Those who Travel on Foot

[photo] LCCFL organizer Michael Harrison speaks at Challenger's Town Hall

Third party candidates often do not benefit from the type of boost that Elephantine or Donkey party machinery can provide, so they often have difficulty making their voices heard.

However, this was not the case on April 10 at the Challengers Town Hall, an event hosted by Luzerne County Campaign for Liberty at Luzerne County Community College. The event provided an opportunity for third party candidates to speak before potential constituents and PCN cameras.

Although two of the candidates who spoke, Republicans Peg Luksik (for Senate) and Sam Rohrer (for Governor), have been made de facto third party candidates by the PA state GOP, I have decided to present summaries of what local candidates said at the event as a public service to the voter. These candidates are Independent Jake Towne and Libertarian candidates Tim Mullen (PA House District 120), Betsy Summers (PA Senate District 14), and Brian Bergman (PA House District 119).

Jake Towne is running for the 15th congressional district, where many King’s College students will vote. In his speech he stated that the unsound dollar is the US’s most pressing issue, but he emphasized the need to balance the budget in Washington, and he called for the repeal of the recent healthcare overhaul and cap and trade legislation. Perhaps his most unique belief was that the US troops should be brought home because “terrorists will best be pursued by small groups seeking bounties under constitutional letters of marque and reprisal, not by conventional armies.”
To foster transparency, Towne plans to write open office letters in which he will explain the reasoning behind his votes. When I asked him why someone should vote for an Independent candidate, he said that one should consider the candidate’s principles, not just party allegiance. He added that electing an Independent such as himself is advantageous because such an individual is not beholden to party machinery but to the people.

Members of the Libertarian Party also could be said to have no party machinery to follow.

Tim Mullen is currently running on the Libertarian ticket for the PA house district 120—adequately summed up in local parlance as “the West Side.” Some stances he took in his speech were the repeal of school property taxes, strike-free public education, opposition to toll roads which will discourage commerce, and the need to address the pension time bomb set to go off in 2012 for Pennsylvania state employees.

Tim Mullen (center), Sam Rohrer (left), Betsy Summers (right)

In my talk with Mullen afterward, he revealed that he plans to go door to door to all of the houses in the 120th district to inform voters of his candidacy and platform, having already gone to a significant number of doorsteps. As to why someone should vote Libertarian, he said “we’re a party bound by the constitution and by the principles of the founding fathers. The platforms of the Republicans and Democrats seem to twist based on where the money is coming from.” He then showed me a pamphlet that compared several major policies of the Bush administration with similar policies of the Obama administration.

PA state Senate candidate Betsy Summers continued along the same vein, calling for the elimination of pensions for all elected officials state-wide. “It is a civic duty when you serve. Do you think the founding fathers said ‘I’m going to run for office so that the tax payers can support me for the rest of my life, once I leave government’”? She also criticized the “war on poverty,” stating that 20 cents of every dollar taxed for purposes of helping the poor actually reaches the poor, with the rest going to state employees. “I would rather much rather just take a dollar and give it to a poor person” said she.

Brian Bergman
A main issue for District 119 candidate Brian Bergman was the lack of protections home owners have against eminent domain. He cited the case of Kelo v. City of New London, and other unjust applications of eminent domain. He also stressed the need for adherence to a document that few people know exists—the Pennsylvania State Constitution.

Candidacies are well and good, but what would it take for the Libertarian party to gain ground politically? Luke Scheitrumph, 19, who is involved with the Mullen campaign, replied “one of them has to win, and momentum will take the party from there.”

Pat Faces Peg on April 20th

After hesitating to even acknowledge Peg's candidacy, Pat Toomey finally agreed to appear in a candidates forum with her on the Pennsylvania Cable Network, PCN. Click here for a video of the debate.

As to whether Toomey decided to appear with Peg out of necessity or out of his own good will, I do not know. He may have been forced to show up by the PCN people if they told him that they'd give the entire forum to Peg if he didn't show up. Maybe showing up was a strategic decision for Toomey, given that he may need the votes of many of Peg's supporters in the general election should he win the primary. To give him the generous benefit of the doubt, maybe he decided that he would participate in the forum out of a desire to participate in the democratic process. Who knows...

For most of the forum, Peg and Toomey didn't argue but merely responded to basic Q&A from the moderator. Hopefully there will be a future forum in which Toomey and Luksik go head to head for most of the duration. (I think Peg would benefit more from such a format.)

