Open Letter to Bill Lee, Governor of Tennessee

To the Honorable Bill Lee, Governor of the Great State of Tennessee:

 

I'm approaching my heart transplant's 14th anniversary. Thousands of my fellow Tennesseans and Americans currently need a life-saving transplant, but only a few will ever be fortunate to receive one. After an 11-year battle with heart disease prior to receiving mine, I know it is a tremendous blessing, and one I do not take for granted.

 

Due to my transplant, I'm required to take immunosuppressants the rest of my life to ward off rejection, which places me into the COVID high risk group along with the elderly and others with pre-existing health conditions. I have, therefore, severely reduced my activities outside my home by order of my doctors since March 17, 2019 - over 9 months. Therefore, when I do venture out, it's mostly for outdoor activities, such as walking in my neighborhood or going to a park with my wife where I can distance myself from others. I have only eaten in a restaurant once since early March. I cannot take my wife out for a "date night". I've seen my 80-year old parents twice since Christmas 2019. As a Christian, I've been going to church since 9 months before I was born, but I have now not been able to attend church since the last Sunday in February.

 

I do not share all that in order for you to feel sorry for me. I know I am fortunate, because myself, my wife, my family, and most of my good friends have avoided COVID to this point. I pray everyday we stay well and thank the Good Lord for His protection, as I know that thousands of my fellow Tennesseans and millions of Americans have not been as fortunate. Currently, approximately 590,000 Tennesseans have fallen ill with about 7000 of them losing their life to the virus (here). Nationally, the numbers are much higher as things are getting worse instead of better.

 

To this point, you have not issued a statewide mask mandate. Your position has been that you prefer to allow local officials to make that decision for the counties and cities where they are in charge. I can respect that - government closer to the people is best. However, it's not working. Most local officials refuse to issue a mask mandate, and many of the ones who have, such as here in Wilson Co., have not allowed for any enforcement action. Therefore, it's the same as not having such a mandate which makes it worthless.

 

Some Tennesseans feel mask mandates violate their freedom. Well, what about the freedom of us in the high risk group to be able to leave our homes and safely go about our usual activities? Does our freedom not matter since we're sick or old?

 

Besides, Tennesseans already have to follow safety mandates every day with seatbelt and helmet laws. Both of which are enforced by law enforcement via citations and the associated fines. So, what's the difference between those state law implemented safety measures and a mask mandate during a pandemic? All have the same purpose - enhanced public safety.

 

Some argue that masks "don't work anyway". There's been studies that support such a viewpoint, but for each one of those studies, another can be found that shows that masks do help prevent the spread of illness. If mask wearing saves the life of one Tennessean, then isn't it worth it?

 

COVID patients with more severe cases feel like they're suffocating. I have an idea of what that feels like. Do you? I spent several years battling heart failure prior to my transplant. Each night when I'd lay down to try to sleep, I'd feel like I was suffocating. It's a horrible, helpless, scary experience. So, when doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals all across our state beg for a statewide mask mandate as they continue to be overrun with sick, suffering, and dying Tennesseans, they should be listened to. After all, they are the experts.

 

Some have incorrectly claimed that you do not have the authority to issue a statewide mask mandate. While it is true there is nothing within the state constitution allowing it, there is also nothing within it prohibiting it. However, state law DOES provide you such authority within Tennessee Code Annotated section, "Emergency Management Powers of the Governor", 58-2-107(e)(11). It states that, in addition to your other powers, you may, "Take measures concerning the conduct of civilians". Therefore, you would be legally within your purview as governor to issue the mask mandate.

 

Over the last few weeks, I've learned of more and more COVID+ cases among people I know personally and their families. I have friends within the healthcare field who are exhausted and stressed. Businesses and livelihoods continue to suffer as Tennesseans can't provide for their families. The suffering and dying has gone on too long already. A statewide mask mandate should've been done months ago. In fact, you said back in July that if we'd had a mask requirement in March, we might not "have had to close everything down".

 

Governor - it's not too late, but the clock is ticking.

 

Like you, I'm a Conservative, but I 100% support President-Elect Biden's plan for masks nationwide. I have no doubt you will have opposition to a statewide mandate and maybe a price to pay at the polls. However, good leaders are the ones who have the courage to do the right and needed thing even when it's difficult and unpopular. Tennessee needs you to be that guy right now. We cannot continue to wait on a vaccine as a cure or on a large enough number of Tennesseans to voluntarily put masks on outside their homes to curtail COVID spread. It hasn't worked for 9 months. It's not sustainable, and if you continue to not issue the mandate, it will most certainly result in thousands more Tennesseans suffering and dying from this horrible virus leaving grieving loved ones. 

 

Please governor - 2021 doesn't have to be like 2020. Issue the statewide mask mandate. Also, give it some teeth with penalties for law enforcement to use to enforce it vigorously. Lives are at stake.

 

Sincerely, 

The Second Chance Sheepdog

  

Smart Raccoon

United HealthCare, God, and a Life-Saving Liver Transplant

In The Sheepdog's opinion, it appears United HealthCare (UHC) thinks it's no longer in the health insurance business. Instead, it's received a promotion into the business of being God. However, don't take my word for it, just ask 38-year-old mother of one, Erika Zak. UHC has put her through as much hell as cancer did.

Location of human liver - credit Wikipedia

Diagnosed with colorectal cancer, Erika endured more than 70 rounds of chemo and various other treatments which resulted in serious side effects, including damage to her liver and subsequent liver failure.

Over 100 doctors from the country's top medical centers concur that Erika's only hope for survival at this point is a life-saving liver transplant. Yet, UHC denied coverage saying, "unproven health services is not a covered benefit". Really? Despite the fact that transplants have saved thousands of lives in the U.S. for decades, UHC refers to transplant as "unproven". Science, medical technology, and thousands of transplant recipients across the country, including The Sheepdog, prove otherwise.

