Your vote on the Water Compact will define you, forever

by Dr. Ed Berry

Montana legislators, you have met your “Robert Frost” moment. Your vote on the CSKT Water Compact will choose the road you will live with the rest of your life.

Montana Republican legislators are split as never before. Emotions are ballistic. The sides are clearly defined and I can make some predictions.

The question is not, “Will the Montana legislature will pass the Compact?” It will. The votes are already there.

The question is, “Will voters re-elect you if you vote NO on the Compact?” The odds will be against you.

So go ahead and vote NO, if you are so disposed. Montana will still approve the Compact because reason will prevail and by 2016 you will have lost your political credibility.

Here’s your choice in a nutshell:

Vote YES to approve the Compact:

  • Resolve all tribal water rights issues forever.
  • Feds give $1.2 billion to CSKT to spend in Montana.
  • CSKT will share water deficits during droughts.
  • Idaho, Oregon, and Washington cannot call water in Hungry Horse.
  • People will move to Montana.
  • Businesses will move to Montana.
  • Real-estate values will improve.
  • Montana gets its economy rolling in 2016.

Vote NO to reject the Compact:

  • Montanans spend $1.7 billion to fight the CSKT in 10,000 court-room battles.
  • People will not move to Montana.
  • Businesses will not move to Montana.
  • Real-estate values do not improve.
  • Montana gets stuck in destructive court battles until 2040.
  • When a drought comes:
    • Idaho, Oregon, and Washington will call Hungry Horse water,
    • CSKT will call on off-reservation water.

The benefit of approval over rejection is $2.9 billion added to Montana’s economy, plus drought protection, minus 25-years wasted in court trials. 

A YES vote is truly a no-brainer.

Remember: The issue is not whether the Water Compact is perfect, as  all Compact opponents seem to think in their critiques. It’s not.

The issue is whether Montana will be better served with the Compact or without the Compact. The road taken makes all the difference.

By 2016, Voters will realize:

  • The CSKT will not deprive irrigators of water.
  • The CSKT will manage Flathead Lake as in the past.
  • The CSKT will not make calls on off-reservation irrigators.
  • The CSKT will not betray Montanans.
  • The Compact is not a government conspiracy to steal our land and water.
  • The Compact is not part of Agenda 21.
  • The Compact reduces, not increases, government involvement in our lives.
  • Montana finally has control of its water.
  • Idaho, Oregon, and Washington cannot call water from Hungry Horse.
  • Montanans avoided $billions in defending CSKT water lawsuits.
  • The courts will dismiss lawsuits against the Compact.
  • Water certainty encourages people and businesses to move to Montana.
  • The Compact increases real-estate values and business investment.
  • The Compact’s federal money improves Montana’s economy.
  • The Compact improves farm productivity on the Reservation.
  • The Compact will be declared a resounding success.
  • The doomsday opponents will be declared wrong.
  • Those who voted YES are the true leaders.
  • Those who voted NO are a drag on Montana.

Compact opponents flunk economics.

Opponents claim the federal money promised to the tribes under the Compact is bad. Opponents do not understand economics.

If the feds give $1.2 billion, or half that amount, to the CSKT this is good for Montana. Much of this money will be spent in Montana and be used to improve the irrigation project infrastructure and efficiency. Everyone benefits when money enters Montana.

If a Montana government agency were to receive $1.2 billion from the feds with virtually no strings attached, every sensible person would rejoice. If a business moved into Montana and brought $1.2 billion into Montana’s economy, Montana’s media, Chambers of Commerce, and everyone else would rejoice.

So why do Compact opponents think $1.2 billion from the feds to the CSKT is bad?

Opponents also object to Montana’s contribution of $55 million, over half of which is an emergency reserved fund that may never be spent. Here’s economic reality: $55 million is about 5 percent of the $1.2 billion federal contribution opponentsဠalso object to.

The federal $1.2 billion contribution justifies Montana’s $55 million contribution. All legislators should recognize the State benefits when it puts up 5 to 10 percent of an assured benefit to assure the benefit happens. Smart states do this to their economic benefit by making land deals or tax deals to attract desired businesses.

The Compact will have secondary economic benefits as well.

Rick Smith, resident of the reservation and owner of several Century 21 businesses in Flathead Valley, testified businesses and retirees are holding off moving to Montana because of the uncertainty about the Water Compact. He testified if Montana approves the compact, property values and business income will improve.

