Ulterior Motives Beyond Equality - Do All Lives Matter

A discussion on Facebook is taking place regarding the use of minority awards and scholarships and whether or not these awards and scholarships were still needed or even fair.  Do "black lives matter" as the current slogan that seems to be popular amongst the liberals is. Or maybe what we should be saying instead is "All lives matter". Lets keep color out. The following is a very real issue and one that maybe should be done away with:

The rationale for the separate minority awards and scholarships is that minorities were under-represented or overlooked. When Hattie McDaniel broke the color barrier at the Academy Awards, receiving top honors for Best Supporting Actress in her role as Mammy in "Gone With The Wind," no one seriously thought "Negroes" would be regular future recipients in 1939. Hattie, however, could not be ignored. One could make the case that for decades the separate awards and scholarships were appropriate. But we have come so far with integration (even electing and reelecting a Black president [actually half-Black]) that people are barely conscious of differences - unless that attention is imposed upon people.

I'll make one example, and see if you agree: After baseball became integrated and became well-staffed with Black, Latino, Asian and Caucasian players - based entirely upon their performance value to a team, do we still need a "Negro Baseball League?" I submit that many of these relics, such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), are no longer needed to promote equality, rather to keep the wounds of the past open for some other gain or reparation, and they have been co-opted by the political left to exploit past grievances for contemporary political gain.

The modern welfare state was created to get and keep minorities in the Democrat party. Lyndon Johnson was famously quoted as saying: "I'll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years." Keeping people in a victim class and in government dependency hurts as much, if not more, than segregation. The need for parallel race recognition awards ended a long time ago.

#blacklivesmatter; #alllivesmatter

"Black Lives Matter" vs "All Lives Matter"

There has been a lot of airplay for "Black Lives Matter". We would agree but it is also a racial statement. What is or would be more appropriate is "All Lives Matter".

We would encourage all of those who follow us to promote the idea that the life of an individual is precious and that the color or creed of a person should not be the deciding factor on whether or not a life is more or less valuable.

#AllLivesMatter

The Birth of the Democratic Party

Ever wonder when the or where the Democratic Party started? Happy Thanksgiving!

Alan Caron: Maine Democrats have only themselves to blame for LePage victory

An article that was posted on November 6 in the PPH (Pingree Press Herald) takes the view of why the Democratic party may have taken such a beating. This from the perspective of a Democrat. When done with the article check out the comments as many of them offer an interesting view of the election.

PPH (Pingree Press Herald)

Congratulations to Republican Gov. Paul LePage and his team for a well-run, smart campaign. They never wavered on making government spending, welfare and immigration their galvanizing issues. LePage didn’t commit a major gaffe. His debate performance was strong, and he actually gained support during the race.

In the wake of Tuesday’s losses, the first instinct of Democrats will be to blame others: big money from away, independent candidate Eliot Cutler and a Republican “wave.” That would be both a mistake and a lost opportunity.

Democrats need to go back to the drawing board and take a hard look at their priorities, their messaging and who they’ve been nominating for higher offices. They need to look inward rather than outward. They promised to do that kind of “soul-searching” after 2010, but there wasn’t much evidence of it this year.

Those who can’t imagine why LePage was re-elected have not been listening carefully enough to Maine people. In growing numbers, Mainers are frustrated about the state’s economy and stagnation. In part, they blame a government that has outgrown our means and that cannot be sustained without continuing tax increases, which, in turn, hurt the economy.

The election of Paul LePage was made possible because of the growing perception that Democrats have forgotten the working people and taxpayers of Maine, and that won’t change until Democrats in Maine pay more attention to those voices, and actually do something about it. Rightly or wrongly, voters are coming to feel that Democrats are incapable of changing a government that they are so busy defending.

Full story: PPH (Pingree Press Herald)

Governor Paul LePage and First Lady Ann LePage on Veterans Day

Today is Veteran's Day. Please take a moment to stop and honor a family member, a friend, or a member of your community who served in uniform.

First Lady Ann LePage said, "to all veterans and their families, our simple thank you will never be enough. You maintain and strengthen the presence of freedom in our nation for generations to come. We want to extend our most sincere appreciation to each and every one of you for your courage and dedication."

Paul LePage, Maine's Governor on Facebook.

Maine Judge Charles LaVerdiere: The EBOLA Czar

In his recent decision to lift the Ebola quarantine on Maine nurse, Kaci Hickox, Judge Charles LaVerdiere - in one fell swoop-  has made himself the “Ebola Czar” for Maine. His decision is not just about Kaci’s right to evade the personal inconvenience of a quarantine imposed by experienced health officials and the governor, it sets a troubling precedent for all other similar, Ebola quarantine situations. It makes an unelected judge, with no medical qualifications or expertise  the “kingpin” of the Ebola problem in Maine. Its impact on public health morale and management must be devastating. It leaves unanswered the question: Who in Maine is in charge of future plans and actions for Ebola - LaVerdiere or public health officials? It is an example, in our opinion, of “judicial power” gone wild, as LaVerdiere carves out an inappropriate role for a jurist: self-appointed “epidemiologist in chief” for Maine!

Judge LaVerdiere  resoundingly scorns the lack of science and the fear mongering on the part of Maine’s trained public health officials, and claims to be operating on the basis of “science”. One has to ask, “Does this new public health “Emperor” have any clothes?” His own scientific ‘bona fides’ seem very scant indeed. We suspect LaVerdiere’s opinions are based on “All I know is what I read in the paper.” And, as we know, many “newspapers”, such as our very own PPH, are using the American Ebola problem as a political tool to support, “Scientist-in-Chief” Obama - and local partisans.

In dealing with Ebola in Maine - or for that matter in the US - we are addressing a public health problem of preventive medicine - preventing a potentially lethal epidemic that could have devastating effects on our populations. It is important in thinking about Ebola to separate “prevention” from “treatment” of actual cases. Wherever possible we want “to prevent”. It is about “population oriented” public health programs of prevention in a population where Ebola hasn’t surfaced. And... we don’t want it to surface! Quarantine is, and always has been, our major “prevention” tool when facing an epidemic.

