One more example of the law of unintended consequences coming into play in the latest attempt to “fix” congressional ethics.

When Rep. Collin Peterson goes home to Minnesota, he likes to get around in his private plane, a single-engine four-seat Beechcraft Bonanza.
But since last month, his plane has been grounded, a victim of the new ethics rules passed by Congress, and Peterson isn't happy.

He said his Democratic colleagues were "trying to do the right thing" by cracking down on lawmakers flying around in fancy jets, but he was surprised when he was told he could no longer be reimbursed for flying his own plane for official business.

"It's a pretty stupid deal," said Peterson, 62, the new chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.

"I threatened to put in a bill to make it illegal for any member to drive their own car until we got this fixed," Peterson said. "And I told Nancy Pelosi that if she didn't get this fixed, I was going to quit and there was going to be a Republican in my place, that if I couldn't fly I wasn't going to do this anymore. She just kind of looked at me -- she said it'll be fixed."

It really is pretty simple – if Congresscritters can be reimbursed for auto mileage, there really isn’t any reason to forbid such reimbursement for official travel in any other sort of personal vehicle, is there?

Posted by: Greg at 11:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

It is a position that certainly appeals to the conservative base of the GOP, but will it be enough to earn John McCain the trust of the many different strains of conservatives he has alienated over the years?

Republican presidential candidate John McCain (news, bio, voting record), looking to improve his standing with the party's conservative voters, said Sunday the court decision that legalized abortion should be overturned.

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned," the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.

McCain also vowed that if elected, he would appoint judges who "strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States and do not legislate from the bench."

The landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade gave women the right to choose an abortion to terminate a pregnancy. The Supreme Court has narrowly upheld the decision, with the presence of an increasing number of more conservative justices on the court raising the possibility that abortion rights would be limited.

Social conservatives are a critical voting bloc in the GOP presidential primaries.

Frankly, this is a pretty mainstream position. Indeed, among legal scholars there is great sentiment that the decision is so flawed that it ought to and will be overturned.based upon its poor legal foundation. And as is often pointed out, all the reversal of Roe will do is place the issue of abortion back in the hands of the elected representatives of the people -- where it rested for the first two centuries of American independence.

Posted by: Greg at 11:24 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

Even the Washington Post can't help but report on one of the biggest broken promises by the DemocratICK majority in the House of Representatives -- free and open debate on the important issues facing America.

Democrats pledged to bring courtesy to the Capitol when they assumed control of Congress last month. But from the start, the new majority used its muscle to force through its agenda in the House and sideline Republicans.

And after an initial burst of lawmaking, the Democratic juggernaut has kept on rolling.

Of nine major bills passed by the House since the 110th Congress began, Republicans have been allowed to make amendments to just one, a measure directing federal research into additives to biofuels. In the arcane world of Capitol Hill, where the majority dictates which legislation comes before the House and which dies on a shelf, the ability to offer amendments from the floor is one of the minority's few tools.

Last week, the strong-arming continued during the most important debate the Congress has faced yet -- the discussion about the Iraq war. Democrats initially said they would allow Republicans to propose one alternative to the resolution denouncing a troop buildup but, days later, they thought better of it.

"It sounds like we're not doing what we said we would do -- I understand that," House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday. "Here, however, we believe we are very justified in one of the most important issues confronting the country, which clearly was a huge issue in the election and which got bottled up in the Senate."

Did you get that from the number two Democrat in the House? Silencing the minority is especially justified when it deals with extremely important issues like national defense! After all, we can't let the elected representatives of the American people actually have their say, offer amendments or alternative resolutions or have any significant input on little things like the War in Iraq. I guess he thinks that this "huge issue in the election" only counts when the people of a district elect Democrats -- that those who voted for Republicans are not even entitled to input on such an important matter.

It has been said that there are three types of falsehoods -- lies, damn lies, and statistics. Pelosi, Hoyer, and the rest of the Democrats have made it clear that the more accurate assessment is that there are lies, damn lies, and Democrat campaign promises of reform.

Oh, and by the way, whose proposal would the Democrats not even allow to be discussed?

Republicans hoped to introduce a bill similar to one written by Rep. Sam Johnson, a Texas Republican who flew combat missions in Korea and Vietnam and was a prisoner of war in Hanoi. It says Congress would not cut off money for soldiers in the field. But Democrats worried it would place some members of their party in a difficult position.

Dems have claimed that anything John Murtha does or says related to the military or the war cannot be disputed because he is a hero. Well, next to Sam Johnson, the corrupt windbag from Pennsylvania is nothing but a treasonous pussy -- and so the Democrats had to suppress Johnson's proposal at all costs. So much for respect for those who served.

Posted by: Greg at 03:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 565 words, total size 4 kb.

I know this might shock the Copperhead Caucus and the White Flag republicans who joined them, but average Americans are not nearly so down on the War in Iraq as they seem to think. Consider these polling results.

An overwhelming majority of Americans believe that victory is necessary, and a clear majority view it as likely. So why the urge to cut and run and defund? Why not follow the desires of the American people?

H/T Malkin & Captain's Quarters

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Maggie's Notebook, Big Dog's Weblog, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, Sujet- Celebrities, Allie Is Wired, Faultline USA, Wake Up America, stikNstein... has no mercy, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:08 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 3 kb.

And so at least one house of Congress will continue to keep faith with America's troops in the field -- despite the fact that seven White Flag Republicans joined the Copperhead Caucus on this one.

Senate Republicans today blocked a floor vote on a House-passed resolution that expresses disapproval of President Bush's plan to send thousands of additional U.S. troops to Iraq, as a procedural motion to cut off debate on the measure fell short of the 60 votes needed.

It was the second time this month that minority Republicans successfully filibustered a nonbinding resolution opposing the troop buildup.

Senators voted 56-34 to invoke cloture and proceed to a floor vote on the resolution, with seven Republicans joining all the chamber's Democrats in calling for an end to the debate. But the motion fell four votes short of the threshold needed under Senate rules.

Most Republicans objected to a rule barring amendments to the resolution and demanded a vote on a separate measure, introduced by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), that pledges not to cut off funding for troops in the field.

And so you see, the issue here is not even one of the GOP trying to block debate -- it is really about the Democrats refusing to allow any chance to permit the Senate to amend the Aid And Comfort Resolution to include a commitment not to give in to John Murtha's proposal to starve the troops until the Administration surrenders.

UPDATE: Looks like the DemocratICK Party is already planning on a strategy of massive aid-and-comfort.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Democrats would be "relentless."

"There will be resolution after resolution, amendment after amendment . . . just like in the days of Vietnam," Schumer said. "The pressure will mount, the president will find he has no strategy, he will have to change his strategy and the vast majority of our troops will be taken out of harm's way and come home."

Here's hoping this includes Sen. Lindsey Graham's suggestion to the Democrats.

"If you believe half of what you're saying in these resolutions then have the courage of your convictions to stop this war by cutting off funding. But no one wants to do that because they don't really know how that's going to play out here at home."

Will the Copperhead Democrats and White Flag Republicans be willing to serve up their treason straight, rather than cutting it with non-binding verbiage?

UPDATE 2: Yes, indeed, the current DemocratICK contingent in the Senate is acting in the finest tradition of the DemocratICK Party's heritage.

