When you cannot even raise half-a-million dollars in six months, you simply need to get out of the race. What may sound harsh, but dollars are a practical measure of the breadth and depth of support for a candidate. As a result, Jim Gilmore has realized that he needs to be out of the race for the GOP presidential nomination.

Former Virginia governor James S. Gilmore III ended his long-shot Republican presidential campaign yesterday, saying he was unable to raise enough money to communicate his conservative vision to Americans. He held out the possibility, however, that he might soon run for public office again in Virginia.

Gilmore, the son of a butcher who had improbably risen to become a local prosecutor, a state attorney general and a governor of Virginia, dropped out of the crowded GOP primary field a day before reporting that he had raised $211,000 between April and June.

Since January, he has raised $381,000, while his rivals have collected tens of millions of dollars.

"You have to build a large organization of people who will raise money for you. That takes years to develop," Gilmore said yesterday. "While the other candidates are raising tens of millions, we were raising hundreds of thousands. We would have to change that paradigm to stay in this race."

My only question is why Gilmore thought he had a chance of getting the nomination in the first place.

Posted by: Greg at 01:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

Rep. Keith Ellison has certainly crossed a line with this one.

America's first Muslim congressman has provoked outrage by apparently comparing President George W Bush to Adolf Hitler and hinting that he might have been responsible for the September 11 attacks.

Addressing a gathering of atheists in his home state of Minnesota, Keith Ellison, a Democrat, compared the 9/11 atrocities to the destruction of the Reichstag, the German parliament, in 1933. This was probably burned down by the Nazis in order to justify Hitler's later seizure of emergency powers.

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," Mr Ellison said. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."

To applause from his audience of 300 members of Atheists for Human Rights, Mr Ellison said he would not accuse the Bush administration of planning 9/11 because "you know, that's how they put you in the nut-ball box - dismiss you".

Excuse me, Keith, but your fellow Muslim, Osama bin Laden, admits that he and his people were behind 9/11. That means that, in fact, MUSLIMS WERE TO BLAME FOR 9/11.

And since you want to make comparisons to Hitler, I'd like to note that this Administration has made extreme efforts to be conciliatory towards Muslims, and to discourage anti-Muslim bias.

On the other hand, Much of the Islamic world revels in anti-Semitism, and rhetoric about killing Jews is considered mainstream. That sounds a whole lot more like Hitler than anything coming from the bush Administration. But then again, given the Muslim support for Hitler that was seen during WWII, we shouldn't be surprised that the Muslim world still echoes with that same foul ideology today. For that matter, given Ellison's history of associating with anti-Semitic organizations, I think that his comparing anyone to Hitler is more a case of projection than anything else.

Posted by: Greg at 02:10 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.

Democrats really don't want little things like the facts to get in the way of the clear conclusion that Valerie Plame Wilson is a liar.

Rep. Tom Davis, ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is puzzled by the House Intelligence Committee's claim that Valerie Plame Wilson has been consistent in her sworn testimony. He is asking the Intelligence Committee for documents to back up their contention.

Davis last month noted that Mrs. Wilson had testified to his committee that she, as a CIA employee, had not suggested the fact-finding mission to Niger by her husband, former Amb. Joseph Wilson. She earlier had told the Senate Intelligence Committee staff that she did not recall whether she made such a proposal. Davis also cited an internal CIA e-mail by her saying Wilson "may be in a position to assist."

Davis asked that Mrs. Wilson be recalled for testimony by his committee. Democratic Chairman Henry Waxman bucked the issue over to the House Intelligence Committee. When it responded she had been consistent in denying that she suggested her husband's mission, Davis was baffled in view of contradictory evidence.

Let's see -- "I don't recall", "No", and "Maybe my hubby could help" doesn't seem all that consistent to me. Indeed, it reeks of perjury. And we all know how the Democrats are against perjury in this case, right?

Kudos to Rep. Davis for pursuing this matter.

Posted by: Greg at 01:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

Prosecutor Ronnie Earle complains that the decision to dismiss a charge against Tom Delay because it did not exist in Texas law at the time the alleged offense was committed somehow "skews" justice.

A Texas prosecutor said in court filings Friday that the state's highest criminal appeals court created a "separate — but not necessarily equal — system of justice" by refusing to reinstate a conspiracy charge against former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle wants the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to reconsider its decision.

Last month, the court refused to reinstate charges against DeLay and two former aides of conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws.

A state district judge threw out that charge after defense lawyers argued that the law DeLay is accused of violating in 2002 wasn't written until 2003.

A regional appeals court upheld the judge's decision. Prosecutors appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Republican-controlled panel ruled 5-4 in favor of DeLay and his co-defendants, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis.

Apparently Earle thinks that enforcing the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto laws somehow creates a two-tiered justice system. I suppose it does, in a sense -- one that allows prosecution for offenses that the accused could have known were illegal, and another that forbids the prosecution of offenses that would have required the defendant to have precognitive abilities to know that they were breaking a law not yet written.

But then again, justice has been skewed in a two-tiered fashion during the entire process.

What other person would Earle or any other prosecutor have invented an entirely new charge to indict him for -- one that did not exist at the time of the alleged offense?

What other individual would have been the subject of presentations of the same evidence to multiple (I believe it was six) grand juries before an indictment could be obtained -- including at least three in one weekend?

For what other individual would a prosecutor break grand jury confidentiality laws over so that he could massage his presentation to a future grand jury?

Yes, justice is skewed in this case -- against Tom DeLay by a rogue, partisan prosecutorial hack whose words and actions have betrayed a partisan animus in his use of the the powers of his office to undermine the justice and overturn the results of valid elections?

Posted by: Greg at 01:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 409 words, total size 3 kb.

This is clearly political payback by the Massachusetts Senator, not a principled stand.

