Mark Fisher…Fool, Tool, or “Useful Idiot”?…

…Mark Fisher, legislator wanabee and candidate for Legislative District 2, seat A, is, we believe, at best a “useful idiot”.  Mr. Fisher campaigns by ranting.  His latest rant is to criticize the recent proposal of adding independent legal counsel for the Legislature. The legislative branch is the so-called “law making” branch of government.  What is so objectionable about having the “law making” branch of government include a lawyer to give them independent legal advice to them about legal issues? Key words here Fish…”legal” and “independent!”

The Legislature is currently forced to rely on the Attorney General’s staff for any legal advice, which might come in the form of a legal opinion, legal counsel to a committee or comment on any legal issues that might arise.  If we are honest people, we need to admit that every human with a pulse has a bias.  The Attorney General’s number one client is state government; it’s obvious to anyone who thinks (apparently Fish doesn’t…very much) about it, that the Attorney General and his entire staff are bias toward the bureaucracy.

Our Idaho Constitution mandates that we have three separate branches of government, legislative, executive and judicial.  The Legislature represents the People.  Common sense tells us that having attorneys from the executive branch of government advising the Legislature is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine.  There are ample examples of where this bias has gone wrong in the past.

Every department of state government has an attorney assigned to it.  Most people don’t realize that these attorneys actually work for the Attorney General’s office and are effectively “on loan” to each state agency.  About two thirds of all the legislation considered by the Legislature is actually written by the state agencies.  If a legislator questions the constitutionality or legal status of a proposed bill, that legislator only recourse is to go to the Attorney General’s office for a legal opinion.  Typically the Attorney General will farm out that request to the agency proposing the legislation.  Quite often the task of writing the legal opinion falls onto the very attorney who drafted the bill!  Hey Fish…do you think the legislator will get an unbiased opinion?  H, E, double hockey sticks, No! (We’re not talking about raw milk here Fish, we’re talking about the CONSTITUTION…or don’t your supporters care about that issues either?

Having biased legal counsel advising the Legislature on legislation drafted by the bureaucrats effectively grows government…and grows…and grows…and grows it!  That legal counsel is biased toward that same bureaucracy that drafted the bill.  Duh!  Yet, Fisher complains that hiring an attorney for the Legislature is growing government! Wake Up Fisher! It is the status quo that is growing government!  We at Chuckleberries have noticed that Mr. Fisher seems to think one dimensionally, and that any two-dimensional scenario is just too complex for him to get his tiny, aquatic, mind around.

Fish is good at thinking inside the, ever so tiny, box. We saw that clearly last session, with Mr. Fisher’s criticism of the raw milk legislation.  Fish says he is against big government, yet he promotes big government policy and is hostile to anything that smacks of “freedom and liberty”.  Maybe Fisher can send in a comment to Chuckleberries and explain to us how the human race evolved from monkeys – to homo erectus – to modern man without pasteurized milk? (No Chuckle Fans, we don’t believe in evolution! …well, maybe Liberals did come from monkeys…but that’s another story!) …Or could it be that the make-up of raw milk is defective because the Master Chemist of that concoction, Who would just happen to be God the Creator of the universe, is so stupid that we need Mark Fisher in office to guarantee that drinking raw-milk will be illegal?  Mark Fisher, The fish…out of water, who wants to do our thinking for us, also wants to force all of us to drink only pasteurized milk. (BTW, new studies link pasteurized milk to cancer…we’ll stick with the raw, whole, healthy stuff, gift from God…thank-you-very-much!)  Yes, we think Fish is so “brilliant” he has gone beyond “brilliant” over to either madness or control-freakism!

Oh, and then there is Fish’s rant against Rep. Phil Hart, and presidential candidate Ron Paul…and …Oh, Fisher is for smaller government…and State’s Rights?  Really?  Without a doubt, the most effective sitting Idaho legislator promoting State’s Rights is Rep. Hart.  It was Phil Hart that led Idaho to become the second state in the Union to outlaw the implementation of Real ID.  Phil Hart was the first legislator in the nation to run anti-TSA legislation.  Phil Hart has also been a leader on the illegal immigration issue.  If the people who are promoting Fisher would quit filing ethics complaints against Hart, he might be able to get back to the illegal immigration issue and get something done. Hey Fish, have you read even one of Hart’s Bills in its entirety? No…we didn’t think so! (Hey Fish, Mayo and Jorg’ee, do us a favor and read Hart’s book…then stay home on election day!)

