Benazir Bhutto

Much has been said about the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. She is called a patriot, a martyr and a cold conniving politician - depending on your view point. Rather than focus on her, I would like to focus on some comments that have been made by US politicians in light of her assassination. I already mentioned Governor Huckabee's "apologies" for the crime. However I did not get a chance (before now) about Congressman Paul's remarks on the event. Hot Air has the video and a few compliments for the Congressman's general point. What Congressman Paul has right is that we probably forced the democracy point with Musharraf, however, what he continues to miss is the point that we live in a world where what happens in Pakistan DOES affect us here in the US and what happens in Europe DOES affect the rest of the world! There are times when we have to deal with the "devil" (as we do now with China) in order to try to get them to play nice with everyone else. We simply can not leave Musharraf to deal with the chaos alone. The stakes (control of Pakistan's nuclear weapons) are too high.

America is NOT to blame for the death of Benazir Bhutto. No one forced her to go back to Pakistan - she went of her own accord. She complained about security lapses, but chose to ride outside her armored vehicle - making herself a willing target. The fact that both Governor Huckabee and Congressman Paul both seem to think that we are somehow to blame is a troubling thing for Governor Huckabee.

Well, Well, Well...

Things certainly were not slow last week when I was out of town! Between the Bhutto assisination (more on that later) and ALL of the news out of Iowa it is hard to know where to start. I guess this is as good a place as any...

If the daily Rasmussen Presidential preference poll is any indication, the bloom is indeed off of the Huckabee rose. In the last 5 days before the Iowa caucuses, Huckabee has gone from 20% and the lead in Iowa to 16% and a tie for second (with Mitt Romney). In first place (surprisingly) is Senator John McCain with 17% and followed by Rudy Giuliani (15%) and Fred Thompson (12%). Thompson's numbers have remained pretty static since this time last month while the others have been riding a roller coaster worthy of any amusement park. This tells me that the voters that are not pre-committed to any candidate are still looking for a candidate to represent them. This could bode well for Thompson.

While Rasmussen still shows a huge lead from Senator Clinton on the Democrats side, the Real Clear Politics poll averages show a much closer race - a slim 2% lead over Obama and Edwards. The RCP averages also show a different race on the Republican side with Romney leading by a slim .4 percent over Huckabee and McCain and Thompson slugging it out for third place.

What do I take from all of this.....first and foremost is to take the polling data with a very large grain of salt! As I have long said, polling data can and is manipulated on a daily basis. Wait to see what the voting says! Second is that the 2008 race to nomination is getting more and more interesting every day and THAT is going to get more people involved in the process and that is a very good thing indeed.

Who's Afraid of the Big, Bad....

Conservative? Well apparently Progressives are (HT Capt Ed)

The New York Times’ hiring of Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol to write for its op-ed page caused a frenzy in the liberal blogosphere Friday night, with threats of canceling subscriptions and claims that the Gray Lady had been hijacked by neo-cons.
But Times editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal sees things differently.
Rosenthal told Politico shortly after the official announcement Saturday that he fails to understand “this weird fear of opposing views.”

Rosenthal is finally starting to see what many on the right have known for a long time.

What is funny (ironic) is this comment.

“The idea that The New York Times is giving voice to a guy who is a serious, respected conservative intellectual — and somehow that’s a bad thing,” Rosenthal added. “How intolerant is that?”

I can't argue with that comment at all.

Huckadont

I was watching CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer" with my mother this evening. They were playing reactions of all of the Republican candidates to the news of Prime Minister Bhutto's assisination this morning. They got to a clip of Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee expressing our "sincere concern and apologies" to the people of Pakistan. My mother and I looked at each other in stunned silence for almost thirty seconds when we both blurted out simultaneously "what do we have to apologize for?" As much as I was flabberghasted at the statement, Paul over at Powerline seems to be less perplexed over Governor Huckabee's unfortunate remarks.

According to this report from CBS News, Mike Huckabee reacted to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto by expressing “our sincere concern and apologies for what has happened in Pakistan.” I'm hoping that Huckabee simply misspoke because otherwise he'll need to explain what the U.S. has to apologize for. Nothing comes to mind unless one is prone, in the fashion of Jimmy Carter, mindlessly to "blame America first." Huckabee also said that the U.S. needs to consider “what impact does [the assassination have] on whether or not there’s going to be martial law continuing in Pakistan.” But martial law was discontinued approximately two weeks ago.
UPDATE: The Huckabee campaign assures me that Huckabee definitely meant to say "sympathy" not "apologies."

As much as I admire the Powerline trio, I simply don't buy the excuse that easily. Governor Huckabee is supposed to be a minister and I would think that any minister would not easily confuse sympathy and apology.....it just doesn't ring right for someone who has been in the pulpit and elected office to be that sloppy.....

The Huckaboom is about to become a Huckabomb.....

Merry Christmas To All

From everyone in the Logical Household to all of your families - may you find joy and blessing this Christmas.

Posting will be very light for the rest of the week as we are spending some quality time with our extended family.

From the In Box.

Minnesota Majority and the Citizens Council on Health Care are teaming up to host 3 "webinars" on market based health care reform.

“Virtual Town Hall Meetings” Announced to Spur Public Dialog on Minnesota Health Care Reform Proposals

Minneapolis, MN- December 14, 2007 – Two groups involved in Minnesota’s health care debate have joined forces to announce a series of virtual town hall meetings to address proposed health care reforms. Citizens' Council on Health Care (CCHC) and Minnesota Majority will host a series of Internet-based conferences to educate the public on the issues surrounding various health care reform proposals and solicit citizen feedback on alternative reform measures.
The virtual town hall meetings will be held from 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. on January 8, January 23 and February 7, 2008. Each event will accommodate up to 1000 participants and will be free-of-charge. Legislators from both sides of the aisle will be invited to present their proposals. The public will have the opportunity to ask questions to the presenters and provide feedback on reform proposals. Individuals can register for the event by visiting www.HealthCareMeeting.com.

