ledeagenda.com

It is reported in todays LATimes.com that the Democratic Party has joined a lawsuit aiming the throw out Indiana’s law requiring identification to be shown in order to vote. This despite the fact that identification at the polls is the only way that a poll watcher can verify 1) the person casting the vote is actually whom they claim to be, 2) that they are properly registered to vote in their local precinct and 3) that they have the legal status to be able to vote (ie not a felon or illegal immigrant).

Granting the government the authority to interject its grand vision for a national ID card in nearly every aspect of our life is indeed troubling. I am no fan to the constant and continual abuses of privacy and liberty that the government has allowed to develop under the current system. As the system currently stands with minimal input of say your social security number or drivers license number an arresting officer has find probable cause by simply looking into your past criminal history. An insurance broker can jack up your auto insurance premiums by inventing data based of your credit score. And let us not forget the wonder thing called the income tax!

Remember, when New York began prosecuting the mafia so successfully it was not criminal offenses that brought most of them down, no it was income tax evasion charges. Uncle Sam, whose own tax agents can only give accurate assessments of tax law sixty percent of the time, has created this wonderful system to ensnare you should they deem it necessary.

The threat of governmental abuse of any and all power given to it is real and consistent danger.  The current state of immigration paranoia is an attempt of the New World Order to build public sympathies for an increased governmental presence in the daily market transactions that we engage in. You have to remember- they control the media and make the laws. They have let our boarder sit open and our laws unenforced to build public sympathy for increased standards to verify citizenship.

If it seems like I am talking out of both sides of my mouth it is because I am. I am in favor of American’s deciding American laws, not illegal immigrants, not the United Nations, not NAFTA and certainly not the media. I also recognize that in many states, like Idaho, like Arizona, the immigration problem is very very real. The situation is worse in other states like California, where it would be better off to call it an invasion.

However I am no stooge. The government doesn’t want this power to monitor the illegals. They have plenty of ways of finding, discovering and prosecuting or deporting (if necessary) those who have unjustly arrived here. No, call me a patriot if you wish, but they don’t want the power to nationalize identity for your safety, they want to do it in spite of your safety.

Let me put it this way: what good would it do me, you, and everyone if we all had our Federal ID card yet the boarders remained wide open, the labor laws encouraging to illegals and our countries welfare and health care systems to be wide open to exploitation of those illegally entering this country? Ok, so in some areas they might not be able to vote, but guess what? They are still drawing off of the welfare system, still getting a free education and, oh yeah, hospitals are still required to give them services.

Let me sum it up: this is exactly how the New World Order operates- problem, reaction, solution.

We may be well off to require that some form of identification  be presented at the polls to vote. This is the only way to ensure an accurate vote. However, know this: a National ID card will not be far behind. How much Federal Interference are we will to accept before we say enough is enough? Or worse, how much deliberate and intentional bungling on the part of the government are we willing to turn a blind eye too?

It is naive to assume the government has allowed the current transportation problems, for instance, to develop to such a level of crises in so many cities across America. Rather, it is a deliberate and willful attempt on their part to intentionally create traffic problems to garner sympathies for light rail and all the property-rights and tax abuses that it brings.

Problem, Reaction, Solution.

Its such a masterful manipulation of American psyche that one can only stand in awe of the enemy we face that is the government/media complex. But it is a battle that we must fight. The very soul of Liberty and Freedom is at stake.

Politico.com has a great article here.

Quite simply, if the Republican party becomes the party of government handouts, then what good is voting Republican party at all? The ONLY real solution for the Republican party is to continue to emphasize a smaller government, less taxation and family values, and a personal responsibility platform.

The rest of Politco.com’s article pretty much sums it up.

---

Roadmap For Rebuilding is a LedeAgenda.com series on the best election scenario for the Republican party in 2008. Part one can be found here, Part Two, here.

For those who strive for the advancement of freedom and liberty nothing is more sacred that bemoaning the latest government power grab. Like and orchestrated production the daily affairs a many of men a swept asunder under an increasing and dizzying array of regulations and laws aimed not at preserving natural law but rather in that of ‘Homeland Security”. Men, it is believed, finds itself at constant threat from the unknown face, that ruthless scrounge whom seems to the the reason that so many things in our life need to cede to the power of the government.