Compact opponents reject legal advice

Legislators are supposed to base their votes on the legal advice of Montana attorneys. But rather than accept the best legal advice, opponent legislators play “attorney.” They think they can read the Hellgate Treaty, ignore case law, and draw their own conclusions better than a professional attorney.

(Digression: I suppose they also think they can calculate a rocket path to the Moon better than a professional physicist, or do better brain surgery than a brain surgeon. This as a common failing among Tea-Party believers. They think they know more about every professional field than the professionals. How about they enter the next Olympics and try to beat the pros in track and field, gymnastics, boxing, you name it. The value of athletics is you can no longer fool yourself. Tea-Party believers have a mental block against any data that conflicts with their preconceived belief. So they reject professional advice when it contradicts with their desired outcome.)

Compact proponents include the best water attorneys in Montana: Hertha Lund, Melissa Hornbein, Helen Thigpen, Colleen Coyle, Andrew Huff, Cory Swanson, Krista Lee Evans. Add Attorney General Tim Fox and Governor (and former AG) Steve Bullock.

Proponent attorneys have made extensive contributions to the Compact. They have rebutted opponents every claim, answered every question, and explained at length how the Compact will work. Everyone should read, listen, and study what they have written and testified.

When opponents base their whole case on rejecting proper legal advice about how the Courts will likely to rule if Montanans attempt to defend themselves in court against CSKT water rights claims, these opponents put Montanans at great risk.

Opponents hired Richard Simms, a New Mexico attorney not qualified to practice in Montana, to write claims against the Compact. Proponent attorney Hertha Lund quickly and thoroughly disposed of Simms’ claims. Case closed. That alone should have caused rational opponents to change sides. No opponent has countered Lund’s disposal of Simms’ claims.

Opponents simply ignore the fact that they have lost their legal case and rattle on repeating lie after lie like Energizer Bunnies beating their drums. Boom, boom, boom.

No opponent has countered any of the Compact attorneys’ rebuttals.

This is telling. In a courtroom, if you fail to counter a rebuttal, you lose. That is exactly what would happen to Montanans if our Legislature rejects the Compact. Montana and its people will loose big time and legislators who rejected the State’s attorneys’ legal advice will be accountable for Montana’s loss.

Compact opponents miscalculate risk.

Opponents’ gamble with Montana’s economy when there is no possible positive outcome.

Attorney Cory Swanson testified,

“Even if you go to court and win, you will not get a better deal than you will under this Compact.”

Other Compact attorneys have testified and written that Montanans cannot expect to win water rights battles against the CSKT.

Attorney Hertha Lund testified that Montanans will spend about $1.7 billion to defend their claimed water rights IF Montana rejects the Compact.

It’s in her interest to reject the Compact because it will assure her of a lifetime of well-paid legal services. But she is ethical to tell Montanans they should approve the Compact and avoid these legal costs.

Opponents throw Montana under the bus because they reject the strong advice of Montana’s Water attorneys and irrationally think Montana will get a better deal by fighting the CSKT in court. Bringing such legal battles upon Montanans would be the greatest disservice any legislators have ever done to Montana.

Compact opponents trash common sense.

Opponents, consumed by doomsday fears, associate government action, whether good or bad, as a conspiracy to take away their land, water, money, and freedom. So in their delusion, they oppose the Compact.

A Casey Dispatch noted:

Nothing makes humans easier to manipulate than fear. Get a group of Homo sapiens afraid of something and most of them will run wherever you want them to. Unfortunately, all the manipulators of our time know this and are maximizing their use of it. – Casey Daily Dispatch 2.20.15

The Compact is not a government conspiracy and not a part of Agenda 21. The opponents’ case is driven by fear and it is not logical.

Opponents claim the Compact will increase government control over Montanans. The truth is the Compact will reduce government control of our lives. The last thing Montanans want is the feds supporting CSKT water rights lawsuits for decades. That is what you call federal government interference in our lives.

By contrast, when the feds sign the Compact it’s a done deal. The Compact constrains the feds.

Compact opponents don’t understand the Compact

Opponent legislators claim they should have the right to change the compact. This is like claiming you have the right to march into Google’s facility and change some of its software to your liking.

