Sunflower Desert

Who’d thunk it?

Convening in a downtown plaza in a session that resembled a political rally, lawmakers unanimously gave Chavez sweeping powers to legislate by decree and impose his radical vision of a more egalitarian socialist state.

“Long live the sovereign people! Long live President Hugo Chavez! Long live socialism!” said National Assembly President Cilia Flores as she proclaimed the “enabling law” approved by a show of hands. “Fatherland, socialism or death! We will prevail!”

Ummm …. won’t be too long before they might be reaping that death part. Stupid schmucks.

The law gives Chavez, who is beginning a fresh six-year term, more power than he has ever had in eight years as president, and he plans to use it during the next 18 months to transform broad areas of public life, from the economy and the oil industry in particular, to “social matters” and the very structure of the state.

His critics call it a radical lurch toward authoritarianism by a leader with unchecked power _ similar to how Fidel Castro monopolized leadership years ago in Cuba.

Yeah, and we all know how well that worked out for the Cubans. With any luck, maybe mother Sheehan will transfer down there permanently.

“The people of Venezuela, not just the National Assembly, are giving this enabling power to the president of the republic,” congresswoman Iris Varela told the crowd.

President Bush said Wednesday that he’s “concerned about the Venezuelan people.”

“I am concerned about the undermining of democratic institutions. And we’re working to help prevent that from happening,” Bush said in an interview with Fox News.

But in the square in Caracas, Venezuelan Vice President Jorge Rodriguez publicly ridiculed the idea that the law is an abuse of power, and argued democracy is flourishing.

“What kind of a dictatorship is this?” Rodriguez asked the crowd, saying the law “only serves to sow democracy and peace.”

“Dictatorship is what there used to be,” Rodriguez said. “We want to impose the dictatorship of a true democracy.”

That sounds like the type of Democracy Castro has. Good luck with that.

Chavez, a former paratroop commander re-elected with 63 percent of the vote in December, has said he will decree nationalizations of Venezuela’s largest telecommunications company and the electricity sector, slap new taxes on the rich, and impose greater state control over the oil and natural gas industries.

The law also allows Chavez to dictate unspecified measures to transform state institutions; reform banking, tax, insurance and financial regulations; decide on security and defense matters such as gun regulations and military organization; and “adapt” legislation to ensure “the equal distribution of wealth” as part of a new “social and economic model.”

Wow! That sounds like a Democrat’s dream government. I think that gun regulation bit might just be the nail in the coffin for any power the people might have had. Oh well, more money for everyone! Thank you rich people — your work has apparently paid off — for those of us who didn’t work. And that bit on slapping new taxes on the rich — priceless.

Well, I hope the Gay couple is okay with this. At least Lander’s least favorite senator was on their side.

CHEYENNE — The Wyoming Senate Wednesday voted 21-8 in favor of a bill to ban recognition of same-sex marriages that are legal in other states.

Voting for Senate File 13 were 20 Republicans and one Democrat, Sen. Bill Vasey of Rawlins.

Voting no were Sens. Cale Case, R-Lander; Ken Decaria, D-Evanston; John Hastert, D-Green River; Rae Lynn Job, D-Rock Springs; Mike Massie, D-Laramie; Jayne Mockler and Kathryn Sessions, D-Cheyenne; and Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette.

The bill now goes to the House. A story in Wednesday’s Star-Tribune included incorrect information about the bill’s next step.

At least the good senator from Lander can tell his gay friends that he went to bat for them.

Awww …. how romantic.

CHEYENNE — Leah Vader and her partner of Gillette will be watching today to see how the Wyoming Senate votes on a bill to ban recognition of same-sex marriages that take place in other states.

What if my husband and I are watching? Can we get a headline — Heterosexual Couple Watches Debate?

Vader and Lynne Huskinson, both 46, have been together for 10 years. They were married in Ontario, Canada, in August.

