We are the drain the swamp people

The communication set forth below is from a fine organization, one of the good guys. They are admitting to, even extolling certain monitoring data gathering capabilities. Nevertheless we are disturbed by the concept. WE HAVE NO DOUBT other good guys are/will be using it including the Trump campaign.  If they can do it anyone can make the same data buy and of course BIG GOV probably has it as well.  Read the communication and ponder the implications yourself.  We have some comments that follow it. Your comments, as always are encouraged.

V’PAC comments and questions (not necessarily conclusions on our part):

Note that what the CV article above brags about involves smart cell phones which comprise the majority of cell phones in use (and maybe all cell phone use is subject to some such “data mining? ). The assignee (you) of a cell phone number can be determined, including your address and an extensive dossier of activities and (at least imputed) contacts based on geography not to mention the records of phone dials.

Some assumptions:

Cell phones are now potentially if not default virtual big-government / big-brother/ corporate monster GPS “ankle” monitors capable of monitoring your activities whereabouts, internet and phone contacts minute by minute.

Whether or not you have geo-specific apps operating on your phone the data reflecting your geographical associations via cell tower operations are still monitored by BIG CELL and becomes available to others.

Because the air-wave frequencies cell phone operations rely on are assigned/ licensed the authority exists to regulate.

This is far worse than robo calls as robo calls can be only an irritant providing data only when you specifically engage a call.

Policy considerations for discussion:

A lot of apps gather this data even though they do not need this for app-specific operations.  It is an add-on that they may or may not insist on in order for you to use their product — and perhaps artificially downgrading service for those who opt out of geo-location, if they offer such an opt-out.  This is done in order to establish a profit center of marketing and may be the reason in some cases for “free” apps.

Liberal agitators use this information and may have, or as a matter of course do have, an inside track to data metrics that others do not.

We understand the argument that such ilk could use the data to target not only their own activists but suppress conservatives with false information.

We understand the argument that conservatives must be competitive, use modern low cost tools, and that this may offer opportunities not otherwise available at a cost that can be met to reach conservatives and keep them informed and motivated.

We also understand that even some liberals oppose this sort of monitoring, of default data collection and even the propriety of opt-in as an affront to the security of the individual because opt-in can be so easily manipulated.

We believe opt-in/ opt-out provisions are often too vague and cumbersome and that normally any geo-data identifiable to the phone and therefore the owner should have opt-in /opt-out capabilities prominently and continuously available as a simple toggle on/off on every screen, or on an easily accessible pull down window with such availability displayed on each screen.

We believe restrictions on the use or trade of such data are properly imposed as a matter of protecting civil liberties and the security of the person, protecting anonymity is a competing social good that deserves presumptive consideration. If some company wants a dossier they can sit with the customer or ask them to fill out a survey.  What is being done now surreptitiously and without regulation is data mining for profiling and monitoring of activities as a business in and of itself.

As an adjunct to appropriate regulation certification agencies should be created (private) to inform and insure that no data is sold and to advice cell-phone users of compliance by all apps downloaded to the phone.

One or another policy consideration above might obviate another.

R Mall

0

0

Eco-tsar Greta

Would there be an adult in a Democrat’s cabinet?

Would there at least be a normal child?

Off-loading the economy to a 16 year-old with mental disorders

Education policy will be submitted to a really screwed up 9-yr old

HERE’S MY FAVORITE EXCERPT FROM THE DEMS LGBTQ CONFABULOSITY … IT WAS CRAZY HORSE WARREN’S ANSWER TO 9 YEAR OLD SO-CALLED TRANSGENDER “JACOB”:   dlh  (in bold)

CNN Town Hall Applauds Jacob, ‘A 9-Year-Old Transgender American’ 

Jacob, a 9-year-old transgender, asks Sen. Elizabeth Warren what she will do so “kids like me feel safer in schools.”

“And here’s my plan, Jacob. I’m going to find just the right secretary of education, but here’s what I plan to do. I want to make sure that the person I think is the right secretary of education meets you and hears your story, and then I want you to tell me if you think that’s the right person, and then we’ll make the deal. Does that sound good?”      