So as the size of government grows so must our ways of combating the unconstitutional demands that the shackles of government would impose on our free will.

A brief assessment of many areas that will be critical for Republican election success have already shown signs of pushback. Faced with a absolute crises in the fund raising department, the GOP is having to depend on donors that traditionally have spurned organized politics. Captain Obvious would like to point out that these donors give far less than the corporate lobbyists and often fall under the reporting requirements the FEC has dreamed up.

And another side note: reliance on those small time donors has also forced the party to return to its smaller government roots, a boon to the disgruntled political base of the party.

But even the big money donors are pushing back- have to Googled Ron Paul Blimp lately? If this innovative approach to free political speech survives a few key lawsuits and rulings it may well pave a way for nearly the entire election campaign contribution limits as we know them to be rendered moot.

But there is a even larger issue that deserves consideration. Namely it comes down to one issue: if no one is appointed to administer the regulations then what good will the regulations do?

This story comes to us from the Washington Post:

The Federal Election Commission will effectively go dark on Jan. 1 because Congress remains locked in a standoff over the confirmation of President Bush’s nominees to the panel. As a consequence, the FEC will enter 2008 with just two of six members — short of the four votes needed for the commission to take any official action.

Did you catch that? The FEC is rendered obsolete by default- it will not be able to act on, “deciding whether to launch investigations into possible campaign finance violations and determining the penalties”. Also, the WaPo notes the FEC commissioners are charged with determining which candidates shall receive matching funds.

The lack of approval for President Bush’s FEC appointments in this case is serving as a positive for the Conservative and Libertarian lending folks in the GOP. Chief among the Presidential Candidates slated to receive federal funding is Mr. I Support Amnesty, Senator John McCain. Let me ask you this: considering that pushing the Dems to appoint the Presidents FEC commissioners would grant McCain public money to run is campaign AND allow the FEC to go about its business in meddling in free political speech, do we really want the President to win this battle?

But Bureaucratic appoints need not be the only struggle the Republicans can gain from. The minority party, when given the opportunity to say block the 60 votes needed for a bill to pass in the Senate, can offer plenty of fight in the cause for self-government. I touched on this a bit in the earlier article. It is key that Republicans present a unified and significant force constantly demanding action for lower taxes, smaller government and family values. So far, per reports from frustrated Democratic officials, our leadership has seemingly keyed in on this vital role.

This from NYTimes.com:

Reid’s comments reflected party leaders’ recent decision to temper their boasts about congressional accomplishments with admissions that Republicans have used their veto and filibuster powers to block or weaken many Democratic initiatives.

The originally title that the New York Times used for the above article was, “Republicans Block Democratic Agenda”. The title was quickly re-worked to its more Democratic-friendly wording lede. After all, it must have just killed the New York Times to admit the Republicans where actually able to do something [finally] to block the advancement of socialism in this country. Not that many of the current Republican counter plans are much better, mind you.

And my final survey of current news for the new Republican Roadmap come from my hometown paper, The Idaho Statesman:

The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District said Friday that it decided to waive the $4.78 it charged Brian Bandhauer for not paying his irrigation bill on time.

the article goes on to note:

Bandhauer said he didn’t know he was in an irrigation district because he doesn’t have access to irrigation water, and because the bill went to the wrong address the first year he lived in the home.

Seems like we can all learn from that battle, no?

---

This is part two of LedeAgendas.com’s, “Roadmap For Re-building” series. The first article can be read here.

A series of unconnected stories?

Woman Wants Homeowner Associations to Make Decisions in Public

Sucker: Mandatory Arbitration Provisions

Avoid Signing Your Rights Away

The connection? All of the stories center around circumstances where individuals have signed their rights away in a contract, either willing, unwilling or unknowingly.

