to have an extensive legal training and experience but fails to realize the definitions of ad hominem and libel (of which I was accused) actually quoted a section of the pageant contract that pretty much said the same thing from the document from which I quoted, except that it also included a few more counties from which contestants could hail.  Of all of the accusations of false information that I allegedly propagated, that was the one and only actual point attempting to show any discrepancy with my column as presented.  Either way, it still does not negate my simple point; every time we have a Miss Johnston County from outside of Johnston County, it cheapens the title of Miss Johnston County.

It is amazing to me that for people who claim to be so tolerant of others, these respondents were incredibly intolerant of anyone else’s viewpoints.  When repeatedly asked to show where I was incorrect, for days and dozens of comments, nobody could point to a single thing except to resort to name calling and accusations.  Sometimes they changed the topic and argued a point that was irrelevant to either my column or Miss Pamarthi.

I went out of my way in my commentary to make sure that it was understood that my opinion had nothing to do with race.  Actually, I chose my words carefully since I had heard from several people about how they were offended that someone from out of the county won the crown, that they could not even pronounce her name, and that her ethnic background was nothing like the citizenry of the county.  In my writing, I actually defended Miss Pamarthi’s heritage as not mattering a wit, and I stand by that.  It makes no difference to me as long as she is an American citizen.  And yet who played the “race card”?  Miss Pamarthi accused me of xenophobia in her letter, and some internet commentators accused me of outright racism.  That, my friends, is how the intolerant truly work.  When you can’t prove a point with facts, impugn with ad hominem arguments.  For those who don’t know what ad hominem means, an ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.  That is exactly what the claim of xenophobia (an unreasonable fear of foreigners or strangers) and racism happens to be.   Basically, they were saying that since they thought I was racist, that my opinion had no merit.  Or they thought I had one fact incorrect, therefore my opinion about Miss Johnston County not actually being from Johnston County was moot.  The hypocrisy is amazing.

I do have one suggestion for the Miss North Carolina pageant officials.  In the same spirit of Miss Johnston County repeatedly being from outside of Johnston County, I think that we should let the runner up from the Miss Virginia pageant take over as Miss North Carolina.

More whining in response to my column of March 1, 2012

This letter was in today's "The Selma News".  I found it amusing that the author didn't really sign the letter but rather wrote on behalf of the "organization".  Still, he/she dwells upon minutia.  The minutia was not the main point.  As to "not acceptable", it is not up to the organization to determine public opinion and acceptability.  Period.  I have eyeballs and the point about tiara wearing heifers is occasionally valid.  I laugh about the comparison to NFL teams.  There is no comparison, considering that one is a pageant and one is professional football on a national stage and private industry.  A proper parallel can not be drawn.  It can, however, be drawn to representation by elected officials who carry the title of representing a particular geographical region.  NFL teams are businesses that can be and are often relocated.  A congressman, in by way of example, is always representing his/her district. 

As to the pageant rules being published prior to the pageant, yeah...and...  Again, the actual geography outside of JoCo is irrelevant and minutia.  My point transcends just the Miss Johnston County pageant.  It was merely one example, and my opinion also extends to the Miss Railroad Days pageant, as used as an example in this letter.  By the way, my point about heifers with tiaras was not specific to the Miss North Carolina pageant.  Here is the actual comment.  "Each and every year, I have seen bunches of pageant winners here in Johnston County, especially making appearances in Christmas parades across the county.  Some are beautiful young ladies.  Some are heifers with tiaras."

Whether they love me or hate me, they are reading. And yes, I still stand by my column.

A response to my column of March 1

Since I believe in fairness and sharing both sides (just not from 3rd party whiners and anonymous shmucks if they go horribly off topic and make baseless claims), here is Bindhu Pamarthi's letter to the editor in response to my March 1st column.  Ironically enough, she does the very thing of which she accuses me...false information.  She obviously did not read for comprehension, got some facts incorrect, and made some blatant charges on something about which I went through great pains to avoid.  Eh, whatever.  My response will be forthcoming.  It is already written.

Column for March 8, 2012

Object lessons sometimes can drive the point home a lot easier than attempting to explain complicated concepts to a child. It sometimes works wonders with my nine-year-old. He is often in the car with me when the morning news is on the radio. As such, he will sometimes get civics lectures, history lectures, religious instruction, or just plain common sense discussions depending upon the subject matter on the radio. This is especially true when I have a talk radio program on and we get into discussions. Usually a discussion begins when he sees me get very frustrated and react to what I am hearing.

Just recently, there was a discussion about a famous talk radio show host who referred to a woman that testified before Congress as “a slut”. She had testified about her lascivious lifestyle as well as that of others she knows, and that she can’t afford all the expense of birth control as a result. Forrest Gump said in the movie of that same title, “My mama always said, ‘Stupid is as stupid does.’” Well, the fictional Gump’s mother is not the only one to have always said that; so did my mom. That principle transcends to behaviors as well. 

