Looks to me like Mitt continues to surge, and may be th man to beat among conservative activists.

The full results may be viewed here.

Matt Margolis of GOPBloggers offers this analysis.

Supporters of the top 3 potential candidates (Romney, Guiliani and Gingrich) are largely committment to their respective candidate of choice, which puts Romney in a very strong position to launch a very successful online grassroots campaign. With his impressive exploratory committee website, and his campaign's clear understanding of how to use the internet to respond to attacks quickly, Romney has proven himself very able to win the GOP nomination.

Indeed, the Romney lead is significant in that he has surged to the front of the pack in a very short period of time, according to John Hawkins of Right Wing News.

The Front Runners

Mitt Romney: +46.6%
Newt Gingrich: +45.8%
Rudy Giuliani: + 33.9%

Analysis: Mitt Romney has really rocketed up the charts in the last few months. For example, if you look back to July of last year, he was sitting at only 17.9%. Back then, the number one candidate was George Allen at 48.9%. After Allen went down in flames, it looks as if most of his support went to Romney with a little spillover going to Gingrich while Rudy has stayed in about the same spot (he was +30.6% back then).

And while Hawkins does note the strength of the Gingrich support, I can't help but think he is a candidate with so much negative baggage as to make a successful candidacy difficult to imagine.

Columnist Jeff Jacoby offers this bit of analysis of Mitt Romney's rightward shift since the 1994 Senatorial race against Ted Kennedy.

Romney's very public migration rightward over the last few years is a different kind of act, one intended not to hide his real views but to liberate them. In 1994, Romney struck me as an extraordinarily bright, talented, and decent man -- and a political neophyte who fell for the canard that the only way a conservative could win in Massachusetts was by passing for liberal.

Thirteen years later, Romney is where he should have been all along. Yes, it took some tap-dancing and artful dodging to get from there to here, and some voters will wonder which Mitt Romney, the 1994 edition or the one on offer today, is the real deal. Can he put those doubts to rest? If he's going to win his party's nomination, he'll have to.

Gov. Romney has been very clear about his journey from 1994 to 2007, and that journey shares much in common with Ronald Reagan himself -- not to mention a great many members of the GOP who have moved from the mushy moderation of Rockefeller Republicanism to the conservatism that is the cornerstone of the GOP today.

Posted by: Greg at 06:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 4 kb.

It looks like Congressman Ron Paul, who represents the neighboring congressional district (I'd be in it if I were one precinct further south) is exploring a presidential run.

Rep. Ron Paul, the iconoclastic, nine-term lawmaker from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward a second, quixotic presidential bid _ this time as a Republican.

Paul filed papers in Texas to create a presidential exploratory committee that will allow him to raise money. In 1988, Paul was the Libertarian nominee for president and received more than 400,000 votes.

Kent Snyder, the chairman of Paul's exploratory committee and a former staffer on Paul's Libertarian campaign, said the congressman knows he's a long shot.

"There's no question that it's an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is an underdog," Snyder said. "But we think it's well worth doing and we'll let the voters decide."

I like Ron Paul personally, and consider him to be a charming individual. I like many of Ron Paul's stands on the issues, though there are a number of places where we part company. And I consider Ron Paul to probably have more integrity than almost any politician in Washington -- of either party.

But I won't be backing his campaign for president -- though I will likely see about helping out his congressional campaign in 2008 if he runs for reelection in CD14.

For those of you who ask why, the reason is simple.

Ron Paul cannot win the presidency. He cannot even win the GOP nomination.

Scratch that last part. He cannot even pull 5% in any primary in any state. His quixotic, gadfly role guarantees that he has and will alienate more folks than he attracts. the best he could do would be raise some ideas that would likely be lost in the crushing defeat he would suffer in every state -- no matter how optimistic some libertarian bloggers are.

By the way -- I'd like to call your attention to this post by Chris Elam of Texas Safety Forum, a definite insider in past Ron Paul campaigns.

Well, I'm sure many of you have heard about it by now. Pop and I have known for a while, and if Ron decides to make a big push for the Presidency - we're behind him 100%. Goodness knows that the current crop of candidates are extremely disheartening when it comes to the topic of conservative government.

Let me address one thing. The internet is abuzz with rumors on who will replace Ron in his Congressional seat. Off the top of my head, I can name at least 8 people who would put their names into the ring for a primary battle.

However, I also have no indication on whether or not Dr. Paul intends to retire from Congress in 2008. At this moment, he is exploring the Presidential bid. He has not announced his impending retirement, and I would not be surprised in the least if we see Dr. Paul on the ballot for CD 14 in 2008.

If I hear something different, and Ron personally tells me that I have permission to share it here - I'll let you know.

My big fear is that this move will set off a bloody primary fight for the CD14 GOP nomination -- and that such a fight could create problems for the GOP holding the seat, regardless of the nominee.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, 123 Beta, Rightwing Guy, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, , The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Renaissance Blogger, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox News, Right Voices, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Phastidio.net, Conservative Cat, Wake Up America, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, High Desert Wanderer, OTB Sports, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 08:54 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 682 words, total size 7 kb.

And it is because federal tax revenues are increasing.

But how can that be?

I thought that the Bush tax cuts were a give-away to the rich and were creating the deficit.

At least that is what the Democrats have been assuring us -- especially during the 2006 election and in the weeks since their congressional victory.

The federal deficit has improved significantly in the first three months of the new budget year, helped by a continued surge in tax revenues.

In its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Friday that the deficit from October through December totaled $80.4 billion, the smallest imbalance for the first three months of a budget year since The budget year ends Sept. 30.

Tax collections are running 8.2 percent higher than a year ago while government spending is up by just 0.7 percent from a year ago. Last year's spending totals were boosted by significant payments to help the victims of the Gulf Coast hurricanes.

The Treasury said for December, the government actually ran a surplus of $44.5 billion, the largest surplus ever recorded in December and a gain that reflected a big jump in quarterly corporate tax payments.

The $80.4 billion deficit for the first three months of the current budget year was down 32.6 percent from the imbalance for the same period a year ago of $119.4 billion.

For the year, analysts are still forecasting that the deficit will worsen from last year's total of $248.2 billion, which had been the lowest in four years.

The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the 2007 budget year will rise to $286 billion, an increase of 15.2 percent from last year, but that figure could be lowered when the CBO releases its revised estimate later this month.

In other words, we have pessimistic estimates of the budget deficit, based upon worsst-case scenarios. But then this ugly little thing called reality kicks in, and shows us once again that lower marginal tax rates produce higher tax revenues. It was true under John F. Kennedy. It was true under Ronald Reagan. And it is true under Geerge W. Bush.

But don't worry, folks -- the Democrats will do their best to raise taxes on every American and kill the goose that laid teh golden egg. After all, that is their standard approach to economics -- because they are the bastion of the "Out-Of-Contact-With-Reality"-Based Community. The Pelosi/Reid Recession is just around the corner!

Posted by: Greg at 07:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.

If this is enacted, I believe we will be seeing a reasonable penalty imposed upon those convicted of official corruption.

With disgraced former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham eligible to collect a congressional pension from behind bars, the Senate on Friday voted to deny taxpayer-funded retirement benefits to lawmakers convicted in the future of serious ethics offenses.

* * *

"The best way to restore and rebuild the trust of the American people is to ensure that we stand firmly against members of Congress who betray the public trust," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the measure's sponsor. The legislation would not apply retroactively. Kerry said such a law would be unconstitutional.

Cunningham, of California, is serving an eight-year prison term after pleading guilty to taking $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors who sought earmarks and to evading more than $1 million in taxes. He is eligible for an estimated $64,000 annual pension with his military service, including $36,000 a year from his eight terms in Congress.

An attorney for Cunningham declined comment.

The measure enjoys strong bipartisan support in the House.

"The fact that the Senate passed it puts a lot of pressure on the House to do the same," said Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., sponsor of a similar measure in the House.
At least 20 former lawmakers convicted of crimes are eligible for taxpayer-funded pensions, some as high as $125,000 a year, according to the National Taxpayers Union, which supports denying pensions to lawmakers turned felons.

Interestingly enough, the public doesnÂ’t get to know how much these taxpayer-funded pensions for elected officials cost the nation each year.

Posted by: Greg at 04:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, except for those who work for some of Queen NancyÂ’s major corporate constituents.

