Delusional

That is what the editorial staff - the admittedly LIBERAL editorial staff of the Minneapolis Star Tribune (aka Red Star) is. Why, you may ask, do I say that? THIS editorial (in tomorrow's paper) shows the depths of the liberal delusions at the Red Star.

"Armitage's error doesn't excuse others
He made a mistake, but Cheney, Rove, Libby have no excuse"

Richard Armitage made the initial "leak" and yet it's a mistake. Karl Rove, when asked "did you hear this?" made the mistake of saying yeah I heard something like that and he is STILL the one who needs to be flayed alive!

Just when you think that they can not possibly get any worse......

Acceptable discrimination

This story confirms what many people have long suspected. That it is perfectly ok (according to liberals) to discriminate against Christians.

" The Minneapolis Police Department has temporarily suspended the use of a well-known psychologist who has been screening potential officers for more than a year after community members questioned his affiliation with a group that opposes civil rights for gays.

The issue of Michael A. Campion's affiliation with a conservative Illinois group that says it opposes the "gay lifestyle" was brought to interim Chief Tim Dolan's attention on Wednesday during a meeting with the Police Community Relations Council.

Although he said there's no indication of any bias in Campion's work, Dolan decided the next day to stop using him until an independent review could take place." (emphasis added)

There you have it dear reader. There was no indication of bias, but that didn't stop the city machinery from chewing him up and spitting him out.

Front Page Magazine dug up what the Red Star refused to print - that this was done at the behest of gay rights and pro abortion activists.

"If you’re a Christian working for the City of Minneapolis, watch your step – your job may already be in jeopardy. In what may be one of the most blatant acts of anti-Christian bigotry and discrimination by an American government agency, the Minneapolis Police Department has suspended a Police Psychologist, Dr. Michael Campion of Campion, Barrow & Associates, at the behest of leftist activists."

The Red Star never said WHO told them about Campion's affiliation with IFI. Just that that accusations of bias (because of his faith) were made!

Christians working for the City of Minneapolis should be very afraid, should this be allowed to stand. Just because Mr. Campion was a consultant, doesn't mean you couldn't be next. Your First Amendment rights, along with those of Mr. Campion, are apparently not as guaranteed as others.

Signs

Is this a sign of things to come? I certainly hope so.

"A federal judge has ordered a Justice Department probe into how CBS News obtained a story two years ago disclosing an FBI investigation into a pro-Israel lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee."

The leaks to the press, in a time of war need to be stopped and stopped soon. I pray that this is a start.

The last of the "moderates"?

Much has been said about this Lori Sturdevant column in Sunday's Star Tribune. However, none of the posts picked up on this:

"For Minnesotans, both books serve up some juicy passages. None tops Eilperin's account of Seventh District Rep. Collin Peterson's exchange with the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee in late 2004 or early 2005. It seems that the eight-termer's penchant for voting with Republicans called into question his Democratic caucus' willingness to make him the ranking minority member of the House Agriculture Committee.

Let me get this straight," Peterson is quoted as telling the caucus leaders who had summoned him for a grilling (not of the barbecue kind). "You're telling me I should vote against my conscience and vote against my constituents so I can become a marginal member, and you can spend two million bucks to save my ass? You guys have to understand, you're not in the majority ... . If you didn't have guys like me you're going to be in the minority for a long time." (emphasis mine)

That speaks volumes about the Democratic leadership. That explains why the DCCC is pushing forward candidates like Coleen Rowley and Patty Wetterling - candidates that do what the DCCC handlers tell them...that toe the party leadership line - no questions asked!

"It details how Republican leaders have denied a meaningful lawmaking role to minority Democrats and their own moderate members. "

Gee Lori - I must have slept through the portion of Poli-Sci that said that the majority was supposed to guarantee the minority a "meaningful" lawmaking role. I know I certainly did not see anything like that in the years that the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate.

And then there is this little gem:

"Both books argue for change in the way congressional districts are drawn. Gerrymandering -- the practice of drawing political maps for partisan advantage -- is out of control, and should be reined in, the authors argue. One possibility: Take the task out of state legislators' hands, and give it to independent commissions. "

Typical leftist - take the power away from the people and their elected representatives and hand it over to the Judiciary. Wait you say - she didn't say judges.....well yes she did:

"In Minnesota, legislative gridlock and/or lawsuits have given the state something akin to that, by default. Panels of judges have drawn this state's political lines for the past 40 years. That may be why Minnesota is still sending moderates to Congress while much of the rest of the nation is not."

Handing redistricting over to judges - just like they handed over drawing up legislation to judges (in Roe v Wade) and took away property owners rights (Kelo v New London). Just like they keep trying to hand over deciding election results (Gore v Bush) to judges. Judges are being handed more and more power at the behest of the elitist left - because they know better than the proletariat (that's you and me dear readers). It's time to resist the elitist push to hand our lives over to the judiciary.

In touch

That's the Democratic Party....in touch with the people of America. At least that is what they try to tell you. So when the American people ask for common sense tactics to try to secure out transit system...

"Most Americans expect a terrorist attack on the United States in the next few months and support the screening of people who look "Middle Eastern" at airports and train stations, a poll showed on Tuesday."

What do you suppose the left's reaction is? We must stop this!

Remember, the people who bombed the US Barracks in Beruit were not young black males, the people who killed 11 Israeli Olympians in Munich were not young hispanic males, the bombers of the USS Cole were not 80 year old grandmothers and the hijackers that flew planes into the World Trade Center were not 5 year old girls. They were Muslim men between the ages of 18 and 30. Let's get a little common sense back in this country. Yes if we start to profile, the odds are that the bad guys will recruit bombers that don't fit the profile, but for NOW the profile fits - let's use it!

I hate to say I told you so, but...

I wrote about this before, so I know you were not surprised at all to learn that the person who supposedly "outed" Valerie Plame was not associated with the White House after all!

"AND so we learn it was former US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage - Australia's best friend in the US - not the Bush White House who was the first to out Valerie Plame as a CIA employee.
With this knowledge is demolished yet another left-liberal fantasy about George W. Bush"

The author hist the fantasy and conspiracy theories right between the eyes.

"Mr Rove and Mr Libby's guilt was never in doubt. Mr Rove spoke with a Texas accent, Scooter had a silly name. What more proof was needed?
From Le Monde to the Guardian, from Balmain to Carlton, no right-thinking progressive ever doubted the conspiracy theory that the Bush White House had decided to punish Mr Wilson for becoming a critic of the war by outing his wife. "

The conspiracies didn't make sense then and they don't make sense now and with good reason.

"Mr Wilson, furiously writing opinion pieces for The New York Times and boasting about his wife, did everything he could to draw attention to himself, not normally the way the spouses of covert agents maintain their covert status. "

Don't expect the truth or logic to stop the conspiracy theorists. As long as George W. Bush is President, those suffering from BDS will spin theories about the evil emminating from the Bush White House. And we know that we will definately not be seeing apologies or retractions from any of the media outlets that played judge, jury and executioner to Karl Rove!

Coleen Rowley on WCCO

I haven't gotten an chance to post on this as I have been busy with my own fair related business. Coleen Rowley and Congressman John Kline engaged in a couple of debates at the Great Minnesota Get Together (aka the State Fair) on Friday. The first was an interview that melded into the debate on WCCO's Jack Rice show. Below are some notes and comments from that interview/debate.

When introduced as a "whistleblower" by Mr. Rice, Ms. Rowley said that she prefered being called a "stickler for the truth" (ed holy cow - talk about hubris!) She said that the word "policy" (in describing this country's Iraq policy) is "too good of a term" - stating that what we are doing now is not a working policy. She said that she agreed with Congressman Murtha's plan to "re-deploy" our troops out of Iraq. She said that the current "lack of a plan" in Iraq is not working and she also accused the President of "not leveling" with the American people when it comes to Iraq and our lack of progress over there. She was asked if she found herself having to figure out who her opponent was.

