Archive for the ‘Krayton Kerns’ Category

by jhwygirl

They’re coming – and we’re all dying. You can’t avoid dying. You might want to hold on clinging to life from a drip tube, rotting in your own flesh as cancer rots you inside….but the future is coming and includes you dying. One way or the other.

Eventually folks – and I’m speaking to the faux conservatives up there in Helena that professed that this legislative session would be all about jobs jobs jobs but all they’ve been doing is meddling between me and my doctor’s office and my own private body and concerning themselves with who I marry and what happens in bedrooms across the state between consenting adults – you xenophobes up there will be outnumbered.

Them’s simply the facts.

Frankly, from what I see in testimony up there in Helena, you really are outnumbered. Now, that doesn’t mean the mob of citizens up there testifying is right, but it should be cause for some self-reflection.

Anyone hear what Jenna Bush had to say lately?

This is our future. Zach Wahls is a 19 year old, testifying in front of an Iowa legislative hearing on January 31, 2011:

On the other end of the age spectrum is one of my favorite bloggers, a senior chic who uses the name Helen Pilpot over at Margaret’s and Helen’s (link on right). She’s wise enough and has been around long enough that she really does legitimately get to just spit it out to the Tea Party people of the world: Grow up – Shit Happens.

I hate to even call ’em conservatives – I’d like to think that there really are a few true conservatives or Libertarians up there in Helena – but that group up there is approving and looking at some utterly ridiculous stuff. Today I saw a hearing where law enforcement officers and social service agencies and attorneys got up in opposition to a law that would effectively eliminate the need to obtain a a concealed weapons permit. During the Q&A, wanna know who all the tea partyiers asked for clarification? Gary Marbut. Not legal staff or law enforcement, but radical anti-government activist lobbyist Gary Marbut.

Marbut is so bad that I was told by someone in the NRA that even they don’t really like him.

And Marbut apparently doesn’t work with law enforcement much anymore when it comes to developing better laws and rules – heard that today in testimony, too.

Closing out that testimony was Krayton Kerns – HB271 is his bill – said something to this effect:

We’re not eliminating the concealed weapons permit. People can still go get one if they want – they just won’t have to.

So that is our legislature right now – a group of them are dragging knuckles back to pre-Tombstone days and flying in the face of their tea party pro-sheriff-is-the-ultimate-law-of-the-land mantra they all so seem to love.

In other words – more proof that they don’t make sense. There’s a lack of logic there that just plain is.

Advertisements

by jhwygirl

Montana’s GOP is shoring up for a showdown for Speaker of the House. Every Tea Partier’s favorite Krayton Kerns – truly on the extreme edges of tea partyism – is expressing a desire to hold the seat.

Mike Milburn of Cascade was the favorite. Here’s his voting record.

