Even though he has been driven out of the CD22 congressional race, Tom DeLay is likely to overcome the trumped-up political charges against him. He achieved another victory today in a Texas appellate court.

An appeals court Wednesday upheld a judge's ruling throwing out a felony conspiracy charge against former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

DeLay, who announced this month that he is resigning his congressional seat, still faces a money-laundering charge and another conspiracy charge stemming from the financing of state legislative races in 2002.

A lower court judge dismissed a conspiracy charge against DeLay in December, agreeing with defense arguments that the conspiracy law did not cover election code violations in 2002; the Legislature amended the law in 2003.

Prosecutors had argued before a three-judge panel of the 3rd Court of Appeals that conspiracy to violate the election code had always been a crime and that the 2003 change merely clarified the law.

Once again, the courts uphold the basic constitutional principle that ex post facto laws are not permitted – even when it interferes with the intrigues of a political hack like Ronnie Earle. I’ve no doubt that the rest of the charges will be easily refuted in court – and that the misconduct that has plagued this prosecution will lead to professional sanctions against the rogue prosecutor.

Posted by: Greg at 12:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 2 kb.

The Democrat leaders of St. Clair County turned out to wish Charlie Powell a happy birthday on April 7, even though his birthday doesn’t roll around until April 28. But then again, Powell will not be available on April 28 – he reported to federal prison on April 17 to begin his 21 month sentence for election fraud.

St. Clair County Circuit Judges John Baricevic and Milton Wharton attended on the evening of April 7 at Club Illusion in East St. Louis as did Associate Judge Laninya Cason and an estimated 250 other party-goers.

They had come to wish a happy birthday to a politician who, even after being convicted of vote fraud, was able to influence county politics. St. Clair County Board Chairman Mark Kern and his wife, Erin, also were at the party as was Assessor Gordon Bush and prominent Belleville attorney Bruce Cook, who defended Powell during his June trial for conspiracy to commit vote fraud.

* * *

Partygoers said Powell circulated through the club's crowded rooms, stopping at tables to talk with friends he has known during more than 30 years of political life.

"He's been a great leader... With his absence you can see all the confusion that's going on at city hall," said Frank Smith, a Democratic precinct committeeman in the city who said he has been a friend of Powell's for three decades.

Smith, a caseworker for East St. Louis Township, said he spoke with Baricevic at the party.

"I talked to Judge Baricevic. He praised Charlie," Smith said.

Bush, the assessor, said, "Charlie Powell is a very good friend of mine who made a mistake. However, I feel that because of all the good that he's done through the years he is worthy of my being present at his birthday party. And I was honored to be there."

Bush has said it was Powell's recommendation last year, after Powell's vote fraud guilty verdict, that led to his appointment as assessor to replace Percy McKinney, who resigned.

Could you imagine the outrage if the shoe were on the other foot, and these were Republican judges and other elected officials turning out to honor a convicted official days before he began his sentence – for example, Duke Cunningham? Could you imagine the outrage from Democrats and the press if he were still being publicly praised by senior elected officials despite his conviction?

So, want to tell me which party has a culture of corruption?

(Please note – I took no pleasure in writing this piece. Judge Baricevic’s sister is an old co-worker of mine, an excellent educator and a faithful member of the School Sisters of Notre Dame whose service to God and the children of southern Illinois is inspirational.)

Posted by: Greg at 12:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 469 words, total size 3 kb.

They canÂ’t get federal financial aid because of their crimes.

One in every 400 students applying for federal financial aid for college is rejected because of a drug conviction, an analysis of Department of Education numbers by a drug policy overhaul group found.

A study to be released today by Students for Sensible Drug Policy says 189,065 people have been turned down for financial aid since the federal government added a drug conviction question to the financial aid form in the 2000-01 school year.

A September report from the Government Accountability Office shows that in the 2003-04 academic year, about 41,000 applicants for federal student aid were disqualified because of drug convictions.

A student can regain eligibility, however, by completing a rehabilitation program that includes random drug tests.

“In the majority of cases, students retain their eligibility,” Education Department spokeswoman Valerie Smith says.

The aid analysis, compiled by the student group from data released last week by the Department of Education, notes that Indiana has the highest percentage of rejections, with one in 200 students denied financial aid because of drug convictions.

Indiana Rep. Mark Souder, a Republican and the author of the legislation, says it makes no difference how the states rank.

“The principle remains the same: the American taxpayer should not be subsidizing the educations of those students who are convicted of dealing or using illegal drugs,” Souder said in a statement provided Sunday.

The ACLU, of course, has filed suit to overturn the law on the basis that it is the only offense for which such a restriction exists (not true – failure to register for the draft is also a disqualifier). If this challenge succeeds, I hope Congress does the right thing and expands the law to deny government aid to ALL convicted felons.

Posted by: Greg at 11:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

It seems to me that some lawyers and city officials in New Orleans ought to be in serious trouble with a federal court over this situation.

More than seven months after New Orleans residents were forcibly and illegally disarmed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the City of New Orleans will begin returning seized firearms to their rightful owners on Monday, according to a gun rights group that took legal action against the city.

"We've learned from the police that starting Monday at 8 a.m., New Orleans gun owners can get their firearms back," said Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), which has been working with the National Rifle Association (NRA) in court to force officials to return guns confiscated after Katrina struck the city on Aug. 29, 2005.

Gun owners must provide proof of ownership, such as a bill of sale, and a description of the firearm, including brand and model and the serial number or a notarized affidavit that describes the firearm.

Citizens claiming their firearms will also need proper identification, such as a driver's license. Before firearms are returned, New Orleans police will conduct a background check on the gun owner.

Now hold on – the police are going to do a background check on owners of firearms they illegally confiscated. That certainly troubles me.

But more to the point, IÂ’m troubled by this little detail.

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, few people objected when police last fall began gathering firearms they found in abandoned New Orleans homes to prevent them from falling into the hands of criminals.

However, the SAF and the NRA sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop authorities in and around the city from seizing firearms from private citizens. The SAF said arbitrary gun seizures, without warrants or probable cause, had been reported. In some cases, police refused to give citizens receipts for their seized firearms, according to the SAF.

A federal judge quickly issued the TRO, but New Orleans officials denied that any guns had been seized and ignored the court order.

The impasse between the city and the pro-gun groups continued until March 1, when the SAF and NRA went back to court.

"The city had been denying for more than five months that these guns were in possession," Gottleib said. "Only when the SAF and the NRA filed a motion to have Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Superintendent Warren Riley held in contempt of court did city officials miraculously discover that more than a thousand seized firearms were being stored.

The city denied seizing the guns in court filings, but now claims to have them to return to citizens. It appears to me that there were false statements made to the court. Somebody needs to face perjury charges, and some lawyers need to face disciplinary action over this. It seems that the Nagin Regime not only doesnÂ’t believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it also does not believe in the truth.

Posted by: Greg at 11:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 514 words, total size 3 kb.

The standard Leftist meme is that "Bush lied" regarding Iraqi efforts to get uranium from Niger. The only problem is that every examination of the evidence shows that the liar was Joe Wilson, whose word is taken as Gospel-truth by the Left.

In a surprising editorial, The Washington Post deviated from the conventional anti-Bush media position on two counts. It said President Bush was right to declassify parts of a National Intelligence Estimate to make clear why he thought Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. And the editorial said ex-ambassador Joseph Wilson was wrong to think he had debunked Bush on the nuclear charge because Wilson's statements after visiting Niger actually "supported the conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium."

In the orthodox narrative line, Wilson is the truth-teller and the Bush the liar. But Wilson was not speaking truthfully when he said his wife, Victoria Plame, had nothing to do with the CIA sending him to Niger. And it obviously wasn't true, as Wilson claimed, that he had found nothing to support Bush's charge about Niger when he (Wilson) had been told that the Iraqis were poking around in that uranium-rich nation.

Testifying before the Senate intelligence committee, Wilson said that the former prime minister of Niger told him he had been asked to meet with Iraqis to talk about "expanding commercial relations" between the two countries. Everybody knew what that meant; Niger has nothing much to trade other than uranium.

Yeah, that's right -- Niger doesn't have much else to export, and Wilson confirmed that Iraq was seeking to do business with Niger. What else would Iraq have been after -- goats, camels, and slaves?

More to the point, every subsequent investigation into the Niger story shows that there was plenty of other evidence to back the contention thqat Iraq was seeking uranium.

The forged documents claiming an Iraq-Niger connection were so crude that they could never have fooled the CIA or British intelligence for very long. Who would do this, and do it so badly? Nobody knows. But if the forgeries were meant to distract from other evidence that Bush was right, then they certainly worked. Look around in American journalism, and you will find great certitude that the forgeries destroyed Bush's claim.

That certitude can only be founded on the belief that Tony Blair, the U.S. Senate intelligence committee and the special investigative team of Parliament were all liars when they said there was substantial non-forged evidence backing Bush's claim. The investigative team was headed by the highly regarded Lord Butler, who served as a Cabinet minister under five prime ministers. It concluded that Bush's 16 words about Iraq's uranium shopping were "well-founded."

Actually, there is one other way to discount the Butler report: Either muffle or don't mention it in your news columns. The New York Times opted for muffling. A database search finds no mention of "well-founded" in the Times reporting, and only one barely scrutable paragraph about uranium in the Butler report, way down in the 11th paragraph of a story buried well inside the paper.

In other words, the reason that the "Bush lied" meme survives is because most of the press simply refuses to give substantive discussion to the evidence of Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium. Instead, Joe Wilson and his wife are painted as martyrs, and his claims are validated based upon that status -- despite the fact that every investigation of his claims have led to the opposite conclusion.

Posted by: Greg at 10:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 591 words, total size 4 kb.

Treason charges would be much better -- she rendered aid and comfort to Saddam Hussein.

Before the bombs fell on Baghdad, Judith Karpova went there to put herself in harm's way.

The veteran activist was among dozens of "human shields" who poured into Iraq as the U.S.-led offensive loomed in early 2003, although she ended up leaving before the war.

Three years later, Karpova is again playing defense, this time against a $6,700 civil fine from the government.

The Treasury Department fined the 61-year-old Hudson Valley woman and three other peace activists who visited Iraq for violating economic sanctions against the country. None of them are paying up quietly, and Karpova is before a federal appeals court disputing charges that she illegally exported services to Iraq as a shield.

"They say it's an export _ Export! _ of services to Iraq, as if a human being is a commodity that can be shipped like light bulbs," Karpova said.

The human shields stationed themselves at potential airstrike targets in Iraq such as food storage warehouses and refineries. U.S. officials warned them that there was no way to guarantee their safety and critics accused them of being pawns of Saddam Hussein. But they said they hoped to prevent attacks on a population that was already suffering.

'Nuf said.

Posted by: Greg at 12:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 1 kb.

Looks like the GOP is about to get another prominent black Republican candidate for office holder. Redskins great Darrell Green is being actively courted by the party for a run for the Virginia state Senate.

Former Washington Redskins cornerback Darrell R. Green is being urged to run for the state Senate from Loudoun County next year by leading Northern Virginia Republicans who hope he can use his fame on the football field to oust newly elected Democrat Mark R. Herring.

Green, one of the most well-known Redskins from the team's recent golden era, lives in Loudoun and has been running a nonprofit foundation since he left the team three years ago.

