Eleven years ago, America was the victim of the most brutal terrorist attack in history. Nearly 3,000 men, women, and children, were taken from us by “faceless cowards”, who crashed jumbo jets into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and western Pennsylvania (which did not meet its intended target thanks to the heroism of the passengers on board the hijacked United 93.) We mourned as a nation then, and we still do today, as the peaceful world many of us knew gave way to a world of war, fear, and resolve. As for the area where those 110-story buildings once...Read More
Author: John McKenna
The Hoosier State recently made headlines when Governor Mitch Daniels made Indiana the first “Right-to-Work” state in a decade and the 23rd state in the country to enact this legislation. Fighting off liberal special interest groups and a Democrat caucus that tried use the disgusting Wisconsin walk-out tactic to kill the bill, Governor Daniels showed the political courage necessary to move his state forward, giving the state’s workers the opportunity to choose the unions they want to associate with. Inspired by this, I decided to try to attempt the impossible: convincing my local legislators to take up the cause of Right-to-Work for our own state, hopefully joining Indiana and the other 22 states that have chosen freedom over the iron fist of big labor. Unfortunately, I live in ultra-liberal Massachusetts, where anything that hurts big labor’s grip on power is met with hostility by the unions and the politicians that unashamedly show off their union connections. Regardless, I still went ahead and wrote a letter detailing my stance on the issue, addressing my representatives as well as the leadership of both parties in both the House and Senate: January 28, 2012 To Whom It May Concern, As I am sure you are well aware, Governor Mitch Daniels in Indiana has just succeeded in making Indiana the newest “Right to Work” state in a decade. Governor Daniels did this because he was aware that “Right...Read More
Even though all of last Tuesday’s attention was focused on New Hampshire’s primary, there was a race going on in my State Senate district in Boston, Massachusetts. Knowing full well that the race was probably one Democrat running unopposed (and I was right), I still went to vote and perform my civic duty. Arriving at the polling station, I walked up to the registration table and gave my name and address. I had my wallet in hand, expecting to show some evidence that I was who I said I was, but after the simple name-giving, I was handed a ballot and sent on my way. This worried me. But rather than think about what goofy name I was going to write-in, in lieu of wasting a vote on the next union-lackey of a public official (this is Massachusetts after all), I couldn’t stop thinking that there was something awfully wrong about this scenario. Some in my state are fighting to put a Voter ID referendum on the ballot in 2012 , which I intend to support. But even without such a law on the books, voters should still need to show some evidence that they are who they say they are (a utility receipt or a rent receipt would suffice). I could’ve walked in and said I was my 98-year-old grandfather — with whom I share a common address — and they would’ve...Read More
When the Voting Rights Act was signed into law in 1965, it was considered a cornerstone bill for civil rights. After all, what wasn’t to like? Minorities would now be equally represented in government, they could vote without having to pay a ridiculous poll tax or take a literacy test, and institutional racism was essentially ended. At least that was what I originally thought, until I saw how the Department of Justice has interpreted the VRA in a recent case, in which the election procedures of Kingston, North Carolina were declared unconstitutional. Since Kingston is a community covered under Section 5 of the VRA – which mandates that areas with a history of voter discrimination must pre-clear any changes in election laws with the Justice Department – the measure was brought forth as a discriminatory case before the Department of Justice by the ACLU, in defense of blacks and minorities. The judge ruled that holding non-partisan local elections was unconstitutional because it would “likely reduce the ability of blacks to elect candidates of choice.” Just try to wrap your head around that for a second. This measure is incredibly insulting to the intelligence of the minority voter. According to the court, it is critical for minorities to know what party their candidate belongs to; otherwise, they can’t vote without fear of voting for the wrong person. The VRA ensures that...Read More
Get Our Newsletter
Join our mailing list to get breaking news delivered to your inbox.