Kerns, by comparison, is billing himself as “more conservative.”

~~~~~
Kerns is, of course, a puppet of another Tea Partier plus gun nut plus state’s rights advocate plus so-called constitutionalist Gary Marbut (president one-man chief lobbyist for the Montana Shooting Sports Association). Remember that crazy gun bill from last session? HB228?

Kerns’.

So how much influence will Missoula resident and right-wing loon Gary Marbut have with the Montana Legislature? Marbut, I assure you, is trying to figure out just the same.

So he’s getting started early this year, trying to score one of his mouthpieces into the Speaker of the House position.

Speaker is a pretty important position – as the Billings Gazette explains:

The speaker sets schedules, grants committee assignments, assigns legislation and controls much of the business of the chamber. The position is a key figure in negotiations with state Senate leaders and the governor’s office.

Who’s going to run the show? Marbut, Kerns and his merry band of Tea Party jesters, or the Montana GOP?

If anything, can I ask that someone consider that he’s got one of the most annoying nasally whining weaselly screechy sounding voices I’ve ever heard. Pitty all reporters that’ll have to deal with that. Do they really want Krayton out there on camera?

Come to think of it…that could be fun.

by jhwygirl

I am beyond disgusted with this kind of stuff. If I’ve never written to the fact that the Constitution is the ultimate law of the land, I’ve written nothing.

Today I find that the MT GOP, at its most recent convention, re-affirmed its 2008 platform calling for making homosexual acts criminal.

And lest you think I’m making this up – mainly because the page link I provided has been removed today by the MT GOP – here is a cached version, courtesy of the google.

Now – these Einsteins of the MT GOP apparently have no respect for the Montana Constitution, nor the United State’s Constitution. See, both the Montana Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States of America have struck down “anti-sodomy” laws.

The Montana Supreme Court did so in Gryczan v. State, 942 P.2d 112 (1997). Not only that, Gryczan and the right of privacy it has conferred has been reaffirmed over and over again by both the Montana courts and other state and federal courts repeatedly since its rendering.

The United States Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws in Lawrence et. al. V. Texas (02-102) 539 U.S. 558 (2003), finding a constitutional protection to sexuality. Only Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

In other words – it’s no government’s business what anyone does in their bedroom.

Where does it stop, MT GOP? What is it you want? Are there not enough problems out there facing Montanan’s? Have you no respect for the ultimate law of our land? Of our nation?

By Goddess, something is really failing us here, Montana – I am gosh darn sick and tired of politicians on both sides of the aisle proposing voting for passing and signing bills into law that violate the constitution (be it the Montana Constitution or the Constitution of the United States).

It’s beyond disrespectful that politicians think they can push the boundaries of these precious documents as if saying to The People “Go ahead and sue me – you can’t afford the fight.”

It’s pretty friggin’ simple – policies must obey rules; rules must obey laws; laws must obey the Constitution. It’s not a “sometimes” thing. It’s not something that should only followed when it’s convenient or when the “other party” is in charge

It’s all the time.

by jhwygirl

Alternate title: How Dangerous is the Montana GOP? Answer: Very

I don’t know how much people have heard or read about Wednesday’s vote on HR3 (I ever-so-briefly mentioned it here), but as a result of the party-line 50-50 vote, Democrats are receiving nasty emails and death threats for their “no” vote.

The bill was sponsored by Rep. Michael More, of Gallatin Gateway. HB3 was a reintroduced version of HJ26 which failed in committee and a blast motion on to the floor.

HB3 was presented at a “state’s rights” bill, but had overtones of secession and asserted that Montana was not subjected to the United States Constitution. James Conner, of Flathead Memo has a great piece up, history lesson and all, titled Will Montana fire on Fort Sumter? that should not be missed.

He also took the initiative to find out who the “horsetrading Democrat” was that let this thing ooze out of committee for the House floor vote: Great Falls’ Rep. Deb Kottel, which, sadly, is of little surprise.

Another great piece on the HB3 bill and subsequent vote is the UM School of Journalism’s The Session ’09 piece, titled Montana ‘state’s rights’ resolution fails on tied vote. That post includes some great background information and links to the out-of-state organizations supporting similar types of legislation elsewhere in the United States.

More is unapologetic about the “right-wing extremism” nature of the bills. From Molly Priddy’s piece:

“This is a debate that has been a long time coming,” More said. The resolution may be labeled as “right wing extremism,” but it really deals with states’ rights versus federal laws, he said, adding that secession is not the goal, but neither is it out of the question.

Priddy get’s even better from Laurel’s Rep. Krayton Kerns:

Rep. Krayton Kerns, R-Laurel, said though the resolution does not imply that Montana will secede from the union, there is always the possibility.

“(Secession) is the big stick in the room that we have to occasionally display,” Kerns said. “This resolution is a shot over the bow.”

Krayton Kerns sure does love waving the saber, doesn’t he?

~~~~~

This is your Montana GOP, folks. Make no mistake – not one Republican broke ranks on this bill (including Missoula’s HD-100 Rep. Bill Nooney). Even now, not even one senate Republican has spoken out against this dangerous nonsense.

Nor has Montana’s representation in Washington, Rep. Denny Rehberg.

The death threats? Two days of them, now, and still {crickets} from the Republicans.

Even conservative bloggers have been silent.

This is dangerous stuff, and had this bill made it into the Senate (and I guess we should be thankful to Kottel for her “no” vote on the floor, right?), there is no telling what might of happen.

This type of persistent – remember, this bill was attempted twice, in two versions – unabashed and unapologetic “right-wing extremism” should not be welcomed. It should be drawn out, exposed, talked about and openly condemned.

Not just by Democrats, but by Republicans too.

by Pete Talbot

Ergot, a mold that attacks rye, is the building block for LSD. It has been discovered in huge quantities in the Laurel airshed.

How else can one explain the lunacy coming from legislators Dan McGee and Krayton Kerns (both Republicans and both out of Laurel) in this 2009 session?

