Dear Mr. Hargadon:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the newly enacted Transportation Security Administration (TSA) procedures for passengers at U.S. airports. I appreciate the opportunity respond.
These new TSA procedures include arguably invasive pat downs and x-ray scanner images. I understand many American's concerns that these procedures threaten our civil liberties and are inappropriate and embarrassing. Amendment IV of the U.S. Constitution states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." There needs to be an appropriate balance between the privacy and freedoms travelers give up and the effectiveness of the security procedures. Moreover, heightened security measures must not infringe on our constitutional liberty.
I do not believe the federal government has proven to Americans' satisfactions that the new intrusive airport screening procedures are necessary to ensure safe air travel. That is why I support Congressman Darrell Issa's (CA-49), the incoming Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, call for stronger evidence that TSA, as currently organized and administered, is competent to ensure air travel security. Furthermore, I support Congressman Issa's Blueprint for Oversight of the Executive Branch. This report details how "the vast expansion of the power and reach of the Executive Branch of government under both Republican and Democratic administrations has only increased the need for vigorous, unflinching Congressional oversight."
Thank you for contacting my office. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on federal issues that are important to you. In the meantime, I encourage you to visit my Internet website http://www.house.gov/bartlett where you can sign up to receive e-mail updates regarding my legislative activity. It is a privilege to serve you in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Sincerely, Roscoe Bartlett
Member of Congress
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
A Non-responsive Church/State
There seems to be little, if any, separation between Church and State when it comes to answering direct questions concerning essential issues, such as doctrinal application or our constitution, respectively. I attempted to contact both Congressman Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland's 6th District, and Archbishop Edwin O'Brien of the Baltimore Archdiocese on the 18th of November, on two separate matters, both of which constitute essential policy. Congressman Bartlett's office was was originally contacted by phone, followed by a website e-mail. The Archbishop was contacted by e-mail, and then a personal mail. I have yet to receive a responsive answer to either.
Congressman Bartlett: (I left this e-mail through his website. December 2 at 8:38pm)
"I left a message at your Washington Office over two weeks ago as to why you had not spoken out on the TSA violations of our 4th amendment. Your staffer was unable to tell me where your position was on this critical issue. He also told me that I would be receiving a letter explaining... your position. I am still waiting! Do you support the 4th amendment of our constitution?"
(Summary of phone conversation posted on Facebook November 18th.)
"I called Congressman Bartlett's office to see what his position is on the TSA affront to our 4th amendment. His staffer said, "The Congressman will have to get back to me in a letter." A letter??? I don't need no stinking letter. I need someone to protect the constitution!!!!"
December 7th, 2010
Dear Archbishop O’Brien: (Follow-up letter to the e-mail)
"I sent you an e-mail on November 18th, under the subject of Election Supplement. It addresses my concerns with the presentation of candidate views in the Catholic Review’s, Decision 2010, Special Voter Guide insert. I have not received a reply.
As my party prepares for the next election cycle, my concern as to the political motivations of the diocese’s newspaper continues to fester. The Church preaches the truth on essential issues, and John Paul II the Great admonished the laity to become political. But, when we do, we are ignored and marginalized by the very Church that encouraged us to go forth and defend the essential matters of faith and morals.
It is difficult to defend a Church that preaches one thing, yet does nothing to direct the faithful, while at the same time, only contributes more to the tidal wave of media hype for politicians who promote state funded abortion, state funding of embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.
I guess you may not have seen my earlier e-mail. Be that what it may, I just needed to have a clear conscience, as I move forward making comments about the sincerity of the Baltimore Archdiocese."
(Original e-mail expressing my election concern.)
Archbishop O’Brien: Nov. 18th, 2010
I attended the dedication of the new chapel at St....
This November, I was on the ballot as the Lieutenant Governor, along with Eric Knowles for Governor under the Constitution Party of Maryland. Our party’s chairman, Mike Dawson requested that the Maryland Catholic Conference resurvey all the candidates before the general election, because the earlier primary survey was only done for the Democrat and Republican candidates. The Catholic Conference agreed. Thank you!
