100% Committed to Protecting OUR

2nd Amendment Rights!

THE SECOND AMENDMENT has both a history and legacy that goes beyond “the right to keep and bear arms.” It was adopted by our forefathers to give us the right to defend ourselves, our families and our liberty. This is not a right only for war time but also in the time of peace. I am a fi rm believer that we need to fi ght to preserve and defend the Constitution. The one right that sees constant and unfailing attack is the right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment, along with both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, places individual liberty above the government. The government, in the founder’s view and mine, is here to serve the people. The government role is to preserve the great and wonderful freedoms we have been blessed with: individual freedom, liberty, and the opportunity to pursue individual happiness. It is time that we look again to the road map of our founding documents and the words of our Founding Fathers. When we honor our Founding Fathers words we will see a bright future for ourselves and our children.

I BELIEVE WE NEED to instill in our children what the Second Amendment means and how important it is to continue the legacy of our founding fathers, preserving individual liberties and freedom for the next generation. We need to allow the plain meaning of the words of the Second Amendment to ring again: “ …the right to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.”

Fighting to Protect the Unborn!

Life begins at conception. Life should be protected from conception to it’s natural end. Our Heavenly Father has given us our life and it is sacred. I am committed to our state constitutional rights being expanded to those who are yet to be born. We must always be vigilant and never waiver in our fight to protect those who are defenseless.

With our liberty comes great responsibility to

protect those who are in the womb!

Todd Courser–Best Candidate for Michigan Senate

Posted 7/22/2010 11:20 AM EDT on thetimesherald.com

By: tracktom’s page

On August 3, primary voters in Michigan’s Senate District 25 (St. Clair and Lapeer Counties) will have an opportunity to elect a new state senator. Vying for that office are three Republican candidates, two of whom were term-limited out of their state representative positions. The third, Todd Courser, is a fresh new face in public service.

Presently working out of Lapeer as an accountant and attorney, Todd is a dedicated family man whose support for the unborn has earned him endorsement by Michigan Right to Life.

As a constitutional conservative, Todd Courser believes we can no longer conduct business as usual in Lansing. He supports a part-time legislature, elimination of the Michigan Business Tax, transformation of Michigan into a right-to-work state so we can attract companies and jobs for our out-of-work citizens, and educational vouchers to give parents real school choice for their children.

Todd wants to cut excess fat out of our state government and combat the special interests that are holding back the economic recovery of Michigan. He will fight for our 2nd Amendment rights and support critical funding for our law enforcement teams.

Remember to vote on August 3 and please consider Todd Courser for the Michigan State Senate.

Underdog Courser could outflank Hager, Pavlov

MIKE CONNELL THE BIGGER QUESTIONS

July 26, 2010

To view the contents on www.thetimesherald.com, go to:

http://www.thetimesherald.com/article/20100726/OPINION02/7260313/Underdog-Courser-could-outflank-Hager-Pavlov

Todd Courser may turn out to be the right man in the right place at the right time.

At first glance, he looks to be a Chihuahua-sized underdog in the chase for the Republican nomination in Senate District 25, which combines Lapeer and St. Clair counties.

His opponents — Lauren Hager and Phil Pavlov — are better known and far more experienced in navigating political minefields. Both men have served six years in the Michigan House, the maximum allowed under term limits.

In fact, Hager, a retired teacher and former councilman in Port Huron, was replaced in 2004 by Pavlov, a St. Clair Township businessman who is winding up the last of his three terms.

Now they’re battling for the seat being vacated by Jud Gilbert, who cannot remain in the Senate after two terms and eight years. More about him in a moment.

COURSER ISN’T a political novice, but only because he failed in a bid for the state House two years ago. He lost in the Republican primary to Kevin Daley, who went on to become the only active farmer sitting in the Legislature.

Along with name recognition, Hager and Pavlov also have the advantage of being residents of St. Clair County, home to 65% of the district’s population. Courser lives in Lapeer County where he is a lawyer and an accountant who specializes in bankruptcies and estate planning.

So much for the preliminaries. Why do I suspect Courser is going to win the Aug. 3 primary? For starters, Hager and Pavlov appeal to similar blocs. If you voted for Hager in ‘98, ‘00 and ‘02, the chances are excellent you also voted for Pavlov in ‘04, ‘06 and ‘08.

They’re going to steal votes from each other, and suddenly it makes little difference if Lapeer County contains barely a third of the electorate. No one is going to run away with the vote in St. Clair County.