That aside, during this debate, Peg used far less of the common platitudes than Toomey*. In other words, she didn't treat the voter as if he were an imbecile. Too bad, since she thereby lost the imbecilic vote--but for all intents and purposes, she had already lost it for not acquiescing to the 'social justice' crowd--some of whose members Toomey apparently thinks he can win over.

For most of the debate, Toomey and Peg seemed like fellow travelers--and in many ways they are, but Peg seemed more sincere and thorough, and she was willing to do things like criticize the big banker/politician oligarchy.

When it came time for the candidates to ask each other questions (and hence to criticize each other), Peg really grilled Mr. Toomey about his vote for making background checks necessary at gun shows--a vote which he denied. (I cannot verify either of their allegations, my schedule prevents me from doing so.)

Next, he asked her whether she would vote against earmarks like he claimed he would. In her response she accused him of publicizing certain earmarks that he brought into his congressional district while he was running for congress. Toomey seemed very timid when questioning Peg--which is understandable since he does not want to alienate her supporters. But Peg had everything to gain and nothing to lose. Plus, well, she has no voting record for Toomey to criticize, nor a non-conservative/non-liberty oriented stance. And if Toomey criticized her for a being too conservative, it could bode badly for him.

So, what can one conclude from the forum? Perhaps that Peg will keep Toomey honest.
_____________________________________

*For instance, Toomey mentioned how he is descended from immigrants--as if Peg weren't also.

PA GOP Trying to Control Which Candidates You See

see this article in the King's College Crown Newspaper

Supporting underdog Republican candidates is not easy. Recently, I began to wonder why Pennsylvania Republican candidates Peg Luksik (Senate) and Sam Rohrer (Governor) were so far behind the GOP-endorsed candidates Pat Toomey (Senate) and Tom Corbett (Governor). After all, Luksik and Rohrer were and still are legitimate, thoroughly Republican candidates with significant followings. Having compared the candidates a while ago, I had determined that Luksik and Rohrer are better.

[Photo] Republican senatorial candidate Peg Luksik speaks at Challanger's Town Hall while PA 119th District Libertarian candidate Brian Bergman looks on.

Over a week ago, I noticed that pagop.org made no mention of Luksik or Rohrer. I thought, somewhat naively, that the site operators would willingly do the public a civil service by posting information concerning the candidacies of Rohrer and Luksik. I wrote an email asking the website operators of pagop.org to place information about Peg Luksik and Sam Rohrer on the site, or at least to provide links to the candidates’ websites. I have yet to receive a reply from anyone at the site, and pagop.org remains devoid of any mention of either Luksik or Rohrer.

Even the local luzernegop.org makes no reference whatsoever either to Peg Luksik or Sam Rohrer. Hopefully folks at the Luzerne GOP will do the right thing and post some information about non-endorsed candidates.*

I also wrote a hand-written letter to Pat Toomey, telling him I would not vote for him in the general election if he continues to pretend Peg Luksik does not exist¹. I have yet to receive a response from Mr. Toomey, even though I previously donated a sum of money to him before I knew about Peg's candidacy.

PCN, Pennsylvania's version of C-SPAN, lists Rohrer and Luksik under Republican candidates on its website. So, this non-profit organization is actually giving more press to Luksik and Rohrer than the Republican party is itself.

After the Challenger’s Town Hall, an event staged April 10, at Luzerne County Community College which featured Peg Luksik and Sam Rohrer among other others, I decided to ask several candidates for their reactions to the state GOP’s custom of endorsing certain candidates before the primary and pretending others don’t exist.

“I don’t make the decisions for the GOP”, replied Hazleton Mayor and 11th Congressional district Republican candidate Lou Barletta.

Other candidates, however, were more opinionated.

“They have clamped down and they have attempted to shut the door for anyone who’s not endorsed” said Sam Rohrer, adding that the tactic is a mistake and that regardless the people will decide which candidates they want.

Independent candidate Jake Towne, who’s gaining ground in the PA 15th congressional district, said “The whole endorsement before the party primary thing completely defeats the purpose of having a primary in the first place”, because primaries should be based on a free election, and therefore the GOP and any other political party should “sponsor debates and let every candidate be considered based on their principles, merits, and ideas, not just on the money they’re able to raise, etc.”

“If the primary were truly an open process”, added Libertarian candidate for PA 119th district Brian Bergman, “then the GOP state committee and the media would give all the candidates pretty much the same access and coverage.” He continued that decision-making in US politics traditionally “starts at the precinct level--your neighborhood, then goes to the county level and then to the state level.” However, he said that the GOP state committee, through its exclusionary practice of premature endorsements, had inverted this hierarchy by attempting to make decisions at the state level and send them down to the county level.