It’s hard to fathom that first sucker:

Used Car Dealer: Well here is your purchase agreement, you just need to sign on the dotted line…

Gullible: Well, OK, hey whats this? It’s says I won’t sue you….

UCD:       …. standard contract langu…..

G:             …and that if I do I have to pay your attorney fees…

UCD:       …it’s intended to discourage frivolous lawsuits…

G:             .. and that’s only if your ‘Executive Committee Arbitration Board’ rules in my favor!

UCD:       Listen, do you want the car or not?

G:             ….well it is a nice car, and what a great price!

Let’s take a moment and review some basic assumptions of government. Our Constitution does NOT grant our rights, rather, it forms and organizes the government to protect them. They are inalienable and unrepeatable unless due process is given. Now, the problem here is that contracts are private agreements- the only legitimate way rights can be curtailed.

The exception of course is when the process by which you sign those rights away is under duress, uninformed, or through coercion. Subtlety is an art, show a little too much and the meaning is too apparent, not enough and it has no meaning. Read through the fine print of the User Licensing Agreement that comes with most of your computer software- do you REALLY agree to all of the terms therein? And why is it that the user agreements are INSIDE the box when most stores will not take them back once the outer packaging has been removed?

My point is this: it seems to me that our rights are very rarely taken away by force. Rather, subtle social pressures, contractual mumbo jumbo and awkward social consumerism have eroded our ability to stalwartly and steadfastly retain all of our God-given rights. Anyone who purchased a new car is subject to this, even if your right to sue wasn’t taken away with your intent, know for sure they probably snuck a mandatory arbitration agreement in there.

So what is wrong with arbitration agreements? Simple, Arbiters are very rarely, if ever, fair.  In fact, by most accounts, well over 75% of all Arbiters rule against the private citizen in the complaint. And another thing- Arbiters are not chosen by chance- rather the firm or legal team chosen to be the Arbiter is chosen by the company that writes the contract of purchase. The consumer has no say in this decision, and certainly these firms are chosen by their willingness to rule in favor of those whom send them business- the company that lists them as Arbiter in the contract.

Another fine example is that of homeowner associations. In the purest Libertarian worldview, Homeowner Associations are free-market examples of how society “could” operate without local land-use regulations. And to some extent, they are right. It does give a free-market answer to those pesky neighbors down the street whom have the audacity to put an American flagpole in their yard. The shame of it! But seriously, HOA’s are neither fair nor equitable. Most counties do not require advance notice of board meetings, or even the right of homeowners to attend their Board meetings.

How exactly does this protect and promote a free and open process? It doesn’t. And here is another fun tidbit- if you live in an HOA, pull out your regulations. Do you have the right to repeal a board member? If you do, consider yourself lucky.  A vast majority of county HOA regulations do not require that the most local level of ‘government’, that of your HOA, preserve the right to a fair and open election  process with the right of recall of an elected official. But then, I guess, they would be a little less likely to raise your Association Dues, now wouldn’t they?

Private ‘justice’ cannot take away or supersede our right to an impartial jury of our peers. Anything less is Un-American.

Is there a place for Arbiters? Homeowners’ Associations? SUA’s? Certainly, as long as it is only a procedural step in an attempt to resolve the dispute and as long as it does not stop either party from engaging in their rights. And that is the problem, a vast majority of what is out there is not designed to engage its side, but rather to take away your rights. And that, my dear readers, really does remind us of the phrase, “signing away your rights”. No?

---

Merry Christmas From LedeAgenda.com!!! I hope your holidays are merry, your occasions memorable, and most importantly that Liberty and Freedom ring bright into the New Year!

Immigration Is THE Issue Of This Election

Politico.com notes:

RNC officials tell us their direct mail money dried up — with some regular donors writing nasty things about immigration as the reason they were stiffing the party.

The article goes on to explain that the reason for McCain’s and Guilliani’s campaign collapses are the candidates’ support for an amnesty program and sanctuary cities.

I would like to remind you, my dear readers, of an obvious and overlooked fact: it was the bloggers and net-savvy techies that solidified the opposition to the amnesty bill. Given the RNC’s fundraising problems and the conservatives’ general distaste for the current slate of candidates, is it any wonder that regulations on a free net are being discussed?