"There's always been a lot of dissent in wartime," said Senate historian Donald A. Ritchie. Sometimes, as in Vietnam, it takes a while to build, he added: "There's a certain point when everybody marches together. They were very much united with Johnson in '65 and '66. But when the war turned bad, that's when they broke away. The same was true in the Civil War, and the same was true in any protracted war when things didn't go well."

But interestingly enough, that opposition continued even when strategic and tactical changes were leading to victory -- with the Copperhead Democrats demanding the Civil War be ended a matter of months before the ultimate No doubt we will continue to get efforts aimed at forcing capitulation to terror even as we se reports like this one.

ATTACKS and killings in Baghdad have dropped by 80 per cent since Iraqi and US forces launched their security plan for Baghdad, Iraqi army spokesman Qasim al-Musawi said today.

"Terror operations in Baghdad dropped by 80 per cent," since the Iraqi Government officially launched a broad plan aimed at snuffing out sectarian violence in the capital, Mr Musawi said.

"The morgue was receiving 40-50 bodies per day before and now has received only 20 in the last 48 hours," said the spokesman for Lieutenant General Abboud Gambar, who commands a joint force of Iraqi soldiers and policemen.

Mr Musawi said that 144 people had been arrested in the four days since Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced the operation was underway. He said "they were wanted suspects and the arrests were not arbitrary."

And these are these are the early results, before the biggest impact of the surge can be expected to be seen. No doubt such successes will only intensify the efforts of the Copperhead Caucus and White Flag Republicans follow the Murtha/Schumer strategy of depriving the troops of training and equipment needed for ultimate victory.

Posted by: Greg at 10:27 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 768 words, total size 5 kb.

The betrayal of AmericaÂ’s troops in Iraq continues.

Capping four days of passionate, often angry debate, the House delivered President Bush its first rebuke since the Iraq war was launched nearly four years ago, voting 246 to 182 to oppose the administration's planned deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq.

Seventeen Republicans joined 229 Democrats to approve a resolution that expresses support for U.S. combat forces but opposes the additional deployments. Two Democrats opposed the measure.

I am more disgusted with every story I read.

This is clearly designed to implement the Murtha strategy for "supporting the troops."

"They won't be able to continue. They won't be able to do the deployment. They won't have the equipment, they don't have the training and they won't be able to do the work. There's no question in my mind."

Clearly, this is a strategy of aid and comfort and cut and run and surrender on the part of the Copperhead Caucus and the associated White Flag Republicans.

These 17 White Flag Republicans must face strong opponents in the 2008 primaries, and must be defeated. Personally, I will be crossing the Kemah Bridge to work for any Republican who challenges Ron Paul, since my precinct borders his district.

Representative James T. Walsh

Phone: 202-225-3701
Fax: 202-225-4042
[Email: Rep.james.walsh AT mail.house.gov]

Representative Walter Jones

Representative Wayne Gilchrest
Phone: 202-225-5311
Fax: 202-225-0254
Web Email

Representative Michael Castle
Phone: 202-225-4165
Fax: 202-225-2291
Web Email

Representative Richard (Ric) Keller

Phone: 202-225-2176
Fax: 202-225-0999
Web Email

Representative Philip Sheridan English

Phone: 202-225-5406
Fax: 202-225-3103
Web Email

Representative Ronald Ernest Paul

Phone: 202-225-2831
Web Email

Representative Frederick Stephen Upton

Phone: 202-225-3761
Fax: 202-225-4986
Web Email

Representative Thomas M. Davis

Phone: 202-225-1492
Fax: 202-225-3071
Web Email

Representative Mark Kirk

Phone: 202-225-4835
Fax: 202-225-0837
Web Email

Representative Howard Coble

Phone: 202-225-3065
Fax: 202-225-8611
Email: howard.coble AT mail.house.gov
Web Email

Representative John J. Duncan Jr.

Phone: 202-225-5435
Fax: 202-225-6440
Web Email

Representative James Ramstad

Phone: 202-225-2871
Fax: 202-225-6351
Email: mn03 AT mail.house.gov
Web Email

Representative Steven C. LaTOURETTE

Phone: 202-225-5731
Fax: 202-225-3307
Web Email

Representative Robert Inglis

Phone: 202-225-6030
Fax: 202-226-1177
Web Email

Representative Timothy V. Johnson

Phone: 202-225-2371
Fax: 202-226-0791
Web Email

Representative Thomas Petri 

Phone: 202-225-2476
Fax: 202-225-2356
Web Email

In addition, I want to give my deepest thanks and heartiest praise to the last two loyal Democrats in House of Representatives.

Representative Jim Marshall

Phone: 202-225-6531
Fax: 202-225-3013
Web Email

Representative Gene Taylor 

Phone: 202-225-5772
Fax: 202-225-7074
Web Email

I know I will also be working hard to get rid of Copperhead Democrat Congressman Nick "I'm Afraid To Face A Republican On The Ballot" Lampson, who disgraced CD22 and the state of Texas today.

I urge every American who loves this country and supports the Crusade Against Jihadi Terrorism to join the Victory Caucus.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, 123beta, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, Diva Dish - Weekly Celebrity Gossip Round UP, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, The Right Nation, Pirate's Cove, and The Pink Flamingo, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:57 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 565 words, total size 10 kb.

I would like to call everyone’s attention to this interview with Mrs. Romney. Given my own wife’s health issues, I was particularly moved by this portion of the interview.

Snow: Stem cell research is another area that he's asked about a lot. He, he's essentially for limited amounts of embryonic (stem cell research)?

Romney: He is in favor, he's in favor of stem cell research. He is hopeful, as we all are, that there will be cures with stem cell research. He is not in favor of cloning…he sees it as sort of, of babies being developed for research, and I don't know, he, for him, that was the, that was the ethical line that he felt that life had been cheapened.

Snow: But this is a tough question, but if he is against most embryonic stem cell research, that's the very research that might help someone just like you.

Romney: That's why this discussion was very heartfelt, and went on for months. Um, and I, was, I'm also pro life, and am opposed to research for, the developing, cloning of embryos, for research.

Snow: Even if it could potentially help you some day, people like you?

Romney: You know, you know, I have to say yes, and, and I, you know, I pray for a cure for MS, and I'm, I'm very supportive of research for MS, and there's many other ways, you know, for, hopefully for us to get there. But it is, it is one of those life questions. Is my life more important than a child's, another child's life, and I, I see it as a life that they would be experimenting on. To maybe make me better, and I, how do you, that's why it's hard. These decisions are very, very hard. They, they tear you apart. But how do you balance that life?

This is an issue I struggle with (my darling wife, as on so many other issues, disagrees with me). But it does come down to the question of whose life one chooses, whose life is more valuable, and whether we as human beings have the right to even make that choice when it comes to a clash of innocents. And I’ll be honest, it is an issue over which I still weep, as I watch the woman I love deal with her medical conditions on a daily basis – and as I acknowledge that a cure for my own diabetes could be found though such research as well.

But what comes through most of all in this interview is the great love that exists between Ann and Mitt Romney – a love affair that is so reminiscent of the deep bond that existed between the Reagans. Mitt Romney isn’t afraid to refer to Ann as “my sweetheart” on the campaign trail – after over four decades as a couple, dating back to their teens. And for all the comments about Mormonism and polygamy that one hears, be they based in ignorance, bias, or humor, it is clear that Ann is a one-man woman and Mitt is a one-woman man.