"We wanted to provide a more convenient and effective method of encouraging a public dialog on important public policy issues that impact people’s lives,” said Jeff Davis, President of Minnesota Majority. “The virtual town hall meeting offers busy families a way to take a few minutes out of their day and step into the public square without leaving the comfort of their homes.” Davis believes that environmentally-conscious individuals may prefer the virtual meeting approach since no fossil fuels are burned travelling to and from a physical meeting location. (is this last sentence tongue in cheek??)

Twila Brase, President of CCHC, is optimistic about the potential benefits. “The online tools will allow participants to submit their questions to legislators and be get immediate responses,” said Brase. We expect health care to be a hot topic during the 2008 legislative session. These town hall meetings will put legislators and the public at large in the same virtual room for a meaningful statewide dialog on this critical issue.
About Minnesota Majority

Minnesota Majority is a non-partisan, non-profit issue advocacy group established to help promote traditional values in Minnesota’s state public policy. Visit www.MinnesotaMajority.org. Media contact is Drew Emmer, 763-242-0863 or drew.emmer@mnmajority.org.

About Citizens Council for Health Care

CCHC is an independent 501(c)3 non-profit organization that advocates for patient and physician freedom, medical innovation, and the right of citizens to a confidential patient-doctor relationship. Visit http://www.cchconline.org. Media contact is Twila Brase at (651) 646-8935 or mediacontact@cchconline.org

I'll be there. Will you?

Despot of the Year

Time Magazine is out with their "Person of the Year" and this year's is a doozy! Time's Person of the Year is Vladimir Putin and the only thing more stunning than the choice was the reason for the choice.

TIME's Person of the Year is not and never has been an honor. It is not an endorsement. It is not a popularity contest. At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping that world—for better or for worse. It is ultimately about leadership—bold, earth-changing leadership. Putin is not a boy scout. He is not a democrat in any way that the West would define it. He is not a paragon of free speech. He stands, above all, for stability—stability before freedom, stability before choice, stability in a country that has hardly seen it for a hundred years.

It is how the former KGB agent achieves that stability that should have put the Time editors off of this nomination. People who question Putin's tactics have died in some rather creative ways along with being handled in some of the more mundane ways.

Putin has moved Russia away from democracy and openness back to the old days of dictatorship and fear. This is what Time feels is leadership. Then again, they also considered Hitler and Stalin to be a leaders too so I suppose that this is not too much of a surprise.

Busy Day

Life at the Casa is going to be busy today. I leave you with this video tribute to Dan Fogelberg (who died over the weekend and the tender age of 56) and 2006 Kentucky Derby Champ Barbaro who also left us way too soo. Enjoy!

Why English is Important.

One of the mantras in the immigration debate is the English language question. It could be something as simple as a sign in a fast food window or as complex as legislation to make English the national language. What is lost in the discussion of diversity versus assimilation is WHY it is so very important for immigrants (legal or illegal) to learn how to speak the English language.

Police blamed bad information for sending a SWAT team into a north Minneapolis house early Sunday morning in a raid that ended with shots exchanged between police -- who were struck by bullets -- and the resident, who said he was just defending his family.
The homeowner, who does not speak English, told his brother that he thought the police were the "bad guys" after they broke through the back door of the house, where he lives with his wife and six children...In a statement released shortly after 5 a.m. Sunday, police said that officers found no one on the first floor of the house. When they made their way up to the second floor, they were confronted by an adult male. The officers identified themselves as police, and the man fired several rounds at them. Several officers returned fire, but no one in the house was injured.

Emphasis mine. The police identified themselves but because the homeowner did not speak English - he didn't know what they said! He assumed that they were bad guys and opened fire!

Back when the Logical Husband and I were newlyweds, we lived in Germany courtesy of the United States Army. Because we were living in Germany, we learned German so that we could communicate with shopkeepers, our landlady and of course the police. It's common sense! Yet two Democratic Presidential candidates (Senators Clinton and Obama) voted against an amendment to the Comprehensive Immigration reform bill that would have required official government business in the United States to be conducted in English! Instead they voted for an amendment that declared that English was the "common and unifying language" of the country. While that is a true and accurate statement, it certainly diminishes the importance of learning English in order to understand what others are saying to you!

When we lived in Germany, we did not "demand" that the German government provide us with English documents in order to do business with the government. We learned the language so that we could do what was necessary for us to live in their country. I think that maybe our guests living here need to do the same. It's common sense.

Pot Meet Kettle

Former PresidentBill Clinton has been hitting the campaign trail hard for his wife lately. Yesterday, on "The Charlie Rose Show", he said something so unbelievably hypocritical that it defies logic. He came out and said that Senator Barak Obama does not have the "experience" to be President. Now I fully understand that many on the right are saying this, but for former President Clinton to say that, in this day and age of YouTube is stunningly stupid.

The Obama Capaign didn't waste any time....



Once upon a time, the Clinton Machine was considered to be "unstoppable". Manipulation and triangulation may have worked in 1990, but with the easy access to the internet and digital technology (like YouTube) allows the world to see what many conservatives have long said about the chamelons that are President and Senator Clinton.

The Ron Paul Phenomenon

You may have noticed that Presidential politics has been on my mind a lot this past week. With the Iowa caucuses three weeks away, is it any wonder? The subject of today's post I'm sure will be controversial....Congressman Ron Paul. I've written about Congressman Paul in the past on my own blog and the more I dig into his record, the more puzzled I am by his candidacy. While I feel that his isolationist views are dead wrong and dangerous, I like a some of his thoughts on limited government.

Today Logical Lady Kimberly Strassel takes a look at some of the lessons that the RNC needs to take from the Ron Paul campaign.

