Disgruntledpatriot's Blog

August 2, 2010

Our view of the Peoria Journal Star’s view, go back to school

Filed under: Sick and Tired — Trever Bierschbach @ 5:46 am
Tags: , ,

by Trever Bierscbach

In the opinion section of Peoria’s Journal Star Sunday they had an article titled ‘Our View’, but there is no author’s name attached so I am curious.  Is this column really the view of the entire newspaper, or perhaps just the opinion department?  Did the opinion editor, Mike Bailey, write it?  Is he writing the opinion of the entire paper when he says ‘Our View’, or just his opinion and too cowardly to put his name on it?

The column is an opinion piece about our local government giving loans to two major businesses, one for a remodel, and the other to build a new store.  It asks the question “Where have the central Illinois’ tea partiers been?”, and the title of the column is “Why the silence from conservatives on local government handouts?”.

Well PJStar, let me clue you in on a little something we like to call, the constitution.  You see, State and Local governments have a lot more leeway when it comes to spending than the federal government is supposed to have (they take that leeway anyway, that’s why we are upset).  I am sure there are TEA party members (See PJStar, that’s how you are supposed to do it.  I made the same mistake too TEA, not tea) upset about all the money given to businesses from tax payers, I am one of them.  But, we also realize that this money is going to create real jobs, not those temporary, triple counted, costly fake jobs the fed is touting.  A Holiday Inn, and a Bass Pro Shop in East Peoria?  How many jobs do you think that will bring in?

You might also notice PJStar, that the money for the Bass Pro Shop is going to come from bonds being sold, not a handout.  It is also worth noting that building the Bass Pro Shop will allow for another building to be put up, without expense to taxpayers.  With East Peoria’s track record of taking in businesses that Peoria has said no to, and turning them to the advantage of the city and the residents, I don’t think anyone is really looking to make a stink about the city doing what they are, at the very least, constitutionally authorized to do.

See, PJStar, you are trying to take an issue, over simplify it, spin it, and make a group of people look bad.  You have failed, as so many others, because of your lack of understanding.  Lack of understanding about the TEA party, and lack of understanding on the issue.  Our recommendation, send whoever wrote this article back to school to take some government/constitution classes so they maybe get what’s going on.  Might also be a good idea for them to have a sit down with a TEA Party member to find out what the group is really about, instead of spouting ignorance, it makes your paper look bad.

March 22, 2010

Local newspaper and Associated Press team up for Liberal bias

I know, today I should be ranting about yesterday’s vote, but what’s done is done.  Now the hard work is ahead of us.  November will be a very telling month.

Now down to the topic.  These two articles ran in the Peoria Journal Star on Sunday, right next to each other.  “Cindy Sheehan arrested as thousands protest wars”, and “Protesters accost lawmakers”. I know, those aren’t links to the PJstar, but the articles on that site are mysteriously absent.

Now, reading the articles separately might lead one to shrug and go on without a second thought.  It’s the fact they were run next to each other that sparked my interest.  First note how there were ‘thousands ‘ of anti-war protesters, but only ‘at least hundreds’ of Tea Party protesters.  The articles claimed that the anti-war protesters clogged the streets and sidewalks, rushed lawmakers, were angry, shouting, etc.  That’s the first article that clearly states the actions of the anti-war protesters.  Now the second article doesn’t even make mention of the anti-war protesters, but it carefully dances around actually accusing the Tea Party members of anything.    Alan Fram, who wrote the second article, expects us to believe that the Tea Part members, for the first time ever, were disrupting traffic, hurling racial slurs, spitting, and accosting lawmakers?  He is very specific about their signs, but not so specific about their actions.

Isn’t it more likely that the group that actually had arrests, the anti-war protesters, were the ones doing all the real accosting?  Those code-pink members, and other anti-war protesters, are well-known for their borderline violent actions.  Their hateful behavior.  When was the last time a Tea Party member was arrested?  Oh yeah, never.  When was the last time one covered their hands in blood and ‘accosted’ a federal official?  Oh, never.  When was the last time a Tea Party member protested at a funeral for a soldier?  Hmm, never.  Isn’t it more likely that Alan Fram, and other liberal ‘journalists’ used the dual protests as a way to finally lay fault at the feet of the Tea Party movement?

While I believe that the Tea Party can sometimes be a little non-PC with their signs, I do not believe they would put themselves physically in the way of others like the article describes.  I just can’t believe that the movement would make a total 180 from their core principles, and their exemplary behavior of the past.  Even the picture the PJStar ran next to the article just shows the Tea Party members standing on a lawn holding signs.  They don’t even look like a mob in the picture.  I challenge Alan Fram (should it be sham) to back up his article with video, or at least a photo.  Show me that it isn’t some bleeding heart liberal in a code-pink tee-shirt spitting on a congressman.

February 8, 2010

Presumed Consent and that Pesky Little Constitution

Filed under: Sick and Tired — Trever Bierschbach @ 7:18 am
Tags: ,

So, another news story here in our local newspaper brought up presumed consent again.  Looks like Peoria’s state senator Dale Risinger, a republican by the way, is drafting legislation that will require people to opt-out of a program in order to retain their personal liberty.

Let me back up a sec so you guys all understand where I am coming from.  I am a registered donor, I think everyone that can be, should be, but I think that it should be a choice.  I do not believe that giving up personal liberties for the greater good is liberty, or good.

Now, they are masquerading this as constitutional by saying you can opt-out.  Let’s put it another way, let’s say that the government decided that getting a search warrant was just too cumbersome so they enact a presumed consent law.  You would be presumed to have consented to a search of your private property unless you opt-out.  How does that idea sit with you?

Perhaps a better idea would be a better incentive program, or more education about the subject.  I don’t know myself, what the solution should be but I do know that if we keep giving away these small personal freedoms eventually we will wake up one day and find that they are all gone.

Supreme Court’s Campaign Finance Decision

Filed under: Sick and Tired — Trever Bierschbach @ 6:28 am
Tags: , , ,

I have been watching this, and thinking on it for a bit now, and a letter in my local newspaper finally got me to write something.  Mr. Parr takes exception with the Supreme Court’s ruling to allow corporations to donate to allow corporations to donate to campaigns, and of course the blind liberal mob rally’s behind his comments.  They all fail to notice the…is it irony?  If you take his letter and replace one word…

“Unions must not be treated as individual people.  Unions are groups given business privileges and responsibilities by governments.  Those favors have created groups having vast wealth and powers spread across our globe, dwarfing any person’s wealth.”

Now we have the same argument, but one that I am sure that liberal’s won’t make.  I myself would push for an across the board ruling that only individuals can donate, no unions, no corporations, conglomerates, etc.  Heck, I have other thoughts about campaign finance that would eliminate the need for donations at all, but that is a much larger argument.  Why is it that progressives talk about fair, but when something is actually made so, they balk at it?

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.