Because of a lifestyle choice, this woman wanted us taxpayers and/or insurance subscribers to pay for her birth control. If one performs a deed, the one performing it should be responsible for the consequences and responsibilities therefor, not others who are responsible enough to run their own lives well and pay for their own habitual needs. 

It just so happened that my wife and I were in the car with our son and our topic of conversation was about taxpayers paying for the actions and habits of others rather than them paying for their own choices. My son was wondering a bit about the conversation, so I decided to include him in the discussion.

I asked him if he would like to see other children in school get good grades, as he has been getting. Of course he did, was his response. I told him that I would contact the principal of the school and see about taking one of the A grades that he got and split it with a C average student. That way, both he and the other student could enjoy a B grade. “No way,” I was told. “I worked hard for my A. That isn’t fair. I shouldn’t have to get a lower grade just because someone else didn’t do as good as I did!”

“Why not,” I asked? “Why should other students get lower grades than you? What if they don’t have the opportunity to study as much as you do, have parents who make them do their homework, or maybe they just aren’t as smart as you? Why should you get a good grade and them not?”

“Because I earned my grades,” my son interjected. “It isn’t fair that I should work to earn my grades and have them taken away and given to someone who didn’t earn as good a grade! I earned it!”

“Congratulations, you are not a Democrat,” I informed him.

That discussion stuck with him, because he brought it up to me again just today. I know that this will be much to the chagrin of some members of the family who are loyal Democrats, regardless of the candidate or issues.

I remember my wife having a discussion with an elderly member of the family about a corrupt politician that is in office in Harnett County. My wife encouraged this dear old woman to vote for someone else in the (then) coming election. “But we can’t have a Republican in office,” was the naive response. The funny thing is that I know the family’s values. They have a strong work ethic, appreciate freedom, oppose welfare programs, oppose affirmative action, believe in merit based advancement, have been in and continue to run small businesses, want low taxes, and oppose things such as abortion. Those are conservative values, and none of which are traits of the present day Democrat Party. And yet there are people who will continue to vote that way regardless all because of some archaic, fallacious, and dangerous preconceived notion stemming back to the days of abolition.

I am still no fan of the Republican Party, believe me. I lament its current state and in general, its crop of candidates. If I could find an honest, conservative Democrat, he or she would get my vote. I just have not run across any in my lifetime. Then again, I have not run across many GOP candidates that are that way, either.

Column for March 1, 2012

Normally, I would be congratulatory towards someone who has won a beauty pageant, ahem, I mean “scholarship program”.  Not necessarily this time, though.  A while ago, I read that a pretty young lady, Bindhu Pamarthi, won the 2012 Miss Johnston County pageant and will represent our county at the Miss North Carolina pageant.  I have seen a few pictures of her and Bindhu is a very attractive, young lady of Indian extraction.  Her ethnic makeup does not bother me in the least bit.  Sure, I may look around Johnston County and see a whole lot of White, Black,  and Hispanic people and not many Indian or Asian folks.  Still, it does not bother me in the least bit.

I was going to write about this earlier, but I am glad that I held off for a few weeks.  The Miss Johnston County web site was finally updated with information on our new winner, complete with a biography and pictures.  She seems to be an intelligent and accomplished young lady.  She is currently a student at UNC.  According to the official pageant web site, her mother is from Chapel Hill.  Wait, did I just type Chapel Hill?  Yes, I did, apparently.  Chapel Hill?  Since when is Chapel Hill in Johnston County?  And this is not the first time that Bindhu has participated in a Johnston County pageant.  In 2007, she was crowned Miss Johnston County Outstanding Teen.  Back then she was listed as being from Cary.  Other news sources also said that Mrs. Pamarthi is from Cary rather than Chapel Hill, so there are conflicting reports.  To my last recollection, Cary wasn’t in Johnston County, either.

When I checked last year’s winner, prior to the pageant web site update, I saw that the winner was from Raleigh.  Now that is closer to Johnston County, but still definitely not JoCo.  I have lived in North Carolina more than half of my life.  The first nine years I lived in Raleigh and the last fifteen have been in Johnston County.  I think I know the difference in both geography and culture.  The official pageant rules, however, do state that “contestants must be between the ages of 17-24 and must be a resident or student of Johnston, Wake, Harnett, Sampson, Wilson, Nash, or Wayne Counties.”  With a residence of Cary being in Wake County, young Ms. Pamarthi would qualify.  Chapel Hill is like Berkley East, a bastion of liberal and socialist thought in North Carolina.  But for that matter, Cary is pretty close.   