EVEN MORE significant is Courser’s standing as a darling of the Tea Party.

Hager and Pavlov are tried-and-true conservatives, but Courser is running to the right of them. And he’s running hard.

At a Tea Party gathering in North Branch, he showed considerable skill as a stump speaker.

“Stop the spending, stop the taxing, stop the regulating and get out of our business,” he said. “Return to the Constitution of the United States of America. That’s what it is about. It is simple. It’s not easy, but it is simple.”

Courser dislikes government enough to want to become part of it, which depending on your point of view is either a contradiction or a revelation.

Let me offer an illustration. He and his wife are home schooling their four children, who previously attended Heritage Christian Academy, where he served on the board. He endorses sweeping changes in public schools.

“Michigan has the most expensive education systems in America, and there is far too much overhead eating our education dollars before it ever reaches the classroom,” he said.

THE TEA PARTY is new enough that one can only guess at the depth and breadth of its support.

My guess is either Pavlov or Hager would win the primary if they weren’t bumping heads with each other. I suspect they’ll split the votes of more traditional party members, giving Courser a real chance to run away with this thing.

If he does become the nominee, it may give Democrats an opportunity to pick up support from more moderate Republicans in November. If so, the Democrats would have an outside shot of picking off a seat considered one of the safest in Michigan for the GOP.

A Courser win also would set up an all-Lapeer battle in November. The Democratic primary is a duel between John Nugent, who was re-elected to the Lapeer school board in May, and Jason Blauet, a 31-year-old teacher from Metamora.

Just as no Republican from St. Clair County is running in the 83rd House race, no Democrat from the county joined the Senate chase. In both districts, a majority of the electorate resides in St. Clair County.

TERM LIMITS prevent Gilbert from returning to the Senate, where he’s the influential chairman of the Transportation Committee.

Gilbert, a funeral director from Algonac who has spent the past dozen years in the Legislature, is running for the 81st District House seat.

The 81st has the shape of a butterfly, with one wing stretching southeast to Harsens Island and the other reaching northwest to “The Island” of high ground in Lynn Township. Port Huron Township connects the two wings.

Gilbert served two terms in the House before replacing Dan DeGrow in the Senate in 2002. He is seeking a third and final House term, and if he wins, he’ll be the chamber’s most experienced member.

He’s favored in the primary over Capac’s Peter Frangedakis, who lost to Pavlov two years ago. The winner faces Carol Morrissette of St. Clair Township, who is unopposed on the Democratic side.

LET’S WRAP this up with a look at what is arguably the most important office on the ballot in St. Clair County — an elimination round in the election of a circuit judge to a six-year term.

Mona Armstrong and Cynthia Lane, both of Fort Gratiot, are matched with Jim Downey of Marine City. They hope to take the seat now held by Pete Deegan, who is stepping down after three decades on the bench.

One of the three will fall by the wayside. The top two vote-getters on Aug. 3 advance to the general election on Nov. 2.

Downey, who grew up in Port Huron and graduated from high school in Detroit, practices law in Algonac. His wife, the former Kara Saph, is a descendant of one of the county’s most prominent pioneer families.

Lane, who ran for probate judge two years ago, is married to Alan Simasko, whose family also is well known locally. She is not related to Dan Lane, the former sheriff and an Armstrong supporter.

Armstrong, who once worked for Deegan as a research attorney, is a senior prosecutor who is perhaps best known for sending former Port Huron Mayor Ajax Ackerman to prison, where he’ll be eligible for parole in 2020.

This is a nonpartisan election, so voters who usually toe the party line are on their own. It might help to check out the candidates’ websites: www.armstrongforjudge.com, www.downeyforjudge.com and www.laneforjudge.com.

SINCE THIS is an opinion column, I’ll close with a strongly held one.

By law, judicial candidates in Michigan must be 69 or younger on Election Day. Deegan turns 72 on Sept. 11, making him ineligible for a sixth term.

It’s a silly law. I’m all for testing judicial candidates in much the way we test drivers. If they don’t know
the difference between liable and libel, or if they’re too senile to know the day of the week, then fine, rule them out.

Rather than a meaningful test, we’ve made the easy choice of using age as a measuring stick of ability. It is as arbitrary (if not quite as heinous) as using sex or race to eliminate candidates.

The judge is an outdoorsman who keeps himself in fine physical shape. He’s as fair-minded and as wise as any citizen could wish. He also is at the place in his life where he cannot be cowed or manipulated.

Why would we choose to give him a gold watch and a good riddance? The defense rests.