The Sheepdog has seen a lot in his time, but the way UHC treated this woman and played GOD with her life, stringing her along for months, may be the most cold hearted thing I've heard of an insurance company doing. I suspect others have experienced similar agony, though.

The Last Growl

I started this blog over 8 years ago. Frequent readers may have noticed the number of posts has decreased during the last few years. I’ve been pondering the blog’s future for awhile, and after 719 posts, including this one, and over 240,000 page views, I’ve decided it’s time to close up shop, sign off one last time, and retire from the blogosphere.

It’s not because this heart transplant recipient’s health is failing. On the contrary - I’m approaching the 11^th anniversary of my transplant and am still doing great. God continues to bless me tremendously.

The decision boils down to one thing – The Sheepdog is weary, and he’s weary for a number of reasons.

First, Google’s Blogger platform has become unreliable. More and more frequently, something doesn’t work correctly, some font has changed, a sidebar tool has been discontinued, a plug-in has failed, or some other aggravating issue has arisen whenever I log in to write. For example. when I wrote this post, the Zemanta plug-in I've used for years had stopped working .... again. I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised, because Blogger is free. Therefore, Google has no incentive to keep it functioning at a high level. It’s the ol’ “you get what you pay for”.

Second, I’m not feeling the motivation to write the blog anymore, which is fueled somewhat by the Blogger issues mentioned above. I could switch to another platform, such as Wordpress, but I’m just not willing to build the site again, nor pay for the service. Sometimes over the last few years, I actually had to force myself to write just to keep the blog active. I’ve had enough of that, too. I’ve read a few articles and studies which have shown that blog readership is declining. Some of that is due to the popularity of Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms. People just aren’t as interested in reading blogs anymore. Based upon my pageviews declining and no comments on posts, it appears these studies are correct.

A Double Dose of Rebellion on Music Monday

English: Flag of the Assembly of Tennessee (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Sheepdog is rather perturbed. In fact, I've had it with the Republican-controlled Tennessee Legislature and Governor "Slick Billy" Haslam. Since they've taken power, they've insisted on telling Tennesseans how much allergy medication we can buy, where we can and can't carry our guns, where we can take a selfie, and more. I could go on and on. That's not freedom, and it needs to stop.

So, today, I'm musically expressing my continued displeasure with these bums, and I'll start with a music video from Monster Truck. Their song "Don't Tell Me How To Live" is a good way to start this double shot of music on the 2nd Monday in May. The video is embedded below or can be watched by clicking here.

Hang on, though, this video is like the "warm-up band" at a rock concert. The Sheepdog's just getting started. The best, "the headliner", is below.



The previous grievances I've had with the Tennessee Legislature and the governor are not my biggest problem with them, though. Recently, these so-called "conservatives" rammed through what will turn out to be the biggest tax increase on Tennesseans in my lifetime. These liars, with the help of the media and fuzzy math, conned many Tennesseans into believing it is "The Largest Tax Cut in Tennessee History".

Nothing could be further from the truth, because the few taxes that are cut in the legislation will only benefit a few, mainly the wealthy, and the cut in the sales tax on food will be far outweighed by the increase in the gas tax and the diesel fuel tax. In fact, the increase in the diesel fuel tax will force up prices on ALL products sold in Tennessee as transportation and shipping costs will go up across the board and be passed on to consumers. It's basic Economics 101 no matter what the politicians tell you.

So, to thoroughly express my outrage with the Tennessee liars' con-job, "the headliner" on this edition of double-shot music Monday is Nickelback with their #1 hit "Edge Of A Revolution". It's perfect here with images of school kids turning from conformists going along with the status quo into nonconformists refusing to take it anymore.

Until Tennesseans do the same thing and stop voting the same Tennessee politicians back into office every single election, nothing will change. They will continue to do whatever they want to us. Video is embedded below or can be watched by clicking here.



Due to some of the images in the video, I know someone's thinking,"Wow. The Sheepdog's gone full-Commie on us." Absolutely not. Neither am I encouraging rioting in Tennessee. All I'm saying by sharing this video is don't buy into the Tennessee GOP's "mass delusion" that the fuel tax increase will actually be a tax cut, because "they're depending on mass confusion". "Don't lay down and accept this fate." Instead, be revolutionaries with your vote on Election Day 2018 by voting every single, sorry Tennessee incumbent out of office regardless of party.

Don't be a sheep. Be a sheepdog. Let your vote be your teeth. I promise you I will.

An Ode to Hillary on Music Monday

Finally. It's over. The Clinton Regime is done. We Conservatives endured 8 years of the liberal, military gutting, law enforcement hating, gun control loving, couldn't keep it in his pants, Clinton presidency. Then, we endured Hillary's progressive tenure in the U.S. Senate. Next, we endured her embarrassing, leftist foreign policy initiatives as Secretary of State. Lastly, we endured her stint as the Democratic nominee for president. Now, thank God, all of that is over.

Through all of it and unlike when things don't go The Lunatic Left's way, we conservatives didn't break and burn things, nor did we riot. Heck, we didn't even threaten to leave the country like a bunch of babies. We endured it and made the best of it.

Now, we only ask for one, simple thing - Hillary, please "Don't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away." So, on this post-2016 election edition of Music Monday, this one's dedicated to Hillary Clinton. It's Motley Crue with "Don't Go Away Mad (Just Go Away)" from their 1989 #1 record, Dr. Feelgood (click here).

Proceed With Caution

Today, the ones of us who voted for Trump are at a minimum relieved while some are thrilled and celebrating. If you supported Clinton, then you're probably a little down, maybe even pissed, but the one thing all of us can agree on is that we're glad it's over. For the first time in a long time, I won't have to empty my "BS" filter before going to bed tonight.