Just yummy

0

0

Stop the Madness Rock Island County
When Sat, October 12, 12:30am – 1:30am
Where: 2401 4th Ave Rock Island Il (map)

Rock Island Republicans are calling on Rep. Cheri Bustos to “Stop the Madness” by dropping the impeachment inquiry against President Trump and get back to work for Illinois and 17th District. Bustos needs to hear that she works for all the people of her district not just hateful Democrats.

Iowa Trump supporters are invited to be there to lend support. Bustos office is in what was the Illinois Petroleum building (now an apartment building) just off the Rock Island Arsenal Bridge.

0

0

Temptress

• I used a plastic drinking straw today . . .
• and two weeks ago I entered a den of inequity — an air-conditioned fast food restaurant with plastic straws offering themselves for table dances
• REPENT YE SINNERS

Vatican Synod on Amazon Proposes Recognition of ‘Ecological Sins’ 

ROME — Participants in the Vatican synod on the Amazon region proposed adding “sins against the environment” to lists of traditionally recognized sins in their second day of discussions and deliberations.

Synod fathers called for an “ecological conversion” that would allow people to see “the gravity of sins against the environment as sins against God, against our neighbour, and against future generations,” Vatican News reported Wednesday.

“This would imply a need to produce and spread more widely a theological literature that would include ‘ecological sins’ alongside traditional sins,” the report stated.
The working document of the Amazon Synod frames the entire question of the Church’s renewal in the region in terms of the environment, proposing “New Paths for the Church and for an Integral Ecology.”

In order to be “ever more synodal,” the Church must listen “to the peoples and to the earth by coming into contact with the abundant reality of an Amazon full of life and wisdom but also of contrasts,” the text states.

“It continues with the cry that is provoked by destructive deforestation and extractivist activities and that demands an integral ecological conversion,” it says.
Again and again the document directs synod members to turn their attention to the cries of the earth and to “convert.”

“The aggression towards this vital zone of Mother Earth and its inhabitants threatens their subsistence, their culture and their spirituality,” it proclaims. “It also affects the life of all humanity, particularly the poor, the excluded, the marginalized, the persecuted. The present situation calls urgently for an integral ecological conversion.”

“The culture of the Amazon, which integrates human beings with nature, constitutes a benchmark for building a new paradigm of integral ecology,” it declares.

0

0

• Maybe Portes campaign Treasurer and long-time Democrat Op Betsy “Stonewall” Brandsgard knows something about counting problems?

Soooo he of formative years in Chicago Dan Portes has called for a recount of his 8 vote loss to Rawson in Tuesday’s Davenport Mayoral primary.  It is an absolute instinct among Democrats to keep counting until you win.

According to the article below he doesn’t expect the results to change but for posterity or something it must be verified.  We accept that but not totally at face value.

Third-place candidate Dan Portes is calling for a recount in Davenport’s mayoral primary

It is a hand count process and given the turnout it shouldn’t take very long.  Rawson, showing a touch of class said she would do the same thing. But then she is a Democrat as well.  Republicans tend to roll over it seems.

We forgot to mention prior to the election that Mary Elizabeth “Betsy” Brandsgard serves as Porte’s Campaign Treasurer —  she of long-time Democrat operative experience – going back to her days with Former (Democrat) Iowa Speaker of the House Bob Arnould, running Don Avenson’s gubernatorial campaign, and being a  common visage in Demo circles. Interesting in that she was a donor (small) to Rawson just two years ago.

