RESIDENTS RALLY AGAINST PROPOSED SKI RESORT

A group of Cache Valley residents are fighting a proposed ski resort east of Richmond at the mouth of Cherry Creek Canyon. David Chadwick and Logan Checketts presented their plans for the 160-acre Rainey Ranch Ski Resort at the March 4, 2010, [...]]]> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

We’re joined in the first hour with Cache Republican Party Chairman David James to discuss all things Bennett, Obama, and TEA Party.  David and I have agreed to not argue (too much) this time.

And in the second hour, as promised, we will speak with Chis Cocola, former Congressman and President/CEO of Club for Growth, who [...]]]> Tonight:

We’re joined in the first hour with Cache Republican Party Chairman David James to discuss all things Bennett, Obama, and TEA Party.  David and I have agreed to not argue (too much) this time.

And in the second hour, as promised, we will speak with Chis Cocola, former Congressman and President/CEO of Club for Growth, who are behind the Stop Bob Bennett campaign and TV ad running here in Utah’s Senate Race.

We’ll find out what Club for Growth is all about, and why they decided to make the Utah Senate race a focus of their 2010 campaign.

Bring the popcorn, this should be good. (I’m surrounded by conservatives!!!)

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

Here are some facts:

HB 150 is designed to give law enforcement a technological tool to investigate not only sex offenses against children but also child kidnapping and stalking activity. Criminals have expanded their criminal activities with technology (text messaging, emails, access to internet) and it is important to [...]]]> Some industrial grade turd-polishing from the Senate Site:

Here are some facts:

HB 150 is designed to give law enforcement a technological tool to investigate not only sex offenses against children but also child kidnapping and stalking activity. Criminals have expanded their criminal activities with technology (text messaging, emails, access to internet) and it is important to expand law enforcement’s ability likewise to include electronic communication devices such as cell phones as well as being able to trace email addresses.

Great.  Lets save the children:

HB 150 does not violate the Fourth Amendment. The bill does not go after content. It only covers contact information such as name, phone number, email address, bank account identifiers and location of suspected offenders (of the three listed crimes: sex offenses against a child, kidnapping of a child, and stalking). The electronic sources being used are cell phones, smart phones, PDA’s and email addresses.

I’m pretty sure this information is already available to the AG via the PATRIOT ACT.  He would just have to wait longer.  Due process sucks.

18 U.S.C. § 2703(c)(2) lists the categories of basic subscriber information:

(A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number)[.]

In general, the items in this list relate to the identity of a subscriber, his relationship with his service provider, and his basic session connection records. This list does not include other, more extensive transaction-related records, such as logging information revealing the e-mail addresses of persons with whom a customer corresponded during a prior session. The PATRIOT Act enhanced the categories of basic subscriber information in three respects. See PATRIOT Act § 210, 115 Stat. 272, 283 (2001). It added “records of session times and durations,” as well as “any temporarily assigned network address” to 18 U.S.C. § 2703(c)(2). In the Internet context, these records include the IP address assigned by an Internet service provider to a customer for a particular session. They also include other information relating to account access, such as the originating telephone number for dial-up Internet access or the IP address of a user accessing an account over the Internet. In addition, the PATRIOT Act added to this list of subscriber information the “means and source of payment” that a customer uses to pay for an account, “including any credit card or bank account number.”  From here:  http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/s&smanual2002.html#_IIIC_

So, the truth is:  it does violate the American version of  the Fourth Amendment, but not the PATRIOT ACT version of the Fourth Amendment.

Additional content can only be obtained only through court orders/warrants.

Sooo, it isn’t surveillance if they don’t know what we are saying?

As an intelligence-gathering phenomenon, an analyst with an MIT degree in algorithms would rather have 50 pages of who called who than 50 hours of actual conversation. Think about conversations with friends, husbands, wives. That raw information doesn’t mean anything. But if there’s a pattern of 30 phone calls over the course of a day, that can mean a lot. It’s a much simpler algorithm.”  From here:  http://www.antiwar.com/orig/ketcham.php

Debatable.

Other states that have similar laws in place: Florida, Idaho, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, North Dakota, Kentucky, Virginia, and Wyoming.

=  All the cool kids are doin’ it.

Most of the major providers of electronic services have service contracts advising customers that the providers will cooperate with law enforcement in criminal investigations.

Hint:  Criminal investigations usually require WARRANTS, upon oath and affirmation (except Utah).

