Posted on

A Clear Choice.

The election results are in.

 

Once again, the Republicans have nominated several candidates who strongly embrace liberal Democrat values.

In HD 14, the Republican House nominee is Richard Cunningham who proudly identifies as an anti gun, Hillary Clinton supporter. His opponent in the race was Alison Rhodes, a strong supporter of gun rights.

In House District 20, liberal gun grabber Selma Pierce narrowly defeated pro-gun Kevin Chambers.

Once again, the Republican Party allowed candidates to run under their banner who either stand for the principles of the other side or who can hardly be taken seriously.

In the Second Congressional district, liberal gun grabber Knute Buehler reinvented himself as a conservative supporter of gun rights and devotee of Donald Trump, whom he attacked regularly when he was running as a liberal for Governor.

Fortunately he was running against several real conservatives and was defeated by Cliff Bentz. Unfortunately he scored enough votes to demonstrate that with the Republican name in your ads, you really can fool a lot of the people a lot of the time. His inexplicable “B+” rating from the NRA probably contributed to the confusion.

As long as it continues to be the policy of the Republican Party to allow anyone to run as a “Republican” irrespective of their policies or even their fitness for office, we will continue to get candidates whose presence on the ballot can only be described as an embarrassment .

The Republican nominee for Attorney General is not only not an attorney, he did not even appear in the voter’s guide. Had you attempted to contribute to his campaign you would have found a link to PayPal that informs you that “The receiver doesn’t have a valid PayPal account.”  Maybe the party can help him correct that before the general election.

Kim Thatcher

There were bright spots. But perhaps the brightest was the nomination of Kim Thatcher for Secretary of State.

Thatcher is without doubt one of the shining stars of the Oregon legislature. In her tenures in the Oregon House and Senate, Thatcher has consistently demonstrated a commitment to constitutional liberties and an unflinching dedication to the Second Amendment. Few legislators have sponsored as many pro-gun bills as Kim. But, just as importantly, she has always taken principled stands with grace, dignity and character. And, given who her Democrat opponent will be, this race will certainly provide a striking contrast.

The Democrat nominee for Secretary of State won, as many ultra leftist’s do. At the last minute, after it appeared her less radical opponent, Mark Hass, had won.

To describe her as a contrast to Kim Thatcher would be to redefine the term “understatement”.

While Thatcher is thoughtful and statesman like, Shemia Fagan is angry, volatile and rude. She wears her hatred for gun owners on her sleeve and was completely bankrolled by Oregon’s public employees unions.

The fact that the public employees own her was not lost even on Willamette Week, which typically can not find a candidate far enough to the left for their liking. During their endorsement process they wrote:

“The way Fagan entered the race, however, raises questions about how she would govern. She filed late, at the end of February, deciding to run only after former state Rep. Jennifer Williamson (D-Portland) dropped out on the eve of a WW story about her misuse of campaign funds.

Public employee unions went looking for a replacement for Williamson and found Fagan. When asked why public employee unions didn’t like Hass in WW’s endorsement interview, Fagan was uncharacteristically reticent. She would only say she was a longtime ally of labor.

To be sure, Fagan has the seal of approval from the left wing of her party, groups that often work in concert to achieve the greatest effect. She has the pro-choice forces and environmental lobby on her side. But two-thirds of the $175,000 in her campaign coffers so far come from the three major public employee unions. If she’s reluctant to be forthright about why she and not others was the recipient of such generosity, it calls into question her willingness to challenge public employees when she’s handed the authority to audit the state’s books.”

             

Even  far-left legislator Alissa Keny-Guyer was so offended by Fagan’s deceitful campaign tactics she distanced herself from Fagan saying “But I’ve been dismayed at the tactics used in your campaign, ESPECIALLY for someone running for a position overseeing election integrity and campaign finance.”