Granting amnesty to the 30+ million illegal immigrants here was part of the the old ‘big tent’ philosophy that has ruled the party for decades. In short, it surmises that herding the votes toward Republican candidates was easier if each voting bloc within the party ‘got something’ out of the policies supported by the party. While that in and by itself is not troublesome, what was disturbing was the amount of groups the Republican party attempted to bring on board toward its cause.

It is no secret that one of the wisest men in Washington was behind the amnesty bill. Karl Rove has spoke at length about capturing the ‘emerging Latino vote’. In many states, like California, Hispanics will be the plurality ethnic group within a few short years. ‘Bush’s Brain’ felt that if the party pushed amnesty and immigration reform, this emerging bloc of voters would then swing toward Republican votes.

To some effect, he may have been right. Given a little motivation, Hispanics, whom are largely culturally, family, and religion oriented, could have also fit in well with the other planks of the Republican platform. The idea from the start was a political gamble, and as Micheal Savage has pointed out numerous times on his talk show ‘The Savage Nation’ it would forever change the landscape of America.

‘We are not just talking about 30 million illegal immigrants here. You see, because as soon as they become citizens, current immigration laws allow them to bring up to five family members over as well. We’re being lied to, this bill grants citizenship to almost 150 million immigrants, forever changing the cultural and demographic landscape of America.’

Bloggers picked up on that, and rightfully so. Immigration, after all, touches on issues of law and order, justice, crime, jobs and economy. With our borders so wide open, it is a widely held belief that we are most vulnerable to terrorist infiltration through porous ‘technology fences’ rather than real ones. Also, don’t forget that the implications of that come with letting foreign speaking and culturally distinct groups be granted a ‘free pass’ despite our immigration laws- which require proficiency in English and an understanding of our laws and Constitution.

It also invokes the protectionist wing of the party who see the loss of jobs due to NAFTA, GATT and the coming North American Union. These conservatives have long bemoaned the destruction of America’s sovereignty. Why is it that we now have to accept foreigners taking jobs that Americans, those on welfare or in a work-prison release situation, could be taking? And what about border security? Wouldn’t granting amnesty to illegals only further the invasion from foreign countries?

Karl Rove’s gamble was just too high.  For the party that was already being perceived as straying way too far from its core beliefs, this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Should Guilliani or McCain, or any Republican candidate, get the nomination whom is not strong on immigration it could set back our party’s efforts for years. The costs would be real- continued withholding of funds and support by the base, a continued lack of a unified message and, most importantly, would open up many weaker Republican districts to all-out assaults by the Democratic party.

At least one website is asking, since Iraq and Immigration were NOT ALLOWED TO BE DEBATED yesterday, the most important Republican issues of the day, will today’s Democratic debate be similarly limited by not debating healthcare and economy? This just reeks of the Republican party trying to limit the influence of its base and of the partisan hack government/media complex.

So tell me, do you still support amnesty? Is that a price you are really willing to pay? Because know this- you have lost nearly all of your support over this issue. There is only one way back to power, and that is to admit you were WRONG, WRONG, WRONG on this issue. Anything less than coming out strong on immigration issues would be an absolute and complete disaster for the Republican party.

Quite simply, we can see your tells and are calling your bluff. That is not a direction the base of the party is willing to go. Rebuilding begins with this issue, and this issue alone. Trust must be restored before we can achieve yesterday’s plan for the future.

---

Update 12-14-2007: Republicans, facing voter anger over the lack of substanitive issues discussed by the liberal-hack Des Moines Register debate held this week, are ‘considering’ hosting another improptu debate where immigration and Iraq could draw discussion. That story, here.

It is not very often as a Conservative that I read NYTimes.com and come away thinking, ‘that was refreshing’. But such was the case today.

After having been battered about by the Democrats, the Anti-War crowd, the Hate Bush crowd and even a substantial portion of its own party, I was beginning to wonder if the Republican party could get back on track in time to re-solidify the base. Such discord that John Boehner was quoted as saying, ‘our fundraising sucks’.