Thank you!

To all who have supported me either through money, signs, prayer or working to bring this about…

I really wanted to thank everyone for all of your help and prayer support for this election run.  It has been a great experience and the most demanding thing I have ever been involved in.  I didn’t know when I stepped into running the last election cycle; it was just a prelude to this campaign.  In my heart I have been grieved by the two sided politics of my own Republican Party and the willingness to speak about liberty and freedom while receiving help from those who are against such things.  I was asked how I would bring it out and slide it into the public consciousness.  I said I would either do it from the front of the room or in a letter – I really think the idea of just saying it is better for everyone and letting the public know why our Party on many occasions has failed to be the Party of liberty and freedom. I believe we should no longer have politicians leading where leaders are required.  We need those who serve, not for themselves, but for the people, as a protector of the public purse and the rights and freedoms that we have been entrusted with by God.

There are now less than two weeks left and they will fly by. As we get closer to the finish line, I am thankful for the help which seems to multiply every day. My hope and prayer is to see our state and our country renewed back to Christ and to see its prosperity restored through fiscal discipline.  To see that happen we will have to be willing to spend less and sacrifice parts of our welfare or entitlement state that has crept into all of our lives.  I have said; if you are happy with where we are as a state and a Republican Party then vote for either of the men who are running against me. A vote for me is a vote to turn the Republican Party and our state to the right and toward liberty and freedom! I want a government that does less for me and reaches less into my back pocket.  We, as a people, have regulated and overspent ourselves to bankruptcy and have destroyed our desire to fight and sacrifice to be more and reach for more.  There is now far too many in the wagon for the rest of us to pull.  Ben Franklin said – if you want to have less poverty then make people uncomfortable in their poverty. We just don’t think that way anymore – it’s all minimum wage, welfare, paid for cell phones, utilities paid for, rent paid for, food paid for, and health care paid for. And that is for the non-tax paying crowd.  We really can’t afford it anymore.

As many of you know I am committed absolutely to the idea that our children need to be taught about the heritage of the country.  The decision of how children should be educated needs to rest with parents not with the government or the teachers union.  The free markets are what will restore our education quality and global competitiveness.

Finally, the MBT which is a tax put in place by Democrats and the Rhino Republicans in our state destroyed our manufacturing. It is the perfect tax if you intend to destroy a manufacturing economy and they apparently did.  Many don’t understand why the Republicans signed on to this killer. The reason they did is the public sector unions were ready to pull their support for the Rhinos they had been quietly supporting with money and recommendations all along the way, so they tripped over themselves to sign it and save their own positions at the expense of the people of this state.

We must decide to be very active in the fight to preserve the country and the ideas of the Founding Fathers.

May God bless you all!

Todd A. Courser ~Candidate for Michigan Senate 2010

Hello Friends,

Well it is here! I received a five liberty bell rating from the Tea Party! Please take a look at this chart and pass it along to those who are searching for answers on the candidate most committed to liberty and freedom!

Also, remember to join us at our Freedom Fest Event this Sunday, July 25^th from 1pm – 4pm, in Lapeer, at Annrook Park. We will be celebrating our Freedom with FREE Food, Live Entertainment, a Car & Bike show with People’s Choice awards and Kids Activities including blow-ups. It’s fun for the whole family!

I hope to see you there!

Todd A. Courser

Candidate for Michigan State Senate

VOTER’S GUIDE

August 3, 2010 Primary Election

Lapeer County Tea Party Patriots

www.lapeerteaparty.org

Click Here to download this Report

Seeds of Faith Homeschool Journalism Interview With Todd Courser By Jen Varberg

Todd Courser Interview – March 31, 2010

I’m here with Todd Courser who is running for State Senate, District 25 (covers all of Lapeer and St. Clair counties) in November.  I had the honor of meeting Todd, and then his extended family, when I had a small part in campaigning for his run for State Representative back in 2008.  I really enjoyed being a part of that process, as I had never done anything like it before.

Back in early 2008, a friend of mine, Kelly Shepherd, called me up one day and said, “Hey Jen!  You gotta meet someone.”  Kelly and I had several one-on-one type meetings with Todd, primarily to talk about homeschooling as he moved forward in his race for State Representative.   During these meetings, Kelly and I also freely gave our opinions on a myriad of things such as:  NAIS (National Animal Identification System), the 2^nd amendment, abortion and a host of other topics.

Now here we are, 2 years later, and he is embarking on a new journey with the State Senate race.