I was not however, appreciative of how the results were presented to the faithful: The Catholic Review’s Election Supplement. This supplement was given to all Catholic churches in the Baltimore Archdiocese just before the general election. The Catholic Church identifies defense of human Life, opposition to Stem Cell Research, and support of marriage, as being essential issues. The Election Supplement though, did not state in simple prose, that the only ballot access candidate to agree with the Church’s position on these three issues was Eric Knowles. Each candidate’s answers were presented in a line, and it was necessary to decode the “A, D, or blank space”, with the questions which were printed earlier in the supplement. Not one sentence in this eight page special insert stated this pure distinction of ballot access candidates on these non-negotiable issues. This inability to simply state a candidate’s positions was not an issue however, when it came to each of the two major party governor candidates. Both had a record in opposition with the Church’s teaching, yet both were provided a full page of print along with photos. What a deal? This had to be about $2,000.00 worth of print exposure.
To promote these non-negotiable principles, and fail to clearly and simply state each candidate’s position of these issues, while at the same time aiding and abetting those who have positions directly opposite of Holy Mother Church, is pure, in your face, dereliction of duty.
Respectfully,
Mike Hargadon
Congressman Bartlett: (I left this e-mail through his website. December 2 at 8:38pm)
"I left a message at your Washington Office over two weeks ago as to why you had not spoken out on the TSA violations of our 4th amendment. Your staffer was unable to tell me where your position was on this critical issue. He also told me that I would be receiving a letter explaining... your position. I am still waiting! Do you support the 4th amendment of our constitution?"
(Summary of phone conversation posted on Facebook November 18th.)
"I called Congressman Bartlett's office to see what his position is on the TSA affront to our 4th amendment. His staffer said, "The Congressman will have to get back to me in a letter." A letter??? I don't need no stinking letter. I need someone to protect the constitution!!!!"
December 7th, 2010
Dear Archbishop O’Brien: (Follow-up letter to the e-mail)
"I sent you an e-mail on November 18th, under the subject of Election Supplement. It addresses my concerns with the presentation of candidate views in the Catholic Review’s, Decision 2010, Special Voter Guide insert. I have not received a reply.
As my party prepares for the next election cycle, my concern as to the political motivations of the diocese’s newspaper continues to fester. The Church preaches the truth on essential issues, and John Paul II the Great admonished the laity to become political. But, when we do, we are ignored and marginalized by the very Church that encouraged us to go forth and defend the essential matters of faith and morals.
It is difficult to defend a Church that preaches one thing, yet does nothing to direct the faithful, while at the same time, only contributes more to the tidal wave of media hype for politicians who promote state funded abortion, state funding of embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.
I guess you may not have seen my earlier e-mail. Be that what it may, I just needed to have a clear conscience, as I move forward making comments about the sincerity of the Baltimore Archdiocese."
(Original e-mail expressing my election concern.)
Archbishop O’Brien: Nov. 18th, 2010
I attended the dedication of the new chapel at St....
This November, I was on the ballot as the Lieutenant Governor, along with Eric Knowles for Governor under the Constitution Party of Maryland. Our party’s chairman, Mike Dawson requested that the Maryland Catholic Conference resurvey all the candidates before the general election, because the earlier primary survey was only done for the Democrat and Republican candidates. The Catholic Conference agreed. Thank you!
I was not however, appreciative of how the results were presented to the faithful: The Catholic Review’s Election Supplement. This supplement was given to all Catholic churches in the Baltimore Archdiocese just before the general election. The Catholic Church identifies defense of human Life, opposition to Stem Cell Research, and support of marriage, as being essential issues. The Election Supplement though, did not state in simple prose, that the only ballot access candidate to agree with the Church’s position on these three issues was Eric Knowles. Each candidate’s answers were presented in a line, and it was necessary to decode the “A, D, or blank space”, with the questions which were printed earlier in the supplement. Not one sentence in this eight page special insert stated this pure distinction of ballot access candidates on these non-negotiable issues. This inability to simply state a candidate’s positions was not an issue however, when it came to each of the two major party governor candidates. Both had a record in opposition with the Church’s teaching, yet both were provided a full page of print along with photos. What a deal? This had to be about $2,000.00 worth of print exposure.
To promote these non-negotiable principles, and fail to clearly and simply state each candidate’s position of these issues, while at the same time aiding and abetting those who have positions directly opposite of Holy Mother Church, is pure, in your face, dereliction of duty.