As a rookie in 1983, he captured the nation's attention with a stunning come-from-behind tackle of Dallas Cowboys running back Tony Dorsett during a Monday Night Football game. Now, some Republicans hope he can help their party recover from a string of bruising losses to Democrats in the past several elections.

"That name is on many lips," said former senator William C. Mims (R), whose Loudoun seat Herring won after Mims left to work in the attorney general's office. "[Green] is a longtime Loudoun resident who has been active in the community. He is highly respected and has an outlook that's consistent with Republican principles."

Green is a good man, and would be a strong candidate. I don't doubt that the name ID would be sufficient to help him win.

And I bet Oliver Willis, a big-time Redskins fan, will have an aneurism if this comes to pass.

MORE AT: Welcome to the Now, Delusional Duck

Posted by: Greg at 01:39 PM | Comments (103) | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like we have another Democrat member of Congress who believes that the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply to him. And, of course, it is another Democrat, running his office like his own personal plantation.

Two former staff members of U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Michigan, say the longtime Detroit congressman made them baby-sit his children, run errands and work on political campaigns while they were on his congressional payroll.

Sydney Rooks, whom Conyers hired as a legal adviser in his Detroit office, recalls the lawmaker brought his two young sons into her office several times, saying, "Rooks, they're your responsibility for right now. I'll be back later."
She said later could be a few minutes or an hour. "Later could be frantically calling around trying to find him because it was now 8 or 9 p.m. or later in the evening and not knowing what to do with the children," she said.

Conyers has even used his staff to house sit and care for his children for weeks on end while he and his wife were out of town. And there are also reports of these government employees being set to work on his campaign and the city council campaign of his wife.

Which party is the party of privilege?

MORE AT GOPBloggers

Posted by: Greg at 11:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 1 kb.

This is interesting. Does the position require Senate confirmation?

The White House is looking at a list of cost-cutting candidates to head the Office of Management and Budget, and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, may be on it.

The former House majority leader, who announced he will resign from Congress and is under a state indictment on political money laundering charges, is listed as a possible replacement for Josh Bolten, the U.S. News and World Report said.

Bolten has been named incoming White House chief of staff.

Other candidates are familiar with the Bush administration, including Deputy OMB Director Joel Kaplan, the head of the National Economic Council, and Rob Portman, current trade czar.

Wouldn’t it be fun to watch all the apoplectic Democrats?

Posted by: Greg at 11:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

This is interesting. Does the position require Senate confirmation?

The White House is looking at a list of cost-cutting candidates to head the Office of Management and Budget, and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, may be on it.

The former House majority leader, who announced he will resign from Congress and is under a state indictment on political money laundering charges, is listed as a possible replacement for Josh Bolten, the U.S. News and World Report said.

Bolten has been named incoming White House chief of staff.

Other candidates are familiar with the Bush administration, including Deputy OMB Director Joel Kaplan, the head of the National Economic Council, and Rob Portman, current trade czar.

WouldnÂ’t it be fun to watch all the apoplectic Democrats?

Posted by: Greg at 11:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.

In the mid 1990s, I worked for a county mental health agency in a sheltered workshop/developmental education program for developmentally disabled adults. As a part of my job, I was assigned a slot on the mental health crisis team, and regularly took calls from local hospitals and law enforcement agencies to evaluate individuals for 72-hour emergency commitment to the state mental hospital is Alton. All together, I made the call to send about a dozen folks from our small rural county, based upon my assessment of whether or not these folks were a danger to themselves or others. They got no hearing, no lawyer or due process – that would be dealt with at the state hospital when and if the mental health professionals determined that a longer commitment was necessary.

That’s why this story caught my attention. It never crossed my mind that my decisions – made with no formal training in the mental health field – could have serious repercussions on the civil liberties of those who I believed needed mental health assistance.

As a Missouri corrections officer for more than 10 years, David Nelson is authorized to carry a gun on the job. But a year ago, he was denied a state permit to buy one.

The contradiction became a court dispute that reached all the way to the seven judges of the Missouri Supreme Court, who ruled unanimously Tuesday in Nelson's favor.

The issue dates to Sept. 11, 2003, when a judge in Callaway County ordered that Nelson be detained, evaluated and treated at a mental institution for 96 hours, against his will, because a Fulton police officer alleged that Nelson had talked about suicide.

In that period, the Mid-Missouri Mental Health Center determined that Nelson did not suffer from mental illness and needed neither medication nor psychiatric care. He never got a court hearing to protest the police officer's claim.

On April 27, 2005, Nelson applied for a permit to acquire a concealable weapon, which is different from a concealed-carry permit but is bound by similar rules. The Callaway County Sheriff's Department said no. Sheriff Dennis Crane, and later Prosecuting Attorney Robert Sterner, cited a state law that denies permits to felons or people having been committed to mental institutions.

Nelson sued, losing before Associate Circuit Judge Joe Holt, who had issued the detention order, and then before Circuit Judge Ellen Roper.

Nelson's attorney, Geoffrey Preckshot, took the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the ruling was unfair to his client and others in a similar situation. "Each of these persons is caught in an almost classic 'Catch 22'; never again to be trusted by society to be allowed to acquire a concealable firearm, but not crazy enough to justify a (commitment) proceeding," he said.

Writing for the unanimous court, Judge Richard B. Teitelman said Nelson had been put under "detention," which he said is different from "committed."

I think this is a good ruling. The mere fact that someone has accessed mental health services is not a basis for denying that person a fundamental right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. A higher standard must be met – and if a person cannot rebut the presumption of unfitness to exercise their rights because mental health professionals have determined that the initial assessment of non-mental health professionals was incorrect, then the very presumption is both absurd and unjust.

Posted by: Greg at 10:11 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 580 words, total size 4 kb.

Looks like Patrick Fitzgerald has had to back down on certain explosive claims he made in a recent court filing.

The federal prosecutor overseeing the indictment of Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, yesterday corrected an assertion in an earlier court filing that Libby had misrepresented the significance placed by the CIA on allegations that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Niger.

Last week, Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald wrote that, in conversation with former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Libby described the uranium story as a "key judgment" of the CIA's 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, a term of art indicating there was consensus within the intelligence community on that issue. In fact, the alleged effort to buy uranium was not among the estimate's key judgments and was listed further back in the 96-page, classified document.

In a letter to U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, Fitzgerald wrote yesterday that he wanted to "correct" the sentence that dealt with the issue in a filing he submitted last Wednesday. That sentence said Libby "was to tell Miller, among other things, that a key judgment of the NIE held that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium."

Instead, the sentence should have conveyed that Libby was to tell Miller some of the key judgments of the NIE "and that the NIE stated that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium."

Simply one more bit of evidence that Fitzgerals os out of control -- making false claims in filings to inflate the importance and significance of his work. He has exceeded his mandates as a special prosecutor, and needs to be closed down, and his charges against Scooter Libby dismissed.

By the way -- anyone else struck by the fact that the "correction" by Fitzgerald is buried by the same media sources that highlighted the original claims?

Posted by: Greg at 10:48 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.

Last spring, former Justice Department lawyer Hans von Spakovsky wrote an article – published anonymously under the name of Publius – regarding Voter ID laws for the Texas Review of Law & Politics. The article, published while von Spakosky was counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights, came as the department was considering Georgia’s Voter ID law, cited data that showed that such laws do not disenfranchise voters, despite anecdotal claims to the contrary.

Now the ACLU is up in arms over the article, demanding that von SpakoskyÂ’s views not even be considered as a new Georgia law, which was passed to meet concerns expressed by liberal groups and a federal court, is evaluated by the Justice Department.

ACLU lawyer [Neil] Bradley believes von Spakovsky's involvement in clearing the previous law could taint consideration of the current law. Bradley has asked Wan J. Kim, assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, to take steps to ensure von Spakovsky's views are not considered as part of the review of Georgia's new law.

In other words, the views of someone with expertise in election laws and who has reviewed the evidence rather than repeated the scare-stories should be excluded from consideration when laws are evaluated for discriminatory effect. Rather than attack the argument made by von Spakovsky, the ACLU lawyer attacks the man who holds them.

But more shocking is this inane quote from the ACLUÂ’s Bradley.

Neil Bradley, a lawyer for the ACLU Voting Rights Project, said the anonymous nature of von Spakovsky's writing is particularly alarming.

"Here's a man who had strong enough views that he published it, but then wanted to hide the fact he had the views," Bradley said. "Either he should have the views and stand up straight and admit them or he shouldn't be involved in the process."

Let's ignore the fact that such a statement is contrary to the official position of the ACLU on anonymous political speech -- a position taken repeatedly over the years.

It also ignores the history of political speech in America, in which pseudonymous and allonymous writings date back to before the American Revolution. That tradition includes the Federalist Papers, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay to justify the aadoption of the US Constitution. Would Bradley like to argue that these men should not have been involved in the ratification process?

Oh, and by the way -- like von Spakovsky's article, the Federalist Papers were originally published under the name "Publius".

Posted by: Greg at 12:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 429 words, total size 3 kb.

Aftr all -- we have three serious candidates plus a Democrat running for governor.

And now the Democrats are going after one of the independents.

A University of Houston student on Monday accused supporters of independent gubernatorial hopeful Carole Keeton Strayhorn of misleading his classmates about the candidate's past stance on tuition deregulation.

Isaiah Warner, president of the school's Young Democrats chapter, said three people who were gathering signatures on campus last week to get Strayhorn on the November ballot told him she had never supported legislation that gave university leaders the authority to set a portion of tuition rates.

As comptroller, Strayhorn issued a report in 2003 urging state leaders to transfer that power from the Legislature to the universities.

"Given her clear record as one of the original supporters of tuition deregulation, this is a deliberate attempt to fabricate her record and mislead Texas college students," Warner said in a prepared statement.

Strayhorn spokesman Mark Sanders said no campaign employee has ever misrepresented her position. But an unknown number of volunteers are also collecting signatures, with or without the campaign's knowledge, and one of them may have misspoke, he said.

"The point is the campaign has been at all times upfront and truthful about the comptroller's positions on a myriad of issues," he said.

Tempest in a teapot.

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

Property tax cuts and appraisal caps have been big issues in Texas. They were, in fact, a major issue in Dan PatrickÂ’s stunning SD7 victory in the 4-way race for the GOP nomination. But will they be part of Governor Rick PerryÂ’s proposal for the special session on education that begins in a week?

For the fifth time in two years, Gov. Rick Perry is asking legislators to cut school property taxes, but something is missing, so far, in his election-year effort to keep a 2002 campaign pledge.

Facing a Texas Supreme Court order and a June 1 deadline to fix the school funding system, Perry isn't proposing lower limits on how homes are appraised, or valued, for tax purposes, a key factor in escalating property taxes.

In recent years, the governor repeatedly had called for lower appraisal caps or revenue limits on local governments, arguing that without them reductions in property tax rates soon would be eroded by rising property values.

He says he still supports the caps but doesn't want legislators, when they convene April 17, to be distracted by other controversies until they address the court order, which doesn't require action on property appraisals.

Appraisal limits may be debated anyway, with the possibility that Perry eventually will add them to the session's agenda, and they may be more controversial than ever.

I’ll say it flat-out – failure to include them in the proposal, and failure to aggressively seek to have them put in place, will get this broken-glass Republican voter thinking Kinky thoughts on election day in November. Is that clear, Governor Perry?