She said that she was the "true Conservative" in the race and that she is seeing more and more "reformed Republicans - like those that Nick Coleman wrote about in his screed last week. My question to her is this - would a true Conservative quote Common Cause (see below)?

She was the asked if they (the Republicans) are the party of "small government", what are you? She didn't answer the question directly - she just went on to attack the special interests that seeem to "control" the Republican party (Mr. Rice interjected here that the Democrats have their own special interest groups "). Coleen answered that yeah that is true but because the Republicans are in power, it is "their problem" (HUH?????) When asked how SHE would fix the problem, she said that she pledged to propose much stronger ethic reform. She admitted that she needed a lot more Dems to sign on to it with her in order to get it passed. She said that we needed "good, common sense reform" such as proposed by Common Cause.

Jumping to National Defense (and the actual debate portion of the program) Ms. Rowley and Congressman Kline was asked about the sectarian violence in Iraq. Ms. Rowley started off slamming the troops by saying "I look at the insurgency as it continues to grow and what I see is them (the troops) doing everything they can but is it enough? How can you stay the course and say it is a good course?" OK - in Ms. Rowley's defense she will say she was slamming the Administration, but in all honestly given the context of the question and her answer, the troops were the ones to get the broadside - in typical Democratic fashion. Congressman Kline's response was much better. He said "The troops are doing a terrific job and morale is high. They are doing a great job. When you say 'stay the course' you imply that there are no tactical changes being made and that is incorrect! The sectarian violence is a problem - this hatred has been building for centuries. The answer to that problem lies in the hands of the new Iraqi government. The key is the Iraqi Army and they have made great progress. The Iraqi Police is not developing as fast, but the Iraqi Army putting a greater presence in these troubled areas will make things better. Question - "Coleen Rowley, what is the Democratic Party specifically proposing we do? Answer - "I am in the majority now of the people in the country who say that there is no progress in Iraq - that is a no brainer (ed - she has used that phrase a lot in this campaign) One vote did not get us security. Regarding redeployment - I can't go into details that would tke an hour. We need responsible redeployment..." At this point Congressman Kline interjected with "We have seen Marines redeploy to Baghdad and they are making progress. If you sare saying we pull out of the country...you thin it is the wild west now???" Ms. Rowley continued "No one knows how effective this Administration has been in negotiating with the insurgents (ed - more on that little nugget in a separate post). Redeployment is part of the plan." Congressman Kline countered with a question of his own - "You mean redeploy to a neighboring country like Okinawa Japan?" Ms. Rowley answered "I am hoping to get Mr. Murtha here to explain the plan to Mr. Kline so that he can understand it...." Congressman Kline said "that is fine, but I am not running against Congressman Murtha."

Question - just recently 2500 Individual Ready Reserve troops were recalled - a shakey number because it changes. Do we need more troops (in the form of a draft) in order to relieve those that are there now. Congressman Kline "there is no doubt that our military has fewer members. In the 1990's the Army was cut from 16 divisions to 10 (ed - under President Clinton) however, I do not think that a draft is necessary." Ms. Rowley "I think a draft is something we should look at!" That was the end of the debate time. After that it went into an interview of Congressman Kline (and I got a phone call). I would like to add a couple of thoughts here. First is that Coleen is much more comfortable addressing the issues now (as compared to February when I first heard her speak) however neither the interview nor the debate got off of National Security which is by far the subject she feels most comfortable speaking about. Second was anger - every single one of Ms. Rowley's answers came from anger. She genuinely seemed to be pi$$ed. Congressman Kline, on the other hand, was cordial to both Mr. Rice and Ms. Rowley during the whole debate - no shouting, no harsh words....none of that.

Which leads to one last observation. Mr. Rice asked both candidates what they liked about being on the campaign trail was it "fun". Congressman Kline talked about the parades and how fun it was to get out and meet the people and shake hands and talk to everyone. He admitted that come October, it tends to drag, but it (campaigning) was still fun because he did get to meet so many people. Ms. Rowley's answer was telling. When asked if she found any part of campaigning fun she simply said "No". She went on to add that when she signed on to the FBI she took a vow to protect the country and the Constitution (so did Congressman Kline when he took his Marine oath) and she sees this as an extension of that vow, but there was nothing "fun" about this.

Therein lies the core difference between the two.

Politician on a stick

That is what Fox 9 News is calling their daily interviews with all of the politicians that are running for state wide office this year. Today's interviewee was Michele Bachmann who is running for Mark Kennedy's seat in the 6th Congressional District. Everything you could ever want to know about this race (one of the top 5 highest profile contests in the country) can be found at BachmannvWetterling (another Andy Aplikowski publication). The interview was unremarkable except for one thing. Three times during the interview, Alix Kendall (one of the two morning anchors) mentioned "gay marriage" three times including in a question that was designed to attempt to designate Michele as a divisive candidate. The question was " Given some of the issues you have campaigned on (tax cuts, gay marriage) do you find your support to be cohesive?" Of course, was Michele's answer.

This kind of question has been normal during the campaign. The local drive by media is not fond of Michele's advocacy for allowing Minnesotans to vote on a state wide Defense of Marriage Act.

If you want to keep an eye on this targeted seat, stop by BVW often. If you want to help Michele, contact the campaign at her website. I know that they would love the help.

Diabetes cure promised in a Hatch Administration

You read me right! Mike Hatch was just on with Alix Kendall of Fox 9 Morning news. Most of the interview focused on health care. AG Hatch came out in support of Universal Health Care stating that "we have universal care in that if you are sick you can go to a hospital and they HAVE to treat you whether you can pay or not". More on that later.

What really got to me was the AG's hyping of stem cell research. The AG claimed that there would be a "cure for diabetes in 5 years" if we would only fund stem cell research. Now let's first start with the fact that it is only EMBRYONIC stem cell research that doesn't get federal funding. Then let's start with the fact that the other types of stem cell research (adult and umbilical cord) are federally funded and are showing more promise. Let's also talk about the fact that the Ag not only promised a cure for diabetes, but also heart disease and spinal cord damage! All we need is to do is federally fund embryonic stem cell research!

What the AG refuses to take into account (aside from the facts listed above) is that the most recent advances in embryonic stem cell research - the one JUST ANNOUNCED LAST WEEK came from privately funded research!

Regarding the comment on Universal Health Care....while the AG is totally correct in that if you are ill and you show up at a hospital, the hospital must treat you regardless of your ability to pay. He is absolutely correct that we all pay for that anyway - we pay for it in the high rates we pay for our health care! My mother, for many years, worked at a very affluent hospital in suburban Chicago. Even the hospital she worked at had to "give" away their services to people who refused to pay. She saw, first hand, how these costs are passed on to insurance companies and the self insured. Getting rid of the abuse of this will help bring down medical costs for all of us. One way to bring this down is to crack down on illegal immigration! Many Southern California hospitals have CLOSED because they got swampped with people who jump the border just to go to treated for illness and then they go back to Mexico! Hospitals can not afford to be "forced" to give services away. Closing these hospitals affected more than just the employees. When the hopitals closed, the businesses around the hopitals lost business and closed. Utilities laid off employees because of these business closures. The state loses tax dollars. The employees of the hospital (and the surrounding businesses that closed or laid off folks) were spending less since they had less income....like a stone tossed into a still pool - the economic ripples move outward!