English: Seal of the President of the United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you supported Trump, I want to encourage you to not get too excited just yet. He is just one man and try as he might, he cannot fix all that ails the country overnight. It will take time, and he will have to have help. Plus, there are other things to consider, too. For instance:

1. Exactly what are we getting with Trump? Are we getting the Trump who years ago was a liberal? You know, the one who was "pro-choice", supported some gun control, and contributed money to liberal politicians. Or, are we getting the Trump who campaigned for the presidency on much more conservative values? The answer is - we don't know. Only time will tell.
2. Trump smacked the establishment around unmercifully, both Republicans and Democrats. Heck, some of the upper echelon Republicans didn't even support him as the party's presidential nominee. I even heard today where former President George W. Bush didn't even bother to vote for president. So, I'm wondering if the establishment in Congress will even work with Trump in fixing what ails us, which they caused, or if they will just make his life difficult.
3. The Republicans now control the House, the Senate, and the White House. They have absolute power over us, which we have given them, and "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Will they limit themselves to the powers granted them by The Constitution, or will it be "anything goes"? Will they keep Trump in check, or will they set on their asses like they did with Obama and let him do whatever he wants? House Speaker Paul Ryan said today that Trump had been given a "mandate". When I heard that, shivers went up my spine. It's eerily similar to Lamar Alexander, the U.S. Senator from Tennessee, saying, "Elections have consequences" after Obama won the presidency in 2008. One party with this much power could prove to be very dangerous, folks. Contrary to what some may think, just because it's the Republicans, it doesn't mean they're saints. Some Republicans are just as low-down evil as some Democrats. I know from first-hand experience.

So, I want to encourage all of my fellow Americans, and especially the Trump supporters, to proceed with caution in regards to their post-election celebrations. Don't get me wrong, I am thrilled that Hillary Clinton was defeated, but the fact is we don't know where a Trump presidency will actually take us as a country. We are in uncharted waters. However, I know one place it better take us to, or we're doomed to failure, and that's the instruction of 2 Chronicles 7:14, which says:

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; THEN (emphasis added) will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (KJV).

Pure Evil

Up until now, The Sheepdog's been pretty silent regarding the 2016 presidential race, and there's two reasons for that:

1. I'm sick of politics. It just keeps getting uglier and uglier. The Republicans and the Democrats are basically the same - they're in it for themselves, not to serve, and are more interested in what's good for their party instead of what's good for the country. It's why I left the GOP back in 2010. The current GOP disgusts me as much as the Democrats.
2. Plus, all the candidates, from the more than a dozen so-called Republicans that started the race, to the few Democrats, to the current third party candidates, totally suck. As my friend, The Colonel used to say, "There ain't a statesman in the bunch". Not one. You disagree? Then, let's review some of them.

The so-called "Republicans":

• Bush III - really? Another one? I can already hear the Democrats if he had won the GOP nomination, "It'll be 4 more years of the same failed policies of the past."
• The anchor baby (Rubio).
• The birther (Cruz) - I still don't understand how the GOP supported this guy after raising so much cain about Obama's birth certificate. Cruz was born in Canada. Total hypocrites.
• The Billionaire, Brattish Bully (Trump)
• George Soro's boy (Kasich).
• Chris Christie - pro-homosexual marriage and governor of one of the most anti-gun states in the country.
• Lindsey Graham - not the sharpest tack in the box and the 2016 version of John McCain.

The Democrats:

• The Progressive Extremist, and
• the Socialist.

Really? Is this the best we can do as a country?

English: Khusruwiyah Mosque in Aleppo, Syria Français : Mosquée Khosrowiyé à Alep en Syrie (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

And then, of course, there's the third party candidates led by Gary Johnson. You remember him, right? He wants to be Commander in Chief and institute his foreign policies, but he doesn't know where Aleppo, Syria is, the center of the Syrian refugee crisis caused by that country's civil war. Additionally, Johnson is supposedly conservative, but yet he is "pro-choice" for abortion and wants to legalize marijuana. Neither of those stances equate to conservative principles and values. He should actually be a Democrat.

Since all the candidates suck like a Hoover vacuum, who should Americans vote for? Since a third party candidate has as much chance at winning the election as a Volkswagen Beetle does at winning the Daytona 500, and both major party nominees have more baggage than a Boeing 747 headed for Europe, it's a tough choice. That is until you are aware of the information I am sharing below. It's shocking and no one is talking about it.

In fact, what I will share the remainder of this post, regarding this presidential election, is far more important than the economy, foreign policy, gun control, jobs, and even abortion. I doubt you will see this information anywhere else, but in my opinion, it's the #1 issue to consider before casting your vote for the presidency.

Back in 2009, Hillary Clinton proudly went on record as someone who "enormously" admires Margaret Sanger (click here for video). Now, who the heck is Margaret Sanger? She was a well-known proponent of eugenics after World War I. In simple terms, eugenics is the idea that some people's lives are more valuable than others. It teaches that people with "undesirable" traits should not be allowed to reproduce and pass their "undesirable" traits to their offspring. Eugenicists desire to reduce or totally eliminate such traits from the human gene pool and are not opposed to eliminating living humans possessing these "undesirable" traits. These traits include:

1. physical disabilities,
2. mental disabilities, 
3. chronic health issues a.k.a. pre-existing conditions,
4. being poor, 
5. being an immigrant, and
6. being a members of a racial or ethnic minority.

Eugenicists consider "undesirables" as "unfit", as in unfit to live, and a waste of oxygen and / or other resources. On the other hand, eugenicists believe people with "good stock", not having one or more of the traits listed above, should be encouraged to have many children. In other words they want to build "a master race." Anyone see a problem here besides me? Eugenics is a dangerous philosophy and has it's pitfalls, such as:

A major criticism of eugenics policies is that, regardless of whether "negative" or "positive" policies are used, they are vulnerable to abuse because the criteria of selection are determined by whichever group is in political power. Furthermore, negative eugenics in particular is considered by many to be a violation of basic human rights, which include the right to reproduction. Another criticism is that eugenic policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, resulting in inbreeding depression instead due to a low genetic variation. - Wikipedia

Does any of this sound familiar? Think back to the 1930s and '40s and Adolf Hitler, the Nazis, and the Jews. The Nazis were huge proponents of eugenics which led to millions of Jews being slaughtered during World War II. The Jews were considered "undesirable", so Hitler wanted them annihilated in order to establish a master race. He might have accomplished his goal, too, if he had not been greedy, arrogant, and power hungry in deciding to go to war with the Russians, while at the same time fighting The Allies. Heck, I even read somewhere that Hitler himself admired Margaret Sanger.