Every federal court that has addressed this topic has ruled that subscriber information to an internet provider is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. The internet provider is a third party and there is no legitimate expectation of privacy in non-content information

Since when does bank account information not considered content?  Log in/ off times not content?  Definition of content:

(A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number)[.]

Thanks Draxler and Hillyard.  Nice ‘conservative’ vote.

We’ll find out what Club for Growth is all about, and why they decided to make the Utah Senate race [...]]]> Special guest for tonight’s 5 o’clock hour will be Chis Cocola, former Congressman and President/CEO of Club for Growth, who are behind the Stop Bob Bennett campaign and TV ad running here in Utah’s Senate Race.

We’ll find out what Club for Growth is all about, and why they decided to make the Utah Senate race a focus of their 2010 campaign.

Bring the popcorn, this should be good.

Anyway…

Tonight:

We’re going 8-bit with the theme music.  We do this to keep ourselves sharp, cutting edge, and proven geeks.

It’s time for another Mero Moment.  Not sure what Paul has chosen [...]]]> Just realized the last few of these “Tonight on…” posts I had dated 2/3, 2/4, etc.  So much for my grasp of the basic calendar, huh?

Anyway…

Tonight:

We’re going 8-bit with the theme music.  We do this to keep ourselves sharp, cutting edge, and proven geeks.

It’s time for another Mero Moment.  Not sure what Paul has chosen to muse upon today, but rest assured it will be some right wing extremist stuff!  (Just kidding… Paul’s usually pretty reasonable, and always good for sparking discussion.)

Mark Shurtleff’s hollowing out of the 4th amendment in seeking access to your email, phone calls, and library card history without a shred of court oversight sailed through the Utah house and senate without much of a peep.  We’ll say goodbye to “getting a warrant” and hello to “Utah’s Patriot Act,” and get your thoughts on the issue.

And in what may be our final FTP Legislative Limelight, we’ll hear from the lawmakers themselves on what goes on these final few days of the 2010 legislative session.

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

This is really frustrating.

Another person has written yet another editorial to the Herald Journal complaining about the behavior of Aggie fans in the Spectrum.  The most recent editorial was by Nick Eastmond, who is apparently a professor on campus.

There have only been three editorials (by my count) complaining of [...]]]> Note: this was originally published at blog.tomgrover.net

This is really frustrating.

Another person has written yet another editorial to the Herald Journal complaining about the behavior of Aggie fans in the Spectrum.  The most recent editorial was by Nick Eastmond, who is apparently a professor on campus.

There have only been three editorials (by my count) complaining of fan behavior in the Spectrum and all three editorials have a common theme- they fundamentally do not understand college basketball.  Mr. Eastmond, for example, concedes that he is “not an avid basketball fan.”  Nonetheless, the editorial seems to know what an appropriate college basketball atmosphere is.

I am sure that Mr. Eastmond means well in his criticism, however, I feel that I must respond to the inaccuracies in his editorial.

The editorial begins by rebutting an earlier Herald Journal editorial this way:

The gist of the article was: It’s OK for spectators to belittle and insult their opponents because (1) that’s the way basketball is played in other places; (2) our coach is “on board” with that; and (3) our fans can make a distinction between behavior in the Spectrum and the real world, where it implied that such behavior would be unacceptable.

This is not an accurate representation of the Herald Journal editorial or the letters that were written in support of the Spectrum crowd.  The Herald Journal did not argue that the Spectrum fans behavior was acceptable because “because that’s the way basketball is played in other places.”  Far from it.  The Herald Journal correctly contrasted the behavior in the Spectrum from that which is found elsewhere:

USU fans are generally pretty tame in terms of their language. While other college basketball fans around the country sport chants that are vulgar and profane, Aggie fans’ chants are — while loud and structured — mild. Fans don’t throw objects onto the court or at players or officials. None of the organized chants include swear words. And there is rarely, if ever, violence at the Spectrum.

Simply put, the Herald Journal correctly noted that Aggie fans are less vulgar but louder and more organized than then norm in college basketball.  That is very different than saying it’s ok because everyone else does it.  Frankly, it’s pretty awesome that our crowd is both louder and less vulgar.  We should all be proud of that.

I don’t take exception with the accuracy of the statement that the crowd is loud because Stew encourages it.  This is absolutely true.