The Montana legislature, in its wisdom created the Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission in 1979 with the specific purpose to:

  • conclude compacts for the equitable division and apportionment of waters between the State and its people and the several Indian Tribes claiming reserved water rights within the state (MCA 85-2-701), and
  • between the State and its people and the federal government claiming non-Indian reserved waters within the state (MCA 85-2-703).

You, the Legislature, delegated the responsibility to negotiate and “conclude” the Compact to the Compact Commission. You do not have the right to micromanage the Compact now that all parties have agreed to it.

Now, 36 years later, some legislators are so arrogant they think they have the right to tinker with a concluded agreement and then use their non-right as an excuse to vote NO. These legislators put their own ego above the interests of the citizens of Montana. They have no appreciation for the years of work by all parties who put the Compact together.

Compact opponents don’t look in the mirror.

Compact opponents claim CSKT advertising is unfair and an argument to vote NO on the Compact. First, it is not unfair. Second, fair or not, it has nothing to do with whether Montana will benefit most by approving or rejecting the Compact.

Many Compact opponents voted Libertarian for Dan Cox in the 2012 US Senate race between Jon Tester (D) and Denny Rehberg (R). These voters did not mind that Jon Tester’s camp and Harry Reid’s Las Vegas underworld funded Dan Cox’s campaign.

Mother Jones reported about Dan Cox:

His unexpected profile boost came last week thanks to a $500,000 ad buy touting Cox as Montana’s “real conservative.” The catch is that his campaign is not behind the ad. It was bankrolled by a political action committee that has been supporting Tester’s campaign and running attack ads against Rehberg.

In a nail-bitingly close race, where Tester and Rehberg are tied at 48 percent, the Cox factor could be a decisive one, potentially siphoning votes away from Rehberg.

The ad supporting Cox shows a man shooting out a security camera—a dig at Rehberg, who has sponsored legislation that would allow the Department of Homeland Security to control and monitor public land. It was financed by the Montana Hunters & Anglers Leadership Fund, which has spent nearly $1.1 million running ads against Rehberg. The PAC paid around $500,000 for the Cox ad. The group’s president is a hunting cap-wearing Montanan named Land Tawney, who last year made a contribution to Tester of $500, according to Open Secrets.

Hunters & Anglers is funded in part by the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which according to The Hill, had donated $410,000 to the PAC as of September 30. But the League doesn’t actually back Cox: “The money we gave was for ads against Rehberg over the summer,” LCV spokesman Jeff Gohringer says. “We’ve never given a dime to run any TV ads supporting anyone other than Tester. Our efforts have been to support and elect Tester, or oppose Rehberg.”

Mike Dennison exposed the same charade in the Billings Gazette.

I exposed how money to support Dan Cox came from the Las Vegas mob.

Now, according to a source knowledgeable in Nevada politics, the stamp on illegal Dan Cox mailers trace to PDQ Printing in Las Vegas, Nevada.

PDQ Printing’s clients stem from the sleazy ‘escort’ pornographic card peddlers to any and all liberal activist projects.  PDQ is known in Las Vegas for its emphasis on alternative lifestyle political action. It is used exclusively by Democrats.

Harry Reid ‘s Connection

PDQ Printing is one of the two union mailhouses Nevada Senator Harry Reid has used for many years.  PDQ keeps Reid’s secrets much better than A&B Printing which Reid also uses.  When anonymity is critical, PDQ is the go-to shop.

PDQ is reliable and quick.  In this busy time, there are not many clients PDQ would drop everything to print for but  Harry Reid and his Majority PAC have priority.  Majority PAC is also influencing Senate Races in other states.  In AZ, Majority PAC is coordinating with League of Conservation Voters (LCV).

The Nevada Democratic support of Dan Cox has Las Vegas political mob values and dirty money all over it.  It’s hard to make a “principled” argument when you allow your “principles” to be used as a weapon to destroy conservative progress.

Compact opponents who complain the CSKT spent a reported $20,000 on advertising, should look in the mirror to see how Tea-Party Libertarian voters did not object to the $500,000 or more that dirty money spent on Dan Cox to defeat Rehberg and elect Tester.

The Water Compact is NOT a partisan issue.

The Water Compact is a bipartisan economic and legal issue that we should all support, and the Democrats in this case are correct.