English: Margaret Sanger Square is the leafy intersection of Mott St. and Bleecker St. in New York City's Greenwich Village. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Take a few minutes and Google Sanger's name. You will find that she is also the founder of Planned Parenthood. You will also find some of the things she said and  / or wrote revealing her racist ideologies and attitudes regarding African-Americans and others. She even conspired with pastors in black communities in order to get them to encourage their members to use more birth control. Her motivation was to reduce the numbers of African-Americans. She was also one of the early promoters of abortion and even spoke at women's chapters of the Ku Klux Klan (read here). So, considering all this, could it be that the original intention of abortion was not about women's freedom to choose to end unwanted pregnancies, nor the freedom to do what they want with their bodies, but it was instead rooted in bigotry and racism as a means of reducing the African-American population and others considered to be "undesirable"?

Eugenics is PURE EVIL. The Nazis proved that. It amounts to humans, sinful, fallen humans, playing God. I could provide link after link in this post showing the connection between eugenics, Margaret Sanger, racism, and other evil, but the post would run on forever. So, I encourage you to take the time and educate yourself. Get on the web, Google Sanger, eugenics, eugenicists, and do your own research. You will be shocked. You probably never knew that such evil thought processes existed in this world except in movies and TV dramas.

Typically, when someone admires another person, it is because they have something in common with them. Many times it's a shared value, principle, ideology, or goal. Since Hillary Clinton is on record as saying she admires a racist woman whose life work was in eugenics, doesn't it also stand to reason that Hillary Clinton very well may hold the same, evil views as Sanger? To me, that's the scary part of thinking about her being president.

So, what might things be like in the U.S. if a Hillary Clinton presidency were to be influenced by the values of her "hero", Sanger? In addition to the traits previously listed as "undesirable", and thinking about the above quote containing the potential problems with eugenics, consider the following:

• We already know she hates guns. In fact, some Democrats have wanted them all banned for a long time. The so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" and the Brady Bill, which became law during Bill's presidency, are direct evidence of that. Would gun owners become "undesirables"?
• She's previously expressed her contempt for Christians and their beliefs. Would Christians, and perhaps Jews, and other people of faith, also become "undesirables"?
• She's has contempt for the so-called "vast right wing conspiracy" and conservatives, because she thinks they're out to get her and Bill. Would they, or the Clintons' other political enemies, or people who disagree, with them become "undesirables"?
• Remember the section in The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. ObamaCare, regarding "end of life care"? Remember how Sarah Palin and others raised concerns about that? That section of the law is so broad that it could be interpreted to mean many things. What if that section was determined to mean that people who are elderly, have chronic health conditions, or some type of disability, whose care is too expensive, should not be given medical treatment but instead just be left alone to die because they're "undesirables"? That would be a eugenicist's utopia, and ObamaCare was basically HillaryCare once upon a time. Could it get any more barbaric than that? God help us.

Now, I'm sure someone reading this post is gonna object to this line of reasoning. They'll say something like just because Hillary admires a woman who was big into eugenics doesn't mean she shares those same ideas, or, that The Sheepdog's nuts and none of this will ever happen. Well, then consider this - do you remember the adjective Hillary used to describe Donald Trump's supporters? She referred to them as "deplorable". Sounds pretty similar to "undesirables" to me, but there's more to consider in making my point than that. Please, read on.

Hillary Clinton in Hampton, NH (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I've read reports telling of an incident, involving Hillary, which took place at the Arkansas governor's mansion during Bill's gubernatorialship. An Easter egg hunt for special needs children was held. She became frustrated and upset with the youngsters, because they were finding the eggs at a much slower pace than she would have liked. So, she popped off saying, "When are they going to get these f---ing ree-tards out of here?!? You can read more about the incident here. Additionally, within the same article, she is quoted as referring to Jews as "kikes" and one Jewish man in particular as a "f***ing Jew bastard". Plus, her temper and fits of rage over the years, culminating in furniture and other items being broken in the Arkansas governor's mansion, and the White House, have been reported in various media. So, in my opinion, if you mix her temper tantrums, with her racist remarks, and her love for a eugenicist, we have a major problem. These are not the qualities we need in the White House. It's a recipe for a disaster.

Hillary made her admiration for Margaret Sanger known about 7 years ago at a Planned Parenthood awards ceremony. Others have been influenced by evil people before and later recanted their admiration for their mentor as a mistake. Hillary has had plenty of time to do the same, but yet she never has. Therefore, it only stands to reason that she still admires Sanger and her ideals. At a time when race relations are tense in this country and people are held accountable and even ostracized for bigoted behavior and words, why has Hillary Clinton not been held accountable for her allegiance to Sanger?

Another thing to consider before voting is that if Hillary Clinton is elected president, she will likely have the opportunity to nominate more than one justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. Does it not stand to reason that anyone she nominates for the highest court in the land will likely hold the same influences, values, principles, or lack thereof (depending on how you look at it), that she does? Do you remember what United States Senator Lamar Alexander from Tennessee said when he was criticized for his vote confirming Sonia Sotomayor as one of Obama's Supreme Court nominees? He said, "Elections have consequences" (read here). In other words, he took the viewpoint that since Obama won the presidency, he could appoint whomever he wanted and get a free pass in doing so. What if a majority of Congress takes that same attitude during a Hillary Clinton presidency? Consider for a moment the ramifications? We cannot as freedom-loving, decent people allow her that opportunity and give her the power that comes with the presidency. We CANNOT do it.