Posted by: Greg at 09:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

I'd just like to take a moment to point out this article about Tom DeLay that I found tonight when I bounced through the Washington Post website. It talks about something that, if you ever meet the man, you will quickly learn is of incredible importance to him. And it is one of those things for which Tom DeLay is rarely recognized by his opponents, who find it necessary to paint him as a cold-hearted evil SOB.

With its white rail fence, long entry drive, and landscaped lawns surrounding large brick houses, Rio Bend looks like many of the neighborhoods springing up in the exurbs southwest of Houston. But the 13 adults and 26 children who have moved in since summer of last year are part of a novel experiment in foster care -- built with money from the fundraising operation of former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and his wife's drive to change child welfare policy.

Rio Bend, still under construction, is the only subdivision in the United States designed for each home to be filled with a foster family.

The 10 girls and 16 boys living here so far share the damaging histories of youngsters throughout Texas and the nation's overburdened foster care systems: neglect, beatings, sexual abuse, psychiatric disorders and the added trauma of moving from place to place. This nascent community is to provide a permanent place to live until they become self-reliant adults: a family-like environment with a strong Christian presence that erases the stigma of being a foster child because every kid here is one.

When he resigned from Congress last week engulfed in legal and political troubles, DeLay said that one of his main goals is to finish building Rio Bend -- and to use it as a role model to transform foster care around the country. His wife, Christine, is the hands-on board chairwoman of the nonprofit corporation, Oaks at Rio Bend Inc.

The ideas behind Rio Bend shatter the orthodoxy of both the right and the left about child welfare. The DeLays' belief in long-term foster homes departs from mainstream thinking that foster children should be reunited with a parent or adopted. Christine DeLay said she is "not big on family reunification" and that teenagers, the focus of Rio Bend, seldom get adopted.

The experiment unfolding here also breaks away from the idea of foster care as mainly a government responsibility. Although the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services remains legally responsible for the children here and pays their foster parents a stipend, the neighborhood is being built entirely with private money -- $8.9 million so far, $7.3 million of it raised through a controversial charity affiliated with DeLay. The foster parents pay a small rent, $450 a month, that is pooled to pay for extras not covered by the state.

Among the issues Tom DeLay worked on during his career in the House of Representatives were those related foster care and adoption. Now that he is leaving Congress, expect to see him do more of that -- and for him to be more public about those issues.

And ask yourself this -- how many other Washington big-wigs care about those issues and have been foster parents themselves?

Posted by: Greg at 02:26 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 559 words, total size 3 kb.

Or will the culture of corruption in that has run rampant among the Donks for generations be allowed to continue unabated?

The National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) today disclosed that it filed a 500-page Complaint on February 28 with the office of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia detailing hundreds of ethics law violations by Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV).

Rep. Mollohan is the ranking member of the House ethics committee and a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee. The Wall Street Journal this morning carried a front-page story about the case.

The lengthy complaint followed a nine-month investigation by NLPC, the ethics group that also broke the Boeing procurement scandal in 2003. NLPC alleged financial conflicts of interest by former Air Force official Darleen Druyun in negotiating the lease of refueling tanker aircraft. Ms. Druyun and Boeing CFO Michael Sears eventually served prison terms, and Boeing CEO Phil Condit resigned.

Would the Democrats have stood by for Tom DeLay serving on the Ethics Committee? We all know the answer -- so will they apply the same standard to one of their own?

What is the problem?

The Wall Street Journal leads today with a piece on Rep. Alan Mollohan (W.Va.), the Democratic ranking member on the House Ethics Committee. Mollohan, also a member of the Appropriations Committee, has earmarked millions in funds for non-profits run by his business partner and some campaign contributors.

The Journal reports that Mollohan is now under investigation, and if this release by the National Legal and Policy Center has any validity, he may have been understating his assets in his congressional disclosure forms over a nine year period. NLPC claims to have conducted a nine-month investigation into Mollohan's finances, triggered by the unusual rise in his net worth since 2000.

"When Mollohan failed to disclose an asset we would document his ownership interest with a deed, Uniform Commercial Code filing or other public record," reads a statement by NLPC Chairman Ken Boehm. "In all, we documented over 250 misrepresentations and omissions. ... The real issue here is not whether Mollohan systematically was hiding financial and real estate assets and grossly misrepresenting their value. He was. The real issue is why he was hiding those assets."

Sounds rather serious to me -- perhaps he needs to get off the Appropriations Committee, too.

Oh, and I love this little tidbit at the end of the Human Events piece.

Currently, the three congressmen who appear most likely to be indicted are Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.), William Jefferson (D-La.), and Bob Ney (R-Ohio). Add Mollohan to that list, and it could become difficult for Democrats to campaign on the "Republican Culture of Corruption" that has laced their rhetoric for months now.

I wonder -- how much attention with the MSM pay to these charges?

H/T No Agenda & GOPBloggers

Posted by: Greg at 01:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.

You have to feel bad for Patrrick Fitzgerald. If what he just filed is true, then the entire notion that there was a crime committed in the Plame case likely goes right out the window.

President Bush authorized White House official I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to disclose highly sensitive intelligence information to the news media in an attempt to discredit a CIA adviser whose views undermined the rationale for the invasion of Iraq, according to a federal prosecutor's account of Libby's testimony to a grand jury.

The court filing by Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald for the first time places Bush and Vice President Cheney at the heart of what Libby testified was an exceptional and deliberate leak of material designed to buttress the administration's claim that Iraq was trying to obtain nuclear weapons. The information was contained in the National Intelligence Estimate, one of the most closely held CIA analyses of whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the war.

Fitzgerald said Libby's disclosure took place as the result of "a strong desire by many, including multiple people in the White House, to repudiate" claims made in a July 2003 newspaper article by former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was hired by the CIA to evaluate whether Iraq sought nuclear material in Niger. Wilson wrote that "some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

The White House did not challenge the prosecutor's account of Bush's and Cheney's role in orchestrating the effort to discredit Wilson yesterday. Both Bush and Cheney have been interviewed by Fitzgerald, but the details of what they told him are unknown. Fitzgerald's new account is based on Libby's grand jury testimony that Cheney told him Bush had authorized the declassification and disclosure of some of the information.

Because after all -- as Commander in Chief, who has the ultimate authority to declassify information? President George W. Bush. And since it has long been established that he similarly authorized Vice President Dick Cheney to declassify information, any disclosures they authorized would be legal.

I guess Fitmas ain't coming for the Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers after all

Posted by: Greg at 10:45 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.

A week later, this arrogant sack of crap finally apologizes.

"There should not have been any physical contact in this incident," McKinney said in brief remarks on the House floor. "I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all and I regret its escalation and I apologize."

But only after this.

No more he-grabbed-she-slapped -- whether U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney should be charged over a confrontation with Capitol Police last week will be decided by a grand jury, perhaps as soon as next week, said federal law enforcement sources familiar with the case.

Prosecutors have decided to present the case, and the grand jury will begin hearing testimony Thursday, the two sources said.

Senior congressional sources said that two House staff members -- Troy Phillips, an aide to Rep. Sam Farr, D-California, and Lisa Subrize, executive assistant to Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Michigan -- have been subpoenaed to testify.

The Justice Department and the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, which is handling the case, refused to comment.

Which was preceded by this and this.

As U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Georgia, faces possible criminal charges for a Wednesday altercation with a Capitol Police officer, one of her lawyers said Friday that the real issues were "sex, race and Ms. McKinney's progressiveness."

In a news conference featuring actor Danny Glover and singer Harry Belafonte, McKinney said she would be exonerated and that "this whole incident was instigated by the inappropriate touching and stopping of me, a female, black congresswoman."

* * *

During the conference, held at historically black Howard University in Washington, civil rights attorney James Myart said his client was "assaulted" by a Capitol Police officer, whose name the department refuses to release.

"Because she was assaulted and placed in impending fear of her safety, she responded," he said. "This case has just begun and we're going to fight, and we're going to use the U.S. Constitution."

Myart said McKinney would seek a criminal investigation against the officer, and a civil lawsuit against both the officer and the Capitol Police is being explored.

Sorry, Cynthia – you made this about the integrity of the Capitol Hill Police. That force will be vindicated – and you will pay the price for your arrogant, criminal behavior.

IÂ’m personally hoping for a felony charge, and at least as much jail time as Martha Stewart got.

And hopefully this ethics complaint will result in harsh sanctions against McKinney.

Soon-to-retire Rep. Tom DeLay (R.-Tex.) said today he would file an ethics complaint against Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D.-Ga.) for striking a Capitol Police officer should no other House member do so first.

DeLayÂ’s comments came during a wide-ranging interview at his Capitol Hill office with reporters, including HUMAN EVENTS Editor Terry Jeffrey.

“If nobody in this House files an ethics charge, I am,” DeLay said in response to a question about McKinney. “Her behavior is outrageous. And it’s not the only time.”

DeLay was asked if he supported the Capitol PoliceÂ’s actions following the incident with McKinney, which took place last week when she bypassed a metal detector and a police officer stopped her.

“You bet,” he said.

“It’s outrageous behavior,” he said about McKinney. “Had it been Tom DeLay, the Ethics Committee would have met the next day.”

Which was exactly my point the other day. WonÂ’t it be poetic justice that DeLayÂ’s final act will be to uphold the honor and dignity of the House of Representatives.

UPDATE: Looks like McKinney isn’t too contrite – she has hired a bodyguard who intimidates reporters.

[E]ven as McKinney appeared to be trying to put the issue to rest, a bodyguard she hired – reportedly a former Georgia state trooper – was raising another furor when he threatened a television reporter trying to interview McKinney outside the Capitol just minutes before she appeared on the House floor.

When the reporter from Cox Broadcasting tried to ask McKinney about the grand jury, the bodyguard told him, "I'm going to put your ass in jail. I'm a police officer," a videotape of the incident shows.

Her Majesty The Congresswoman doesn’t have to speak to the press – but her retainers are out of line making threats they cannot carry out in an attempt to stop the exercise of Constitutional rights. Last time I checked, that was a violation of civil rights.

UPDATE 2: Gee, not only was there a threat against the reporter, but Her Majesty The Congresswoman's thug-for-hire actually laid hands on the reporter -- on camera, no less!

As she was heading into the U.S. Capitol to apologize for a run-in with a police officer, a bodyguard for Rep. Cynthia McKinney shoved a reporter for Channel 2 Action News.

Reporter Scott MacFarlane was trying to question McKinney as she entered the Capitol.

As the group moved across the Capitol grounds McKinney's bodyguard tried to block access to the congresswoman.

At one point the unidentified bodyguard and MacFarlane bumped into each other.

The bodyguard then shoved the reporter telling him, "I'm going to put your ass in jail."

When asked if he worked for the Capitol Police the bodyguard responded, "I work for Ms. McKinney." On the tape of the incident you can hear the man say that he wasn't a Capitol police officer but that, "I am a police officer." McKinney's office is now saying that the man was not a police officer, but a driver for the congresswoman.

The Capitol Police Criminal Investigative Department is investigating the incident and trying to determine who the man is.

MacFarlane says he believes that he and the bodyguard were both equal parties when they intially collided. MacFarlane says the bodyguard did give him a shove after the initial contact as they approached the Capitol steps, but that he does not begrudge him for that.

Seems to me that there could be grounds for assault charges against the bodyguard as well. Maybe he and Cynthia could share a cell.