. House Republicans yesterday declared "something fishy" about the major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district being exempted from the minimum-wage increase that Democrats approved this week.

"I am shocked," said Rep. Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican and his party's chief deputy whip, noting that Mrs. Pelosi campaigned heavily on promises of honest government. "Now we find out that she is exempting hometown companies from minimum wage. This is exactly the hypocrisy and double talk that we have come to expect from the Democrats."

On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.

I guess that some workers just don’t need a “living wage” if it might impact the bottom line of the fat cats from a certain San Francisco congressional district. Right, Madam Speaker?

UPDATE: Guess whose husband has a $17 million dollar stake in one of the companies benefitting from this exemption? The new Speaker of the House, Queen Nancy Pelosi!

Posted by: Greg at 12:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 189 words, total size 1 kb.

This one is disgustingly low, even for a bitch like Barbara Boxer.

Condoleezza Rice came under a shocking Democratic attack yesterday - as a childless woman who canÂ’t understand the sacrifices made by families of U.S. troops in Iraq. In a bitter personal assault on the secretary of state during her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, anti-war Sen. Barbara Boxer fumed that Rice didn't comprehend the "price" of the war.

"You're not going to pay a particular price, as I under stand it, with an immediate family," Boxer (D- Calif.) ranted.

"Who pays the price?" she repeatedly demanded during Rice's Capitol Hill grilling.

"I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young . . . So who pays the price? Not me, not you."

Boxer continued:

"You can't begin to imagine how you celebrate any holiday or birthday. There's an absence. It's not like the person's never been there. They always were there, and now they're not, and you're looking at an empty hole."

Excuse me? Apparently the pro-choice feminist Boxer wants to disqualify and disparage a highly qualified and accomplished woman – the Secretary of State – from participating in the formulation of public policy on Iraq because she has not borne a child. So much for the notion that Democrats respect a woman’s right to choose, and value a woman’s brain over her uterus.

Dr. Rice, of course, responded in the sort of fashion that shows why she should be on the 2008 GOP ticket.

The unflappable Rice responded at the packed hearing that she well understood the sacrifice of service members and families.

"I visit them. I know what they're going through," said Rice, who has never been married and has no children.

"I talk to their families. I see it. I could never and I can never do anything to replace any of those lost men and women in uniform, or the diplomats, some of whom . . ."

At that point, however, the Wicked Witch of Marin County interrupted Dr. Rice and refused to allow her to continue her too-the-point answer – and made an even more offensive attack on the Secretary of State.

"Madam Secretary, please," Boxer said. "I know you feel terrible about it. That's not the point. I was making the case as to who pays the price for your decisions."

Good grief! Is this really an attempt to argue that being childless renders one less of a citizen and less worthy of commenting on political matters – an irrelevant and intellectually bankrupt ad hominem attack not dissimilar to the “chickenhawk” meme the left has used for years?

I’m curious – would Senator Boxer suggest that other childless officials are equally incompetent to formulate military policy? You know, someone like the Sugar Plum Fairy Barney Frank, who is also single and childless. Probably not – because he is on her side, and because only liberals have the requisite "sensitivity" to empathize with the pain of others.

And let me speak as a man with no children despite the deepest desires of both my wife and I -- I feel the absence of the miscarried children on every holiday, every birthday, and the anniversaries of those losses. And as a teacher with dozens of former students in uniform, including a least a half-dozen currently deployed in combat zones, each announcement of a local casualty leads me a moment of dread -- Is it Angel or Andrew? Jason or Marcus? Am I about to hear them say Ricky's name, or see Robert's picture on the television screen. These are my boys, of whom I am most proud and for whom I fervently pray. In two cases I also taught their wives, and I have held one of their daughters in my arms as I have beamed with pride at the fine young man her father has become. And having grown up as a part of the military community during Vietnam, I know just how real the dangers are any time we commit our armed forces to the field of combat. It is for that reason that I am particularly offended by Barbara Boxer's reprehensible attack upon the my fellow educator, Dr. Rice.

And I therefore passionately cry out against this mean-spirited and dishonest assault upon the character and humanity of Condoleezza Rice.

Shame, Senator Boxer!

Shame!

UPDATE: Secretary Rice makes a great retort in an interview with the NY Times -- and clarifies what feminism really is, as opposed to the false version espoused by Boxer.

In an interview this afternoon with The New York Times, Ms. Rice suggested that the California Democrat had set back feminism by suggesting during the hearing that the childless Ms. Rice had paid no price in the Iraq war.

“I thought it was okay to be single,” Ms. Rice said. “I thought it was okay to not have children, and I thought you could still make good decisions on behalf of the country if you were single and didn’t have children.”

Women can rise to the highest ranks of American society without relying on millionaire husband's money or riding their politically powerful spouse's coattails, based upon their own hard work and and expertise. That is why I expect to see Dr. Rice in the White House one day.

Boxer, on the other hand, continues to defend her comments, proving she is an unprincipled bitch.

MORE AT Blogs for Bush, Black Informant, Jo's Cafe, It Shines For All, Sierra Faith, Okie on the Lammemeorandom, Unpartisan, Macsmind, Hot Air, Strata-Sphere, Stop the ACLU, Wizbang, The Anchoress, Big Dogs, Nelson Guirado, Sister Toldjah

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, 123 Beta, Rightwing Guy, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, Dumb Ox News, Right Voices, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Phastidio.net, Conservative Cat, Wake Up America, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, High Desert Wanderer, Gone Hollywood, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1061 words, total size 11 kb.

What do you have to say about the race for the GOP nomination in 2008?

Posted by: Greg at 10:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

Once again, it is because of Jimmy Carter's current book. And mind you, these are folks that are Carter associates making the criticism, not his political enemies.

The text of the letter is as follows.

Dear President Carter,

As members of the Board of Councilors each one of us has been proud to be associated with the Carter Center in its noble struggle to repair the world. However, in light of the publication of your latest book Palestine; Peace Not Apartheid and your subsequent comments made in promoting the book, we can no longer in good conscience continue to serve the Center as members of the Board of Councilors.

In its work in conflict resolution the Carter Center has always played the useful and constructive role of honest broker and mediator between warring parties. In your book, which portrays the conflict between Israel and her neighbors as a purely one-sided affair with Israel holding all of the responsibility for resolving the conflict, you have clearly abandoned your historic role of broker in favor of becoming an advocate for one side.

The facts in dealing with the conflict are these: There are two national narratives contesting one piece of land. The Israelis, through deed and public comment, have consistently spoken of a desire to live in peace and make territorial compromise to achieve this status. The Palestinian side has consistently resorted to acts of terror as a national expression and elected parties endorsing the use of terror, the rejection of territorial compromise and of Israel's right to exist. Palestinian leaders have had chances since 1947 to have their own state, including during your own presidency when they snubbed your efforts.

Your book has confused opinion with fact, subjectivity with objectivity and force for change with partisan advocacy. Furthermore the comments you have made the past few weeks insinuating that there is a monolith of Jewish power in America are most disturbing and must be addressed by us. In our great country where freedom of expression is basic bedrock you have suddenly proclaimed that Americans cannot express their opinion on matters in the Middle East for fear of retribution from the "Jewish Lobby" In condemning the Jews of America you also condemn Christians and others for their support of Israel. Is any interest group to be penalized for participating in the free and open political process that is America? Your book and recent comments suggest you seem to think so.

In the past you would inject yourself into this world to moderate between the two sides in the pursuit of peace and as a result you earned our admiration and support. Now you repeatedly make false claims. You wrote that UN Security Council Resolution 242 says that "Israel must withdraw from territories" (p. 3 , but you know the word "must" in fact is not in the resolution. You said that since Mahmoud Abbas has been in office there have been no peace discussions. That is wrong. You wrote that Yassir Arafat told you in 1990 that, "The PLO has never advocated the annihilation of Israel" (p. 62). Given that their Charter, which explicitly calls for Israel's destruction, was not revised until the late 1990s, how could you even write such a claim as if it were credible?

You denied on Denver radio on December 12 that Palestinian Prime Minister Haniyah said he would never accept or negotiate with Israel. However the BBC monitoring service reported just the opposite. In fact Haniyah said: "We will never recognize the usurper Zionist government and will continue our jihadist movement until Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem) and the Al-Aqsa Mosque are liberated. When presented with this fact you said, "No he didn't say that, no he did not do that, I did not hear that." These are not points of opinion, these are points of fact.