Respectfully,
Mike Hargadon
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Maryland's Neo Quads
The Neo family’s announcement of their recent Maryland birth of quadruplets: Neo-Lifer, Neo-Family, Neo-Gunner, and Neo-Liberty, may not have been noticed by many citizens. The excitement of the recent election probably caused some to miss the announcement. The proud parents, Neo-Conservatives, have long been known for their espousing of conservative values, while supporting unconstitutional international foreign wars, and an unchecked stripping of our citizens’ individual rights. The Neo-Conservatives laid the groundwork for our current fascist regime, ensuring the continuation of the establishment’s raping of our economic wealth. The Neo family members, like many, are proud of the meaning contained in their very name: “a combining form meaning “new,” “recent,” “revived,” “modified,” The Neos four newest additions to the political elite, promise to be regulars, so it would behoove us to recognize these cute little modifications.
Neo-Lifer had a long gestation. Early indications of his presence were seen during the 2008 Ron Paul campaign. In the Republican primary for the 2008 election, National Right to Life basically ignored Dr. Paul’s pro-life credentials, and his outstanding record in defense of innocent unborn children. Dr. Paul did not consent to Neo-Lifer’s daddy’s support of unconstitutional wars and deficit spending. Two years later, in Maryland, this little guy came busting out, as the Constitution Party of Maryland (CP) ran a group of candidates, who all professed to be pro-life. Even though several of the CP candidates have records of their submission of the Maryland Right to Life survey, no CP candidates were endorsed. Neo-Lifer is more concerned with nursing from the established party teat, than Life.
Neo-Family, showed his true self in the Catholic Review’s Election Supplement, which was given to all Catholic churches in the Baltimore Archdiocese just before the general election. The Catholic Church identifies defense of human Life, opposition to Stem Cell Research, and support of marriage, as being essential issues. The Maryland Catholic Conference did go through the trouble of resurveying all the candidates before the general election. The Election Supplement though, did not state in simple prose, that the only ballot access candidate to agree with the Church’s position on these three issues was Eric Knowles. Not one sentence in this eight page special insert stated this pure distinction. This inability to state a candidate’s positions was not an issue however, when it came to each of the two major party governor candidates. Both had a record in opposition with the Church’s teaching, yet both were provided a full page of print along with photos. What a deal? This had to be about $2,000.00 worth of print exposure. The Catholic Review baptized Maryland’s, and their own, Neo-Family.
Neo-Gunner fired his first shot for Second Amendment advocates in Maryland. This little guy was so ambitious that he took it upon himself to decide for all the members of the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore. After surveying all the candidates and inviting many candidates to give a second amendment speech, this little guy decided to trash any third party candidate into the unelectable bin, and just provide election recommendations based on the two party duopoly. Our little Neo-Gunner takes after his uncle who has also directed the NRA to ignore 3rd party candidates.
Neo-Liberty has got to be the runt of the four. She came forth stuttering the word, “libbbberty”. Like so many young ones, she had no idea of the words meaning, or where its importance lies. Take the non-partisan group Americans for Prosperity who hustled around the state giving rallies with non-partisan speakers like, Andy Harris, Ellen Sauerbrey, and Mrs. Bob Ehrlich. Many of their speeches were saturated with the word, “constitution”, but try to get an answer from them, as to where our war mongering powers are in the constitution? Maryland’s Neo-Liberty also cried from the Dr. Paul spin-off group, Campaign for Liberty. The state coordinator of Campaign for Liberty had been asked several times before the election to survey the candidates for governor in Maryland. He was asked because the governor of our great state may be the last person able to contain this run away Federal government. It never happened, and Maryland’s own Neo-Liberty took its first breath.
So now you have been introduced. Don’t make yourself a stranger! The next time you hear the Catholic Church talking a bunch of family tripe, or Maryland Right to Life pleading for funds for their political advocacy, or gun groups crying about no politicians are aware of a gun owner’s plight, or liberty groups demanding strong states rights, don’t be fooled. It’s just those Neo kids again.