I honestly don't know which I dispise more. The absolute pandering that the Dems do to those that are sick, their total distortion of the facts that they choose to cite or their ignoring of the facts that don't suit their predetermined talking points. Either way, I find their stand on the issue of stem cell research reeks of desperation - desperation to regain power.

English versus Texan

Kathleen Parker is another wonderfully logical lady. Her recent column was directed at the purveyors of the meme that President Bush is "stupid".

"Bush-bashing for sport has never lacked fans in the blogosphere, but questioning the president's intelligence lately has gone mainstream.

Joe Scarborough, former Republican congressman and host of MSNBC's "Scarborough Country,'' recently tossed his beanie into the ring, running a 10-minute segment titled: "Is Bush an 'Idiot'?''
Scarborough wasn't calling Bush an idiot, mind you. He was just quoting that renowned American intellectual, Linda Ronstadt. Recently, Ronstadt had commented on the president's performance while attending an international summit of heads of state.

No wait, my mistake, she made those comments to reporters and audiences while touring in Canada. But never mind. When Ronstadt talks, people listen. Citing other leading American intellectuals -- The Dixie Chicks, Peter, Paul & Mary, and Joan Baez..."

This phenomonon is what prompted Laura Ingraham (yet another great logical lady) to pen the book "Shut up and Sing".

Lawrence Kudlow takes on the President's "communications shortcomings" in this column on the untold story about our robust economy:

"Some conservatives are alleging that the president suffers from an inability to communicate with the American people, and there may be some overrated truth to this."

I had the extreme good fortune to see President Bush speak several times during the 2004 campaign. I found him to be very good at communicating the important issues to the audience. John Hinderaker also has the same experience.

"The conventional wisdom is that Bush is not a very good speaker. But up close, he is a great communicator, in a way that, in my opinion, Ronald Reagan was not. He was by turns instructive, persuasive, and funny. His persona is very much that of the big brother. Above all, he was impassioned. I have never seen a politician speak so evidently from the heart, about big issues--freedom, most of all."

Those that do not understand the President blame the President for not making himself "clear" but I think that too many have gotten too used to hearing political double-speak...to the point that when they hear a straight forward speaker, the temptation is to insert meanings that are not there. A great case in point is the meme that the President said that Saddam was tied to the 9/11 attacks. He never did say that...he did say that Saddam was tied to TERRORISM. Now at the time that was said, most people were still dealing with the shock of 9/11. However that does not erase the reality of the situation. Saddam did have ties to terrorists who had attacked Americans - most notoriously Abu Nidal the mastermind of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing. Saddam also played host to Abu Abbas, who took part in the hijacking of the Achille Lauro.

I think that Ms. Parker nails the problem in this paragraph.

"My theory dovetails with something one of his most acerbic critics, columnist Molly Ivins, once wrote: "George W. Bush sounds like English is his second language.'' That's because it's true. "Washington English'' is a second language for Bush; "Texas English'' is his first."

I have several friends from Texas. They definately do not speak "northern" and most northerners just don't know how to handle them. Oh sure, they chuckle at some of the quaint phrases that Texans use, but many just don't get Texans and never will. Which is a pity....my Texan friends are some of the smartest most wonderful people I know. Loyal to a fault, ready to do battle for a friend if needed. We need more Texans in the world. Heaven knows if we had more people like that, this world would be a MUCH better place.

Endorsements

Well, well....the timing of this certainly could not have been coincidential, could it?

"SILVER SPRING, Md., Aug. 4 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The political action committee of Peace Action, the nation's largest grassroots peace organization, has lent its support to candidates who have consistently supported peace positions, in an election year that is likely to turn on public dissatisfaction with the Iraq war and the generally militarist policies of the Bush Administration.Topping the list is the endorsement of Ned Lamont, the Connecticut businessman running to unseat three-term Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. Sen. Lieberman's, a consistent support of Bush policies in Iraq has helped galvanize support for Lamont's rise from little-known underdog to potential victor in next week's primary.Peace Action PAC also endorsed Senator Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, who expressed his gratitude and appreciation to Peace Action. "I am honored to work with Peace Action in stressing the need for a clear exit strategy from Iraq," Akaka said. "I will continue my efforts in support of Peace Action's mission to establish international peace." Senator Akaka has also aggressively fought the development of new nuclear weapons and supported ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.Other just-announced endorsements from the nation's largest peace group include:-- Jerry McNerney, Democratic Nominee for California's 11th Congressional District against U.S. Rep. Richard Pombo-- Patricia 'Pan' Godchaux, running in the Republican primary for Michigan's 9th Congressional District against seven term incumbent Joe Knollenberg.-- Rep. Sherrod Brown, the Democratic nominee for the Senate in Ohio; in the last 3 years Rep. Brown has averaged 95 on the Peace Action voting record.-- Coleen Rowley, challenging John Kline in 2nd district of Minnesota-- Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), who has averaged 93 percent on the Peace Action voting record over the past two years and is in a tough primary race.-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), who has averaged 90 percent on the Peace Action voting record over the past three years." (emphasis mine)

It was exactly 1 year ago that Coleen Rowley and State Senator (and now Gubernatorial Candidate) Becky Lourey went to Crawford TX to join Cindy Sheehan in her protest outside the President's ranch. It was one year ago that Ms. Rowley started polishing her anti-war credentials.

Note the company that Ms. Rowley is in. Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Rep. Sherrod Brown, Sen. Robert Byrd all staunchly left and anti-war. You would think that Ms. Rowley would be proud to be held in such esteemed company and would have the endorsement prominently displayed on her campaign website, wouldn't you? Well if you did think that, you would be incorrect. She lists all sorts of endorsements - the NEA, Clean Water Action, the National Women's Campaign Fund, the Council for a Livable World, the Teamsters - but no mention at all about this endorsement. I wonder why that is?

It is becoming clearer (by the company that she keeps) that Coleen Rowley will toe the line established by the Kos left should she be elected to the US House of Representatives. It is also becoming clearer why Coleen Rowley is the wrong person for the job. Hopefully the residents of Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District will see that as well.

Baby bust!

I mentioned this theory before, but it came up again. This time in the Wall Street Journal.

"Simply put, liberals have a big baby problem: They're not having enough of them, they haven't for a long time, and their pool of potential new voters is suffering as a result. According to the 2004 General Social Survey, if you picked 100 unrelated politically liberal adults at random, you would find that they had, between them, 147 children. If you picked 100 conservatives, you would find 208 kids. That's a "fertility gap" of 41%. Given that about 80% of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents, this gap translates into lots more little Republicans than little Democrats to vote in future elections. Over the past 30 years this gap has not been below 20%--explaining, to a large extent, the current ineffectiveness of liberal youth voter campaigns today."

Now of course, the article does not take into account the "rebellion" factor. I know more than a few college Republicans who are Republican partly out of rebellion, just as many of their parents became liberal out of rebellion to their parents. However, are we are seeing with the Junior Logician, politics is partly a learned behavior. The Junior Logician has, on more than one occasion, argued a conservative point of view on a political issue. Heck, he has already stated that he WILL be campaigning for Senator Coleman when he is up for re-election in 2006! However, the liberal indoctrination that he will get in High School and College so who knows what will happen between now and then.

Rebellion factor aside, the fact is that the liberals are just not having kids like the conservatives are. Even if the liberals DID start having 2-4 kids (to catch up with the conservatives) it will take 18 years for those kids to hit the voter rolls. Either way, this will have an effect on future elections.

What part of the war on terrorism do they support?

Love her or hate her, Ann Coulter does bring up a lot of logical points about the ideas and ideals of the left. She usually has the audacity to ask the question that everyone else is afraid to ask. This week's column is not different. What makes this week different is that she finally asks the question that the Democrats are afraid to answer.