To our knowledge, Rep. Hart is the only legislator who authored a State’s Rights bill that resulted in an Act of Congress within three days of its passage.  This occurred when the Idaho Legislature passed HB343 in 2011, the Wolf Emergency Declaration Bill.  Three days after the Legislature passed HB343; Congress took the wolves off the endangered species list and turned management of the wolves over to the state of Idaho. (Do wolves like to eat fish?)  It was either that, or Idaho would have taken management of the wolves away from the federal government using Idaho’s police power as outlined in HB343.  Congress even restricted the jurisdiction of the federal courts to hear a lawsuit on the issue, permanently locking in state management.  It appears that Congress wanted to avoid the State’s Rights show-down that was set up by HB343. That bill would have never happened if Hart had not burned the mid-night oil night after night researching how to get the job done. Fisher is for state’s rights, but thinks Hart should be replaced? Get real Fish…you’re not even qualified to carry Phil Hart’s brief case!

Finally, it is our…ever so humble…opinion that even the little green GEICO lizard is smarter then Fisher.  Just ask that friendly little guy with the Australian accent and he will tell you “If you switch to Ron Paul you can save $1.4 Trillion a year.”

This is one Fish that should become an endangered species…a mindless psudo-conservative that is nothing but a tool…a useful idiot as such…for the power hungry cabal seeking to replace our Conservative team in District 2.

Say NO to a double martini Senate! Say NO to Mayo and Fish!

Hart, Vito and Vick!  We need to keep them in Boise working for US!

Our blog…our opinion…we’re Chuckleberries Online, and that’s a fact!

3 thoughts on “Mark Fisher…Fool, Tool, or “Useful Idiot”?…”

  1. You might be more persuasive if you stuck to facts instead of calling people tools and idiots. The name-calling crap and this he’s-less-Conservative finger pointing doesn’t do anything for your credibility or for the party.

    Note from Chester: You mistake us for journalists! Our only rules: No Defamation! No Profanity! No Lies! Want to write for us? We need some Pro’s around here…we do have one democrat, but we only let him post at night when nobody’s looking!

  2. I don’t think the “name-calling” was inappropriate. The fact is the Mr. Fisher has been talking quite a bit about things that don’t make any sense. Why is he running against Vito? Because Phil Hart has got to go, at least in Fisher’s opinion.

    There are plenty of facts in the post about Fisher’s positions. He claims to be a Christian, yet he continues to spread calumny about Phil Hart and other conservatives. His recent post card he mailed out was just plain silly. Whom ever “Chuckleberries” is, I hope they continue their tone. It is, at least, interesting and factual. I know it’s only opinion, but I happen to agree with them most of the time.

    I called someone an idiot once and they scolded me. They were correct and I apologized. I won’t do that anymore.

  3. I guess it’s subjective. When I read something an adult has written, I think about how I’ve taught my 8- and 10-year-old children to behave. If an adult doesn’t come across as having the level of maturity of my elementary school children, I don’t put much stock in what they have to say — or give much consideration to their endorsements.

    (Note from Chester: Good point! However, we’re writing on the same level as the liberals we make fun of, except that we don’t say vile things or defame them. We wouldn’t let our kids read this site and certainly wouldn’t hold it up as an example of acceptable behavior. On the other hand, we’re a parody site, mixed with news/facts/opinions, etc. that is having an affect on local politics and we aspire to do nothing more than vent! We have had, and will continue to have, posts of a more serious nature. Otherwise, we’re going to continue to yuck it up, drink a few beers and pretend we’re witty, pithy and funny! People are having a visceral reaction to many of our posts and if we make people think, or liberals fume, or expose some truth, then we’re happy campers!

    Your two comments are likely the most cerebral sentences that have appeared on these pages. Thanks! Gotta go have another beer now…bye!)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.