0

0

Results of Davenport municipal primary

Precinct by precinct voting information is not available at this writing. When it is available an analysis of party strength  by registration in those precincts may lead to some conclusions.  Our initial comments are below the tabulated results from Scott County Auditor website.  Party identification of candidates for all area races including school board will be in a soon-to-be future post

Well the Quad City Chamber of Commerce must be sorely surprised, since it and so many of the cloth were the primary donors to candidate Portes. But you know the whole bi-state symbolism thing which is so much of Portes’ handler Victory Enterprise’s shtick (along with the Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce) just doesn’t seem to cut it politically, if it ever did.  Portes’ web page designed by “VE” is resplendent with the symbolism of what most should see is a bridge to Illinois politics.  Wow, what a great compelling idea, raise the specter of Illinois and all its rot. When will these “Quad-Citians” figure out that people want their streets fixed, here in a city in Iowa. The “joined by a river” symbolism just says — distraction, and I am not focused on you but elect me.

The “Chamber” people think they are all about good policy but they sure are at the trough for their versions of it  – financed by public / private partnerships,  TIFs , bond issues  – you name it, as long it is guaranteed with everybody else’s money they are champions of “free” enterprise.  It is often assumed that they are Republican, and there are some of a type,  but look who was their guy  – a Democrat hailing from Chicago.  Plenty of Republicans no doubt fell for the Chamber BS or also regrettably for Matson’s, Mr. Public Union.

The mayoral vote between number two Rawson and Portes was close – only 8 votes separated them – but with so little turn-out (9%)  and only 748 votes by absentee the chances of picking up the necessary votes in a recount does not seem all that likely when  you are up against another Democrat. It would seem one would just conjure up more votes  so it might turn into just a “spell” casting match. Besides, Democrats will be satisfied that they have the Mayor’s office either way now in that Rawson will be opposing fellow Democrat, the “anti-Trump and all who voted for him “Mr. Union” Mike Matson, who received 33% of the vote.

We really believe that if one of the two Republicans who ran – Duffy and Weber — had pursued Republican voters early on by aggressively identifying as such they could have been contenders given the six way split even though neither would have had much money.

Republicans should really have someone to support in the general election and we hope one of the two who ran or another prominent Republican serve in a write-in campaign role.  Mostly word-of mouth and social media. If anybody has some solid reasons not to we would like to convey them.

Oh well, other races are actually more important.  Comments on the city council outlook and others in the next post.

R Mall

0

0

While the primary election today will eliminate a few candidates (in particular for Mayor and three Alderman positions in Davenport) many of the municipal and some school board elections on November 5th in Scott County are probably already determined because so many of the elected positions did not have enough candidates to force an elimination or primary round or are unopposed.  It is too late to mount anything but a write-in campaign for unopposed positions or alternatives to the soon to be set field where only one political party is “represented”.

Today’s election and the general election on November 5th are  supposedly non-partisan so some might say Republicans or Democrats party operatives need not pursue encouraging or supporting candidates.  Davenport Democrats do not believe that so it is only true if Republicans do not mind having the city’s affairs governed by the competencies and predilections of Democrats (and the same for schools).

It might be said that the party registrations of the candidates will tend to follow the party registration of the governing unit as a whole. That may be true elsewhere except for  Davenport city and Davenport schools. Davenport has ten city council members (8 ward aldermen and 2 aldermen-at-large ) and a weak mayor who votes in the case of a tie. The current city line-up shows that seven of the aldermanic positions are held by Democrats three by Republicans and a no-party mayor. Seventy percent to thirty percent is not the party registration ratio quite yet.

The Alderman-at large positions will not change after the November election as there are but the two incumbents running for the two positions, one is Republican the other Democrat. Wards 1,2, 7 and 8 will be filled by Democrats as that is all that are running in those ward elections (barring a write-in vote by a Republican which is tough to win but should be helped).  Two are uncontested period and four uncontested by Republicans.

Davenport Wards 3, 4, 5, and 6 are contested. A Democrat holds the 3rd Ward and is running again but does not have a Republican opponent (unless the No-Party candidate ops to register as one).

Republican Ray Ambrose holds the 4th Ward and is running. Today’s primary could eliminate the two Republicans running, exalt them or provide a two-party contest next month. We hope Ambrose prevails.

Ward 5 is now held by Democrat Rawson who is running for mayor. It is possible a Republican could emerge there as 3 of the 6 running in the primary are Republican.