The answer to the question of which presidential candidate to vote for is a hard one to swallow, especially for a conservative like me. Even with all his baggage, such as insulting people, being rude and crude, arrogant, and a bully, we must elect Donald Trump as president. There is no other way to stop Hillary Clinton from having absolute power and potentially setting up her own "Evil Empire". "But Sheepdog, Congress and the Supreme Court will limit her power through our system of constitutional checks and balances?" Really? Where have you been the last 8 years and the last few years of W's administration? Congress and the Supreme Court have set on their "assets" and allowed Obama to run wild. Heck, the Supreme Court even ruled that ObamaCare is constitutional!! Yet the power to regulate healthcare is mentioned NOWHERE in the constitution. NOWHERE. So, what makes you think those lazy bums will do anything to limit a President Hillary's power?

Now, look back over this post and review who a eugenicist, like "Hillary's Hero", would consider "unfit" or "undesirable" or a "weed". Now, is that you, or one of your loved ones? Is that your spouse, your child, your boyfriend / girlfriend, your parent, your best friend, or someone you care about? If it is, then you have ONLY one choice in this election - Donald Trump. If you stay home and don't vote, or vote for a third party candidate instead of Donald Trump, then you will be helping Hillary Clinton, an evil woman, gain absolute authority over you and the country. It's the equivalent of a chicken voting for a fox AND leaving the door to the chicken coop unlocked and standing open.

If Trump were running against anyone else, it's likely that myself and many others would not vote for him. So, here's what it boils down to for me. Donald Trump has said and done a lot of unacceptable stuff. However, I'm not aware of him even once expressing his admiration for someone like the evil, racist, eugenicist Margaret Sanger who was also admired by Adolf Hitler. Hillary has, and she's proud of it.

Now, this article should not be interpreted as my prediction that the potential scenario I've painted will definitely happen with Hillary as president. If I could predict the future that accurately, I would have already won the PowerBall multiple times. All I'm saying is that when you put all this information together, including Hillary's fits of anger, her bigoted comments, and her admiration for a racist eugenicist, it adds up to it being too risky to give her the power of the presidency.  I'm not willing to take that risk. Are you?

So, with early voting already starting around the country, The Sheepdog is endorsing, and will be voting for, Donald Trump. I do it for one reason and one reason only - to defeat Hillary Clinton and prevent her rise to power. I want to encourage everyone to do the same. Please do not stay home and not vote. Please do not vote for a third party candidate. If you do either of these things, you will be helping The Mother of All Wolves rise to power and risking her finishing Obama's "fundamental transformation" of this country.

The Sheepdog don't like wolves, and Hillary Clinton is the epitome of a wolf. Grrrrr.....

P.S. I'm sure this post has pissed off many people. However, that was not my intention. In fact, I hope in goes viral, so please share it. I am simply a patriot and am concerned that a Hillary Clinton presidency will be a disaster. America will NOT survive it. Therefore, she must be defeated at the ballot box. Therefore, I wrote this out of love for my country and am not concerned with losing, keeping, or making friends as a result of it. It had to be said, and no one else is saying it. Too much is at stake. I'm sure some will want to leave comments, which I welcome. If you do, you MUST follow my blog policy for comments (click here to read). I had the balls to put my name on what will be considered a controversial post. So, if you don't have the "cojones" to put your name on a comment, or you fill it with profanity, it will NOT be posted.

P.P.S. If I disappear from the blogosphere after this post, it's safe to assume that either "they" got me or Google and Blogger shut the blog down. Just know I fought the good fight and did what I could to save my country from a potentially Evil Empire. 

SUMMARY : One More Kick Of A Dead Horse

During the month of March, I first introduced (click here) and then updated (click here) my readers about the fantasy sports regulatory bill the Tennessee Legislature was working on. I was, and still am, adamantly opposed to the legislation, because there are much more important things than fantasy sports that the legislature needs to be working on. Unfortunately, today I must report that the bill overwhelmingly passed both the Tennessee State House, hereafter known simply as "House", and State Senate, hereafter known simply as "Senate", and was signed into law by Governor Haslam.

State Seal of Tennessee. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

However, there is more to be told. The Sheepdog has now reviewed the floor votes of both chambers of the Tennessee Legislature as well as the votes taken in the committees and subcommittees during HB 2105 / SB 2109's journey to becoming law (see votes here). Today, I'm revealing who did what with their vote. Before I do, I want to encourage any Tennessean reading this who may not know who their state representative and / or state senator is to click here, and then enter your address and click search to find out who represents you. Then, as you read through the rest of this article, look for your legislators to see how they voted.

I'll start with the House Committees and Subcommittees. Let me say first, though, that the way the House records votes in the committees is .... "interesting". It's not transparent. Only the "NO" or "Present Not Voting" (PNV) votes are listed on the legislature's website for each bill. It appears that the committee member must request to be recorded as voting "NO" or PNV to actually get it on the record. The appearance is that the House is hiding something. Whatever is going on, the following members of the House who voted against HB 2105 in committee or subcommittee are :

David Alexander (R) - voted "NO" in House Finance Ways and Means Committee and "NO" in House Finance Ways and Means SubCommittee. He also voted "NO" on House Floor.

Mike Carter (R) - voted "NO" in House Finance Ways and Means Committee

David Hawk (R) - voted "NO" in House Fiance Ways and Means Committee. He also voted "NO" on House floor.

Bill Dunn (R) - "Present Not Voting" ** in House Finance Ways and Means Committee. He voted "NO" on House floor.

John Ragan (R) - Voted "NO" in Government Operations Committee, but then voted "Yes" on House floor. Why did he change his vote?

Kevin Dunlap (D) - voted "NO" in Business and Utilities Committee. He also voted "NO" on House floor.

These 6 gentlemen were the only 6 members of the house bold enough to attempt to stop the bill in a committee or subcommittee before it made it to the house floor to waste the house's time. Sad isn't it?

When we look at the committee and subcommittee votes in the senate, it gets worse - NOT ONE MEMBER of the state senate voted "NO" in committee. Not one. The bill passed unanimously in every committee hearing. Every. Single. One. Pathetic. Every member of every Tennessee Senate Committee was basically derelict in their duty on this bill.