"What Part of the War on Terrorism Do They Support?"

Ms. Coulter is right - time after time the Democrats say that they support the war and support the troops. Yet time after time, they vote against giving the President, the Intelligence Community and the troops the tools they need to fight the war on terror.

Ann lays it out better than I ever could. Please go read the article NOW!

A-Klo at the Fair

I was just finishing up the last post listening to Channel 9's morning news when they cut to a shot of Democratic Candidate Amy Klobuchar. Now the guys at KvM have long (and well) covered the lopsided treatment that the local media has given our Senatorial candidates, but I thought I would chime in on this interview.

Tom Butler drew the interviewing duty. He started off welcoming her to the show. Amy talked about her "house" that they just opened there at the fair for people to come get info on the campaign and invited all the viewers to come visit her.

Tom Butler then asked - you and your opponent differ on issues, why should people vote for you?

A- Klo answered "Mark Kennedy has been in Washington for 6 years - we need a change. Gas prices are up, helath care costs are up. We should be helping the middle class and not the wealthy like Paris Hilton" (maybe A-Klo should read my last post and look at her own donor base before she goes down that road).

Tom Butler asked what is your favorite fair food and thing to do.

A-Klo answered favorite food is cheese curds - favorite thing is Princess Kay and the ladies league when ladies knit sweaters from wool shorn from sheep at the fair and then they lead the sheep around in the sweaters they knitted.

Whoa - such biting questions (she snarks). Honestly, most politicians get softballs like this in fair interviews. Mark Kennedy will be on later this week we'll see if that truism holds for him as well. I hope that the KvM boys make sure to cover that.

Oh and AAA - be nice to the media!

I'll take Pot-pourri for $100 Alex...

Well we certainly couldn't see THIS story coming, could we?

"One of the first tests for Washington's new gay civil rights law has an intriguing twist: The complaint was filed by a heterosexual woman. The state's discrimination watchdogs are investigating the case, which claims unmarried straight people should get the same domestic partner benefits as their gay and lesbian co-workers."

I won't say that "I" told you so, but a lot of well known conservative pundits DID tell you that this was going to happen!

Then there is this newsflash:

"Forty-five percent of Americans believe the news media in this country are too liberal, while only 14% say the news media are too conservative. These perceptions of liberal inclination have not changed over the last three years. A majority of Americans who describe their political views as conservative perceive liberal leanings in the media, while only about a third of self-described liberals perceive conservative leanings. "

This article says it all (when it comes to the Democrats understanding of basic economics):

"One of the most poignant moments in the presidential debates prior to the 2004 election occurred when Sen. John Kerry was pontificating about how he would halt the outsourcing of American jobs overseas.After outlining his approach—which predominantly consisted of giving incentives to American businesses to refrain from such nefarious behavior—Kerry was stopped cold by moderator Charles Gibson. To his everlasting credit, Gibson asked how Kerry could reasonably expect this to be effective when any incentives that could be offered would still pale by comparison to the amount companies would save by paying so much less per worker abroad than American workers would have to receive. To this, Kerry could only sheepishly reply that he never said he’d be able to stop all outsourcing.This exchange largely served to puncture Kerry’s balloon on an issue the Democrats had pinned high hopes on in seeking to derail President Bush’s re-election.This anecdote is highly relevant to numerous issues today in which even an elementary knowledge of economics is all that would be required to discern the folly of very dubious (albeit politically popular) proposals." (emphasis added)

Lastly is this. Remember the cannard about the Republican Party being the party of the "rich"?

"In this analysis, we examined only those Fortune 100 companies that operated nonprofit charitable foundations that made grants to groups we identified as on either the political right or left. That reduced the number to 53 corporate foundations. (See page 20.) We examined the most recent tax- return filings for these foundations (IRS Form 990) and compiled the dollar values for grants and matching gifts to left-wing groups and right-wing groups.
The results are the exact opposite of the common perception. The Fortune 100 foundations gave more money to the political left. In fact, the grant-making was lopsided: The political left received nearly $59 million, while the political right received only about $4 million, a ratio of 14.5 to 1. " (emphasis again added)

Hmmmmm......that certainly gives one pause for thought, doesn't it?

Democrats or Socialists

I got this via email this week and was unsourced.

"The following is a list of members of congress that also belong to an organization called the Democratic Socialists of America. Also included are web pages and e-mail addresses for contact, and demand that they stop promoting their socialist agenda in Congress. For more information about the Democratic Socialists of America, you can go to their web site and find out for yourself what it is all about. The URL is (http://www.dsausa.org/)
At one time, the following list of members could be located on the DSA web site. However, Once this list was made public, The DSA removed the link to the Web page that listed the following members. Although they removed the link, they did not remove the Web Page. You can go directly to the Web page that contains the list of names by clicking on this link (http://www.dsausa.org/pc/pc.members.html). Now that this is exposed also, I wonder how long it will take them to remove the page altogether?" (emphasis in the original)

Well it didn't take long. Following the link gets you a "404 page not found error". However, the email lists out some of the Congressional folks involved.

"Rep Bernard Sanders (VT-AL), Chair
2202 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
http://b5.mail.yahoo.com/ym/hope4america.net/Compose?To=bsanders@hr.house.gov
http://b5.mail.yahoo.com/ym/hope4america.net/Compose?To=sanders@igc.apc.org
http://www.house.gov/bernie/

Rep Cynthia A. McKinney (GA-04), Co-Chair
124 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
No e-mail address found
http://www.house.gov/mckinney/
Rep Peter A. DeFazio (OR-04), Co-Chair
2134 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
http://b5.mail.yahoo.com/ym/hope4america.net/Compose?To=pdefazio@hr.house.gov
http://www.house.gov/defazio/
Rep Maurice Hinchey (NY-26), Co-Chair
2431 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
http://b5.mail.yahoo.com/ym/hope4america.net/Compose?To=hinchey@mail.house.gov
http://www.house.gov/hinchey/
Rep Major Owens (NY-11), Co-Chair
2305 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
http://b5.mail.yahoo.com/ym/hope4america.net/Compose?To=Major.Owens@Mail.House.Gov"

The list went on - a lot of the usual suspects. One thing that surprised me is that none of our Minnesota delegation was on this list. One that didn't surprise me though (based on voting records) was this one:

"Rep James A McDermott (WA-07)
2349 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
No e-mail address found
http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/"

Now if you take a look at the voting records of the folks on this list you can certainly understand why the connection is made. Any socialists piece of legislation that has been brought up on the floor of the House or or the Senate was either proposed by one of the folks on this list or voted one of the names on this list. Legislation for greater re-distribution of wealth, greater centralized government powers, you name it. Take a look at the voting records of all of these folks - many of whom are running for re-election and compare it to the stated ideals on the DSA website. The parallels are there.

Seattle certainly can do better than what they have now. Good Luck Steve. Fight the good fight and may November 8 find us all calling you "Congressman-elect".

The promise of stem cells

Adult stem cells that is. I wonder why we don't hear about this kind of stem cell research out of the Red Star and the NY Times?

"Ryan Schneider was born in late 1992. He's been through a lot in his young life.
Ryan's mom, Mary, said, "His main means of communication was screaming, pointing and crying...He was so frustrated in his own body -- it was very, very difficult. He just couldn't get his point across. It was…impossible...Last summer, doctors came up with a diagnosis for Ryan's afflictions: cerebral palsy, a brain affliction with no certain cause and no certain cure.
But the Schneiders had saved cells from Ryan's umbilical cord in a special blood bank. Those cells are rich in adult stem cells.... In October, doctors put those cells into Ryan's blood through an IV inserted in the back of his hand...Mary recalled, “after the first week, Ryan said his first sentence to us, and we were shocked. And we were even more shocked -- it was about giving him some food, which was even more shocking -- he ate it all and wanted more!"