If there's been a phenomenon in this Republican presidential race, it's been the strength of a fiery doctor from Texas and his message of limited government. As the GOP front-runners address crowds of dispirited primary voters, Mr. Paul has been tearing across the country, leaving a trail of passionate devotees in his wake.
Paul rallies heave with voters waving placards and shouting "Liberty! Liberty!" Money is pouring in from tens of thousands of individual donors--so much cash that the 10-term congressman recently admitted he wasn't sure he could spend it all. A fund-raising event on Guy Fawkes Day (in tribute to Mr. Paul's rebel persona) netted his campaign $4 million, the biggest one-day haul of any GOP candidate, ever. He continues to inch up in the early primary polls, and even bests Fred Thompson in New Hampshire.
Mr. Paul isn't going to be president. He trails in national polls, in no small part because his lack of a proactive foreign policy makes him an unserious candidate in today's terror world. But his success still holds lessons for the leading Republican candidates, as well as those pundits falling for the argument that the future of the GOP rests in a "heroic conservatism" that embraces big government. Mr. Paul shows that the way to many Republican voters' hearts is still through a spirited belief in lower taxes and smaller government, with more state and individual rights.

Congressman Paul is not going to be President. Besides his foreign policy stands, his supporters have put off so many potential converts (such as myself) with their tactics of gaming online polls to inflate his support and their blatent disregard for the property rights of venues that hold political events (such as the Iowa Straw Poll which dictated where signage could be posted...something Congressman Paul's supporters disregarded). Because of these actions, many Republicans disregard the Paul campaign entirely and that is a pity because his call for smaller government is a core conservative principle.

On the stump, Mr. Paul whips up crowds with his libertarian talk of "less taxation, less regulation, a better economic system." While Mitt Romney explains his support of No Child Left Behind, Mr. Paul gets standing ovations by promising to eliminate the Department of Education. Rudy Giuliani toys with reducing marginal rates; Mr. Paul gets whoops with his dream to ax the income tax (and by extension the IRS). Mike Huckabee lectures on the need for more government-subsidized clean energy; Mr. Paul brings cheers with his motto that environmental problems are best solved with stronger property rights. His rhetoric is based on first principles--carefully connecting his policies to the goals of liberty and freedom--and it fires up the base.

First principles....hmmmm where have I heard THAT before??????

The men vying to lead the Republican Party might instead make a study of Mr. Paul. One shame of this race is that for all the enthusiasm the Texan has generated among voters, he hasn't managed to pressure the front-runners toward his positions. His more kooky views (say, his belief in a conspiracy to create a "North American Union") and his violent antiwar talk have allowed the other aspirants to dismiss him.
They shouldn't dismiss the passion he's tapped. If Mr. Paul has shown anything, it's that many conservative voters continue to doubt there's anything "heroic" or "compassionate" in a ballooning government that sucks up their dollars to aid a dysfunctional state. When Mr. Paul gracefully exits this race, his followers will be looking for an alternative to take up that cause. Any takers?

Emphasis mine. The Party had best wake up and take a page from Congressman Paul's campaign. Small government is a winner! Returning control to the people will get you votes. This is not rocket science....it's common sense - something that appears to be lacking in both parties right now.

Taking It On Faith

Logical Lady Peggy Noonan has a column out today that all conservatives need to read and contemplate.

Christian conservatives have been rising, most recently, for 30 years in national politics, since they helped elect Jimmy Carter. They care about the religious faith of their leaders, and their interest is legitimate. Faith is a shaping force. Lincoln got grilled on it. But there is a sense in Iowa now that faith has been heightened as a determining factor in how to vote, that such things as executive ability, professional history, temperament, character, political philosophy and professed stands are secondary, tertiary.
But they are not, and cannot be. They are central. Things seem to be getting out of kilter, with the emphasis shifting too far....
I wonder if our old friend Ronald Reagan could rise in this party, this environment. Not a regular churchgoer, said he experienced God riding his horse at the ranch, divorced, relaxed about the faiths of his friends and aides, or about its absence. He was a believing Christian, but he spent his adulthood in relativist Hollywood, and had a father who belonged to what some saw, and even see, as the Catholic cult. I'm just not sure he'd be pure enough to make it in this party. I'm not sure he'd be considered good enough.

While the emphasis on religion does seem to come mostly from the press, there is a fair amount of it coming from within the conservative movement. As a "values voter" myself, I do take these issues seriously, but I also find myself in disagreement with other values voters on the priority of the values. As Ms. Noonan points out, many put the character values ahead of the ability to govern. I know some wonderful Godly people who would not be able to handle the stress of governing and I know many who have the temperment to govern wisely who are not the "best Christians" (like Ronald Reagan).

Just as we the people expect wisdom out of our elected officials, we the people need to show a little wisdom of our own! For those who (like me) prayer and meditation is an important part of your life, you need to pray and meditate on who will be the best overall to govern our nation...not who is the "best Christian", but who will be the best leader for ALL the people.

Making a three dimensional decision (who has the best character, who has experience and who can get the job done), as opposed to deciding strictly on faith, is the best thing that people of faith can do for their country.

St. Pauls Finest "In Action"

Like a lot of other 2nd Amendment advocates, I have been following the Martin Treptow case quite closely through the pages of Shot In The Dark and Joel Rosenberg's Live Journal. For those of you that want a quick rundown on the case see Joel's post here.

OK - now that you are up to speed on the basics of the case, it took a rather bizarre turn this week. It seems that 7 years ago, Mrs. Treptow was involved in another traffic incident. Tom Lyden, Investigative Reporter for Fox 9 News, wanted to get some details of the encounter and instead ended up with his own close encounter with St. Paul's finest.

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher says St. Paul police officials improperly obtained the cell phone records of Fox-9 news reporter Tom Lyden as part of an
investigation that involved a sheriff's department employee.
The case is a big media deal because Minnesota's shield law protects reporters and their sources; news organizations have the right to challenge any law enforcement request in court. However, the St. Paul police did an end run: they went after a third party — Lyden's cell phone provider — with an "administrative subpoena" which does not need to be disclosed to the reporter or media organization.
"They have basically opened up my reporter's notebook. They have basically looked at my notes, they have looked at sources, they have looked at people I have tried to protect," Lyden told fellow investigative reporter Trish Van Pilsum for a Fox-9
story that aired Tuesday...Fox says police Public Information Officer Tom Walsh denied a request for the criminal history; the sheriff's office gave Lyden the document, ruling it was public. (Walsh refused comment, citing an open investigation into the case.)