Neo-Lifer had a long gestation. Early indications of his presence were seen during the 2008 Ron Paul campaign. In the Republican primary for the 2008 election, National Right to Life basically ignored Dr. Paul’s pro-life credentials, and his outstanding record in defense of innocent unborn children. Dr. Paul did not consent to Neo-Lifer’s daddy’s support of unconstitutional wars and deficit spending. Two years later, in Maryland, this little guy came busting out, as the Constitution Party of Maryland (CP) ran a group of candidates, who all professed to be pro-life. Even though several of the CP candidates have records of their submission of the Maryland Right to Life survey, no CP candidates were endorsed. Neo-Lifer is more concerned with nursing from the established party teat, than Life.
Neo-Family, showed his true self in the Catholic Review’s Election Supplement, which was given to all Catholic churches in the Baltimore Archdiocese just before the general election. The Catholic Church identifies defense of human Life, opposition to Stem Cell Research, and support of marriage, as being essential issues. The Maryland Catholic Conference did go through the trouble of resurveying all the candidates before the general election. The Election Supplement though, did not state in simple prose, that the only ballot access candidate to agree with the Church’s position on these three issues was Eric Knowles. Not one sentence in this eight page special insert stated this pure distinction. This inability to state a candidate’s positions was not an issue however, when it came to each of the two major party governor candidates. Both had a record in opposition with the Church’s teaching, yet both were provided a full page of print along with photos. What a deal? This had to be about $2,000.00 worth of print exposure. The Catholic Review baptized Maryland’s, and their own, Neo-Family.
Neo-Gunner fired his first shot for Second Amendment advocates in Maryland. This little guy was so ambitious that he took it upon himself to decide for all the members of the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore. After surveying all the candidates and inviting many candidates to give a second amendment speech, this little guy decided to trash any third party candidate into the unelectable bin, and just provide election recommendations based on the two party duopoly. Our little Neo-Gunner takes after his uncle who has also directed the NRA to ignore 3rd party candidates.
Neo-Liberty has got to be the runt of the four. She came forth stuttering the word, “libbbberty”. Like so many young ones, she had no idea of the words meaning, or where its importance lies. Take the non-partisan group Americans for Prosperity who hustled around the state giving rallies with non-partisan speakers like, Andy Harris, Ellen Sauerbrey, and Mrs. Bob Ehrlich. Many of their speeches were saturated with the word, “constitution”, but try to get an answer from them, as to where our war mongering powers are in the constitution? Maryland’s Neo-Liberty also cried from the Dr. Paul spin-off group, Campaign for Liberty. The state coordinator of Campaign for Liberty had been asked several times before the election to survey the candidates for governor in Maryland. He was asked because the governor of our great state may be the last person able to contain this run away Federal government. It never happened, and Maryland’s own Neo-Liberty took its first breath.
So now you have been introduced. Don’t make yourself a stranger! The next time you hear the Catholic Church talking a bunch of family tripe, or Maryland Right to Life pleading for funds for their political advocacy, or gun groups crying about no politicians are aware of a gun owner’s plight, or liberty groups demanding strong states rights, don’t be fooled. It’s just those Neo kids again.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Less Than One Percent Is "Not Enough".
Even before our candidates declared their intent to run for office, the motto of our Constitution Party of Maryland has been “principles over party”. We assumed this would not be disruptive to our party, since all potential candidates and officers are vetted on their adherence to our seven main principles; LIFE, LIBERTY, FAMILY, PROPERTY, THE CONSTITUTION, STATES RIGHTS AND AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY. We also assumed that as advocacy groups viewed our positions, they might endorse us, or throw us some print media. We figured that the one percent in the governor’s race, which we needed to maintain ballot access for the next election, should be doable. It was not! It may take a few days to process our loss at the polls, but I think I got the message: We just were, not enough.