The only reason the Water Compact is a political issue is because Tea-Party Republicans who oppose the Compact have made it a political issue. Tea-Party Republicans  have made the Compact vote their Alamo. Their problem is they chose the wrong bill and the wrong time to pick their fight with rational Republicans.

I predict Tea-Party Republicans will lose and their vote against the Compact will initiate the demise of the political influence of Montana’s Tea-Party radicals.

A reader asked, “Where do you stand politically, Dr. Ed?”

I am a conservative Republican, every bit as conservative as any elected legislator. But I am not a Tea-Party Republican because I will not follow them in their irrational extremes dictated by their Tea-Party “religion.”

I show people how to be a conservative without being a flaming nutcase.

As a scientist, I seek truth among fiction and, believe me, there is a lot of fiction in politics. I follow the scientific method and, as it requires, I admit my hypothesis is wrong when its prediction is wrong or the data supporting it is wrong.

That last sentence is critical. The world is full of people who will not admit their hypothesis is wrong if its prediction is wrong or the data supporting it is wrong. This fundamental rule is the only known path to truth. Unfortunately, few people understand this rule or follow it. If all followed this rule, all would vote YES on the Compact.

Some Tea-Party radicals believe they violate their “principles” if they change their mind about a political issue, like to support the winner of a primary when they supported an opponent. This belief is an invalid extension of their personal religion into politics and it blocks their ability to find  truth and do good. They talk of a “moral compass” and think their belief is moral. In truth, their belief is immoral. I have proved that with simple logic. We must always open our mind to facts that contradict our beliefs and reject beliefs that contradict facts. That is the only way to find truth.

I have studied the Compact much more, I will argue, than those who oppose the Compact. Before I studied it, I was against the Compact. Then, last December, I made time to study it carefully with an open mind. Then I realized my original hypothesis was incorrect, and the Compact is good for Montana. Every rational person would conclude the same if he or she would study the Compact with an open mind.

A reader asked, “How can you side with the Democrats, Dr. Ed?”

Because on the Water Compact, the Democrats are correct and any Republican who thinks he or she must always vote opposite the Democrats is a political moron. There will always be issues where both parties should agree. The Water Compact is one of them.

Tea-Party Republicans draw incorrect conclusions from Roger Koopman’s TAB scores. They think Republicans should always oppose Democrats. They are wrong.

I don’t know where Roger would put the Compact on his TAB score but I know where I would put it. Since the Compact will simplify government, reduce government control of our lives, bring money into Montana, protect Montana water from drought calls, and stop the federal government from supporting 10,000 lawsuits against Montanans, the Compact rates 100 percent good and “conservative” on Koopman’s TAB scores.

From a Republican conservative point of view, the Democrats will vote 100 percent correct on the Compact, rational Republicans will vote 100 percent correct, and the irrational Tea-Party Republicans will vote ZERO percent. That is how wrong Compact opponents are. 180 degrees wrong.

There is a better scoring system than TAB that supports the Compact.

This may be difficult for some readers because it involves the principle of entropy. But I will try to make it short and simple. When we act to lower entropy of a system, we do the right thing. We do good. We act morally. When we act to raise entropy of a system, we do the wrong thing. We do bad. We act immorally.

So, what’s entropy? By definition, entropy is a measure of the energy unavailable to do work. Energy can do work but not all energy can do work. When we lower entropy we make more energy available to do work, and vice-versa.

Are you ready for some abstract thinking?

When we develop a mathematical formula, we create a system with lower entropy. This low-entropy organization of information can do work. For example, the mathematical formulas used for Internet communications are low entropy. Because of their low entropy, they can move information at great speeds with close to 100 percent error correction. This application of entropy is called information theory.

The concept of entropy is proven and it applies in very many ways to our lives and to our decisions.

Entropy proves D’Souza’s thesis in his “America” is true and proves Obama’s belief that America stole its wealth from others is false. We humans can indeed create wealth from nothing by using our intellect and create wealth from raw materials by using our labor. We did it to build America. When we create wealth, we do good.

When terrorists or hackers destroy what we build, they increase entropy. If we destroy useful things, whether we destroy a building, a ship, a work of art, a mathematical formula, or a human life, our action is immoral and unethical. Good and bad are defined by entropy.

Put a child in a room with toys all organized and soon the child will disorganize the toys. The child does not yet have the capacity to reduce entropy but his mother does so she cleans up the room. With maturity comes the ability to reduce the entropy of the system we live in.