Taken in small doses, ergot can lead to feelings of euphoria but in large enough quantities, it tends toward disassociation and psychosis.

Here’s the latest, this time from McGee (courtesy of Planned Parenthood of Montana):

Protect access to contraceptives for Montana’s low-income families!

On Thursday, the Senate may hear an amendment from Dan McGee (R-Laurel) to strip state funding for Montana’s family planning clinics from the state’s budget.

1. This represents a 20% cut to family planning clinics statewide
2. 70% of Montana’s family planning clients were at or below 150% of poverty.
3. Every $1 spent on family planning saves $4 down the road in public funding.

In other words, let’s make sure the poorest in Montana don’t have access to health care and contraception, so they can keep cranking out (sickly) babies who will end up being subsidized by government services (if they’re lucky). This guy McGee should run for pope. Here are more details from PP.

There has been a litany of bad legislation coming from these two yokels: Kerns’ wacky gun bill (HB 228) and his assault on the Healthy Kids Bill (HB 157). And here’s just a sampling of McGee’s: protect all zygotes (SB 406) but attack those who are different (SB 223) and don’t forget to bring partisan politics into our education system (SB 80 and 81).

Let’s hope Laurel gets that ergot problem cleaned up before the next election.

(Update 4-9-09: Good news. The Montana Senate chose not to vote on McGee’s amendments. More below the fold.)

Continue Reading »

by Jay Stevens

There’s a lot of resistance in some circles to the idea that global warming is real, despite the overwhelming evidence. The question is, why?

Believe it or not, I think an answer can be found in Krayton Kerns’ paranoid theory that a cabal of “environmental disaster wizards” whose goal is…well…it’s not exactly clear. To return cattle ranch land to its “pristine” state? To subvert everyone under a socialist state?

My sense is that Kerns, and people like Kerns, are wary of the chorus of voices urging change, most of it lifestyle change. They want to dictate what kind of car you buy, goes the theory, they want to tell you what light bulbs to use in your home. It’s intrusive government policy that’s concerning here, not the raw data on climate change.

(By the way, Kerns’ conspiracy is patently ridiculous. As a card-carrying member of the Democratic party, and with many personal connections to environmentalists of all stripes, I can say with utmost confidence that there is no conspiracy. If you don’t believe me – and why would a conspiracy buff believe me? — consider the conspiracy itself. The means by which the conspiracy is implemented – banking on some wily carbon-trading scheme – is too complex. And the conspiracy’s goals are vague and unrewarding. Why would so many people – so many connected people – want to turn ranch land into wilderness? What’s the payoff?)

You can see the conspiracist’s concern in the debate over Al Gore’s energy usage, an argument that genuinely befuddles and aggravates those that believe climate change is here and is a problem. To us, it looks like the ol’ bait-and-switch con game. Distract us with the – irrelevant – details of an individual’s lifestyle, while continuing to deny and address a problem that threatens our economy, geography, and, eventually, our very existence as a species. And to what end? To continue supporting big oil companies? To avoid the hard facts of scientific data?

(Criticizing Gore’s energy usage is ridiculous, of course. The key data missing from the allegations is how much energy he would be using if he didn’t conserve. I’d expect a filmmaker, PR man, celebrity, former vice president, and possible presidential candidate to use more energy than your average schmoe. How many functions does he host? How many laptops are going at one time in his house? How many guests stay over? Gore’s energy use is not an indictment of the man’s principles, but an indictment of the energy choices available to us.)

Yet, from a global-warming denier’s perspective, Gore’s alleged “hypocrisy” supports her suspicion that she’s being played. Here’s the most famous climate-change alarmist, and his energy bills are twelve times the average household’s! In other words, he’s jetting around the country “dictating” to us what products we can and can’t buy, where our energy comes from, and basically how we live our lives – and he’s not even following his own dictates! (All false claims, by the way. I don’t recall Gore ever “dictating” to us how to live our lives.) It must be a con!

Let’s face it, we’ll never convince a climate change denier to believe in global warming. The more evidence we provide, the more scientists and scientific organizations agree on the problem, the more governments decide to take action, the more the denier believes there’s a conspiracy afoot.

But here’s what I would say: don’t confuse the science with the policy.

Scientifically, global warming is a real problem, and it’s clear that human activity contributes to it. There’s a dispute on how serious the problem will be, and there’s room to maneuver on just how much human activity contributes. But there’s no denying that climate change is happening, and that it’s already having an adverse effect on our lives and pocketbooks.