Take our first principle, “Life”. We just were not pro-life enough. Even though our party’s executive committee questioned each potential candidate, and rejected half for their weak life position. Even though each of our candidates professed before our Executive Committee that: they believe that life starts at conception, that the rights of each human life should be protected using our constitution, and that Roe v Wade should be taken for what it is: not a law, just an opinion. Maybe you didn’t notice the accolades? There weren’t any. Our governor candidate, Eric Knowles, challenged a life-long career pro-abort, and a flaming liberal incumbent. We just weren’t pro-life enough? Not one of our pro-life candidates, were endorsed by Maryland Right to Life; not even our chairman, Mike Dawson, who ran for Delegate in 34b. He is arguably one of the best pro-lifers in Maryland, but the Maryland Right to Life failed to endorse him. Even Janet Baker, who writes regularly in Defend Life, and her blog, could not give our governor candidate a nod. This became perfectly clear as we sat at the Annual Pro-life Appreciation Dinner at which 500 people gathered for a great evening to celebrate those who support human life. Our table of ten, (half of them candidates), was placed next to a complimentary candidate information table, dominated by Harris propaganda, and bordered with “Ehrlich/ Harris” lawn signs. We just were “not pro-life enough?”
How about our second principle: “Liberty”. Liberty is the new word that the GOP just recently learned to say. After the 2008 defeat, the GOP was lifeless, and in dire need of support. Following George [Patriot Act] Bush, the GOP needed to tap into the grass roots energy, which their ostracized Congressman Ron Paul seemed to garner. So, they practiced some of his commonly used words like: the “constitution”, “free markets”, and “liberty”. Many of our candidates had a background, or an association, with Dr. Paul’s liberty effort, Campaign for Liberty. We were part of this movement. But, when we asked the Campaign For Liberty state leadership to survey the candidates for Governor, as to their liberty positions? “No can do.” The highest office in the state, the Chief Executive, the person responsible to interpose against a run amok federal tyranny on behalf of our residents, was just not important enough?
Oh, and then there is “Family”. Family is the main reason I have been active in the Constitution Party and this campaign. I loved my childhood family of my nine brothers and sisters in my little Catholic community. I knew that if the Catholic community were aware that a pro-life, and pro-family ticket was on the ballot, the 1 % should be chump change. That’s why our chairman, Mike Dawson, insisted that the Maryland Catholic Conference, against their original intent to just use the earlier two party primary survey, resurvey all the candidates for the general election. I personally assured that our governor candidate filled out this survey. In fact, he was the only gubernatorial ballot candidate to complete all questions in the survey. His answers were in agreement with Catholic family life on abortion, marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. This, you would think, should be big? Well, the Voters Guide Supplement to the Catholic Review, which presented Eric’s completed answers on one line, separate from the questions, required a bit of puzzle solving ability. Compare this one line listing of Knowles’ answers, to the full page, and photo, that took up a third of the supplement, on each of the pro-aborts, the one who promotes the gay agenda, and the one who fired Bob Smith for quoting the Catechism. We just were not pro-family enough?
Let’s not forget the issue that encompasses the constitution and states rights: our beloved second amendment. All of our candidates are supportive of our right to bear arms. Eric Knowles is a veteran and a huge supporter of a person’s ability to carry an arm for defense. Early on, Maryland Shall Issue, a guns rights advocacy group, presented themselves as interested in hearing from, and evaluating our candidates. Maryland Shall Issue is associated with the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore along with some 20 gun clubs. After the surveys were filled out, and great speeches were delivered, the table was set for encouragement. When the recommendations were published, the Legislative Committee for the Associated Gun Clubs passed-over third party candidates. When questioned on this, we were told, “Candidates must be electable, not just pro 2nd Amendment.” So why even bother filling out the survey and making a speech, if the gatekeeper has already deemed third parties as not electable enough?
We expected this from the two main parties, the controlled media, the Republican Party disguised as Americans for Prosperity, and maybe even groups like the “non-partisan”, Jewish council who sponsored the WJZ debate, which excluded all third party candidates, but advocacy groups? Where were the people, the members, and the Boards of these advocacy groups that discounted constitutional conservatives who tried to hold the line? I also did not see surveys from the Christian Coalition or the National Riffle Association.
I think we will all soon suffer from not doing enough.