(H/T Michelle Malkin)

UPDATE 2: At least one Congressional Black Caucus loon is defending Crazy Cindy.

"I feel there is some racial profiling in this case," said Georgia state Rep. Tyrone L. Brooks Sr. (D), who has known McKinney for 30 years and was her campaign manager from 1992 to 2002. "Believe me, I know in my travels through the government buildings, I know my white colleagues are treated differently from me."

Because, of course, white folks without credentials are routinely allowed to skip the security procedures -- right, Tyrone? Or is it just that when presented with the choice between a simple, non-racial, no-conspiratorial explanation and an explanation involving racism, poverty pimps and race 'ho's always play the race card.

Posted by: Greg at 10:37 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 1117 words, total size 8 kb.

In their never-ending search for a Tom DeLay scandal, the Houston Chronicle is reporting as news the retirement benefits that Tom DeLay will receive after he retires from Congress – benefits that he paid in for and which are subject to the same rules as other federal employees.

When he resigns in a few months, U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay immediately will be eligible for a congressional pension of nearly $67,000 a year.
The Sugar Land Republican, who will turn 59 on Saturday, would get a total of about $1.3 million in pension payouts in the next 20 years alone. DeLay also will be eligible to participate in the health plan available to all federal retirees.

His pension would be unaffected by any conviction on the campaign finance charges he faces in Travis County or any charges rising from the congressional lobbying scandal in which two of his former aides, and former ally and lobbyist Jack Abramoff, have pleaded guilty.

DeLay has not been charged with a crime in the Washington case and denies wrongdoing there and in Texas.

Notice – the same health plan as other retirees.

And let us not that there is no reason that he should lose his pension in case of conviction -- any more tha someone should lose their Social Security check because of a conviction. after all, consider the information below. Here are the nitty-gritty details.

DeLay and other members of Congress first elected in 1984 are covered automatically under the Federal Employees Retirement System, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Congressional pensions, like those of other federal employees, are financed through a combination of employee and government contributions.

Members of Congress are eligible for a pension at age 62 if they have completed at least five years of service. Members are eligible for a pension at age 50 if they have completed 20 years of service, or at any age after completing 25 years of service.

The amount of the pension depends on years of service and the average of the highest three years of salary.

Members of Congress get $165,200 per year. As majority leader last year, DeLay was paid at annual rate of $180,100.

In other words, no special treatment for Tom DeLay. The rules are the same for everyone. And since he paid into the system (which functions like Social Security), he is entitled to a payout upon retirement -- regardless of any (hypothetical) conviction.

But since this is Tom DeLay, it sure is easy to make it SOUND scandalous.

Posted by: Greg at 10:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 440 words, total size 3 kb.

Democrats in Maryland -- and nationally -- are running scared over the possibility that Michael Steele might draw significant support from the black community in Maryland.

An internal document prepared by a top Democratic strategist warns that a majority of African American voters in Maryland are open to supporting Republican Senate candidate Michael S. Steele and advises the party not to wait to "knock Steele down."

The 37-page report says a sizable segment of likely black voters -- as much as 44 percent -- would readily abandon their historic Democratic allegiances "after hearing Steele's messaging."

"Governor Ehrlich and [Lt. Gov.] Michael Steele have a clear ability to break through the Democratic stronghold among African American voters in Maryland," says the March 27 report by Cornell Belcher, polling consultant for the Democratic National Committee, which bases its findings on a survey of 489 black voters in Maryland conducted last month.

The report, given to The Washington Post this week, drills into a topic that has emerged as a key focus of this year's U.S. Senate contest in Maryland: race.

Why is that? Simple -- the message of the GOP is one that resonates with the values of many African-Americans in this country. After all, the black community shares many of the bedrock values of the more conservaitve element of the white population of this country -- and the younger generation of African-Americans is beginning to adopt a "what have you done for me lately" attitude that weakens historuical ties to the Democrats and opens the door to the message of the GOP. The presence of black faces on the GOP ticket -- embraced with enthusiasm by the mainstream of the party -- creates an opportunity for the GOP message to be heard.

Some question this poll's results.

If the findings of the poll are correct, they paint a somewhat different vision of the black electorate from what has been commonly understood to this point, said David Bositis, a senior research associate at the D.C.-based Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Bositis said nothing in his research suggests that an African American Republican will be able to grab a significant segment of the black vote.

The DNC survey finds that 22 percent of black voters support Steele when matched against a "generic" Democrat.

"There's just no way it's that high," Bositis said, noting that Steele's performance among black voters in the 2002 election did not approach that number. "If he was that much of a draw then it's doubtful he would only have received 13 percent of the black vote."

Yes, that is true -- but in 2002 he did not have four years in office as a popular statewide officeholder. There was no track record of openness to African-Americans on the part of a GOP administrationin Annapolis. The situation is very different than it was four years ago.

The recommendation in this Democrat report? Attack Steele early, often, and intensely.

Steele focused on two aspects of the document: the finding that a high percentage of black voters have connected with his message and the recommendation that the Democrats attack him early.

"Voters need to know they're trying to make me into something I'm not," Steele said.

He deflected questions about a potential vulnerability exposed in the report. A message that resonated with black voters identified Steele as "George W. Bush's hand-picked candidate," the survey found. It's a message Democrats have tried to exploit. Even as Walker discussed the findings, he pointed to a photograph hanging in his office -- it shows Steele and Bush arm in arm.

But I have to wonder if that very message does not have the potential to backfire -- by highlighting that the GOP message of inclusiveness. After all, if a black man like Steele has risen to the top on his merits in the GOP without the appeal to the same tired rhetoric of race-baiting that so many black politicians have used (paging Cynthia McKinney!), then the presidential connection could help.

LINK TO: GOPBloggers

Posted by: Greg at 10:29 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 676 words, total size 4 kb.

First he called for censure -- now he is backing homosexual marriage.

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), a prospective 2008 presidential candidate, said yesterday that he thinks bans on same-sex marriages have no place in the nation's laws.

Feingold said in an interview that he was motivated to state his position on one of the most divisive social issues in the country after being asked at a town hall meeting Sunday about a pending amendment to the Wisconsin state constitution to ban same-sex marriages.

Feingold called the amendment "a mean-spirited attempt" to single out gay men and lesbians for discrimination and said he would vote against it. But he went further, announcing that he favors legalizing same-sex marriages.

That puts him at odds with many prominent Democratic politicians who support gay rights but not same-sex marriage. Should Feingold decide to run for the party's presidential nomination in 2008, his position would put him to the left of many likely rivals.

"Obviously, it's a very difficult issue and evokes a lot of emotions," Feingold said in a telephone interview yesterday. "I think it's something ultimately that people throughout the country will accept, but it's not an easy issue." He accused the Bush White House and the Republican Party of using same-sex marriage as a wedge issue "to hurt Democrats who are against discrimination."

Gee, Russ, every time the people have been permitted to speak on the issue, they have opposed homosexual marriage. The level of opposition has been somewhere on the order of 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 Your position may get you the votes of the out-of-touch Left in the Democrat party, effectively getting you the nomination. But your position will not play well in Peoria -- or most of the rest of the country.

Posted by: Greg at 10:40 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

BREAKING!

If the currently breaking report form Chris Matthews is correct, my congressman, former house Majority leader Tom Delay, is withdrawing from the race for CD22 based upon falling poll numbers and recent guilty pleas by former staffers. It is unknown at this time wheter this means he will be facing additional (federal?) charges, or whetehr is is simply a case of the man taking the honorable way out following his betrayal by subordinates.

BREAKING!

UPDATE 1: CNN is confirming the Chris Matthews report.

What does this mean? First, obviously, it means that Tom Delay will be out at the end of this term in January. It also means that we will have to find a replacement candidate for CD22. I'm not sure what the process is -- but I have every reason to believe that I am a part of it as a precinct chair in the district. I'll post more as I know more.

I will say this much -- the DeLay campaign has not issued any statement as of this time, not even to those of us who have formally and publicly endorsed him.

UPDATE 2:

This from a local source in Fort Bend Ccunty.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC and CNN both have reported that U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay will announce Tuesday that he has decided not to seek re-election and is quitting the race.

DeLay campaign staffers could not immediately be reached for comment Tuesday night.

“He basically looked at the polling,” Matthews said of a conversation he had with DeLay. “He said the (negative) trend continued. He said he expected to take a beating all summer” on news about developments in the Jack Abramoff scandal and the Texas indictments DeLay faces.

Matthews said DeLay told him he felt he had a 50-50 chance of winning re-election, “but he said another Republican could walk into that district.” – More as it develops –

This from RedState

Just breaking on MSNBC's "Scarborough Country".

Tom DeLay just phoned Chris Matthews to give him the scoop that DeLay will be announcing tomorrow that he's dropping out of his Texas congressional race and will be leaving Congress.

Apparently, Rep. DeLay felt that he couldn't overcome the downward trends in the polls, his numbers weren't improving and likely wouldn't improve with the various scandals surrounding him, and he felt his chance of winning was no better than 50/50.

DeLay also felt another Republican candidate would walk into the job, and so he fell on his sword.

I'd agree with the assessment of the posibilities of another Republican -- but which one. Certainly not Steve Stockman, who has been circulating petitions for an independent run and has already lost to Nick Lampson in the past. I'll put out my feelers shortly and try to find something out.

UPDATE 3: Holy Crap -- this is definitely real

Time Magazine has an interview with DeLay.

Rep. Tom DeLay, whose iron hold on the House Republicans melted as a lobbying corruption scandal engulfed the Capitol, told TIME that he will not seek reelection and will leave Congress within months. Taking defiant swipes at "the left" and the press, he said he feels "liberated" and vowed to pursue an aggressive speaking and organizing campaign aimed at promoting foster care, Republican candidates and a closer connection between religion and government.

"I'm going to announce tomorrow that I'm not running for reelection and that I'm going to leave Congress," DeLay, who turns 59 on Saturday, said during a 90-minute interview on Monday. "I'm very much at peace with it." He notified President Bush in the afternoon. DeLay and his wife, Christine, said they had been prepared to fight, but that he decided last Wednesday, after months of prayer and contemplation, to spare his suburban Houston district the mudfest to come. "This had become a referendum on me," he said. "So it's better for me to step aside and let it be a referendum on ideas, Republican values and what's important for this district."

And there is more.

"I'm a realist. I've been around awhile. I can evaluate political situations," DeLay told TIME at his kitchen table in Sugar Land, a former sugar plantation in suburban Houston. Bluebonnets are blooming along the highways. "I feel that I could have won the race. I just felt like I didn't want to risk the seat and that I can do more on the outside of the House than I can on the inside right now. I want to continue to fight for the conservative cause. I want to continue to work for a Republican majority."

Asked if he had done anything illegal or immoral in public office, DeLay replied curtly, "No." Asked if he'd done anything immoral, he said with a laugh, "We're all sinners." Asked what he would do differently, he said, "Nothing." He denied having failed to adequately supervise members of his staff, even though two of his former aides have pleaded guilty to committing crimes while on his staff. "Two people violated my trust over 21 years," he said. "I guarantee you if other offices were under the scrutiny I've been under in the last 10 years, with the Democrat Party announcing that they're going to destroy me, destroy my reputation, and that's how they're going to get rid of me, I guarantee you you're going to find, out of hundreds of people, somebody that's probably done something wrong."