Putting aside climate change, there’s also no denying that our fossil-fuel-based economy is causing a lot of negative impacts. Whether you think climate change is happening, you probably are concerned that the average American is putting 16 tons of carbon into the atmosphere – each year. And our reliance on oil creates political problems in places like Iraq and Iran; until we wean ourselves off of oil, we’ll be entangled in Middle East politics. (We’re also headed for a confrontation with Russia and China in the oil-rich Central Asian republics, but that’s another topic.)

Fighting climate change also reduces pollution and could potentially head off further global conflict over oil. Fighting climate change would also strengthen the domestic economy.

Even if the danger of climate change is wildly exaggerated, the policies to combat it are positive.

But here’s the thing: it’s policy-making time. While deniers are pretending the problem doesn’t exist, those that do believe are making policy. Personally, I’m concerned over the general trend of alternative energy plans that seem to involve millions and billions in taxpayer money, yet would only perpetuate the domination of energy by big corporations.

Wind farms, for example, are wildly expensive, put money into big business pockets, and aren’t that efficient, anyway. Compare wind farms to insulation. Take this post from MaxSpeak, rejecting the common ideology that we should switch energy sources, but instead should work more to make our current sources more efficient:

Take the case of attic insulation again. In my home state of Washington, the optimum amount of attic insulation is ~R50. With R20 insulation or less upgrading to this will pay itself back in four years or fewer. (In new homes of course the payback is even faster.) However regulations only require R38. Almost every new home built is at the R38 level. Even when existing homes upgrade from R20 or below, they typically choose R38. (That is because insulation contractors know that competitors will quote R38, and don?t want to be the high bidder.) A price rise sufficient to motivate homeowners to demand R50 in new homes, and to let contractors risk bidding higher insulation levels would cost consumers much more than including an R50 insulation requirement in a comprehensive set of efficiency regulation.

Because the energy saved with increased efficiency pays for the cost of the upgrade in insulation, it’s not only cost-effective for the home owner, but saves on energy consumption, too. Image a state program that extends loans to homeowners who wish to better their insulation. The homeowner easily pays off her loans with the energy savings from the insulation; the state program pays for itself off the interest from the loans, perhaps using the money to upgrade household insulation for the elderly, say, or the poor. Or you could use tax incentives, giving homeowners a tax break if they upgrade their insulation.

Of course, such a program would never fly without a lot of lobbying. Why? Quite simply, it takes money out of the utilities’ pockets and puts it right into our pockets.

So, yes, be wary about the policies associated with global warming. Fight like hell to make sure energy-reduction happens the right way. But deny climate change? The facts are there, folks. The problem is clear.

by Jay Stevens 

I know I’m a big proponent of transparency. I recently touted Montana’s Democratic legislators’ blog as an exercise of democracy, and a benefit to the voters of the state. But there are some folks better off without a website. Like Krayton Kerns.

You may remember Kerns. He made a splash in the news on Election Day because he beat out Democrat Emilie Eaton by three votes in the election. It’s safe to say that, with a 3-vote margin of victory, Kerns’ election was hardly a ringing endorsement of conservative values in Laurel.

But here’s what he writes – for example – about climate change (no link – you have to click “Weekly Postings” on the sidebar, then “The Biggest Hoax”):

Carbon dioxide emission as a cause of global climate warming is the biggest hoax of the last 30 years. In 1975 the number one slot was held by those who proclaimed that the earth was entering the next ice age because economic growth was producing pollutants that were eating a hole in the ozone layer and letting the earth’s heat escape into space.

I don’t remember that the hole in the Ozone would have caused an “ice age,” but it certainly has changed the climate. Used to be you could outdoors for an hour without getting burnt. Thank goodness we successfully regulated the gasses that destroy the ozone. This is actually a real-life success story for the environmental movement.

The environmental disaster wizards are much craftier this time, so those of you equipped with well adjusted logic-meters had better be on your toes. The shake-down technique is so refined this time many folks buy into it without seeing what is coming. Frighteningly, man caused global warming is being taught as a religion, and the ministers who promote it are particularly aggressive. If you cast doubt on their faith you become the target. (Did you see what happened on the Weather Channel the week of January 15th?)

What can I add here? This is hilarious. Kerns may be the first person who claims that the environmental movement is actually organized. A couple of notes: the majority of scientific consensus says that climate change is real, it’s here, and humans are – at the very least – contributing to it.