Ward 6 is contested with the incumbent a Democrat but the ward should be competitive so Republican challenger Jobgen can win and we of course hope he does.

Democrats look to hold six of the Davenport City Council positions even before today’s primary — as in Wards 1,2, (likely 3),  7, 8 and one of the at-large.  It would be a nice cap off for Democrats to have the mayoral position as well with the possibility of 7 even 8 of the council members if Republicans do not get out and vote.

The possibility of that mayoral cap to the Democrat council cake in Davenport brings up the involvement of the company Victory Enterprises on behalf of one of the leading Democrats in that race – Dan Portes.

The company has notoriously, scandalously if you ask us, received a huge share of Republican Party of Iowa related coffers over the years for its various electioneering enterprises. Its track-record with state-wide candidates includes Mark Jacobs who spent gobs of money with them and still lost with less that 17% of the primary vote in 2014. Their list of Iowa Presidential caucus candidates wannabees includes the now obscure with no wins places or shows in our memory. Any presumption about “VE” having their finger on the pulse of Republican voters might more accurately be thought of as bloodletting, with all the attendant beneficence. Local Republican candidates who contribute to the company’s bottom line should be embarrassed for their exercise of “fiscal discipline” in that it is just not that hard to save money elsewhere with excellent results.

The company’s reputation in some quarters of being a “Republican” consultancy is also tarnished by “VE’s” running or assisting in various tax and spend referendums and the like over the years. Its real consultancy it seems is with corporate big-government and spend-a-lot interests. Appropriately then it is involved as the campaign consultant to registered Democrat Chamber of Commerce guy Portes, he also of the registered Democrat Shawver spousalhood.  Together they are ACT Blue donors and through it a myriad of “progressive” causes and candidates. As we mentioned yesterday Portes has been a direct donor to the campaigns of Fred Hubbell, Rita Hart, Bill Braley,  Jack Hatch, Tom Miller and Richard Clewell.  Wife Judy Shawver is an Obama and Hillary supporter among others of that ilk. Portes is the type of candidate Victory Enterprises frequently chooses to advance.

According to the most recent campaign disclosure report for Democrat Portes of $22,632 expended almost 97% of it has gone through Victory Enterprises.  You can read more about Victory Enterprises by toggling “Shameful” on our page bar above.

R Mall

0

0

• Political registration, donor history and associations are relevant and telling when scant information is available
• Democrat registration is a disqualifying attribute
• Voting time and locations available at Scott County Auditor website
• Note that only Davenport has a primary Tuesday October 8th.  It is an all city primary for Mayor and individually Ward 3, Ward 4 and Ward 5. Other Wards do not have primaries. 
• In coming days we will publish the party identification of all the candidates  for the general election as determined already (many races have no primary opposition) and as determined in tomorrow’s primary.
  
• Davenport, Bettendorf and North Scott school board races have many candidates but there are no primary eliminations. We will have party registration and other information on those candidates in coming days.
• Scroll down for party identifications of candidates on October 8th ballot

Why vote partisan in a so-called non-partisan election

On Tuesday there are municipal primary elections in Scott County. These elections are officially non-partisan in that political parties do not hold primaries to nominate candidates to officially run under the party banner. The concept is based on the foolish idea that policy decisions involving education, taxation, the propriety of bond referendums, crime, property values, are somehow divorced from economic and policy preferences exposed or held by participants in organizations focused on such very things. It is silly to think party affiliation is no indicator of approach to issues of the day.

The gullible proponents of “non-partisan” elections were fond of saying “filling a pot-hole or what is best for the children is not a partisan issue”. It is of course a vacuous idea divorced from the scope of activities and how elected officials are informed in their decision making.

The same people who seek non-partisan office often aspire to “partisan” office running under a banner that presumably reflects their approach to policy matters. It is witless to think that their decision making in their non-party role is not informed by the same thought processes that leads them to their “partisan” membership and advocacy.