And finally, it is a disturbing statement to write: "that it is imperative, that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel." In this sentence you clearly suggest that you are condoning violence against Israelis until they do certain things (p.213). Your use of the word "Apartheid," regardless of your disclaimers, has already energized white supremacist groups who thrive on asserting Jewish control of government and foreign policy, an insinuation you made in your OPED to the LA Times on December 8, 2006: "For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts." According to Web site monitoring by the Anti-Defamation League, U.S. white supremacists have enthusiastically embraced your suggestion that the Israel lobby stifles debate in this country, saying it confirms Jewish control of government and foreign policy as well as and the inherently "evil" nature of Jews. If you doubt the support you are giving and receiving, please refer to: [http://www.adl.org]

From there you can get to the postings of four different White Supremacist organizations that both support and make use of the contents of your book and what you have said in public.

As a result it seems that you have turned to a world of advocacy, including even malicious advocacy. We can no longer endorse your strident and uncompromising position. This is not the Carter Center or the Jimmy Carter we came to respect and support. Therefore it is with sadness and regret that we hereby tender our resignation from the Board of Councilors of the Carter Center effective immediately.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Counstitution, the following are signatories to the letter.

1. Alan R. Abrams, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Servidyne, Inc., an Atlanta-based company serving the needs of commercial customers in the hospitality, industrial, corporate and institutional real estate markets.

2. Steve Berman, managing partner, OA Development, an Atlanta based real estate developer company.

3. Michael Coles, chairman of Minneapolis-based Caribou Coffee Co., the country's No. 2 coffeehouse chain.

4. Doug Hertz, president & CEO, United Distributors, a privately held Atlanta beverage distribution business.

5. Jonathan Golden, Partner and Chairman, Arnall, Golden, Gregory LLP, an Atlanta law firm.

6. Barbara Babbit Kaufman, author; formerly of Chapter 11 Books as its founder.

7. Liane Levetan, former state senator and DeKalb CEO.

8. Jeff Levy, Chairman and CEO of Atlanta-based PrDigital Media and its parent company, Biltmore Communications. PrDigital provides high density residential and commercial properties with a complete suite of broadband services.

9. Leon Novak, principal, The Trilogy Group, a full-service provider of commercial real estate services based in Atlanta.

10. Gail Solomon, Georgia Dome executive services manager.

11. Cathey Steinberg, Executive Director of the Juvenile Justice Fund, former state Consumers' Insurance Advocate and former state Senator.

12. Steve Selig, President and Chairman of the Board of Selig Enterprises. Has been in the commercial real estate field and employed with Selig Enterprises for over 35 years. He is also the Chairman of the Board of AAA Parking, a Selig subsidiary.

13. William B. Schwartz, Jr. was the U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas from 1977-1981 during the Carter Administration.

14. William B. Schwartz III, formerly senior wealth management professional at Offitbank, an arm of Wachovia, Rockefeller & Co.

Again, I'd argue that Carter's book and recent statements are functionally, if not intentionally, anti-Semitic in nature -- a conclusion I came to after my recently-banned Holocaust-denying troll began promoting Carter's work as proof that Israel and the Jews were a malignant force in the world.

Additional coverage may be found here.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 1280 words, total size 8 kb.

Durbin on American troops fighting the Crusade Against Islamofascism -- January 10, 2007

We are not winning in Iraq, despite the courage and immense sacrifice of our military.

Durban on American troops fighting the Crusade Against Islamofascism -- June 15, 2005

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

So which is it, Senator Durbin? Are our troops the equivalent of the worst regimes of the twentieth century, or are they courageous patriots making great sacrifices on behalf of the United States?

Posted by: Greg at 03:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

Indeed, this analogy is much more revealing about Ted Kennedy and his fellow cut-and-runners than it is about the President today -- or in 1967.

In Vietnam, the White House grew increasingly obsessed with victory, and increasingly divorced from the will of the people and any rational policy.

I'm sorry -- I always believe that during time of war the nation and its leaders are SUPPOSED TO BE obsessed with victory. And while I will agree that the Johnson Administration grew divorced from rational policy, that was because it was too connected with ephemeral public opinion and was unwilling to do the things necessary to secure the victory we were achieving militarily.

Instead, it is obvious that Kennedy and company are obsessed with ensuring that we lose the war in Iraq, just as like they were forty years ago. Even though the United States was winning in Vietnam by any objective measure, a certain segment of the American populace lost their will and demanded defeat at any price.

And the lessons of April, 1975, show us the next step will be by Kennedy & Co., as we abandon our allies to defeat and destruction at the hands of an enemy that has the will to win and is not troubled by "public opinion".

Confirming, of course, that the United States is a paper tiger, unwilling and unable to fight a sustained conflict despite its technological and numerical superiority.

Posted by: Greg at 01:39 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

What do the many professors and intellectuals who have rejected teh former president's recent book know that CarterÂ’s fellow terrorist-loving leftists donÂ’t?

This time it is another Emory University professor, Melvin Konner.

TO: Dr. John Hardman, M.D. Executive Director, The Carter Center

Dear Dr. Hardman,

I am sorry to say that after careful and frankly painful reflection, I have decided not to participate in your group advising President Carter and The Carter Center regarding his recent book on the Middle East conflict. During our telephone conversation on December 11 (perhaps not incidentally my late father's birthday) I spoke from my heart when I agreed to participate; it is not easy for me to lose one of my greatest heroes.

In less than a week since then, events have progressed in such a way as to persuade me that I cannot in good conscience participate in such an effort.

First, President Carter has proved capable of distorting the truth about such meetings and consultations in public remarks following them. In particular, he mischaracterized the meeting he had with the executive committee of the Board of Rabbis of Greater Phoenix, saying he and they had positive interactions and prayed together, when in fact others present stated that the meeting was highly confrontational and that the prayer was merely a pro forma closing invocation. (See "Letters," The New York Times, Dec. 15, 2006, p. A32.) However modest my reputation may be, I will not jeopardize it by participating in a meeting that might subsequently be so starkly misconstrued.

Second, in television interviews I have seen over the past week, President Carter has revealed himself to be so rigid and inflexible in his views that he seems to me no longer capable of dialogue. In an interview with Soledad O'Brien of CNN he failed to address a single one of the criticisms she quoted from various experts in a very serious tone of voice, pointing out that she was not reading the worst of the criticisms; he began laughing inappropriately while she spoke, and when she asked him how he would respond to the criticisms he stated, "With laughter." In a number of interviews I have seen and heard him respond to highly specific questions merely by stating again and again in one form or another, "My book is completely accurate." This rigidity of thought and complete failure to engage criticisms from much greater experts than me about his numerous and serious errors of commission and omission make it clear to me that an attempt by me to advise him would be pointless and counterproductive. In addition, his repeated public insinuations that the Jews control the media and the Congress˜well-worn anti-Semitic slurs that, especially coming from President Carter, present a clear and present danger to American Jews˜are offensive to me beyond what I can politely say.

Third, I am now carefully rereading parts of this very puzzling and problematic book, having read it through once quickly. I am not going to point out again here all the mistakes and misrepresentations pointed out by others (to take just one example, his flat contradiction of the accounts by President Clinton and Dennis Ross of events at Camp David at which they were present and he was not)˜none of which he has answered—nor explain the grotesque distortion caused by his almost completely ignoring Jewish history between ancient times and 1947 (he devotes five lines on page 64 to that millennial tragic story and mentions the Holocaust twice; his "Historical Chronology" at the outset contains nothing˜nothing˜between 1939 and 1947). However, I will call your attention to a sentence on p. 213 that had not stood out for me the first time I read it: "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."

As someone who has lived his life as a professional reader and writer, I cannot find any way to read this sentence that does not condone the murder of Jews until such time as Israel unilaterally follows President Carter's prescription for peace. This sentence, simply put, makes President Carter an apologist for terrorists and places my children, along with all Jews everywhere, in greater danger.

I am sure you will now understand why I cannot participate in your group advising President Carter.

However, if I may, I will share this advice to you: If you want The Carter Center to survive and thrive independently in the future, you must take prompt and decisive steps to separate the Center from President Carter's now irrevocably tarnished legacy. You must make it clear on your web site and in appropriately circulated press releases that President Carter does not speak for The Carter Center on the subject of the Middle East conflict or the political role of the American Jewish community. If you do not do this, then President Carter's damage to his own effectiveness as a mediator, not to mention to his reputation and legacy will extend, far more tragically in my view, to The Carter Center and all its activities.