(And I find Kerns’ accusations that January’s weather was somehow involved in a “liberal plot” to foist climate change on all of us. I suppose the early snow melts and summer wildfires are the left’s fault, too.)

Here is how the scam works: Carbon credits are trading on the Chicago Climate Exchange. You folks in agriculture are viewed as an asset because you have CRP ground, forest land, and un-grazed pastureland containing vegetation that is being promoted as a vehicle to store carbon. (Plants are made of chains of carbon molecules.)
In the process of turning coal into electricity, the coal is burned and the carbon molecules are released into the air. The believers radically proclaim this release is causing global warming.

To counter this release, carbon-offset companies provide a mechanism whereby evil-multinational-electricity-generating plants pay you not to harvest your crop of timber, grassland or farmland so they can continue to produce carbon emissions. Although not much, any money is better than none so you take the cash. I would too. Step one of the shakedown is complete.

The years pass, and the $4.00 per acre per year of standing timber or $25 per acre of un-harvested hay ground has allowed you and the Mrs. to take a week’s vacation to Jackpot Nevada every winter before calving season. Things seem great. Then the other shoe drops.

Suddenly, Reverend Global-Warming-Climatologist announces that the biggest source for the release of carbon dioxide is not electricity generating plants, it is cattle. The shakedown now shifts direction. Your 300 momma cows are now assessed an annual carbon tax forcing you to BUY carbon credits from the Chicago Climate Exchange just to stay in business. Today Carbon Credits are trading in Europe for $16 a unit, so you will likely be forced to purchase them at even higher prices. You have just been conned.
Furious, you write your legislators and congressmen, but they reply the carbon tax regulations are set in concrete. Because of the narrow margins in agriculture, this tax will put you out of business. You struggle in the death throes for a few years living off the equity of your land, but the inevitable day comes: You are forced to sell the family farm to a conservation group who returns your land to the undeveloped state of the 1850’s. To the environmental extremist, the carbon-credit world is now in balance.

Nice conspiracy theory. Again, has anyone accused the left of being this organized before? I’d love to hear Kerns’ opinions on alien abductions and 9/11 theories. I’m sure he’s got a thing or two to say.

You move to town and get a job as a Wal-Mart greeter. Time slowly passes. When a blizzard rolls in you gaze out the window and across the parking lot and sadly think of the days when such weather meant moving the heifers into the calving lot.

“Will the heifer take the calf after it comes out of the hot box or will she kick it off,” you reminisce to yourself. But, none of that matters now.

At the day’s end you go home and dig through the mail looking for your Social Security check. Because of the lean years in agriculture, it isn’t much and your budget is tight. Once proud, now you are forced to beg the government for a bigger handout because you are completely dependent on them. Your economic freedom is gone and you are hopelessly trapped under the security blanket of socialism. The con is complete.
Carbon sequestration regulation is everywhere in this 60th meeting of the Montana Legislature. Get educated. Stay alert and be prepared. We will fight this one but it will get nasty.

This is the funniest bit: Walmart is part of the “socialist conspiracy.”

Okay, so how out of touch is this guy with reality? Pretty dang far.

As I’ve shown before, just about every scientist on the planet agrees climate change is a serious problem. The one MIT scientist who’s trotted out by the flat-earthers – Richard Lindzen – claims that the dangers of climate change are overstated, but agrees that human activity contributes to climate change.

And let’s face it, there’s no reason not to institute changes in our energy consumption, anyway. Higher gas mileage on cars saves our finite supply of fuel, makes us less dependent on oil. Ending subsidies for Big Energy will make gas and oil prices rise, allowing the free market to make alternative energy sources more attractive to consumers and saves taxpayer money. Filling our markets and restaurants with more locally grown food cuts down on gas consumption and gives an economic boost to local family farmers. Et cetera and company.

All the effects of weaning us of oil, gas, and coal are good for everybody but the big energy and agricultural multinationals.

That a legislative representative of Montana clings to a conspiracy theory that rivals staged moon landings and the dinosaur hoax is quite disturbing. As the wildfires again whip out of control this summer, I’m sure homeowners, ranchers, and taxpayers who shoulder the brunt of climate change’s damage to our local environment, property, and health and well-being will not find Kerns’ mubo-jumbo very amusing.




  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,670,130 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,738 other followers

  • June 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Oct    
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  
  • Categories