This interview, by the way, took 1 ½ hours!  I did some editing, to keep in the most important issues, and fit it in this paper!

Jen Varberg:  Hi Todd!  Thanks for meeting with me.  Can you give a little background on yourself?

Todd Courser: I went to Lapeer East, went to Mott Community College.  I went to U of M, Flint.  I went to Thomas M. Cooley Law School where I started my business, my tax and accounting practice.  That was before I went to law school.  Then after I did that, went to law school & studied tax, estate planning and bankruptcy.

JV:  Do you specialize in bankruptcy?

TC: Bankruptcy, tax and then estate planning and elder law they call it.  So, those are all really kinda related.  I do some probate work as well, but that kinda gives you an idea what we do as a practice.

Georgeann Courser (Todd’s mom): He does quite a lot of financial counseling.

TC: So, basically then, just seeing all the sort of the distress starting to happen and there’s a failure, I think, in the, in obviously the leadership.   Failure in leadership in both parties, and so we have this, my realization that there wasn’t two parties in a lot of ways, it was one monster with two heads.   Some people have chosen then to leave the Republican Party.  Mine has been to drive back through the Republican Party – just sort of exposing the RINO (Republican In Name Only) tendencies of a lot of the party and really to focus on the fact that we need to have a live a well conservative movement inside the Republican Party, because we have a two-party system.  And just kind of leaving the other stuff for folks that lead the Republican Party – let them fight that battle as well.  Which I think is a good battle.  The constitution movement and movement of the tea party wanting to remain sort of non- partisan – not even bi-partisan, but non-partisan.  I think those are really great parts of the conservative movement being alive and refreshed and renewed.

JV:  It just seems that everybody is going so far to the left that the Republicans are now in the middle and the Democrats are socialists or something.

GC: He’s been a Republican in his heart since he was pretty young.  He feels really passionate about drawing the Republicans back to where they’re supposed to be.

TC: It’s really calling the party back to the conservative ideals.  Then I’m running against two guys who are establishment Republicans, Pavlov and Hager.  They both have establishment backing.

JV: Do you know who the Democrats are (that you’re running against)?

TC: Blauette (sp?) and I can’t remember the other one’s name.

So then the … Republicans providing the votes that passed the taxes, that did the increases that really were the backbreaking weights that were put on our economy in saying that we provided the votes to do that, which was the passing of the, increase in the income tax, then the service tax fiasco.  And then the MBT tax which was the worst business tax in the nation.

JV:  Oh, I know.

TC: That was really passed by Republicans tripping over themselves in the senate … and that’s where it really solidified in my mind that in a lot of ways the Republicans are bought and paid for by the same special interests as the Democrats and so you really can’t expect them to be voices for the people because at the most critical moment they’re going  … like Stupak.  Stupak does the same for 30 years, he gets to say he’s pro-life and get all the political capital that comes with that, but people say, “Oh, well, he’s a pro-life Democrat”.  Then you turn back around …  I guess what he meant is that he’s pro-life until it mattered.  Once it mattered, then he wasn’t pro-life any more.  So, I think that the – obviously I’ve been exposing the, you know, the special interests and the MEA is one of them.

JV:  I know, I heard you on one of the videos (on YouTube).  And that’s the thing.  That’s when you become a politician – in the negative sense.  I always pray that it won’t corrupt you like it does everybody else.

When we last spoke, you were just ending your run for State Rep. and you stated that you didn’t think you would have the energy to run for office again.  What changed your mind?

TC: It was kinda crazy.  There were a couple of people that said that I should consider running for the State Senate seat.  Right now there are the three of us, and so that does make it a very competitive race between the three of us, but we’ll just have to wait and see how that all breaks out, but time will tell.

JV:   So, someone just suggested it and that’s why you changed your mind?

TC: No.  I really felt the Lord was leading me in that direction.  I am hoping that’s not the case after, you know – that basically I can do this, this race, come out successful, go on to the general and be done.  I don’t really, honestly, you know, the further you go, the less you really want to be involved in politics.  There’s a desire to want to change the system, to change the direction of the country.  It is a burden.  It’s just a big burden in my heart and I can’t put my, you know, I can’t lay that down and just go about my life and say, “Okay.  That’s for somebody else to take up”.  A lot of people watch Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly and they watch it and then they get all upset and then they go to bed.  Well they get up, and go about their routine for the rest of their life with no intention of getting any more involved than that.