Former Wisconsin congressman Mark Green's nomination to become the ambassador of Tanzania hit a snag today because of Democratic opposition.

Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts placed a hold on the nomination.

A Kerry aide says the reason is Green is a political appointee and not a career foreign service officer.

Green -- a Green Bay Republican -- was nominated for the post in Africa last month by President Bush.

Excuse me, but that really is not a legitimate basis for opposing the nomination of an ambassador. Political supporters, including many with no diplomatic experience, have often been appointed as ambassador -- indeed, the percentage of such political appointees has generally hovered around 35%. And I don't recall any John Kerry objections to such practices in the past,m such as the appointment of former Vice President Walter Mondale as Ambassador to Japan, or the appointment of gay rights activist James C. Hormel as Ambassador to Belgium. neither of those individuals was a career foreign service officer -- and both were clearly political appointees.

I think that perhaps Kerry is simply seeking revenge for Green's efforts against Kerry during the 2004 presidential campaign.

Posted by: Greg at 01:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 1 kb.

When the Supreme Court issued its ruling on wage discrimination suits, the justices noted that their ruling was based upon the language of the statute, which constrained them to rule as they did. They also invited Congress to fix the statute in question in order to achieve what everyone views as a more just solution to the problem of wage discrimination.

Well, Congress has finally gotten its butt in gear and begun to consider legislation to solve the problem.

A Supreme Court decision restricting workersÂ’ ability to sue for wage discrimination has prompted Democrats to introduce legislation to counteract the ruling.

In May, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 against a supervisor at a Goodyear tire plant in Alabama who discovered, after working there for nearly 20 years, that her male colleagues, including those with less experience, had been receiving higher salaries. Most courts had ruled that each unfair paycheck was a new act of discrimination, effectively a new opportunity for an employee to sue. But the justices said that the clock started running out the first time a worker was paid unfairly and that therefore, the plaintiff, Lilly M. Ledbetter, had waited too long to file suit.

The main federal antidiscrimination law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, says that employees must make their charge of employment discrimination within 180 days after the alleged unlawful practice occurred.

Now I'm shocked and appalled that anyone would question the need to do this, and heartily condemn the members of my party who appear opposed to solving the problem at hand. However, I'd like to urge the Congress to be sure that it does not completely remove the statute of limitations here, and that it does retain a limit on how far a suit can reach back, if only because the entire purpose of a statute of limitations is to allow a defendant to have the means to offer an effective defense against charges in a timely fashion.

Posted by: Greg at 12:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.

If Mike Nifong can be disbarred for his attempt to railroad the innocent for political purposes, shouldn't John Murtha at least be censured by his peers for doing the same?

The parents of a U.S. Marine accused of killing three Iraqis execution-style in Haditha in late 2005 said Thursday they would ask Congress to censure Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) for saying that the Marines "overreacted" during the incident and killed civilians "in cold blood."

"It's too late for an apology," Darryl Sharratt of Canonsburg, Pa., told Cybercast News Service after the hearing officer in the case, Lt. Col. Paul Ware, released an 18-page report recommending that all charges against Sharratt's son, Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, be dismissed because his actions "were in accord with the rules of engagement and use of force."

Sharratt said that he, his wife Theresa and other supporters of their 22-year-old son were planning to visit Martha's office, and "we're going to ask for more than an apology."

"We need this man censured by our Congress," he said, because "he denied my son -- and the other Marines involved -- their constitutional rights to a fair trial and a presumption of innocence."

"This is what we've been fighting for in Iraq," Sharratt added. "This is what we've been fighting for -- what soldiers and Marines have been dying for -- for the past 200 years."

Before he had even been briefed by military officials, Jon Murtha had acted as judge, jury, and would-be executioner in declaring these Marines guilty of cold-blooded murder -- because it fit with the narrative he was constructing to justify his lack of support for the troops in Iraq. He has refused to apologize, despite a flood of evidence that shows his words to have been objectively false and defamatory of these fighting men.

Doesn't simple justice require that the House of representatives go on the record as declaring Murtha to have been morally and ethically wrong in his words and actions?

Posted by: Greg at 02:26 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm always interested when liberals point to Europe as a model for the values and policies that we in the United States should follow. I'm curious -- would they be supportive of implementing this sort of policy in the United States, in place of the Patriot Act and other Bush Administration security initiatives?

Germany, fearful of being the next major target for Islamic terrorists, is edging away from its deep aversion to intrusive and harsh enforcement tactics, provoking a storm of protest from those who recall the official brutality of Nazism and Communism in decades past.

Sensing a growing threat, Germany’s top security official, Wolfgang Schäuble, is breaking down resistance within the government to surreptitious online searches of computers belonging to people they deem suspicious. He is pushing for a law to allow security forces to shoot down a plane commandeered by hijackers. And he said this week that Germany should consider detaining potential terrorists and approving the killing of terrorist leaders abroad.

Hey, liberals -- it is coming out of Europe, so it must be good. Right?

And you do support security in the face of the terrorist threat. Right?

Or do you really believe there is a terrorist threat at all?

Posted by: Greg at 02:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 1 kb.

Of course he admits this -- after all, we know the name of the leaker and it is "Richard Armitage".

President Bush on Thursday acknowledged publicly for the first time that someone in his administration likely leaked the name of a CIA operative, although he also said he hopes the controversy over his decision to spare prison for a former White House aide has "run its course."

"And now we're going to move on," Bush said in a White House news conference.

The president had initially said he would fire anyone in his administration found to have publicly disclosed the identity of Valerie Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and a CIA operative. Ten days ago, Bush commuted the 30-month sentence given to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby by a federal judge in connection with the case.

Patrick Fitzgerald chose not to charge the leaker, who came forward before the special prosecutor was ever appointed. Fitzgerald decided instead to go after non-leakers as part of his out-of-control investigation of what he had determined was a non-crime within days of his appointment.

