I met a fellow named McCullers at the Santuck Flea Market who was doing everything to campaign for Republican gubernatorial candidate, Bob Riley. He insisted that he was the best man to be Alabama's chief executive.

I promised him I would read Riley's book, "A Plan for Change," which I did. I was not impressed. In fact I was very disturbed. His "plan" was even worse than I had feared.

Here are some examples:

Page 3: "...our sister states flourish... why has Alabama lagged behind...?"

Riley is lamenting why Alabama has not been able to adopt as many government oppressions and revenue raising measures as most of our neighboring states.

Page 16: "[We need] much more detailed reporting requirements... on the forms currently required by the Alabama Ethics Commission."

These are just invasions of privacy. They should be repealed, not tightened. The behavior of government officials is no more ethical than it was before these requirements ever existed. Don Siegelman's $250,000 house sale is a graphic illustration of how easy it is to get around the $1000 campaign contribution limit, which for all practical purposes is unenforcable.

Page 19 "...we need to reform our state constitution."

Page 22: "One obvious flaw in the 1901 Constitution is the lack of limited home rule."

We already suffered a graphic example of "home rule" in Montgomery County with that hideous occupational tax. I say "HELL NO" to "home rule."

Pages 22-23: "...county governments [need] to provide adequate services [such as] a water and sewer authority... a fire district... zoning, economic development, fire and police protection, etc."

HELL NO!!! County governments, like all governments, are too big already. We DON'T need more programs and regulations, and we sure don't need any more taxes to pay for them.

Page 29: "...we could delete the obsolete, irrelevant, and unconstitutional provisions that still appear in our constitution's text."

NO!!! The reason these are left intact is to make sure people won't forget them. And as a matter of fact, I would like to restore some of these liberty-protecting provisions. Have you ever heard the cry, "People who forget history are doomed to repeat it?"

Page 31: "We must provide our children with an education..."

Here is one of many times the term "our children" appears in a collective context in Riley's book. The responsibility of providing an education is that of the parents, NOT the state or other people coerced into paying for it.

Page 33: "The education of our children (here we go again) should be... our state's first priority.... I pledge to... ensure full funding for our public schools."

HERE'S PROOF that Riley is NOT a conservative. He's talking like a Ted Kennedy Democrat. No taxes or expenditures are too high to throw into the black holes of our Marxist, government-run indoctrination centers.

Page 34: "[We must] convince the people... to provide additional funding for our educational system."

How left-wing can you get? MORE draconian tax increases.

Page 35: "...we, as a state, need to... FULLY FUND the education of all our children."

DITTO!!!

Page 41: "I propose that we invest more funds in the area of teacher development..."

You mean show them how to teach little children to be good little slaves and serfs for the state?

Page 55: "Our highways, for all practical purposes, are not being patrolled at night due to the failure to fund an adequate number of state troopers."

Ever thought there was a good reason for this? If the roads are nearly empty, why should they need patrolling?

Page 62: "...there are a maximum of 380 uniformed troopers who can patrol the roads of this state."

Considering the number of checkpoints and excess traffic stops around the state, we could do very well with 200 or less.

Page 80: "The primary role of the state will be to: (1) Create a world-class educational system for our children, and (2) oversee a long-term infrastructure investment program."

Now that's THE DREAM OF A TRUE MARXIST.

Page 82: "[We must] take advantage of federal dollars.... There is no better way to leverage state dollars..."

The Alabama politicians should grab every bribe from the federal government they can get, regardless of how much it costs or how oppressive the programs are.

Pages 85-86: "I will use my relationship with the President of the United States and the Director of Homeland Security to ensure that Alabama gets a major share of the investment being made to ensure our safety."

Riley wants Alabama to play a major role in creating Bush's new "Gestapo."

AFTER READING THIS, I have decided that Riley is even more dangerous than the incumbent Democrat, Don Siegelman. And I concluded long ago that Siegelman was very dangerous, and so far, his track record has proven it.

I WISH I could seriously consider Siegelman's charges in his TV ads claiming that Riley (in the U.S. Congress) voted against more money for education and supported abolishing the federal Department of Education. But I doubt that Riley has enough guts to make any serious reductions. Siegelman also accused Riley of "hardly working" and missed many votes. If Riley really was "hardly working," it was probably a good thing.

IN CONCLUSION, Riley is completely disqualified as a viable candidate for governor. And of course, Siegelman disqualified himself long ago only a day or two after his inaugeration.

That leaves ONLY ONE VIABLE CANDIDATE for governor here in Alabama--the LIBERTARIAN candidate. His name is JOHN SOPHOCLEUS. He is clearly the ONLY candidate who will protect and defend our priceless and sacrosanct individual rights and will not compromise to the oppressive powers that be.

John Martin writes from Elmore County.

[FAC Home] [Archives]