The editorial’s third contention implies that the Herald Journal advocates compartmentalization of ethics.   Again, this is not what the Herald Journal argued.  This comes down to an unfamiliarity with college basketball.  Here is what the Herald Journal argued:

In general, student fans know the difference between game-day behavior and everyday behavior. The trademarked cheers and heckling start when they enter the Spectrum and end when they leave the Spectrum.

This is not arguing that different ethics are appropriate for the Spectrum.  It’s arguing that we behave differently in different venues.  The way you behave at a BBQ, for example, is different than how you behave at Church.

Building on this theme, the editorial compares college basketball to the Winter Olympics:

Let me ask you: We just finished with the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, Canada. Would this kind of behavior be acceptable at the Olympics, winter or summer? Is that the kind of competition you would want American athletes to be part of? If American fans harassed teams from other countries, is that something you would want (possibly it would increase our athletes’ chances of winning)?

Mr. Eastmond assumes that heckling and racous behavior is inherently inappropriate. As I noted previously, this is completely false.  Our opponents love the hostility in the Spectrum.  Year after year our opponents lavish praise upon the same fans that heckle them.

Our opponents praise the Spectrum and Aggie fans because they understand what the editorial doesn’t- that heckling, loud crowds and organized chants make for great environments for both teams.  Each opponent would love nothing more than the glory of being the 14th team out of nearly 200 to beat Stew Morrill in Logan.  What a huge honor that will be!

I only included a few quotes in my letter to the Herald Journal because I was limited to 450 words, but believe me, there is a limitless supply of quotes by the opposition of how much they love the Spectrum.  For many players, the chance to win in Logan is the highlight of their season.

Mr. Eastmond tells the unfortunate story of a graduate student who sat behind the visitors bench and was heckled:

I brought this topic up in a class I taught on campus yesterday and heard sentiments worth repeating. (These were graduate students, not undergrads). One student from another country told how he had been invited to attend an Aggie basketball game, with tickets supplied by a Canadian Christian university. Because of the generosity of the hosts, he had sat in their section. He felt that the Aggie fan behavior directed toward him was aggressive, insulting and offensive, just because of where he was sitting.

This is truly unfortunate.  If it really is common place, it needs to stop. However, to impute the behavior of one or two people on 10,270 is ludicrous.  Though the visiting team was generous, this was probably not fair to the student to sit him behind the bench.  It is probable that this would have happened at any venue in America.  At the very least, the grad student should have been given a warning that it was a possibility.

Finally, the editorial wraps up with the “won’t someone puh-leeze think of the children” argument:

The second [foreign graduate student] recounted how he had taken one of his children to a game and later, when playing a game of basketball with the child, had to correct the language to state emphatically that “you suck” and “stupid” were not appropriate language on a neighborhood basketball court.

If you really think that the non-vulgar crowd at the Spectrum has the potential to corrupt your kids, you are incredibly naive.  First, your kids hear things that are ten times worse every day at school.  Hell, it might even be your kid that’s saying the stuff that’s ten times worse!  If you are worried about your child being corrupted by vulgar influences, the Spectrum really ought to be somewhere like #459 on your list.

Finally, it is not the duty of the entire world to conform their public behavior to the particular preferences of your individual parenting.  Indeed, there is an old Buddhist saying which is an appropriate response to the editorial’s “think of the children” argument:

Instead of avoiding the pain of stepping on thorns and pebbles by paving the entire planet with a smooth and soft surface, one can instead put on shoes.

In other words, if in public, you see behavior that you don’t think your kids should emulate, use the opportunity to be a parent and teach your kids.  Use it as a teaching moment.  Explain to them that in your family you don’t say “you suck” or “stupid” and why. Explain that how you behave in your family is different than how college students behave at Aggie games.

Anyway, my fear with these people remains the same. That we have a bunch of people making public complaints about something that they don’t know anything about.  My fear is that the officials at USU would capitulate to this handful of individuals and ruin something that is really special and unique.

Finally, it’s astounding to me that in one of the greatest seasons of Aggie basketball, there are still people who manage to hone in on negativity.  Seriously, that’s ridiculous!  We are Conference Champions! Relax and enjoy the ride!  Seasons like this are uncommon!

GO AGGIES!

Probably the most notable and oft sited myth stems from the [...]]]> Marijuana: From Reefer Madness to Fast Times at Ridgemont High, it is imbedded in our culture and has come to mean different things to different people. However most treatment of Marijuana, Hemp or just plain THC seems at least loosely entrenched in myth and emotion.