The people who built businesses like Apple, Google, and others, created wealth by lowering entropy.

So what about the Water Compact?

The Water Compact is an organized agreement for managing water rights claims, distributing water to irrigators, improving the irrigation system and productivity of the Reservation, and bringing more money into Montana. It is like a ship that can carry people and products from one point to another. It is a low-entropy system created by a lot of hard work. In my opinion, the Water Compact is a masterpiece.

That the Compact is imperfect is not the issue. Nothing we humans create is perfect. The issue is the Compact is a much lower entropy solution than its alternative of no Compact.

Compact opponents are consumed by imperfection. This is why they do not vote for Republican winners of a primary election. Denny Rehberg is “not good enough for them.” Ryan Zinke is “not good enough for them.” And the Compact is “not good enough for them.” They are consumed by imperfections yet they themselves are certainly not perfect.

Thank God, mainstream voters sent Ryan Zinke to Congress, with no help from the Montana Tea-Party Republicans who voted Libertarian. I predicted Ryan Zinke will become the best Congressman Montana ever elected and so far he has proven me correct, from a conservative point of view of course.

Compact opponents want to replace the Compact with 10,000 court decisions. While each court decision will lower the entropy over a non-decision, there is no way 10,000 court decisions can ever lower the entropy as much as the one organized Compact will. It is physically impossible.

That’s why Attorney Cory Swanson was correct when he testified,

“Even if you go to court and win, you will not get a better deal than you will under this Compact.”

As one example, only the Compact can protect Hungry Horse reservoir from downstream calls from Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. No individual lawsuit can ever get that protection of Montana water. The Compact is our last chance to get this drought protection. As an atmospheric scientist who has studied drought cycles, I recommend you take this deal while you can.

In entropy terms, rejecting the Compact is comparable to an act of terrorism. It is the same as blowing up a ship (the Compact) and putting everyone in life preservers (10,000 lawsuits) and expecting all these people to reach their destination as quickly and comfortably as they would in the ship. It won’t happen.

So if you vote NO, do not think you are doing good. You are similar to a terrorist who blow things up.

Opponents can get everything they want even if they approve the Compact, and approving the Compact is an insurance policy against disaster.

Attorney Krista Lee Evans, senior water rights commissioner, testified

The Compact is not a federal government takeover. If you want to litigate your own water rights, the Compact won’t stop you. But don’t reject the Compact and take the rest of us down with you.

I have introduced you to the tip of the iceberg about the physics of entropy. The principle of entropy is powerful, it applies to almost everything we do, and it is the best available guide to ethics and morality.

Who opposes the Water Compact? 

It does not matter if you are not among the Tea-Party Republicans who oppose the Compact because they think it is a government conspiracy. Here’s how voters will perceive you if you vote NO on the Compact.

(In the quotes below, all underlining is mine for emphasis.) is Montana’s de facto Tea-Party website. They discuss nutcase conspiracy theories that attract Tea-Party radicals like roadkill attracts hungry vultures.

Recently, they brought you critical news that normal jet contrails are disguised “smart dust” the government sprays on us humans to transform us into machines. The Liberty Brothers report:

According to our recent guest on The Liberty Brothers Radio Show, Deborah Tavares, Smart Dust is being sprayed overhead across America, and it is apparently one “legal” government experiment that is nearly impossible to avoid. When one understands the push towards a “singularity” between man and machine, it is not too hard to believe Deborah’s research into the attempted transformation from humankind into cyborgs.

Here’s the photo they use to prove their claimed government conspiracy:


As one who has been extensively involved in atmospheric physics, weather modification, cloud research, and airborne atmospheric sampling, I can assure you this photo shows normal jet-aircraft contrails formed in high-altitude conditions where the water vapor from jet engines condenses to form very small cloud droplets and some ice crystals.

Psst: We better keep the truth to ourselves or we will spoil the illusions of the radicals who love their doomsday hypotheses.

But I digress. The Liberty Brothers further warn us:

Deborah first covered the DOD chemical experiments on Americans, and moved on to Smart-Meters being used as weapons. That’s right, Deborah states that Smart Meters can be used to crank up the dial on uncooperative, and unsuspecting, households who may be considered problematic; making the people who live inside the home sick from microwave, or some other type of radiation.