How bad is our fundraising thus far? Politico.com notes:

At the end of the third quarter, the Democratic campaign arm had $28 million in the bank; the Republicans had $1.6 million (and twice that total in debt).

In short, it’s really not a good time to be a Republican right now. We can’t raise money, can’t agree on a candidate and are fighting an uphill battle in the courts of public opinion and the media. And quite frankly, with how we have spent money and expanded government like drunken sailors over the last few years, we deserve it. 

However, read both of the articles above. They should be must-reads for anyone involved with the Republican party at the moment. There is a plan for the future that has been developed. Allow me, for a moment, to summarize:

1. ‘We have a long fight back to power’.
2. We need to take our position as a minority party seriously. 
3. Coy and precise leadership is necessary to craft and inject our vision into law.
4. Only a return to our principals can regain lost trust and support.

Let me summarize my summary: we need to re-build.

Let me be clear: the best way for the Republican party to regain its power it to once again take its own ideas seriously. Stop dilly-dallying with ‘moderate’ and Democratic proposals and trying to make them ‘less Big-government’ or ‘more taxpayer friendly’. Lets get back to our creed: Lower taxes, limited government and family values.

They are principles that we can use to rally behind and stick to our guns on in the Senate, as we have done thus far with most the budget bills in the Senate. The are practical, time-honored viewpoints that will be respected in debate.

So how does this all play out?

Well, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has figured it out- procedure, procedure, procedure.

In short- It takes 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate. The Democrats do not have 60 Dems in the Senate. Well guess what, if we stand united and true to our own beliefs, we can inject our policy into nearly any legislative agenda. And the best part is- we get to frustrate the hell out of the Democrats and beat them at their own game. Remember this- during almost all of the Bush II Presidency the Dems have continuously used the filibuster or some other Senate tactic to delay, deny, or stop a bill.

I think it’s time that we unite around our common values- lower taxes, less government and family values. It’s time for us to make sure that legislation does not get our votes unless its values meet these criteria.

It’s time for us to become what the NYTimes.com calls, ‘The Grand Obstructionist Party’.

You know, irritating the hell out of the Democratic party, the NYTimes and still making progress on our cause? That is what I call a win-win situation. I think we may have finally found peace with our party’s current situation. It’s sure gonna be fun.

Catch this story?

Quite simply, this is modus operandi for the government/media complex to squash any political discussion it does not like.

Don’t like the message of Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee? Threaten their supporters’ church’s tax-exempt status.

Don’t like the message a political advocacy group espouses? Threaten them with investigations that their supporters are ’supporting terrorism’.

Don’t like the role conservative parents play in raising their children? Send Child Protective Services after them for harassment and ‘re-education’.

Don’t like the plans for a global government to be disseminated? Dismiss those concerned about the North American Union as ‘conspiracy theorists’. (BTW the website the government claims doesn’t exist can be found right here).

It’s all connected. Realize the government/media complex has all the powers of government as tools at its disposal to disarm any attempt to resist their infiltration and establishment of a global government. Political correctness and the power of the State will be exalted. Personal liberty and civil rights will be ‘necessary sacrifices’ for them to protect us from ‘terrorists’ and to ’secure order’.

Be very skeptical of this story. It reeks of rotten politics. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion and speech, both of which are jeopardized by the IRS harassment of these Huckabee supporters. Remember, in the modern world their will be very few blatant violations of our civil rights, the NWO has found that regulations, policy, and procedure are much more effective measures of control.

And no, I am not now a Huckabee supporter, I’m still for Ron Paul. But, if the IRS is involved, our rights are probably being violated.

The story, here.

Romney is quoted as saying:

Said Romney, “Those who have come illegally, in my view, should be given the opportunity to get in line with everybody else, but there should be no special pathway for those that have come here illegally to jump ahead of the line or to become permanent residents or citizens.”

Slice it and dice it anyway you want, this statement endorses Amnesty. What don’t these politicians understand? We do not want Amnesty of any kind! Simply not calling Amnesty by its name does not change the fact you are granting an illegal citizenship.