Meanwhile, in my own private and modest public capacity as a university professor and writer, I will work very hard in the foreseeable future to help discredit President Carter's biased, intemperate and inflexible mischaracterizations of the reality of Israel, Palestine, terrorism, and the American Jewish community. I will urge all my colleagues and students to do the same. And, most painfully, I will discourage any connection with The Carter Center until such time as you make perfectly and publicly clear your independence from President Carter on this tragically difficult set of questions, which he has chosen so dangerously to distort and oversimplify.

I emphasize that I have been a decades-long supporter of President Carter and of The Carter Center and have defended him, his legacy, and The Center's work at every possible opportunity. It is a grave loss for me to acknowledge that this will no longer be possible.

I applaud Dr. Konner, whose understanding of Carters books, articles, and statements seem to be in concert with mine (and yes, I have had the chance to read the book fully now), and those of numerous other academics and commentators on this issue.

And I would particularly like to highlight the one statement made in the book that is supportive of the murder of Jews.

: "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."

No two ways about it – Jimmy is unwilling to tolerate the shedding of even one drop of Arab blood by Israelis seeking to defend themselves from terrorists, but is willing to countenance the continued murder of Jews to bring about the political solution he seeks. If that is not anti-Semitism, the term has no meaning.

Posted by: Greg at 12:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1193 words, total size 7 kb.

After all, we are talking about Chicago politicians.

Aldermen said on Tuesday they were upset about one of their fellow alderman's description of the city council.

"Now, we have another element in every one of our campaigns -- this perception that we're all crooks," said Alderman Freddrenna Lyle of the 6th Ward. "Which is the furthest thing from the truth."

On Monday, Alderman Arenda Troutman was arrested on suspicion of bribery. Federal agents said she had accepted a $5,000 bribe. According to government tapes, there are recordings of Troutman saying that, "well, the thing is, most aldermen, most politicians are hos."

Given the history of Chicago politics, this just seems to be an accurate assessment of the nature of the beast.

Posted by: Greg at 12:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

A minority of Senators can still prevent a majority from even discussing the public's business -- and the body voted to honor a corrupt, philandering drunk from the minority party by placing him third in line of gubernatorial succession.

The first disgrace was the inability of Senator Dan Patrick to get even a single additional senator to vote in favor of majority rule in the Senate by repealing the "blocker bill" rule.

He came, he spoke, he did not conquer.

Dan Patrick, Houston's fiery star of conservative talk radio, filled the Texas Senate chamber with his booming voice Tuesday, but his words fell flat.

Patrick's fight to kill a long-standing Senate rule requiring a two-thirds vote to debate a bill failed, 30-1.

* * *

For freshman Sen. Patrick, the day was more about challenging tradition than embracing it.

"I expected the vote to be 30-1," he said in an interview. "No one wants to let a rookie freshman change the rules of the Senate. I did not plan on diving into the pool on the first day, not in the deep end."

Patrick campaigned on trying to replace the two-thirds rule with a simple majority vote, a change that he thinks would give Republicans better control of the agenda.

The current Senate makeup is 20 Republicans and 11 Democrats. It takes 21 votes to bring a bill up for debate.

The rule, Patrick told his fellow senators, stifles debate.

"No controversial bill is brought up for honest debate on the floor," he said, adding that people want senators to take a stand on difficult policy matters.

"As long as we have the two-thirds rule, that doesn't happen," he said. "What's wrong with majority rule? It was good enough for Jefferson, for Madison and Monroe. It's not good enough for the Texas Senate?"

Since it was clear from the start that Patrick had no chance of prevailing, he kept his remarks under 10 minutes.

Looks to me like it doesn't really matter that we have nearly 2/3 of the Senate if we can't even get a majority to vote in favor of allowing a majority to talk about the business of the people of the state of Texas. Shame on every last GOP member who sided with Democrats against the people of Texas.

But equally troubling was the decision to honor Senator Mario Gallegos, a Democrat, by making him president pro tem of the Senate.

The Texas Senate's first day began on a far more poignant note, however, as the upper chamber honored recovering alcoholic Sen. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston, naming him the Senate's new president pro tempore.

As third in line of succession to the governorship, Gallegos will serve as "Governor for a Day" sometime during the session while Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst are "out of the state."

"For a young man who grew up in the barrio of Houston, this is truly a humbling experience for me," Gallegos said in his acceptance speech, joined on the dais by his wife, Theresa, and mother, Olga.

And that is strangely appropriate, given that Gallegos has been using Mom's address to run for office while living outside his district and carrying on with a stripper. And let's make no mistake -- this was about saving Gallegos from a possible primary challenge from fellow Democrats disgusted with his actions.

Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, lauded the ailing Gallegos for undergoing rehabilitation for alcoholism last spring.

Whitmire told senators he's confident that his "best friend" in the Senate has stopped drinking.

"I've been here long enough to see the human side of state representatives and state senators," Whitmire said. "We're not perfect. Mario's got some issues, but he's the first senator I've been familiar with that recognized his problem, sought help, went public and has been successful with his sobriety."

Whitmire then issued a warning at-large to anyone thinking of challenging Gallegos for his Senate seat: "You mess with Mario Gallegos while he's in recovery, while he's doing well and representing his district, you mess with Mario, and you're messing with me and the rest of this Senate."

Frankly, this is a disgusting show of buddy-buddy politics -- and a disgraceful decision on the part of the Senate.

I don't really ahve much to say about the race for Speaker of the House her in texas. I don't like Craddick and didn't like his challengers, because none of them are right on property tax relief, or on teacher pay and benefits. I just didn't have a dog in this hunt.

But I'm still a bit pleased that Craddick won.

After all, the lefty blogs are howling.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 788 words, total size 5 kb.

Speaking as a Republican who supports the President on Iraq, I want to urge "symbolic votes" and hold significant policy votes on the proposals to cut funds and mandate troop withdrawal from Iraq. After all, the American people deserve substantive debate and substantive votes on substantive policies, not window dressing and political posturing from those who seek surrender and wish to undercut the president and the crusade against Islamofascist jihadis.

Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they intended to hold symbolic votes in the House and Senate on President BushÂ’s plan to send more troops to Baghdad, forcing Republicans to take a stand on the proposal and seeking to isolate the president politically over his handling of the war.

Senate Democrats decided to schedule a vote on the resolution after a closed-door meeting on a day when Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts introduced legislation to require Mr. Bush to gain Congressional approval before sending more troops to Iraq.

The Senate vote is expected as early as next week, after an initial round of committee hearings on the plan Mr. Bush will lay out for the nation Wednesday night in a televised address delivered from the White House library, a setting chosen because it will provide a fresh backdrop for a presidential message.

The office of Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, followed with an announcement that the House would also take up a resolution in opposition to a troop increase. House Democrats were scheduled to meet Wednesday morning to consider whether to interrupt their carefully choreographed 100-hour, two-week-long rollout of their domestic agenda this month to address the Iraq war.

In both chambers, Democrats made clear that the resolutions — which would do nothing in practical terms to block Mr. Bush’s intention to increase the United States military presence in Iraq — would be the minimum steps they would pursue. They did not rule out eventually considering more muscular responses, like seeking to cap the number of troops being deployed to Iraq or limiting financing for the war — steps that could provoke a Constitutional and political showdown over the president’s power to wage war.

So come on, Democrats, you have teh power -- have the testicular fortitude to use it by voting on actual legislation, not non-binding resolutions, on what we all agree is the defining issue of the day.

Or is it that you lack the will and the courage to actually stand up and be counted when it comes time for a real implementation of your principles -- just like you lack the will to use America's military might to spread freedom and American values abroad in the face of those who seek to destroy both.

Oh, and a closing note -- who chose the picture of harry Reid that makes him look like a plaster saint, complete with halo?

Posted by: Greg at 11:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 489 words, total size 3 kb.

It is great to be able to report this bit of good news.

Sen. Tim Johnson's condition has been upgraded from critical to fair, four weeks after he was hospitalized for a brain hemorrhage, his office said yesterday.

The South Dakota Democrat, who was taken to the hospital Dec. 13 and underwent emergency surgery, remains in intensive care.

"The senator continues to make progress," spokeswoman Julianne Fisher said. "The next step would be rehabilitation, and we hope that would happen within the week."