Now the doctors can't say for sure that Ryan's turn around was because of the adult stem cells or not, but they say that Ryan's recovery is "consistent" with other adult stem cell successes.

One thing that they do seem to be sure of. There appears to be more potential (and cures) from adult stem cell research. I wonder why we don't hear more about this?

Whose rights are more guaranteed?

A lot has been said about "rights" lately. The ACLU has been pushing for the Constitutional rights of NON US citizens. However there is one right that they have not been talking about. The Constitutional rights of US citizens to LIFE, liberty and the persuit of happiness.

One right that is no where to be found is the right to aid those that want to kill millions of Americans.

"The ACLU says the NSA surveillance program makes it difficult for its attorneys to represent its clients. Especially when your attorneys help fund terrorist groups like Hezbollah...

One of the lesser known plaintiffs in the case, Noel Saleh, attorney for the ACLU's Michigan chapter, said the NSA program made it difficult for him to represent his clients, some of whom the government accuses of terrorist connections.
Saleh has had a number of terrorist clients, such as Ibrahim Parlak, a member of the PKK, the Kurdish Islamic terrorist group on the State Department's terror list, who was found responsible for the deaths of two Turkish border police.

Not to mention Imad Hamad, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine member."

What about the right to life of the 3000 people killed on September 11, 2001? Do their rights not matter? Apparently not to the ACLU. What about the right to pursue happiness for the families of those that died? Their happiness died the day that the terrorists flew airplanes into those 3 buildings on that sunny September morning. What about the rights of US citizens to live in liberty on our own shores? Apparently the ACLU doesn't care about those rights.

"The ACLU seems to have a fondness for attorneys who send money to terrorists or act as couriers for them and an agenda that opposes any activity that protects the American people from those who would kill them. "

Yep, this is the organization that claims to be the defenders of OUR Constitutional rights. Don't you feel better?

Religious Persecution

Over the last few months, you have heard CAIR warn the Western World that it should not "persecute" Muslims because of the actions of the terrorists. Recently we heard the story of a Muslim pilot who claimed that he was persecuted because he was not allowed to board a flight England because the other passengers were concerned about them. Well for the benefit of these two (and for CAIR), I thought I would give you a couple of examples of REAL persecution.

"Reporters Without Borders today condemned the months of harassment bythe authorities in Qina (near Luxor, in central Egypt) that forced Hala Helmy Botros to close down her blog Aqbat Bela Hodood(Copts Without Borders) about the persecution of the Christian Copticminority, and to stop writing on this subject for other websites.

Botros, 42, who wrote under thepseudonym of Hala El-Masry, is now the target of a judicial investigation and is banned from leaving the country."

It seems to me that not being allowed to board an airplane is mild compared to what this woman is going through. Here is another one:

"Last month, CBN News brought you the story of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan man who was thrown in prison for converting from Islam to Christianity. He has since been released and has left Afghanistan.

But countless other ex-Muslims continue to face persecution--even here in the West."

Hmmmmmm - countless Christians are persecuted by MUSLIMS!!! Yet we are not supposed to persect them for their beliefs....does anyone beside me see the incongruity in that? ANYBODY?????

Meanwhile the American left (you know, the tolerant ones) not to be outdone has their own method of discriminating and denegrating Christians.

"A slew of new books have emerged with titles like ``American Theocracy,'' and ``Kingdom Coming,'' that tackle the perceived emerging Christocracy, while op-ed-ists opine that right-wing evangelicals are directing foreign policy through the White House. Words like ``theocrats'' and ``American Taliban'' have become commonplace in describing those who fill televangelism's La-Z-Boys. "

Kathleen Parker is one of the wonderful logical ladies that I love to read and highlight here.

"Doubtless (Pastor John) Hagee holds his audiences in thrall, but that audience does not happen to include George W. Bush or even (cue thunderclouds) Karl Rove. Nor millions of other Christians. Despite what the anti-Christianists seem to believe, the evangelical movement is not monolithic on such issues and Hagee doesn't have an office in the State Department. "

That is what I am talking about. The anti-Christian left will tell you that Evangelical Christians, like you humble author, are h*ll bent on bringing about the second coming of Christ. The conspiracy minded will tell you that the Zionists (which is a code word for Jews and their Evangelical supporters) are willing to sacrifice all in order to bring about their version of "heaven on earth" (sound familiar?). As Ms. Parker points out, there is one little problem with that theory.

"Although both groups may be ``true believers,'' those who try to connect the dots of Christian belief, specifically evangelical Christianity, to Islamism seem willing to overlook the fact that Islamists praise Allah and fly airplanes into buildings while Christianists praise Jesus and pass the mustard.

And though both groups of people may use scripture to shape their approach to the public square, Islamist interpretation of doctrine permits religious expression through suicide-murder, beheadings, public stonings (preferably of women) and Jew-hating, while Christianist doctrine deals in such wimpy notions as forgiveness, tolerance, redemption and cheek-turning."

Yeah - that is a big difference between the two. Something that those suffering from BDS will never be able to see until the day they remove the blinders of hatred.

Duck and dodge - cut and run

I recently received a press release for a Congressional candidate from Seattle . This candidate happens to be a friend of mine which is why I got the press release. In the release is below:

Beren: McDermott weak on terrorism and avoiding debate
Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th C.D.) www.berenforcongress.com

Britain has successfully broken up a terrorist plot to blow up planes flying to the United States. The uncovering of this plot drives home the fact that we are a nation at war with Islamic fascism. But Jim McDermott and the Democratic Party are weak on national security, with a pre-9/11 mentality. They don't have a clue how to fight terrorism. McDermott opposes the terrorist wiretapping program and the Patriot Act - precisely the tools we need to continue successfully disrupting the enemy's plans.

I am sick and tired of hearing Jim McDermott say this is a so-called war, that this is a so-called threat, that this is so-called terrorism, that it's all hype.

The war is real, the threat of terrorism is real, the effort of Islamic fascists to acquire nuclear weapons is real, the attempt to destroy Israel. National defense, homeland security, protection of our ports, and disruption of the terrorists must remain priorities.

McDermott says there is no way we can win the war, and he says we should completely withdraw from Iraq before election day. Such a defeatist approach is not only wrong - it is dangerous. McDermott is entitled to his opinion, but he also needs to be held accountable. He should defend his views in an open forum, and that's why I've challenged him to a series of debates. So far, he has tried to avoid my challenge.

But Jim McDermott and I WILL debate! I won't let him be a debate dodger. He can cut and run - but he can't hide!

Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th CD)
www.berenforcongress.com
(206) 240-1841
* Lower taxes and limited government
* Protect our ports and borders
* Victory in the war against terrorism
This communication paid for and authorized by Beren for Congress

Now, reading this it struck me that there has indeed been little debate so I did some digging. In the Klobuchar/Bell/Kennedy race, only Ford Bell and Mark Kennedy debated. Ms. Klobuchar declined to attend all debates. In the 7th CD, incumbent Collin Peterson was a no show at a debate that included a primary challenger to Peterson, the Republican candidate AND the Constitution Party Candidate. In the 2nd CD, Coleen Rowley has finally accepted (after many local attempts) an invitation to debate incumbent John Kline. The debates that she finally accepted were RADIO debates and not live in front of constituent debates! The same scene is playing out in Minnesota's 6th CD as well. All over Minnesota (and apparently all over the country if my friend's campaign is any indication) Democratic candidates for office are engaging in the same tactic that they are advocating for our troops - avoid engaging the enemy at ALL COSTS. It's the same old cut and run that they advocate for our troops.