The major tool for prevention of Ebola (or any disease with epidemic potential) is isolation of “at risk” persons. This is in no way to say that “at risk” will inevitably shift into “very high risk” and, then, into  frank clinical Ebola. Prevention is always a safety first approach, which has been tried and proven by public health officials in many countries over a period of over a century. A classic “population oriented approach” cannot ever be based on “perfect certainty”; therefore, it defines “risk” and moves to isolate it in order to protect large, vulnerable populations from exposure to risk. In brief, this is the essence of public health practice when faced with the potential threat of a difficult to control epidemic. It may inconvenience individuals in the process, but its higher purpose aims at  the best level of public protection for the greater number of people.

“Dr” LaVerdiere is basically defining the Ebola “risk” down, minimizing it without presenting his evidence. He has also deemed the personal “inconvenience of quarantine” for one person as of a higher public value than public safety or public protection. He is in this matter at odds with the reported 80% of the public who vote for safety and quarantine! “Personal inconvenience” has just been been raised by Judge LaVerdiere to the highest social value and, at the same time, he implies that public safety is just for “sissies”!

Public fear of Ebola was scorned by LaVerdiere in his comments. Public fear of the disease he inferred was media manufactured or ”neurotic”. But one asks, is it  “neurotic” for any of us to fear a potentially lethal epidemic when someone like LaVerdiere is trashing our protections and our protectors in public health? His recent decision effectively “fires” the public health officials (and the governor) on whom we rely for public health protection! Were people in past ages “fearless” or “neurotically fearful ' when facing “the Black Death”? How about modern day Africa? Any fear of Ebola there? Fear is a logical normal reaction to a possible death threat. LaVerdiere should stop using this sort of “junk science/pop psychology” unorthodox, "unscientific" tools acquired, perhaps, from his long exposure to family courts where “junk science” and “pop” psychology are rampant.

We hope that Tuesday’s court hearing on the Kaci Hickox story can lead to our public health officials to be put back in charge of Ebola epidemiology. Can LaVerdiere back off? If he can’t the state of Maine should send him for a sabbatical to the Harvard School of Public Health for instruction in epidemiology!

For the welfare of the public, LaVerdiere should immediately resign as ‘de facto’ Maine state epidemiologist. He is totally unqualified. His recent public health decision is a fair sample, for those who have never seen other evidence, of his similar questionable judgments in family court matters!

For up to date local Maine Republican issues find us on Facebook.

Ebola: Public Health Practice vs post modern politics

Traditionally, public health practice looks at any epidemic in terms of levels of prevention: primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. For a successful battling of an epidemic all three types of prevention activities are needed, if possible. Primary prevention is the notion of an absolute prevention of new cases (reducing incidence), using whatever methodologies are available. A vaccination program - when vaccine exists- is one excellent example of primary prevention. Eliminating infected water or food sources is another tactic for food or water borne infections. Isolating or strictly localizing infected persons is yet another classic preventive approach, which aims at halting further spread of the disease.

Secondary prevention is treating actual, existing, known cases of the disease and conducting the treatment in such a manner as to prevent spread of the illness from the known cases of the illness to those around them, in contact with them: family, friends, caregivers, children. The aim here is to reduce the prevalence by reducing the numbers of sick by early treatment and intervention- and thereby eliminating spread of the disease to the extent possible.

Tertiary prevention is reducing the pools of disability and dysfunctions that may result in people who have recovered from the infectious stage of the illness, but who retain secondary damage, dysfunction or disability. It is commonly thought of as "rehabilitation" from secondary (non-infectious) disabling effects of an illness (such as paralysis in polio).

In all of its activities public health aims at keeping the public well and functioning. It is what is called a "population oriented approach" defining populations at risk and intervening in the ways noted above. It works for the greater good of the "at risk" population, and to do so it must have medical control over those who can cause contamination/infection of those who are potential victims of the epidemic.

This classic public health approach is at odds with the rampant, "I have a right", personal rights of the post-modern generation.  Officials must minutely titrate risk/benefit so as to avoid offending politically.  In the present Ebola epidemic there are larger, always latent political issues: the epidemic is in a "black African country" (watch out for the "race card"), there are national interests vs the liberal fear that we don't want to appear "nationalistic". We have elements in the country (US) that believes passionately in "diversity" and in the myth of "the international community". The liberal concern is "what will our neighbors think".

So public health becomes "political health" and our leaders try to cut things as close as possible to protect individualistic rights, feminist rights in the face of potential contagion. Is it better to exhibit "politically correct" 'bona fides' than to protect our huge population from death? Today's Portland Press Herald has multiple reportages, editorials, opinions about Ebola is a near perfect demo of the liberal interpretation of the issue and the problems for partisan political purposes. Since the epidemiology of Ebola, or any viral disease, is not a precise matter, the mantra of "only if you have contact with body fluids" gets repeated again and again. But viruses are prone to change genetically over the course of an epidemic, and human resistance/immunity is highly variable.

Does the Ebola virus know that the US President will only allow it to cause disease via body fluids?  What about used Kleenexes, door knobs, cutlery, dinner plates, clothing wash basins, bath tubs, towels, face cloths? And ... which body fluids: spray from coughing and sneezing, sputum, sweat, feces?

The question for the US public is: How safe do we want to be? How much risk of medical danger can we tolerate? Is being scrupulously politically correct more important to everyone than getting a potentially deadly disease? Look what the military is recommending. Look at other countries.

Governor LePage Issues Statement About Healthcare Worker in Fort Kent Who Worked in West Africa

October 29, 2014

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Contact: Adrienne Bennett, Press Secretary (207) 287-2531

AUGUSTA – Governor Paul R. LePage issued a statement Wednesday morning about a healthcare worker who had been quarantined in New Jersey and is now in Fort Kent still under voluntary quarantine.

“We commend all healthcare workers for their humanitarian work in West Africa and other regions in the world, and we are proud that Americans are always ready to help others,” said Governor LePage. “However, the healthcare worker who is in Fort Kent has been unwilling to follow the protocols set forth by the Maine CDC and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control for medical workers who have been in contact with Ebola patients.”

“We hoped that the healthcare worker would voluntarily comply with these protocols, but this individual has stated publicly she will not abide by the protocols,” Governor LePage said. “We are very concerned about her safety and health and that of the community. We are exploring all of our options for protecting the health and well-being of the healthcare worker, anyone who comes in contact with her, the Fort Kent community and all of Maine. While we certainly respect the rights of one individual, we must be vigilant in protecting 1.3 million Mainers, as well as anyone who visits our great state.”

