Should we starve Grandpa to death?

June 7, 2017 at 11:19 AMIsaac Helland

Today I bring a simple question. It's not one of politics. It's one of simple human decency and ethics.

Well at least, it should be.

I wish the Oregon State Legislature knew that though. Because they just passed a bill out of committee that would allow for the withholding of food and water from people who have Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other mental health issues.

Why didn't a whole bunch of people show up at the hearing to testify? That certainly would have been the case, thanks to watchdog groups like Oregon Right to Life, but to avoid such unseemly public input, the hearing was conveniently cancelled and then silently re-scheduled for one hour later.


Is this how we want our local politicians behaving? Trying to hide their evil doings? We elected them, and it's time that we remind them of that fact.

We all need to step up if we are going to make a change. If you care at all about thousands of elderly people across the state, and many more who have mental health conditions while younger, if you don't think we should literally starve people to death because of factors that they can't control, then you have to TAKE ACTION.

Call your senator and ask them to VOTE NO ON SENATE BILL 494.

And you had better do it fast, because the full Senate is voting on this... TOMORROW! Wish I had known sooner, but I just found out about this.

If you don't know who your representatives are, you are welcome to contact me through any method you have - comment, FB, Twitter, LinkedIn, phone... with your address so I can look them up for you to call. Or you can look them up yourself at Calling is best, so definitely do that, and if you have time email as well. We need them to know that we aren't barbarians and that we won't reelect murderers.

Posted in: Liberties and Rights


Legislative Days at the Capital

December 13, 2016 at 12:08 PMIsaac Helland

This week I was up at the capitol building in Salem. Behind me, I was carting a case of hundreds of flyers and documents. On my blazer I proudly wore a pin that said, "Convention of States." And beside me, I had two great people who I had the honor of working with: my State Directors.

I am a legislative liaison for the Convention of States Project (if you haven't heard of the project, see my article on it below, "A REAL Solution"). That means that I'm a lobbyist. Wicked, I know, but a necessary task if you want to get anything done in the legislature. Actually, what most people don't realize is that any form of activism in the capitol can be considered lobbying, and that lobbying is not bad per se. In fact, lobbying is a vital part of our legislative process because those who have expertise can share their knowledge of a given subject with those who are not as knowledgeable about it; legislators are generally only experts in one or two areas of policy.

We started off by making a plan. We made a list of legislators to visit and set up appointments. We sent out email blasts to our supporters, asking them to call certain legislators who we wanted as sponsors. And we also did a lot of computer work.

Lobbying is not all glory and games. It entails more than just going around to legislators and scoring big wins and getting them to spend money on whatever your little pet interest is. For our team, a lot of our time was spent simply updating our digital legislator database, adding pertinent information like whether or not they support us or whether they are still going to be holding office after the results of the election. A lot of what we do is gathering information; you never know what might come in handy some day.

On the last day that our team was up there, it began to snow and the temperature dropped. By the time we left, there was half a foot of snow covering everything and severe weather warnings out for the roads. We ended up stopping at Shari's to wait for the roads to clear a little bit, and found to our surprise that a member of the legislature was stuck there too! It was an interesting ending to a tiring but fulfilling day.

Posted in: State Policy

Tags: ,


November 9, 2016 at 10:48 AMIsaac Helland

(I have been so busy volunteering for a congressional election and working on homework that I have not been able to post for a while! Here's what I think about Trump's big win.)

I was shocked to see Trump win last night (or this morning, whichever it was.)

Those of you who have read my previous posts know that I was very strongly opposed to Trump, even to the point where I would not have voted for him had I been of voting age.

However, last night, as I sat around a group of volunteers for the Colm Willis for Congress Campaign, of which I was one, watching the election, I couldn't help but want Trump to win. It wasn't really until then that I actually felt that I would have been willing to vote for Trump. By the end of the night, I was clapping and cheering with everyone else every time Trump won a new state.

Do I like Trump? NO. I still have fiery disagreements with him.

However, I sincerely hope that his administration will help American succeed.

What hit me really hard last night, after even CNN declared a Trump victory (which they were very hesitant to do – even after Clinton called Trump and conceded, they didn't call it for him), was that Trump just doesn't fit in with the list of presidents – at all. In every way – policies, populism, hairdo and the fact that he has no prior political experience whatsoever, he sticks out like a sore combover in the list of Presidents.

So, how did Trump pull it off?