 

Shemia Fagan

 

Rarely have Oregon voters had a clearer choice for candidates. But this race is more than a choice between integrity and vulgarity, between principles and political payoffs. Remember, the Secretary of State is next in line if the governor leaves office. You will recall that is how we got saddled with Kate Brown in the first place.  If Brown were to be removed from office, as her predecessor was, the Secretary of State would be our new governor.

We have seen the power governors have in Oregon. Kate Brown, one of the most unpopular governors in America, who has built a career on being appointed to jobs she was not elected to, has proven how one person can crush an entire economy and enforce her dangerous will on the people.

If Shemia Fagan were to become the next Governor of Oregon, rest assured you would be reminiscing fondly for the days of Kate Brown.

Posted on

PRO-GUN LEGISLATOR SILENCED

02.21.19

 

House Rep Bill Post has been removed from the House Judiciary Committee. Post is one of the most committed pro-gun legislators in Oregon history. House Speaker Tina Kotek removed Post from the committee (the one that hears gun bills) for the crime of tweeting pro-gun messages on his Twitter account.

The Bloomberg funded anti-rights extremists considered his messages threats from “armed hate groups.” You simply cannot make up something that absurd.

This is a raw abuse of power at at time when the Democrats in the legislature are acting like abusive bullies and trying to make sure their behavior is concealed.

Please take a moment to contact Tina Kotek and express your outrage at these abuses.

Take action here. 

Posted on

“Republican” Introduces “Bump-Stock” Ban

02.11.19

House Rep Cheri Helt,  (R. District 54) rated “F” by Oregon Firearms Federation, has demonstrated her predictable ignorance and introduced a “bump-stock” ban.

You can see her proposed legislation here.

Use or transfer of a “bump-stock” will result in a $2000.00 fine.

The bill says : “Bump-fire stock” means a buttstock designed to be attached to a semiautomatic firearm with the effect of increasing the rate of fire achievable by the semiautomatic firearm to that of a fully automatic firearm by using the energy from the recoil of the firearm to generate reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger.”

Whatever you think of bump-stocks, any knowledgable gun owner knows that you can “bump-fire” a rifle with no modifications. And a skilled person can fire, with an unmodified gun, about as quickly as with a bump stock.

So will Helt be fining people for having good reflexes?

This pointless legislation is just one more attack on gun owners and accomplishes nothing but create another avenue for the state to get into your pocket.

It’s tiresome that legislators feel the need to write laws about things they don’t understand just to amp up their political correctness street cred.

Please sent Helt a message that you oppose this pointless waste of time and attempt to deprive law abiding Oregonians of their rights and property.

Posted on

The New Culture Of Sexual Harassment In Our State’s Capitol

10.27.17

As you no doubt know, pro-gun Republican Senator Jeff Kruse was recently stripped of all his committee assignments by anti-gun Democrat Senate President Peter Courtney.

For those who may not be too familiar with how our legislature operates, this punishment essentially makes Kruse incapable of having any influence on legislation, a job voters in his district have reelected him numerous times to do. 

The explanation for this unprecedented, and possibly career ending, punishment was an allegation by Democrat Senator Sara Gelser that Kruse had engaged in sexual harassment against her by what has been described as “non-sexual inappropriate touching.” Oh, yeah, and  Kruse also smokes in his office.

After this story started making the rounds, we posted a Facebook post that acknowledged that yes indeed, Kruse has smoked in his office. We have actually seen this transgression.

We also commented that if (as of now totally unproven) allegations that he was groping Sara Gelser were true, he might need an eye test. On Tuesday October 24th, we deleted that post after considering how it easily it could be construed to be an attack on Gelser’s appearance and how that was hardly the point.  Soon after, there were several media stories commenting on that post and stating how it simply proved that there is an ingrained culture of sexual harassment in Salem, and that we were essentially guilty of it ourselves.

So, now, (since the media considers our commentary newsworthy) we’d like to clarify and expand on those remarks.