Upon learning the healthcare worker intends to defy the protocols, the Office of the Governor has been working collaboratively with the State health officials within the Department of Health and Human Services to seek legal authority to enforce the quarantine.

Governor LePage and the Maine CDC have been following the care and movements of the healthcare worker since Monday. The Maine State Police will monitor the residence in Fort Kent where the healthcare worker is staying, for both her protection and the health of the community.

To protect privacy and security, neither this person’s identity nor the location of quarantine will be released by the state.

The original press release may be found by following this link: Governor Paul LePage

Lawyers, Divorce Industry Like Mike - Should You?

Several years ago I went through a divorce which involved a Guardian ad litem (GAL). At the time I believed in the court system and had not reason to mistrust a GAL. As the divorce went from weeks to months it became apparent that this "officer of the court" was nothing more than an unmonitored GOD allowed to do an say and do anything they wanted. The very idea of a GAL in itself violates the rights that we have as citizens. Aside from the Guardian ad litem the whole process in Family Court has been and continues to be very revealing. It is a corrupt system that is in a slow state of decay.

Why is this important to you - A Republican, Independent or Democrat?

Three years ago I started to become politically active - being motivated by the corruption and decay I was seeing with Guardians ad litem and our Family Courts. There were few politicians that would give me the time of day - most brushing me aside as being sour grapes because of a divorce gone wrong.

Slowly though that has changed. In three years a grass roots group of like minded people have come together and managed to have legislation enacted (LD 872) which was signed by Gov. Paul LePage (July 2013). Since then there has been numerous pieces of correspondence with him regarding the issues in Family Court. This from myself and the many others who have been abused by the system. It has taken years to educate Gov. Paul LePage but he gets it and as a result the governor is clearly a Politician Putting Kids First.

The Governor has earned the wrath of many over the years. In the past few months he has been in the sights of the Judicial Branch (which has silently endorsed Mike Michaud), lawyers (with Mike Asen publicly stating that he and other lawyers do not want another 4 years of LePage), Guardians ad litem (which like the Judicial Branch has silently been endorsing Mike Michaud) and many who make their living off of divorcing families (the Divorce Industry) going through the Family Court system.

As a parent who has gone through or is going through a divorce and is considering a vote for Mike Michaud because of the values he may bring to the table, or the fact that he may be more polished than our current governor. I would ask this of you:

Why is it that the Judicial Branch, Family Court lawyers, GALs and the Divorce Industry like Mike so much? Why is it that they are raising money for Mike as if it were going out of style? Do you think they have your interest at heart?



If Mike is elected will he listen to your voice as a concerned parent or the voice of the Divorce Industry which has supported him financially?

We are asking you with this election to vote for anyone other than Mike Michaud. A vote for Mike in our eyes is a vote for the Divorce Industry and the status quo.

Some of the lawyers who like Mike:

Michael Asen Esq (MittelAsen) - has helped fundraise for Mike on several occasions - 07/25/2014; 08/11/2014; 08/14/2014;

Michael Asen Esq has also been quoted by the Portland Press Herald as saying “My highest priority is making sure we don’t have another four years of this governor.” in an August 12, 2014 posting and referring to Gov. Paul LePage. Remember Gov. Paul LePage signed the Dutremble bill LD 872 "An Act To Improve the Quality of Guardian ad Litem Services for the Children and Families of Maine" which the Judicial Branch hated as did lawyers and Guardians ad litem. Michael Asen Esq is also the chair of fund raising for Maine lawyers who like "Mike".

Diane Dusini Esq (MittelAsen) - has helped raise money for Mike on at least one occasion - 08/11/2014. It should be noted that is also the President of the Maine Bar.

Stephanie Cotsirilos - former Wall Street Lawyer - has helped raise money for Mike Michaud - 08/11/2014.

Robert Gips Esq (DrummondWoodsun) has helped raise money for Mike Michaud - 08/11/2014.

Neil Jamieson Esq (Prescott Jamieson Nelson & Murphy) has helped to raise money for Mike Michaud - 07/21/2014; 08/11/2014.

Brett D. Baber Esq (Lanham Blackwell & Baber) has helped to raise money for Mike Michaud - 08/11/2014.

Janis B. Cohen Esq. has helped to raise money for Mike Michaud - 08/11/2014.

Elizabeth Scheffee Esq. (Givertz Scheffee & Lavoie, PA) has helped raised money for Mike Michaud - 08/11/2014.

Richard S. Berne Esq. (Law Office of Richard Berne) - is helping Mike Michaud with campaign contributions - 08/11/2014.

Add to this list the fact that Senate President Justin Alfond has reportedly told Senators in his caucus - enough with GAL and Family Court reform……….

In the Home Stretch - Help Gov. Paul LePage Retain the Blaine House

Governor LePage needs your help! We need volunteers to help get out the vote in this last week before the election to make sure we can continue the common sense reforms and keep the pro-job growth environment that the Governor has created in his first term. If you are available to help please call our office 621-6720 and ask for Kevin, or send us a message here on Facebook. Even an hour can make a big difference on election day! "If it is to be, it is up to us!"

An open letter to Andy O'Brien of the Free Press on his article of District 12 Candidate

A recent article published in the Free Press is more an opinion of the writer than it is a piece educating the readers of where these two candidates stand. The piece "Knox County Senate Race - Miramant and Sutton Disagree on Role of Gov't, Existence of Climate Change" written with a heavy slant favoring Dave Miramant and mis-quotes Paula Sutton painting the candidate as someone who is uncaring or mis-guided on many issues.

The piece has prompted an open letter to the Free Press and writer Andy O'Brien response to the piece by Andy O'Brien which you can read below.


An open letter to Andy O'Brien of the Free Press On His Paula Sutton/Dave Miramant article

I read with interest your article outlining the positions held by the State Senate candidates Paula Sutton and Dave Miramant.

While most of the piece contains some facts I couldn't help but notice comments such as "Her campaign is also focused on opposing government funded safety-net programs for the needy, arguing that programs should be be volunteer based not funded with tax money." This statement is a half truth. Paula Sutton believes the truly needy including the handicapped and elderly are deserving of taxpayer help. There are limited funds to go around. So for you to say her campaign is "focused" on opposing government funded safety-net programs for the needy is not so. Paula Sutton is concerned as most taxpayers should be that welfare money goes to those most deserving of assistance.