A few critical developments happened over just the past week that really boosted Trump. For instance, the FBI reopened Hillary's email investigation, which gave him tons of fodder for his attacks. Also, it is now being speculated that a lot of people voted for Trump, but were afraid that if they told anyone they would be lambasted for supporting a bigot, a racist, a sexist… the list goes on. Therefore, it is unlikely that these people were reflected in the polls.

I can remember all of us at the campaign completely stressing out over Pennsylvania. It was pretty clear by that point – if Trump won Pennsylvania, we would have to rename it Pence-sylvania, because Trump would win the election. Trump eventually did win there, although it was incredibly close.

What does all this mean for America? Nobody knows yet. The YUUUUUUUUUUGE stock market crash tells us that a Trump presidency is an uncertain presidency. The DOW went down 800 points once it became likely that Trump would win. So I'm not sure what to expect. Hope for the best, expect the worst – the story of my life.

Posted in: Elections

Tags: , , ,

Is politics meaningless now?

September 5, 2016 at 12:36 AMIsaac Helland

(Sorry for the long gap in my writing. College life has started for me, and the homework has been coming in thick and fast. Fortunately for you guys, I'm taking all sorts of political-oriented classes – I'm a political science major, after all – and so I'll be reading through tons of material that will be the inspiration for new blog posts. Regular writing is hopefully on the way!)

Many have become discouraged with politics now that The Donald and Killary have become the two nominees. Google searches on how to move to Canada are skyrocketing. Amidst all this despair, people are doubting the importance of voting. I have a reminder for those people.


You don't have to vote for Donald or Killary. But believe it or not, there are other people on the ballot. Perhaps not for President, but I believe that the other elections may actually become more important in these coming years. State legislators especially will play a critical role in deciding on a Convention of States – pretty much the only hope for liberty in America.

Senate and Congressional races will also have a huge outcome this cycle. We don't have to give the President an agreeable Congress. Let's fight for candidates who will stand for our values – if you are in Oregon District 5, I would heartily recommend supporting Colm Willis, a great candidate who I may campaign for myself (updates coming on that in the near future!)

The point of this post is, don't just toss your ballot because you didn't get the nominee you wanted. Vote the other races – there are lots of good candidates who need our support. We can still make a difference in November.

And above all,


Posted in: Elections



June 27, 2016 at 2:45 PMIsaac Helland

I'm sorry I haven't been posting regularly! My schedule has been crammed, as I try to juggle volunteering for the Convention of States, college admissions, and summer life on the family farm! A full post will be coming shortly! Until then, please laugh over this ridiculously funny video of an 8th-grader's graduation speech in the style of Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Obama, and Sanders (I got a real good kick out of the Sanders impersonation!)


SOURCE: Youtube/John Aiello

Posted in: Miscellaneous | Elections

Tags: , , , ,

A REAL Solution!

May 20, 2016 at 7:31 PMIsaac Helland

I promised in my last post that a full article would be forthcoming on the solution called the Convention of States (COS). Here it is. Feel free to comment and ask questions.

We have a problem. Not just any problem. A big one. Huge. I mean, just YUUUGE. 

Ahem. Let me rephrase that. 19 trillion problems. Does that ring a bell?

Our nation is in a terrible economic condition. Taxes are a record high, and yet we are trillions upon trillions of dollars in debt. The value of the dollars is plummeting. It is becoming harder and harder to own a business. And who's fault is this?

The Federal Government. They are taking your tax dollars and wasting them on the most ridiculous things. For instance, ever hear politicians say that they need more money for 'defense'? Well, it turns out that a lot of that 'defense' money goes to brewing beer, beef jerky, twitter slang studies, fish studies, robots that play with children, grilling shows, caffeine iPhone apps, and so much more.1 Great money management, Department of Defense. Americans should be proud of the beer you use to keep our country safe.

Oh, and there's another problem. States are losing their sovereignty. As you have probably all heard, Obama has declared that all schools must comply with the way that he feels about transgender's choice of bathroom - or else. What happened to state sovereignty? Or this: the Federal Government has an entire department exclusively for telling the states what their schools can and cannot do. It's called the Dept. of Education. Why don't we just let the states decide? Did the Founders really intend for the Federal government to bully the states into doing what it wants?

The Federal Government is to blame. The President, a Federal official, the Federal Agencies (which are arguably not even Constitutional - just try to find a spot for the EPA in the Constitution) and the Courts (who use the more vague phrases of the Constitution to find clever ways to give the other branches more power) are all part of the problem too.