If they can't even stand up to defend what they believe in a debate format, how are they going to defend the country if (God forbid) we are ever attacked again! The choice is becoming clearer by the minute. If the Democrats can't even stand up for their "firmly held beliefs" how are they going to stand up for the country?

I would be very interested in hearing of any similar situations out there.

Duck and dodge - cut and run

I recently received a press release for a Congressional candidate from Seattle . This candidate happens to be a friend of mine which is why I got the press release. In the release is below:

Beren: McDermott weak on terrorism and avoiding debate
Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th C.D.) www.berenforcongress.com

Britain has successfully broken up a terrorist plot to blow up planes flying to the United States. The uncovering of this plot drives home the fact that we are a nation at war with Islamic fascism. But Jim McDermott and the Democratic Party are weak on national security, with a pre-9/11 mentality. They don't have a clue how to fight terrorism. McDermott opposes the terrorist wiretapping program and the Patriot Act - precisely the tools we need to continue successfully disrupting the enemy's plans.

I am sick and tired of hearing Jim McDermott say this is a so-called war, that this is a so-called threat, that this is so-called terrorism, that it's all hype.

The war is real, the threat of terrorism is real, the effort of Islamic fascists to acquire nuclear weapons is real, the attempt to destroy Israel. National defense, homeland security, protection of our ports, and disruption of the terrorists must remain priorities.

McDermott says there is no way we can win the war, and he says we should completely withdraw from Iraq before election day. Such a defeatist approach is not only wrong - it is dangerous. McDermott is entitled to his opinion, but he also needs to be held accountable. He should defend his views in an open forum, and that's why I've challenged him to a series of debates. So far, he has tried to avoid my challenge.

But Jim McDermott and I WILL debate! I won't let him be a debate dodger. He can cut and run - but he can't hide!

Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th CD)
www.berenforcongress.com
(206) 240-1841
* Lower taxes and limited government
* Protect our ports and borders
* Victory in the war against terrorism
This communication paid for and authorized by Beren for Congress

Now, reading this it struck me that there has indeed been little debate so I did some digging. In the Klobuchar/Bell/Kennedy race, only Ford Bell and Mark Kennedy debated. Ms. Klobuchar declined to attend all debates. In the 7th CD, incumbent Collin Peterson was a no show at a debate that included a primary challenger to Peterson, the Republican candidate AND the Constitution Party Candidate. In the 2nd CD, Coleen Rowley has finally accepted (after many local attempts) an invitation to debate incumbent John Kline. The debates that she finally accepted were RADIO debates and not live in front of constituent debates! The same scene is playing out in Minnesota's 6th CD as well. All over Minnesota (and apparently all over the country if my friend's campaign is any indication) Democratic candidates for office are engaging in the same tactic that they are advocating for our troops - avoid engaging the enemy at ALL COSTS. It's the same old cut and run that they advocate for our troops.

If they can't even stand up to defend what they believe in a debate format, how are they going to defend the country if (God forbid) we are ever attacked again! The choice is becoming clearer by the minute. If the Democrats can't even stand up for their "firmly held beliefs" how are they going to stand up for the country?

I would be very interested in hearing of any similar situations out there.

Democrats vs Wla-Mart

What do you do with a company that employes over 1 million Americans and makes $316 billion in revenue? If you are a Democrat, you turn them into a campaign target.

"DES MOINES, Aug. 16 — Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, a likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2008, delivered a 15-minute, blistering attack to warm applause from Democrats and union organizers here on Wednesday. But Mr. Biden’s main target was not Republicans in Washington, or even his prospective presidential rivals.

It was Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private employer."

Forget Islamic terrorists, Wal-Mart is apparently the largest single threat to American safety! Instead of focusing on the danger that terrorists they cater to unions.

Never mind the fact that Wal-Mart makes life better for the middle class by making more products available at a more affordable price. Never mind the fact that many of Wal-Mart's employees are the very voters that the Democrats say they are reaching out to. Never mind the fact that many of Wal-Mart's shopers are the same "values voters" that the Democrats are trying to court! Instead, focus on the fact that Wal-Mart doesn't "provide benefits" - never mind the fact that most Wal-Mart employees are PART TIME employees and companies are not required to give full time benefits to part time employees. Never mind that over 10 million Americans shopped at Wal-Mart on the Friday after Thanksgiving last year.

Yep - that is a winning strategy.....

Multiculturalism bad? Really?????

WOW - I didn't think anyone would have the intestinal fortitude to print this headline.

" Multiculturalism is to blame for perverting young Muslims "

While the article itself does not say that, it does do an admirable job of putting to rest the myth that there is a "reason" for the hatred that the radicals have for "the West".

"Islamic radicalism did not begin with Muslim grievances over Western foreign policy in Iraq or Afghanistan. It has deep roots, going back to the 13th-century reformer Ibn Taimiyya, through Wahhabism to modern ideologues such as Sayyid Qutb in Egypt or Maududi in Pakistan. "

The telling thing, that most people will miss, is this:

"Given the world view that has given rise to such grievances, there can never be sufficient appeasement, and new demands will continue to be made" (emphasis added)

That is the one thing that the left just will never get! No matter what we do it will never be enough for the Islamofascists. If you don't believe me look at what happened to someone who had the audacity to question CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations).

"I went to the event because CAIR had advertised that it was open to the public, and regardless, it was held on a public sidewalk in front of a Federal building. I had every right to be there. It was clear that they had a message they wanted to express, and I hoped to get them to speak beyond their scripted press release comments…to get some straight answers about how they really feel about the violence and terrorism committed by Hezbollah that provoked the Israeli response.

I wasn’t there more than a couple of minutes when I began to interview a gentleman wearing a kafiyyeh that concealed everything but his eyes. I was asking him about his support for Hezbollah when Dr. Al-Akhras approached us and began telling everyone in the vicinity not to speak to me. I then asked him what his message and I kept rolling as he explained how they were there opposing terror. He was clearly agitated. It was when several of them were telling me about Israel bombing innocent civilians, and I responded by asking them about Hezbollah missiles being fired into Israel killing innocent civilians that Al-Akhras lunged at me and grabbed ahold of my camera as I was filming.

At 5’3” and 100 pounds, “ciaospirit” is not a physically intimidating figure. Yet she says Dr. Al-Akhras assaulted her a second time as she was filming him as he addressed the rally – again, all captured on a video she made available on her blog."

One thing that Americans need to be made aware of is this:

"Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law."

Read that again and let it sink in....30% of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than live in a free democratic society! But wait there is more:

"Forty-five percent say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments. (they must be the ones that watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann - ed) This figure is more than twice as high as those who say it was not a conspiracy. Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror.

When asked, "Is Britain my country or their country?" only one in four say it is. Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law. According to the report, "Half of those who express a preference for living under Sharia law say that, given the choice, they would move to a country governed by those laws."

Twenty-eight percent hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. This comports with last year's Daily Telegraph newspaper survey that found one-third of British Muslims believe that Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to end it. " (emphasis added)

Are you starting to see yet, dear reader, what it is we are up against?

Cross posted at Savage Republican

Delving further into the swamp.

If you really want to see how bad the fever swamp left has gotten, you need look no further than "Countdown" with Keith Olbermann. Last week brought us a classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) courtesy of Newsbusters. In opening his show Olberman hinted that the attack that was thwarted by British Intelligence was "not quite as real as advertised". He then went on to imply that the administration used their campaign plan to paint the Dems as "soft on terror" to push the Brits into arresting the terror plotters right after the Connecticut primary - to push Ned Lamont's victory over Bush lackey Joe Leiberman!

Well first off the Administration doesn't have to do much at all to push the impression that the Dems are soft on terror. They demonstrate that to the world day in and day out.