Minnesota has a "Shield Law" that protects journalists from this kind of police over-reaching.

What is worse is HOW the SPPD got Mr. Lyden's data.

...Fletcher alleges St. Paul police:
· Submitted a "false affidavit" to get phone records.
· Opened a criminal investigation to "deflect" civil liability police feared due to the records' release.
· Engaged in a conflict of interest by investigating his office as the aggrieved party, rather than referring the matter to a neutral third party.
· Pursued the inquiry in part because of animus between police commander David Korus and sheriff's office director Steve Lydon, plus Walsh's "distain" [sic] for Lyden.

The charge that is most frightening to me is the first.....filing a false affidavit to get the phone records. The St. Paul PD obviously knew that what they were doing was wrong - otherwise they would have gone through the correct process to get the subpeona. The fact that they didn't give Fox 9 and Mr. Lyden an opportunity to fight for their rights, shows just how aware that actions they were engaging in were wrong.

With the RNC Convention coming into town next year, the last thing we need is a scandal like this where both delegates and protesters are afraid that the police are looking at their phone records without proper warrants.

WWMD (What Would Mitt Do?)

When True North was first formed, the one constant (amongst the Nucleus) was the concept of principles first conservatism. For the Nucleus that is a very important thing for ANY upcoming candidate. That is what makes this WSJ story about Governor Mitt Romney so troubling.
Mitt Romney loves data and lusts after process.

In a recent cover profile in The Weekly Standard by the magazine's Fred Barnes, Mr. Romney is portrayed as the man who would be the CEO of America. Says Mr.
Barnes, quoting Mr. Romney, a Harvard M.B.A.: "His idea of the perfect deal is not when one side wins but when 'you find a new alternative that everybody agrees is the right way to go. That doesn't always happen.' "
Indeed.
Mr. Barnes says Mr. Romney's "approach to government is not ideological." A Romney adviser is quoted as saying of his candidate: "He's super-pragmatic. He's an eclectic conservative." And Mr. Romney himself says flatly that as president he would "insist on gathering data . . . and analyze the data looking for trends."

I can be as pragmatic as the next guy but there are certain core principles that my pragmatism will never over-ride.

There is a reason why you should have core principles that pragmatism never over-rides...

One of the subtle images of Mr. Romney's recent speech on religion is perhaps not understood by Mr. Romney's advisers. Where did Mr. Romney go to deliver his talk on principle? And who introduced him? The site was the presidential library of former president George H.W. Bush--the former president himself in his always gracious fashion introducing Romney.
Yet Mr. Romney did not need a visit to the Bush Library to understand why the Library does not contain the papers of a two-term president. The reason, of course, is that then-Vice President George H.W. Bush campaigned for the presidency in 1988 on the principle he phrased as "read my lips--no new taxes." He won. Yet in the name of precisely the process Mr. Romney lovingly describes--gathering data and looking for trends--the first President Bush was persuaded by Romneyesque
advisers like then-Treasury aide Richard Darman to surrender bedrock conservative principle and raise taxes. The senior Mr. Bush was advised to choose data and process over principle. He did--and in short order had lots of time on his hands to decide the process for building a library about a one-term president while Bill and Hillary Clinton took charge.

Process and data can only take you so far...especially in politics. At some point in time you have to decide that there is a line that you will not cross. Governor Romney has yet to show principled voters where that line is for him. He needs to find it soon - voting in Iowa is less than 3 weeks away.

BSL Heating up

ECM Publications runs several weekly local newspapers in Central Minnesota. Here in the Savage Lands, the representatives of ECM are This Week Prior Lake and This Week Burnsville. T.W. Buddig, the Capital reporter for ECM gives us part one of a three part series on Rep. John Lesch's (DFL-St. Paul) pending breed ban proposal.

When Kellie Dillner of Andover scooped up Marri, the pit bull showed only tenderness cradled in her owner’s arms.
Tenderness might not be the behavior expected from a breed of dog proposed to be banned from Minnesota.

Tenderness is only an unexpected behavior if all you knew about the breed was what was in the local media.

According to the article, Rep. Lesch is still adamant on proposing this ill-conceived legislation. Thankfully, support for the legislation is not high.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty is inclined to let local communities handle dog-related issues rather than favor a statewide approach, he recently explained.“What happens in a densely populated area of an urban center may be different than if you have a three thousand acre farm,” said Pawlenty this month. “It’s probably an issue that’s best addressed by local units of government,” he said.Animal control officers, too, see problems with a breed ban.The Minnesota Animal Control Association rejected Lesch’s breed ban proposal, said Bill Forbes, an association official and an animal control officer with the Bloomington Police Department.

The article then hits on the main opposition point.

Dog bite statistics, Forbes argues, reflect the popularity of dog breeds. He points to dog owners themselves as a major factor in the dog bite equation. “The breeds have changed, but the people (problem owners) are still the same,” Forbes said.Troublesome dogs tend to belong to certain types of owners, Forbes argues.
These owners tend to have personal histories of violence, substance abuse, run in with the law, he explained. “It’s mostly men — it’s kind of a hormonal thing,” said Forbes. It’s not a racial. It’s not a cultural. These problem owners are found across the socioeconomic spectrum, said Forbes.

Given my previous posts on the issue, I hope you would assume that the above emphasis is mine! After talking to the enforcement officers, Mr. Buddig talks to a veterinarian about the issue.