Of course we know that the real push behind such ‘non-partisan” election tripe was the newspaper editorialists who wanted to enhance their influence over what was acceptable policy, and the Chamber of Commerce trough feeders who wanted to bypass political decision making in favor of true backroom “uni-party” deals.

The “non-partisan” illusion, which was initially officially opposed by Republicans and Democrats is now protected by the Democrat apparat who have discovered that their usual mechanics of election fit quite well into such a system, however indirect or sub rosa. Witness the enthusiasm of union involvement in this “non-partisan” election. Liberals (Democrats) get involved to move a partisan agenda under cover of “non-partisan’. And Republicans don’t know what hit them or do not do much about the pretense.

It is our view that given the most superficial of blandishments in campaign literature, a news media that isn’t much better in revealing candidate positions, a dearth of responded to and/or widely published issue surveys of candidates, — that party affiliation with all its inconsistencies is the best way to determine support this election unless something disqualifying is known about the candidate.

As regards those candidates in these elections who have no recorded political party preference they should be pegged as shallow as they have no evident desire to influence the selections of the parties in the partisan election process, probably only to complain, while limiting their own choices if they even vote in the general elections. Or, they incur a special obligation to reveal what they do believe — their personal platform on all subjects that could reveal their orientation on policy matters before them. We concede that as compared to a Democrat with a Republican not running, some or most might be considered the lesser of evils.

To be sure, using party registration, our readers may be disappointed by the indicated Republican and on occasion be surprised by the Democrat, however, as regards a policy making entity as a whole, dominant party affiliation is the best predictor about spending levels, fiscal policy, growth of government, priorities, mission creep, public union influence, philosophy of governing, competence, “sanctuary” policy, crime control issues, regulations, use of the prestige of office, so called social issues when they come up . . . all things that they may bring under their purview. Some Republicans can correctly be accused of supporting bad policies, but  Democrats are in a more aggressive category of their own with no institutional hold back, indeed just the opposite. And just being a member of such a party facilitates its policies

Look at what Democrats have produced in San Francisco, in LA, in Chicago, in Baltimore and regrettably city after city. Candidates everywhere who identify with that party are possessed of a similar operating philosophy that is easily susceptible to the same sequelae. Union obsequience, tax and spend governance, inculcation of leftist values, incompetence in other matters

As regards school board elections  TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 5th many of the aforementioned pertain and as former Education Secretary William Bennett has remarked “there is a cultural war raging in American society . . . and the winners get to teach our children” Do you want Democrat Party philosophies inculcated into area children, however incremental? The aforementioned cities have school systems run by Democrats and the rot and declining educational achievements did not happen overnight.

We are not saying party affiliation information is always enough, only that it is the best conservatives have to go on at this time for this election. We hope for a time when Republicans compete for the local party endorsement and run as such. By comparison to other local government electoral processes,  no one can maintain that county government which officially involves partisan elections produces worse than “non-partisan” municipal and school board performance.

We call on readers to remember when they vote what Democrats in general are about and to question the good judgement of anyone who declares themselves a Democrat and whether they could possibly be close to you in philosophy and still ascribe to the Democrat party, given its platform, its leadership, and what they are up to. Whatever their personal background, their veteran status their religion, an election is about the infusion of policy that governs YOU. Be friends as you will, but don’t choose them to govern you while being part of the political machinery that has and is bent on doing so much damage.

While it is enough in our judgement, we have more than party registration to disqualify candidates in this election.  We looked up and have set forth some of the donation records of the two we guess are the leading Democrats in the race for Mayor of Davenport – Michael Matson and Daniel Portes. It is inescapable that along with their party affiliation, the pattern of who they give to aids and abets Democrat policies and candidates across the board. And there is other information as well.

The Davenport Mayoral race can be overemphasized, we would much rather have solid Republicans on the council.  However Democrats are looking to have that again and are therefore looking to consolidate. Davenport has a weak mayoral system but the Democrats involved typically see it as a strong bully-pulpit and a launching pad and to use every opportunity it presents for appointments and other avenues to move an agenda (as do the Chamber of Commerce trough feeders).