I don’t know if that answers it.  The Lord is really just leading me back to running again and It’s really to just bring forward and bring out the message that the direction we’re going with electing people who are now, that have been established Republicans, cuz the other two guys have been in the party and they’ve been pack mules – you know, collecting money for the packs.  That’s not going to work if we’re to try and preserve individual liberty and freedom.  We have got to move in a direction of actually having candidates who are going to try and move our society back towards freeing – freeing us from the socialist tendencies.

JV:  What do you plan on bringing to the table once you win the Senate race? 

TC: What are some of the things I’m trying to work on?

JV:  Uh huh.

TC: I think we have to reform entitlement.  Reform the entitlement system that we have first.  We have to essentially cut off the amount of funding that provides for that.  Right now we have about 1 in – it’s about 1 in 6 people on welfare in this state.  ¾ of the kids in a lot of areas in the county are on public assistance.  I think it’s ¾ of the kids in North Branch are on full or reduced lunch, which means they are below the poverty level.  That gives you kind of an idea in your own

community what is actually going on.  So, that’s a bit disturbing when you start looking at all the entitlement money, …, it’s just not sustainable.  We care, but as a society, we just can’t afford it.  We simply can’t afford to provide those benefits.  It used to be that we had ½ million people on public assistance in this state through our historical average.  Now we have less people in this state and now I think it’s up to 1.25 people and it might be up to 1.5 million they’re saying.

JV:  That’s just our state?

TC: Just our state.  So that gives you kind of an idea where things are at.  That’s kind of a disturbing situation.  That’s the first thing.

The second thing is we really have to deal with the MBT (Michigan Business Tax).  The MBT tax is really a tax on sales and to really give you a simple way of explaining it, it’s really, it’s a value added tax.  On sales, there’s a tax that’s placed and it’s 1%.  Well, most manufacturing, I would say it’s 4 out of 5 or 9 out of 10 – most manufacturers survive on a 1% profit.  It would cut those 9 out of 10, let’s day, I’m obviously using rough numbers, it cuts them immediately to a break-even point.  Where 9 out of 10 of our employers in our state became immediately either at zero or unprofitable.  That’s why all those little job shops are no longer employing people and all those little communities are gone because it’s not a profitable year.

There are plenty of small businesses that either closed up or went out of business – accounting clients.  Might be 100 of them, in my own practice that have disappeared.  So, that MBT tax is, first it’s entitlement reform.  We gotta deal with that – we can’t continue to pay what we’re paying.  We have to cut off and essentially say, “This is the portion of the budget.  There isn’t any more that is going to be provided.”  And then, dealing with the MBT, cutting that and eliminating it.  The candidates on the other side, they mentioned, and I don’t want to say that their positions were to not cut the tax, but they said to cut the surcharge, which is sort of an additional tax on top of the MBT, on small businesses.  Even if the surcharge disappears, it still leaves us with the worst business tax in the country.

JV:  I know there are a lot of our readers who would like to know how conservative you really are.  Could you tell me what your views are on…

JV:  Abortion?

TC: Pro-life.  100% pro-life.  The pro-life groups that endorse candidates who then never, ever offer any piece of legislation to actually end it and yet those groups continue to give those men and women 100% ratings, even though they’ve never actually offered anything in years in office.

GC: They say they’re pro-life and then never, ever do anything.

TC: Right.  I’d like to see some transparency on the state website and really how the whole Planned Parenthood thing is actually being funded.  Transparency of all of our budget.

JV:  Homeschooling?

TC: Well we have, homeschooling is where we are at.  I think there are a lot of families that are doing a great job at homeschooling.  I think there are a lot of families that probably could benefit a whole bunch by choosing homeschooling.  Some moms are obviously a little fearful that they are not going to do a great job for their children.  And dads as well.  It’s not an easy task at all, my wife obviously carries the vast majority of that burden.  We’ve seen some improvement in our kids as far as their disposition.  I think it’s an improvement all around.  My wife and my daughter’s relationship has improved.

JV:  I think a lot of people would like to know what does a senator do regarding our rights of homeschooling.  There are two schools of thought on this.  Some believe that we already have the right to Homeschool our children and we just need to have those rights protected, then there are those that believe, like the HSLDA, that we need to create laws to give us those rights, which gives the impression that we don’t have that right to begin with – but rather we created it.