What we have here, then is not evidence of an intentional leak by the Bush Administration. Instead we have evidence of why there should not be special prosecutors in cases like this one.

Posted by: Greg at 01:32 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 1 kb.

No other way to interpret today's vote by the House of Representatives to give a victory to the terrorists. We now know who this motley crew of traitors in Congress have meant when they said they support the troops -- the troops operating under the banner of al-Qaeda, not the Stars and Stripes.

Defying a White House veto threat, the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation to bring combat troops out of Iraq by April 1, 2008.

By a vote of 223-201, the Democratic-controlled House approved the legislation in the hope it will pressure the Senate to attach a similar mandatory troop withdrawal timetable to a military policy bill it is debating.

Passage of the House bill marked the third time this year it has voted for timetables to end the U.S. involvement in the war that is now in its fifth year. Two previous efforts either died in the Senate or were vetoed by President George W. Bush.

The measure that passed on Thursday would tell the Pentagon to begin withdrawing combat troops within four months and complete the redeployment by April 1.

Under the bill, an unspecified number of U.S. soldiers would stay in Iraq to train Iraqi soldiers, conduct counter-terrorism operations and protect U.S. diplomats.

And folks wonder why there were reports today about al-Qaeda gaining strength. Of course they are -- when one side has indicated its willingness to surrender, it is natural to for folks to flock to the banner of the likely victor. It is called the bandwagon effect -- and today a majority of the House of Representatives have decided to march along with Osama and the boys.

MORE AT Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, The Hill Chronicles, Bill's Bites, Wake Up America, Webloggin, bRight & Early

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, DeMediacratic Nation, Big Dog's Weblog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Allie Is Wired, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, Gone Hollywood, The Yankee Sailor, and Public Eye, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 5 kb.

My first overtly political act came back when I was four or five years old. I wrote the President and First Lady asking them, as the son of an officer serving in Vietnam, to continue to support the work he was doing there.

Some weeks later, I got a letter back from the White House, from some aide whose name I don't recall, thanking me for writing. But then, several days later, I got a second letter -- this one signed by the First Lady (well, probably by an auto-pen -- but at that age you don't know such things). I was impressed, as a little boy would be, by the attention by one so important, and developed a fondness for that First Lady.

She died yesterday, some four decades later, at the age of 94. And I truly feel a loss.

Lady Bird Johnson, the former first lady who championed conservation and worked tenaciously for the political career of her husband, Lyndon B. Johnson, died Wednesday, a family spokeswoman said. She was 94.

Johnson, who suffered a stroke in 2002 that affected her ability to speak, returned home late last month after a week at Seton Medical Center, where she'd been admitted for a low-grade fever.

She died at her Austin home of natural causes and she was surrounded by family and friends, said spokeswoman Elizabeth Christian.

Even after the stroke, Johnson still managed to make occasional public appearances and get outdoors to enjoy her beloved wildflowers. But she was unable to speak more than a few short phrases, and more recently did not speak at all, Anne Wheeler, spokeswoman for the LBJ Library and Museum, said in 2006. She communicated her thoughts and needs by writing, Wheeler said.

For those who, like me, are in a position to honor Lady Bird Johnson by making the trip to Austin as she lies in repose, here is the schedule.

Friday, July 13

• Morning: Private family Eucharist at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center, Austin. Invitation only.

• 1:15 p.m.: The public is invited to pay its final respects to Lady Bird Johnson as she lies in repose at the LBJ Library and Museum, 2313 Red River, Austin. Johnson will remain in repose throughout the night and visitation will end at 11 a.m. the following morning.

Saturday, July 14

• Private funeral: By invitation only at Riverbend Centre, Austin.

Sunday, July 15

• Ceremonial route: The public is invited to line the route of a ceremonial cortege that will pass through Austin and carry Johnson on to her burial place in Stonewall at the Johnson family cemetery. The public route will begin at the State Capitol at approximately 9 a.m. and will proceed south on Congress to Cesar Chavez. It will go right on Cesar Chavez and head west on the shores of Town Lake. It will turn and go west on 290 toward Johnson City, where it will ultimately motor through downtown Johnson City, past President Johnson's boyhood home and past the LBJ National Park Visitors Center. The public aspect of the cortege will end in Johnson City.

• Afternoon: Private family services at the graveside at the Johnson family cemetery in Stonewall. Invitation only.

May she rest in peace, and may her family and friends be comforted in this time of loss.

Posted by: Greg at 11:02 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 562 words, total size 4 kb.

Two -- no, make that four -- key campaign staffers quit in one day. What does that tell you about the state of the McCain Campaign?

John McCain jettisoned two top aides Tuesday, the one-time Republican front-runner struggling to right a presidential bid in deep financial and political trouble.

Campaign manager Terry Nelson and chief strategist John Weaver offered McCain their resignations, which the Arizona senator accepted with "regret and deep gratitude for their dedication, hard work and friendship."

Other senior aides followed the two out the door, and the campaign announced that Rick Davis, who managed McCain's 2000 bid and has served as the current campaign's chief executive officer, will take over.

"I'm determined to continue to face our challenges head-on and win," McCain said, vowing to press on in an e-mail to supporters. Aides insisted he would not drop out of the race.

And knowing McCain, that is probably true. he will stick it out and fight it out until he gets humiliated in Iowa and New Hampshire. Then, mired in campaign debt (he is already deep in the hole financially), the 2008 edition of the McCain Campaign will be forced to fold.

Why would this war hero fail so miserably? Simple -- he's been wrong on free speech, immigration and judges, all issues important to the GOP base. What's more, he has been arrogantly wrong on those issues, which has made his straying from the views of the base unforgivable, so don't expect to see him take the VP spot on the GOP ticket, either.