DeLay brushed off the torrent of investigative news articles questioning the funding behind the golf, private planes and resort hotels that marked his travel at home and abroad. He even accepted a plane from R.J. Reynolds Tobacco to go to his arraignment. "There's nothing wrong with it," he said. "They had a plane available. My schedule was such that I couldn't do it commercially — that I had to get up there and then get back and do my job. And that's the only plane that was available at the time."

"You can't prove to me one thing that I have done for my own personal gain," he added. "Yes, I play golf. I'm very proud of the fact that I play golf. It's the only thing that I do for myself. And when you go to a country and you're there for seven days and you take an afternoon off to play golf, what does the national media write? All about the golf, not about the meeting that went to. I'm not ashamed of anything I've done. I've never done anything in my political career for my own personal gain. You can look at my bank account and my house to understand that."

I tend to agree with that assessment of the accusations against Tom DeLay, and still expect him to be cleared.

And the interesting thing is that Tom DeLay might not be sticking out the rest of the term.

Putting the best face on the poll taken by his campaign, DeLay said it gave him "a little bit better than a 50/50 chance of winning reelection." Asked if that didn't mean that he could lose, he replied, "Could have. There's no reason to risk a seat. This is a very strong Republican district. It's obvious to me that anybody but me running here will overwhelmingly win the seat."

DeLay said he is likely to leave by the end of May, depending on the Congressional schedule and finishing his work on a couple of issues. He said he will change his legal residence to his condominium in Alexandria, Va., from his modest two-story home on a golf course here in the 22nd District of Texas. "I become ineligible to run for election if I'm not a resident of the state of Texas," he said, turning election law to his purposes for perhaps on last time. State Republican officials will then be able to name another Republican candidate to face Democrat Nick Lampson, a former House members who lost his seat in a redistricting engineered by DeLay.

This also leaves me wondering if I do have a role in selecting the replacement candidate, since the discussion is about state party leaders selecting the candidate. I can tell you that folks will not be happy about having overwhelmingly renominated him and then having a substitute who was not picked locally.

UPDATE 4:: Drudge picks up on tthe Time interview, and understands, as I do, that DeLay is going to leave office sooner rather than later.

In Exclusive First Interview with TIME's Mike Allen, Delay Says He Feels 'Liberated' And Vowed to Pursue Aggressive Speaking and Organizing Campaign Aimed at Promoting Foster Care, Republican Candidates and Closer Connection Between Religion and Government

New York - Rep. Tom DeLay, whose iron hold on the House Republicans melted as a lobbying corruption scandal engulfed the Capitol, told TIME on Monday that he will not seek reelection and will leave Congress within months. Taking defiant swipes at “the left” and the press, he said he feels “liberated” and vowed to pursue an aggressive speaking and organizing campaign aimed at promoting foster care, Republican candidates and a closer connection between religion and government.

(Via GOPBloggers and Blogs for Bush)

UPDATE 5: Michelle Malkin offers a bit of a round-up of information on the impending resignation.

She references Bruce Armstrong regarding the withdrawal/resignation issue -- but what i find interesting is his recap of the scandal news.

In recent months, two of DeLay's former staff members have pled guilty to charges related to former DC lobbyist and power broker Jack Abramoff. A story in today's San Jose Mercury News details the plea deal involving Tom Rudy, DeLay's former deputy chief of staff, who pled guilty last Friday to a conspiracy charge. The Mercury News story reports that Rudy has implicated his direct boss, former chief of staff Ed Buckham.

Last November, former DeLay press secretary Michael Scanlon, who went on to partner with Abramoff in the lobbying business, pled guilty to bribery charges. Neither Scanlon nor Rudy are believed to have directly implicated DeLay in criminal activity.

This seems to me to indicate that this is a political move, not a pre-indictment/guilty plea move. That certainly makes sense, given some of the Time magazine interview in which he talks about future plans.

Michelle also references this article in the Galveston Daily News. Again, I find this more interesting because of the information on the process for selecting DeLay's replacement than I am by the comments on his leaving the race and the House, which are essentially the same as the Time magazine article.

DeLay said he planned to move to a house he has in Virginia near Washington, D.C. By doing so, he would no longer be eligible to run for Congress in Texas.

With the primary already past, party leaders will have to select a candidate to run against Lampson, Libertarian Bob Smither and perhaps former Republican congressman Steve Stockman running as an independent.

DeLay said that decision would be up to the Texas GOPÂ’s executive committee.

“I should not play the role to play kingmaker,” said DeLay, who first was elected to public office as a Texas House member in 1978.

Whoever is tapped will get his support, DeLay said, and that candidate will win because LampsonÂ’s No. 1 issue will be gone.

“I imagine that this is the worst news he could get,” said DeLay. “He is going to have to tell people what he is for.”

DeLayÂ’s exit also robs Democrats of a handy target for national attacks on the Republican Party and may take the national spin off the race.

“I would assume, being the realist I am that Mr. Lampson is going to have a hard time keeping this a national race,” DeLay said.

Yeah, I suppose this is true, but a big part of the equation is going to be who the candidate who replaces him turns out to be. The DeLay loyalsists -- the many folks who have had signs out in the since before the primary race -- will back whoever the choice is. But will we be able to draw back the 1/3 of GOP primary voters who were disenchanted enough with Tom DeLay to vote for one of his opponents -- either the pair of non-entities or Tom Campbell (the relative unknown). Will Tom Campbell's showing be enough to get him the nod as a replacement candidate? Or will we have some other candidate arise. For example, what about Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, whose former legislative district sits right in the heart of CD22 (he was a resident of my old precinct, before I moved to my new one)? Would he consider re-establishing residence in CD22 to make a run against lampson, or would he prefer to stay with the "sure thing" reelection to his current post? I havew no doubt that he could get the support of the state-level folks in the GOP. Those are the first two names to jump into my head at this moment -- I'm sure there are several legislators, county officials, and even local folks giving a run some thought. Heck, I even took a moment to fantasize!

UPDATE 6: The Washington Post checks in -- and includes this assessment.

DeLay became arguably the most effective whip in modern House history. He corralled Republicans into a lock-step discipline that blocked much of former President Bill Clinton's agenda in the 1990s, engineered the impeachment of Clinton -- the first time a sitting president had been impeached in over 100 years -- and later turned the House into President Bush's firewall against Senate Republican dissent.

Beyond those legislative accomplishments, DeLay worked to turn Washington's lobbying and business community into a bulwark of Republican support, dispensing legislative favors to those who played along. He was admonished by the House Ethics Committee in 1999 for retaliating against a trade association that hired a Democrat.

The question is, of course, whether these accomplishments will outlive the congressional career of Tom Delay.

Powerline offers this assessment.

It's too bad, I think. DeLay was an effective leader, albeit too liberal in recent years. It's possible, of course, that he did something wrong along the way. But there is no evidence of that in the public domain; as I've often said, the politically-inspired prosection of DeLay by Travis County's discredited DA, Ronnie Earle, is a bad joke. As far as we can tell at the moment, DeLay appears to be yet another victim of the Democrats' politics of personal destruction--the only politics they know.

Too liberal? That may be the only time you see such an assessment.

UPDATE 7: At last, the blogger I have been waiting for -- Chris Elam of Texas Safety Forum. He has the obligatory "DeLay Quits" piece, but more importantly has a longer piece on the replacement process and current handicapping.

SREC Can Pick a Replacement Candidate

Are what my early reports say... Conflicting reports say that County Chairs could be doing it.

Who could that replacement candidate be?

Feel free to add to this list...

State Sen. Kyle Janek
Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace
Second-Place finisher Tom Campbell

Remember, Congressmen DO NOT have to live in their district. Its entirely possible that we could see a Metro Houston area replacement candidate.

PLUS.... plus... its very important to remember... we do not yet know if Tom is stepping down RIGHT NOW, or going to serve out the rest of his term. FNC is reporting that he will step down in Late Spring.

Can you say special election?

And if that turns out to be the case, what would happen in the search for a replacement candidate for the November ballot?

We'll know definite names soon, I promise.

UPDATE: I'm hearing that the special election is almost certainly what we are facing. Kronberg reports the following...

Here is what we hear from independent Texas sources. Tom Delay will resign, probably by the end of the week in order to allow the Governor to call a special election. The presumptive favorite is David Wallace, Mayor of Sugarland.

That's Sugar Land, Harvey. Two words.

Given the connections Chris and his dad have as part of their campaign work in Fort Bend County, I suspect that he has great sources. However, I really hope he is wrong on the David Wallace tip -- I think that would alienate those of us on the east side of the district -- folks who used to be part of Lampson's old district. It would be beneficial to get someone with a connection to this side of the district to shore up GOP support in what could, potentially be Lampson territory.

UPDATE 8: Fort Bend County GOP Chair Eric Thode makes the following comment over at Chris Elam's website, outlining the process that will follow.

There are two processes in play. One is withdrawal from the ballot. Two is resignation from the seat.

According to DeLay's staff, the official withdrawal will occur once residency has been established in another state, which will allow the CD 22 District Committee to replace DeLay on the ballot. Based on my conversation with Secretary of State staff, the Committee will be comprised of the County Chairs from Harris, Fort Bend, Galveston and Brazoria; plus one Precinct Chair from CD 22 in each of those counties. This individual would be selected by their peers from CD 22 in the respective counties.

Part two is the resignation, which according to DeLay staff will not occur until June or July. At that point, the Governor can choose to hold a special election on one of Texas' predetermined election dates, or decide not to hold a Special Election. Essentially, there could be two simultaneous elections...the November General Election for the 2007-2008 term of Congress and a Special Election for the final few months of DeLay's current term.

Needless to say, it's all up to Congressman DeLay when these two processes actually start and this could all change tomorrow.

FYI: In order for a May Special Election to occur, DeLay must resign before April 7, which at this point, he says he does not plan to do.

As for the candidates you mention, there are two good choices....Janek and Wallace. Although Campbell is a nice guy, he has no chance at all.

Hmmmmm.... Interesiting.

And I have to agree with the assessment of Tom Campbell's chances -- and obviously he had not seen my comment on jerry Patterson, given that our time stamps are only 3 minutes apart and his comment was a very long one.

UPDATE 9: More from Chris Elam.

First, he notes that Tom Campbell and Dave Wallace have both declared their candidacies. Will either of them (Wallace, more likely than Campbell) scare off other challengers?

Second, he takes Eric Thode's comment and gives it a separate posting of its own on TSF.

UPDATE 10: Delay Vs. World has several posts

UPDATE 11: Elam reports two additional names in the hopper to replace DeLay -- State Representative Charlie Howard and Fort Bend County Commissioner Andy Meyers -- though it is unlikely both would enter, due to similar support bases.

UPDATE 12: The Houston Chronicle is reporting a number of names that had not yet surfaced.

Familiar and lesser-known political names emerged tonight as possible contenders for the congressional seat being vacated by Republican U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay.

Those who acknowledged interest in the seat or were mentioned as contenders included Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, state Rep. Robert Talton, Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace, Houston City Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs and former State District Judge John Devine.

Harris County Republican Party Chairman Jared Woodfill said he started receiving calls from interested officials within minutes of hearing the news of DeLay's decision.

"Numerous people have called me inquiring about the seat," he said.

Other phones also were ringing as politicians gauged potential support or heard from backers.