And don't let Congress get away without some blame too. Both parties have been in on creating more unconstitutional Federal agencies, and refusing to use the power of the purse over Obama's executive orders. In short, they have no guts. We can't expect the cure to come from them if they refuse to do what's right for the sake of political correctness, or for special interests.

Michael Farris describes the problem this way: "The central problem with American government is the belief that the purpose of government is to provide for our needs. Washington, D.C. carefully nurtures this belief because it serves its own prime purpose—the aggregation of federal power. Accordingly, Washington, D.C. has gradually amassed overwhelming power that is clearly outside of the boundaries that the Framers intended when they wrote the Constitution."

That's a quick run-down of the problem. However I'm sure that most of you already knew all of that. If you really still aren't convinced that there is a problem, just comment below and I'll try to get back to you soon.

But now for the plan: How are we going to fix this monstrous blot on our nation's future?

Well, the Founders were smart people. They knew that there was a possibility that someday the Federal government might overstep its bounds. And they wondered, "What if we needed to pass amendments to the Constitution to put restraints on those guys? Well, so far we only have one way to do that... Congress..." They realized that if the only way to restrain the Federal Government was the Federal Government, then they weren't in very good shape.

So they voted unanimously to add the provision found in Article V of the Constitution, which allows the States to call for a Convention to propose amendments.

The way it works is that 2/3 of the states have to call for a convention for the same purpose. It is best if the text of the resolutions are exactly the same; otherwise, the courts may determine that only some of them 'aggregate', or are close enough to warrant being called 'the same'. A good example is the Balanced Budget Amedment (BBA); almost enough states have passed resolutions for a BBA convention in the past, but not only have many states rescinded those applications, but they are so different that it is believed that very few of them would aggregate.

The COS Project ( is trying to get states to pass identical resolutions that would call for a convention not to pass just any amendments, but just amendments pertaining to restricting the Federal Government. Any way of doing that is open to discussion, but anything else is off topic. This way, we can completely bypass the Federal Government and put restrictions on them.

Which brings us to a point of contention. Opponents of this plan like to say that for some reason we can't limit what we talk about in a convention, and so delegates (the way it works is that the state legislatures choose delegates to attend the convention) will start suggesting amendments that will completely rewrite the whole Constitution and it will all be a steaming wreck and we will all be so sorry that we didn't listen to them when they said don't do it. This is known as the "runaway convention" argument, and is espoused by such organizations as the John Birch Society and the Eagle Forum.


What most people don't know is that there have been 30+ conventions similar to this before. They weren't Article V conventions, nor were they for Constitutional Amendments, but they were conventions of states nonetheless. And did they ever "run away"? No. Not to mention, there is strong support for the idea that the Courts will affirm the limiting of a COS to what the originally stated purpose was. So no, our 2nd amendment rights aren't up for grabs, as some have said. No, our whole Constitution can't be rewritten.

But even if the Courts were to refuse to affirm this, there is another, more powerful check.

After the convention, the amendments don't immediately become part of the Constitution. They have to go through the States - they must be ratified by 3/4 of them. That means that if some nonsense comes out of the convention, it only takes 13 states to stand up to it.

The problem with a convention wouldn't be that too many amendments would get passed and the whole thing would run away; it's far more likely that the delegates would argue and not get anything done!

Also, those who are afraid of letting the delegates do this should consider: How have we always amended the Constitution in the past?

We let the Federal Government propose them, and then send them to the states.

And we don't give Congress any boundaries. In fact, a COS is the only way to give them boundaries for anything.

But seriously. We leave Congress (The Federal Government!) lock itself up in their chambers and propose amendments and anything else they dream up.

What's the worst that can happen if we let the states send delegates to do the same thing - with more rules? With the specific purpose of making even more rules for the Federal Government?

Not much.

And if anything goes wrong, then it only takes 13 states to stop the madness.

But think of the advantages to having a COS. We could:

  1. Balance the budget!!!
  2. Term limits!!!
  3. Lessen the power of the Supreme Court!!!
  4. Take away the majority of the power of the President's Executive Orders!!!
  5. Restrict what sort of taxes can be imposed
  6. And so much more...

So I say we give it a shot. After all, it's the only chance we've got... anybody got a better idea?

Some say that we just need to elect better people into office. I think that that's a great idea, but I don't think that it will solve the problem. It will slow it, for sure, but you can't cure alcoholism with more alcohol, and you can't cure Federal Government with more Federal Government. Period.

Convinced? Sign the petition with the link below:


Now I must stress how direly important it is that you use the link above, and not just the website. You see, I get credit for recruiting you, and I get points...