Johnson's office has said that his recovery is expected to take several months. The surgery was done to correct a condition called arteriovenous malformation, which involves tangled arteries.

And as i've said in the past, I don't give a damn about all the political calculations and machinations associated with the senator's illness -- I'm more concerned about his recovery. That matter is significantly more important than any other matter, because Johnson is a fellw human being first, and a politician second.

Posted by: Greg at 10:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney got a needed boost to his presidential effort yesterday -- an infusion of $6.5 million from a 400 person phone-a-thon yesterday. Paul Mirengoff from Power Line reports the following.

Mitt Romney's call-a-thon, "National Call Day," is underway. It's the campaign's first big fundraising event, and involves approximately 400 fundraisers from across the country. I'm told that the Romney people hope they will be able to announce impressive results later today.

Meanwhile, David Frum explains why he thinks Romney has a fighting chance, notwithstanding the presence of heavyweights John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. To Frum, it's about Romney's record of competence and problem-solving, based on "a voracious appetite for data, a willingness to hear contrary opinions and a cool and deliberate decision-making style."

Not a bad single day total -- and indicative that there is a base of support among Republicans unhappy with the other two front-runners.

The bloggers from My Man Mitt live-blogged the event, and have a great photo from the end.

Posted by: Greg at 11:53 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 174 words, total size 2 kb.

It looks like Mitt is surging in Florida.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is making Florida a key part of his strategy to challenge front-runners John McCain and Rudy Giuliani for the Republican nomination for president.

To carry that off, Romney is appealing to the state's influential religious and social conservative community, and building on tacit support from former Gov. Jeb Bush.

Given the popularity of the former governor and First Brother, Romney is in a great position to get the delegates from this key Republican state. And while current governor Charlie Crist is said to lean towards McCain, that could change.

And Romney is certainly building on the Jeb Bush legacy.

Romney, who just left office as Massachusetts governor and announced formation of an exploratory presidential campaign committee, trails both McCain and Giuliani in national polls.

So far, however, he's well ahead of both in building a Florida organization.

His Florida organizing began attracting attention last year when his political action committee, Commonwealth PAC, hired two of Bush's top political operatives: longtime strategist Sally Bradshaw and fundraiser Ann Herberger, a key player in the phenomenal Bush gubernatorial campaign fundraising machine.

Romney has since announced that two other major Bush political backers, former state party Chairman Al Cardenas and former Lt. Gov. Toni Jennings, have joined the PAC's Florida steering committee.

Bush is publicly neutral in the primary for now, but Bradshaw confirmed that he suggested she talk to Romney about the campaign.

Some GOP insiders say Romney has sought to recruit Bush as his running mate. Like the other candidates, Romney covets the fundraising machine built by the Bush family.

Bush has ruled out running for president himself in 2008, but hasn't ruled out a running mate slot. Romney backers wouldn't say whether he's broached the subject with Bush.

I'd certainly wait to see where the poll number of a certain OTHER Bush are before offering Jeb a spot on the ticket, but I think it s fair to say that the former governor is likely to find a Cabinet-level home in any Romney administration.

Unfortunately, there are still those nagging questions about religion. Take this example.

How, the South Carolina Republican activist asked presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, could he square Mormon doctrine with civil rights or monogamy?

Cyndi Mosteller understood that church founder and prophet Joseph Smith taught that black skin was a curse visited upon descendants of Cain. And that a man should be able to take multiple wives.

Romney told her Mormons no longer practice such beliefs. For almost 30 years African-Americans have been in the priesthood of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church renounced polygamy in 1890.

Mosteller, chairwoman of the Charleston County Republican Party, wasnÂ’t satisfied.

“He’s going to have to defend these positions,” she said, “or reject his faith.”

Such is the dilemma for the former Massachusetts governor and one-time church leader. Even in explaining the modern Mormon church, Romney must persuade voters — particularly evangelicals — that his faith is no threat to theirs.

Frankly, Mosteller is an embarrassment to the GOP. Scratch that -- Mosteller is an embarrassment to the United States. I urge South Carolina (and national) Republicans to repudiate her. Indeed, I urge my readers to contact Cyndi Mosteller to let her know how out of step she is with Republican and American values.

And I say this as someone who has theological problems with the LDS church. I've studied their doctrines and their history, and don't see how anyone who does a critical analysis of either can be a member. And yet, I cannot think of a single Mormon I have ever known who has not been one of the finest, most decent people I've known. By all accounts, even those of his political opponents, I'd find that statement to be applicable to Mitt Romney as well were I to have the opportunity to meet him.

Ultimately, I feel it is important to urge my fellow Republicans -- and fellow Americans -- to give serious consideration to the words of Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention>

We are not electing a theologian-in-chief. We are electing a commander-in-chief."

Judge Romney on his record of achievement and his position on the crucial issues facing America -- not where he worships or does not worship.

UPDATE: I sent my own letter to Ms. Mosteller.

more...

Posted by: Greg at 09:32 AM | Comments (33) | Add Comment
Post contains 1282 words, total size 11 kb.

There are few Americans in politics today who I see as having more integrity than Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.). His willingness to put the needs of the nation above the needs of his party nearly cost him everything in 2006, but it didn't -- and clearly demonstrates why he would be worthy of a chapter in Profiles in Courage if John F. Kennedy were writing it today rather than a half century ago.

Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman shared his own thoughts on Bush's plan. "We need an increase in troops there now," he asserted before an audience of military experts and academics. "It must be substantial, and it must be sustained."

Lieberman was sworn in last week as the chamber's one and only "independent Democrat," with the emphasis on "independent." On most issues, including big domestic priorities, he expects to vote as he has for the past 18 years, as a loyal Democrat. But on Iraq, Lieberman is more in sync with Bush than are many Republicans. He is a passionate defender of the war as a death struggle against Islamic terrorism.

* * *

One Lieberman trait that particularly rankles Democrats is his abiding loyalty to Bush. A few days after the Wall Street Journal published the senator's op-ed piece, Lieberman lectured at a foreign policy conference. "It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be commander in chief for three more critical years," he said, "and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril."

The senator was a bit more measured Friday, but his point was clear.

"The president of the United States gets this," Lieberman said. "I think he sees the moment that we are at in the larger war on terrorism and the significance of how we conclude the war in Iraq, how devastating it would be to the Iraqis, to the Middle East, to America if we simply withdrew. He needs our support."

I want to disagree with the author of this article. Liberman is not being loyal to George W. Bush. Rather, he is being loyal to the very American notion that politics ends at the water's edge, and that during time of war we need to fight to victory. Indeed, that is the only appropriate "exit strategy" for the United State in Iraq -- "Win, then bring the troops home."

I'm not a fan of "fusion tickets". I could never vote for John McCain because of his betrayal of the First Amendment. But with that single exception, I will state for the record that I could be quite enthusiastic about a 2008 GOP ticket that showed the true meaning of bipartisanship by including Joe Lieberman in the second slot.

Because after all -- patriotism matters more than party labels.

Posted by: Greg at 08:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 476 words, total size 3 kb.

No, not the many political prisoners rotting in Castro's tropical gulags, nor the Cuban people yearning to be free from Communist tyranny.

No, this disgrace to American motherhood, who supports the Cuban dictator, wants freedom for terrorists who want to destroy the United States.

American "peace mom" Cindy Sheehan called for the closure of the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as she and other activists arrived here Saturday to draw attention to the nearly 400 terror suspects held at the remote site.

Sheehan is among 12 human rights and anti-war activists who will travel across this Caribbean island next week, arriving at the main gate of the Guantanamo base in eastern Cuba on Thursday -- five years after the first prisoners were flown in.

"Anyone who knows me, knows that I am not afraid of anything," Sheehan said when asked about the possibility of U.S. sanctions for traveling to communist-run Cuba, which remains under an American trade embargo.

"What is more important is the inhumanity that my government is perpetrating at Guantanamo," she told reporters.

Sheehan, 49, of Vacaville, Calif., became an anti-war activist known as the "peace mom" after losing her 24-year-old son Casey in Iraq in April 2004.

Gee, Cindy, what a way to honor your son -- seeking freedom for the ideological soulmates of those who killed him!

Posted by: Greg at 05:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

Here is a little something for the race-baiters and poverty pimps of the Left (including Bawney Fwank) to consider.

