The Internet Archive discovers and captures web pages through many different web crawls.
At any given time several distinct crawls are running, some for months, and some every day or longer.
View the web archive through the Wayback Machine.
Paul Hodes is not going to let the Union Leader's bizarre position in this state or his high-pressure senate race get in the way of standing up for what's right:
I read with deep disappointment that the Union Leader has decided it will not publish the wedding announcement for Greg Gould and Aurelio Tine. The couple is legally getting married this weekend in Portsmouth. Last year New Hampshire legalized same-sex marriage to ensure that everyone has equal opportunity.
It is reprehensible that the Union Leader would exclude legal marriage in New Hampshire from publication because of their right-wing agenda. Legitimate minds can disagree over policy but once the law is settled, the paper should put aside differences and allow all couples to have equal access to their publication.
Mr. Gould and Mr. Tine will become legally married this weekend and they should have the same opportunities as everyone in New Hampshire to have their marriage publicized and recognized. The Union Leader's disgraceful policy of exclusion harkens to a different time in this country when people were denied opportunity because of their race, religion and ethnic origin.
Standing ovation, Congressman! And Paul is absolutely correct: you can't claim to be a paper for the entire state of New Hampshire, while simultaneously wishing away the law of the land.
George W. Bush, perhaps the worst president in the history of the Republic, got reflective the other day:
The former president said his greatest failure in office was not passing Social Security reform.
It wasn't "reform"; it was privatization. And I remember it as the tipping point that led to Bush's dramatic decline in popularity. Which was certainly fortunate for America; imagine the economic collapse his policies hastened with the added horror of our Social Security money having gone into Wall St. instead.
But never to fear. Where George W. Bush and his congressional allies John E. Sununu and Paul Ryan failed, Frank Guinta intends to succeed:
Government's the problem here, ladies and gentlemen. When Social Security was created, you didn't have the wealth of private sector solutions for lifetime savings that you have today. We have to honor the obligations that have been made to those who are reliant on the federal government - older generations. But future generations should seek different private sector solutions and have personal responsibility start to lead the way. My kids are 6 and 5. They shouldn't know what Social Security is!
Of course, this brings us to where we were before with Frank on this: by taking future generations out of Social Security, he doesn't have a clue as to how to pay for people like you and me who are currently contributing to the system. So under the Frank Guinta plan, either we will see decades of our earnings stolen from us, or else he will have to dramatically balloon the budget deficit. Take it away, President Obama:
"Given the way Social Security is structured, you'd actually have to borrow a trillion dollars to make up for the money that was siphoned into the private accounts, and this would weaken the solvency of Social Security,"
So there you have it. In order for Frank Guinta's kids never to know what Social Security is, he's going to have to put the US in debt one trillion dollars.
I'm not sure there's a magic bank account in the world big enough for Frank Guinta to borrow that much money.
(Part put below the fold. - promoted by Dean Barker)
October 20 was a wonderful day for New Hampshire and Maine. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood came to Portsmouth with a $20 million grant that will be used towards replacing the deteriorating Memorial Bridge. This bridge, built in 1923 to honor New Hampshire's World War I veterans, connects Portsmouth and Kittery, Maine. It is a foundation of the economic and cultural life of the Seacoast.
Joe McQuaid is wrong - New Hampshire has never been a referendum state and he should know better than to claim this law should be subject to a referendum.
What Governor Lynch said before he signed the bill into law is irrelevant to whether the UL should publish gay wedding announcements. Act like a mature adult, Joe.
Joe, you are anti-gay. There are years of editorials proving this.
I have been told that the UL may be violating Human Rights statutes, from someone who works in that office.
The UL publishes articles about many topics they disagree with already, such as articles about Democrats and liberals. This arguement is meaningless.
This statement will be adding fuel to the outrage over this policy.
UPDATE: I am glad to see Team Shea-Porter is not letting up:
END UPDATE
Because if he lived in a state that had campaign finance laws with teeth he might get tossed off the ballot:
Democrat Joe Garcia filed a federal lawsuit Thursday in an attempt to get his Republican opponent, state Rep. David Rivera, kicked off the November ballot. Garcia argues that recent amendments to Rivera's financial statements disqualify him from running for office. The Miami Herald reports there's a legal precedent: Last week, a judge threw a Tampa-area state Senate candidate off the ballot because he didn't list all of his personal assets.
The fact remains: logic and common sense show that the $355,000 that Frank Guinta gave to his campaign could not possibly be his, thus making it an illegal act.
And despite repeated calls from leading New Hampshire Republicans - including Jeb Bradley, his old boss and the last Republican to hold the seat he runs for, repeated calls from Democrats, and repeated calls from the media, Frank Guinta refuses to show a simple bank statement to back up his claim that the money was his to give.