Eckels would have to move to the district, Sekula-Gibbs is part of the scandal-tainted Houston City Council, and Devine lost his last race for office (he left the bench to run for state rep). On the plus side, Sekula-Gibbs is from the part of the district that is "Lampson Territory" by virtue of having been a part of Nick's old district. What is interesting is that these are the first Harris County candidates I've heard mentioned.

Update 13: I was about to go to bed when I came across this bit of information -- it explains why DeLay is going to move out of state rather than simply withdraw.

With news that Tom DeLay is withdrawing from his House reelection contest, the question is what happens now in his race. It appears that the following is the applicable Texas law (putting aside any caselaw that might affect interpretation of these chapters):

Under Texas Election code section 1.005(7), DeLay was running in a 'General election for state and county officers' [, which] means the general election at which officers of the federal, state, and county governments are elected." Section 145.031 et. seq. set forth the rules for "a candidate who is a political party's nominee in the general election for state and county officers except a candidate for president or vice-president of the United States." DeLay is the party's nominee in a general election for state and county officers and he's not a candidate for president or vice president, so these rules apply.

Under 145.032, DeLay can withdraw because it is more than 74 days before election day. If he withdraws, under section 145.035, his name is omitted from the ballot. Under section 145.036, the political party's executive committee can only fill a vacancy under limited circumstances (such as catastrophic illness), none of which seem to apply to DeLay. So this route does not look like it would work for DeLay.

Instead, reports suggest he will move from Texas, thereby becoming ineligible to serve. (See section 145.003 on declaration of ineligibility.) If he is "ineligible" rather than "withdraws," section 145.036 gives the party the right to name a candidate to fill the vacancy.

There are also rumors that the governor could call a special election. Under 204.021, "An unexpired term in the office of United States representative may be filled only by a special election in the same manner as provided by Chapter 203 for the legislature, except that Section 203.013 does not apply." (203.013 sets forth a timetable for the election.) Chapter 203 sets forth the requirement of a special election, the requirement of a majority vote (meaning a runoff will be necessary if no candidate gets a majority of the vote), etc. But this would only apply to the unexpired term. There's this provision that appears to allow a replacement to run for the full term, but only if the vacancy occurs after the general election. So even if the governor calls a special election that chooses someone to serve out the rest of DeLay's current term, that does not appear to affect the nomination rules for the upcoming general election.

Well, that clarifies a lot of what is going on. It also makes timing quite relevant.

UPDATE 14: As one of the let-down DeLay supporters, I rather like the response to the news over at JackLewis.net.

In other words he's letting the political gangsters on the left win, thereby empowering them. When more thugs like Ronnie Earle make false charges against other Republicans, we can thank DeLay for sending the message that such tactics can work.

Whatever happened to refusing to capitulate to terrorists?

Indeed -- does this further embolden the Democrats, who have no platform other than the destruction of the President and other Republicans?

OTHER BLOGGERSON THE RIGHT (I won't link the left-wing bilge on this one) checking in are Wizbang, Ed Driscoll, bRight & Early, Tech in Black (a DeLay relative?), Political Pit Bull, Captain's Quarters, The Markum Report, Pardon My English, Riehl World View, BlogHOUSTON, LoneStar Times, Rossputin, Unpartisan, Lakeshore Laments, Outside the Beltway, Texas Rainmaker, Gateway Pundit, Rolling Barrage, Big Lizards

Posted by: Greg at 02:22 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 4007 words, total size 28 kb.

Of course, it was his racism I was criticizing, so John Aravosis (or one of his buddies) kicked me off the site.

It all had to do with this little piece of trash that he posted approvingly.

I posted the following reaction to the racist piece of filth.

Great racist cartoon, John. Has virtually every negative black stereotype promoted by the Democrats for decades. I'm sure that Senator Byrd has already called you to express his enthusiastic approval. Did he make you a Kleagle Skout?

I'm curious -- what would you say if a Republican posted such a cartoon of a black leftist on a website? Let me guess -- you would be declaring it proof positive of the racist roots of the Republican party (which freed the slaves and brought them civil rights by amending the Constitution over Democrat objections).

I then ran out to get my wife some medication that one of the specialists from the hospital called in to Walgreens. Since I didn't find the response there, so figured I must have hit preview instead. I reposted the comment, , hit reload about a minute later to see that it had posted correctly, and found a message that I was banned.

I guess the truth -- about both the DemoKlan Senator from West Virginia (enthusiastically supported by Aravosis) and the white silk-sheet wearing Aravosis himself hit just a little too close to home.

I wear that ban as a source of great pride -- opposition to racism is at the heart of my principles. I guess they aren't for Mr. Aravosis.

Posted by: Greg at 02:49 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.

Former North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms has been diagnosed with vascular dementia -- a condition that is in many wys similar to Alzheimers disease.

Former U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms, in increasingly poor health before and since he left office three years ago, has vascular dementia and has moved into a convalescent center near his home, his wife said.

"He has his good days and his bad days," Dot Helms, told The News & Observer for a story Sunday. "He still sees friends. Company is good for him. He is still signing books. But he is not able to conduct any business or make any speeches."

The 84-year-old Republican has been slowed by illnesses including a bone disorder, prostate cancer and heart problems. As his career neared its end, he made his way through the Capitol on a motorized scooter. He decided against seeking a sixth term and left Congress in January 2003.

Vascular dementia is considered one of the most common types of dementia in aging people, with symptoms that may appear similar to those caused by Alzheimer's disease, according to the Memory and Aging Center at the University of California-San Francisco.

Helms' last major public appearance was in September, when he was honored by a group of conservatives in Washington.

Helms' wife of 63 years said that she and friends visit him daily, and that he hopes to resume going to church.

"His manners are always intact," Dot Helms said. "He is very gracious when people come to see him. He is his same self in a lot of ways. He just doesn't always remember."

So what we have here is a major personal tragedy, and a family taking the tragedy and using it to bring the disease into wider attention -- quite similar to the Reagan family's decision with the Ronald Reagan's long struggle with Alzheimers. This decision by the Helms family is a courageous one by a decent man and his family.

Which is, of course, why you get responses loke this from left-wing low-lifes.

it's just too easy

so I'm not even going to say anything other than to include this link:

Jesse Helms has dementia.

and

Hands up, those of you who feel ANY surprise whatsoever. Anyone?...

and

Jesse Helms has dementia

I have no idea why this is being presented as news, anyone with North Carolina connections has known this for years.

Then there is this.

Former Republican Sen. Jesse Helms has dementia. He left Congress in January of 2003. If he had not been a conservative Republican he might have got it treated sooner. It is hard to tell if someone just has dementia or if they are a right wing Republican.

I'm sure we will get similar classy responses from the KOSsacks and the DUmmies in a very short time, along with the rest of the left-wing hate squad.

UPDATE: The DUmmies have made a start.

Posted by: Greg at 02:30 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 498 words, total size 3 kb.

I mean, isn't a "Yes" vote an act of giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States? Fortunately, we have some real Americans in Wisconsin who are trying to support the troops and the President rather than undercut them on behalf of the terrorists.

Supporters of the war in Iraq drove laps around the state Capitol Saturday afternoon, honking horns and revving engines as they urged voters to turn down a referendum asking whether President Bush should pull U.S. troops out immediately.

A caravan of vehicles, escorted by about a half-dozen leather-clad members of the U.S. Military Vets Motorcycle Club, circled the Capitol for about half an hour.

The vehicles were decked out with American flags and signs that read "Vote No To Cut and Run." Across the rear window of one car someone had written "Choose Victory." About 20 supporters cheered from the sidewalks.

"I consider it a betrayal," said Jake Kraschnewski, a 22-year-old University of Wisconsin-Madison student from Burlington who spent a year in Iraq as a Marine reservist. He stood on the sidewalk holding a "Vote No To Cut and Run" sign.

Voters in Madison and 30 other Wisconsin cities, villages and towns will go to the polls Tuesday to decide referendums that ask whether Bush should bring American troops home now. Peace activists pushed to have the questions placed on the ballots, even though the referendums have no bearing on federal policy.

This really pisses me off.

UPDATE: Blogs for Bush has an interesting piece on the issue of treason on their site today. It is the third of a series of posts on dissent and treason. I cannot say that I agree with all of Mark's conclusions, but I do find them rather interesting.

UPDATE 2 -- 4/5/06: Treason accomplished.

Posted by: Greg at 03:04 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney is an arrogant nutjob. That seems to be a plus for her Georgia constituents, who seem to find those qualities to be a plus. As a member of Congress -- more to the point, a female African-American Democrat member of Congress -- she manages to get away with a certain amount of misconduct that most of us would never be permitted.

But this woman went well over the line yesterday.

Why she was allowed to walk away is beyond me -- and why there have been no sharges filed and no arrest made is absolutely beyond me.

Rep. Cynthia McKinney and a police officer scuffled Wednesday after the Georgia Democrat entered a House office building unrecognized and refused to stop when asked, according to U.S. Capitol Police.

McKinney, a sixth-term congresswoman who represents suburban Atlanta, struck the officer according to one account, a police official said, adding there were conflicting accounts. The officer, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the incident, spoke only on condition of anonymity.

No charges were filed, police said.

McKinney issued a statement Wednesday night saying she regretted the confrontation.

"I know that Capitol Hill Police are securing our safety, and I appreciate the work that they do. I have demonstrated my support for them in the past and I continue to support them now," she said.

Oh bullshit, bitch! If you really supported the Capitol Hill Police, you would have complied with a reasonable request that could have been made of any American citizen -- and of any member of Congress. You would not have "scuffled" with the cop, which is a violation of criminal law right there -- a law you and your colleagues passed. And you certainly would not have hit the officer, which would have earned most Americans a ride in a squad car and a huge legal bill, along with jail time.

And you certainly would not have forgotten that one of these guys died to protect you and your colleagues a few years ago, so that is why the security has been ramped-up for several years.

Members of Congress do not have to walk through metal detectors as they enter buildings on the Capitol complex. They wear lapel pins identifying them as members.

McKinney routinely doesn't wear her pin and is recognized by many officers, the police official said, adding that she wasn't wearing it when she entered a House office building early Wednesday.

By one police account, she walked around a metal detector and an officer asked her several times to stop. When she did not, the officer tried to stop her, and she then struck the officer, according to that account.

So she doesn't wear her identification, and tries to go around the security. One would damn well hope she would be stopped!

In her statement, McKinney said most members of Congress expect Capitol police to recognize them. "I was urgently trying to get to an important meeting on time to fulfill my obligations to my constituents. Unfortunately, the police officer did not recognize me as a member of Congress and a confrontation ensued," she said. "I did not have on my congressional pin but showed the police officer my congressional ID."

Yeah -- and if they do not recognize you, they are going to stop you and they are going to demand identification. Who are you to object, you arrogant moron? And more to the point, who are you to lay hands on an officer?

Not that this is the first time that Her Majesty The Congresswoman has objected that she is not immediately recognized by everyone, and that they have not genuflected in the presence of her sublime personage.

Not being recognized is apparently something of an issue for Rep. Cynthia McKinney , as a Capitol Police officer discovered yesterday.

In 1998, the outspoken Georgia Democrat wrote a scathing letter to President Bill Clinton accusing White House guards of racism after they failed to recognize her when she arrived for an event. For years, the Hill newspaper reported in 2002, Capitol Police kept a photo of her posted in a basement office to warn security officers against committing any other such embarrassment.