Posted by: Greg at 01:45 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

Louisiana Senator David Vitter was clearly after damage control when he sent the email about his phone number being in the DC Madam's little black book.

"This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter, 46, said in a statement, which his spokesman, Joel DiGrado, confirmed to the Associated Press.

"Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling," Vitter continued. "Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there -- with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way."

Given Vitter's conservative rhetoric on marriage, I don't know that this statement is going to cut it with many people. That is especially true of the Left, which is having a field day with the story -- not noting that, in the end, this is "just about sex."

But I'd like to note something about this -- the mere fact that Vitter failed to live up to his principles does not invalidate them. The mere fact that he sinned does not necessarily render him unfit for office. Absent more information on this situation -- information I'm sure will come out in the next several days and weeks -- I'm not sure how I would respond if I were a Louisiana voter.

But I do keep being drawn back to a quote from St. Paul.

Romans 7:15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.
16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good.
17 But in fact it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me.
18 For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it.
19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.
20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Based upon what I know, I'll condemn Vitter's actions, but I won't condemn the man. His struggle is the struggle faced by each and every one of us who claims to be a follower of Christ -- for we are not made perfect through faith, merely forgiven and redeemed.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, DeMediacratic Nation, Jeanette's Celebrity Corner, Right Truth, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Right Celebrity, Wake Up America, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Nuke's news and views, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 05:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 504 words, total size 5 kb.

Now let me begin with saying that I fully believe this shooting was justified -- and that I wish Borris Miles had managed to ventilate both perps, not just one. However, the hypocrisy here is rather striking.

Borris Miles told police he was fixing a leak on the second floor of the Houston house he's building Sunday night when he heard a noise downstairs and saw two men trying to steal the copper. After Miles confronted the pair, one of the men threw a pocketknife at him, Houston Police spokesman Victor Senties.

Miles, a former law enforcement officer, shot the man in the left leg, police said. The wounded suspect was being treated at a Houston hospital. Police were trying to identify the other suspect.

Charges of aggravated robbery are pending against the wounded suspect, Senties said.

The hypocrisy, of course, stems from the fact that Miles is a Democrat in the Texas Legislature who voted against allowing Texans to do exactly what he did -- shoot without making every possible effort to retreat from criminals.

Posted by: Greg at 02:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.

After promising the world she was just going to go away, Cindy Sheehan is back seeking another 15 minutes of fame

Now she is threatening to run for Congress against Nancy Pelosi if she doesn't get the president impeached.

Cindy Sheehan, the soldier's mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.

Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch.

"Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "We hired them to bring an end to the war. I'm not too far from San Francisco, so it wouldn't be too big of a move for me. I would give her a run for her money."

I'm particularly struck that Sheehan doesn't notice that Bush hasn't committed an impeachable offense. But then again, since when has the Constitution mattered to these people.

I'm also pleasantly surprised at how Sheehan breaks matters down -- referring to "Democrats and Americans". At least she is honest enough to place herself and the rest of the Democrats in the anti-American category where they belong.

Posted by: Greg at 06:55 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.

Expect to see more of this as the Arizona Senator's campaign implodes.

The downsizing of Senator McCain's presidential campaign is coming at an opportune time for Fred Thompson, the former Tennessee senator who is likely to jump into the race officially any day now and seeking to build a campaign staff in the early primary states.

Struggling with a shortage of cash, Mr. McCain's campaign announced last week that it was laying off dozens of staff members, including about half of his paid team in Iowa and New Hampshire.

While there is no evidence of an outright pillaging of Mr. McCain's departed aides, Republican sources in those states say Mr. Thompson's emerging campaign is the likeliest landing spot. Aside from Mr. Thompson's obvious need for staff — assuming he enters the race — the two are closely aligned ideologically, and Mr. Thompson even endorsed Mr. McCain when he sought the White House in 2000.

This really shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. Of the major candidates, Mitt Romney has the best organization in place, and has done a superb job of staffing his campaign. he just doesn't need many additional people at this time.

The differences between Rudy Giuliani and John McCain are stark enough that most McCain staffers wouldn't fit in at this early stage of the race.

And the other candidates in the race are operating with small staffs until and unless they can get some traction in this race.

But Fred Thompson is starting a brand new organization, and appeals to much of the same base that John McCain does It doesn't come as any surprise to me, therefore, that the logical home for some of these operatives is the Thompson campaign. Some may end up elsewhere, but expect most of the early departures from McCain to end up with the former Tennessee senator.

Posted by: Greg at 06:39 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.

Probably nothing to this story except a random burglary -- except for the fact that I remember being a kid in Washington DC 35 years ago and seeing a little blurb in the newspaper about a break-in at the DNC.

he Davenport campaign headquarters for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was burglarized Friday night.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said that two laptop computers and some campaign literature were taken. A campaign worker discovered the burglary this morning, and a report was filed with Davenport police.

"It doesn't appear that it was anything sensitive or irreplaceable," Vietor said.

Now which candidate has a history of of dirty tricks against political opponents?

Posted by: Greg at 05:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

They came in with grand promises for the "first hundred hours" -- and then defined that term to stretch over weeks by claiming that meant only hours the full Congress was in session, not actual clock hours.

Then they failed to accomplish those goals.

Now they can't bring themselves to do their most basic job.

President Bush accused Democratic lawmakers on Saturday of being unable to live up to their duties, citing Congress' inability to pass legislation to fund the federal government.

"Democrats are failing in their responsibility to make tough decisions and spend the people's money wisely," Bush said in his weekly radio address. "This moment is a test."

The White House has said the failure of a broad immigration overhaul was proof that Democratic-controlled Capitol Hill cannot take on major issues. "We saw this with immigration, and we're seeing it with some other issues where Congress is having an inability to take on major challenges," said spokesman Tony Fratto.

The Democrats: Failed Leadership Inaction.