But I guess this shouldn’t surprise us, after all Romney employs illegals for landscaping purposes.

And the Republicans still wonder why they are having such a hard time raising funds…. unbelievable.

 

With no public input in the process, the officials in Star, Idaho continue to feed their small-town agenda.

Star officials recently voted to install crosswalk warning signs. Albeit, in and by itself, this means nothing. However, when you look at the facts, their agenda is staggering. They are operating an illegal entrapment act to operate a virtual speed trap to boost city revenue. How do you think that a town this size can afford to employ so many full-time officers? And where do you think that money came from to build the new City Hall?

It all comes down to money, and Star is hellbent on using the force of law to operate its speed trap.

Remember, this is the same city that illegally stretched out the speed limit on a State Highway for 5 miles in either direction. That was, until they were verbally and legally rebuked by the State Transportation Department- they DO NOT have authority over State Highways.

Here is a fun site: speedtrap.org- notice Star, Idaho has made the list.

I know Star officials are stuck in a catch-22, but let’s face it- they have a state highway running through their town. It is logical and factually represented that they are operating this speed trap for profit, not traffic enforcement. Until Idaho mandates Highway bypasses for all small-rural towns in Idaho, we need to raise our level actions to make sure we keep these power and money-hungry cities in check.

Star, Idaho is breaking the law, and we need to demand actions for their aggressive enforcement of minor and trivial infractions of the law.

Perhaps if taxpayers post “Speed Trap Ahead” signs this will help to alleviate domineering presence this small town has. More as it becomes available.

So the government/media complex has manipulated otherwise smart people into ‘cooperation’ once again. This time investors whom have given out millions of dollars on the promise of high-returns on sub-prime mortgages are the ones who will get to take the hit, ‘for the benefit of society’.

This so-called-mortgage crisis is a deliberate and willful attempt for the mortgage industry to cover its losses as it tests risky mortgage and financial ventures. After all, who can better gather ‘assets’ by force than the power of taxation by the government?

Don’t believe me? Check out this article.

The Chief Executive of Goldman Sachs, Hank Paulson, is also Treasury Secretary in the Bush Administration. Golman Sachs is one of the nations leading sub-prime mortgage backers.

With friends like these in the Bush administration, it’s no wonder that the government is suddenly seeking to ‘help’ people out of their mortgages.

There seems to be a pattern emerging for the latest round of increasing governmental power over our lives: intentional intervention.

Read between the lines: the banks are not freezing mortgage rates because they suddenly realize that it would better for ’society’ as a whole. The three major banks only signed on after indemnification was granted to them by the President and Treasury Secretary Paulson to prevent the investors from taking legal action.

In other words: someone lost their civil rights to recover their losses under the guise of ‘benefiting society’.  Is the government, as is currently done with health care, now expected to be the stop-loss mechanism for the natural cycle of real-estate? By the actions taken here it certainly seems so.

Remember, with the government it’s a short leap from ‘cooperation’ to ‘compulsion’. What prevents the government from making your cooperation the standard that others must follow? And what sort of impact will this bear on private property rights if the government starts backing the loans?

Consider this: the New World Order is not always clearly labeled as legislation or regulation that is intended to cause the erosion of liberty. The government/media complex learned long ago that subtleties in their approach is the best way to make the public apathetic to expanding governmental power over their lives.

So, for today, it’s just getting lenders to ‘cooperate’ and ‘temporarily’ freeze interest rates. Tomorrow, it may just be minor legislation or regulations of the mortgage industry. Then perhaps reserves, funded by the taxpayers dollar of course to help ‘the poor and needy’ obtain loans in an increasingly regulated marketplace. And then a couple of years later we are not to be surprised by a near completely quasi-government run mortgage market? And we are not to be concerned that the Left’s obsession with ‘political correctness’ will take from the rich to ‘help someone get into a home’??

Do you see where this all leads? This is the path to insanity.