TC: I don’t believe that everybody should

Homeschool.  I think there are some families that are not equipped to for it.  I think there are some families

where there is too much dysfunction already in the family to provide the kids with an adequate education.  I think parents should have the choice.  I think if you give them the choice, more often than not, though not always, the parents are in the best position to make sure that they get a good education.  So, for every family, I think the best situation is to have school choice.  I believe the burden should be squarely on the family.  I believe vouchers will help a whole bunch for allowing the freedom for families to leave and move on.  School choice does not help any family in a poverty-stricken area where they can go to another terrible school.  Or the bussing and commuting is impossible for them to take on.  So that the idea that the school choice programs are somehow, is an empty argument in my mind.

GC: And it’s not really choice.

TC: Right.  It’s limited and restricted.

JV:  I think the argument about school choice is a lot like anything that is government controlled.  Because when you take the government out of it, it’s no longer a monopoly.  When competition between schools is allowed, improvements happen.  Think of the phone company.  Once there was no longer a monopoly on that, great strides were made.  We suddenly got call-waiting, caller ID, voice mail, etc.  I think that was one of the arguments for schooling, school of choice and the vouchers.  Just having the freedom to choose.  The teacher’s unions don’t want that because they’re comfortable where they’re at.

TC: There are a lot of great teachers out there, that love the Lord.

JV:  Absolutely.  I meant the teacher’s union.

TC: That’s the distinction I get nailed with, when I’m out there and on the Facebook posts that I’ve had where there are a couple of teachers from our church even, are bought into the ideology, or the dogma of the union that says they have choice.

GC: Well, they misinterpreted.

TC: They do.  Or they mischaracterized, if you want tosay.  It’s pretty clear that I’m saying there is a problem inside the system, I thought.  Even my answers that say…

JV: There are absolutely great teachers.  It’s not the teachers.  I think it’s the union that is the issue.

TC: And that’s why homeschooling has grown.  It provides other options.  I think that people, I think that freedom will naturally progress towards conservative ideology.  The idea, being more conservative and I think they’ll find Christ.  Not because you force them one way or the other, but because essentially the natural tendency is the discovery of our heritage leads you back to Christ, the discovery of our Constitution leads you back to Christ, the discovery of the founding of the country leads you back to Christ.  I think that that’s really the sort of, you know, what the establishment of those interest groups don’t want to have happen.  So, I would say that maybe a quarter of them will leave the public school immediately if you gave them a $3,000 credit or voucher to leave.  If that were for homeschools, then somehow there would obviously have to be accountability and that sort of stuff and I’m not sure what that would entail.  There’s obviously got to be some planning.  Anything that we can do to create freedom in that marketplace, you’re absolutely right, would be a good thing.

JV:  You touched on something that I would like to revisit about homeschooling.  You said that there has to be accountability.  What do you mean by that?

TC: If you have a, if you’re going to allow, nobody is – the political reality is I would love to have homeschooling not have any, not have any – I think my wife is doing a fine job but when you’re not going to get it in the political reality, is you’re not going to get a voucher system that allows people to have $3,000 checks from

the government or $5,000 checks without some accountability.  That doesn’t mean you need to take the voucher because then we need to be accountable to take from the government.  I don’t know that I would anyway.

JV:  See, that’s the thing.  I would be tempted to

take the money, because I could use it…

TC: …Accountability.

JV:  but I would rather not have to answer to anybody about my methods of homeschooling.

TC: Right.  What you teach them.  Right.  I know, myself, and obviously this would be interesting for the article, because I personally am not so interested in receiving a voucher from the government with any strings attached at all.

JV:  Right.  But there might have to be if there is…

TC: The political realities might make it very difficult to do that and create the option for people to stay out of the system and not have a voucher, and the option for them to get out and have a voucher.

JV:  Which goes back to freedom..

TC: Choice.  Far more choices.  And the more choices you offer to people, I believe that that’s really the..

GC: I think that goes back to what you said which brings up the quality of whatever is, so you have the quality in public education if that’s where you choose to go.  Quality in charter, wherever you go.

TC: It’s putting the parent in charge of the child’s education, not the government and not the people that control government.  That’s really the idea.  More choices.  More opportunity, whether it be homeschooling, whether it be private, whether it be for-profit schooling.

JV:  The 2^nd Amendment?

TC: I’m a pretty strong supporter of the 2^nd Amendment.  I have my CCW or CPL.  Of course you can open carry at Starbucks, you know.

JV:  What??

TC: Yeah.  You can open carry.  Have you seen opencarry.org?

JV:  No.  I thought we couldn’t here in Michigan.

TC: Oh yeah.  Most states are open carry.  Yeah, we’re an open carry state.  You can open carry as long as it’s on your side and fully exposed.