Take our first principle, “Life”. We just were not pro-life enough. Even though our party’s executive committee questioned each potential candidate, and rejected half for their weak life position. Even though each of our candidates professed before our Executive Committee that: they believe that life starts at conception, that the rights of each human life should be protected using our constitution, and that Roe v Wade should be taken for what it is: not a law, just an opinion. Maybe you didn’t notice the accolades? There weren’t any. Our governor candidate, Eric Knowles, challenged a life-long career pro-abort, and a flaming liberal incumbent. We just weren’t pro-life enough? Not one of our pro-life candidates, were endorsed by Maryland Right to Life; not even our chairman, Mike Dawson, who ran for Delegate in 34b. He is arguably one of the best pro-lifers in Maryland, but the Maryland Right to Life failed to endorse him. Even Janet Baker, who writes regularly in Defend Life, and her blog, could not give our governor candidate a nod. This became perfectly clear as we sat at the Annual Pro-life Appreciation Dinner at which 500 people gathered for a great evening to celebrate those who support human life. Our table of ten, (half of them candidates), was placed next to a complimentary candidate information table, dominated by Harris propaganda, and bordered with “Ehrlich/ Harris” lawn signs. We just were “not pro-life enough?”
How about our second principle: “Liberty”. Liberty is the new word that the GOP just recently learned to say. After the 2008 defeat, the GOP was lifeless, and in dire need of support. Following George [Patriot Act] Bush, the GOP needed to tap into the grass roots energy, which their ostracized Congressman Ron Paul seemed to garner. So, they practiced some of his commonly used words like: the “constitution”, “free markets”, and “liberty”. Many of our candidates had a background, or an association, with Dr. Paul’s liberty effort, Campaign for Liberty. We were part of this movement. But, when we asked the Campaign For Liberty state leadership to survey the candidates for Governor, as to their liberty positions? “No can do.” The highest office in the state, the Chief Executive, the person responsible to interpose against a run amok federal tyranny on behalf of our residents, was just not important enough?
Oh, and then there is “Family”. Family is the main reason I have been active in the Constitution Party and this campaign. I loved my childhood family of my nine brothers and sisters in my little Catholic community. I knew that if the Catholic community were aware that a pro-life, and pro-family ticket was on the ballot, the 1 % should be chump change. That’s why our chairman, Mike Dawson, insisted that the Maryland Catholic Conference, against their original intent to just use the earlier two party primary survey, resurvey all the candidates for the general election. I personally assured that our governor candidate filled out this survey. In fact, he was the only gubernatorial ballot candidate to complete all questions in the survey. His answers were in agreement with Catholic family life on abortion, marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. This, you would think, should be big? Well, the Voters Guide Supplement to the Catholic Review, which presented Eric’s completed answers on one line, separate from the questions, required a bit of puzzle solving ability. Compare this one line listing of Knowles’ answers, to the full page, and photo, that took up a third of the supplement, on each of the pro-aborts, the one who promotes the gay agenda, and the one who fired Bob Smith for quoting the Catechism. We just were not pro-family enough?
Let’s not forget the issue that encompasses the constitution and states rights: our beloved second amendment. All of our candidates are supportive of our right to bear arms. Eric Knowles is a veteran and a huge supporter of a person’s ability to carry an arm for defense. Early on, Maryland Shall Issue, a guns rights advocacy group, presented themselves as interested in hearing from, and evaluating our candidates. Maryland Shall Issue is associated with the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore along with some 20 gun clubs. After the surveys were filled out, and great speeches were delivered, the table was set for encouragement. When the recommendations were published, the Legislative Committee for the Associated Gun Clubs passed-over third party candidates. When questioned on this, we were told, “Candidates must be electable, not just pro 2nd Amendment.” So why even bother filling out the survey and making a speech, if the gatekeeper has already deemed third parties as not electable enough?
We expected this from the two main parties, the controlled media, the Republican Party disguised as Americans for Prosperity, and maybe even groups like the “non-partisan”, Jewish council who sponsored the WJZ debate, which excluded all third party candidates, but advocacy groups? Where were the people, the members, and the Boards of these advocacy groups that discounted constitutional conservatives who tried to hold the line? I also did not see surveys from the Christian Coalition or the National Riffle Association.
I think we will all soon suffer from not doing enough.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Write your air carrier TODAY!
Please take a minute to convey your concern regarding our passing of our 4th amendment to be secure in our person.
"Dear Southwest:
Southwest has been our airline of choice in flying from BWI to Nashville, Indianapolis, and Chicago. Most, if not, all of our trips have been for family gatherings. My wife and I are concerned about the enhanced security measures at many airports. We have several trips planned, but we have no intention of going through nude imaging or intensive secondary screening. Please, insist on some decency for us and your other customers!"