And who would you rather see in the White House two years from now – Hill and Bill, Rudy or Newt and the spouse du jour, or a this sterling example of marital fidelity?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, 123beta, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, Diva Dish - Weekly Celebrity Gossip Round UP, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, The Right Nation, Pirate's Cove, and The Pink Flamingo, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 650 words, total size 6 kb.

I would like to call everyoneÂ’s attention to this interview with Mrs. Romney. Given my own wifeÂ’s health issues, I was particularly moved by this portion of the interview.

Snow: Stem cell research is another area that he's asked about a lot. He, he's essentially for limited amounts of embryonic (stem cell research)?

Romney: He is in favor, he's in favor of stem cell research. He is hopeful, as we all are, that there will be cures with stem cell research. He is not in favor of cloningÂ…he sees it as sort of, of babies being developed for research, and I don't know, he, for him, that was the, that was the ethical line that he felt that life had been cheapened.

Snow: But this is a tough question, but if he is against most embryonic stem cell research, that's the very research that might help someone just like you.

Romney: That's why this discussion was very heartfelt, and went on for months. Um, and I, was, I'm also pro life, and am opposed to research for, the developing, cloning of embryos, for research.

Snow: Even if it could potentially help you some day, people like you?

Romney: You know, you know, I have to say yes, and, and I, you know, I pray for a cure for MS, and I'm, I'm very supportive of research for MS, and there's many other ways, you know, for, hopefully for us to get there. But it is, it is one of those life questions. Is my life more important than a child's, another child's life, and I, I see it as a life that they would be experimenting on. To maybe make me better, and I, how do you, that's why it's hard. These decisions are very, very hard. They, they tear you apart. But how do you balance that life?

This is an issue I struggle with (my darling wife, as on so many other issues, disagrees with me). But it does come down to the question of whose life one chooses, whose life is more valuable, and whether we as human beings have the right to even make that choice when it comes to a clash of innocents. And I’ll be honest, it is an issue over which I still weep, as I watch the woman I love deal with her medical conditions on a daily basis – and as I acknowledge that a cure for my own diabetes could be found though such research as well.

But what comes through most of all in this interview is the great love that exists between Ann and Mitt Romney – a love affair that is so reminiscent of the deep bond that existed between the Reagans. Mitt Romney isn’t afraid to refer to Ann as “my sweetheart” on the campaign trail – after over four decades as a couple, dating back to their teens. And for all the comments about Mormonism and polygamy that one hears, be they based in ignorance, bias, or humor, it is clear that Ann is a one-man woman and Mitt is a one-woman man.

And who would you rather see in the White House two years from now – Hill and Bill, Rudy or Newt and the spouse du jour, or a this sterling example of marital fidelity?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, 123beta, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, Diva Dish - Weekly Celebrity Gossip Round UP, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, The Right Nation, Pirate's Cove, and The Pink Flamingo, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 657 words, total size 6 kb.

On the Homeland Security Committee, no less. Now he can seek to take graft from companies involved in protecting our nation from terrorists – and get a cut of the relief funds for Katrina, since the committee controls FEMA.

Rep. William Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat who's facing an ongoing federal corruption probe, is being granted a spot on the Homeland Security Committee, according to Democratic aides.

The appointment will be announced Friday, according to one aide who requested anonymity because the decision isn't yet official.

Jefferson was removed from his seat on the Ways and Means Committee, one of the most important panels in Congress, by Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) last summer in an attempt to show how seriously Democrats viewed the allegations of corruption.

But the move by Pelosi, who was still minority leader at the time, infuriated members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who said Jefferson shouldn't be punished unless he is indicted; federal prosecutors have yet to bring an indictment, despite an FBI raid 18 months ago on his home that yielded $90,000 in cash in his freezer.

Other lawmakers were angling for the seat on Homeland Security, which was the last slot available on the panel, according to another Democratic aide.
The committee oversees the Homeland Security Department and its web of agencies designed to protect against terrorism on U.S. soil.

The committee has oversight of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which was widely panned for its response to Hurricane Katrina in Jefferson's hometown of New Orleans.

Remember – this is the same Jefferson who commandeered a relief boat and crew to remove evidence from his home in the days immediately following hurricane Katrina.

Nice choice, Nancy!

Posted by: Greg at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

On the Homeland Security Committee, no less. Now he can seek to take graft from companies involved in protecting our nation from terrorists – and get a cut of the relief funds for Katrina, since the committee controls FEMA.

Rep. William Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat who's facing an ongoing federal corruption probe, is being granted a spot on the Homeland Security Committee, according to Democratic aides.

The appointment will be announced Friday, according to one aide who requested anonymity because the decision isn't yet official.

Jefferson was removed from his seat on the Ways and Means Committee, one of the most important panels in Congress, by Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) last summer in an attempt to show how seriously Democrats viewed the allegations of corruption.

But the move by Pelosi, who was still minority leader at the time, infuriated members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who said Jefferson shouldn't be punished unless he is indicted; federal prosecutors have yet to bring an indictment, despite an FBI raid 18 months ago on his home that yielded $90,000 in cash in his freezer.

Other lawmakers were angling for the seat on Homeland Security, which was the last slot available on the panel, according to another Democratic aide.
The committee oversees the Homeland Security Department and its web of agencies designed to protect against terrorism on U.S. soil.

The committee has oversight of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which was widely panned for its response to Hurricane Katrina in Jefferson's hometown of New Orleans.

Remember – this is the same Jefferson who commandeered a relief boat and crew to remove evidence from his home in the days immediately following hurricane Katrina.

Nice choice, Nancy!

Posted by: Greg at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.

Politics apparently trumps humanitarianism in Ohio.

When Gov. Ted Strickland was campaigning for election, among the superlatives voters were fed about him was his background as a minister. Good man, big heart, trustworthy fellow was what the public was supposed to think.

Having met him, that description seemed to fit the bill.

Which is why it was distressing to read a news story in which Strickland basically said Ohio is off limits to Iraqi refugees coming to the United States to flee the violence in their homeland.

Under pressure from the United Nations to help relocate Iraqi refugees, the Bush Administration agreed yesterday to allow 7,000 to relocate in the United States this year. The administration especially wants to help Iraqis whose lives are in danger because of their cooperation with U.S. forces in Iraq.

Strickland opposed the U.S. war in Iraq as a congressman, and when asked about the refugee plan yesterday, he reportedly said, ''I think Ohio and Ohioans have contributed a lot to Iraq in terms of blood, sweat and too many tears. I am sympathetic to the plight of the innocent Iraqi people who have fled that country. However, I would not want to ask Ohioans to accept a greater burden than they already have borne for the Bush administration's failed policies.''

I suppose that DemocratICK Gov. Ted Strickland would have tried to keep out blacks in 1863, Jews in 1938, and Southeast Asians in 1973 as well, combining racism with naked political partisanship. In that he constitutes a worthy successor to another former congressman from Ohio, Clement Vallandigham.

Posted by: Greg at 11:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

Proving that some things never change, DemocratICK opponents of the war are pushing for state cut-and-run resolutions to go with the cowardly proposals pending in Congress.

Frustrated by the inability of Democrats in Congress to pass a resolution opposing President BushÂ’s policies in Iraq, state legislators across the country, led by Democrats and under pressure from liberal advocacy groups, are pushing forward with their own resolutions.