Together they have raised Leah’s four children, ages 17 to 23, from her first traditional marriage.

Maybe they raised 4 children together, but they sure didn’t have 4 children together. Biologically impossible. I would be curious as to how these children turned out.

Burt said most people take for granted marital or spousal rights. They include the right to health insurance and other benefits, to participate in estate planning and to make medical decisions for the spouse-partner.

“One thing we hear most often is when families don’t allow the partner into the hospital room,” Burt said.

She said it is unfortunate that the Senate so far is supporting the bill.

“Not many people are rushing to Wyoming — gay couples who have been married somewhere else,” Burt said. “The only purpose of this bill is to make discrimination very clear.”

Don’t you just love it? You either agree with the left and gays and lesbians — or you are discriminating. Better yet, you’re a hater! Hmmm …. they don’t agree with my traditional family values, does that make them discriminators and haters? Yes! This can work both ways.

Supporters contend that making same-sex marriages legal in the state diminishes traditional family values and society’s support of those values.

John Birbari of Lander, a representative of the Casper-based Wyoming Family Values Coalition, said Tuesday his group of 9,000 families of various religious denominations — Catholic, Protestant and Mormon — support the bill.

“Our position is marriage is not an invention of mankind,” Birbari said. “It was ordained by God and was ordained between a man and a woman, and that has been the view held through most of the ages, and that’s the way we think it ought to stay.”

Hats off to Mr Birbari. He doesn’t get all wishy washy when he’s in Cheyenne and he actually has the nerve to stand up against the peer pressure of the left.

Vader goes on to make this ridiculous remark:

“We have a completely legal marriage,” she said. “I’m talking about full faith and credit.”

Actually, if this bill passes, there will be no full faith and credit for your pretend marriage.

But without enjoying the full range of spousal benefits in Wyoming, Vader said she sees the bill as a simple statement of prejudice.

“I think what they want is for there not to be gay people,” she said. “It’s hard to legislate that.”

Once again, not of the same view as Ms. Vader (or is it Mrs. Vader?) Then you are prejudice. I don’t think the bill is written in a matter that will get rid of gay people — just not recognize them as married, as in the traditional sense. I really wish these people would learn to read.

I’m glad the bill is advancing — but what the crap are these WY legislators thinking? Are we now swallowing the load of bull being fed to us from the freaking left?

By a voice vote, the Senate approved on first reading a bill sponsored by Sen. Gerald Geis, R-Worland, that would specify that Wyoming won’t recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. State law already specifies that marriages performed in Wyoming must be between a man and a woman.

“This is a straightforward bill, plain and simple,” Geis said. “I think most of you already have your mind made up how you’re going to vote on it. All it says is that if the marriage is not between a man and a woman, that Wyoming won’t honor it.”

Okay — that makes sense. Straightforward.

Several senators spoke against the measure, saying it goes against Wyoming’s motto: “Equal Rights.”

“I can tell you that the signal that we’re putting out is not good for the state,” said Sen. Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette, during the debate. “We depend a lot on tourism.”

Von Flatern said the state should have to change its motto if the bill becomes law.

Equal Rights? The Equality State? So, where do we draw the line morons? Polygamists want equal rights. Freaking child molesters want equal rights. Should we invite them to come to Wyoming and visit Yellowstone? All tourism is good tourism. Is that the way it works?

The grizzlies and wolves are wonderful for tourism. Too bad they suck for ranchers.

What will we ever think of to change our state motto to? All marriages welcome! How about, We don’t care what you’re married to! Now that we can no longer be the equality state.

Oh, here’s some great Wyoming logic for you:

Sen. Mike Massie, D-Laramie, said that although Wyoming is proud of giving women the right to vote as a territory in 1869, the Legislature that same year banned mixed-race marriages.

“That law remained on the books for nearly 100 years,” Massie said, adding that the reasons people gave at the time for banning mix-race marriages are similar to those presented now in favor of the ban on recognizing same-sex marriages: that it goes against their reading of the Bible.