Posted by: Greg at 01:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 174 words, total size 1 kb.

Personally, this doesn't bother me. After all, lawyers and lobbyists sometimes represent clients who they disagree with on an issue.

Former Senator Fred D. Thompson, who has positioned himself as an opponent of abortion rights as he prepares to run for president, was hired as a lobbyist 16 years ago by a group on the other side of the issue, according to documents and people involved with his hiring.

The group, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, hired Mr. Thompson in 1991, three years before he was elected to the Senate from Tennessee, as part of the groupÂ’s effort to overturn a ban on federally financed family planning clinics giving women information about abortion, according to the groupÂ’s board minutes and former president. The associationÂ’s president at the time, Judith DeSarno, said she was looking for a Republican lobbyist who could help find a compromise at a time when the first President George Bush was opposed to lifting the ban, put in place during the Reagan administration. Mr. Thompson, then a lobbyist at a prominent Washington law firm, fit the bill, she said.

In the group’s board minutes of September 1991, Ms. DeSarno reported hiring Mr. Thompson to “aid us in discussions with the administration.” Ms. DeSarno, who provided the minutes, said in an interview that Mr. Thompson served as the group’s liaison to the White House.

A spokesman for Mr. Thompson said yesterday that Mr. Thompson had “no recollection of doing any work on behalf of this group.”

Key to me is that this appears to be a relatively minor part of Thompson's work, and that the rest of his record is sufficiently pro-life.

And I do want to reemphasize my earlier point -- and illustrate it with an example.

When I was in seminary, one of my professors was a Jesuit whose brother was a lawyer involved in a major criminal case -- he was the lead attorney for Jeffrey Dahmer. Naturally, someone asked this professor (our moral theology prof) how one could morally defend such an individual and try to get them off at trial. his response still resonates with me all these years later -- "You speak truthfully, you protect your client's interests, and you seek an outcome which balances his interests and the interests of justice. But you cannot say that anyone, even someone who has acted as horribly as this man has, is undeserving of a voice to advocate for him in our system."

It strikes me that this is no more than what Thompson may have done.

I do find it interesting, though, that no one else remembers Thompson representing this group.

More at Captain's Quarters

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, , third world county, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:59 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 533 words, total size 6 kb.

I sure am -- give me Condi Rice, JC Watts, or Michael Steele and I'll vote for them in a heartbeat.

Somehow, though, I don't think they are the candidates being pushed in this article.

Could 2008 be the year that Americans put an end to an unbroken 218-year streak of electing white male presidents? Large majorities report a willingness to vote for either a woman or an African-American candidate for the office, according to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll. But those numbers drop significantly when respondents are asked whether the country is ready to accept a black or a woman in the White House.

Although 92 percent of the NEWSWEEK Poll’s respondents claim they would vote for a black candidate (up from 83 percent in 1991), only 59 percent believe the country is actually ready for an African-American president (an improvement over 37 percent in a 2000 CBS News poll). Similarly, 86 percent of voters say they would vote for a female commander in chief, but only 58 percent believe the country is ready for one (up from 40 percent in a 1996 CBS poll). Two thirds (66 percent) of voters said there was at least some chance they’d vote for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (35 percent said there was a “good” chance, up from 20 percent last May). About as many (62 percent) said there was some chance they’d vote for Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton (43 percent said good chance, up from 33 percent). In a head-to-head race, though, Clinton dominates Obama 56 to 33 percent.

So what we see here is that almost everyone is willing to vote for a black or a woman -- but they have doubts about the rest of the country. I'd love to see the breakdown by party, since I suspect that you would find the GOP voters more willing to vote for either and more optimistic about the country's acceptance of them -- but Newsweek doesn't give us that split.

One troubling detail that the article does not report -- the continuing presence of anti-Mormon bigotry among those polled. You can bet that if there had been even a fraction of this bigotry expressed towards blacks or women, that would have been the cover story.

Posted by: Greg at 01:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 2 kb.

I love the fact that a number of rockers are questioning the integrity of Al Gwhore's Live Earth concerts. They include the hottest new group in the UK, who really hit the nail on the head.

Rock group Arctic Monkeys have become the latest music industry stars to question whether the performers taking part in Live Earth on Saturday are suitable climate change activists.

"It's a bit patronising for us 21 year olds to try to start to change the world," said Arctic Monkeys drummer Matt Helders, explaining why the group is not on the bill at any of Al Gore's charity concerts.

"Especially when we're using enough power for 10 houses just for (stage) lighting. It'd be a bit hypocritical," he told AFP in an interview before a concert in Paris.

Bass player Nick O'Malley chimes in: "And we're always jetting off on aeroplanes!"

I wonder -- how will those rockers (and much of the audience) get to the venues of Sydney, Tokyo, Shanghai, Hamburg, London, Johannesburg and New York? I suspect via environmentally unfriendly aircraft!

Perhaps Al Gwhore will be there selling carbon offsets indulgences to those hypocrites who actually have a conscience. I've even got a song for him to sing as he tries to scam people into believing that a cash donation will make up for their environmental sins.

Maybe that little ditty will inspire some latter-day Luthers (and some witty entrepreneurs) to upset the so-called consensus of the cult of global warming.

UPDATE: Courtesy of Thomas M., a Michelle Malkin reader.

1.) What will be the true source of the power that will power all the lighting, the amplifiers and speakers, the concessions stands? Will it be massive arrays of solar cells?, Hydrogen fusion cells?, Wind Turbines? Ethanol Bio-Fueled generators?

2.) If the latter, who (which company / manufacturer) will supply them and what model No. engine / generators will be used?

3.) Will the food (for the concessions) be cooked on wood fires? Or perhaps they will use dried out cow & horse manure pellets for fuel?

4.) Will they re-use “used toilet paper” in the restrooms (in following what a “Green” labeled performing artist has recently suggested in the media.