Dr. Margaret M. Duxbury, a veterinary behaviorist at the University of Minnesota Veterinary Medical Center, doesn’t view certain dog breeds as inherently more dangerous than any other. “Do I support the idea of outlawing certain dog breeds? No,” she said. “The issue is way too complicated to be solved that way,” said Duxbury.
“We see dogs every week for many kinds of aggressions. And many, many, many of them are not pit bulls,” she said. Several factors influence dog behavior, explained Duxbury.
Genetic temperament is one, but it strongly depends on a particular dog’s own direct relatives, she explained.
Within breeds, individuals differ, she explained.
Duxbury also points to socialization as a primary influence on dog behavior.“That starts really early — like three to twelve weeks,” she said.“It’s important what environment the puppies are in at the breeders. If they’re isolated — in a barn or a room and they don’t hear many people — they aren’t handled very much, that puts them at a great disadvantage,” she said.

Again, points I made in my previous posts. However, leave it to Rep. Lesch to ignore facts and base his decision solely on emotion.

But Lesch believes the testimony of dog bite victims will be powerful and compelling.
“I think they’re (A Rotta Love Plus) going to have to take their chances with that one,” Lesch of the idea of his bill lacking legs.

There is no doubt that the testimony of the dog bite victims will be powerful, but if you really want to fix the problem, Rep. Lesch, then listen to the experts. They are trying to tell you what the real solution to this problem is.

The Minnesota Animal Control Association is currently working on ways to give courts more ways of dealing with problem dogs.

To quote Laura Ingraham (when she is talking about illegal immigration) "ENFORCE THE LAW!" It's really that simple!

Lazy Like A Fox

A lot of folks have been talking about Fred Thompson's campaign - and most of what they are saying is not good. The latest press meme is that the former Senator is "lazy". Others have tried to dispell that notion in the past by rattling off his numerous accomplishments. If you look at what he has done in his life, they are correct - there is no way you can consider him to be "lazy". Now I would offer my observations on the charge.

Most of the people that I have heard making the "lazy" charge, have either been inside the beltway pundits or people who live in the Northeastern US. These "Yankees" are get to the point kind of people. The inside the beltway pundits are driven by the 30 second sound byte. That is what they make a living on. The rest just feel that they don't have time to waste - they have places to go and people to see and they want the information they need now! They just don't have the time or the patience for "southern".

Before I get into the defination of "southern", a little background will help you understand where I am coming from. I am a Chicago native married to a New York boy. I don't do slow! It's not in my DNA. I do, however, understand "Southern". I went to college in Missouri, which is somewhat southern and some of my dearest friends are from "the South"...Georgia, Louisiana, the Carolinas etc and there is a distinct difference in mindset. When I talk to these people, It drives me crazy if I don't check my "Chicago attitude" at the door. That is because nothing that I say or do will get them to "get to the point" any faster. What I consider "getting to the point" my friends from the south consider "rude" and "un-neighborly". What I consider "slow" is deliberate and well thought out to them. That's just the way we were raised.

"Southern" is a different way of life. "Southern" is more laid back. They stop to appreciate the finer things in life - including a well thought out, reasoned, deliberate approach to the issues. "Southern" does not give a fast answer to a question that needs a nuanced answer. "Southern" will give you the answer to the problem and not just a promise to "act in an appropriate manner". "Southern" gets to the meat of an issue and comes up with workable solutions. They troubleshoot the problem which is why I "get" Southern....I like to troubleshoot problems and fix them which is why I got into a technical field of work. They are expert listeners (something we northerners need to work on) and will only offer advise if the advise will indeed work to solve your problem.

Fred Thompson is, first and foremost, a product of the South. He is deliberate in his actions and speech. He does not say anything that he has not put a lot of thought and consideration into. For a serious politician that is a plus. As an actor nothing he says or does has not been pre-scripted for maximum effect. Nothing he does is by chance. That deliberation is what people see as "laziness". Senator Thompson does not speak in 30 second sound bytes and that is what got him pegged as lazy.

There was another Southern boy that the GOP and it's northern supporters "didn't get". He'll never get elected, they said. He's too slow and lazy. That Southern boy, the former Governor of Arkansas, that the GOP took for granted ended up beating the northern insider that they chose to run for President TWICE! My fear is that former Senator Thompson's deliberation will be what keeps him from getting top billing in 2008. There are simply too many voters (in the GOP) out there who don't get "Southern" and therefore will not get Thompson. It's a shame. Senator Thompson deserves a good look as his policy positions are quite good and worthy of the GOP's support.

True Choices

Our friends on the left have long claimed to be "pro-choice". However when you look at the record, they are only "pro" the choice to abort an unborn baby. When it comes to choices in other areas though, they ideas seem to be choiceless.

Case in point is the health care "crisis". The answer, according to all of the Democratic Presidential Contenders, to the health care crisis is similar forms of single payer/government run health care. Even in Minnesota our DFL legislators are all responding by proposing a HHS takeover of all Minnesotans medical care. Well today, the House Republican Caucus announced a real choice in the health care "crisis".

2008 HEALTH CARE REFORM INITIATIVES
FREEDOM AND CHOICE
It is a matter of personal responsibility to control your own health care.
Patients should be allowed to choose their health plan and doctor, and have a say in their care.
No mandate requiring everyone to have insurance.
Allow nationwide purchasing of any approved health care plan. This will promote nationwide competition, innovative plans, and lessened costs.
Provide individual tax credits/deductions to promote non-employer coverage, on a sliding scale.
Promote and expand information on cost of services and quality of care available to consumers.
PRIVACY AND SECURITY
Require patient consent to disseminate medical records.
Create a medical data bank in the consumer's wallet with e-health care cards with medical information. No hackers, no prying eyes on private information.
Portability is increased with individual insurance policies so consumers won't lose insurance if they lose their jobs.
Promote and enhance ongoing market-based reforms including evidence-based and value oriented medical information.
Create a tort court to assure quality of care, minimize defensive medicine, provide fair compensation to injured parties, standardize patient expectations and provider practices, and preserve statewide access to emergency room and obstetric services.
NO GOVERNMENT TAKE OVER OF HEALTH CARE
No government-directed rationing and no "Big Brother" decisions.
No months-long waiting lines like in Canada and Europe.
Maintain a safety net for those in need. Promote greater results in state programs, which will spill over into the private sector.
Make it easier for personal purchase of insurance where possible. Optional section 125 plans should be made easily available through agents, brokers and a voluntary
Insurance Exchange.
Shift state plan enrollees where possible to private plans via health care vouchers and/or tax credits.
FUNDING MECHANISMS
Reduce growth rate in Health and Human Services to the rate of inflation for one biennium. The Department functions are so vast that no one person can know all the overlaps and duplicated services that exist.
Create a statewide process to prioritize Human Services funding to address essential and important needs.
Use that source to fund tax credits, tax deductions, repeal of health taxes, including the Provider Tax, and other pressing needs, like the gap created by the Federal rule changes on targeted case management.
Increased consumer responsibility and engagement creates increased market pressure on prices and quality and reduces costs and increases quality, increasing affordability.
Follow the law: no increased state funding for illegal immigrants.