Resolutions have passed in chambers of three legislatures, in California, Iowa and Vermont. The Maryland General Assembly sent a letter to its Congressional delegation, signed by a majority of the State Senate and close to a majority of the House, urging opposition to the increase in troops in Iraq.

Letters or resolutions are being drafted in at least 19 other states. The goal is to embarrass Congress into passing its own resolution and to provide cover for Democrats and Republicans looking for concrete evidence back home that anti-Iraq resolutions enjoy popular support.

And this movement is in the finest tradition of the DemocratICK Party.

At the 1864 Democratic convention, Vallandigham persuaded the party to adopt a platform that declared the war a failure and called for negotiations with the Confederacy.

After all -- what's a little aid and comfort to the enemy among like-minded friends?

UPDATE: Biden seeks to up the ante on Iraq, actually proposing a move that would do something. But then again, we know he is in the best tradition of the Copperheads, who were also racist and supportive of slave states.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Perri Nelson's Website, Faultline USA, third world county, Big Dog's Weblog, Shadowscope, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, and Diva Dish - Weekly Celebrity Gossip Round UP, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, the worst kept secret in Harris County has been confirmed.

County Judge Robert Eckels announced his resignation this afternoon at the annual State of the County speech.

"Today, the time is right,'' Eckels said. "I had a friend who told me, 'You never become what you want to be while remaining where you are.' Harris County is moving forward, and it's time for me to do the same.''

Eckels said he has no timetable for his departure, but he will remain until the Commissioners Court considers the upcoming annual budget next month.
The Greater Houston Partnership, which sponsors the event, had sold about 1,140 tickets through Wednesday, within 60 of a sellout.

Speculation about Eckels' departure has increased in recent days with a close Republican ally, Commissioner Jerry Eversole, saying Eckels' departure was a sure thing. Eversole had advised Eckels to make his intentions known during the luncheon speech today, even though Eckels had indicated he wanted to wait for a previously scheduled fundraiser next week

I’m curious, Judge Eckels – why didn’t you adopt this philosophy a year ago, so that the voters of Harris County (and the GOP in particular) could have had a candidate on the ballot who really wanted your job and intended to serve us for a full term?

Posted by: Greg at 12:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 221 words, total size 1 kb.

Mitt Romney does pretty well among conservatives when you look at opinion polls. I was shocked, therefore to see that he was mentioned nowhere in this story from FoxNews.

Perhaps because of the early start to the race, many voters say they hope someone new will join the 2008 presidential contest. And by new they mean new, making it clear they do not want third-party candidate Ralph Nader, former Vice President Al Gore or former Florida Governor Jeb Bush to step into the contest, according to the latest FOX News Poll.

Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from February 13 to February 14. The poll has a 3-point error margin.

Half of voters (49 percent) say they are hoping there is someone new out there who they have yet to hear about who will enter the presidential contest. Republicans (53 percent) are a bit more interested than Democrats (46 percent) for someone new to come along.

Overall, one of four voters (26 percent) would like Gore to enter the 2008 presidential race, which is moderately more than want Jeb Bush (16 percent) and Nader to do so (14 percent). Even so, the big picture is clear — majorities are against all three of these potential contenders throwing their hat into the ring.

But then I looked at the polling results – and discovered that Opinion Dynamics didn’t even include Romney anywhere in the polling! Not one question about the guy who clearly is just such a fresh face in the race – but questions almost designed to bring the “old gang” (a fomer VP, a former Speaker, another Bush, and a has-been gadfly) into the race.

So tell me, FoxNews and Opinion Dynamics – where’s Mitt?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Perri Nelson's Website, Faultline USA, third world county, Big Dog's Weblog, Shadowscope, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, and Diva Dish - Weekly Celebrity Gossip Round UP, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 338 words, total size 3 kb.

Keith Ellison offered Tom Tancredo a non-apology for the recent call to Capitol Hill Police over Tancredo’s perfectly permissible smoking in his own office.

A freshman Democratic lawmaker sent a hand-written note Wednesday night to a neighboring Republican congressman to apologize for the situation that erupted after his staff complained to U.S. Capitol Police about cigar smoke.

No word yet that Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison is sorry that his staff called the cops in the first place to complain that Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo's cigar was stinking up the hallway they share in the Longworth House Office Building.

Ellison "apologizes for the situation" because "it was so blown out of proportion," Carlos Espinosa, Tancredo’s press secretary, told FOX News.

Notice that this is not an apology for the call to the police in the first place without so much as a courtesy call to Tancredo, who Ellison has never even met despite being in the neighboring office. The apology is for the press coverage of the situation – coverage that makes Tancredo look reasonable and Ellison look incompetent, foolish, and arrogant.

Maybe Ellison will choose to be an adult one of these days and actually apologize for the impertinent call to the police.

Posted by: Greg at 12:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.

Keith Ellison offered Tom Tancredo a non-apology for the recent call to Capitol Hill Police over TancredoÂ’s perfectly permissible smoking in his own office.

A freshman Democratic lawmaker sent a hand-written note Wednesday night to a neighboring Republican congressman to apologize for the situation that erupted after his staff complained to U.S. Capitol Police about cigar smoke.

No word yet that Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison is sorry that his staff called the cops in the first place to complain that Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo's cigar was stinking up the hallway they share in the Longworth House Office Building.

Ellison "apologizes for the situation" because "it was so blown out of proportion," Carlos Espinosa, TancredoÂ’s press secretary, told FOX News.

Notice that this is not an apology for the call to the police in the first place without so much as a courtesy call to Tancredo, who Ellison has never even met despite being in the neighboring office. The apology is for the press coverage of the situation – coverage that makes Tancredo look reasonable and Ellison look incompetent, foolish, and arrogant.

Maybe Ellison will choose to be an adult one of these days and actually apologize for the impertinent call to the police.

Posted by: Greg at 12:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.

I guess it is more of that “appearance of impropriety” thing at work in the DemocratICK Party.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign reached a deal to pay a key South Carolina black leader's consulting firm more than $200,000 just days before he agreed to endorse her run for president, it was revealed yesterday.

The arrangement involves South Carolina state Sen. Darrell Jackson, a well-connected African-American leader and pastor whose support is coveted by national campaigns.

Jackson confirmed to The Post yesterday that his public-relations firm struck a deal with the Clinton campaign just days ago for a contract worth up to $10,000 a month through the 2008 elections.

Jackson had also been in talks with Sen. Barack Obama's campaign about endorsing him and entering into a consulting contract for more than $5,000, sources said - raising questions about whether Jackson's endorsement was bought by a higher bidder.

Remember, this is one of the guys who more or less claimed that “a black man can’t win” and that an Obama nomination would destroy the chances of the DemocratICK Party in 2008. Now we find out that he was prepared to endorse Obama for a fee, until the Illinois senator was outbid by the former First Lady.
Am I the only one who thinks something stinks here – and that it is “politics as usual” in the DemocratICK Party?

Posted by: Greg at 12:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

From Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL)

"...the majority would have us consider a resolution that puts us one day closer to handing militant Islamists a safe haven the size of California. And when ideological militants achieve their objectives, history tells us that they don't settle; that they only attempt to expand their reach even further. And that means following us home."

We can fight the jihadi terrorists in Iraq, or we can fight them in California. You decide.

Posted by: Greg at 12:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

In a move to restore democracy to the state of Texas, the Texas House is considering a bill to overturn Rick PerryÂ’s power-grab on the Gardasil vaccine.