First, it’s important to note that Gelser claims that Kruse’s “inappropriate ” touching has been going on, literally, for years. But as far as we can tell, Gelser chose to keep this from the public until she climbed on the Hollywood Hashtag bandwagon following the revelations that a powerful, millionaire, Democrat donor and movie producer was abusing, harassing and allegedly raping young and aspiring starlets.

That, of course, would be Harvey Weinstein, a man who has publicly stated that he HATES guns and promised to singlehandedly “take down” the NRA. Oh, and he also produced such anti-gun classics as  “Kill Bill.” As stated, Weinstein is a big donor to Democrats. In the past he sent money to Oregon Democrats.

None of Weinstein’s crimes and disgusting behavior were any secret in Hollywood. They were, of course, kept secret from the public by the mainstream, liberal dominated, media who also knew about his actions but spiked stories, because, well that’s what the left does for each other.

After the revelations were made public, numerous actresses who had been assaulted or otherwise abused by Weinstein started a Twitter campaign to let the world know what they all knew, or had experienced themselves, and kept silent about for years. It was then, and only then, that Gelser decided to join the chorus with her own Tweet. The implication was clear. Although at first she would not name names, she soon made it known that is was Kruse she was accusing.

As far as we can tell, most, or at least many, of the transgressions Gelser has accused Kruse of have taken place on the Senate Floor. It is hard to imagine a more public, populated and videotaped place on Earth.  Not only can anyone watch the proceedings on any computer, but the galleries above the chamber provide a bird’s eye view for any member of the public who choses to go there.

In this forum, surrounded by Senators, staff, reporters, police, the public and constant video surveillance, is where Kruse’s alleged outrageous behavior took place….for years. Of course, sitting at the front of this august chamber, high above the floor, with possibly the best view of all, stands the man who stripped Kruse of his committee assignments, Senate President Peter Courtney, who like so many others within spitting distance of the accused…saw nothing, for years. It’s all rather remarkable.

Now in the wake of Gelser’s accusations, the media is publishing quotes from other women (many unnamed) who work in the Capitol in one capacity or another. They include legislators and lobbyists.  There is common agreement that there is a pervasive atmosphere of “good old boy” sexual harassment and bad behavior. It’s everywhere, and women there have been too afraid of a negative impact on their careers to talk about it before. 

Clearly, politics under the dome in Salem is a damn hostile place for a woman. It’s a wonder they are willing to work there at all given how little opportunity they have.

So it really is hard to understand how we have a female governor, our last two Secretaries of State have been women and the Speaker of the House is a woman.

Almost 30% of all Senators are women. 35% of Democrat Senators are women. 22 of 60 House reps (or over 36 %) are women .

Over 54% of Democrat House members are women. (19 of 35)

As expected, Governor Brown issued a statement about inappropriate touching saying it was “unacceptable.”

Kate apparently does not hold herself to the same standard. We have it on good authority that Kate is not very close to Sheriff Glenn Palmer.

Kate Brown Getting Too Close to Sheriff Glenn Palmer
Kate Brown Inappropriately Touching Sheriff Glenn Palmer

Women hold positions of enormous power in Oregon, and Sara Gelser is one of them.

Gelser is no shrinking violet. She is an affluent, powerful member of the Senate who has no qualms about using slash and burn campaign tactics, including lying about her opponents supporters to get elected. She is a member of the ruling party. And yet..

Gelser alleges that Kruse’s inappropriate behavior began in 2011. That is 5 years before she made any official complaint. 5 lonely years of hell. But Gelser did not even get elected to the Senate until 2015. She and Kruse never served in the House together. When she was elected to the House for the first time, Kruse had already moved onto the Senate.  So apparently, Kruse was making his way over to the House to touch her for years. And no one noticed that either.

House Speaker Tina Kotek’s legislative biography says “In 2013, Tina became the first openly lesbian speaker of any state house in the nation.”  So Gelser served in the House under a lesbian woman for two years without mentioning to this powerful and very liberal person that a conservative Senator was coming over to their chamber to harass her.