Newsflash Mr. Massie — no where can you find in the Bible where God is against mixed race marriages! People just make that crap up. However, there are many places in the Bible where you can find that homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord. Might try reading it. Just a thought. I mean, if you’re going to use it as a pathetic excuse to keep family friendly legislation from passing.

And my least favorite local senator:

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, said that if Wyoming chooses not to acknowledge same-sex marriages performed in other states, that it should consider recognizing the rights of people in long-term, committed relationships to visit each other in the hospital and similar things.

“Frankly, the gay relationships that I’m aware of, they’re some of the strongest relationships I’ve known,” Case said. “I admire these people; I admire how they’ve stuck to each other.”

I think Senator Case has been to one too many showings of brokeback mountain. Not sure when the last time he’s been in a hospital, but anyone can pretty much control who can and cannot visit them. It’s not the 70’s anymore buddy.

Last but not least:

Geis said after the vote that he wasn’t aware of any same-sex couple from another state asking Wyoming to recognize their marriage. He said he sponsored the bill because a group of people from his district asked him to.

“I’m going to vote for the bill,” Geis said. “I must believe in it a little, or I wouldn’t have sponsored it.”

Senate Majority Floor Leader John Hines, R-Gillette, said he didn’t have strong personal opinions on the issue, but also said he voted in favor of the bill in response to comments he heard from constituents.

Hines said he scheduled the bill for a vote after it passed the Senate Judiciary Committee last week because the Senate isn’t very busy.

Wow, what a gesture — trying to get legislation passed that your constituents want. Now, that’s a novel idea. Isn’t it cute how these legislators really aren’t bigots? I mean, they’re just trying to please their bigoted constituents! Three words: grow a pair.

Found yet another fun blog at WordPress.

I Can Plainly See

Interesting article from the Casper Star Tribune today.

By BEN NEARY
Associated Press writer-CHEYENNE — Two of the most emotional issues in politics are set to hit the Wyoming Legislature this week: abortion rights and same-sex marriage.

The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday narrowly endorsed a bill titled, “Women’s right to know.” It would require doctors who perform abortions in the state to inform their patients beforehand of alternatives and warn them of potential risks and side effects. Supporters of the measure say they want to protect women from physical and psychological problems they say have been associated with abortion. But abortion rights groups say they view the bill as part of an effort to ban the procedure in the state.The bill will likely be debated on the House floor some time this week, House Speaker Roy Cohee, R-Casper, said.

Okay, abortion rights groups say they view the bill as part of an effort to ban the procedure in the state? Well, read the freaking bill morons — that is not what it does. I wish it did it, but it doesn’t. Learn to read you baby killing left wing liberal freaks.

Meanwhile, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday endorsed a bill that would specify Wyoming won’t recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Senate President John Schiffer, R-Kaycee, said Friday he expects debate on the marriage bill will be lively. “It will be controversial, that’s a controversial bill,” he said.

Both the abortion and same-sex marriage issues promise to draw lobbyists and concerned citizens to the Capitol.

Rep. Bob Brechtel, R-Casper, sponsor of the abortion bill, said he’s not trying to erode abortion rights.

“My only intention is to help them avoid injury and long-term regrets. It has nothing to do with stopping abortion,” he said.

John Birbari, of Lander, who is president of the Wyoming Family Coalition, said his group strongly supports Brechtel’s legislation.

“Anytime you undergo a surgical procedure, there should be full disclosure about what the risks are and what you can expect,” Birbari said. “That’s true with just about every surgical procedure, except for abortion.

“We know for a fact that women who have had abortions have not been fully informed about the risks, both surgical and psychological,” Birbari said. “And this bill will give them the information they need to make an informed decision.”

Sharon Breitweiser, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Wyoming, an abortion-rights group headquartered in Laramie, said her group intends to rally members to fight Brechtel’s bill.

