People have been asking, so I’m sharing who I’m voting for. I choose my candidates based on the following criteria, in the following order:

1. Strict Constitutional literalist.
2. Pro Life
3. Pro Second Amendment
4. Pro personal freedom (anti big government)

I’m pragmatic enough to realize that I’m unlikely to get a candidate who will be everything I want, so I try to “weight” the above ideals and pick the candidate who seems closest to my values.

Below are my selections based on the Jackson Twp. ballot. You can find a sample ballot for your precinct in Venango County here.

I’m voting for the following folks in the Republican primary:
1. President: Rick Santorum – because I can, and because I refuse to vote for ORomney (Robama? … whatever.)
2. US Representative: Glenn Thompson. He’s unopposed on the Republican ballot, and he hasn’t done anything that really ticked me off so far.
3. US Senator: Sam Rohrer. I’ve met Sam, prayed with Sam, listened to Sam (really listened.) Sam doesn’t slam on everyone else, he really tries to articulate a sound, thoughtful approach to government, which I appreciate. And he meets all my criteria above.
4. PA Attorney General: David J Freed is unopposed on the Republican ballot. I don’t know him so I will probably leave this office blank.
5. PA Auditor General: John Maher. I am trying NOT to vote for anyone endorsed by the PA Republican committee, but I’m making an exception for John Maher only because Peg Luksik has endorsed him.
6. State Treasurer. Diana Vaughan is unopposed, but I don’t know her so I will leave this blank.
7. PA State Senator: Scott Hutchinson. I’ve known Scott for a long time, I believe he has provided fair representation in the House and I believe he will be a good Senator.
8. PA State Representative: Randall Smith. I like the fact that he’s a farmer, he was able to articulate at least a minimum knowledge of government structure/function (which some of his opponents were not.)
9. Republican National Convention delegates: No opinion yet, I’m checking on these folks. This office is more important than many people realize, since these are the folks that will actually choose the presidential candidate. You want someone who will pledge to vote for whoever the people vote for. Not all delegates do that, or even claim they will.
10. Republican National Convention Alternate: see above.
11. District committee man/committee woman (Jackson Township):  Need to write these in. NOTE: you must write them in exactly like this:
John M Silvagni
Cindy Shearer Swendsen
 That’s it. Don’t forget your ID, and don’t forget to go all the way to the last page and click “CONFIRM” to cast your ballot.

The government is saying, in essence, “we heard you, loud and clear – but we just don’t care.”

SOPA and PIPA, the notorius and widely condemned attempts by the government to eliminate free and open speech on the internet, died due to the incredible outpouring of citizen resistance… but that doesn’t mean the government is giving up on an internet takeover.

A new bill, CISPA, has been introduced that would give the government even more intrusive authority. Under this bill the government will have broadly increased authority to use the internet as an agent of the burgeoning police state.

They just don’t give up.

While supporters of CISPA claim that it is “harmless” to citizens and internet freedom, independent analysis by a variety of reviewers indicates nothing could be further from the truth.

They hear us alright - they just really don’t care anymore.

Now that Rick Santorum dropped out of the presidential race, we have two choices:

ORomney or Robama.

If someone could convince me there was a practical or philosophical difference between Obama and Romney, I’d be tempted to vote. As it is, I’m tempted to puke.

1. Both richer than sin

2. Both change position at the drop of a political pundit or a change in the latest “survey.”

3. Neither one has any principles at all except the “me first” principle.

4. Neither one understands the constitution as far as I can tell.

I seriously think I will “write in” the candidate of my choice.

Romney doesn’t get it. Neither does Obama.

It’s not an accident that there is an anti-American, pro-Muslim bias in the American Education system.

Attorney General Eric Holder isn’t sure…

House Children and Youth Committee Examines PA Adoption Laws

The House Children and Youth Committee held an informational meeting in Harrisburg this week to examine Pennsylvania’s adoption laws and processes.

The committee specifically looked at House Bills 449, 451 and 594.

House Bill 449 would amend the state’s Domestic Relations Code to enhance counseling opportunities for parents unable to pay who are considering relinquishing or terminating their parental rights.

House Bill 451 would reduce the amount of time a parent can use to revoke his/her consent for an adoption from 30 days to 96 hours.

House Bill 594 would make extensive changes to the state’s adoption laws, including provisions to clarify issues relating to parental rights, especially for unknown birth fathers; address counseling and legal representation; and outline reimbursement of expenses for birth mothers.

The bills aim to remove obstacles to adoption, as hundreds of Pennsylvania children are currently waiting long periods of time before being placed in a caring and loving home environment.

2011, JUNE 28, P.L.48, NO.10

 Preamble

 The General Assembly finds that:

(1)  It is proper for law-abiding people to protect themselves, their families and others from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others.

(2)  The Castle Doctrine is a common law doctrine of ancient origins which declares that a home is a person’s castle.

(3)  Section 21 of Article I of the Constitution of Pennsylvania guarantees that the “right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

(4)  Persons residing in or visiting this Commonwealth have a right to expect to remain unmolested within their homes or vehicles.

(5)  No person should be required to surrender his or her personal safety to a criminal, nor should a person be required to needlessly retreat in the face of intrusion or attack outside the person’s home or vehicle.

 Explanatory Note.  Act 10 amended or added sections 501, 505, 506, 3903, 6102 and 6109 of Title 18 and section 8340.2 of Title 42.