Maybe it's time to change the photo. The police department is investigating a bizarre scuffle yesterday morning between McKinney and an officer who tried to stop her at a congressional office building checkpoint after apparently failing to realize she was a member of Congress.

McKinney allegedly "stabbed" the officer with her cellphone when he grabbed her, said a police source who requested anonymity because the investigation had just begun; the officer, whom the source did not identify, is considering whether to file criminal charges. The source said the officer was not seriously injured.

* * *

How on earth did this all come to pass? Could it be the officer didn't recognize her after her recent makeover? The 51-year-old recently ditched her trademark braids for a softer, full-bodied do that started turning heads around her suburban Georgia district in January.

So apparently she doesn't even look much like her photos since she had the makeover.

This woman needs to be treated like every other American. Capitol Hill Police need to appear in her office. They need to cuff her. They need to get her out to a police car and stuff her. And in the process, they need to rough her up, just as would happen to anyone else who assaults a cop.

And then her colleagues need to expel her from the House of Representatives for conduct unbecoming a member.

Though I doubt that such a course of action would keep her constituents from reelecting her in a district designed to keep her coming back.

And for any liberal who objects to my words -- what would be your response if this were my congressman, Tom DeLay? My response would not change -- but I also believe that he would not do anything like this.

MORE AT GOPBloggers, Captain's Quarters, Radio Equalizer, Delusional Duck, Chainik Hocker, Slobokan, College Conservative Movement, Lunch Counter, Michelle Malkin, Right Winged, Uncooperative Blogger, Suitably Flip, Wizbang, Iowa Voice, Rolling Barrage Mind in the Qatar, Decision '08

Posted by: Greg at 11:58 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 1053 words, total size 8 kb.

Left-wing loon Jim McDermott is know for going to foreign countries to make treasonous statements in support of our nation's enemies. Democrats, of course, call this "dissent" and label it "the highest form of patriotism".

Fine. I won't get into that political question with them.

But will they at least act against their law-breaking colleague after he has been slapped down twice by courts for breaking federal law on wiretapping?

federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Rep. Jim McDermott violated federal law by turning over an illegally taped telephone call to reporters nearly a decade ago.

In a 2-1 opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a lower court ruling that McDermott violated the rights of Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, who was heard on the 1996 call involving then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

The court ordered McDermott to pay Boehner more than $700,000 for leaking the taped conversation. The figure includes $60,000 in damages and at least $600,000 in legal costs.

McDermott, D-Wash., has acknowledged leaking a tape of a 1996 cell phone call involving Gingrich to The New York Times and other news organizations.

The call included discussion by Gingrich and other House GOP leaders about a House ethics committee investigation of Gingrich. Boehner was a Gingrich lieutenant at the time and is now House majority leader.

* * *

McDermott was never charged with a criminal offense, but Boehner later filed a lawsuit accusing McDermott of violating state and federal wiretapping laws. A federal judge ruled in Boehner's favor in 2004, a ruling that was upheld Tuesday by the appeals court.

"Because there was no genuine dispute that Representative McDermott knew the Martins had illegally intercepted the conversation, he did not lawfully obtain the tape from them," Judge A. Raymond Randolph wrote in an opinion shared by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg.

In other words, the Clinton "Justice" Department (a misnomer if there ever was one) refused to prosecute a clear violation of the law against one of their important partisan allies. It took one of the victims filing a civil suit against McDermott to get any justice -- and this unethical little weasel still does not admit his own wrong-doing.

I'll just ask one question -- would Democrats be so passive on this matter if the law-breaker in this case had been Tom Delay, and the illegal recording had been of Democrats? I think we all know the answer.

Oh, and what does this say about Democrat opposition to undeniably illegal domestic spying?

MORE AT: Lifelike Pundits, Danger Management, Darth Dilbert, Freedom Eden, Liberally Conservative, GOPBloggers, Slobokan, Gay Patriot, Iowa Voice, Michelle Malkin, RedState

Posted by: Greg at 02:32 PM | Comments (23) | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 4 kb.

If you think that the theft of private property for private development under the guise of eminent domain was outrageous, wait until you see this one. A city in New York is looking to steal an exclusive private golf club with members from around the country – to turn it into an exclusive, publicly-owned private golf club for city residents only.

he mayor of North Hills wants to use the power of government to condemn Deepdale--whose members are a diverse group of people from all over the country and around the world--to make it an exclusive high-end golf course restricted to people who live in his small village and would be willing to pay thousands of dollars in yearly membership fees. The model is said to be the nearby Village Club of Sands Point, which is owned by that village. There you not only have to pay village taxes but membership dues to join. A full family membership at the Sands Point club costs $18,000 a year. If this is indeed the model for Deepdale, the club would become "public" in name only but in truth would be every bit as exclusive as any private club.

The mayor even went on television twice recently to brag about his plan. He told WNBC reporter Greg Cergol that turning Deepdale into "a village golf course exclusively for the village residents" would be a nice "amenity" for them. According to the reporter, the mayor explained that "his goal" is "to turn Deepdale into a private club for his village's 5,000 residents." And he told Channel 12's Bill Mooney that his plan would "increase property values"--private property values--in North Hills.

It is time to rein-in the expansive power of government to take property, lest private property ownership becomes nothing more than a legal fiction.

Posted by: Greg at 01:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Unfortunately, he wasn’t seeking freedom for Cubans – he was calling for the overthrow of the American government. The oppressive Castro regime is just fine with him.

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan called for "regime change" in the United States on Monday and denounced "wicked" U.S. policies for turning the world against America.

"We need a new government, we need regime change in America," he said at the end of a visit to Communist Cuba.

Farrakhan, who led the Million Man March on the Washington Mall in 1995 to promote black self-reliance, said the Bush administration's domestic policies were "sucking the blood of the poor and the weak."

IÂ’ve got a suggestion on what you can suck, Louie.

The controversial African American leader defended Iran's right to develop a nuclear energy program to reduce dependence on oil and said Washington's opposition was a pretext for a war.

"The Muslim world should unite against America's desire for a preemptive strike against Iran and Syria," he said at a news conference.

Farrakhan said a similar pretext was used by Washington to invade Iraq "to rape the treasuries of the United States of hundreds of billions of dollars to be doled out to the friends of President Bush, Halliburton and Bechtel and associates."

IÂ’d suggest Bush Derangement Syndrome, but he was making similar comments decades before anyone head of George W. Bush.

He thanked President Fidel Castro and blasted the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba as a "wicked blockade." The U.S. government has no moral grounds to criticize Cuba, where education and health care are free, he added.

Education is provided by the government in this country, you moron, and health care is denied to no one due to generous government programs.

I’ve got an idea, though – since Calypso Louie, who murdered Malcolm X, thinks Cuba is such a fine place, why don’t we arrest him and throw him into a jail for criticizing the government once he returns. After all, that is what his hero, Fidel, would do to a Cuban who spoke so disrespectfully of him. But then again, that is why this ignorant fool makes such statements about our country – there is no personal cost to doing so.

Posted by: Greg at 01:02 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 3 kb.

There are times when mere politics need to be set aside. This is one of them.

Erma Ora James Byrd, 88, the wife of U.S. Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) died March 25 at their home in McLean. The cause of death was not immediately available, but the Associated Press said she had been ill for five years.

The senator's Web site said she grew up in the West Virginia coal fields and met the future senator when both were students in grade school in Raleigh County, W.Va.

They were married May 29, 1937, when both were 19, according to the site.

At the time of their 65th wedding anniversary in 2002, the senator said that "in my life, Erma Ora Byrd is the diamond. She is a priceless treasure, a multifaceted woman of great insight and wisdom, of quiet humor and common sense."

She once said in a newspaper interview that she left politics to her husband. "The people elected him, not me," she said.

The account on the Web site described a couple who "came up the hard way."

It said that their first refrigerator was part of an orange crate nailed to the side of their home and that in their early years, "they spent many hours at square dances and community events, where Robert would play his fiddle and Erma would dance."

In addition to her husband, survivors include two daughters, five grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.

Senator Byrd, I have opposed you on many things over the years, but in this one I stand by your side. The loss of a loved one, especially of a companion of so many years, is a a deep and difficult pain to the heart of even the most sprit-filled of individuals. I would like to offer my condolences in this time.

Please know that you and your family are in my prayers as you face this loss, and that it is my profound hope and faith that the Lord will pour out his healing graces upon you all.

Lord, eternal rest grant unto your servant, Erma Ora Byrd, and let perpetual light shine upon her. May she rest in peace. Amen.

Posted by: Greg at 12:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 370 words, total size 2 kb.

But only after endorsing him, despite knowing of his support for terrorism against Israel.

Democrats pulled an Arab-American candidate from their election ticket on Saturday amid a furor over comments he made four years ago that some interpreted as sympathetic to Palestinian suicide bombers.

At the urging of state party leaders, including Gov. Jon S. Corzine and U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, Passaic County Democrats withdrew its endorsement of Sami Merhi for freeholder, a member of the county's legislative body. They chose a school board member to run in his place.

"I'm in shock, feeling betrayed," Merhi said. "They should be ashamed of themselves."

The Lebanese-born Merhi made the comments at a September 2002 Democratic fundraiser for U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell, where he condemned the Sept. 11 terrorists "as cold-blooded murders" and "crazy fanatics."

When asked whether he would apply the same label to Palestinian suicide bombers who target Israelis, Merhi said, "I can't see the comparison."

From what I can tell, the real reason Merhi opposed the 9/11 attack was that his godson, who worked at the World Trade Center, died at Ground Zero. I feel reasonably confident he would be a part of the "you have to understand the grievances" crowd had he not lost family that day.

What is shocking is that this terror-backer feels he is the one who has been victimized here.

Mehri indicates he may run in the primary without an endorsement, or he may sek theRepublican nomination for the position. Speaking as a Republican, I'd like to say that he is not welcome in my party, any more than David Duke was welcome. I don't doubt that national party leaders will show up in Jersey to campaign against him if he does attempt to befoul our party by seeking our noimination.

Posted by: Greg at 06:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

This letter is certainly a damning one, coming as it does from a historian and former service secretary. Should we take it seriously, and abandon our support for the President?

I recently ran across the text of a letter, penned by liberal historian and former Secretary of the U.S. Navy George Bancroft, about the president of the U.S.

In it, he wrote: "How can we reach our president with advice? He is ignorant, self-willed, and is surrounded by men, some of whom are almost as ignorant as himself.

"So we have the dilemma put to us. What to do when his power must continue for two years longer and when the existence of our country may be endangered before he can be replaced by a man of sense. How hard, in order to save the country, to sustain a man who is incompetent."

If your response is that even his allies should abandon him, given his incompetence, you would certainly change history.

After all, the "man who is incompetent" is not George W. Bush -- it is Abraham Lincoln.

Reviled by enemies -- and even by allies -- in his lifetime, Lincoln is generally remembered as one of the greatest leaders this nation has ever had, regardless of his flaws and errors. I can point to other presidents similarly reviled -- Jefferson, Truman, Reagan -- who are seen today as men of vision and (if not greatness) high achievement.

So remember -- George W. Bush is in good company.

Posted by: Greg at 06:14 AM | Comments (79) | Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.

The New York Times does an interesting profile of the next United States Senator from Maryland, Lt. Gov. Michael Steele. The personal biographical information on the man is compelling.