THEIR RESPONSE:
Dear Michael,
Thank you for taking the time to contact us. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns regarding the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
It's important to explain that the implementation of imaging technology is solely determined by the TSA and not by the airline. The TSA has a responsibility to ensure the security of the traveling public. However, they also recognize that there is a delicate balance between privacy and security; therefore, imaging technology is optional for all passengers. Please visit the TSA’s web site for more information (including locations where imaging technology is currently being used) regarding this screening method.
Again, we appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts. Should your future plans require air travel, we hope we will merit your consideration.
Sincerely,
Edna, Southwest Airlines
[Jefferson to S.W.]
Dear Edna:
Thank you for responding to my progeny's concern.
There is nothing "delicate" about attracting attention to the fact that a person values his or her 4th amendment, by shouting, "Opt-out! We have an Opt-out!", and then proceeding to examine a person's crotch and buttocks. What is '"optional, the nude photo, or the feeling-up of a person's privates? How about neither?
Maybe if enough people stop flying, Southwest will tell these "blue shirts" to back off. Until then, I'll suggest, that all who value individual liberty hold tight to what is remaining of, "being secure in one's person...."
Thomas Jefferson
"Dear Southwest:
Southwest has been our airline of choice in flying from BWI to Nashville, Indianapolis, and Chicago. Most, if not, all of our trips have been for family gatherings. My wife and I are concerned about the enhanced security measures at many airports. We have several trips planned, but we have no intention of going through nude imaging or intensive secondary screening. Please, insist on some decency for us and your other customers!"
THEIR RESPONSE:
Dear Michael,
Thank you for taking the time to contact us. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns regarding the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
It's important to explain that the implementation of imaging technology is solely determined by the TSA and not by the airline. The TSA has a responsibility to ensure the security of the traveling public. However, they also recognize that there is a delicate balance between privacy and security; therefore, imaging technology is optional for all passengers. Please visit the TSA’s web site for more information (including locations where imaging technology is currently being used) regarding this screening method.
Again, we appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts. Should your future plans require air travel, we hope we will merit your consideration.
Sincerely,
Edna, Southwest Airlines
[Jefferson to S.W.]
Dear Edna:
Thank you for responding to my progeny's concern.
There is nothing "delicate" about attracting attention to the fact that a person values his or her 4th amendment, by shouting, "Opt-out! We have an Opt-out!", and then proceeding to examine a person's crotch and buttocks. What is '"optional, the nude photo, or the feeling-up of a person's privates? How about neither?
Maybe if enough people stop flying, Southwest will tell these "blue shirts" to back off. Until then, I'll suggest, that all who value individual liberty hold tight to what is remaining of, "being secure in one's person...."
Thomas Jefferson
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Progging
When I started this most recent effort, I made the following statement,
Since then, I have discovered that my original idea, although intended to be more structured, will have to be customized to fit my state in life. I intend to stay on tract with the following clarification.
"I will write everyday" does not necessitate blogging everyday. The definition of blog is- Blog: A frequent, chronological publication of personal thoughts and Web links. The key word, is "publish". I have been feeling a need to publish everyday, but this was unsuccessful, and rushing my spirit. My confusion about blogging is seen in my statement about a "daily blog". My effort is not to blog everyday, but to write everyday.
The "twist of faith", that guides this effort, of "reestablishing or deepening this relationship" with God, is prayer. Christ instructs us, "But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen." Matt6:6. For my effort to achieve this spiritual intimacy, I need to close the door. The second part of the original spiritual effort was that, "He may use me to do His will, and possibly show others that He is real, and He loves each one of us." This is where I may open the door, and hit the publish key. This is where my written prayer with God results in a Blog.
I have learned that spiritual time is not always secular. God created creation in "seven days" but were these 24 hour days? When I was in Africa, I became aware of African time. A seminarian explained that we Americans needed to relax. He explained, if there was to be a gathering at 10:30 am, it wasn't 10:30 am, until the gathering came together. The clock did not dictate to the people, the people dictated the time. This seems almost impossible unless those who are gathering agree to this loose clock.
Therefore "day" used in this effort will be the period of time between one writing and the next. If it takes 48 hours to sit down and write my thoughts, then that will be my "literary day". I still intend to prayerfully write for a year's worth of literary days. When the result is meaningful, I will blog. I call this effort Progging.