Personally, I think that the Miss Johnston County pageant should have questions like, “What are your views on extending bow hunting season on white tailed deer?” and “What is your favorite brand of hunting scope and why?”  For an evening gown competition, it should be compulsory for each contestant to carry their favorite firearm.  Now if a beauty pageant required the displaying of firearms, as a Second Amendment enthusiast, I would go watch and actually feel like I am in Johnston County, regardless of from whence the contestants come.  I would be right there paying more attention to the weaponry, commenting “Look at the Picatinny Rail System on that AR-15!”

I almost feel like having a Miss Johnston County being from Cary is like having someone from the Wake County Board of Commissioners serve as my elected official.  It just isn’t right being represented by someone outside of my county.  Each and every year, I have seen bunches of pageant winners here in Johnston County, especially making appearances in Christmas parades across the county.  Some are beautiful young ladies.  Some are heifers with tiaras.  Nonetheless, if they are from Johnston County, then great.

Bindhu Pamarthi’s mother happens to lead the Miss India North Carolina pageant.  Obviously, their family is into talent and beauty competitions.  Forget the fact that most people in Johnston County can’t pronounce her name, if Bindhu was from Johnston County, I wouldn’t have a problem with her being our pageant winner or representing our county.  But Chapel Hill or Cary?  Really??  Obviously, pageant rules do not exclude people from outside the county from taking a county crown.  To me, that is sad.

Column for Feb. 23, 2011

I occasionally get to read another county newspaper, if and when it actually hits my driveway, which it doesn’t more often that it does. I communicate with several of my elected officials on the internet via email, Facebook, and other means. Just ask Selma’s mayor, our Congressional representative, some of our state representatives, and some of our county representatives. Since some news stories and opinion columns about our local hospital were unable to be read in print (because unlike The Selma News and The Wilson's Mills News, that paper almost never gets delivered), I had to check the online version after reading some Facebook comments by my elected county representative.

It has been alleged that the Johnston Health Board of Commissioners has been holding secret meetings with suitors for a possible affiliation for Johnston Medical Center. That basically means that the county is seeking out possible avenues for new management of the county hospital system. It does not mean that the county is looking to sell off the hospital, nor does it mean that the hospital is in dire financial straits. Upon reading the comments by both the newspaper and the claims of horribly inaccurate reporting, I went to the source and asked County Commissioner and Johnston Health Board of Commissioners member Tony Braswell for some details on the matter. He sent me his comments, which are now public record, so I am not sharing anything that is not open for all to read.

He said that the county is investigating whether or not to stay with the same hospital management company that has been in place for twenty years, or if there was a way to improve upon existing services and economics. That, to me, is only wisdom. Not only do I find that appropriate as one who uses the hospital facilities (and in less than 60 days, my next son will be born there, most likely) but as a county taxpayer.

It was alleged that the Johnston Health Board of Commissioners signed non-disclosure agreements, which according to Mr. Braswell is totally untrue. It is true, however, that some discussions with third parties will be (and frankly should be) done in private session. Nobody supports open meetings and transparent government more than I do. However, I also realize that some business matters and negotiations need to be done without potential competitors being fully aware of every detail. That is only good business sense. It is true that some governing bodies abuse private session discretion, and I have been critical of such. Business details that affect private bids and arrangements may need closed doors from time to time, but the fact that such will happen still needs to be public knowledge.

Also, according to Commissioner Braswell, contrary to allegations of “the hospital's financial picture is so bleak that its leaders are willing to pledge their loyalty not to the people of Johnston County but to outside companies dangling cash in their faces”, the truth of the matter is, in his own words, “we are financially better now than we were a year and a half ago and we have the capabilities of paying the debt service to HUD. So we are actually in better financial shape and that information is easily available if anyone chose to attend our meetings that we have every month over there.”

I have no problem with any sort of hospital affiliation, or even the direct sale of the county facility, for that matter. As a father who has had to deal with the birth defect of a child and has traveled to both Duke and UNC hospitals for treatment, I would not object to having an affiliation with another group. If that would help bring good management, better access to other health care systems, and better resources to us here in Podunk, Johnston County, then I am in support of the concept.

As a taxpayer, if the cost of running the hospital can be minimized or even eliminated altogether, I am all for it. If officials serving on the Johnston Health Board of Commissioners or even the County Board of Commissioners are not considering, in Braswell’s words, “Is this the best way to do business or is there another way to do business?” then they should not be serving at all. To help insure that such a question gets asked, I volunteer openly to serve on the Johnston Health Board of Commissioners.

Publishing oops.

Because of a mixup, the column published in this week's paper was not the one for the 16th but rather the one intended for the 23rd of February.  The column below will actually be published in the newspaper on the 23rd.  I will post the other column here next week.