I also asked the organizer of Luzerne County Campaign for Liberty, Michael Harrison, about how the GOP’s handling of the senatorial and gubernatorial elections would bode for the party in the future. "It’s definitely going to hurt the GOP because people are upset about the endorsement of certain candidates over other candidates.” He continued that the tactic would only divide the electorate and and that it would be counter-productive to the GOP's goal of unity.

Indeed, the marginalization of certain candidates by the state GOP will lead to more discord within the Republican Party than would the promotion of open debate between candidates**. However, despite the GOP’s modus operandi to hide Luksik and Rohrer, events like the Challenger’s Town Hall and free media like the Internet, PCN, and the Crown newspaper go a long way to make otherwise unknown candidates known to the select few who are willing enough to look for them.
________________________________
*[May 7th] Despite receiving numerous appeals from Nothington Post staff, the representative official at Luzerne GOP refused to post anything about Luksik or Rohrer.

¹After I wrote this article I found out about an Tea Party forum in the Lehigh Valley at which both Toomey and Luksik spoke. I do not believe they debated, but Toomey's decision to step out of his campaign headquarters lair and to appear at this event with Luksik is, for him, a step in the right direction.

**[June, 17th] It already has. Many Sam Rohrer supporters have chosen not to vote for Corbett in the general election.

Opinion: Time for a Name Change, Democratic Party

It is indisputable that the tactics which the Democratic Party used to pass the Health Care overhaul were undemocratic. The nuclear option, once decried as an assault on democracy by Harry Reid and other prominent Democrat politicians, all the sudden became perfectly acceptable when the vote for further state control of health care came up. As the ruffian Democrat may counter, Republicans used the nuclear option under George W. Bush. However, he may not tell you that it was never used for a vote involving a 6th of the US economy, as the health bill did.

But perhaps the least democratic tactic was the deem and pass option which made a senate vote--which Scott Brown would have stopped--unnecessary for the passage of the health care overhaul.

Usually, democratic action involves debate, but the 2,000+ page health care bill was purposefully hidden from the public until 48 hours before the vote. Some surprise parts of the bill, such as the provision for an emergency health care army were only discovered, even by most Democrat Politicians, after the bill was passed.

New Name
In May of last year, several top Republicans suggested a name change to the "Democratic Socialist" party. It is commonly known that the most sincere of democrats love Marxist ideology and central planning schemes. Plus, every socialistic bit of legislation seems to be pushed by democrats these days. But, Democratic politicians are corporatist and bureaucratic before they are socialist. So adding the tag "socialist" is a bad idea.

We have already established that Democrat politicians don't care a damn for democratic process when it comes to votes on their beloved legislation, so they ought to get rid of the "Democratic" title. "Bureaucratic Party" may work, but sometimes Republicans start bureaucracies too--like the Department of Homeland Security. "Corporatist Party" might work, but then again, Republicans during the health care debate gave no opposition to how the AMA and big Pharma drive up heath care costs (through government patent and licensure, of course). A more distinctive name which may be appropriate is the Amoral Statist Party; or maybe the American Neo-Soviet Party; or the Government Growth Party; or the Spend Party; or the Nanny State Party. "Draconian party" would allow for the retention of the D abbreviation. Or, perhaps Democrats could adopt the name which earlier proactive fans of Karl Marx have: The Communist Party.

Did Congressman Kanjorski Betray Sallie Mae?

see this article in the King's College Crown Newspaper

Congressman Kanjorski has posed in many photos with Sallie Mae employees. He even has a board room named after him in the Sallie Mae call center located in Hanover Township. But Congressman Kanjorski may have just betrayed the very organization that he has purported to help--and its local workers.

Late Sunday night, March 21, the House of Representatives passed HR 3590--the famed, federal healthcare overhaul which will change the nature of healthcare in the United States indefinitely. The bill passed by a narrow margin, with only 3 votes to spare. Several days before the day vote, rumor had it that Congressman Kanjorski might vote against it. However, before Congress passed the bill Sunday, Congressman Kanjorski indicated that he would vote yea, in support of it.

The passage of HR 3590 means that the reconciliation bill, HR 4872, will likely be passed. The reconciliation bill will make possible provisions set forth last September in HR 3221, a bill set to centralize control of certain federal student loans to the federal government. Sallie Mae officials claim the now-imminent reconciliation bill will threaten about 2,500 Sallie Mae jobs nation-wide and several hundred in the local center located in the Hanover Industrial Complex. Sallie Mae has aired commercials imploring locals to call Congressman Kanjorski to tell him to vote no on legislation which will threaten the local Sallie Mae jobs. Kanjorski voted in favor of HR 3590 which made possible the reconciliation bill. Kanjorski, it seems, did not listen to Sallie Mae.