Probably the most notable and oft sited myth stems from the notion that Marijuana is particularly and unreasonably harmful to one’s health and to society in general. By comparison to alcohol (black marketing aside) the harm Pot causes to society, the physical body or state of mind is minimal.

Reefer even holds real medicinal value. This is not a myth revealed by a grassroots movement to pervasively bring about legalization through some backdoor. Marijuana truly IS useful in treating side-effects associated with certain cancer or tumor treatments. It holds value as a pain killer. As a non-physically addictive psychotropic it can be used as a treatment for depression or anxiety disorders. It reduces symptoms of conditions such as Glaucoma. In fact, evidence exists that Pot smokers tend not to get cancers of ANY kind.

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/142271/smoking_marijuana_does_not_cause_lung_cancer/

One common myth-based argument against its legalization is the consideration of Marijuana as a ‘gateway’ drug that leads to other MORE harmful behaviors. While there is truth that Pot can lead to other behaviors, I postulate that it’s only a ‘gateway’ drug BECAUSE it’s illegal. Once one crosses the line into illicit drug activity, the barriers to cocaine, meth, LSD and heroin break down. If MJ were off the list of illicit drugs, the gateway effect would largely subside.  The ‘gateway drug’ myth is hardly a legitimate argument for keeping Weed illegal.

On the other hand, advocates often perpetuate the myth that legalization of Marijuana will alleviate society of all ills associated with the substance.  I think hasty legalization would bring with it a certain set of societal ills some old and some new. I think we are far from prepared for the consequences of all out legalization.

Perhaps the greatest burden to our society brought on by Marijuana stems from black market sales and all obvious associated pitfalls therein. One hurdle to overcome before legalization can realistically occur is the handling of Pot as a free-market competition and tax issue. Marijuana is very easy to grow. It would be relatively easy for a Weed farmer to grow enough Pot to supply the entire neighborhood whereas  a brewer of beer would have to set up quite an operation to supply large portions of a population. By comparison to sharing one’s latest crop of tomatoes and peppers from the garden for a pittance at the Gardner’s Market, one could make a decent living growing only Weed in a small room or back yard lending allure to black market tax evasion made easier by society-wide acceptance of use.

Legit entrepreneurs would have to face regulations and liabilities similar to those faced by distillers of alcoholic beverages but bootleggers might undermine the finer points of free-market treatment for THC with little effort. If growing Weed is legalized without complicated regulation, the market remains underground and this is a bad thing.

Perhaps regulation could involve offering grow permits for a fee per plant, per year. To reduce the enticement for bootlegging, stiff penalties for growing without a permit and for black market sales are in order.

Regardless, with legalization the ATF becomes the ATMF or some such acronym inclusive of  THC representation and none of it will happen until the challenges associated with sobriety measurement are met. It’s difficult now to chemically detect how much time has passed since THC ingestion by an individual though technology is getting better. This has relevance to DUI enforcement and workplace management.

In conclusion, my experience has been that realism lacks from the perspectives of each side of the Marijuana legalization movement.  Once the true value associated with this plant is realized and once the true pitfalls associated with a Libertarian-style free-for-all on the substance are acknowledged, Prohibition of THC and Hemp as marketable products might find its end.

Club for Growth has moved into Utah in the hopes of unseating Senator Bob Bennett (that liberal!).  Tyler, Jon and I will will discuss what drives this movement.  Has Bob Bennett betrayed his ideology, or is this just a band wagon attached to a purity test that will boost Sam Granato’s chances?  We’ll discuss.

And in [...]]]> Tonight:

Club for Growth has moved into Utah in the hopes of unseating Senator Bob Bennett (that liberal!).  Tyler, Jon and I will will discuss what drives this movement.  Has Bob Bennett betrayed his ideology, or is this just a band wagon attached to a purity test that will boost Sam Granato’s chances?  We’ll discuss.

And in one of our last few (sniff!) Legislative Limelights, we’ll speak to Senator Allen Christensen (District 19) about the $1 increase to the state’s cigarette tax.  Christensen has fought for this two years running, and it looks like this year, it’s a go.  We’ll hear the latest from the Senator himself at 5.

We’ll also tackle health care, a visit from the Deputy Agriculture Secretary, and Scott Matheson Jr.’s [Jim's Bro] appointment to [insert big important legal title] by President Obama.

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

“Hella.”  A movement actually exists to get this introduced into the official English lexicon to define something that is “really, really, big.”  We’ll discuss.