Up here, in the Northern Plains, we just recovered from a Historic event— may I even say a “Weather Event” of “Biblical Proportions” — with a historic blizzard of up to 44″ inches of snow and winds to 90 MPH that broke trees in half, knocked down utility poles, stranded hundreds of motorists in lethal snow banks, closed ALL roads, isolated scores of communities and cut power to 10Â’s of thousands. George Bush did not come.

FEMA did nothing.

No one howled for the government.

No one blamed the government.

No one even uttered an expletive on TV.

Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton did not visit.

Our Mayor did not blame Bush or anyone else.

Our Governor did not blame Bush or anyone else, either.

CNN, ABC, CBS, FOX or NBC did not visit - or report on this category 5 snowstorm. Nobody demanded $2,000 debit cards.

No one asked for a FEMA Trailer House.

No one looted.

Nobody - I mean Nobody demanded the government do something.

Nobody expected the government to do anything, either.

No Larry King, No Bill OÂ’Rielly, No Oprah, No Chris Mathews and No Geraldo Rivera.

No Shaun Penn, No Barbara Striesand, No Hollywood types to be found.

Nope, we just melted the snow for water.

Sent out caravans of SUVÂ’s to pluck people out of snow engulfed cars.

The truck drivers pulled people out of snow banks and didnÂ’t ask for a penny.

Local restaurants made food and the police and fire departments delivered it to the snowbound families. Families took in the stranded people - total strangers.

We fired up wood stoves, broke out coal oil lanterns or Coleman lanterns.

We put on extra layers of clothes because up here it is “Work or Die”.

We did not wait for some affirmative action government to get us out of a mess created by being immobilized by a welfare program that trades votes for Â’sittin at homeÂ’ checks.

Even though a Category “5″ blizzard of this scale has never fallen this early, we know it can happen and how to deal with it ourselves.

In my many travels, I have noticed that once one gets north of about 48 degrees North Latitude, 90% of the worldÂ’s social problems evaporate.

It does seem that way, at least to me.

I hope this gets passed on.

And as one who had family impacted by this mess and the recent winter storms that left family members in Washington and Oregon blacked-out for days in unseasonably cold weather, I won't even try to argue that the lack of media frenzy, massive federal response and presidential visits was based upon racism, incompetence or lack of concern -- or claim that the weather was a government conspiracy or designed to commit genocide.

H/T The Conspiracy To Keep You Poor & Stupid, Areopagitica, Colossus of Rhodey

UPDATE: Want to bet this doesn't rate a presidential visit, saturation news coverage, or left-wing conspiracy theories about how "the Bush Crime Family and CIA did this to distract from Iraq"?

Posted by: Greg at 06:57 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 4 kb.

You know, some mistakes are really not acceptable. This is one.

Fortunately, Wolf Blitzer apologized today for this mistake from yesterday's edition of The Situation Room.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: One additional note, I just want to make a correction, an apology, Soledad, for what we did yesterday. In "THE SITUATION ROOM," we had a bad typographical error in one of ourgraphics. We were doing a piece on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in this new year 2007.

Unfortunately there was a graphic, instead of saying where is Osama, it said where is Obama. We want to apologize for that bad typo. We want to also apologize personally to Senator Barack Obama. I'm going to be making a call to him later this morning to offer my personal apology –Soledad.

The KOSsacks are, of course, frothing. They forget who the first national figure was who made that mistake -- fellow Senator Jabba the Drunk Ted Kennedy (D-Chappaquidick).

UPDATE -- 1/6/07: Some loony lefties (and some not-so-loony lefties) are still complaining about this obvious typo on CNN. I bet none of them were so upset when this error was made during an appearance by Congress On Racial Equality representative and Republican strategist Niger Innis appeared on MSNBC in 2002.

Then again, many of them probably think this is a fair description of any black Republican.

H/T Crooks & Liars and Raw Story

Posted by: Greg at 01:00 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 3 kb.

Sort of like Wheaties is the Breakfast of Democrats.

After all, what else do you call a group that votes to supposedly limit lobbyist influence, but then goes to a $1000-a-plate fundraiser full of lobbyists with open checkbooks?

Democrats say they were returned to power in part because of corruption and ethical lapses of the Republican Congress. They promised to clean up the swamp and crack down on lobbyists.

But hours after changing House rules to reduce favors from lobbyists, it was back to business as usual in Washington.

Democrats threw a $1,000-a-person fundraising concert in Washington Thursday night, with Hollywood celebrities, big donors and those lobbyists writing checks to re-elect Democrats.

“Tonight we are having a celebration!” said Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Democrats are back!”

You see lobbyists are bad -- until they are giving money to the Democrats, at which point they are a vital, indeed essential, part of the political system.

I particularly love this particular laugh line from Queen Nancy's spokeswhoreperson.

Speaker Pelosi's spokesperson says there were only about 200 lobbyists at Thursday night's fundraising concert, and that this still will be the most open, honest Congress ever.

Taking money from lobbyists at Nancy's Place? I'm shocked! Shocked!

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 216 words, total size 2 kb.

We folks here in CD22 are a conservative bunch -- so of course our new "representative" voted for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House.

One of only two freshmen in the 34-member Texas delegation, Lampson also praised the importance of the House vote installing Pelosi as the first female speaker in the chamber's history.

He cast that vote with granddaughter Olivia, who turns 2 next month, in his arms.

Yep -- backing that San Francisco liberal certainly is a prime example of representing the beliefs of the people of the district.

It should be a fun two years, cataloging every betrayal of CD22 by the carpetbagger, Nick Lampson.

Posted by: Greg at 01:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess that some Democrats want to ensure that the Louisiana Freezer Alligator (Bribus freezeris William-Jeffersonis) remains in Queen Nancy's "ethical swamp".

On the same day that the 110th Democratic-led Congress convenes with a plan to immediately pass lobbyist and ethics reforms, the Congressional Black Caucus Thursday gave a standing ovation to Rep. William Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat who faces an FBI probe into bribery allegations.

"The haters... and negative nabobs...the people who spoke against him couldn't prevail against the people who spoke for him," Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, master of ceremonies for the CBC's celebratory event, said Thursday morning.

I guess racial solidarity trumps integrity for the CDC.

Posted by: Greg at 10:45 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

Unless this Massachusetts scumbag has proof of his claim that George W. Bush has committed ethnic cleansing against Americans – and I mean documents or video that prove as much -- he must resign from the House of Representatives in well-deserved disgrace. And if he will not, his colleagues must expel him for such an intolerable statement.

Welcome to the “new tone” in Democrat “bipartisanship”.

H/T Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Jawa Report, Seven Stripes, Gay Patriot

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.

Three heartbeats from the presidency.

"Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

Robert Byrd

The Democrat Party -- Making America Proud!

Posted by: Greg at 01:12 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.

The Dems now control both Houses of Congress.

The 110th Congress convened Thursday with Democrats in control of both the House and Senate for the first time in a dozen years. "Today we make history. Today we change the direction of our country," exulted Rep. Nancy Pelosi, poised to become the first woman speaker in history.

With her grandchildren joining her for the historic moment, Pelosi beamed as her name was placed in nomination and the party-line roll call commenced.

I cannot help but notice the difference in how the AP treats this power change as opposed to the 1994 shift of partisan control.

Dingell administered the same oath to former Speaker Newt Gingrich, R- Ga., 12 years ago when Republicans seized the House after 40 years of Democratic control _ and he's set to get back his gavel as the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Democrats are “in control”; Republicans “seize power”. No bias in that language – none at all.

MORE COVERGE of this national tragedy.

Posted by: Greg at 10:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

How, precisely will they do this? By decreasing freedom, of course!

American companies can expect proposals mandating increased wages and health care, a boost in union membership and greater scrutiny of trade agreements, a key Democrat promised Wednesday.

It's all part of the new Democratic congressional majority's agenda to reduce what Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) calls "inequality" that inhibits economic growth.

"Inequality is not necessarily a bad thing. It's necessary in the capitalist system, and I'm a capitalist," Frank said during a speech to the National Press Club. "But we do not have to have a government that reinforces it."

Frank has a definite agenda, though – letting the government tell business how to do business.

Frank was not specific on every proposal, but he said he intends to hold hearings into income disparity and what the government can do about it. He is also proposing a "grand bargain" that will tie trade bills, regulatory relief and other business-friendly legislation to mandates on increased wages, union empowerment and health care coverage.

"Government doesn't have to interfere with the free enterprise system, but we can work along with it to reduce inequality," Frank said.