Mortgage lenders owe society nothing. People took on these loans knowing full well that the rates would adjust. They were putting out loans that offered back-loaded interest to help people get into homes on an increasingly bloated housing market. Consumers simply swallowed the magic ‘buy now pay later’ pill. And yet somehow the government is once again supposed to ignore personal responsibility?

It seems here as if regulation is intended to replace free will. It also seems to be narrowing the free-market choices for consumers- actions that we know will require the government to ‘assist’ displaced citizens who may have needed that ARM. This is a path that should seem foreign to a country that creeds ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’.

But then again, what politician REALLY wants to stand up an say, “Well, you were the one who took out the ARM!”?

Isn’t progress great?

---

A quick side note: LedeAgenda.com is quietly approaching its 6-month anniversary. I would like to extend my gratitude to my site host and web designer. I would also like to offer an extra special thanks to my wife whom has served as an editor, idea consultant and general inspiration in my life. Thanks to everyone for being part of the idea that liberty must not be spared to the government/media complex!

Let me start this post by congratulating the Boise State Bronco’s on a 10-2 season. Many fans wait lengthy periods of time in between 10+ win seasons. We have the luxury of a superior athletic department who always seems to know what it takes to keep elevating this program’s potential. However, recent decisions pushed by Athletic Director Gene Bleymaier have left many funs, including myself, puzzled by the internal debates the program must be having.

Specifically fans are concerned about Gene’s ‘1 for 1′ doctrine and the recent decision to ship the team across the Pacific for its bowl game.

To put it simply: Gene is standing on solid principal. He wants nothing but the best matchup scenarios for our team and the ability to reward players for a solid season. However, growth takes sacrifice to elevate your level of play, something Gene seems unwilling, or unable, to accommodate. What fans want to know is why.

Let me start my dissecting the ‘1 for 1′ doctrine. It is unacceptable for a non-BCS school, like Boise State, to tout demands to BCS-caliber opponents. We are not USC, Michigan or Nebraska, we do not have the luxury of being an ‘established’ college football power. We are newcomers to the scene, and we have a mighty fine record thus far to be proud of. But there is still the fatal flaw- we weaken our attractiveness by continuing to play in the WAC.

We cannot hope to maintain the momentum that catapulted the Broncos to the 2006/2007 Fiesta Bowl win without scheduling aggressively- meaning taking one away game matchups with more traditional college football schools. There is nothing wrong with agreeing to play a USC or Wisconsin at their place, it would offer BSU exposure to the BCS purists whom merely see us as a one-hit-wonder right now.

But therein lies the rub: Gene wants game contracts to include a minimum of one away AND one home game. Schools like USC and Nebraska have quickly shut down this line of discussion. Even schools that Gene HAS managed to schedule are fighting us tooth-and-nail to come play on the blue. Oregon wanted to ship our home game to China and Bowling Green keeps finding “scheduling issues” to force delays.

Quite simply- there is no incentive, or reason, for them to come and play here. Our stadium is small, so ticket percentages will drop, and the risk is great- a loss at a non-BCS school could quickly endanger a school’s national ranking. However, the reward for Boise State taking these contracts is great, albeit, we have much work to do.

Quite simply, short of the Fiesta Bowl (which, BTW, is considered a ‘neutral’ site), Boise State has NEVER won a road game against a BCS opponent. We must overcome this deficiency if we intend to maintain the level of respect that has so far been given on credit. A Fiesta Bowl win means a lot, but winning at Washington, Oregon, or another BCS opponent, now there lies a prize.

It plays out in everything- even after winning the Fiesta Bowl last year BSU still found it self ranked #24 in the nation pre-season this year. Why? New quarterback? Yes. Loss of seniors? Of course. However, the magical little words- Strength Of Schedule, kill us and will continue to kill us, unless we start scheduling better non-conference games. There will come a time when we can no longer rely on an undefeated season to get us into a BCS bowl game if we continue to let WAC scheduling rule our season.

Which brings me to my second point: Why was the decision made to send the players overseas to the Hawaii Bowl when the potential to face a BCS caliber opponent was not there? I’m sorry, but facing the East Carolina Pirates, even playing on the beautiful shores of Hawaii, does not make for a good football game.