Even one of Olbermann's guests, Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank, thought that Olbermann was carrying this a bit far as this excerpt indicates:

"Olbermann: "None of us can say for certain why the Bush administration would have pressured British authorities to move early on the terror arrests, but giving them the benefit of the doubt, even doing that, did not the pounding by the Vice President, by Ken Mehlman, by others, still leave the administration wide open for doubt and even suspicion about the timing of all this?"

Milbank: "Well, Keith, that's just the kind of question that emboldens the al-Qaeda types."

Olbermann: "Thank you very much."

Milbank: "Well, it's not really even a matter of suspicion. I mean, Karl Rove came out earlier this year and said, look, this is what our fall campaign is going to be about, it's about stirring up terrorism and then saying that we can protect you better than the other guy. I wouldn't get too bogged down in the timing issue because, if anything, the Bush administration politically would have wanted to wait until September or October when everybody was paying attention. But it's not even an open secret, it's completely out in the open that terrorism is politicized routinely over and over again." (emphasis added)

Milbank is correct - terrorism HAS been politicized over and over in the last 5 years - it was a staple of the 2004 election. He is also correct in his analysis that if the administration was indeed looking for an "imminent attack" to exploit they would have waited until October when people were actually paying attention to the elections.

The fact that Keith Olbermann has any viewers is astonishing. That 375,000 people in this country actually watch this tripe and take him seriously is disturbing. Then again, I do know some people who think that the Popular Mechanics article (and soon to be book) debunking the 9/11 myths is a government conspiracy so.....

Buh bye now....

That is what the Democratic Party is saying to 2004 VP Candidate Joe Leiberman. Now that the Kidz have successfully ousted the Senior Senator from Connecticut they are looking for the next hawk.....Hillary Clinton.

"The same activists are now seeking to bend Senator Hillary Clinton to their anti-war side or face defeat in the Democratic presidential primaries. Her supporters are concerned that the “jihadist” left, galvanised by the victory of East Coast millionaire Ned Lamont, are on the rise in the Democratic party, starkly affecting its national electoral prospects. "

Well you have to give the Kidz credit - they aim high!

"Mike McCurry, White House press secretary during Bill Clinton’s presidency, said: “The very idea of centrism is under attack now in the party. We have our own loony left too.”

Too????? Mike - I hate to tell you this buddy, but you own the rights to the loony left! They are yours and yours alone!

I wouldn't worry about Mrs. Clinton though. She is the one that master the tactic of triangulation.

"Clinton quickly shored up her position on the left last week by telephoning Lamont to congratulate him on his victory and dropping $5,000 (£2,650) into his electoral coffers.

She also declared that “there is a great deal of difference” between her position on Iraq and Lieberman’s. Days before the primary vote, in a nifty use of her influence on the Senate armed services committee, she summoned Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, and then demanded his resignation for mismanaging the war (a position Lieberman has not taken). "

See she's already working her way back to the left. Not a worry! Madam Hillary will survive. That is what she does best.

A trip into the swamp

I don't normally delve into the depths of the fever swamp, but a friend sent me this and I just had to look. Now the diarist in question is of interest to me and it was interesting to see his side of the story but what was really amusing were the comments of the Kidz.

"You're already news, since he's personally attacked you twice. Also talk to a lawyer. If he sent a mass mailing to the whole district attacking you personally, that's libel and slander and you have grounds for a lawsuit. So talk to a lawyer and to the local paper."

Said one commenter. Another chimed in with this:

"and call a press conference to announce you're suing the bastard. You're NOT a public person, and this is damaging in so many ways it's not funny. Call the ACLU too, while you're at it. And the FEC, to find out what money (and whose time) was used to create that flyer. He might be in violation of some FEC regs. But I'd definitely call a lawyer right now. John Edwards might not be too busy... ;-)"

There was lots of advise to "sue the b*stard" and that led a self professed lawyer to chime in with this.

"I would advise Bailey not to bother any attorneys with this garbage, and to quit "helping" congressional candidates. "

That led to an accusation of the poster being a troll. Her response is classic!

"I am attempting to point out that the people here talking about defamation claims don't know what they are talking about. What Kline says is a slight exaggeration at best -- it is essentially true. And its not actionable. If this guy sued,he would end up paying John Kline money. Although the diarist is not a public figure, he is working for a public figure and the allegations relate to his work on Rowley's behalf. This is political speech, and as such, the most first amendment protection is afforded to it, making it is very difficult to prove up a defamation claim.
If a staffer for a Republican congressional candidate had his own political website with controvertial positions, people on DailyKos would be all over it. The diarist screwed up bigtime, and writing a diary about it is even more of a disservice to Rowley. If he really wanted to help her out, he would delete this diary and shut up" (emphasis added)

Common sense out of a Kos commenter. Whoa - whodathunkit....but wait - there is even more common sense out of the poster in question.

"What frustrates me is the reaction to this. Republicans are dirty cheaters? Tell me something I don't know. Four years ago, Minnesota Republicans spun Paul Wellstone's funeral into electoral victory. They are going to keep doing it, especially if we keep making it easy for them. Instead of talking about suing them or exposing Kline for this we should work on not giving the Republicans easy material to work with. Maybe some self-reflection instead of cheerleading. Despite all the bitching here, if you read the linked article about this with any objectivity, its Rowley who looks bad. Time to stop pretending everything is ok when its not.Rowley needs to:
1) issue a statement explaining that this guy was not with the campaign when he went to Kline's office, and that the content on the website was not authorized by the campaign.
2) Sh__can him. "(not a direct quote - Kos may allow that kind of language on his site, but I don't!)

What was the reaction of the Kidz to such advice....when they couldn't "shout" the poster down, they ignored her. Keep on ignoring the views that don't agree with you Kidz and you will continue to loose elections! It's your choice... It makes no difference to me whether you pay attention to the common sense advise of a lawyer who knows better or not. Go ahead, distract yourself with a frivolous lawsuit and while you are off doing that, the Kline campaign will continue to do the work that needs to be done in order to win the election.

Ethical Decision Making

I have followed this story, like most folks, in the pages of the Star Tribune and the blog Minnesota Democrats Exposed. MDE first broke the story last week.

"Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., accused Democratic challenger Coleen Rowley Wednesday of using a "double-agent" to attempt to make an illegal campaign contribution and infiltrate his reelection campaign."

Much has been said about the actions of both campaigns in this incident. The Congressman's detractors complain about the timing of the allegations. The illegal campaign contribution was apparently made back in February - why did the Kline camp not make their complaint until August? According to a letter sent out by the campaign, they were going to let it slide but when Ms. Rowley's supporters turned nasty (in letters to the editor and calls to local talk radio) they changed their minds. I suppose that could be the case, but...

I would like to focus on two things. First is this - the volunteer in question, David Bailey, said that his actions were purely innocent. I highly doubt that. The fact that any citizen that is interested in signing up for campaign literature can do so online. Any citizen that wants to get on the campaign mailing lists can do so online. In either case - NO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION IS NECESSARY! I am on several campaign mailing lists and I have yet to contribute to any of them. Then there is the fact that he went to the Congressman's local office first (as opposed to the campaign office). There are strict federal laws against campaign business being done in an elected officials office - and for good reason! Since Mr. Bailey's blatent attempt to trap an unwitting staffer into commiting a federal crime, the Rowley campaign has promoted him to a paid staff position. Something certainly seems fishy here.