Choice - that's what it is all about...the choice to find the health plan that fits you and your needs. Your choice of plan, doctor and anything else you need without government interference or (most importantly) some bureaucrat telling you and your doctor what services he/she will provide to you and when.

If you want to know why choice is prefereable, you can read my previous posts on the subject.

Further Thoughts on the O'Donnell Interview

I have a few more thoughts on the Hugh Hewitt/Lawrence O'Donnell interview that I wrote about in my last post. I wanted to make sure that the "Islam" remarks stood on their own because they are such an important admission. Now I would like to focus on a couple of other salient points that Hewitt made.

Hugh nailed O'Donnell in a major flip-flop. First O'Donnell said this, about the Mormon practice of polygamy. First O'Donnell says that Governor Romney needs to address the practice of polygamy...

HH: I want to ask you, Lawrence. You mentioned on the McLaughlin Group that Mitt Romney’s great-grandfather’s polygamy was an issue. Can you explain to me why?
LO’D: No, well, he…remember the line in the speech, this is the faith of my fathers, not just the…
HH: do you believe by that he meant…
LO’D: …not just George. Did he mean his great-grandfather?
HH: Do you think he did? You asserted that he did.
LO’D: Yup, I do.
HH: You…
LO’D: I do think…if I said that, I’d mean my great-grandfather.
HH: You believe that Mitt Romney was endorsing polygamy in his speech?
LO’D: I wouldn’t cut it off with my great-grandfather. No, I don’t think he endorses polygamy...

Then he turns around and says that Romney does not need to attone for the beliefs of his great-grandfather...

HH: Let me break in here. Now Lawrence, given your standard…
LO’D: Yeah.
HH: Are Catholics responsible for the anti-Semitism in the Church’s past?
LO’D: Yes.
HH: They are?
LO’D: Oh, current Catholics? No. No, not current Catholics, no.
HH: Well, do current Catholics need to step up and explain that when they say
they’re…
LO’D: I don’t think Romney’s responsible for his great-grandfather.

Then, when O'Donnell realizes that Hugh trapped him, he pulled out an old favorite of his....

LO’D: I think he’s lying about his great-grandfather.
HH: I just want to follow through. You laid down a principle, and I want to follow through. As recently as…
LO’D: I think Romney’s a liar about his great-grandfather. That’s what I think.

Gee....this sounds vaguely familiar....

Now I will be the first to admit that I have serious theological issues with the faith of Mitt Romney's fathers. However, I would certainly not go about addressing them in the manner that Lawrence O'Donnell did on both the McLaughlin Report OR on the Hugh Hewitt show. For as much as people went all gonzo about Don Imus' "nappy headed ho's" comment (as well they should have), I find it just a wee bit interesting that Lawrence O'Donnell still has a job at MSNBC for his rather bigoted remarks about Mormonism (among others). It's time for MSNBC to do the right thing and take this bigot off of the air, once and for all.

Confirming What We Already Knew

Hugh Hewitt (Romney apologist extraordinaire) interviewed Lawrence O'Donnell yesterday. Now anyone who has listened to the show knows that Hugh tends to get wee bit harpy when he has a member of the MSM on his program. In this case he had O'Donnell on because of a diatribe of O'Donnell's on last week-ends "McLaughlin Report". Bye and large, this was one of Hugh's better interviews - he didn't harrangue O'Donnell nearly as badly as I expected him to, given the subject matter. However, what I did find interesting was the close of the interview. O'Donnell admitted, what many of us have suspected. That it is OK to attack Christians because, unlike Islam, they don't shoot back (emphasis mine).

HH: Okay. And do you believe, would you say the same things about Mohammed as you just said about Joseph Smith?
LO’D: Oh, well, I’m afraid of what the…that’s where I’m really afraid. I would like to criticize Islam much more than I do publicly, but I’m afraid for my life if I do.
HH: Well, that’s candid.
LO’D: Mormons are the nicest people in the world. They’re not going to ever…
HH: So you can be bigoted towards Mormons, because they’ll just send you a strudel.
LO’D: They’ll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I’m not going to say a word about them.
HH: They’ll send you a strudel. The Mormons will bake you a cake and be nice to you.
LO’D: I agree.
HH: Lawrence O’Donnell, I appreciate your candor.

The media routinely defers to Islam, refusing to show the "infamous" Mohammed Cartoons and they go out of their way to avoid portraying Islam in a bad light, they relish insulting Christians and Christianity. Many have long asked "Why?". Now, finally we know what we have long suspected is indeed true.

Freedom Minutes

Jason Lewis and Minnesota Majority have a new ad out that is a killer!



This is a video version of the state wide radio campaign that Minnesota Majority launched today! MM also has an online petition that you can sign if you are interested.

If you want to know more about some of the pitfalls of Universal health care, you can read my posts here, here, here, here, here and here. The bottom line is that while health care reform is needed, universal health care is not the answer. The market can and will work, if we the people allow it to happen and do the work necessary to allow it to happen.