5.) How will the performers arrive at the concert areas as well as their Jacuzzi-equipped hotels? Will it be the normal gas-guzzling plush stretch limousines or will they opt for hybrid or Electric vehicles? Maybe they will go all out and pedal a bicycle?

6.) Will the concert tickets & concert programs be printed on the most biodegradable paper available?

7.) Where will all the proceeds as well as all of the financial pledge donations that you and LIVE EARTH are soliciting be distributed to / earmarked for?

Unless, of course, it is only the little people who are expected to be green.

MORE AT JammieWearingFool, Pirates Cove, Cao's Blog

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, DeMediacratic Nation, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, On the Horizon, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 03:30 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 576 words, total size 6 kb.

The military doesn't want it. The military says it is unneeded. But Teddy Kennedy wants it anyway -- and so is acting to see that a $100 million dollar contract is for the unnecessary jet engine is awarded to a company in his state as part of a $480 million dollar appropriation for the project.

For the second year in a row the Pentagon has insisted that it doesn't need another engine for its next-generation fighter jet. And again, Senator Edward M. Kennedy and other powerful lawmakers are forcing it to build one anyway.

Tucked in the annual defense bill moving through Congress is $480 million to develop a spare engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter even though the Air Force concluded in 2005 that it was redundant -- and two independent review boards agreed.

That didn't trump pork-barrel politics.

General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn is designing the spare engine and says the project will bring jobs to the Bay State. That led Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Armed Services Committee, to keep the project alive.

Last month, Kennedy personally "earmarked" $100 million for the engine -- more than 20 percent of its cost -- during committee deliberations over the 2008 defense authorization bill. Other lawmakers whose home states could also benefit inserted the rest of the funding.

Gee -- I wonder what a half-billion dollars could do for the troops in Iraq, who are slowly winning a war that Teddy Kennedy is seeking to undermine while using the Defense Department budget to distribute federal largesse around his state.

Posted by: Greg at 01:34 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

Could be -- and I'm sure that the same hard-Left Democrats who showed him no loyalty in 2006 will consider his failure to give deference to them in 2008.

U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent who supports Democrats in Congress despite his backing of the Iraq war, said on Thursday he was not ruling out endorsing a Republican in the White House race.

The 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate said he also wants to see if an independent enters the crowded field of 2008 presidential hopefuls.

"I'm going to chose whichever candidate that I think will do the best job for our country, regardless of the party affiliation of that candidate," the Connecticut senator told reporters in the state capital Hartford.

"I'm not going to get involved until after both parties have their presumptive nominees and, frankly, to see if there is a strong independent candidate," he said.

That does present some interesting possibilities, doesn't it.

Hmmmmm.... Thompson-Lieberman 2008. Does have an interesting ring to it, dontha think?

Posted by: Greg at 12:43 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

Seems to me that Gov. Spitzer may be guilty of an impeachable offense -- but that he is also following his traditional pattern of using the powers of his office to settle personal political scores.

Gov. Spitzer targeted state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno for an unprecedented State Police surveillance program that led to allegations Bruno improperly used a state helicopter for political purposes, an investigation by The Post has found.

No other state official, including Spitzer and Lt. Gov. David Paterson, was singled out for the type of detailed record-keeping the State Police maintained on Bruno, the state's most powerful Republican, official records show.

Part of the Spitzer administration's justification for homing in on Bruno - the governor's leading political adversary - is a claim that state Conservative Party leader Michael Long raised objections to Bruno's use of the State Police.

Spitzer spokesman Darren Dopp told The Post that the records on Bruno began to be assembled because "there was an incident late last year in which Mike Long called to complain about Joe bringing armed troopers to [Long's] fund-raising event.

"Long thought it was highly inappropriate, and it probably was. Recalling that incident, the [State Police] made some changes . . . and, yes, [started] keeping basic records, i.e. logs," Dopp said.

But Long insisted yesterday that he never complained about Bruno and the State Police, and that no such incident had occurred.

"That is a baldfaced lie," said Long, who has been at odds with Bruno in recent years.

"I never made a complaint to the State Police or the governor's office, and if Bruno had shown up with armed troopers I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it."

A senior state official familiar with the surveillance program told The Post that he believed the governor and his aides had sought to "set up" Bruno by having the State Police keep track of his travels.

"Why else would they do it if not to set up Bruno - by getting on him something they thought was incriminating - when they weren't doing it to anyone else?" said the official.

Bruno himself said "it appears" Spitzer and his staff used the State Police to try to obtain negative information on him in an effort to "set up an officeholder" with whom the governor disagrees.

"I would like not to believe that the governor and the people who work for him would purposely set up an officeholder of the opposing party, but it certainly appears that way," said Bruno.

Spitzer ran on a platform of "clean government" -- but it looks like he may be the dirtiest one of all. Let's hope that the state legislature takes its duty seriously and removes him immediately.

Posted by: Greg at 02:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 467 words, total size 3 kb.

"Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto" -- Juvenal

For those unfamiliar with Latin, that translates as "The will of the people is the highest law."

Today, columnist David Broder presents a different point of view, one which might well be summed up as "Screw the people!"

Let a reporter who is not running for anything suggest that exactly the opposite may be true: A particularly virulent strain of populism has made official Washington altogether too responsive to public opinion.

From Aristotle to Edmund Burke, philosophers have written of the healthy tension that normally exists between the understanding and strategies of leaders and the sentiments and opinions of their people.

In today's Washington, a badly weakened president and a dangerously compliant congressional leadership are no match for the power of public opinion -- magnified and sometimes exaggerated by modern communications and interest group pressure.