The Texas House will take its first step Monday to overturn Gov. Rick Perry's mandate that schoolgirls be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted virus linked to cervical cancer.

The House Public Health Committee posted notice Tuesday that it will hold a public hearing on a bill that would pre-empt Perry's order and prevent the human papillomavirus vaccine from being required for admission to any elementary or secondary school.

"The governor has accomplished his goal of bringing attention to this issue," said Rep. Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton, author of the bill. "All citizens of Texas will have an opportunity to come to Austin to give an opinion."

Bonnen has signed up more than 60 members as co-authors of House Bill 1098.
If the committee votes out the bill, it could be the first major piece of legislation heard on the House floor this session.

IÂ’m all for girls getting the vaccine, but not for a government mandate or a gubernatorial decree dictating it. IÂ’m therefore pleased to see over 40% of the Texas House sponsoring this legislation, for that bodes well for making the bill veto-proof.

Posted by: Greg at 12:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.

HereÂ’s hoping we can get Bill OÂ’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved and Rush Limbaugh into congressional or senatorial races somewhere in the country to counter-balance this likely win eventual win in Minnesota.

Comedian Al Franken announced Wednesday that he will run for the Senate in 2008, seeking the Democratic nomination to challenge Republican incumbent Norm Coleman.

Franken's announcement came on the final day of his show on the liberal radio network Air America. The decision by the former "Saturday Night Live" performer instantly makes him a serious contender and brings national attention to the race.

Well, for the sake of his ego letÂ’s hope that he is a more serious contender in the senatorial race than he was as a talk radio host.

And let me make this observation – if hosting a talk radio show constitutes credential that qualifies someone for public office, perhaps the GOP ought to run former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett for the presidency in 2008.

Posted by: Greg at 12:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

I agree wholeheartedly with the Detroit News on the issue of the anti-surge resolutions pending in the House and Senate.

C ongress is in the middle of three days of debate on a nonbinding resolution that would express to President George W. Bush its opposition to sending 20,000 troops to Iraq. But why settle for a symbolic gesture of discontent when the representatives have the authority to do something concrete?

If Congress feels the troop surge is the wrong idea, it should vote to cut off funding.

It doesn't do that because the Democratic leadership loves to protest and complain about the Iraq War, but doesn't want to be held accountable for the consequences of an alternative strategy.

It is easy to bitch and moan about the war, and to try to make political hay over it. That has been the strategy of the Democrats of late. However, they should be willing to act on that sentiment if they REALLY believe what they are saying. Otherwise, they are at best engaged in a cynical political ploy, if not outright cowardice and hypocrisy. After all, the current course of action would allow them to be on record as opposing this course of action to avoid blame in the event of failure, while still claiming credit when the surge succeeds because they didn’t cut off funds.

Such triangulation would be nothing short of a sick joke, if it didn’t involve opponents of the war intentionally allowing troops to be placed in harm’s way for a mission that Congress does not believe can be a success. That makes it a criminal abrogation of their constitutional responsibility, for they are knowingly and intentionally allowing soldiers to die for a policy/strategy they believe should not be followed? How can they reconcile respect for the troops with allowing them to be the next to die for a policy that a majority of Congress believes is wrong and a mission they view as unattainable?

So let me say for the record – if the DemocratICK majority in the House and Senate really believes that funding the troop surge is wrong, they should vote to cut off funds in order to force a change in direction in Iraq. But if the legislative branch lacks the integrity to do so, they need to stand aside in silence while the president pursues the strategy he believes provides the best chance for success. And at this moment, George W. Bush appears to be the only elected leader in Washington with a plan for success and the will to implement it – which makes him the only real leader in government today, despite DemocratICK rhetoric about charting a new course in the Middle East.

Posted by: Greg at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 461 words, total size 3 kb.

I agree wholeheartedly with the Detroit News on the issue of the anti-surge resolutions pending in the House and Senate.

C ongress is in the middle of three days of debate on a nonbinding resolution that would express to President George W. Bush its opposition to sending 20,000 troops to Iraq. But why settle for a symbolic gesture of discontent when the representatives have the authority to do something concrete?

If Congress feels the troop surge is the wrong idea, it should vote to cut off funding.

It doesn't do that because the Democratic leadership loves to protest and complain about the Iraq War, but doesn't want to be held accountable for the consequences of an alternative strategy.

It is easy to bitch and moan about the war, and to try to make political hay over it. That has been the strategy of the Democrats of late. However, they should be willing to act on that sentiment if they REALLY believe what they are saying. Otherwise, they are at best engaged in a cynical political ploy, if not outright cowardice and hypocrisy. After all, the current course of action would allow them to be on record as opposing this course of action to avoid blame in the event of failure, while still claiming credit when the surge succeeds because they didnÂ’t cut off funds.

Such triangulation would be nothing short of a sick joke, if it didnÂ’t involve opponents of the war intentionally allowing troops to be placed in harmÂ’s way for a mission that Congress does not believe can be a success. That makes it a criminal abrogation of their constitutional responsibility, for they are knowingly and intentionally allowing soldiers to die for a policy/strategy they believe should not be followed? How can they reconcile respect for the troops with allowing them to be the next to die for a policy that a majority of Congress believes is wrong and a mission they view as unattainable?

So let me say for the record – if the DemocratICK majority in the House and Senate really believes that funding the troop surge is wrong, they should vote to cut off funds in order to force a change in direction in Iraq. But if the legislative branch lacks the integrity to do so, they need to stand aside in silence while the president pursues the strategy he believes provides the best chance for success. And at this moment, George W. Bush appears to be the only elected leader in Washington with a plan for success and the will to implement it – which makes him the only real leader in government today, despite DemocratICK rhetoric about charting a new course in the Middle East.

Posted by: Greg at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 470 words, total size 3 kb.

I defended his right to use the Quran at his ceremonial swearing-in, but I won’t cut him any slack here.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) believes it is his right as a Muslim to be sworn into Congress with the Quran. But apparently, the freshman lawmaker doesn’t believe it’s Rep. Tom Tancredo’s (R-Colo.) right to smoke a cigar in his congressional office.

Ellison’s office called the Capitol Hill Police on Tancredo last Wednesday night as Tancredo was in his office smoking a cigar. The lawmakers have neighboring offices on the first floor of the Longworth House Office Building.

Tancredo was still stunned a day later. “It’s very bizarre,” said Tancredo, who has never met Ellison. “Seemed to me not a good way to say hello.”

And let’s face it. Calling the cops on a colleague takes the cake for the nerviest behavior so far among members of this year’s freshman class of Congress.

* * *

Tancredo said he would not stop smoking in his office. “Heck, no!” he said. “If he [Ellison] would have [had] the courtesy to say something I’m sure I would have been more accommodating to his wishes.”

To help keep his office free of impurities, Tancredo has three air purifiers. And he has no plans to meet Ellison anytime soon. “I’m sure we will, but I’m not going to make a point [of it],” the presidential hopeful said, adding that he supported Ellison’s right to be sworn in with the Quran.

Ellison’s press secretary, Rick Jauert, made the call to the Superintendent’s office when he noticed the smoke. “I called because the smoke was coming through the walls,” Jauert said, adding that the Superintendent’s office referred him to the Capitol Police.

Jauert said he then informed his boss what he had done. He said “fine,” Jauert said. “He’s complained of the smoke before.”

