Archive for the ‘Private Property Rights’ Category



by problembear

Bill Moyers Journal on PBS aired an indepth look at single payer last night. (update) since this program aired bill moyers has a poll on the obama/baucus health reform plan up on his website. you can watch the program if you missed it and vote here. they also have an easy way to submit comments if you want to add your 2 cents to what america is saying about this. so far people are not pleased about mr baucus’s plans. the early word is that max baucus is the number 9 pin and it’s a strike!

the albany times union newspaper has gone on record as supporting at least looking a single payer and giving it a place at the table.

do not miss this if you like to watch train wrecks… you just gotta see  this program before the so-called listening meetings with baucus aides next week. donna smith is especially compelling and they address most of our frustrations with dealing with health insurers.

i also find compelling and ominous this post over at piece of mind by the ever incorrigible but eminently logical mark t. read it and get fired up before max crams this stinking mess down our throats and makes us swallow….say aaaahhhh! 

wait- don’t run away max…we only want to talk….after all. what’s the harm in talking to your constituents?

if i am able i’ll take a few minutes out of my work day to attend the so-called baucus aides listening session here in missoula cause i like train wrecks and i like to think that a majority of citizens still means something in this country. but there is no excuse at all for not allowing single payer to be on the table. it is embarrassing behavior for a senator from montana to act like this and it should not be tolerated without letting max know how you feel about it as a citizen of montana. see you all on tuesday morning at 10:00am at St Pat’s. i hope they have a lot of seats cause i think they are going to need them.

update saturday; after watching moyer’s piece on single payer last night it is clear that the baucus plan is too corrupt for me to support. see what you think after listening to this lady.

donna smith makes a compelling case for single payer. and i have heard no argument thus far which would allow me to support the contaminated with corruption baucus health care arguments for the uniquely american solution- which is designed to funnel more money to the powerful interests who bribe our politicians while patients and the doctors and nurses who care for us just get screwed all over again.

seems to me it is always politically feasible for congress to bail out big banks and wall street investors but when it comes to even looking at a plan which would provide guaranteed health care to it’s working middle class supported by over 60% of the people suddenly max says it just won’t pass….

bears have simple rules; if it doesn’t pass the smell test – don’t eat it!

makes me ask this question; is it just me or does something not smell right about what max is dishing out here?……



by Bob Gentry

This piece is cross-posted from Left in the West. We’re happy to have it. – j-girl

In response to a 5 year old Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the ACLU, today the US Department of Justice released four memos generated during the Bush years by US DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) attorneys. The OLC is a component of the Justice Department created to provide “objective” legal advice to the AG and to resolve legal disputes among federal agencies. Each of these memos was directed to the attention of John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, and provided “legal opinions” regarding a few questions he had.

Here are the memos:

August 1, 2002, Memorandum for John Rizzo, Acting General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, Interrogation of al Qaeda Operative, by Jay S. Bybee

May 10, 2005, Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, by Steven Bradbury

May 10, 2005, Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, by Steven Bradbury

May 30, 2005 Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, by Steven Bradbury

I’ve read parts of all of them and all I could stomach of the August 1, 2002 memo by the Honorable Jay S. Bybee (now a Bush appointed 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge). I was on the verge of retching, not so much because of the graphic content of the memos, but because of the macabre torture of the rule of law set forth in every sterile sentence of these redacted memos. They are, quite simply, red hot insanity.

The August 2002 memo was written in response to questions from Rizzo about 10 techniques used on Abu Zubaydah. In short, Bybee lays out the questions from Rizzo, describes the 10 techniques, and then decides that none of them constitutes torture. If the subject weren’t so tragic, parts of the memo would be hilarious. Lucky for them that no judge had to decide whether the memo was an accurate statement of the law.

Whoops, the author is now a federal judge.
Continue Reading »

by jhwygirl

The Editor at the Button Valley Bugle has two bills that have both had their hearings and are awaiting committee action.

Both bills deal with carbon sequestration – which sounds nice and green, but as The Very Worthy Editor puts forth, really isn’t. Quite an informative post over there on HB338 and SB498.

All in support of the ultimate energy fallacy: Clean Coal.

One question I have – why does Montana want to store Canada’s CO2? Or, better asked: Why doesn’t Canada want to store its own CO2?

You really must read that post over at the Button Valley Bugle.