JV:  When did that happen?

TC: You don’t have to have a concealed weapon permit.  Oh, that’s always been like that.

GC: It’s a well-kept secret.

JV:  NAIS?

TC: I’m against it.

JV:  New Healthcare Bill?

TC: I think it’s going to bankrupt the country.  I mean, we simply can’t afford it.  Not to mention the taking away of our personal liberty and freedom.

This is the spot where liberty and freedom is reborn here, meaning people are really aware of the fact that there’s too much government or they may see liberty and freedom leave the country and it will be gone.  That’s a terrible situation so we have to keep fighting this, is the way it works.

JV:  The last question I have for you is, one of the moms said it would be good if you could explain what a state senator does and your role in the bigger picture.  It’s something that most people should know and probably don’t, especially the kids.

TC: In a bicameral legislature, where you have two houses, what’s supposed to happen is, it’s supposed to be checks and balances.  The founding fathers who looked at the federal idea when they were setting it up in the Constitution.  The first house was sort of a lower house and they took it from – similar to the house of parliament.  But they didn’t call it that, it was a senate and a house of representatives which goes more towards Rome and Greece.  Essentially that was kind of the idea.  Well, the House of Representatives was more the lower house, essentially, it’s renewed, it’s the common folks, the common folks have the most influence into that spot.  It’s sort of the seasons and emotions of the country.  The house can be turned over every couple of years – that was the idea.  The senate initially was,

really, they were elected by the … state legislatures.  So, the senate was turned over and voted on, not popularly, the way that they are now.  They’re voted in popularly now, that kinda took away a check that was there, a balance to the whole process.  Meaning, if your legislature is turned over, then your local movement in your state was to move toward a more conservative way of doing things.  Then your senators would, of course, be turned over because now you’d have a movement by those Republicans like Sayer, those conservative folks would then elect the new senators.  And the new senators would reflect sort of the feeling inside that state.  Now we have where the special interests, all they do is they fund Levin and fund Stabenow and they’re really very, very difficult to overcome.  In our state, we have the representatives are elected in a popular amount, as far as population, and our senators are elected according to population in the district, according to population.  There really isn’t any difference between them and that’s why a lot of states are moving away toward unicameral, where it’s just one legislature, just one group.  I don’t know if that would save us money or make more sense, I like the idea that it’s according to geographic area and in reality have these two counties, two counties, or one county a piece.  Something like that to create a senate that has a different method of electing rather than just the popular vote, which I think gives you a different impact.

JV:  Now the senators are divided among different counties according to the amount of people, aren’t they?

TC: That’s right.  And that will change in 2011 because of the census that is being conducted right now.  That will all be redrawn.

Thank you so much Todd and Georgeann, for taking the time to meet with me today.

Leadership in Elections
by Dan Stacy June 7, 2010

As far back as I can remember, I’ve considered voting to be not only a privilege but my responsibility. I took pride in knowing that I’d done my part in getting out and exercising my vote whenever possible. Yet like many people, I always found a part of the ballot very confusing. You know that part of the ballot that lists those candidates who run for Judgeships and County Commissioner positions?

First off, those who are listed as running for Judge have no party affiliation. Now I know these folks are supposed to be non-partisan, and many of us like to think we are voting for candidates based on their positions and abilities, not party affiliation. Yet political parties do a great service to the voter in that if a candidate identifies with a party, he identifies with that party platform. It gives me a pretty good idea where that candidate stands on some pretty core issues, simply because political parties spend a great deal of time pointing out their position on core issues important to voters, and the candidate feels comfortable enough identifying with the party. That lets me know the candidate is pretty close to the party platform on those issues.

Now, there are some others that confuse me as well. I’m not referring to the state university board of regent contestants. I’m talking about State House of Representatives and State Senate candidates. You see, folks that run for these state offices are usually regular folks like you and me. They usually live and work among us. Yet our voter district is usually large enough that we don’t know these folks personal. Also, since they are running for local and state office, they haven’t had the opportunity to speak on national, big ticket issues that concern many Americans, nor are they given the amount of air time that their national counterparts are given. Sure, we know the folks running for the U.S. Senate and House races. They are on the news often. Yet we don’t know our local and state candidates.

And therein lies the true danger. Sure, those folks in national office can do more than enough damage to the nation; they can have more than a little negative impact on our way of life. Yet, these folks did not wake up one day when they turned thirty-five and decide to run for national office. A majority of the folks in national office have come up through local and state election processes.