What next? Will Ellison and his staff demand that Capitol Hill offices go dry in accordance with Islamic teachings? Will he act to have ham sandwiches banned from Capitol Hill? Will he insist that Speaker Pelosi wear a burqa (not that it wouldn’t be an improvement)? At the risk for giving offense to the Muslim Congressman by using a Yiddish work, Ellison showed a lot of chutzpah here.

Posted by: Greg at 12:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 3 kb.

I defended his right to use the Quran at his ceremonial swearing-in, but I wonÂ’t cut him any slack here.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) believes it is his right as a Muslim to be sworn into Congress with the Quran. But apparently, the freshman lawmaker doesnÂ’t believe itÂ’s Rep. Tom TancredoÂ’s (R-Colo.) right to smoke a cigar in his congressional office.

EllisonÂ’s office called the Capitol Hill Police on Tancredo last Wednesday night as Tancredo was in his office smoking a cigar. The lawmakers have neighboring offices on the first floor of the Longworth House Office Building.

Tancredo was still stunned a day later. “It’s very bizarre,” said Tancredo, who has never met Ellison. “Seemed to me not a good way to say hello.”

And letÂ’s face it. Calling the cops on a colleague takes the cake for the nerviest behavior so far among members of this yearÂ’s freshman class of Congress.

* * *

Tancredo said he would not stop smoking in his office. “Heck, no!” he said. “If he [Ellison] would have [had] the courtesy to say something I’m sure I would have been more accommodating to his wishes.”

To help keep his office free of impurities, Tancredo has three air purifiers. And he has no plans to meet Ellison anytime soon. “I’m sure we will, but I’m not going to make a point [of it],” the presidential hopeful said, adding that he supported Ellison’s right to be sworn in with the Quran.

Ellison’s press secretary, Rick Jauert, made the call to the Superintendent’s office when he noticed the smoke. “I called because the smoke was coming through the walls,” Jauert said, adding that the Superintendent’s office referred him to the Capitol Police.

Jauert said he then informed his boss what he had done. He said “fine,” Jauert said. “He’s complained of the smoke before.”

What next? Will Ellison and his staff demand that Capitol Hill offices go dry in accordance with Islamic teachings? Will he act to have ham sandwiches banned from Capitol Hill? Will he insist that Speaker Pelosi wear a burqa (not that it wouldnÂ’t be an improvement)? At the risk for giving offense to the Muslim Congressman by using a Yiddish work, Ellison showed a lot of chutzpah here.

Posted by: Greg at 12:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.

I guess it is more than just $90K in the freezer, commandeering rescue workers to remove evidence from his home during Katrina and obstruction of justice in his Capitol office. Now a shareholder in the firm from which he solicited bribes is suing him.

A former stockholder in a technology company sued a beleaguered congressman and a former business associate Tuesday, claiming they bilked stockholders by using business funds to pay bribes.

The lawsuit alleges that Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., his wife and Vernon Jackson, former chief executive of the telecommunications firm iGate, schemed to funnel money to Jefferson, his family and foreign officials.

The allegations mirror those in an ongoing federal investigation of Jefferson and his business dealings. Jefferson has not been charged, but the FBI has said in court records that agents found $90,000 in a freezer in his New Orleans home.

As part of that investigation, Jackson, 54, of Louisville, pleaded guilty to paying more than $400,000 in bribes to Jefferson to gain the congressman's help in obtaining business deals in Africa. Jackson was sentenced to seven years in federal prison.

The corrupt practices engaged in by Jefferson and his inside co-conspirator have caused the company to all but cease operations.

Will the Democrats act against this criminal in their midst? Nope – which shows the hollow nature of their “ethics reform”.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.

I guess it is more than just $90K in the freezer, commandeering rescue workers to remove evidence from his home during Katrina and obstruction of justice in his Capitol office. Now a shareholder in the firm from which he solicited bribes is suing him.

A former stockholder in a technology company sued a beleaguered congressman and a former business associate Tuesday, claiming they bilked stockholders by using business funds to pay bribes.

The lawsuit alleges that Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., his wife and Vernon Jackson, former chief executive of the telecommunications firm iGate, schemed to funnel money to Jefferson, his family and foreign officials.

The allegations mirror those in an ongoing federal investigation of Jefferson and his business dealings. Jefferson has not been charged, but the FBI has said in court records that agents found $90,000 in a freezer in his New Orleans home.

As part of that investigation, Jackson, 54, of Louisville, pleaded guilty to paying more than $400,000 in bribes to Jefferson to gain the congressman's help in obtaining business deals in Africa. Jackson was sentenced to seven years in federal prison.

The corrupt practices engaged in by Jefferson and his inside co-conspirator have caused the company to all but cease operations.

Will the Democrats act against this criminal in their midst? Nope – which shows the hollow nature of their “ethics reform”.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

Barack Obama has already made two major blunders (that is one more than Joe Biden, for those keeping track), and he only declared his candidacy on Saturday.

HereÂ’s the first.

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois said Monday that he had misspoken when he suggested that the lives of more than 3,000 American soldiers killed in Iraq had been “wasted.”

As he arrived in New Hampshire, Mr. Obama said he would “absolutely apologize” to military families if they were offended by a remark he made in Iowa while criticizing the Bush administration’s Iraq policy.

“What I would say — and meant to say — is that their service hasn’t been honored,” Mr. Obama told reporters in Nashua, N.H., “because our civilian strategy has not honored their courage and bravery, and we have put them in a situation in which it is hard for them to succeed.”

No, Senator, your words were pretty clear – you believe that the lives of soldiers fighting for this country are wasted – hardly a fitting sentiment for a potential commander-in-chief.

And then there indication of ObamaÂ’s lack of preparation to conduct foreign affairs in his verbal jousting with AustraliaÂ’s John Howard.

No, Senator Obama may be a superb public speaker and a charismatic man, but he is not quite ready for prime time. We elect him at our peril.

Posted by: Greg at 12:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

Congressman Norwood has, sadly, succumbed to the cancer he has been battling.

Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.) died Tuesday morning, a week after returning home to Augusta for hospice care.

Norwood, 65, waged a long battle with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic lung disease. He underwent a single lung transplant in 2004, then developed lung cancer in his other lung while taking immune-response-suppression drugs to prevent his body from rejecting the new organ. The cancer spread to his liver late last year.

Norwood announced he was forgoing further treatment last week. One of his last acts as a congressman was to reintroduce the Norwood-Dingell Patient's Bill of Rights, legislation that put him at odds with the Bush administration and his own congressional leadership. Among other things, the bill would have allowed patients to sue HMOs that overruled doctors and refused to pay for recommended treatments.

Survivors include his wife of 42 years, the former Gloria Wilkinson ; two grown sons, Charles and Carlton; and four grandchildren.

Norwood's office will announce memorial plans later.

Under Georgia law, the governor must, within 10 days of the death of a member of Congress, send a writ to the Secretary of State's office asking for a non-partisan special election to choose a replacement. The election can be held no earlier than 30 days later.

May his family be comforted in this time of loss.

Posted by: Greg at 12:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.

Congressman Norwood has, sadly, succumbed to the cancer he has been battling.

Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.) died Tuesday morning, a week after returning home to Augusta for hospice care.