Consider this: We could have accepted the invitation to the Las Vegas bowl and played UCLA. We could have accepted the invitation to the Humanitarian Bowl and faced Georgia Tech. We could have, but didn’t. All because Gene let the players ‘vote’ on where to go. Was thought given to building our program? Was consideration given to elevating our level of play? What about keeping our momentum rising?

The Hawaii bowl just reeks of taking a huge step backwards and Boise State fans are right to be questioning this puzzling decision by an otherwise superior Athletic Director. Let us hope all the facts, when presented together, make the picture more rosy. But what it seems like at this point is a huge disappointment for the fans, whom would of liked to have seen a better opponent and possibly another chance to watch their team play a ‘home’ game.

Again, 10-2, let’s give it up for the Broncos and look to continue building a program that has been given much credit for its accomplishments thus far. Let us not take that for granted.

Catch this story?

The Democrats are complaining that their government/media complex driven message of, ‘Iraq war hate’, is starting to fizzle.

And, ummm, why exactly shouldn’t it?

Like every other American out there, I want to know the specifics on the battle our troops are fighting. I want to know that American lives have not been given in vain. I want to make sure that the candidates have an exit strategy so we are not stuck there, like say we are in Vietnam or the Korea’s.

But quite frankly I could list off a whole pantheon of domestic issues that mean more to me than does the Iraq war.

It’s not that I don’t care. But it is a realization: that no matter who was President, Kerry, Gore, McCain, et all, we would still be at war in Iraq. For the most part Presidents only respond to military situation- most decisions of war, peace, troop deployments, are made by the Military Generals, most of whom have served multiple presidents. In other words, there is a backbone of foreign policy that doesn’t change. The President has very little influence over the decisions of foreign policy.

Which brings me to my point: why exactly then shouldn’t we focus on domestic issues?

Issues of immigration, the NAU, reducing federal regulation and growth, cutting taxes are something I can contribute to. You, me, the media, we are not in the military. They have access to all the data, we don’t. What makes you assume that you can do their job?

On the other hand, take for instance Immigration. This issue affects everyone. It affects your security, your neighborhoods, your job, the economic conditions of your local hospital. It affects your culture, your community, the crime rate in your neighborhood. Quite simply- this is a legitimate focus for decision making as far as whom should be President.

Don’t believe me that this is an issue first and foremost in Republican voters minds? Take a look at the data. The Republican fundraising troubles started directly after Republican leadership pushed for Amnesty. The McCain and Guilliani campaigns know this all to well, they where widely viewed as the GOP favorites until the voters, bloggers and Conservatives joined forces to get the Amnesty bill shut-down. And now their campaigns are in a state of turmoil. Hell, McCain was BOOED during the YouTube debate. And your telling me immigration policy is NOT a front and center issue? Please.

Mark my words- Republicans will also unite against government run healthcare as we did with immigration. Whoever emerges as a GOP front-runner had better be prepared to face the conservative blogosphere on this issue. Right now there is simply just distaste and scorn for the candidates whom cater to the ‘moderates’ by proposing some trimmed down version of Hillarycare. But read this- as soon as a leader emerges, the new political power that the Conservative base has found in online message boards, blogs and meet-up network sites will demand that the candidate have a answer that fits in with traditional GOP philosophy. Anything short would amount to continued fund raising issues and general Republican base disinterest.

In short- this new shift to domestic issues is a direct response to the ‘new media’ driven public policy debates. No longer will the MSM get to control the issues that ‘the voters should focus on’. Watch most of the MSM political reporters- they view with scorn the fact that we have forced immigration as a main election issue. And given that the Democrats have largely relied on Bush-Hate and Iraq-War-Hate to drive their political base over the last 7 years, you can almost hear them saying, “uh oh”.

Keep up the pressure bloggers, we are succeeding in destroying the government/media complex driven Presidential debates. Let us hope the candidates listen and respond to the expectations that we have for them. Anything less would be unacceptable.

Isn’t progress great?