The statement immediately before that saying that Paula is not employed or involved in a business is again, a half truth. Paula is now a consultant for the business she and her husband own but is taking a hiatus from working full time for their small business to run for the Maine State Senate.

Your paragraph on The Existence of Climate Change is an interesting one. The wording "Sutton is skeptical of the benefits of renewable energy." is also worded poorly. Paula Sutton realizes that renewable energy is fine but years away from society being able to utilize it as one would oil, propane and natural gas. Renewable energy trying to expand too quickly has accounted for money that was wasted. Solyndra was a solar company that received over $500 million dollars from taxpayers and it went bankrupt. That was not a good financial move and was a waste of taxpayer money. You also seem to put your personal spin on this, quoting reports that seem to say that climate change is a fact. What happened to the Al Gore choruses of global warming?  There has been a "pause" in "global warming" a big "pause" of over 17 years!

There is a lot of money to be had in the "global warming" myth. Money that if the lie is repeated enough and believed enough by some people, the average consumer will be paying much more for utilities, cars, food and most everything.

Another paragraph and your bias continues to show, with a direct slam on Paula Sutton with the statement "Sutton said, incorrectly, that the gas tax is not dedicated to roads but dumped into the state's general fund." States are allotting a growing share of the funds they raise from gas taxes to debt service and spending unrelated to roads and bridges, making them more reliant on federal assistance to pay for new infrastructure.

Healthcare can be done on a grand and expensive scale (think and feel Obamacare) or done in smaller more cost effective ways like with the Knox County Health Clinic. Several doctors I have spoken with have told me if some relief could be forthcoming with student loans being reduced or partially forgiven for doctors and if medical malpractice insurance could be reduced to where only proven negligence were to account for most of the expense of malpractice insurance reducing its cost, that would free up a financial burden placed on doctors and allow for more time to dedicate to volunteering.

Your article does a disservice to the voting public. Label it the way it should have been labeled, an editorial.

David Miramant wants to raise our cost of living by raising taxes in a state that can't afford it.
We know from what you have written that you are a Democrat voting for Dave Miramant and Paula Sutton is a Republican with Conservative values and that bothers you, which showed in this piece.

To read the original article published in the Free Press click on this link.

Why welfare, minimum wage make it harder for poor Americans to succeed

Foxnews.com

By John Stossel
Published October 08, 2014

Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson declared “War on Poverty.” It sounded great to me.

I was taught at Princeton, “We’re a rich country. All we have to do is tax the rich, and then use that money to create programs that will lift the poor out of poverty.” Government created job-training programs for the strong and expanded social security for the weak.

It seemed to work. The poverty rate dropped from 17 percent to 12 percent in the programs’ first decade. Unfortunately, few people noticed that during the half-decade before the “War,” the rate dropped from 22 percent to 17 percent. Without big government, Americans were already lifting themselves out of poverty!

Johnson’s War brought further progress, but progress then stopped. It stopped because government is not good at making a distinction between needy and lazy. It taught moms not to marry the father of their kids because that would reduce their welfare benefits. Welfare invited people to be dependent. Some people started to say, “Entry-level jobs are for suckers.” Many could live almost as well without the hassle of work.

Despite spending an astonishing $22 trillion dollars, despite 92 different government welfare programs, poverty stopped declining. Government’s answer? Spend more!

Full story: Foxnews.com

Ain't Politics Fun?

Truth be known, no they "ain't", in fact they have become too dirty and offensive. As an example, I refer to the recent column by Dave Miramant. The man got into office some two elections back through some shenanigans of the State Democrat party. He served his term, then in an attempted re-election came forth with aims of how he worked to lower taxes and other good things. This paper printed a letter from a political colleague of Mr. Miramant's which exposed the Miramant claims to be bogus. Fortunately and thankfully the voters saw through his offensive diatribe and voted Chris Rector into that office.

Apparently, now with Mr. Rector retiring, Mr. Miramant is giving it another go. In so doing, Mr. Miramant hasn't changed his fallacious political litany. This time, thanks to the letter in this paper (Sept. 4, by Paul Ackerman - "Puzzled by Miramant's take") Mr. Miramant is blown out of the political waters once again.

To disagree politically or otherwise is a precious prerogative of those of us in the free world. So why pollute it with untruths, especially when those untruths are blatantly intellectually offensive. Mr. Miramant accuses the governor of "creating more debt for the state" when in fact the governor paid back multi-millions of Medicare debt the state owed the hospitals. In addition, Maine now has a sizable surplus of some $93 million. Then again one needs remember that Democrats only generate debt much less accumulate surpluses. Paying back debts is alien to them. The fact that Mr. Miramant isn't running for governor seems to be irrelevant. To have read his column one needs conclude Mr. Miramant is amongst those Democrats who expect us to assume that our lakes and streams became polluted, (if in fact they are) with the election of a Republican governor. Does Mr. Miramant really expect us to be so obtuse as to forget that the same lakes and streams were flowing during the tenure of the four Democrat governors who preceded Governor LePage and no one raised the issue of pollution?? True, Governor LePage has his caustic and even his bawdy side, but he gets things done. Then again, who amongst us doesn't have a bit of the caustic and bawdy? The governor has lowered taxes, and his prime interest is the well-being of the state, not of his political party.

From the earliest of my 70 years of voting I used to look to vote "either side of the political aisle" if for no other reason but to assert my individual independence, but with the advent of the four musketeers headed by Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Harry Ried, heading the cesspool in D.C., it will be a cold day in hell before I consider adding to it by a local vote for Mr. Miramant.

Steve Masone
Camden

Planned Parenthood to Spend 500K in Support of Mike Michaud

Recently Maine has been assaulted by ads from Planned Parenthood (PAC) in support of Mike Michaud over Gov Paul LePage. Planned parenthood is planning on spending 500k to defeat the Governor. This is one of the most aggressive campaigns that Planned Parenthood has waged against a candidate in the state.

Why us it that Planned Parenthood support and want Mich Michaud so much. Is it because Mike is a better person? Or because of something else?