As our interview progressed, we learned how much of a grip the Rothschild Dynasty has over the energy here in America; and how some of those same organizations, and the corporations that serve them, are pushing the “illusion of scarcity” as another means of control. We also covered the re-engineering of human DNA, and how the “green movement,” if successful, will require every house in America to be retrofitted to comply with UN mandates. The interview with Deborah covers a wide range of topics and is one not to miss. To get up-to-speed on Chemtrails, I encourage to watch our previous interview with Elana Freeland and Billy Hayes.

Ooooh! Don’t you love this stuff?

Now let’s learn the real reason some radicals oppose the CSKT Water Compact.

She is Arizona hydrologist Dr. Catherine Vandemoer, the de facto leader of the Compact opposition in Montana. She moved to Montana a few years ago to lead the fight.

Why is she so interested in Montana’s Water Compact? James White reported this on the Liberty Brothers on November 1, 2014:

Dr. Kate Vandemoer outlines the Federal grab for control of water out West

As with any commodity of limited supply, corporations, kingpins and governments all maneuver into positions of control; often working in concert to achieve a quasi-monopoly. Numerous examples of this throughout history can be revealed with the proper search terms. Out West, the Federal Government, the State of Montana and the Native American tribes are working to form just such a monopoly; at the expense, of course, of the citizens of Montana and surrounding states. What would facilitate this monopoly? The CSKT Water Compact.

The CSKT Water Compact, in its current form, is merely a disguise by the Feds to control all of the water out West, using the Native American tribes as proxies. … the CSKT Water Compact, in its current form, would cause a cascade of similar compacts nationwide; which would infringe upon the very water that you use every day, with few exceptions. As the CSKT Water Compact is widely recognized as a “forever” document, we are literally in a battle for the lives and futures of our posterity. The seriousness of this fight cannot be overlooked, and few people are on the front lines engaging the enemy. One such fighter is Hydrologist, Dr. Catherine Vandemoer.

You can listen to Dr. Kate’s presentation “Population Control via Water Control” here.

Dr. Kate has made her illusions clear.

Here’s Dr. Kate on “Geoengineering”:

But as readers of this blog have pointed out, ‘geoengineering’ as chemtrails, HAARP, the explosion of the BP rig in the Gulf of Mexico, earthquake generation, tornado activity, and now the flooding of the entire mid-west via the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers are simply activities that create or have magnified disaster.  The ‘crisis’ created allows the government the ‘opportunity’ to step in and take over.

Here’s Dr. Kate on “Why Spray the Skies?”:

G. Edward Griffin’s excellent film entitled ‘What in World are they Spraying” educated us all to the deadly toxins that are being sprayed into the atmosphere as those stripes across the sky called ‘chemtrails’, or ‘persistent contrails’.  It is geoengineering disaster for us all. Now comes the follow up film called “Why in the World are they Spraying” that begins to fill in the picture…and its all about world domination.

Who is doing the spraying? This is Satan’s design, and Satan’s confusion.

Does this fit Scripture’s description of ‘Wormwood’?  How are chemtrails one of the signs of the end times? Do the chemtrails poison the food, so it becomes bitter like the plant wormwood?

Here’s Dr. Kate on “Geoengineering Weather”:

It seems to me as obvious as the nose on your face: there is something causing the increase in severity of storms, droughts, hurricanes, typhoons, and earthquake-generated tsunamis, and it ain’t cow farts.

Those citizen journalists who have documented the HAARP rings, microwave pulses, and chemtrails are on target with the geoengineering of global climate as the man-made source of ‘global climate change’  and have received the same treatment as others who have dared to tell the truth about any number of hazards that are intentionally created to do harm to citizens.  Somebody wants to make money and have total control through manipulating climate.

No longer a secret then, we know what they are spraying, why they are spraying, and the additional tools that are used to manipulate the human environment and inject trouble into our very breathing space. While each one of these tools is dangerous in itself, the combined use of HAARP, chemtrails, and nanotechnology is wreaking havoc across America.  When you artificially heat the atmosphere, change its electrical properties, and send vibrational pulses into the earth, what is unleashed is something that cannot now be controlled or predicted.

Do you think God created man to manipulate everything that is fundamental to life, like water, air, soil, and plant life?