But until recently, Congressman Kanjorski had been quite friendly to Sallie Mae and its employees. In April of 2009, he played a significant role in convincing Sallie Mae CEO Albert Lord to bring 600 (actually about 400) jobs to the local call center in Hanover Township. At the time, critics scoffed at the move, saying the jobs were low paying. However, I saw the move as a positive thing because those $10/hr jobs are helpful to people looking to make ends meet. Furthermore, having worked one summer in the Hanover Sallie Mae call center, I know from experience that the company treats its employees well.

Just a few months ago, Congressman Kanjorski continued, as it seemed, to be loyal to local Sallie Mae workers. In September of 2009 he voted against HR 3221, which contained educational "reforms" that Sallie Mae officials believed would threaten company jobs. Congressman Kanjorski knew Sunday night that the passing of the healthcare bill entailed, indirectly, the passing the reconciliation bill, and hence the educational reforms set forth in HR 3221. In other words, healthcare "reform" was the tipping point that made Kanjorski support educational "reforms" that may leave many local Sallie Mae employees out of work.

However, Congressman Kanjorski now claims that local Sallie Mae jobs will not be significantly affected by the implementation of HR 3221 (but for some reason he voted against it earlier). Yet, Friday, March 19th, when news surfaces that the healthcare bill would probably pass; Sallie Mae's stock price plummets over 5%. Watch Sallie Mae stock now that the bill has officially passed: it may sink. It seems local Sallie Mae workers will inevitably be affected.

One could make the argument that Kanjorski has put national interests above local interests by placing national healthcare reform (deform?) above the interests of local Sallie Mae workers. However, one could counter that the overall benefits of passing HR 3590 (and the reconciliation bill) will outweigh whatever job losses are incurred by local Sallie Mae employees. But to anyone espousing either sentiment, I would ask whether he knows of how current government regulation drives up healthcare costs. A serenade of crickets would likely respond. Anyway, if local Sallie Mae employees do in fact lose jobs because of Kanjorski's vote, the following modicum will apply: a government official like Kanjorski who is powerful enough to bring jobs to the area is powerful enough to take them away.

Rube Lomax vs. Steve Corbett

Recently, an anonymous gossip columnist and rube named Lomax calumniated talk-show host Steve Corbett of WILK Newsradio. Rube Lomax's column appeared in Electric City and Diamond City events newspapers, both publications of the Times Shamrock syndicate. Lomax's statements are obviously false and of a malicious nature. Corbett ought to sue Times Shamrock for libel, or otherwise the Times Shamrock corporation will continue its recent trend of yellow journalism.

Here is a portion of the Rube's column:

The local rumor mill is grinding that Scranton carpetbagger and WILK whiner Steve Corbett is trying hard to latch his wannabe star on a nationally syndicated FOX radio show through his worship of all things Sara Palin. Allegedly, he’s working to impress Greta Van Sustern [sic] via her husband John P. Coale, who worked locally on the Hillary Clinton campaign. Corbett became acquainted with Coale through the Rodham brothers (his good buddies and Hillary’s wearisome siblings) which is why he’s now got his sights on a national show, hence his lips on the derriere of all things Palin-related....Perhaps he and Caribou Barbie could team up together. Now that would make for some good talk radio.

To anyone unfamiliar with Steve Corbett this might seem possible. Thus, the column has the potential to destroy Corbett's reputation among many potential listeners of his program. However, the cloumn's statements are absurd to anyone who has listened to Corbett. First, he is quite the liberal and he's very feminist. He supported judicial candidate Tina Gartley partly because he believes women should have more representation in government. But during the election, Corbett also supported Palin/McCain because he saw through the fraudulent Obama.

In fact, not only do disenfranchised Hilary supporters such as Corbett oppose Obama, but many anti-corporatist liberals do too, like the Dennis Kucinich supporter who made the Obama joker picture.

Liberals such as Steve Corbett who oppose Obama are very dangerous for Obamaphiles like Rube Lomax because they hold all the same liberal values but yet see the Obaman Kommissar for the fraud that he is.

However, this Rube apparently wants to cast Steve Corbett as a conservative by associating him with FOX News--an obvious choice. The allegation is obviously fabricated. For one thing, FOX has it's pick of the creme de la creme of pundits, and no offense to Corbett, but he's no John Stossel or Glenn Beck. Futhermore, anyone who listens to Corbett knows that 99% of the time he talks about local NEPA news items--something FOX news could care less about. Why would Corbett discuss mostly local stuff if he wanted to "audition" for a national show?