Of course, everything Frank is proposing does interfere with free enterprise.

Government will tell businesses how much they must pay heir workers and what benefits they must offer. Government will force in unions, even upon workers who don’t want to be a part of them. And government will impose conditions and restrictions upon how they do business.

I believe that is generally called socialism by economists, Barney.

Posted by: Greg at 10:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

How, precisely will they do this? By decreasing freedom, of course!

American companies can expect proposals mandating increased wages and health care, a boost in union membership and greater scrutiny of trade agreements, a key Democrat promised Wednesday.

It's all part of the new Democratic congressional majority's agenda to reduce what Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) calls "inequality" that inhibits economic growth.

"Inequality is not necessarily a bad thing. It's necessary in the capitalist system, and I'm a capitalist," Frank said during a speech to the National Press Club. "But we do not have to have a government that reinforces it."

Frank has a definite agenda, though – letting the government tell business how to do business.

Frank was not specific on every proposal, but he said he intends to hold hearings into income disparity and what the government can do about it. He is also proposing a "grand bargain" that will tie trade bills, regulatory relief and other business-friendly legislation to mandates on increased wages, union empowerment and health care coverage.

"Government doesn't have to interfere with the free enterprise system, but we can work along with it to reduce inequality," Frank said.

Of course, everything Frank is proposing does interfere with free enterprise.

Government will tell businesses how much they must pay heir workers and what benefits they must offer. Government will force in unions, even upon workers who donÂ’t want to be a part of them. And government will impose conditions and restrictions upon how they do business.

I believe that is generally called socialism by economists, Barney.

Posted by: Greg at 10:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.

Is Sean Hannity the ascendant voice of American conservatism? Well, it could be, given his increasing talk time.

If 2007 is supposed to be a big year for liberals, conservative voice box Sean Hannity didn't get the memo. The man not only keeps going and going, but he's also growing and growing.

Already heard 2-5 p.m. daily on KPRC 950 AM and 8-9 p.m. on Fox News Channel, Hannity will now appear 8-9 p.m. Sundays starting this weekend on FNC, as well. Unlike his weeknight gig opposite Alan Colmes, he'll host Hannity's America solo.

"What I want to do with this are things I couldn't do on Hannity & Colmes," said the Man Who Loves to Talk. "We're going to have reporters assigned to the show, and we're going to go out and find stories nobody else is covering."

The show will also include, he said, an on-the-street segment, a Sunday "rewind," a two-on-two political debate and a segment called the Hannity Hot Seat.

I do not watch H&C, and rarely listen to his show for more than a few minutes in the afternoon -- but i wish him well.

Posted by: Greg at 11:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.

is their own constituency.

House Democrats tried to unveil their lobbying reform package today, but their press conference was drowned out by chants from anti-war activists who want Congress to stop funding the Iraq war before taking on other issues.

Led by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a slain soldier, the protesters chanted "De-escalate, investigate, troops home now" as Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., began outlining the Democrats' plans to ban lobbyist-funded travel and institute other ethics reforms. The press conference was held in the Cannon House Office Building in an area open to the public.

Emanuel finally gave up trying to be heard over the chants, and retreated to a caucus room where Democrats were meeting.

Sheehan says she has nothing against lobbying reform, but she and her fellow anti-war activists want Democrats to know they will keep pressuring Congress to end the war in Iraq.

"We wanted the Democrats to know they're back in power because of the grass roots," Sheehan says.

The anti-war activists held their own Capitol Hill press conference earlier in the day before deciding to attend the lobbying reform press conference as well.

Not that this pathetic woman who has made a career of whoring her dead soldier-son is necessarily in favor of ethics reform.

Before the chanting started, Sheehan got a hug from Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

After all -- Conyers has just owned up to abusing his government-paid staff by using them for personal and campaign purposes.

Posted by: Greg at 01:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.

The paperwork for the “exploratory committee” has been filed, making it all but official that Mitt Romney will actively pursue the 2008 GOP presidential nomination.

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said Wednesday he's taking the first step in a 2008 presidential bid, joining an increasingly crowded field of Republican hopefuls.

"We've filed exploratory papers today, so the process is moving forward on that front," he told reporters Wednesday, his final day in office.

A spokesman for Romney later said the paperwork officially would be filed late Wednesday afternoon in Washington with the Federal Election Commission. The formation of an exploratory committee allows Romney to raise and spend money for a presidential run.

Romney's confirmation of his plans comes after a 10-day period of contemplation during a family vacation in Utah and follows several years in which he acknowledged he was considering a White House run but hadn't made a final decision about pursuing the presidency.

Forming an exploratory committee is the prelude to a full declaration of candidacy for the presidency,

Posted by: Greg at 11:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 174 words, total size 1 kb.

Look at what counts as “an unreported independent expenditure or a prohibited corporate expenditure."

In a decision announced Tuesday, the FEC sent an “admonishment letter” to Kirk Shelmerdine Racing. Kirk Shelmerdine, a former pit boss for the late Dale Earnhardt, has been an unsuccessful, underfunded and undersponsored driver. He has never finished higher than 26th.

So back in 2004, in a move perhaps designed to draw some attention to his car, he placed a “Bush-Cheney ’04” decal on his rear quarter panel, which was otherwise unencumbered by advertising. Democratic activist Sydnor Thompson complained to the FEC, and the agency found that Shelmerdine “may have made an unreported independent expenditure or a prohibited corporate expenditure.”

This literally amounts to a ruling that a bumper sticker can count as a regulated contribution, if it is placed on a commercial vehicle. So rather than being permitted to engage in the sort of political speech clearly envisioned by the Founding Fathers when they adopted the First Amendment, we have a pathetic gang of government bureaucrats determining that such political speech violates laws designed to suppress and regulate political speech.

Former FEC commissioner Bradley Smith makes an observation about the placement of the sticker by Shelmerdine – in light of the fact that no one was willing to pay to place a logo or other sponsorship decal on that part of the car, “evidence is strong that the market value of Shelmerdine’s rear quarter panel was approximately $0, give or take $249.”

UPDATE -- 1/3/2007: Ryan Sager makes this pointed observation about how far this absurd ruling could go in allowing the regulation of political speech -- and the danger of just such absurdity.

With this case, the FEC has opened a new and disturbing door. If the agency claims oversight over any endorsement that it sees as valuable, what's next? Celebrities routinely get paid for endorsements. Is a rock star wearing a "Kerry for President" or "Impeach Bush" shirt now fair game?

It seems that, so long as trouble-makers are ready to write up the complaints, the FEC is happy to take any nutball theory for a few spins around the track - no matter how ludicrous the repercussions for free speech in our democracy.

Indeed -- this case proves that "campaign finance reform" has become less about ending corruption than it is about regulating speech and the ability of Americans to freely participate in the American political process.

Posted by: Greg at 12:10 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.

Initial reports indicate it was lost by an aide this fall, and leaked to the press by a supporter of another GOP hopeful.

It's clearly laid out in 140 pages of printed text, handwriting and spreadsheets: The top-secret plan for Rudy Giuliani's bid for the White House.

The remarkably detailed dossier sets out the budgets, schedules and fund-raising plans that will underpin the former New York mayor's presidential campaign - as well as his aides' worries that personal and political baggage could scuttle his run.

At the center of his efforts: a massive fund-raising push to bring in at least $100 million this year, with a scramble for at least $25 million in the next three months alone.

The loss of the battle plan is a remarkable breach in the high-stakes game of presidential politics and a potentially disastrous blunder for Giuliani in the early stages of his campaign.

The document also examines the possible skeletons in the Giuliani closet.

One page cites the explicit concern that he might "drop out of [the] race" as a consequence of his potentially "insurmountable" personal and political vulnerabilities.

On the same page is a list of the candidate's central problems in bullet-point form: his private sector business; disgraced former aide Bernard Kerik; his third wife, Judith Nathan Giuliani; "social issues," on which is he is more liberal than most Republicans, and his former wife Donna Hanover.

The concerns appear to be listed as issues for Giuliani law partner Pat Oxford to address and are followed by the central question of the campaign:

Are there "prob[lem]s that are insurmount[able]?" it asks, adding, "Has anyone reviewed with RWG?" Giuliani, whose middle name is William, is referred to throughout the document by his initials.

"All will come out - in worst light," the memo continues. "$100 million against us on this stuff."

The Giuliani campaign has fired back, claiming the document was stolen from an aide's luggage, not mislaid and forgotten.