And I really want to be at the top of the leaderboard... you know, be famous.

So it is critical that you use the link above, because it is my special recruiter link.

Hope to see you join the project!

Don't forget to comment if you have any questions or comments!

1Tom Coburn's document, "Department of Everything"

Posted in: Justice System | Liberties and Rights | Policy | State Policy

Tags: , , , ,

Dark Days Ahead

May 12, 2016 at 9:37 AMIsaac Helland

Correction: The Email Newsletter said that Cruz dropped out yesterday. That is incorrect. That was because I started writing this post the day after he dropped out, but didn't finish it that day.

Ted Cruz and John Kasich have dropped out. What do we do?

Supporting Trump is not an option; read my previous posts on him for why. Ad besides, according to almost every poll, Trump loses to Hillary. That means that we are virtually certain that Hillary will be our next president.

There is only one option left to us, and that is to ensure that Hillary doesn't have a willing legislature to work with, and to also ensure that we at least have the state legislatures filled with good people. We've lost the presidency, for sure, but that's no reason to assume that all is lost (although almost everything is). We can't just give up hope (we must at least pretend that we have some), and we must fight on.

What troubles me the most is not merely the fact that Trump is now going to be the nominee (although that is disturbing); what is really troubling is the fact that the American people chose him, over Cruz or anyone else for that matter. When the race started, I thought that it was inconceivable that the American people, especially the Republicans - who are supposed to be conservative, who are supposed to be the good guys - would choose some billionaire with years of scandals and shady business and casinos and strip clubs behind him. We laughed aloud at the dinner table when we heard that he was running. This is no laughing matter anymore. Trump is unsupportable, and so is Hillary, and Kasich has no plausible way to stop Trump, so the Presidency is really quite lost for liberty lovers, which apparently are few. How could any liberty lover actually support someone like Trump? It boggles my mind that he obtained a single vote - that he didn't become the laughing stock of the whole race. We seriously chose someone who has no governmental experience, and almost no policy positions (his website covers very little of his beliefs) besides, "We'll make America great again!", who has supported nobody but Democrats before in his whole life (including Hillary), and who utters profanity every chance he gets? Please, wake me up and tell me it was all a dream. Please don't tell me that the American people, who chose death over loss of liberty, were misguided and duped enough to choose him

We have dark days ahead. Hillary will be the president (or, best case scenario, Sanders), and Bill will be First Lady. And with Donald Trump as its face, the Republican party is dead; it will be for a long, long time - if not forever. It's time to find a third party to become the second party - and don't say that it's impossible, because it's been done before. We gone through parties like candy in the past - when was the last time a Federalist, Anti Federalist, Whig, Free-soiler or Democrat-Republican run for office that you remember? It can be done, and now is as good a time as any.

If you want another solution to fixing the overreaches of the Federal Government (because the Presidency will obviously not be the answer) check out this link:

If you're energized by the idea, please sign the petition using this link

(If you use this link, then I get the credit for getting you in!)

Look out for a full length post on this in the future!

Posted in: Elections

Tags: , , , , , ,

Alert: #BoycottTarget

April 29, 2016 at 6:26 AMIsaac Helland


Last week, Target announced that "Everyone deserves to feel like they belong" and that people who claim to be "transgender" are welcome to use the bathroom of the opposite gender - meaning that men could use women's restrooms and that women could use men's restrooms. started a petition, which has reached over a million signatures, to boycott Target until they change their policy. Target is going to lose millions if they don't stop letting predators get the access they need.

I ask you today to sign the petition and to boycott Target - help keep shoppers safe.

Don't believe that there's any danger? If you check out the website, they have a good list of times when such policies have led to assaults and how people have been hurt from this sort of policy. And if you want a list of some incidents that have already happened at Target, here's a few:

These two incidents occurred inside Target stores:


It's time we stop this madness. Target could easily fix this problem by building a single occupancy, unisex bathroom. If transgender people are truly uncomfortable using the right bathroom, then they have this option that allows them to not distress others, and not giving predators access to whatever bathroom they want, but also not having to use the bathroom that they don't 'identify' with.

Now, if you ask me, I think that this is all nonsense to begin with. Being a boy or girl is not how you 'feel'; it's how you physically are. You can't change how you are. There is, in my worldview and in my interpretation of the Scriptures, no such thing as 'transgender'. However, I don't expect Target, as a secular institution, to follow my worldview completely. But they had better at least make sure that I'm comfortable shopping there, or else I'm just not going to.