Norwood, 65, waged a long battle with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic lung disease. He underwent a single lung transplant in 2004, then developed lung cancer in his other lung while taking immune-response-suppression drugs to prevent his body from rejecting the new organ. The cancer spread to his liver late last year.

Norwood announced he was forgoing further treatment last week. One of his last acts as a congressman was to reintroduce the Norwood-Dingell Patient's Bill of Rights, legislation that put him at odds with the Bush administration and his own congressional leadership. Among other things, the bill would have allowed patients to sue HMOs that overruled doctors and refused to pay for recommended treatments.

Survivors include his wife of 42 years, the former Gloria Wilkinson ; two grown sons, Charles and Carlton; and four grandchildren.

Norwood's office will announce memorial plans later.

Under Georgia law, the governor must, within 10 days of the death of a member of Congress, send a writ to the Secretary of State's office asking for a non-partisan special election to choose a replacement. The election can be held no earlier than 30 days later.

May his family be comforted in this time of loss.

Posted by: Greg at 12:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

Mitt Romney has formally declared his candidacy for president in 2008.

Mitt Romney officially entered the 2008 presidential race Tuesday, a former one-term Republican governor of Massachusetts suggesting that his record of leadership inside and outside government uniquely positions him to tackle the countryÂ’s challenges.

”I do not believe Washington can be transformed from within by a lifelong politician,” Romney said, seeking to turn a potential liability, his limited political experience, into an asset. ”There have been too many deals, too many favors, too many entanglements - and too little real world experience managing, guiding, leading.”

His speech placed great emphasis upon the American family, and made special reference to the importance of his own family , as he presented himself to the people of this country not just as a politician, not just as a businessman, but first as a family man.

"This Christmas, Ann and I gathered my five sons and five daughters-in-law to ask them whether I should run for President.

* * *

"And so, with them behind us, with the fine people of Michigan before us, and with my sweetheart beside me, I declare my intention to run for President of the United States.

And I would have to describe the speech itself as Reaganesque in its lyrical celebration of this country of ours and its deep expression of hope..

"It has been said that a person is defined by what he loves and by what he believes and by what he dreams.

"I love America and I believe in the people of America.

"I believe in God and I believe that every person in this great country, and every person on this grand planet, is a child of God. We are all sisters and brothers.

"I believe the family is the foundation of America – and that we must fight to protect and strengthen it.

"I believe in the sanctity of human life.

"I believe that people and their elected representatives should make our laws, not unelected judges.

"I believe we are overtaxed and government is overfed. Washington is spending too much money.

"I believe that homeland security begins with securing our borders.

"I believe the best days of this country are ahead of us, becauseÂ…

"I believe in America!

I urge all who still believe in America to consider Mitt RomneyÂ’s candidacy seriously, for his vision of America is one consistent with conservative values and which sees AmericaÂ’s best days as being in the future, not the past.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Random Yak, Big Dog's Weblog, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Common Folk Using Common Sense, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, third world county, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Planck's Constant, and Dumb Ox Daily News, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 478 words, total size 5 kb.

It sounds to me like this may already be a done deal, with the resignation of County Judge Robert Eckels to come on Thursday.

Transportation consultant and former state Rep. Ed Emmett has emerged as the Republican consensus candidate to succeed County Judge Robert Eckels if he resigns to take a private sector job.

The two Republican county commissioners and Eckels, also a Republican, say they could back Emmett, which would give him the job even if the Commissioners Court's two Democrats disagreed.

Eckels said he hopes to make a decision within a week on whether to take a new job. He just began his fourth, four-year term.

Eckels described Emmett as "the kind of guy who I would love to see come behind me."

"He's a guy who understands politics and he has stayed active in transportation," Eckels said.

Frankly, I'm disturbed by this development. That Eckels just ran for reelection last November but may resign just weeks into his new term is troubling, and feels like a fraud upon the voters of Harris County. That his potential replacement for a nearly four year term will come not from among those county-wide officeholders who have received the consent of the governed but will instead be an individual out of elective office for two decades bothers me even more.

Frankly, this situation stinks. If Eckels is to leave the office to which he was just reelected, the position needs to be filled by someone who clearly has the confidence of the voters, not Robert Eckels' buddy. Otherwise we have, at bare minimum, an appearance of impropriety, if not an actual one.

Posted by: Greg at 11:51 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

Mission:

Deliver the perspectives and news on the war effort which the mainstream media neglects to help the American public understand the nature of our conflict and its true progress.

Provide tools and infrastructure to help citizens who are committed to victory organize into a recognized and influential caucus.

Identify opportunities for the caucus to act and exert influence on AmericaÂ’s leaders and to directly aid and support the men and women of our military.

Beliefs:

We support victory in the war against radical Islamists.

We supported the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and we believe victory is necessary in both countries for AmericaÂ’s self-defense.

We believe that the radical regime in Iran, while not representative of the Iranian people, is a menace and that it cannot be allowed to obtain or build nuclear weapons.

We believe that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that has killed hundreds of Americans and which waged war against Israel in violation of every law of war this past summer, and will do so again in the future.

We believe Israel is our ally and friend and deserves the full assistance of the United States in its battle with radical Islamists.

We believe that Israel has repeatedly shown its willingness to negotiate a just and lasting peace, but that its enemies do not want peace, but the destruction of Israel.

We believe that the American military is the finest in the world and indeed in history, well led and superbly trained, and populated at every level by AmericaÂ’s best and brightest.

We support the troops, and those organizations which assist the wounded in their recoveries and support the families of those who sacrificed everything.

We support leaders who support victory.

Visit the
Victory Caucus

Posted by: Greg at 05:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

I simply cannot imagine any way that such a tax would not be passed on by the oil companies, at least indirectly, as a part of the “cost of doing business” that goes into the calculation of prices.

Gov. Jim Doyle will unveil a tax on oil companies on Tuesday but will bar the firms from passing it on to consumers.

The tax would mark the first cash infusion into the state's transportation account since an annual automatic increase in the gas tax ended in April.
But some question whether the state can legally prevent companies from passing taxes on to consumers.

In my eyes, it isnÂ’t even a question of legality. Prices are set, in any situation, in light of the full cost of doing business. Taxes are a part of that cost, so when prices are set in the state of Wisconsin that additional margin will simply be factored in. Indeed, short of limiting the legal amount of profit the companies make (a virtual impossibility when we are dealing with a multi-national industry), there is no way to impose such limits.

And, of course, if they do try to impose such limits and penalties upon the oil companies doing business in the state of Wisconsin, there is always one other option available to the oil companies – they can withdraw from the market, and the state of Wisconsin can become a pre-industrial society on a par with Amish country. Maybe Gov. Doyle needs to learn the same lessons as Hugo Chavez about the limits of the government’s control over the economy.

Posted by: Greg at 10:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

For all that 60 Minutes and other folks on the Left want to argue that Barack Obama is in danger of assassination, Neil Steinberg offers a different take.

Would-be assassins shoot at presidents and presidential candidates either because the assailants are crazy or because they hate their targets, or both. With that in mind, Hillary Clinton is at far greater risk than Obama, because every nut case in America seems to hate her. She's the one we should worry about.

Personally, I think one would need to be a nut case NOT to hate (or, more accurately, fear) Hillary.

And interestingly enough, an Obama fan urged the murder of Senator Clinton on his campaign website – which should tell you it is not a vast right-wing conspiracy that these people need to fear, but their own leftist confreres.

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.