Now I'll agree with the notion that unfettered democracy is a bad thing -- hence my support of and near idolatry towards a Constitution that does place limits on what government can do, no matter what the majority wants. That is an essential feature of our system. And from time to time it might be necessary for the people and their representatives to hold their noses and acquiesce to unpopular legislation or policies that produce a substantive benefit to the nation as a whole.

However, Broder's gripe is that the Senate and House are unwilling to shove a bad immigration bill down the throats of an American people who are screaming their opposition. He defines listening to the collective wisdom of the American people as "failure", and ignoring our voices as "leadership".

I'm sorry, but his position is akin to claiming that a rapist might be justified in continuing his forcible violation of a screaming, struggling woman on the grounds that there might be a higher good that comes out of the assault, and that the victim is somehow obliged to lay back and enjoy it. Knowing that Broder is a decent man, I am sure he would never advocate such a thing if the victim were his granddaughter -- and he should be ashamed to advocate it when the victim would be the American people.

Posted by: Greg at 04:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 2 kb.

Does the WaPo profile of Jonathan Edwards' hairstylist reveal a possible violation of federal campaign finance law?

Torrenueva provided his first five haircuts for Edwards in late 2003 and early 2004 free of charge. "I was just doing it because I'm a Democrat," he said.

That the Post is doing a profile of the candidate's hairstylist is a sign on how non-substantive a candidate Edwards really is. But consider the implications of that little excerpt above.

Wasn't Edwards a presidential candidate at the time? Would they constitute in-kind contributions? Were these contributions properly reported on his FEC disclosures? Is Torrenueva incorporated for business purposes, and if he is do those haircuts constitute illegal corporate contributions to the Edwards campaign? And if Torrenueva also gave cash to the campaign, did the combined total value of the haircuts and cash exceed the legal limit for campaign contributions?

UPDATE: 7/6/2007: Looks like Mark L. Jackson and Debbie Schlussel are asking the same question I am.

Posted by: Greg at 04:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.

Andrew Sullivan has been flacking this quote.

"I don't believe my role is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own," - George W. Bush on why he signed death warrants for 152 inmates as governor of Texas.

The quote is from his own book, "A Charge To Keep." I think that's a debate-ender, isn't it?

The only thing is that there are two problems with the way Sullivan is using it.

1) In issuing a commutation, Bush did not substitute his judgment for that of the jury. The conviction remains intact, only the sentence (handed down by a judge, not a jury as in a death penalty case in Texas) is modified. Besides, a number of the jurors even called for a presidential pardon of Scooter Libby on the same day that they convicted him.

2) The governor of Texas doesn't have the power to pardon or grant a commutation any criminal without an affirmative recommendation fo the state's Board of pardons and Parole. This has been the case in Texas since the current constitution was adopted in 1876. Any attempt to stop the executions would therefore have been an impeachable offense -- and I believe that Texas law allows for the executions to proceed even without the signature of the governor.

So if you consider the pathetically inept analysis put forward by Andrew Sullivan, aside from the fact that the mechanisms by which the sentences were issued are completely different and the fact that the powers of the President and the Governor of Texas are completely different, the situations are exactly the same!

Posted by: Greg at 02:38 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

So if a commutation of sentence means that the person was carrying out the wishes of the President, what does a pardon mean, Hillary?

Democratic presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton drew a distinction between President Bush's decision to commute the sentence of White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby — which she has harshly criticized — and her husband's 140 pardons in his closing hours in office.

"I believe that presidential pardon authority is available to any president, and almost all presidents have exercised it," Clinton said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House. ... There isn't any doubt now, what we know is that Libby was carrying out the implicit or explicit wishes of the vice president, or maybe the president as well, in the further effort to stifle dissent."

A commutation, please remember, leaves the conviction intact and leaves the individual in question still legally guilty of the crime -- a pardon constitutes a Christ-like redemption and complete forgiveness of the offense.

Let's see -- Bill Clinton pardoned a bunch of FALN terrorists. Does that indicate that they had carried out actions of which Bill Clinton explicitly or implicitly approved, including the murder of a police officer?

And we know he gave several pardons to big campaign contributors, and to at least one client of his brother-in-law who had given him a multi-million dollar interest-free loan that was forgiven after the pardon.

Indeed, let's look at the pardons and commutations given by Bill Clinton -- and remember that, according to Senator Clinton, that a pardon equals approval of the activities carried out.

I guess Slick Willie has a lot of stuff that he is complicit with.

UPDATE: Just wehn you thought the hypocrisy couldn't get any worse, what's up with this?

Former President Bill Clinton blasted his successor's decision to spare former White House aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby from prison, telling Iowa radio listeners that Libby's case differed from his own administration's pardon controversy.

"You've got to understand, this is consistent with their philosophy," Clinton said during an interview on Des Moines news-talk station WHO.

Bush administration officials, he said, "believe that they should be able to do what they want to do, and that the law is a minor obstacle."

HOLY CRAP! This is the guy who got slapped down on virtually every claim of executive privilege he and his administration made -- and also on several new "privileges" that he tried to get made up! Furthermore, this is the guy who took campaign donations and other financial kickbacks from folks who he later pardoned -- and who also pardoned close associates who were convicted in relation to his crimes. In-FREAKIN'-credible!

Posted by: Greg at 02:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 472 words, total size 3 kb.

Personally, I think a lot of the cause is the Thompson Effect -- folks waiting around for Fred Thompson's entry into the race. Also, we just don't have the excitement of the Hillary/Obama race, which is being hyped relentlessly by the press.

But I find these statistics to be telling.

Key fundraising numbers:

* Giuliani raised $17 million with about $15 million devoted to the primary and about $2 million for the general election. Candidates can't use general election money unless they win their party's nomination. In six months, he has had revenues of nearly $32 million and has spent about $17 million.

* Romney raised $14 million, all primary election money. He lent himself an extra $6.5 million. His six-month revenues are about $44 million and his expenditures are about $32 million.