Bringing Home the Bacon

There has been a lot of talk, in the last two years, about pork-barrel spending. One of the things that the Democrats campaigned on last fall was earmark reform (which as with all of their campaign promises have fallen far short of their promises). It has turned into a bit of an issue with many activists across the country. Legislators from both parties are guilty of writing pet projects into bills - it's what is "done" in DC.

Today's Star Tribune is featuring a story in it's Politically Connected section on one Minnesota Representative's change of heart on pork. It is one of those rare stories where the Strib's natural bias against conservatives is actually more subtle than normal. While they devote a majority of the article talking to the Congressman's detractors on the issue, they also do talk to the Congressman's supporters on this issue. One sentence, in particular struck me.

Others on the Dakota County Board, including former Eagan Mayor Tom Egan, complain that the planned Mall of America bus corridor "is not a 'Bridge to Nowhere' " -- a reference the now infamous Alaska project regarded as the turning point in last year's backlash against earmarks.

Now I fully understand that the MOA bus corridore is important to some residents of Eagan and Apple Valley and Bloomington, but you know what - the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere" was just as important to some residents of the Kodiak Island Alaska area! That in a nutshell is the problem with pork. To the residents of the district - that spending project IS important, but what is important to Norwood/Young America is not important to the residents of New Orleans or the residents of Atlanta. A spending project in Salt Lake City may be important to them, but it is not as important to the residents of Madison as their project is. If your representative or senator is senior enough or particularily adept at getting his/her pork put through (like John Murtha or Trent Lott) then your state wins the "pork" lottery. If you are represented by someone who is less adept at bringing home the bacon or change their mind on pork, you get articles accusing you of not taking care of your district!

Which is why real earmark reform is so important for all taxpayers. The more we can control the pork barrel spending, the more we can focus on important things like health care reform or Medicare reform or welfare reform or social security reform or any one of the hundreds of other reforms that are direly needed in this country.

What this country needs is more Congressmen and women like John Kline, not less. Some day we will all be forced to realize that and the sooner that happens the better it will be for all Americans.

UPDATE: - Welcome Captains Quarters readers. Get comfy and stay a while.

Who Owns Your DNA?

Sue Jeffers asks this timely question...

The state of Minnesota's Health and Human Services (HHS) budget is $11.4 Billion. Included in this budget is funding for the Health Insurance Exchange, state funded abortions, genetic databases, online medical records and electronic surveillance, prescription surveillance and narcotic databases.

Part of the HHS agenda includes the Minnesota Genetic Information Work Group. . A subcommittee is currently discussing recommendations on the sale, use, consent, dissent and property rights of our DNA.

There are lots of organizations who want our time and money but few work as hard as the President of the Citizens' Council on Health Care, Twila Brase. The CCHC advocates to protect patient privacy, reduced dependency on government health care programs, and market based health care solutions. Recently, Twila sent out the following survey.

Please answer the following questions and return comments to Twila Brase at twila@cchconline.org. Additional contact information below.

CCHC SURVEY

Please answer yes or no.

1) DNA is the private property of the individual. Y or N

2) DNA is public property, available to be used by government and others for 'public good' purposes. Y or N

3) Only with explicit informed written consent should a person, government agency, corporation, researcher, or institution be allowed to use an individual's DNA-filled tissues, fluids, and body parts for medical or genetic research. Y or N

4) Unless an individual objects (dissents) the individual's DNA-filled tissues, fluids, and body parts may be used for medical or genetic research. Y or N

5) Hospitals, clinics, doctors, laboratories and others who obtain or receive blood, urine, hair, tissue, organs or other body parts in the process of providing medical treatment may use these body parts at their own discretion, including for medical and genetic research. Y or N

6) Hospitals, clinics, doctors, laboratories, and others who obtain or receive blood, urine, hair, tissue, organs or other body parts in the process of providing medical treatment may sell these body parts at their own discretion. Y or N

7) Your Comments:
Please provide contact information for CCHC's contact purposes only.
Name: Phone: Email:
Contact information:Twila Brase President Citizens' Council on Health Care
http://www.cchconline.org/
651-646-8935
Email: twila@cchconline.org

A Two-fer

Two of my favorite TownHall.com logical ladies have wonderful columns up today. First, Mona Charen challenges the presses insistence at glamorizing mass murderers like the young man who shot up the Omaha mall this week.

The same dangerous pattern has been repeated again and again. The disturbed man who took hostages at Sen. Clinton's headquarters in New Hampshire told loved ones to "watch the news tonight." The shooter who terrorized an Omaha shopping mall by mowing down total strangers has achieved his goal (and I will not add to the problem by publishing his name). He left a suicide note in which he predicted "at least now I'll be famous." His picture is featured in every newspaper and is flashed on television hourly. His miseries are being dissected and analyzed. An unhappy and rejected young man is finally getting, posthumously, the attention he clearly sought but could not secure in life.

Maybe if this young man had gotten some positive attention in his short life things would have turned out differently. We don't know this for sure, but maybe if SOMEONE had reached out to him this could have been averted.

The other column is from Linda Chavez, whom I don't always agree with. This time, she hits a home run.

President Bush seemed at a loss for words this week when he was asked during a press conference if he would use his influence to help a Saudi rape victim who has drawn international attention. The young woman was raped 14 times by seven men and now faces her own imprisonment and 200 lashes in a sentence imposed by a Saudi court. So what was the victim's "crime"? She happened to be in the company of a man who was not a close relative when she was attacked.
The president hemmed and hawed...When the reporter pressed him on whether he had raised the issue with Saudi King Abdullah in the last few weeks, the president demurred. "We'll have plenty of time. [King Abdullah] knows our position loud and clear."