Our take is that Gov. Paul LePage has it right and Planned Parenthood is scared at the loss of funding. They look to Mike Michaud to reinstate the money that has been lost as much as supporting the reproductive rights of women. Planned Parenthood has been on the state and federal gravy train for years. They fear the loss associated with Gov Paul LePage. Our state is in no position where it can continue to support the policies that Planned Parenthood pushes on its clients. A vote for Gov. Paul LePage is a vote to keep more of your money in your pocket. A vote for Mike Michaud will mean opening up your checkbook for institutions and organizations like Planned Parenthood. To support policies that run against the ethics and morals that this country is based upon.

Do we want a career politician supporting special interests and funding their agendas. Or a politician that puts people first - that is putting our kids first? Supporting Gov. Paul LePage is supporting our kids.


For backup on the spending that Planned Parenthood is planning on spending:
2014-08-14 WABI - Planned Parenthood To Spend $500K In Maine Races
.

Response to Dave Miramant Guest Column

To the Editor:

The recent guest column by Dave Miramant of Camden initially left me puzzled, as much of it was a diatribe against Governor Paul LePage. I momentarily wondered if Dave was running for governor against Paul LePage.

Further reading cleared things up, Dave Miramant thinks he is running against a partisan mirage of Governor LePage's record. Imagine that? Maybe he hasn't met his opponent Paula Sutton yet?

Miramant's comments: "...we can't take any more bullying and obstructionism of the present governor.." ; "..he has undone years of good environmental work and created more debt for our state.." ,are just remarkably twisted statements.

Granted it is obvious that Dave does not like Governor LePage, but lets be realistic about these specious claims.

The past legislative session saw about 2000 bills introduced, and the governor vetoed 180 of them. It is not obstructionism to veto bills, in fact it is usually the result of fiscal prudence, or the odor of legislative over-reach, that prompts a governor to fulfill his responsibilities of office and veto bad legislation.

Created more debt? Really Dave? Last budget numbers I saw (MEGOV) showed the state now has a surplus at fiscal year end, $39.1 million, and a balance in the general fund of $9.8 million.

When was the last time a Democrat governor in Maine put the brakes on overboard spending and waste,and helped the state to show a surplus?

Would it be too much for Dave Miramant to provide specifics of his environmental work "undone" claim. Isn't this just the perfect straw man?

Contrary to the claim, this administration has a very pro-active record trying to streamline and improve the efficiency of state agencies that deal with environmental matters.

In addition, the LePage administration overhauled the Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, changed the Land for Maine's Future charter to require the prioritization of acquiring deer wintering habitat, repealed the unnecessary 2009 saltwater fishing license mandate, and supported the creation of a fisheries tax credit to encourage private sector investment in fish hatcheries and docks.

No, Governor LePage isn't poisoning streams and dumping pollutants into rivers.

The drum beat about Medicaid expansion is truly absurd. Claiming that we ought to take federal money for three years to expand a program that already costs Maine $2.4 billion per year defies logic. As if after the 3 years of "free" federal money we will magically come up with the hundreds of millions in addition to current costs per year to cover the expansion.

Sorry Dave did not knock on my door when he was making his 10,000+ calls, as a former Democrat of 30+ years I'd have enjoyed listening to his pitch.

Paul Ackerman

Tenants Harbor,Maine

372-6204 - cell 712-5601

Where do the candidates stand on welfare reform?

Today Michael Michaud announced a health plan which actually calls for spending more taxpayer money on welfare. That's right, Michael Michaud who in the State Senate helped expand welfare and create the hospital debt, is now calling for even more welfare. Haven't we had enough welfare expansion?

You can probably guess where Governor Paul LePage stands on this issue.

Support Gov Paul LePage by making a donation so that the state does not see welfare expansion.

Facebook



Donate: Facebook / Website









http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2755853/It-amazing-moment-Social-worker-gloats-Facebook-breaking-family-revelling-massive-rollicking-judge-gave-parents.html#comments-2755853

www.LePage2014.com/donate

2014 Gov Paul LePage is Putting Kids First - He cares

Out of all three candidates for Governor - Paul LePage gets it when it comes to our kids. Because of the experiences he had as a child has made him a champion for children. In 2013 he signed into law the bill Sen David Dutremble submitted - LD 872. Just recently in a radio interview he spoke of an incident that had a profound impact on his life:

2014-09-13 PPH: “Listen. My dad, I remember, my dad, being about 10 years old, my dad kicking my mother seven months pregnant. A week later, it’s a stillborn. I blame my dad. End of story. End of story.”

Gov. Paul LePage is going to bat for parental rights - have Mike Michaud or Elliot Cutler done the same? The last four years Gov. Paul LePage has been putting kids first. Voting for Gov Paul LePage will ensure that our kids continue to stay in the front.

Maine GOP Praises Court Decision on Pension Reform

One of Gov. LePage, Republicans' signature achievements

AUGUSTA -- The Maine Republican Party on Tuesday praised a recent decision by the federal First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, which upheld the monumental pension reforms implemented by Governor Paul LePage, then-State Treasurer Bruce Poliquin, and Republican majority lawmakers in 2011. 

"Our state faced a looming cloud of fiscal disaster that had been ignored for years until Governor LePage reduced the state's long-term pension shortfall by $1.7 billion, protecting Maine taxpayers and keeping our promises to retired state employees," said Maine Republican Party Vice-Chairwoman Susan Morissette, who served in the 125th Legislature of 2011-12 and voted to pass the pension reform package.  "It takes bold leadership to fix big problems, and Governor LePage and Republicans showed that they have it in abundance." 

The case, Maine Association of Retirees v. Board of Trustees of the Maine Public Employees Retirement System, was decided unanimously in the favor of pension reformers against a challenge by various state employee labor unions in a brief opinion by a three-member panel of the First Circuit, which included former U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

The Republican pension reform initiative was enacted as a part of the 2011 biennial state budget and reduced the state's long-term pension shortfall from $4.1 billion to $2.4 billion -- a reduction of 41 percent -- by raising the retirement age from 62 to 65 for non-vested employees and freezing cost of living adjustments temporarily. 