* McCain raised $11.2 million with about $10.4 million devoted to the primary. His overall revenues are about $26 million; the campaign spent about $24 million. In the first quarter, the campaign reported a debt of nearly $2 million. Aides would not comment on where his debt may stand.

In terms of the primary fundraising numbers, Romney and Giuliani are very close. It is only because Romney is not taking general election contributions that the gap gets magnified. What stands out, though, is McCain's inability to keep up with his competitors AND the fact that he is burning money without airing a single commercial on television. No wonder he is cutting staff!

Posted by: Greg at 01:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

We keep hearing from liberals about the need for "fairness" in the media. If they really believe in that concept, why don't they demand equal time for those who disagree with the pseudo-science being promoted with this event.

This coming Saturday, July 7, NBC Universal will devote a record 75 hours of coverage to Al Gore’s “Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis,” to raise awareness about the alleged global warming “crisis” as defined by Gore. The coverage will air on seven NBC Universal-owned programs, and Today news anchor Ann Curry will host coverage during NBC’s primetime.

The 75 hours of coverage constitutes unprecedented promotion of one side of a political issue, and the largest in-kind contribution to Al Gore should he decide to run for President in 2008. Although undeclared, Gore ranks No. 3 among Democrats in leading polls on the presidential race.

Jeff Gaspin, president of NBC Universal Cable and Digital Content, declared, “By leveraging all of our properties, we will reach millions of viewers with this important call to action to combat global warming.” Kevin Wall, Live Earth founder and producer, said: “NBC Universal’s sweeping coverage of Live Earth ensures that Americans from coast to coast will be able to tune in to the concerts and take action against the climate crisis.”

So we have 75 hours of express advocacy of the global warming hooey promoted by Al Gore. How about 75 hours of scientific fact that shows that global warming, to the degree it exists, is not caused by mankind, and that there is not a consensus on the issue (no matter how often the global warming cultists claim there is).

I'm waiting, liberals, for you demand for "fairness" by NBC on global warming.

Posted by: Greg at 02:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

That the Circuit Court refused to allow Scooter Libby out on bond during his appeal was an incorrect decision, but I also believe that President Bush made an incorrect move with his commutation of Libby's sentence today.

President Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison term in the CIA leak case Monday, stepping into a criminal case with heavy political overtones on grounds that the sentence was just too harsh.

Bush's move came hours after a federal appeals panel ruled Libby could not delay his prison term in the CIA leak case. That meant Libby was likely to have to report to prison soon and put new pressure on the president, who had been sidestepping calls by Libby's allies to pardon the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I respect the jury's verdict," Bush said in a statement. "But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."

Bush left intact a $250,000 fine and two years probation for Libby, and Bush said his action still "leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby."

Now let me make a couple of things clear here. I believe the charges were unfounded. I believe the evidence indicates something other than an intent to deceive. I believe the sentence was too harsh, and based upon offenses with which Libby was not charged and against which he was never permitted to present a defense. Given that the actual leaker was known before the investigation even began and was not charged with any crime, as well as the fact that the perjury before Congress of Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame has not bee prosecuted, the trial and conviction of Scooter Libby over what was essentially an erroneous recollection of non-material facts is a travesty of justice.

However, President Bush made the wrong move today. Rather than the commutation, the President should have exercised his authority to grant a reprieve until the end of the appeals process -- a move which would have essentially reversed the move by the Circuit Court while still leaving the conviction and sentence intact pending the appeal.

Some may wonder why I take this position. Easy -- I believe that the elimination of the grossest miscarriage of justice, the 30-month prison sentence, has the effect of prejudicing Libby's appeal. It is hard to argue the sentence is too harsh when the worst element of it has been wiped away -- and since judges are human, it is possible that a court might reason that the President's action might lead certain jurists to have a bias against Libby due to the presidential intervention prior to the exhaustion of all appeals.

Personally, I believe a full and complete pardon may be in order -- but not at this time, when Libby still has a realistic chance of finding the remedy for this injustice in the Judicial Branch. And sadly, today's commutation also makes an eventual pardon harder to justify at a later date.

H/T Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiller, Stop the ACLU, Ace, Jawa Report

Posted by: Greg at 04:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 542 words, total size 4 kb.

The Illinois senator may have raised a bunch of cash, but I keep coming back to two words: Howard Dean.

Senator Barack Obama raised at least $32.5 million from April through June, he announced today, on his campaign Web site, attracting more than 258,000 contributors since entering the Democratic presidential race nearly six months ago.

As candidates tabulated how much money they raised in the yearÂ’s second quarter, Mr. Obama of Illinois appeared to be sitting atop contenders from either party, raising at least $31 million for the primary campaign alone. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, raised about $21 million for the primary, a spokesman confirmed today, and about $27 million over all.

“Together, we have built the largest grass-roots campaign in history for this stage of a presidential race,” Mr. Obama said, adding that 154,000 new donors had signed on in the last three months. “That’s the kind of movement that can change the special interest-driven politics in Washington and transform our country. And it’s just the beginning.”

The question is, of course, whether or not this financial success translates into success at the polls. After all, Hillary! still has great name ID (but bunches of negatives), and Obama's name ID remains relatively low. This is precisely where the Democrats were 3 1/2 years ago, when Dean raised lots of cash and then crashed-and-burned in the primaries and caucuses. Will Obama succeed where Dean failed?

I'll be really interested in the GOP numbers, and whether or not the Thomson effect depressed fundraising among the other GOP candidates (and which ones).

Posted by: Greg at 04:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

Here's the punchline.

If Mr. Edwards was half the woman Hillary Clinton is, he might be leading in the polls.

The rest of this great commentary on the disingenuous hypocrisy of John Edwards and his wife in the Ann Coulter Affair can be found here.

Posted by: Greg at 01:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.