Second is this:

"Our campaign has never sent anyone in there to do anything like that," said Rowley campaign manager Terry Rogers. "

I don't doubt this for a second. I imagine that Mr. Rogers is savvy enough to know that these kinds of actions are suicide for a campaign. However, the culture that has flourished within the Rowley campaign has been less than honorable. As I have recounted in other posts Ms. Rowley and her campaign has made it a campaign staple to distort and tell outright lies about Congressman Kline. Their clumsy attempts at distortion are easily disproven by tools such as Project Vote Smart - something that the campaign really should be looking at from time to time. Then there is the infamous "photo-shopping" incident, something that (again) is blamed on an uncontrolable volunteer. Obviously the volunteers believe that these actions are condoned, maybe even encouraged, by the campaign otherwise they would not do it.

For someone who has made the phrase "ethical decision making" a staple of her campaign, the Rowley campaign has been rife with less than ethical decisions. That is the thing that saddens me most. I love a good, well fought campaign and the Rowley camp has run neither. It seems to be the norm, right now, for Democratic candidates...

Reading writing and gay rights

My friend Amendment X asked (rather rhetorically) how the NEA would respond to a headline in the Red Star that laments about how Americans know little about the US. I think I know the reason why our children aren't learning about silly little things like "how many houses of Congress does the US have?" and "how many Congressmen from your state?" It is because the NEA are teaching "more important things" like acceptance of gays as "normal" and promoting atheism and Islam over the religion of the parents choosing. I have told (many times) the story of a "Diversity Day" program that was held at the Junior Logicians school 6 years ago. Speakers to the kiddies included an Islamic Imam and a Native American Holy man. No Christian pastor, no Jewish holy man.....just Native American and Islam. When the Logical Husband inquired as to why the school was promoting a religion - a clear violation of the "separation of church and state" the Imam was "uninvited"! Apparently they didn't think that Native American religion counted as a religion - I don't know.....

Phyllis Schlafly (a wonderfully logical lady) writes about the NEA agenda in a recent Townhall article.

"The NEA is determined to get control of children at the earliest possible age. One resolution calls for public school programs for children "from birth through age 8," another calls for pre-kindergarten for "all 3- and 4-year-old children," and still another demands "mandatory kindergarten with compulsory attendance." The anti-parent animus of the NEA is apparent in its insistence that the public schools be in the driver's seat about the teaching of sex. Claiming that every child has the right to "freely available information and knowledge about sexuality," the NEA demands the right to teach children about diversity of sexual orientation and gender identification, incest, and homophobia. "

That is the thing that frightens me the most. These people, who are with my child 6 hours a day, 5 days a week for 9 months want to tell me that they know my child better than I do???? I have already had more than a few discussions with teachers who have no interest in trying to figure out the Junior Logicians learning style, but want to brand him as uncooperative or unable to perform. We had a teacher this last year who took a kid who was in honors math (and who loved math) and in one year had him in remedial math and hating the subject. The teacher was astonished when we had the audacity to ask HIM what he did to change the equation.

Don't get me wrong, we have had good teachers - teachers who looked to us as partners in the Junior Logicians education. That is as it should be. The NEA needs to remember that. They also need to remember that the TAXPAYERS are the ones who pay the teachers salaries and that it is not a good thing to "dis" the boss.

Well now, I almost missed this.

I was reading this story in the local Prior Lake MN (which is next door to Savage) paper this weekend.

"Veterans Field at Memorial Park would more than quadruple in seat capacity by 2008 under a proposal to bring a Northwoods League baseball team to Prior Lake. The plan calls for expanded seating and other renovations at both Veterans Field, where the league's new club team would play, and Ryan Park, where some local teams would move."

Well, this sounds familiar - build us a ball park in order to attract or keep a ball club. However, this was the part that was missed in the local story.

"Prior Lake, on the other hand, is finalizing details on an agreement with former Star Tribune executive editor and publisher Joel Kramer, who contacted Mayor Jack Haugen in early July."

Joel Kramer....that name sounds familiar...former Star Tribune editor and publisher Joel Kramer.....OH HIM!!!!!

" Several well-off Minnesotans who believe more tax money should be pumped into public initiatives said the state can start with them. More than 200 wealthy Minnesotans signed a full-page ad appearing Thursday in the Star Tribune asking the state to raise $2 billion for various initiatives by increasing the state's tax burden for high-salary earners. "We need to invest more in our future," said Joel Kramer, former publisher of the Star Tribune and founder of the think tank Growth and Justice, which organized the "Invest for Real Prosperity" fiscal strategy.

Co-chair of "Works for Minnesota" the group of leftists that decided that "we can afford to pay more state taxes!", founder of a leftist think tank which wants to take money from the middle class under the guise that the money is really coming from "the rich". Now he wants to force the citizens of the City of Prior Lake to build him a baseball stadium for his semi-pro team? I hope that the people of Prior Lake realize what is being foisted on them by someone who can afford to build his own stadium.

Cross posted at Savage Republican

Peaceful purposes?

Anyone see this reported on THIS side of the pond?

"Border guards seized a British lorry on its way to make a delivery to the Iranian military - after discovering it was packed with radioactive material that could be used to build a dirty bomb. "

Hmmmmm......

"The lorry set off from Kent on its way to Tehran but was stopped by officials at a checkpoint on Bulgaria's northernborder with Romania after a scanner indicated radiation levels 200 times above normal. "

Surely this was some innocent misunderstanding...right?

"On board they found ten lead-lined boxes addressed to the Iranian Ministry of Defence. Inside each box was a soil-testing device, containing highly dangerous quantities of radioactive caesium 137 and americium-beryllium." (emphasis mine)

Well this certain sheds a whole new light on the peacefull purposes of the Iranian governments nuclear program, doesn't it?????

The real modern day Hitler

A lot of people have thrown out the "Hitler" insult in recent years - refering to President Bush as "Hitlerian" and now equating Israel to Nazi Germany. But are those comparisons accurate? Let's compare Hitler with another current leader and see who is really Hitlerian.

First we have Hezbollah:

"Just like Hitler fought the Jews, we are a great Islamic nation of jihad, and we too should fight the Jews and burn them."
— Hisham Shamas, political science student, at a symposium hosted by Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV at Lebanon's largest and only government-run university, Université Libanaise, November 29, 2005"

Then there is this from a 1920 speech made by Adolph Hitler:

"For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst. "

Then there is the President of Iran:

"I invite the faithful to wait for good news,” Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said last Tuesday. “We shall soon witness the elimination of the Zionist stain of shame.”

This is reproduction of the profile of the 1939 Time Man of the Year - ADOLPH HITLER!

"Lesser men of the year seemed small indeed beside the Fuhrer. "

Now compare this to the fawning remarks that Mike Wallace recently made regarding President Ahmadinejad.

"Wallace said, "He's an impressive fellow, this guy. He really is. He's obviously smart as hell."

The Bible teaches of a time when good is called evil and wrong is called right. It certainly appears that we are quickly reaching that point in time. And that is not a good thing for a lot of people.

What happens when your friends turn on you?

This happens.....

"My brief and unhappy experience with the hate and vitriol of bloggers on the liberal side of the aisle comes from the last several months I spent campaigning for a longtime friend, Joe Lieberman.
This kind of scary hatred, my dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing--in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against "communists and their fellow travelers." The word "McCarthyism" became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right's fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a "communist" or "socialist" who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.
I came to believe that we liberals couldn't possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us. And in recent years--with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage--I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.

Now, in the closing days of the Lieberman primary campaign, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong. The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony. "

It's not pretty, but it is is something that those on the right have been getting from our esteemed friends on the left for the last 15 years. It is a lesson on what the far left is turning the Democratic Party into.

UPDATE: Jack Kelly has this take on the Lamont victory, the reaction of the "nutroots" and the history of previous attempts of the far left to hijack the Democratic Party. It is a must read as all of his articles are.