Giuliani spokeswoman Sunny Mindel claimed it was actually pilfered from a piece of airline luggage.

"This wasn't left in a hotel," Mindel told The Associated Press. "This is clearly a dirty trick. The voters are sick and tired of this kind of thing."

Ms. Mindel said that while working on the 2006 campaign trail, a Giuliani aide lost a piece of luggage containing the paper.

"After repeated requests over the course of a few days, the bag was finally returned with the document inside. Because our staffer had custody of this document at all times except for this one occasion, it is clear that the document was removed from the luggage and photocopied," she said.

If that is the case, I am not pleased. This sort of crap is bad for the GOP, and I will not look kindly on anyone involved in stealing the document, if that is what happened.

Regardless, though, the document presents some fascinating insights into the Giuliani machine.

Posted by: Greg at 11:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 497 words, total size 3 kb.

Another Democrat promise bites the dust.

As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

So, when it comes down to a choice between passing their cornerstone legislation and keeping their promise to the American people to operate in a new spirit of bipartisanship and openness, Queen Nancy and her merry band of left-wing jesters are going to allow no GOP input on ethics reform, the minimum wage or other major proposals.

Brian Daly, Queen Nancy's spokeswhoreperson claims that the first 100 hours is not the test of his boss's commitment to bipartisanship in the House.

"The test is not the first 100 hours," he said. "The test is the first six months or the first year. We will do what we promised to do."

No, Brian, you will show that the Democrat commitment to bipartisanship is a sham, and that when it comes down to anything significant, the Democrats will use their power to freeze out the GOP, despite the guarantees of a new tone in Washington.

H/T GOP Bloggers

UPDATE -- 1/3/2007: And now the Washington Post takes the Dems to task for their promise-breaking!

Posted by: Greg at 04:34 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

1

Sounds like sour grapes to me, but lets face it you'd never be happy with anything the left would do. You guys just don't have it in you.

Posted by: Not Dick but Richard at Tue Jan 2 07:58:57 2007 (1HuM5)

2 When and if the Dems do the right thing, I'll be all for it.

The problem is that I rarelyr expect them to do the right thing.

If they were usually going to do the right thing, they'd be Republicans.

And you may notice that I can and do praise and support Dem proposals from time to time. Look around the site for a while and you'll find examples -- including one just below about Ted Kennedy.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue Jan 2 10:15:58 2007 (tCngE)

3 baltimore and convention center and headquarters nasdaq 100 tennis tournament

Posted by: Olgunka-vz at Thu Nov 27 23:37:46 2008 (CtUwW)

4 dog sleds safarilandstore ohio chamber of commerece work at home leads the drew carey show tv tome

Posted by: Larcik-om at Wed Jan 21 06:14:13 2009 (i8CMM)

5 www cute milfs com - sex10 ru - vidiosex - analtube - www easy erotic de -

Posted by: ellaelax-co at Tue May 19 04:34:14 2009 (V7y0K)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Or do you plan to prove that my second prediction for 2007 is correct this soon? After all, a senior member has acknowledged responsibility for ethical and criminal violations in his (ab)use of his staff -- how can you allow him the chairmanship of one of the most important committees in the House of Representatives?

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is scheduled to become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, but only because he agreed when Pelosi previously made clear that she intended him not to waste time on impeachment proceedings against President Bush. But now we learn that Conyers has his own problems with obeying the law.

There is so much wrong with the Conyers situation that Pelosi shouldnÂ’t have to think twice about nixing ConyersÂ’ chairmanship. Let us look at how the Conyers scandal epitomizes the ethics mess in the House:

First, releasing its report late on Friday before the New Year’s holiday weekend made it clear that the House “Ethics” Committee intended to minimize public understanding of the Conyers scandal. This is classic Washington Establishment manipulation of the news cycle to insulate itself against public accountability.

Second, Conyers responded to the “Ethics” committee by “accepting responsibility” for a “lack of clarity” in asking aides to work on his re-election campaign while on the official payroll instead of going on a campaign staff, as the law requires, and to do personal chores for him. The allegations came from senior staff members, including a former chief of staff, not interns or other short-term aides who might have questionable motives.

Third, the “Ethics” committee report also concerned a second investigation of Conyers from 2003 on allegations that his aides also worked on the Carol Mosely-Braun presidential campaign and JoAnn Watson’s Detroit City Council race. Would Conyers have applied the same slipshod legal standards to his Bush impeachment effort?

Fourth, the Conyers scandal shows it’s still business as usual for the “Ethics” committee. Pelosi should demand that Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., the committee leaders who signed off on the Conyers report, be removed permanently from the panel and barred from leadership of other House panels.

Finally, Pelosi should heed former White House chief of staff and ex-congressman Leon Panetta, who said “you can attack one party for having a lack of ethics, but if any of your own members have problems, it dulls the message with the American people, they begin to put everybody in the same box.” In other words, whenever one member of the House has an ethics problem, it damages the credibility of all members of the House, including most especially its most visible leader, the speaker.

So come on, Nancy -- either get rid of this big-time Democrat alligator in the "ethical swamp" or admit that your promises about ethics reform were nothing but empty, partisan rhetoric designed to scare up a few more votes after Democrats ginned up one more scandal involving the GOP.

And for that matter, make sure you take action against Rahm Emanuel, who left House pages at risk by holding back the Foley emails until their release became politically profitable?

The ball is in your court, Nancy -- act, or prove yourself a liar and a hypocrite.

H/T Captain's Quarters

Posted by: Greg at 04:14 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 552 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Orbit Downloader, Mercy Medical Center In Canton Oh, Mercy Medical Center In Canton Oh, http://palacios.dragbikecentral.com/ Mercy Medical Center In Canton Oh, 036396,

Posted by: Zackery at Wed Jan 7 02:27:14 2009 (1dCvn)

2 quick download PC games, Mercy Medical Center In Canton Oh, msyjhi,

Posted by: Sterling at Wed Jan 7 02:56:45 2009 (yEwnL)

3 viagra 61527

Posted by: viagra at Tue Mar 3 00:44:26 2009 (E2Rgd)

4 Tricor

Posted by: Buy Lantus at Wed Mar 4 04:13:33 2009 (9azZo)

5 us dept of education, megan fox fhm, :-P, lindsay lohan hot, 938, carmen electra gallery, 661, megan fox fhm, 577861, katy perry sexy, 0419,

Posted by: megan fox fhm at Thu Nov 5 08:44:24 2009 (PZ4uf)

6 meaning of physical education, lindsay lohan hot, gth, holly madison photos, nkg, miley cyrus nude pics, wmu, holly madison photos, 180, miley cyrus nude, 95526,

Posted by: ashley tisdale sex at Fri Nov 6 11:24:43 2009 (CfekM)

7 definition of physical education, miley cyrus pics, hll, megan fox gallery, 462, holly madison pictorial, adm, is jessica biel a lesbian, 2184, jenna jameson anal, =-PPP, holly madison pictorial, =-OOO,

Posted by: jessica alba exposed at Fri Nov 6 14:14:48 2009 (BxfYA)

8 california department of education, ashley tisdale sex, >:-P, megan fox pics, 8], lucy pinder, dep, holly madison pictorial, wsrwh, paris hilton video, ypfcz,

Posted by: paris hilton sex at Sat Nov 7 05:13:11 2009 (0Br1x)

9 QuickBust QuickBust, what is ranitidine prescribed for what is ranitidine prescribed for, is remeron an maoinhibitor is remeron an maoinhibitor, wjat is the drug reminyl used to treat wjat is the drug reminyl used to treat, what is relafen used for? what is relafen used for?,

Posted by: QuickBust at Mon Nov 9 04:49:34 2009 (VUy2/)

10 stop smoking patch strength 22 mg stop smoking patch strength 22 mg, Snoroff Snoroff, soothenol soothenol, dogs kidney disease soloxine dogs kidney disease soloxine, starlix mechanism of action starlix mechanism of action,

Posted by: Ayurveda Stop Smoking at Tue Nov 10 10:11:37 2009 (JQSlG)

11 iowa department of education, lindsay lohan sex tape, 0651, miley cyrus naked, P, nude megan fox, :-DDD, katy perry sexy, 46628, megan fox fhm, oufgj,

Posted by: carmen electra gallery at Wed Nov 18 12:32:45 2009 (Jd7ul)

Hide Comments | Add Comment