I have already written about how all of Dr. Kate’s claims about the Compact fail. Dr. Kate’s article reads like a conspiracy theory. She assumes and implies “intentions” that do not exist to the Compact Commission, the Tribes, the federal government, and the Montana Governor. She wrote:

Moreover, both the proposed Compact and the recently-filed CSKT lawsuit challenging federal land laws have as their goal the complete takeover, ownership, and eventual decommissioning of the FIIP. There are more than 2,000 families, including Indians, which are the target of these aggressive efforts. The Tribes’ lawsuit claims that ALL the privately-held fee land on the reservation, and within the irrigation project, belongs to the Tribes.

In effect, the proposed Compact is a “work around” to the “inconvenient” laws of the United States that have rejected the Tribes’ transparent effort to destroy the FIPP.

The Governor’s recent letter proposing a “limited renegotiation” of the irrigation water use agreement is nothing more than a transparent attempt to eliminate the irrigation districts from any discussion as to the disposition and ownership of their lands and water rights.

No wonder the Tribes and the Compact Commission want this compact so badly. If they had to submit their claims in a court of law, they could very well be denied everything in the proposed Compact because a court has to follow the law, not “work around” it.

The bottom line is Compact opponents base their case on testimony of a witness who is not credible.

The liberal view of Compact opponents.

Here’s Montana Cowgirl‘s liberal view of Compact opponents:

Two groups of TEA Partiers have come to town, stirring up sentiments against tribal sovereignty in hopes of obstructing a water rights agreement that the tribes negotiated with the state of Montana. One group is called the Western Montana Water Users Association and the other Concerned Citizens of Western Montana. Their donors are anonymous and they haven’t filed anything with the Political Practices office.

The head of the first group is Steve Killorn, a conficted felon (“tampering with public records.”)  …

The head of the second group–is Terry Backs, founder of the the Lake County Tea Party.  …

A third Tea Party ring leader is part of the action as well. She is Catherine Vandemoer, who is pictured here at a WMWUA meeting.

The most important thing to know about “Dr. Kate” Vandemoer is that she has some pretty extreme, marginal views–and some writings that reflect the soundness of her judgement and the rational of the effort to stop a tribe from getting water. …

She co-hosts a radio show with white supremacist Red Beckman, who wrote that the Holocaust was God’s punishment for Jews because they worship the devil. Besides the usual racist birther garbage, Vandemoer’s blog features the ravings Eustice Mullins, who “claimed that Jews kidnap Christian children, ritually puncture their veins, and drink their blood as a restorative for their own degenerate bodies,” The Atlantic reported.

Vandemoer herself has written that, “the Rothschilds (translated ‘Red Shield), Rockefellers, and many other monied JKhazar Jews, who together form a cabal acting like a synagogue of Satan that is in full gear enforcing its agenda on America, including Agenda 21.”

Cowgirl reports on an anti-Compact meeting:

Tonight at the Perkins Restaurant is Kalispell, a member of Chuck Baldwin’s “Black Regiment” has organized a speech by Kate Vandemoer to drum up opposition to tribal sovereignty and water rights in Montana.

Let’s take a look at who this bunch really is and what they might be up to.

The speakers at this gathering are birther blogger Kate Vandemoer and her fellow anti-tribal organizer Terry Banks. … Here’s Pastor Huff explaining why he has invited them to speak:

We owe these two fine ladies a debt of gratitude!! …they are fighting our fight on the water compact and without them Montana would be a waste land!!  I ain’t kidding!!!!  They do this on their own and their own time!  They are volunteers, just like some others in the room who love America, who love freedom enough to do it!!! They are the water compact proponent’s worst nightmare!!  If you are dishonest, if you are a fraud, if you are a crooked politician, if you are a left winger or a communist, you hate these people.  MAN, WHAT HEROS!!! Let’s give them a hero’s welcome!!

… Perhaps these [Kate Vandemmoer’s] views were what made Baldwin’s acolytes so eager to hear from her.

Chuck Baldwin himself is the author of an anti-Semitic sermon in which he lashes out at the Jewish Banking Conspiracy and refers to Jews as the modern day “moneychangers” which Jesus banished from the temple. He also says these same moneychangers control the media and thus will never report on their own banking conspiracy, and so of course it is he, Chuck Baldwin, who must bring us the truth about them.