Open and personable, Steele had a prominent speaking role at the Republican convention in 2004, and by the following spring the Republican hierarchy was trying to coax him into the Senate race. The field was kept clear. Money was promised. It didn't matter that Steele lacked some of the attributes typical of a candidate running for high office. He was not a proven vote-getter, having ridden to victory as the running mate of Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., a popular congressman from outside Baltimore who became the state's first Republican governor elected in 36 years. Steele, who is 47, had no personal fortune to offer up to the cause, no campaign war chest. He had been an associate in a law firm, then left that job to open a consulting firm that struggled.

What Steele had to offer, as a candidate, was personal biography, his inspiring life story: childhood in a poor section of Washington; college at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore; then three years studying for the priesthood at a monastery, where he wore the long white tunic of the Augustinian order before deciding that his call to service lay elsewhere. His mother had worked in a laundry, making the minimum wage; his stepfather drove a limo. His parents weren't educated themselves, but they valued learning and made sure the homework in their household got done. Steele's only sibling is Monica Turner, a Georgetown-educated pediatrician (as well as an ex-wife of Mike Tyson, the former heavyweight champ).

The thing is, the article never seems to realize that it answers the question found in its title, "Why is Michael Steele a Republican Candidate?" It talks about a philosophy of self-reliance, pro-live policies, a focus on family, on faith, and on exonomic opportunity, but never wants to accept that these are, in fact, the reason for Steele's finding a home in the Republican party. It talks about his outreach to Democrats (especially black Democrats) as if that is somehow a negative, when it is the ultimate positive.

I'd have to say that the article is worth the read, and reasonably fair -- especially given the source.

Posted by: Greg at 06:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 2 kb.

The sound you just heard was another door being slammed in the face of leftoids seeking to destroy Tom DeLay with corruption allegations.

Disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff has advised friends that he has no derogatory information about former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and is not implicating him as part of his plea bargain with federal prosecutors.

Abramoff's guilty plea on fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy charges requires him to provide evidence about members of Congress. That led to speculation that this would mean trouble for DeLay, who faces money laundering and conspiracy charges in Texas.

However, Abramoff has not given a clean bill of health to any other congressman -- including Rep. Robert Ney, who has stepped down as chairman of the House Administration Committee. Ney was the only member of Congress named in court papers connected with Abramoff's guilty plea Jan. 4.

You just have to feel for these folks as they try to destroy my congressman -- every time they turn around they run into these little obstacles. Unethical prosecutorial conduct. Charges that are invalid. Lack of evidence. Why, its almost enough to make a guy want to chip in to get them some Thorazine to tame their dementia.

Almost.

MORE AT: GOPBloggers, Big Lizards

Posted by: Greg at 03:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.

This is interesting – and really disturbing.

A prominent Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, is alleging that the authors of a Harvard Kennedy School paper about the "Israel lobby," one of which is the Kennedy School's academic dean, culled sections of the paper from neo-Nazi and other anti-Israel hate Web sites.

"What we're discovering first of all is that the quotes that they use are not only wrenched out of context, but they are the common quotes that appear on hate sites," Mr. Dershowitz, who is identified in the paper as part of the "lobby," told The New York Sun yesterday.

"The wrenching out of context is done by the hate sites,and then [the authors] cite them to the original sources, in order to disguise the fact that they've gotten them from hate sites."

The paper, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," was written by the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and a political science professor and the codirector of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, John Mearsheimer, and published by the Kennedy School.

In the 83-page "working paper," the professors suggest that a vast network of journalists, think tanks, lobbyists, and largely Jewish officials have seized the foreign policy debate and manipulated America to invade Iraq.

The paper has drawn sharp criticism from prominent Harvard faculty, Harvard students, and a member of Congress, with many critics alleging that the document is riddled with factual inaccuracies and suffers from bias and faulty research.

According to Mr. Dershowitz, one of the paper's most prominent critics, Messrs. Mearsheimer and Walt not only demonstrated "shallowness" in their analysis,but also based that analysis on quotes and viewpoints widely available on the Web sites of hate groups.

The paper, the law professor said, was "simply a compilation of hateful paragraphs lifted from other sources and given academic imprimatur." Mr. Dershowitz said that he and his research assistants were currently working on a comparative chart showing the parallelism between parts of the Walt-Mearsheimer paper and quotes available on neo-Nazi Web sites.

I can’t wait to see the full results of the analysis, which already appears to show that Jew-hatred is at the heart of much of what passes for “scholarship” on issues related to Israel and the Middle East.

Posted by: Greg at 12:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.

We are getting reports of Vice President Cheney’s “demands” when he travels. Tell me, is there anything in this for folks to get worked up about?

At least that was the evidence from "Vice Presidential Downtime Requirements," the heading of a document posted Thursday on the Smoking Gun Web site and confirmed as authentic by Mr. Cheney's office.

The document listed 13 requirements. Among them were these: All televisions sets in Mr. Cheney's hotel suite should be tuned to Fox News, all lights should be on, and the thermostat set at 68 degrees. Mr. Cheney should have a queen- or king-size bed, a desk with a chair, a private bathroom, a container for ice, a microwave oven and a coffee pot, with decaf brewed before arrival.

The vice president should also have four cans of caffeine-free Diet Sprite and four to six bottles of water. He must have the hotel restaurant menu, with a copy faxed ahead to his advance office. If his wife is with him, she should have two bottles of sparkling water, either Calistoga or Perrier.

For his reading material, Mr. Cheney should have The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and the local newspaper.

Hmmm… the man wants a comfortable room in which he can work, simple amenities, and a few favorite refreshments that are consistent with his health needs. He wants to be able to plan for a heart-healthy diet at mealtime. He wants access to current mainstream news sources, including the up-to-the-minute convenience of Fox News, since his job requires he be up-to-date on domestic and world affairs. Oh, the unreasonableness of it all!

At least if you view the world through the eyes of a sufferer of “Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Posted by: Greg at 12:09 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.

We are getting reports of Vice President Cheney’s “demands” when he travels. Tell me, is there anything in this for folks to get worked up about?

At least that was the evidence from "Vice Presidential Downtime Requirements," the heading of a document posted Thursday on the Smoking Gun Web site and confirmed as authentic by Mr. Cheney's office.

The document listed 13 requirements. Among them were these: All televisions sets in Mr. Cheney's hotel suite should be tuned to Fox News, all lights should be on, and the thermostat set at 68 degrees. Mr. Cheney should have a queen- or king-size bed, a desk with a chair, a private bathroom, a container for ice, a microwave oven and a coffee pot, with decaf brewed before arrival.

The vice president should also have four cans of caffeine-free Diet Sprite and four to six bottles of water. He must have the hotel restaurant menu, with a copy faxed ahead to his advance office. If his wife is with him, she should have two bottles of sparkling water, either Calistoga or Perrier.

For his reading material, Mr. Cheney should have The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and the local newspaper.

HmmmÂ… the man wants a comfortable room in which he can work, simple amenities, and a few favorite refreshments that are consistent with his health needs. He wants to be able to plan for a heart-healthy diet at mealtime. He wants access to current mainstream news sources, including the up-to-the-minute convenience of Fox News, since his job requires he be up-to-date on domestic and world affairs. Oh, the unreasonableness of it all!

At least if you view the world through the eyes of a sufferer of “Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Posted by: Greg at 12:09 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.

Strangely enough, I donÂ’t hear anyone in the Democrat Party calling for resignations or imprisonment, as they do regularly with Tom DeLay. I guess it is because they are members of the right (and by that I mean Left) party.

Let's start in the state of Misery . . . uhhh. . . Missouri.

A political committee dedicated to helping Democrats win seats in the Missouri House must pay a $104,000 state fine for financial misconduct during the 2002 elections.

The fine, one of the largest ever levied by the Missouri Ethics Commission, stems from an admission by the House Democratic Campaign Committee that it mixed its money with another committee, came under the control of a candidate for office and failed to properly report donations and spending in support of candidates.

In addition to the committee, U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-St. Louis and a former House member, must pay a $600 fine for his involvement with the committee's practices.

The fines are the result of an internal investigation, said Robert Connor, executive director of the Ethics Commission. Additional fines are possible, Connor said.

In addition to Carnahan and the committee, the statement of facts that accompanied the fine said former lawmaker Bill Gratz of Jefferson City and Team Missouri, a committee that commingled funds with the Democratic campaign committee, also violated campaign finance laws.

Both the Democratic committee and Team Missouri are considered continuing committees under Missouri law, which means they are not established to elect any single candidate.

And also this, from Maine (and Rhode Island).

Former Democratic Party Chairman Patrick Colwell owes Maine voters an explanation.

Colwell resigned Sunday, several months before the end of his two-year term and just weeks after news broke of a highly questionable series of transactions involving campaign funds.

On Dec. 31, Maine's Democratic Party gave $10,000 to the campaign of Matt Brown, a Democrat from Rhode Island who is running for the U.S. Senate.

Two weeks later, the Maine Democrats received $6,000 from Richard Bready, a Rhode Island businessman who supports Brown and had already given the maximum donation to him under Rhode Island law.

Bready also gave $5,000 to the Democratic Party in Massachusetts and $6,000 to the Democratic Party in Hawaii. Both organizations also gave money to Brown's campaign.

In all, Brown received $25,000 in donations from the Democratic Party state organizations in those three states -- money that has since been returned.
Federal election laws prohibit money exchanges made to avoid campaign donation limits. The flow of money from Maine to Rhode Island and back appears to be exactly that type of transaction.

Dem corruption – its all around us. But don't expect any real punishment, because honesty is optional for Donks.

Posted by: Greg at 12:20 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 3 kb.

Rabid Legislator Alert!

State Police are investigating an allegation that state Sen. Ada Smith, D-Queens, assaulted a staffer Tuesday morning in the Legislative Office Building.

Lt. Glenn Miner, a State Police spokesman, confirmed "we've been made aware of the allegations" but could not comment on the specifics or say whether an arrest of the 17-year incumbent is imminent.

Law enforcement sources said the staffer alleged Smith threw coffee in her face and pulled her hair. The alleged attack, according to a person familiar with the details of the complaint, happened after Smith returned from a Weight Watchers meeting and announced she had lost about four pounds, and the staffer remarked that she thought the senator would have lost more given her active lifestyle.

The staffer went to St. Peter's Hospital, complaining of eye damage and abrasions on her neck, the source said.

Smith's office said the staffer no longer works there. It had no immediate comment.

And it isnÂ’t like this is SmithÂ’s first tangle with the law.

Smith was found guilty in Albany City Court and ordered to pay $200 in 2004 for failing to obey a direct order from a police officer in May 2003. She refused to hand over her government ID and drove through a security checkpoint at an Empire State Plaza parking garage. A trooper said Smith cursed and sped off, refusing his order to stop.

Last year, Douglas Greene, a former chief of staff for Smith, asked Albany County District Attorney David Soares and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to investigate her for providing no-show and semi-show jobs and having staff work on political business. The state ethics commission had cleared her of any wrongdoing within its jurisdiction.

Smith was cleared last year by the state Division of Human Rights of accusations by another ex-chief of staff, Philip Wayne Mahlke, for racist remarks and firing him because he's gay.

Smith was also charged with biting a New York City Police officer's hand during a traffic dispute in 1998. In 1996, she was accused of threatening a former staff member with a knife. In both cases, Smith denied the charges.

You know, she may have even topped Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Posted by: Greg at 12:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.