We see a huge deficit in both character and leadership in today’s national office holders. Had we paid attention years ago, we’d have realized that these folks did not change and become corrupt, characterless political animals only upon reaching the national scene. Chances are good that these folks were corrupt a good long time before getting into national office. There is a long trail of devastation, fallout and corruption in the wake of many a national political career.

This year folks are more in tune than ever before in my lifetime. Due to the drastic changes to our society, countless changes have happened which threaten our very way of life. Our nation teeters on the brink of economic, political, moral and sociological failure due in large part to those who our society has voted up through the process, from local politicians to national figures. The results have been devastating. Our nation finds itself in moral peril, unable to realize even the basic tenets of our constitutional form of government. We seem perched upon the opportunity to nullify the very governing principles which protect us from tyranny. And our corrupt national…dare I say “leadership” has as its head the personification of the progressive movement which threatens to dismantle our system of government…Barack Obama.

So, this time around, folks are willing and able to be informed more than ever. They’ve experienced some awful leadership making awful decisions which fly in the face of “we the people.”

In the race in my local district, there are three good men running on the Republican ticket for the Michigan Senate seat soon to be vacated by Sen. Judd Gilbert (R) due to term limits. Now, I don’t know all three men, but I know one. I don’t know the character of all three men, nor do I know the family history of the three. But I know one of these men is a good, honest, conscientious Christian man who values family, faith, and freedom. I know his family and his extended family. I know his business reputation, I know of his childhood, how he was raised in the area, attended the local school system here, was raised in a good Christian home, valued family and hard work, went to school and worked hard to build a life and a living for himself and his family. I know he ran for election to the State House of Representatives because he felt called to do his part to ensure that we are free to life, work, and worship, or not worship as the constitution provides for us. After that election was over and he found he had not won, he didn’t miss a beat. When the opportunity arose for him to run for the senate seat, he didn’t even hesitate.

A core of principles continued to drive this man to run for a leadership position in the Senate. He does not view the job of Michigan senator as a position “over” people. No, he truly has the heart of a servant. He simply believes that the core conservatives principles of freedom and faith are important, even crucial now more than ever. As he’s said before, we may never be at a point in our life where the decisions made and results of this election are more important. Some changes may be irreversible.

About his opponents, I’m sure they are fine men. I’ve heard good things about them, but on core issues such as right to life and school choice, religious freedom, smaller government and a return of the school system to a state unshackled by the powerful Michigan Education Association, these men don’t measure up. On core conservative and constitutional values, there are some distinct conflicts of interest, in my opinion.

When things matter, they really do matter. And in the case of this year’s election, things couldn’t matter more. If we’ve any hope in reversing the horrible mess created by years of ceding all things political to our noisier, more insistent, more determined fellow citizens on the left, it has to start with the local and state elections, not just the national elections. We have to learn to change, from the bottom up. A national government without any support from an informed and activated state and local voting populace will find it so much harder to legislatively steal the rights of its citizens impose tyranny.

If you don’t know your candidates, I urge you to get to know them. They would all welcome your interest, your questions, and your support. It is important to ask the core questions: how do you feel about the constitutional protection of my rights? How will you advance the right to life, to protect the unborn? How will you shrink government? How will you bring spending in line with income, and how and when will you cut my taxes? How will you end subsidies and spending on programs not constitutionally mandated? How will you oppose non-constitutional efforts by our national government to take power away from local and state governments and give sovereignty away to global governance? If you cannot get answers you are comfortable with, you should not vote for those men. If you put them in office, it is so much easier for folks to continue to put them back in office, and continue their journey to the top of national leadership. Character will not ever appear magically where it never previously existed. Leadership must come from all levels of government, from township supervisor to city commissioner to state senator and yes, even President.

I don’t know everything about the others, but I know a lot about this man, Todd Courser. I know he’s working harder than ever before to win your trust and earn your vote. Will you talk to him today and ask the questions you need to ask, so that you can support the right man for office?

Saturday, May 22, 2010 at the Lapeer Country Club.

Format

4-person scramble, shotgun start at 9am

Schedule

• 8:00-8:45: Registration & Continental Breakfast
• 9:00am Sharp: Shotgun Start
• Lunch at the Turn
• 2:30-5:00pm: Dinner, Awards & Prizes

More Details?

Georgeann Courser or Miranda McIntosh (800) 376-2216

Remove me from your email list

1. Email(valid email required)

 

cforms contact form by delicious:days