It's your job between now and November 2nd to let everyone you know in the first district about this. Every person with whom I have discussed it finds it repellent and indefensible. Because it is repellent and indefensible.
The late-campaign airing of allegations of ethical misconduct in the race for an open New Hampshire House seat could produce the rare spectacle of a member of Congress facing an ethics investigation shortly after entering office.
Remember, whether he sleazily purchased the stock three minutes after leaving office or not is not the issue. There's the lying about the nepotistic influence peddling as well.
Personally I think they are wasting their time with the UL - both the New York Times and the Boston Globe publish gay wedding announcements.
There was a small article about Judd Gregg's daughter's wedding in the New York Times the same week our civil union was featured in the Vows section. I believe the Gregg wedding was not published in the Union Leader.
Aurelio and Greg - you both deserve better than the Union Leader. May you have many years of love and happiness.
1990 1 in 2,000
2000 1 in 500
2004 1 in 166
2007 1 in 150
2010 1 in 110
That's roughly one child receiving an autism diagnosis every fifteen minutes.
In 2006, the Republican controlled congress stepped in, with the passage of the Combating Autism Act:
...signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 19, 2006. It authorizes nearly one billion dollars in expenditures, over five years beginning in 2007, to combat the autism spectrum disorders of autism, Asperger syndrome, Rett syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder, and PDD-NOS through screening, education, early intervention, prompt referrals for treatment and services, and research.
The legislation had broad bipartisan support in both chambers of congress. In the Senate, John E. Sununu was a co-sponsor. As were Jeb Bradley and Charlie Bass in the House version of the bill.
I realize that I have cited this quote before on Blue Hampshire, but it's too damn good to ignore:
Twelve years ago tonight, in the WMUR 2nd CD debate, Congressman Charles Foster Bass criticized opponent Mary Rauh's support for the Patients' Bill of Rights in the following manner:
"The big problem with the bill you support is that it requires insurance companies to cover any procedure that is medically necessary."
Charlie's record on health care is atrocious in so many ways -- supporting cuts to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Medicare, opposing generic drug reform, supporting the industry's flawed prescription drug bill, and opposing expansion of insurance access to working families. But nothing represents Bass values more than this single quote.
No-Gummit Guinta wants food and drug producers to have no safety oversight. Was Frank asleep when they covered this in high school? Or does he consciously want to bring 19th century laissez-faire to 21st century factory farms and Big PhRMA?
(And here I thought Charlie Bass' support of allowing someone to slap a "NH MAPLE SYRUP" label onto a bottle of corn syrup was bad.)
Of course, I gather the FEC is another one of those Big Gummit acronyms Frank would also love to abolish.
If Frank Guinta wants to live in an adolescent Ayn Rand fantasy world, good for him. But please don't let him drag New Hampshire along for the ride. We have serious problems in this country that call for serious public servants. The kind of puerile demagoguery Guinta shows in the clip above is not going to cut the mustard.
I've said this before in a general sense. And the continuing scandal over Frank Guinta's refusal to prove that $355,000 of his campaign money came from him is unfairly blocking this "hair-on-fire" issue from getting the traction it deserves.
But let's be clear. A Congress with a Frank Guinta in it is one step closer to two generations of workers getting the reward of their Social Security, to which system they have been contributing for years, stolen from them:
For two decades I've been paying into the system for those older than me.
Frank doesn't want his kids or anyone else's kids to do the same for me. He doesn't even want them to know what Social Security is.
When pressed by Carol Shea-Porter at the debate on how he was going to do this while at the same time honoring the commitment to those already in the system, he was either too ignorant or too dishonest to answer outside of his non-answering talking points.
This is a huge deal. Frank Guinta might be able to rely on hundreds of thousands of mystery money dollars to get him through retirement, but you and I and regular law-abiding folks don't have access to those kinds of magical bank accounts.
Do you have friends and neighbors who are Millenials or Ge X-ers in the first district? Or others who care about them? Because they need to know ASAP.
Carol Shea-Porter: 42%
Frank Guinta: 47%
Undecided: 9%
407 "likely voters," MoE 4.9%, 10/9-10/12
The poll ended over a week ago, just before the NHPR Guinta expose started filtering into the larger state media bloodstream. Pair that fact with this:
However, 20 percent of voters said they aren't familiar with Guinta, while only 4 percent said that of Shea-Porter, who is the first woman to be elected to national office from New Hampshire.
We can win this race, folks. Don't let those presidential drop-off voters get away. Remind everyone that there is an election going on! Most of all, remind them about Carol's relentless focus on the "rest of us," and Guinta's refusal to prove that $355,000 dollars he put into his campaign is legal. We need those 20% of voters to learn all about Frank Guinta.