"If Michael Michaud were to return to Augusta, he would surely bring back the old ways of tax, spend, promise, and pass the buck to the next legislature and the next generation," added Maine Republican Party Executive Director Jason Savage.  "He is too indebted to the union bosses and too entrenched in the old, machine politics of the past to fix Maine's finances and economy.  The very problems that this reform fixed were created by Michael Michaud and other liberal politicians in the '80s and '90s who refused to change the status quo.  They lied to Maine state workers by telling them that their pension system is sustainable." 

Michaud has received $1.65 million in Big Labor campaign contributions throughout his 12-year career in Congress.  One major union alone contributed $300,000 this year to the Maine Democratic Party to support Michaud's gubernatorial bid.  Powerful Democratic Party elder and lobbyist Severin Beliveau recently said that Gov. LePage is "the first governor in ages that is not indebted to the MSEA, NRCM and MEA."

Knox County - Mark Your Calendar - July 10 and August 14, 2014

Knox County Republicans announce the next two meetings at their new summer headquarters.

Thursday July 10 and August 14 (second Thursday of the month for July & August only)
Social time is 6:30pm and the meetings will start at 7pm. Refreshments will be provided as well as some really good food.

The new headquarters is located in Rockport at the old Cody's Restaurant building on Old County Road. Our space is located in the big red building. The street address is 399 Commercial Street, Rockland ME for those of you who do not remember Cody's.

At the meeting we will be working on campaign preparation, assisting candidates. Staff training for volunteers working at the office. We do have a new coordinator and we will hear updates from the candidates.

All republicans are welcome. Remember to bring a friend.

Sonja Sleeper
Knox County Committee Secretary

Sutton for Senate at Annual Warren Days Parade - June 28 2014

Join us on Saturday,  June 28th at 10:00 am to walk in  the Annual Warren Days parade in downtown Warren.

The Sutton for Senate campaign (SD 12) will be having a float and a few cars in the event and ask that you join us!  We can accommodate people with mobility issues and encourage you to bring your family, children and grandchildren (If possible please wear jeans or chinos and  orange t-shirt ,white is OK if no orange available).

Line up for event is at 10:00 am (at the Motor Shop, 167 Western Road near fire station) and parade begins at 10:30.  Let me know if you think you can join us.  After the parade you can take advantage of the games, activities, bounce house and Chicken BBQ which is around 11:30. There will be live music from noon to 3:00 pm from Bobby Littlehale and his band "Winging It".

Paula Sutton
Candidate for State Senate District 12
207 380 3406

Find Paula Sutton on Facebook and at paulasuttonforsenate.com. Paula may also be contacted through her email at: pgsutton@hotmail.com

Will Illegal Aliens Receive Benefits in Maine?

Not if Governor Paul LePage has taken a common sense action - declaring to Maine cities and towns that the State will no longer fund general assistance welfare for illegal aliens. In doing this Maine will be in compliance with Federal law which prohibits states from providing welfare assistance to illegal aliens.

"Illegal aliens who choose to live in Maine are not our most vulnerable citizens. We need to take care of Mainers first. I think most Mainers would agree" Governor Paul LePage is quoted as saying. Illegal aliens contribute little to the state but manage to drain the limited resources that should be available to law abiding citizens. The citizens of this state should come first.

To keep current with Governor Paul LePage's reelection campaign follow him on Facebook.

Senator Emily Cain is a Creator of Job Growth?

In what has to be the most un-shocking news possible, the AFL-CIO has endorsed liberal, State Senator Emily Cain, touting her as someone who will help create jobs. Really? Lets be clear--Senator Cain's policies have hurt job growth, hurt our families, and have contributed to our kids having to look elsewhere to find employment. That is her record, not political spin, and it is not one of job growth. In contrast, Bruce Poliquin has 35 years experience of creating hundreds of jobs. Unemployment doesn't discriminate between party lines and most everyone can agree that we need More Jobs & Less Debt. Looking at her actual record makes it clear, Senator Cain is no more a job creator than Justin Bieber is the best role model for our kids. 

Please share with your friends and remind them to vote for More Jobs and Less Debt, Vote Poliquin for Congress and like on Facebook.

Michael Michaud Claims Gov Paul LePage Hurts the Homeless

Yesterday Michael Michaud made the claim that Gov. Paul LePage is hurting the poor and if elected again will continue to hurt the poor. Keep in mind that the Governor was homeless when he was younger and has made it a point to give those less fortunate a hand up not a hand out while in office.

To find out more on the Gov LePage campaign find him on Facebook.

Putting Children First - An Audit of 'Pro se' Representation in Maine Family Courts

Wikipedia defines an audit as: "A planned and documented activity performed by qualified personnel to determine by investigation, examination or evaluation of objective evidence  the adequacy and compliance with established procedures or applicable documents and the effectiveness of implementation.

A performance audit is increasingly used in government agencies as an examination of success in satisfying mission objectives.

Auditing is defined as a systematic and independent examination of data, statements, records and operations and performances of an enterprise for a stated purpose.

The purpose is then to give an opinion on the adequacy of controls and to improve the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance processes."

This is the working definition we use when we consider asking for an audit of ‘pro se’ issues in family courts.  Is the growth of ‘pro se’ representation impacting the “normal” functioning of family courts?  If so, how, and what are the qualitative implications?

'PRO SE' IN MAINE COURTS WIDELY ACKNOWLEDGED:  'Pro se' representation in Maine courts is a problem of amateur, ”do-it-yourself “ players trying to navigate the arcane complexities and traditions of family law in family courts.  It is an incredible challenge to amateurs that is repeatedly and despairingly acknowledged by self representing users of family courts and by sympathetic members of the Judiciary.  It is also acknowledged, as a problem by the Maine Bar, which - in spite of its good faith efforts to find answers to the 'pro se' problem - sees the problem escape those efforts and grow numerically ever larger.

'PRO SE' NUMBERS:  Most people don't know the actual size, the statistics, of the 'pro se' problem in Maine Family Courts and are shocked when the hear the statistics.  74% is the number recently reported (personal communication) by Chief Justice Leigh Saufley.  Justice Andrew Mead in an "op ed" essay in the Portland Press Herald reported 3/4 'pro se' representation in family courts (or 75%).  But we won't quibble over 1%!!   It is a big problem.  ‘Pro se” users are the majority “parties” in family courts- a big majority!