Remember in the case of former Democrat Mayor Bill Gluba we had someone who aggravated illegal immigration, undermined Second Amendment rights through his mayoral memberships, bowed to communist dictators on US soil and of course used his political influence and prestige of office to push the candidacies of hard leftists with appearances and endorsements “in his personal capacity of course”.

Any demurral by any of today’s Democrat candidates that they would not do as such is BS, in our humble opinion, given who they are.  Democrat Mike Matson, as leader of the Davenport American Legion Post put the kibosh on a request through channels to RENT the facility for a local rally in support of President Trump in the Spring of 2017 as being too political for the venue. Never mind that political candidates of both parties have rented the facility. This prince then used the same organization facilities to further his candidacy for the Democrat nomination for Iowa Governor (alderman to governor shows the megalomania of the guy). It was not merely partisan it was dishonorable treatment of Republican veterans and Legion members. It also says a lot about what Matson thinks about Trump voters in this area. He is as partisan as they come.

Matson soon abandoned his gubernatorial pipe-dream and then contributed at least $200 to eventual nominee Fred Hubbell, as far left a candidate as the Democrats have ever nominated. Matson also gives to Act Blue which only supports “progressive” causes. Matson’s wife is a donor as well. By all indications Matson is hard-core anti-Trump besides being a contributor to the Democrat leftist culture and candidates.

With Matson’s fellow Democrat Dan Portes you have a Braley for Congress donor ($500) Hubbell for Governor donor, Hatch for Governor donor, Rita Hart (State Senate) donor, and also an Act Blue donor. His wife is a  Democrat as well having been an Obama donor, a Hillary donor, Act Blue donor, and various other Democrat office seekers. Portes is also creature of the “uni-party” Chamber of Commerce trough feeders.

All party listings are the candidate’s registration as indicated in the September 2019 Scott County Auditor data base for all voters. Donor information comes via Iowa Campaign Finance reports and Federal Election Commission reports

Davenport Municipal Primary (I = Incumbent)

MAYOR
For the Davenport mayoral primary there are six candidates running. You may vote for only one. The top two vote-getters advance to the general election in November. Note that only two of the six are registered Republicans. To those who say that these municipal elections are just about fixing the streets then Republican Dean Weber is the choice as he has been there and done that as a long-time city employee.

MIKE MATSON – DEMOCRAT – DONOR TO DEMOCRATS; DEMOCRAT PRIMARY CANDIDATE; ANTI-TRUMP
DAN PORTES – DEMOCRAT– DONOR TO DEMOCRATS; CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CREATURE
RITA RAWSON – DEMOCRAT
ELIZABETH VANCAMP – DEMOCRAT (her personal platform is heavy on the “green” agenda)

DEAN WEBER – REPUBLICAN – our pick
STEVE DUFFY – REPUBLICAN

3RD WARD (vote for no more than 1, top 2 advance to general election, can write in)
PHIL ARMER – NO PARTY; PAUL VASQUEZ – DEMOCRAT; MARION MEGINNIS (I) – DEMOCRAT

4TH WARD (vote for no more than one, top two advance to general election)
BUD WILKINS – REPUBLICAN; HEATHER BRINKSCHROEDER – DEMOCRAT; JEFFREY BASS – DEMOCRAT; RAYMOND AMBROSE (I) – REPUBLICAN                     (our pick Ray Ambrose)

5TH WARD (vote for no more than 1, top 2 advance to general election)
MATTHEW TORMANN – REPUBLICAN; KRISTI MILLER – NO PARTY; PATRICK DRISCOLL – REPUBLICAN; AUSTON MCCLAIN – REPUBLICAN; TIM KELLY – DEMOCRAT; T.RAGNVALD JACOBSON – DEMOCRAT

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

November General Election and School Board information along with other commentary in coming days

R Mall

0

0

Check back later this evening for information related to the Scott County area Municipal and School Board primary election to be held tomorrow October 8th – (polls open 7:00 AM)

0

0