Posted in: Miscellaneous



April 25, 2016 at 5:48 PMIsaac Helland

This video ad by Ted Cruz is... well, Hillary-ous!


This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; - Titus 1:13

Posted in: Elections

Tags: , ,

Should we vote for a Trump Nominee?

April 18, 2016 at 9:15 PMIsaac Helland

Donald Trump August 19, 2015 (cropped)


I, for one, do not intend to vote for Trump. Ever. (Part of that is because I will miss being able to vote in the general election by a few weeks, but I have other reasons as well.)

Many of you are probably dropping your jaw, and saying, "But then Hillary will be elected!"

I constantly hear people say, "I hate Trump. He's horrible. I mean, I would vote for him if he was the nominee, because he's better than Hillary..." If I was really convinced that Trump was better than Hillary (and if I was of age) then I would vote for him. Here are my reasons why I believe that he is not better than Hillary.

1. Questionable positions

Trump was formerly pro-choice, chose Jimmy Carter over Reagan, donated twice to Hillary during her bid for the Democratic Nomination which she lost to Obama, and the New York Times has claimed to have tapes of him stating that he wouldn't actually follow through on any of his immigration policies, and that they were just to help him get elected, which the NYT said that they couldn't release without Trump's permission. Not surprisingly, he refused to let them release them (despite the urging of Ted Cruz). He also refused to release his tax returns. His excuse for that was that he was being audited. A while later, the IRS issued a statement saying that being audited does not prevent one from releasing his tax returns. And yet to this day Trump's tax returns remain undisclosed. I wonder if it is because he doesn't want anyone to see his donations to liberal organizations and people?

The truth is, before his running for President, Trump was as liberal as liberal gets and supported people who were liberals. And now we are supposed to believe him when he says that he is conservative, even though he has no proof and has evidences against him that he refuses to disclose? I, for one, do not believe him. At least Hillary has always been clear on her positions; Trump previously supported everything that Hillary did and donated to her, but now is supposedly completely against all of his old positions.

2. Moral depravity

Trump is an extremely immoral man. In fact, I would rank him as much more wicked than Hillary any day. His life has been full of shady business deals, running casinos and strip clubs, fornication and filthy, disgusting language. Who wants to have to cover the ears of their children every time the President speaks? Hillary, at least, we can listen to without fear of having to beep out what she says. And she never ran any casinos, either. 

3. Liberal Positions

In case you didn't know, Trump is for censoring people on the Internet. He says he wants to censor terrorist information so that people can't connect with ISIS over the internet. Great idea, Trump, but have you ever heard of the camel with his head in his master's tent? It was a cold night, and the camel asked his master if he could stick his head in the tent. Next he wanted his neck in. Next his front legs. Before you knew it, he had his whole body in the tent and his master had gotten up and walked out to make room. That's what happens when you let the government do something one time; they itch to do it again. You give them an inch, and they'll take it a mile. That's why I don't like the idea of the government wanting Apple to hack into the terrorist's iPhone; they say that it's just this once, but if we let them do it, then they'll want to do it just one more time, until they feel like they can hack into anybody's phone anytime they want. Same with the Internet; first you censor terrorists, and then you can censor anything that you classify as 'dangerous', which could be anything under the sun that you disagree with. It encroaches on our right to free speech. We shouldn't do it.

Trump has also come out in support of transgender people using whichever restroom they 'identify' with - a sure way for more predators. Trump is by no means pro-family.

4. Capability

Trump, as an exceedingly rich individual and a businessman, wants everything that he wants when he wants it. He wrote a book called "Art of the Deal" (aka How to Get Everything You Want at All Costs.) And I think that it would be disastrous having him as the Commander in Chief. Before we knew it, he would insult Putin's wife, and call our allies stupid, and we would have no friends and many enemies. We would probably get involved in NW1 (Nuclear War 1). Why would I think such things? Well, look at the way he insults Cruz' wife and how he says that he will be 'neutral' towards Israel, and just look at the way that his supporters are now giving death threats to delegates who have pledged their support for Cruz (, we should seriously question his abilities to get along with people. Sure, in the business world, he's had enough money to do whatever he wants, but when we are talking about Russia, North Korea, Iran, Iraq... money isn't everything. We need someone who is actually capable of diplomacy.

None of this is to vindicate Hillary by any means. I think that Hillary would be a horrible president. My problem is that I think that Trump would be just as bad - perhaps worse. I would never vote for Hillary, but I wouldn't vote for Trump either.

They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. - Titus 1:16

Posted in: Elections

Tags: , , , ,