And ... this 74% percentage isn't static.  It keeps on growing despite efforts by the Bar and the Judicial Branch to reduce the numbers - to reduce its prevalence.  From the absence of  successful “solutions” and the failure to reduce the numbers, one has to infer that there is a problem in diagnosing the "disease" - and its dynamics -  or that the corrective "medicine" isn't strong enough or isn't working fast enough.  Because the numbers keep growing there is an need for an opinion outside of the Judicial Branch about the nature and scope of the problems and for proposals to correct them.  We feel that OPEGA qualifies, given their experience in conducting audits and given their enviable reputation for fairness and objectivity.

NATIONAL 'PRO SE' PERSPECTIVE: The 'pro se' problem is by no means just a Maine problem.  The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) reports that growing ‘pro se’ representation is a growing problem for every state.  Connecticut and New York are said to have 82 and 83% 'pro se', respectively.  Some of the problem seems related to national "macro economics" and the economic problems of the last several years.  Some of it is related to the escalating costs of private  legal services, which quickly become a financial deterrent to middle class family court users. But we have to ask, regardless of abstract economic speculation, do we really want to end up competing with Connecticut and New York for bigger ‘pro se’ numbers? What are we waiting for?

Like it or not, the 74%  'pro se'  problem proclaims a 'de facto', two tier user (and social class) system in our courts - the wealthy 25% have lawyers, and the middle class 75% “do-it-yourself”.  The questions for the public are: (a) what are the root causes of  this social discrimination, can causes be addressed and (b) should we just let the problem continue (and grow) uncorrected?

THE HUMAN PROBLEMS behind the 'pro se' number: are public users, judges, lawyers and others. Any audit needs to consider who uses family courts 'pro se' and otherwise. What are the demographics? What are other differentiating features? How do 'pro se' users feel about their legal adequacy in court? What "tools" do they use in representing themselves? What is their experience of judges?  What outcomes differentiate those with lawyers form those with none. Is there a differential with regard to Guardian ad litem experiences?

Likewise there is a need to evaluate how judges perceive the 'pro se' issue.  What are the professional challenges for judges dealing with 'pro se'?  What solutions do they improvise to address the problems?  What suggestions or recommendations do they have for improvement?  What "tools" does the Judicial Branch already provide those doing self representation?  How useful/adequate are these?

We have heard many lawyers claim that they see no problem with the current operation of the family court system.  On a personal/professional level this is certainly understandable, because in cases where they oppose a 'pro se' "lawyer", they have an extreme professional advantage in their own favor. It must be like "taking candy from a baby"! There may be other advantages too in this sort of uneven "legal combat", but an audit would look at all of the dynamics and, one hopes, challenge complacency.

THE DEMOCRACY "PROBLEM":  Clearly a two class court system in which those with money for a lawyers are favored and those without a lawyer to represent them are disfavored poses a huge challenge to a democratic society. It is an enormous embarrassment to all of us to ignore the inequality. It is an important issue that needs thoughtful evaluation to diagnose the nature of the problem and to recommend intelligent proposals for correction that will be democratic and constitutional.

AN OPEGA PERFORMANCE AUDIT, we feel strongly,  is the way to go for Maine’s children and families, who are forced to represent themselves in family courts!  We ask the Legislature, the Judicial Branch and the Governor, along with the “grassroots” to support legislation to begin problem analysis and problem solving of the ‘pro se’ issue.


.
.
Supporting candidates that are Putting Children First during this election cycle. Candidates that are willing to support an audit of the Family Court system in Maine. For more information please contact us at Republicanofme@gmail.com

Paula Sutton - Seeks to Represent District 12 for State Senate

Paula Sutton - a Warren resident is running for Maine State Senate in district 12 (this includes all of Knox county with the exception of the town of Washington).

Paula lived and was raised in Maine growing up in Readfield before attending Becker College in Massachusetts where she studied business. Two daughters and two grandchildren round out the family that Paula and her husband Kerin have.

Paula has worked selling real estate and as an owner in various local restaurants. She is currently an owner in a seafood company. She views her current and past roles as a small business owner and understands the issues that surround small business owners in Maine. While business matters involve a good part of Paula's life she does give back to the community. Paula has volunteered at a local food pantry and local YMCA.

Because of her background and experience with business Paula understands the issues that many of Maine's small businesses have to deal with. Because of what Paula has seen in volunteering her time - she recognizes that Maine needs better jobs for her constituents and stronger schools for our children. There is a very real need for government on all levels to be more efficient and work to make the lives of Mainers better. This includes transparency that she supports but is lacking.

For more information on Paul Sutton visit Paula Sutton for Senator on Facebook or you may contact her at pgsutton@hotmail.com.

Gov Paul LePage - Reform of EBT Cards in Maine

Today Governor Paul R. LePage announced he has started blocking welfare EBT cards from being used in ATM’s in prohibited locations. This comes after a LePage Administration effort to gather data on usage. Welfare EBT cards are now blocked in 44 ATMs around the state and more than 200 locations will be blocked by August. Blocked locations include: PT’s Showclub, Portland; Diamond’s Gentlemen’s Club, Bangor; Styxx, Portland; Bayside Liquors, Bar Harbor; Foreplay Sports Pub, Portland; Joka’s Discount Beverage, Waterville. The Governor said today: "This is not about politics – it’s about making sure that each public dollar spent on welfare is used appropriately. These tax dollars are designated for daily necessities like diapers and healthy meals that vulnerable families and children need to survive. To think these dollars may have been spent on liquor and adult entertainment is incomprehensible, and this administration will not tolerate it.”

To find out more about what Goc Paul LePage is doing to help turn Maine around find him on Facebook.

Republican State Convention Straw Poll results are in

The results below probably will not come as a surprise - or maybe they will. 

176   Rand Paul
98     Ted Cruz
70     Scott Walker
62     Ben Carson
60     Chris Christie
57     Jeb Bush
37     Paul Ryan
26     Mike Huckabee
26     Condeleeza Rice
21     Marco Rubio
21     Write Ins

Is a Governor supposed to play politics or work for Maine?

It appears that Mike Michaud is at it again playing politics - meanwhile Governor Paul LePage is out working for the state.

When Gov LePage took over from the outgoing Gov Baldacci unemployment was 8%. Since then Maine has seen its unemployment rate drop to 6.1%. Maine is ahead of the curve beating out the New England average of 6.4% and the National average of 6.7%. 