HB338 is in Senate Energy and Telecommunications, after having passed the House on a 90-9 vote. HB338 expands eminent domain. Wow. Nadine Spencer the secretary –

If you look at the 9 who are listed as having voted NO there, you’ll know that I’m finding it very scary to find myself in agreement with that group. But I’ll try to sleep well tonight believing that while we might agree on the outcome, the road we’ve taken has been drastically different.

SB498 is in House Federal Relations, Energy, and Telecommunications, having passed the Senate on a 42-8 vote. Bryce Bennett the secretary –

The list of NO bedfellows on this one isn’t as strange – but I’ll note that this probably the first time I’ve found myself in agreement with Sen. Verdell Jackson.

Did I mention these bills could have devastating affects on water quality?

by jhwygirl

There is a correction in this post, below, for HB75

This post is just for Monday and Tuesday. 105 committee hearings for just those two days. Keep in mind, too, that this is all on the downhill side, too – and I need to remember that also. Floor hearings are becoming all the more important, too. I will be making an effort to get up brief previews as stuff hits the floor. Those will be, please note, don’t-delay, email-or-call-today types of notices.

Last Thursday – and then Friday – were two disappointments – both SB425, the “Walleye Welfare” bill, and SB497, the “it protects protesters from people that are entering health care clinics” bill both passed 2nd and 3rd readings in the Senate – on a nearly party-line vote. These were no-go bills from my perspective – and others – so that they passed is a bad thing.

Is there any good to report out of that? Well, in committee, both bills passed unanamously out of committee – SB425 a 9-0 vote our of Senate Fish & Game, and SB497 a 12-0 vote out of Senate Judiciary. By the time they hit the floor, all of the Democratic committee members – save one on each of those bills – had changed their vote. So while the bills weren’t killed on the floor, clearly there was movement. Is there more good? There’s still another chance at these bills – they’re now in their respective House committees….which means ongoing public comment should continue, and may have an affect. So keep it up.

Now, onto the task at hand, shall we?

Monday has an interesting one – the topic of which we’ve blogged about here previously. Rep. Scott Sales has HB526, which would require the use of regular road salt and prohibit the use of magnesium chloride and calcium chloride on state and county roads. Now..boy. What do you say about this? The bill started out prohibiting salt – and I could see where that was too unspecific, so as originally proposed it has been amended. But amended to prohibit magnesium and calcium chloride? When both are more effective? And road salt is more corrosive? And worse for water quality? What are these people thinking? This is House Appropriations (another crazy place for it – it was originally in House Transportation – and me, I’d love to see this in House Natural Resources) – Samuel Speerschneider the secretary –

Here’s another one of those crazy unconstitutional ones: Rep. Joel Boniek has HB246 which would “Exempt(ing) from the federal regulation under the commerce clause of the constitution of the United States a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in Montana”. Honestly. The lunacy. And the waste of time. Boniek and the rest of the loonies that are proposing this kind of stuff should be embarrassed.

Sen. Jeff Essman has an interesting one: SB348, which would put forth a constitutional amendment to Montanan’s that would result in yearly legislative sessions that would alternate between regular and budgetary. This passed through the Senate overwhelmingly – 42-8. Now – I don’t know what I think about this: On one hand, if ridiculous legislation (like the one above, for example) weren’t getting proposed, maybe there wouldn’t be a need for annual sessions. On the other hand, 90 days has rarely been enough time to get stuff done. The cost of annual sessions – the fiscal note gets away from addressing it all together by basically saying nothing is going to happen until a time period out of our purview – would be significant. Further, we have interim sessions now where real analysis and attempts at bi-partisan agreement are worked out on significant issues. When would that stuff get done? If someone could explain that to me, maybe then I could support it – but as it stands now, we got a 90 day session that essentially focuses on the “regular” stuff like approving proposed bills that affect every day life, water quality, air quality, taxes, etc., and they have nominal hearings that are politically driven, with little substance given to true analysis, whether fiscal or scientific, of the effects. Would Essman’s proposal result in year-after-year of that? No analysis, just politically-driven decisions. If so, hell no. I wish the legislators would consider all that before they go putting forth a constitutional amendment to the voters that would result in a politically-driven decision that would then result in year-after-year of politically-driven decisions.

Sen. Carol C. Juneau wants to regulate the sale of alcoholic energy drinks with SB438. This one passed nicely out of the Senate, and hopefully finds the same support in the House. In House Business & Labor, Santella Baglivo the secretary –

I’m going to have to split this post, people, so please click Continue Reading »

  • 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

    • 1,671,489 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,737 other followers

  • August 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Oct    
  • Categories