As per the Times Shamrock Corporation's involvement, Corbett details how its officials treated him like garbage* when he confronted them about the libelous column. But this is not the first case of Times Shamrock affiliates overseeing politically malicious journalism. One of its papers, the Scranton Times, reportedly was VERY biased against conservative Bishop Martino, and one of its reporters, David Singleton, reported an unsubstatiated "threat" against then-candidate Obama at a Sarah Palin rally that nobody else present heard, including me.

As much as Rube Lomax may scowl at Corbett's frustration, his frustration is well-warrented. Corbett wrote the following on his blog:

As soon as I read the story Thursday in this week’s edition of “Diamond City” and “Electric City,” I went to Entercom Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Vice President/General Manager Ryan Flynn and told him the story was not true. I worried that he might think I am trying to cut a deal behind his back and find a way out of my contract and the commitment I have made to my community. I worried that he might think less of me the next time we negotiate my job if a false rumor plants a seed of doubt about my character.
I also worried that advertisers and listeners might not trust me anymore if they thought I was using the area as a stepping stone to another job.

Times-Shamrock vs. Entercom Communcations?
Despite Corbett's appeals to the T-S officials to pull the article, they have obstinantly refused to do so. It begs the question: Does the pro-Obama Times Shamrock ownership have something against Corbett? More specifically, T-S owns radio stations that compete with Entercom. Entercom operates WILK News radio on which Corbett's program airs. Corbett is their competitor...

Strangely enough, Rube Lomax gleefully pointed out on her/his/its Facebook page that Corbett's popularity has fallen since the election. She responed to a Corbet Supporter who asked whether she would appear on Corbett's show:

And boost his sagging ratings? Never. He's only carrying on so I'll talk to him to help pull his ratings out of the toilet...[He is] down from number one last summer to number four.. .behind Jumpin' Jeff, Doc Medek and Frankie Warren.

I believe Rube Lomax actively intends to ruin Corbett's reputation and thereby his listenership while she/he/it cowers behind her pseudonym.

Finally, anyone who listens to Corbett can attest to his honesty. He frequently tells callers not to spread rumors on his show. Many are grateful to Corbett for having publicized Luzerne/Lackawanna County corruption, but there are those who would like it to stay in the dark. There are also those who don't like Corbett from when he was a newspaper reporter. I must admit, of his prior newspaper days, I know little.

Public figures have to deal with lies. If Rush Limbaugh got upset over every lie and misrepresentation of what he said, he'd surely have died of it long ago. Corbett is also used to dealing with calumnies.

However, I like to stand up for people being lied about, and if you do too, boycott Times-Shamrock Communications or write them a letter denoting your displeasure with their yellow journalism.



*see Corbett's blogs:
Thanks for Listening
& Times Shamrock Only Makes it Worse

TL LETTER TO THE EDITOR: River Common project: What Were They Thinking?

by Michelle T. Boice of Harveys Lake

I copied this from Ms. Boice's letter to the editor in the January 29th Times Leader:

Due to years of rampant corruption and gross mismanagement, Luzerne County is nearly a half billion dollars in debt.

The payment on this debt this year alone will cost county taxpayers nearly $25 million. This, folks, is the reason our elected officials ignored our pleas to stop the seriously flawed reassessment and force the company that charged us $9 million to go back to the drawing board and get it right.

Serious cuts need to be made and our elected officials need to become more accountable. They need to do the job they were elected by us to do and pay attention. With that said, I cannot help but wonder what could have been done to save Moon Lake Park had we not spent $30 million to build the River Common, a place where you cannot camp, cannot swim, cannot eat any fish you might catch, etc.

In fact, you cannot spend a few hours there with your family because there are no toilet facilities.

Just over the bridge is beautiful Kirby Park with all the amenities, and then some, that they are attempting to offer at the River Common.

Therefore, I see this $30 million expenditure as our own little “Bridge to Nowhere.” The architects, engineers and out-of-state contractors made money on this concrete, stone and flower project, which might look pretty, but it looked pretty before we spent $30 million. Now the people have been saddled with the annual maintenance fees for the park that will exceed the annual cost of keeping Moon Lake Park open. Yes, a park used more and more by county residents, strapped by an economy that doesn’t allow them the luxury of taking a family vacation to the shore, let alone Disney. No common sense seems to have been applied here.

What were they thinking?