“They are destroying America,”  Baldwin says, “but Christians don’t see it,” and so he implores Christians to wake up to the reality of what Jewish leaders are up to.

Compact opponents have made Compact opposition a religion.

Let me put it this way:

Would you hire Dr. Vandemoer as your science advisor?

But if you vote NO on the Compact, you will be taking her advice.

Maybe you are bought and paid for.

If so, did you take your oath to serve your puppet master or Montana? The Compact may be the most significant vote of your career. If you serve your puppet master and vote NO you will forever regret that you did not serve Montana first. You will forever realize you are a wimp.

If you vote against the Compact because of your puppet master, you will be like the greedy folks in an old episode of Twilight Zone who donned masks until the clock stuck midnight and then found their masks had made permanent inprints on their faces.

I will watch how all legislators vote on the Compact, especially the ones I know from Flathead County. If Austin Knudsen (HD-36) votes for the Compact I will put a link to his website on I think he has good potential if he does not ruin it by voting NO.

Voters will remember your Water Compact vote like they remember the Alamo.

You now have enough information to decide how to vote on the Compact, especially if you also read my suggestions in “The CSKT Water Compact for Dummies” and my other articles about the Compact.

If you really are one of the Tea-Party folks who oppose the Compact, then by all means vote NO to make yourself known. There will never be a better opportunity to come clean.

But if you are not one of the Tea-Party folks then you should think long and hard about your vote on the Compact.

If you vote NO you will paint a target on your back for your future elections. Your future political opponents will remind the voters. I will remind them. Montana Cowgirl might remind them. Likely all major media will remind them.

Vote NO to follow the “Boom, boom, boom” repetitions of the Energizer Bunnies.

Vote YES to follow the truth that is blowing in the wind.

I suggest you ignore the alarmists. Focus on opportunity rather than fear. Vote to build Montana. Approve the Compact and move on.

1 thought on “Your vote on the Water Compact will define you, forever”


    Conspiracy promoters like Deborah Tavares falsely claim that Agenda 21 is a U.N plan to expand the wilderness into areas already occupied by humans so as drive us out of our rural and suburban homes and into tightly-packed, over-populated “Kill Cities” in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, none of this is so.

    Agenda 21 was merely a suggestion that the United Nations recommended to all its member nations in 1992. Member nations were permitted, but not required to adopt Agenda 21 for themselves.

    Under the United States Constitution, both the President and the Senate must consent to a proposed international treaty or convention before it becomes law in the United States. While the President ceremonially signed Agenda 21, the Senate withheld its consent to Agenda 21. As a result, the United States government REJECTED Agenda 21 almost 30 years ago, a fact which conspiracy promoters fraudulently conceal from their followers.

    That means Agenda 21 never applied in the United States and does not apply in the United States now. So, whatever Agenda 21 “would have done” if it not been REJECTED is completely irrelevant. It was REJECTED.

    Likewise so-called “Agenda 21 Map” is entirely FAKE and had nothing to do with Agenda 21 in the first place. Instead, the fake “Agenda 21 Map” was a wild exaggeration created by Michael Coffman to generate United States Senate opposition to “The U.N. Treaty On Bio-Diversity”, something entirely different from Agenda 21. (This is why the fake map only depicts the United States, rather than all member nations of the United Nations.), As it turned out, the United States Senate also rejected The U.N. Treaty On Bio-Diversity. So, neither Agenda 21 nor The U.N. Treaty On Bio-Diversity (which the fake “Agenda 21 Map” allegedly illustrated) ever applied in the United States. BOTH WERE REJECTED.

    The mere fact that some elected local governments have since passed regulations to protect the remaining environment has NOTHING to do with Agenda 21. These elected local governments merely concluded (entirely on their own) that some protection of the environmental made sense.

    FOR PROOF, CLICK ON POST #5 HERE. REMEMBER, POST #5 HERE. Google “The Hoaxes Of Deborah Tavares”, or click here.


    For the hoaxes of ANTHONY WILLIAMS, click here.

    For the hoaxes of CARL MILLER, click here.

    For the hoaxes of EDDIE CRAIG, click here.

    For the hoaxes of DEBRA JONES, click here.;

    For the hoaxes of ROD CLASS, click here.

    For the hoaxes of DEBORAH TAVARES, click here.

    I thought that you should know.

    All My Best,


Leave a Comment

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.