And we were emailed an announcement that a local organization plans to push Logan City to adopt a non-discrimination ordinance.  Mormons for Equality and Social Justice (MESJ) would like to see the [...]]]> Tonight:

“Hella.”  A movement actually exists to get this introduced into the official English lexicon to define something that is “really, really, big.”  We’ll discuss.

And we were emailed an announcement that a local organization plans to push Logan City to adopt a non-discrimination ordinance.  Mormons for Equality and Social Justice (MESJ) would like to see the city adopt protections for residents against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in housing and employment.  The LDS church has endorsed such city based efforts.  What do you think?

And Mark Shurtleff’s HB 150 is being criticized as unconstitutional, and (by me) really, really stupid.  We’ll discuss the why’s and the why not’s, and ask where all the Defenders of the Constitution scuttled off to on this one… (PAGING CARL WIMMER!  PAGING CARL WIMMER!).

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

Via “Mark Shurtleff for Senate 2010″ on Facebook:

Logan City Police Chief Gary R. Jensen is still residing in Farmington, waiting to for his home to sell before moving to Logan officially.  Local news story reports a tally of 15,000 miles, and $2,000 in fuel costs.  Issue,  non issue?  We report, you decide.

Tuesday means it’s Mero Moment time, with the latest musings from [...]]]> Tonight:

Logan City Police Chief Gary R. Jensen is still residing in Farmington, waiting to for his home to sell before moving to Logan officially.  Local news story reports a tally of 15,000 miles, and $2,000 in fuel costs.  Issue,  non issue?  We report, you decide.

Tuesday means it’s Mero Moment time, with the latest musings from uber-conservative think tank president Paul Mero.  Today Paul wants to talk “Undercover Boss.”  Always a good time when Sutherland Institute goes “infotainment.”  Not one to miss.

And continuing our FTP Legislative Limelight (Tues and Thurs, 5pm), we’ll have another special guest from Capitol Hill to fill us in on the latest lawmaking festivities from lawmakers themselves.  Brought to you by Ric Cantrell, The Senate Site, and my iPhone Facebook App.

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9949293

Jon has noticed a frightening (Geek!) trend in Cache Valley, and has a special PSA announcement for fellow (Geeks!) residents.

A report on child pornography arrests in Utah has been released by the Attorney General’s office.  The results are more than a little troubling.  What gives?  We’ll try to find out.

Forging onward with our Legislative Limelight [...]]]> Tonight:

Jon has noticed a frightening (Geek!) trend in Cache Valley, and has a special PSA announcement for fellow (Geeks!) residents.

A report on child pornography arrests in Utah has been released by the Attorney General’s office.  The results are more than a little troubling.  What gives?  We’ll try to find out.

Forging onward with our Legislative Limelight series, we’ll speak to the latest involuntary victim, er… guest legislator on the latest goings on on the Hill.  Was there arm wrestling?  Rock/paper/scissors for who gets to pass their bill?  We’ll find out.  As always, who the guest is remains a mystery until closer to 5, but that’s what makes this exciting!

This an more, tonight at 4.  (<—- rhymes!)

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.

A lot to discuss from today’s legislative festivities. Retirement reform, using school trust funds for suing the Fed’s, a really, really, really strange conversation between Reps. Herrod and Seegmiller on parents smoking in cars (which Tyler and I may just re-enact for your entertainment), and much, much more. What are you hearing that [...]]]> Tonight:

A lot to discuss from today’s legislative festivities. Retirement reform, using school trust funds for suing the Fed’s, a really, really, really strange conversation between Reps. Herrod and Seegmiller on parents smoking in cars (which Tyler and I may just re-enact for your entertainment), and much, much more. What are you hearing that we might be missing?

And live, in studio, we’ll welcome members of Sky Views “We the People” team. What is that?  Read on:

We the People the Citizen and the Constitution High School Level Simulated Congressional Hearings is a federally sponsored program for students. Those at the High School level have the opportunity to compete for district, state, and then national competitions. For the fourth year running, Sky View’s team has taken the …state title, meaning that the team proceeds onto the national level in Washington D.C.

They are fundraising for the trip.  We’ll get the deets.

And finally, Attorney General Mark Shurtleff wants to sniff through your email without a warrant or even a hint of judicial review, anytime he needs to.  We’ll discuss the AG’s assault on the 4th amendment in a segment we’ve loving titled “Thank You, Patriot Act!”

Tune in, or Log in.

Your calls are welcome.

Podcasts of this and previous shows are available here.