** - "Present Not Voting" votes are essentially "No" votes, because each bill must receive a majority of "yes" votes to advance to the next committee in line, or to the floor of the House or Senate. So, if there's 8 members on a committee, and the bill gets 4 yes, 3 no's, and 1 present not voting, then it fails. It would've needed at least 5 yes votes to advance.

Let's move on to the House and Senate Floor votes. Here, I will list ONLY the "yes" votes. These are the ones who supported this legislation. I will list the Senate floor votes first and beside them I will list any recorded "yes" votes in Committee or Subcommittee.

Tennessee Senate Chamber (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Senate Floor "YES" Votes ****

• Paul Bailey (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Janice Bowling (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Richard Briggs (R)
• Rusty Crowe (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Steven Dickerson (R) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Todd Gardenshire (R) - also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Mark Green (R)
• Dolores Gresham (R) - also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Ferrelle Haile  (R) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Thelma Harper (D) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Lee Harris (D) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Ed Jackson (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Jack Johnson - (R) also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Brian Kelsey (R)
• Bill Ketron (R) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Sara Kyle (D)
• Becky Duncan Massey (R)
• Randy McNally (R) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Frank Nicely (R)
• Mark Norris (R) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
• Doug Overbey (R) - also in Senate Finance Ways, and Means Committee
• Liet. Gov. Ron Ramsey (R)
• John Stevens (R) - also in Senate Finance Ways, and Means Committee
• Bo Watson (R) - also in Senate Finance Ways, and Means Committee AND Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Jim Tracy (R) - also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Ken Yager - (R) - also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Jeff Yarbro (D)
• Mae Beavers (R) ++ - also in Senate Government Operations Committee - no surprise here. To read about Beavers support for other "nanny state" bills, please click here and then scroll down to the "The Ugly" section.
• Mike Bell - (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Kerry Roberts (R) - also in Senate Government Operations Committee
• Steve Southerland (R) - also in Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
• Reginald Tate (D) - also in Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee

**** - Absent from list but voting "yes" in favor of the bill in the Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee is Joey Hensley (R).

++ - Beavers actually voted for the bill 2 out of 3 times she had the opportunity. As mentioned above, she voted "yes" in the Senate Government Operations Committee and then "yes" during the first Senate floor vote. However, after the House added an amendment placing an additional 6% tax on the fantasy sports companies, she voted "no" when the amended version of the bill came back to the Senate floor. Why did she change her vote? Afterall, the only change to the bill was the new, additional tax. Did she not approve of the tax? Did she think it was too much?  

Since the version of the bill she supported during the 1st Senate floor vote would levy various fees and taxes on the fantasy sports companies, and she has other pro-tax votes on her resume (read here), could it be that she didn't think 6% was high enough?

House Floor "Yes" Votes

• Raumesh Akbari (D)
• Joe Armstrong (D)
• Harry Brooks (R)
• Kevin Brooks (R)
• Kent Calfee (R)
• Karen Camper (D)
• Dale Carr (R)
• Glen Casada (R)
• John Ray Clemmons (D)
• Jim Coley (R)
• Barbara Cooper  (D)
• Martin Daniel (R)
• Barry Doss (R)
• Jeremy Durham (R)
• Jimmy Eldridge (R)
• Jeremy Faison (R)
• Andrew Farmer (R)
• Craig Fitzhugh (D)
• John Fogerty (R)
• Tilman Goins (R)
• Marc Gravitt (R)
• Curtis Halford (R)
• G.A. Hardaway (D)
• Patsy Hazlewood (R)
• Gary Hicks (R)
• Matthew Hill (R)
• Timothy Hill (R)
• John B. Holsclaw, Jr. (R)
• Dan Howell (R)
• Jamie Jenkins (R)
• Curtis Johnson (R)
• Sherry Jones (D)
• Kelly Keisling (R)
• Sabi Kumar (R)
• Ron Lollar (R)
• Harold M. Love, Jr. (D)
• Pat Marsh (R)
• Gerald McCormick (R)
• Steve McDaniel (R)
• Larry Miller (D)
• Bo Mitchell (D)
• Antonio Parkinson (D)
• Joe Pitts (D)
• Jason Powell (D)
• Jay Reedy (R)
• Courtney Rogers (R)
• Bill Sanderson (R)
• Charles Sargent (R)
• Cameron Sexton (R)
• Jerry Sexton (R)
• Johnny Shaw (D)
• David Shepard (D)
• Mike Stewart (D)
• Art Swann (R)
• Bryan Terry (R)
• Curry Todd (R)
• Joe Towns, Jr. (D)
• Ron Travis (R)
• Johnnie Turner (D)
• James (Micah) Van Huss (D)
• Terri Lynn Weaver (D)
• Dawn White (D)
• Mark White (D)
• Ryan Williams (D)
• Tim Wirgau (D)
• Speaker Beth Harwell (D)

I must thank Wilson Co.'s (TN) two State Representatives, Susan Lynn (west Wilson Co.) and Mark Pody (east Wilson Co.), for voting "NO" during the House floor vote on the bill.

Summary

Combined, the Tennessee House and Senate is made up of 132 individuals. During the fantasy sports regulatory bill's journey to becoming law, each of Tennessee's lawmakers had an opportunity to vote on it. After reviewing the votes from the House and Senate floor and the various committees, I found that only about 12% or 1 out of every 8 of them ever voiced their opposition to the bill. Another way of looking at it is that about 88%, or 7 out of every 8, of Tennessee's lawmakers either voiced their approval of the bill or didn't voice their opposition during floor or committee votes.