For all that 60 Minutes and other folks on the Left want to argue that Barack Obama is in danger of assassination, Neil Steinberg offers a different take.

Would-be assassins shoot at presidents and presidential candidates either because the assailants are crazy or because they hate their targets, or both. With that in mind, Hillary Clinton is at far greater risk than Obama, because every nut case in America seems to hate her. She's the one we should worry about.

Personally, I think one would need to be a nut case NOT to hate (or, more accurately, fear) Hillary.

And interestingly enough, an Obama fan urged the murder of Senator Clinton on his campaign website – which should tell you it is not a vast right-wing conspiracy that these people need to fear, but their own leftist confreres.

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

And that is not necessarily to say that the Democrats are on the side of al Qaeda – merely that their positions on Iraq and the War on Terror coincide with the best interest of that terrorist organization.

THE one thing no one is saying about Prime Minister John Howard's remarks is they are obviously right. Asked about US Senator Barack Hussein Obama's plan to withdraw all US forces from Iraq by March 31, 2008, Howard replied: "If I were running al-Qa'ida in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and pray as many times as possible for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats."

Certainly al-Qa'ida agrees. After the November 2006 elections handed control of the US Congress to the anti-war Democrats, al-Qa'ida's leader in Iraq gloated in an audio-taped message: "The American people have taken a step in the right path to come out of their predicament, they voted for a level of reason."

Abu Omar al-Baghdad, who heads an al-Qa'ida umbrella group, made the terror group's latest demand for allied withdrawal on February 2: "We order you to withdraw your forces immediately. But the withdrawal must be via troop transport trucks and passenger planes whereby each soldier is allowed to carry his own weapon only. They may not withdraw any of the heavy military equipment, and the military bases must be handed over to the mujahidin of the Islamic state, and the duration of the withdrawal may not exceed a month."

So Obama's position and that of al-Qa'ida's are virtually identical, except for the departure date.

I know many in the DemocratICK Party take offense at the notion that they encourage the terrorists by calling for a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. The reality is, however, that such rhetoric DOES encourage our enemies. And if you have a presidential candidate whose platform on Iraq is substantively identical to that of the terrorists, then it is not unreasonable to state, as the Australian Prime Minister did, that his election (and that of his supporters) would be welcomed by and hoped for by those terrorists. Whether Howard should have stated it in the way he did is an entirely different question.

Now IÂ’ll let you decide whether such the convergence of the platforms of al-Qaeda and Barack Obama constitutes sufficient reason to oppose his candidacy for office. But I would hope that it does give my fellow citizens pause.

Posted by: Greg at 10:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 425 words, total size 3 kb.

Posted by: Greg at 10:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

Frankly, I don't see what else you can call this proposal by Rochelle Riley.

How long would it take to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney? A day?

It could be the day after impeachment hearings ended in the conviction of President George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors. It would take only one courageous member of the House of Representatives to propose an article of impeachment against Cheney. Then it would take a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate to send Cheney packing -- almost as quickly as former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

* * *

I've called for the impeachment of President George W. Bush twice before and had correspondents tell me that their greater fear was a President Cheney. Get rid of them both for "high crimes and misdemeanors" against the American people. The best definition of that came from our own President Gerald Ford in 1970: "An impeachable offense is whatever the majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at any given moment."

When the GOP impeached and sought to remove a sitting president, Bill Clinton, for undeniable violations of the law (to which he later admitted and accepted punishment), we were accused of trying to "overturn the results of an election" despite the fact that the new president would have been Al Gore, the elected vice president who had been Clinton's running mate. No election would have been overturned -- and such a course of action would have undoubtedly led to a landslide victory by President Al Gore in 2000 -- and his likely reelection in 2004.

What Ms. Riley proposes here is the removal of a president and vice president over policy differences and interpretations of the data from our nation's intelligence agencies -- in order to place the government into the hands of a different party, and a new president who had never stood for national office nor been subject to the sort of review that Ms. Riley's new-found hero, President Ford, faced when he assumed the vice presidency under trying circumstances in 1973.

Indeed, her proposal is nothing short of a coup d'etat by the DemocratICK Party -- a group which is is no more loyal to the United States and its Constitution than it was 145 years ago.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, third world county, The HILL Chronicles, Right Celebrity, Woman Honor Thyself, Pentimento, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Right Pundits, The Random Yak, A Blog For All, 123 Beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Maggie's Notebook, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, Phastidio.net, The Florida Masochist, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Wake Up America, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 08:17 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 7 kb.

Why should we not be surprised by this naked threat against the Defense Department by corrupt DemocratICK Congressman John Murtha?

February 10, 2007 -- Perhaps the flap over Speaker Nancy Pelosi's plane wouldn't be so bad - had she and her trusty sidekick, Rep. Jack Murtha (D-Pa.), not reacted so obnoxiously.

When the Pentagon didn't immediately honor the request of the self-proclaimed "most powerful woman in America" for a top-of-the-line Air Force passenger jet, Pelosi deployed the "s"-word: sexism.

"As a woman, as a woman speaker of the House, I don't want any less of an opportunity than male speakers when they have served here," she said.

Pelosi then implied that the Pentagon was getting even with her:

"Why are they [the Pentagon] feeding the flames? Of course, I have been a constant critic - for nearly three years, I've called for the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld, who still has a desk at the Department of Defense . . ."

Then the thuggish, ethically challenged Murtha weighed in - saying it would be a "mistake" to deny her request, "since she decides on the allocations for the Department of Defense."

* * *

"I don't need to pressure them. I just tell them what they need to do," Murtha said of his efforts to secure from the Pentagon a plane for Pelosi.

As more information comes out, I'm progressively more willing to give Pelosi a pass -- it appears that it wasn't her or her staff who asked for the larger plane to be at her full-time disposal. But Murtha's words are more troubling.

Especially since this isn't the first time he has tried crap like this.

Murtha's history of manipulating defense appropriations for personal gain is long and distinguished. In a 1989 defense bill, then-Speaker Tom Foley was shamed into redlining a Murtha-authored provision requiring the speaker have a C-20 jet available at all times.

And, of course, there is his cozy relationship with Defense industry lobbyists who feather his nest, and with companies that are clients of his brother's company.

Thuggish and corrupt -- those are two of the words that best describe John Murtha. I'll refrain from using the other one that comes to mind.

Posted by: Greg at 12:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 2 kb.

As I've said in the past, the situation involving the stricken senator transcends the political -- and so I bring you the following update of what can only be called positive developments.

Sen. Tim Johnson is reading news clippings and starting to do some office work from the hospital, almost two months after suffering a life-threatening brain hemorrhage. "At this point, he has requested more contact with office and is looking for updates from staff," his office said in a statement Friday.

Spokeswoman Julianne Fisher said the South Dakota Democrat is starting slowly.

"We do not anticipate him back (in the Senate) for several weeks," Fisher said. "We are bringing work to him rather than him coming to us. His first priority still is rehabilitation."

Johnson has been undergoing physical, occupational and speech therapy since he was transferred to rehabilitation from intensive care at George Washington University Hospital last month. He recently began to read and speak in full sentences, according to statements from his doctors.

Johnson continues to have weakness on his right side, but is continuing with therapy and will eventually return to the Senate. And while I'm of a different party, I will rejoice when that day arrives -- as should every American.

Posted by: Greg at 12:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 218 words, total size 1 kb.