“We’re stunned that the majority of the House Judiciary Committee ignored the testimony of doctors, lawyers, health care professionals and reproductive rights advocates,” Breitweiser said Friday.

“We believe that it’s not the government’s business,” she said. “The majority of people in this state do not want government intrusion into their personal lives, and the proponents of this bill are the same people who want to outlaw abortion.”

Whatever the motivation behind the abortion legislation, Cohee said it promises to take a lot of time in the House this week.

“The problem with a bill like that is we have, right now, some 50, 60 bills on general file,” Cohee said. “And discussion of a bill like that can consume massive amounts of time. It eliminates the opportunity to hear the bills that have been brought forth in the Legislature by many other people. We can spend time on one bill or we can spend time on consideration of 10 or 12 more.”

As for Breitweiser — what does she mean? “We’re stunned that the majority of the House Judiciary Committee ignored the testimony of doctors, lawyers, health care professionals and reproductive rights advocates.” Is the House Judiciary Committee of the state of Wyoming obligated to believe the testimony of baby murdering thugs — such as abortionists and reproductive rights advocates? I think not. Let’s go through her list of testifiers:

1st of all — doctors. Doctors or abortionists? There is a difference. The primary difference being that doctors actually save lives and abortionists actually dismember and murder children. I think that makes their testimony pretty freaking worthless — don’t you?

2nd lawyers — enough said.

3rd — reproductive rights advocates. In other words, advocates for the abortion industry — killing babies for money. Yeah, great testimonies there woman.

Oh, I almost forgot, the testimony of “health care professionals”. Most likely femi-nazi freaks that work in baby killing mills.

There, I think I’ve pretty much discredited her fine list of testifiers.

Wyoming legislators need to do the right thing and pass this bill. Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop the barbaric practice of abortion, but at least it gives the would be murdering mother an opportunity to change her mind.

Sunday funnies. Let me start by saying that I truthfully cannot stand Roger Federer. Yes, I love tennis — and am having difficulty getting over the idea that Pete is no longer playing

This Federer character … I think he uses broken English as an excuse to say stupid, arrogant crap. Maybe, I just get sick of hearing him referred to as possibly the best male tennis player ever. Of course, in my eyes, that would be Pete.

Oh well, Andy Roddick is hilarious after losing to Roger in the Australian Open this past week. I think the world would be a better place if everyone treated the media like this when they ask stupid questions — which is all the time.

Yet so real

I don’t want to post the entire disgusting story. I just want to ask a question. Is the accused senator a Republican or a Democrat? Would you like to know how to tell? Okay. If the accused is a Republican, you will read that in the first paragraph of the AP article. BUT, if the accused senator is a Democrat, you will have to skip to the LAST paragraph in the article to find that out.   Actually, sometimes the party affiliation will not even be mentioned if the accused is a Democrat.  We got lucky with this article.  Not sure why it works out that way, because from what I’ve heard, the MSM has no left wing liberal bias at all. Confusing stuff.

I think this is good news. Why, you ask? Because of this.

The AFA boycott of Ford Motor Company continues to impact its sales. December sales dropped 13% compared to the same period a year ago.

In December of 2005, Ford agreed to basically follow the path taken by Wal-Mart — remain neutral in the culture war over the homosexual agenda. However, Ford later reneged on that agreement after meeting with a group of homosexual leaders. AFA has continued to ask Ford to take a neutral stance like Wal-Mart, but Ford has consistently refused.

Here is a track record of Ford sales since the boycott began:

I find it interesting, that when reading about Ford’s worst loss in its history, AP fails to mention anything about the AFA boycott.

“We began aggressive actions in 2006 to restructure our automotive business so we can operate profitably at lower volumes with a product mix that better reflects consumer demand for smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles,” Alan Mulally, president and chief executive officer, said in a statement. “We fully recognize our business reality and are dealing with it. We have a plan and are on track to deliver.”

Okay Ford, you go with that.