(If you have any doubts about Kotek’s power and her willingness to exercise it, try being a pro-gun House Democrat. Sooner or later you will be neutered and groveling and voting for bills you oppose lest you face her wrath.)

During the years Jeff Kruse forced his unwanted attentions on her, Gelser either suffered in silence or, after 5 years, quietly asked others to intercede on her part. She never loudly and publicly rebuked him. She never slapped him, pushed him away or told him to leave his hands off her.

Former Democrat Senator Jackie Dingfelder also claims that Kruse “placed his hand on her back in an inappropriate way during a committee hearing in 2011 or 2012.” But Dingfelder said “…when Kruse placed his hand on her back she was clear with him that his touching was unwanted. She confronted Kruse then and there. ‘I said, ‘Jeff, don’t do that. That’s inappropriate. Don’t ever do that again.’ And he never did,’ she said.”

Apparently, this is the kind of complex verbal judo Gelser is incapable of.

Why?

Kruse has no power over her. He is not her boss, he is not her superior. He is in the minority party and, in many cases his vote, as a conservative, does not even matter. And where were all the male Democrat Senators while this unacceptable behavior was taking place? Surely such champions of women’s rights as Michel Dembrow and Floyd Prozanski would have leapt to her defense even if she was too intimated to do it herself, there on the Senate floor under the watchful eyes of thousands. Surely Mark Haas or Rod Monroe would have never stood for that. Where was Lew Fredrick and James Manning? Where the hell was “eye in the sky” Peter Courtney? This was going on for years. And if Gelser’s allegations are true, there were no real Democrat men in the House in the time she served there either.

Can anyone imagine what would happen to any man who inappropriately put his hands on Democrat Senator Betsy Johnson? He’d quickly find a walking cane coming down on his head. And Betsy doesn’t get around quite as fast as Sara these days.

So here’s the thing. There are three possibilities.

1) Jeff Kruse did what he is accused and no one except Gelser and Ginny Burdick noticed. If so he should change his name to Houdini.

2) Lots of people knew what he was doing but it was never caught on video and no one, except Burdick, (if you believe her) stepped up and confronted him.

3) Gelser is a disingenuous and opportunistic fabricator with a political agenda.

If it was number 2, then the entire Democrat  Caucus is no better than all the Hollywood types who went along to get along with the Weinstein machine. And they are all cowards.

But no matter what, it is still an outrage for Gelser to attempt to associate whatever she alleges Kruse did with the fate of countless dewey eyed ingenues who just got off the bus from Peoria and fell into the clutches of the pig Weinstein in hopes of scoring a walk-on part.

Gelser is not some kid whose dreams of being on the big screen let her discard her ethics and morals or some innocent aspiring starlet who found herself locked in a hotel room with a raping dirtbag.

She is an aggressive, accomplished, powerful woman who claims to have been the “victim” of someone who had NO power over her…for years.

She is part of the cabal of anti-gun feminists who would much rather perpetuate the entrepreneurial victimhood of women than to ever encourage them to stand up for themselves and have the means to do it. She has advanced her own career while voting to make sure that the most vulnerable among us are denied the right to protect themselves and she has timed her accusations to deflect the reality that a massive donor to the causes she supports has finally been exposed to the public in spite of years of efforts by the media to protect him.

It’s understandable that the mainstream media would use our comments to imply that  we are part of some mass movement to denigrate and belittle women. A quick review of our campaign contributions will make clear that we have spent thousands to support female candidates.  For Gelser to imply that she is in the same boat as some kid with stars in her eyes who is abused by powerful man who controls her future is absurd. 

When a Republican House Rep was discovered to have taken advantage of a young female subordinate, he was rightfully driven from office. We strongly supported that action. Women (and men who are harassed  by powerful women…see “Amanda Marshall”)  should never be subject to any kind of improper behavior by someone with power over them.

Sorry Sara. You don’t qualify.