Since 2016 is an election year, here's some things to think about in regards to the fantasy sports bill:

1. The next time you drive I-40 between Nashville and Knoxville and your teeth about get jarred outta your head due to hitting a moon-sized crater of a pothole, just remember that 88% of Tennessee's lawmakers thought it was more important to regulate and tax fantasy football than to provide additional funding for TDOT to keep the roads maintained.
2. The next time you drop your child off at school and notice how rundown and in need of repair it is, remember that 88% of Tennessee's lawmakers thought it was more important to regulate and tax fantasy football than it was to provide funding to fix your child's school.
3. Hey gunowners - remember back about 6 years ago when Haslam was running for governor and said he'd support and sign constitutional carry into law if it reached his desk as governor? Guess what? It ain't happened yet. So, the next time you have to renew your carry permit a.k.a. ask permission to carry a gun to defend yourself and your family and pay the associated fee a.k.a. tax, just remember that 88% of Tennessee lawmakers thought it was more important to regulate and tax fantasy football than it was to pass constitutional carry.
4. If you've been laid off and can't find work, because businesses aren't hiring due to too much government regulation and interference, and you're having to make ends meet on your unemployment benefits, remember that 88% of Tennessee lawmakers thought it was more important to regulate and tax fantasy football instead of helping businesses create jobs.
5. The next time you want to take an evening stroll in your neighborhood but don't because it's not safe, remember that 88% of Tennessee's lawmakers thought it was more important to regulate and tax fantasy football than it was to provide local communities more funding so they could put more cops on the street.

I could go on all day with more and more examples of what Tennessee's lawmakers should have been doing this legislative session instead of wasting their time, which is actually our time, worrying about fantasy football. However, I think my point is now clearly evident.

Here's one last thing to remember - EVERY member of the Tennessee House of Representatives and much of the Senate is up for re-election this year. Therefore, we have an opportunity to remove many of these "88 percenters" and replace them with people who will do the REAL work that Tennesseans need done.

So, if your Representative or Senator is up for re-election in 2016, and his or her name appears above as having cast a "yes" vote on this nanny state legislation, then they were 1 of the 88% that think regulating and taxing fantasy football and other fantasy sports this year was more important than many other things that affect Tennesseans everyday.

Now, I'm done kicking the dead horse, so, it's YOUR turn to act - go vote the sorry "YES" bums out during the August primaries and then during the general election in November.

Dang. My foot hurts.  

Tennessee Lawmaker Thinks Deer Are A "Nuisance", But Poachers Not So Much

Did the title of this post get your attention? Did it have "shock value"? Did you think, "what the heck", or something similar? Well, good. Those are the exact reactions I wanted you to have. If you're a Tennessee hunter, I'll bet your reaction will be even more intense by the time you finish reading the article.

State Seal of Tennessee. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Hunting is one of my hobbies and one of my passions. My health situation doesn't allow me to hunt as much as I'd like, but I'm always thankful for the opportunities I do have. Every year, I look forward to spring and the start of turkey season. Every fall, I look forward to November and the start of muzzleloader deer season, just like thousands of other hunters in Tennessee and other states. Legal, ethical hunters, no matter what state they live in, have two things in common - a love for the outdoors and a disdain for poachers.

Our dislike for poachers is because they illegally kill game animals, oftentimes trophy animals, and deprive us of the legal, ethical opportunity to do so. While we purchase license(s) and put in hours and hours of homework in order to hunt and enjoy the outdoors the right way, poachers take the easy, illegal, unethical way out. These criminal poachers have no respect for the law, legal hunters, landowners, and the very animals they kill. They kill animals when they want, how they won't, and without regard for the safety and property rights of others. They are basically thieves stealing a resource they are not entitled to. The sad part is that in the state of Tennessee, if a poacher is caught and convicted of his or her crime, they get a mere slap on the wrist. However, Tennessee State Senator Jim Tracy is currently sponsoring legislation (SB 0904 / HB 1185) that will significantly increase the penalty a convicted poacher will pay, if it becomes law.

According to the bill's summary, under current Tennessee law, if a person illegally kills a deer, turkey, bear, elk, etc., TWRA can recover damages of at least $200 for each such animal. If the animal is an elk the amount jumps to at least $1000.

If Sen. Tracy's legislation becomes law, these amounts will increase substantially. For instance, restitution will be required in the amount of:

1. at least $1500 for each illegally killed bear or elk,
2. at least $1000 for each illegally killed deer or turkey,
3. in addition to #1 or 2 above, there would be an additional $500 per point for an antlered deer or elk with 8-10 points or $750 per point if it has 11 or more points, 
4. in addition to #1, another $3000 would be added if the bear is female, and
5. the person(s) hunting / fishing / trapping license is revoked until the restitution is paid.

Now, let's compare current law to the proposed new one. According to the bill's summary, currently if a poacher kills an 8-point whitetail buck deer and is caught and convicted, they have to pay ONLY $200 in damages to TWRA (Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency). If these new, stiffer restitution amounts become law, that same illegally killed 8-point will NOW cost the poacher $5000 {$1000 + (8 x $500 per antler point)}. I think legal, ethical hunters across this state will agree with me - this is good, needed legislation that needs to become law .... now. Non-hunters will likely agree, also. However, one Tennessee State Senator, Frank Niceley, a Republican, from East Tennessee thinks it's a bad idea.

English: Map of Tennessee counties. White border. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Niceley represents the Tennessee counties of Union, Hawkins, Jefferson, Hancock, Grainger, and Claiborne. In the video from the March 11, 2015 meeting of the Tennessee State Senate Energy, Agriculture, and Natural Resources Committee, Niceley makes it very clear that he does not support the new legislation and makes himself look much less than statesmanlike in the process. On more than one occasion, he makes asinine comments, asks asinine questions, and is condescending towards witnesses, including a representative from TWRA. For instance :