Private sector jobs are being created during one of the worse economic times of modern history under the current administration. Will a change to someone who knows how to work in Washington DC be better for Maine? Or do we stay the course with Gov LePage?

Keep Maine growing, keep Gov Paul LePage......

For more on Gov Paul LePage follow him on Facebook.

IRS Targeting of Conservative Groups - Catherine Engelbrecht

Catherine Engelbrecht

Give us a truly transparent process. Protect the people. is what she asks the committee. This is her story of what happened to her family, to her business after 20 years of anonymity. All of a sudden she was in the sights of several government agencies.

Her testimony before the House of Representatives on YouTube.

Baby It’s Cold Outside, And It’s Expensive

Today, the RGA released this: Baby It’s Cold Outside, And It’s Expensive

But If Mike Michaud Had His Way, It Would Be Worse

“Maine, like many other parts of the country, has been gripped by freezing weather and soaring heating costs. If Mike Michaud had his way, the cost to heat your home would be even more expensive. In June 2009, Michaud voted to pass Cap & Trade, a national energy tax that would have been like increasing Mainers’ personal income taxes by 15%, costing the average household an additional $1,761 per year and would have caused an increase in electricity prices by 90%. Maine can’t afford Mike Michaud’s failed policies.”

Facts: Barack Obama said “Under My Plan Of A Cap And Trade System, Electricity Rates Will Necessarily Skyrocket.” According To An Analysis By The Heritage Foundation, Gas Prices Would Increase 58%.

.
To find out more about what Governor Paul LePage can do for you and the state visit his Facebook page.

Maine Supreme Court rules in favor of transgender girl in Orono school bathroom case Nicole Maines

While this may be a victory for Nicole Maines allowing her to choose which gender specific bathroom she identifies with. What does this mean for others who are not transgender. If I "identify" with the other gender does this mean as a man I may now freely use the women's room? Or as a woman use the men's? Or does this ruling only apply to transgendered people? If so then is this ruling in fact a ruling in favor of discrimination?

The courts appear to be going out of their way to over compensate for an issue and in doing so they are creating more problems for the future.

Bangor Daily News

PORTLAND, Maine — The Maine Supreme Judicial Court on Thursday guaranteed the right of a transgender child to use the school bathroom designated for the gender with which he or she identifies.

It is the first time any court in the nation has ruled it is unlawful to force a transgender child to use the school bathroom designated for the sex he or she was born with rather than the one with which the child identifies, according to the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders of Boston, which represented the girl and her family.

“This sends a message to my children that you can believe in the system,” Wayne Maines, the father of Nicole Maines, the girl at the center of the case, said Thursday afternoon in a conference call.

Full story: BDN

Additional reading:

Yahoo! News: Maine court rules in favor of transgender pupil

ABC News: Twin Boys, One Transgender, Become Brother and Sister

Maine has an Obligation to Help Our Most Vulnerable and Pay its Bills

Governor LePage's Radio address today: "Welfare expansion will cost Maine more than $800 million dollars over the first 10 years.

Hello, this is Governor Paul LePage.

While liberals are busy blasting me and the Administration about hiring a consultant to analyze whether we should expand Maine's Medicaid program, the reality is the report provides a road map to save taxpayers money and improve services for the truly needy. If Maine opts to expand Medicaid as it did 10 years ago, the report estimates it will cost the state more than $800 million—and that’s without additional risk factors. It does not include the hundreds of millions of dollars that will be shifted onto the middle class who buy their insurance. This will cause private insurance premiums to skyrocket. Maine already has the third-highest spending on Medicaid in the nation. Expanding is not affordable. The report also predicts between 31 and 36 percent of all Mainers will be receiving taxpayer-funded health care by 2023. In other words, for every three Mainers, one will be on Medicaid at the taxpayer’s expense. Today, Maine’s welfare program is not financially solvent. Last week, I alerted legislative leadership of a major shortfall in the budget. The culprit? The Medicaid program. There is a multimillion-dollar shortfall for several reasons, including a rise in the use of services and increasing health care costs. Like everything else, prices are going up and health care is no exception. I do not want to see Maine falling behind in paying its bills again. It was a battle with liberals for three years to get them to do the right thing and finally pay 750 million dollars to Maine’s hospitals. The state had an obligation to pay its welfare bills. And we have an obligation to continue to pay them. I talk frequently about fiscal responsibility, but as important is the quality of care provided by our welfare programs. Medicaid is supposed to help our most vulnerable citizens – the children, elderly, disabled and mentally ill. However, there are thousands of Mainers on wait lists who need health care services. We have nursing homes on the brink of closing due to below cost reimbursement rates. Our Administration wants a welfare system that works for Maine people. Mainers deserve a safety net that provides quality and accessible care. That’s why we are striving to gain greater flexibility from the federal government to improve services for those who need it most.

Follow Governor Paul LePage and his campaign for reelection on Facebook

Who do you want managing your govenment? A politician or a Businessman?

If you had two choices as a voter, which would you pick? A 30-year politician who has voted for budget after budget which has helped balloon the federal debt to over $17 trillion? Or a lifelong businessman and job creator who solved a $500 million hospital debt without raising taxes? Among your major party candidates that is your choice this fall.

Follow Gov Paul LePage on Facebook.

Is unemployment really 6.7 percent?

What is the unemployment? It is hard to say. If you have stopped looking for employment then the US Department of Labor stops  counting you. The unemployment rate is determined by deviding the unemployed by the number that are considered employed. Is this an accurate way to tabulate those who are unemplyed?

Yahoo! News

Unemployment fell to a five-year low of 6.7 percent in December, yet employers added just 74,000 new jobs during the month — the lowest monthly payroll increase in nearly three years.

So how does the "unemployment" number fall despite such weak job growth?

In simple terms, the U.S. Department of Labor stops counting people who have stopped looking for work. The "labor force," as defined by the department, fell from 155.3 million in November to 154.9. This decrease of 400,000 accounts for nearly the entire drop in unemployment — from 7 percent in November to 6.7 in December.

How the department calculates unemployment is rather simple: It takes the number of unemployed and divides it by the number of people it considers in the labor force. But does this provide an accurate account of how many people are really unemployed? Not really.

Full story: Yahoo! News