"For my part, I will write every day,but here is the twist of faith. I know God is real, and I have waxed and waned in my sense of relationship with Him. I hope to use this daily blog as a means of reestablishing or deepening this relationship; not to preach, but to discuss Truth vs. Credibility. For His part, He may use me to do His will, and possibly show others that He is real, and He loves each one of us."
Since then, I have discovered that my original idea, although intended to be more structured, will have to be customized to fit my state in life. I intend to stay on tract with the following clarification.
"I will write everyday" does not necessitate blogging everyday. The definition of blog is- Blog: A frequent, chronological publication of personal thoughts and Web links. The key word, is "publish". I have been feeling a need to publish everyday, but this was unsuccessful, and rushing my spirit. My confusion about blogging is seen in my statement about a "daily blog". My effort is not to blog everyday, but to write everyday.
The "twist of faith", that guides this effort, of "reestablishing or deepening this relationship" with God, is prayer. Christ instructs us, "But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen." Matt6:6. For my effort to achieve this spiritual intimacy, I need to close the door. The second part of the original spiritual effort was that, "He may use me to do His will, and possibly show others that He is real, and He loves each one of us." This is where I may open the door, and hit the publish key. This is where my written prayer with God results in a Blog.
I have learned that spiritual time is not always secular. God created creation in "seven days" but were these 24 hour days? When I was in Africa, I became aware of African time. A seminarian explained that we Americans needed to relax. He explained, if there was to be a gathering at 10:30 am, it wasn't 10:30 am, until the gathering came together. The clock did not dictate to the people, the people dictated the time. This seems almost impossible unless those who are gathering agree to this loose clock.
Therefore "day" used in this effort will be the period of time between one writing and the next. If it takes 48 hours to sit down and write my thoughts, then that will be my "literary day". I still intend to prayerfully write for a year's worth of literary days. When the result is meaningful, I will blog. I call this effort Progging.
Friday, February 26, 2010
"Independent", or independent
Maryland voters may not be aware that the word Independent on the voters registration pertains to a political party. Mr. Dawson, Chairman for the Constitution Party of Maryland, met yesterday with the Maryland Election Board to discuss his concerns. I have taken the liberty to reprint several paragraphs from his position.
Dawson had originally filed his complaint four months ago. Since then the Board of Elections has place "Party" behind each of the political parties. This may help eliminate some of the confusion with the registration form, but anyone who has already registered, or people who change their party without the official form, need to be aware of this.
Dawson argues that the use of the term ‘independent’ as the name of a political party is misleading at best. Because the layman’s terminology for an unaffiliated registered voter is oftentimes referred to as ‘independent,’ the very idea that a partisan political organization would name itself the Independent Party is downright deceptive. Further, he adds it is very likely that many, if not most of the party’s 28,798 registered voters never intended to be registered with a partisan political party.
As evidence, Dawson looks to the registration statistics for clues to irregularities in voter registration behavior. In September 2008, the first month of the Independent Party’s existence, the number of registered voters climbed from zero to 2,292. It managed to do this with a no national organization, no previous history, no public presence (web, advertising, public figure, personality, etc.) and with a voter registration application (VRA) yet to be updated with the newly-recognized party’s name.
He offers by way of comparison, when the Green Party, as the state affiliate of a national party and recognizable by the general public in name and ideology, first attained recognized party status in August 2000, it grew by 370 registered voters in its first month.
Dawson also contends that state agencies, such as Social Services or the MVA, who have been charged with aiding voter registration efforts, have not exercised the appropriate care and diligence to secure the integrity of the voting process, with which they have been, by default, entrusted. He argues these agencies, either through lack of knowledge or laziness, have failed to accurately record and transfer the will, desire and intent of the registrant to the VRA, or completed the form on behalf of the registrant based on the word/term used by the applicant (e.g. ‘I want to be independent.’) translating it to the VRA as a registered voter affiliated with the Independent Party.
Dawson had originally filed his complaint four months ago. Since then the Board of Elections has place "Party" behind each of the political parties. This may help eliminate some of the confusion with the registration form, but anyone who has already registered, or people who change their party without the official form, need to be aware of this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)