• He is the first member of the committee to speak, besides the chair, when he asks, "How much does it cost to shoot a deer off the road these days?" Do what? He follows that up with, "How do you arrive at what it's worth? I mean is a young deer worth more than an old one? Is a buck worth more than a doe? How do you arrive at how much it's gonna cost to pay for this?" He missed the whole point of the legislation. The cost of the animal is not the point. The point is to deter poaching and protect the natural resource. Duh.
• Nicely follows those questions up with a real gem saying that poachers should be sent to, and likely would be welcomed, in parts of Tennessee where the deer population is high. Really? Tennesseans would welcome these criminals into their neighborhoods? I doubt that, Senator.
• Nicely also states that he does not understand why the punishment for poaching should be increased since there are so many deer? To me it seems he thinks poachers are performing a community service by helping to remove a public "nuisance" a.k.a. the deer. Is he trying to make the case that breaking the state's game laws by illegally killing animals is justified when animal populations are high? If that's his logic, it's like saying robbing banks is o.k. because the big, bad banks have so much money. Sounds kinda like something a Democrat would say, doesn't it?
• Lastly, Nicely wants to know if he can exempt the counties in his district from these new stiffer, poaching restitution guidelines, laughing as if it's a joke. Wonder what other state laws he would like to exempt his counties from? Drunk driving laws? Campaign contribution laws? Speed limit laws? Ethics laws? What else, senator? The only joke I see here is his behavior in the hearing. The reason he wants his district exempted is because, as he says, "we don't have a (poaching) problem." So, no poaching occurs in his district? Having grown up in East Tennessee near Niceley's district, I doubt that, too, but more on that in a bit.

The fun doesn't end with this hearing. The legislation was rolled one week to March 18 where Niceley, still opposing the legislation, gives us more gems, including :

• When addressing the TWRA representative, he says, "You (the TWRA) rarely catch anybody." He then states, in regards to his local game warden not catching poachers, "We laugh about him trying to catch 'em. He's never caught one." Senator, perhaps instead of laughing at the game warden, you could be a responsible citizen and help them. Once again, he acts much less than statesmanlike.
• A week earlier, Niceley said there is no poaching problem in his district, but then in the 3/18/15 hearing he states, "I've lived on my farm 44 years. I bet there's been 2000 deer poached down River Road." Uh ..... hang on a minute, Senator. I thought you said there was no poaching problem in your district, but yet you just admitted to knowing of one. Which is it? ... Spoken like a true politician - say one thing one time and something entirely different later. Gotcha dude.
• He also states his opinion that the bill is overkill, because, "we've got more deer than we need."

Please don't take my word for it. Go and watch the video of these committee hearings for yourself by clicking here. After clicking on the link, click on the "Video" tab to watch the videos from both hearings.

English: Tennessee State Capitol in Nashville, Tennessee (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I am happy to be able to report that despite Niceley's shenanigans, the legislation passed out of the committee. It's members voted as follows :

• Voting against - Frank Niceley (R) (1st Vice Chair) and Paul Bailey (R)(2nd Vice Chair)
• Voting for - Steve Southerland (R)(Chair), Mike Bell (R), Mark Green (R), Dolores Gresham (R), Lee Harris (D), Kerry Roberts (R), and Ken Yager (R) 

On behalf of ethical, true hunters all across the state, I want to thank all the members who voted in favor of the legislation and Sen. Jim Tracy for sponsoring it. I'd also like to point out that the only two voting against it were Republicans.

The thing I'm trying to figure out is why Niceley is so dead set against the legislation. I've bullet-pointed several of his reasons in the statements he made above. The interesting thing is that if you look at his bio on the Tennessee Legislature's website, it says that he's involved with the Tennessee Hunter Alliance. It also states that he was given the 2009 SAOVA (Sportsman and Animal Owners Voting Alliance Legislative Leader) Award. Those 2 things make it appear as if Niceley supports hunters and sportsmans' causes, but his opposition to the new poaching bill says otherwise. I don't know any hunter that does not hate poachers. So, why would a guy that has won a sportsman legislative leader award and apparently belongs to a hunting organization not support a law that would help deter poaching?

It's not because poaching is not a problem in his district, as he said on 3/11/15, because he contradicted that statement on 3/18 by stating that he's aware of a couple thousand deer being poached "down on River Road" during the last 40 years. Could it be that the senator does not really care about wildlife laws, hunting, or outdoors interests but has just "appeared" to in order to earn votes from hunters? Or, is there something more to it than that? One might wonder if poaching is an acceptable activity is his district and that explains his lack of support for the bill, but being from East Tennessee myself, I would find that one hard to believe.

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I guess the thing that really irks me about Niceley dismissing this legislation and treating it as a joke is his inference that the state does not need to crackdown on poaching, because there are just so many deer in Tennessee that they've become a nuisance. Well, based on that reasoning, can we assume that Niceley, a Republican, thinks illegal immigration is justified, also, since U.S. employers say they need the cheap, unskilled labor in order to compete in the marketplace? 

Or, let's take it a step further. Niceley also voices his objection to the new legislation because the current anti-poaching laws on the books haven't fixed the problem. Does this mean he would also oppose any new drunk driving legislation that increases the penalties for that offense because the current laws haven't fixed the problem? Would he be opposed to stiffer penalties for murder since despite our current laws people just keep killing each other?

None of Niceley's objections to the new poaching legislation make any sense nor are they valid. Hunters and non-hunters alike can agree that the penalties for the illegal killing of animals should be stiff enough to be a deterrent to such crimes. Why Niceley cannot is beyond me. It really makes me wonder what his game is and why he wants this bill killed.

On my "About" page, I tell about how I came to name this blog The 2nd Chance Sheepdog. I also briefly discuss the theory of sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. I give a few examples of who might make up each of these 3 groups. In regards to poaching, the illegally killed animals are the sheep. The poachers are the wolves, and the sheepdogs include wildlife officers, ethical hunters, and others. I think you could also place politicians, like Niceley, who choose to turn a blind eye to poaching into the wolf category.

The Sheepdog has no tolerance for poachers and wolves whether they be out in the woods and fields or in the state legislature. It is my opinion that since Niceley does not think it is a priority to protect the state's wildlife resources from poaching, it is time for him to retire to his 6 counties. Then, perhaps his constituents will send someone else to Nashville who will protect the states wildlife resources so that all Tennesseans can enjoy them in whatever legal fashion they choose.