One of my biggest frustrations with President Bush (aside from amnesty for illegal immigrants) has been his enormous blind spot toward Islam. In the days following 9/11 he (rightly) made the extra effort to remind the American people that not all Arab looking people were terrorists. I applauded that effort and still do. However, he insists that Islam is a "religion of Peace" when every critical thinker who has ever read the Koran (and yes I too have read the Holy Book of Islam) will tell you that there is little about the Koran and the Hadith (the life and teachings of Mohammed) are peaceful! Couple that with the actions of the followers of Islam and one certainly gets the impression that they practice a rather barbaric religion. The brutality that women, gays, Jews and anyone who does not practice their version of Islam is on display daily. Yet this President hems and haws and hesitates to tell our "dear friends" the Saudis the things that they need to be told.....that this is simply NOT DONE in civilized society and if you want to be a part of civilized society you must stop these practices!

Ms. Chavez' main point is this.

The abuse of the rape victim, known only as the "Girl of Qatif," should shame the Saudi government. But it will only do so if the Saudi Royal Family is forced by the civilized world to account for the brutal society the House of Saud has created and rules. President Bush missed his opportunity to do so publicly this week. But it is not too late to do so quietly but directly. The fate of the Girl of Qatif could well turn on the president's intervention.

She is spot on - the President MUST intervene on this girl's behave. As the most powerful leader in the civilized world it is a political and MORAL imperative. Please Mr. President....do the right thing here and tell the House of Saud that this can not stand. For your daughters and grand-daughters sake - do it today!

The New Face of the Republican Party?

Those of you who subscribe to the Limbaugh Letter are in for a real treat this month. In it, Rush publishes a very in-depth interview with Bobby Jindal, the Governor elect of Lousiana. Those of us who don't get it, well....it's either a good opportunity to subscribe or make friends with someone who gets it because you have to read this interview. It is a lesson in principles first Conservatism that needs to be passed on far and wide. Thankfully, I have a friend who sent me a copy of it that I can exerpt here for you today.

RUSH:...First I want to congratulate you. I want to put your victory in perspective here. You won against 11 opponents. You won 60 out of 64 Louisana parishes. You won in the primary which has not happened before in Louisiana's history of open-primary elections. You got 54 percent of the vote; your nearest competitor got only 17 percent. And you ran as an unapologetic pro-life conservative. This isn't supposed to happen, according to the inside -the-Beltway conventional wisdom. Tell us why you think it happened and whether or not you think it is a bellweather.

I should add (before we get to the answer) that Mr. Jindal was the ONLY Republican/Conservative on the ticket. All of the other candidates were Democrats and 3rd party candidates.

JINDAL: Thank you Rush, for those nice comments. Two things. One, I think the people of Louisiana were saying strongly that they wanted change...Louisiana has a history of boom-and-bust cycles. We have oil booms. We're in the middle of another boom cycle, and I think the people are saying, "We don't want the politicians putting this money in their pocket. We don't want them just growing governemt. We don't want instant gratification. We want to see money put into roads. We want to see taxes cut. We want to see new jobs for our people." The Louisiana state budget went from $16 to $32 billion in six years. This last year alone, they added over 1,250 new state employees. There's a billion dollars of recurring spending funded with one-time money...You're exactly right - we were very clear where we stood on the issues...and that's the second message of this election. The reason Republicans did poorly in 2006 is not because the country became less conservative. The Republican candidates and Party became less conservative. You can't win an election by being a weaker version of your're opponent. You can't try to have power just for the sake of holding on to power. The Republican Party can't be in the business of defending corrupt elected officials, can't be in the business of defending wasteful earmark spending...The voters are tired of poll-tested messages. They want authenticity. When the Republican Party get's back to its conservative roots, we'll do well with the
voters.

The emphasis is mine. The points that Governor-elect Jindal made above (and continue to make throughout the interview) are points that many principles first Republicans have been making for the last two election cycles. We want our candidates to be authentic - true to the beliefs and principles of the Party. We are tired of the inside-the-Beltway way of thinking that seems to infect politics down to the local level. We want people who will be true to their principles.

Another comment that the Governor-elect made that is very refreshing indeed was this.

...Politics is a funny business. When you win, everybody's your friend. When you lose, people don't know you anymore. I thin it's so important for anyone considering getting into the political arena to think about what's important. What principles are you unwilling to violate? What transcends popularity polls? I'm a competitive person. I want to win. I know I can't make change unless I win. But there
are certain things you just don't do even for the sake of winning an
election or being successful from a worldly perspective...

Emphasis again mine. There ARE certain things that you don't do even to get elected. That is a lesson that many in DC and in St. Paul seem to have forgotten.

Walking the Walk

During the last Legislative Session, the Minnesota Legislature adopted legislation that requires Minnesota to increase our use of alternative energy by 20% by the year 2020. It was hailed by the environmentalists as landmark legislation. One of the alternatives that the Legislature and the Governor are pushing hard is wind energy. Wind power is a favorite among the enviros, except for one itty-bitty, little problem...

There goes the neighborhood
Your Nov. 28 article "An energy model for all to see," about a wind turbine in Maple Grove, certainly tells it all! I am looking out my front window and see this eyesore!
My husband and I specifically chose to live in Maple Grove three years ago as we were very impressed with their "master plan" of residential and commercial. It was very well orchestrated. Note that I say "was." This vulgar wind turbine completely desecrates this once wonderful Arbor Lakes area. Now, don't get me wrong; I am not saying that I do not agree that wind turbines have their place and are certainly an alternative energy source, but the once-beautiful Arbor Lakes area is not the place.
We were recently in the Palm Springs, Calif., area. Take a lesson: Outside of the city, far away from any residential or commercial development, they had a large area of wind turbines. Great!
I can't believe that the Maple Grove City Council would approve this monstrosity. Maybe it was a very late night when it came on the agenda and they all just wanted to go home and so approved it. What will they approve next? A 160-foot giant donut for Krispy Kreme, or a 160-foot super-sized rack of ribs for Famous Dave's?
M. E., MAPLE GROVE

Emphasis mine. In all fairness to M.E. of Maple Grove, she is not the only one that objects to having a wind farm outside their front door.

Rich, oceanfront residents of Cape Cod do not want their view of Nantucket Sound
faintly obstructed by offshore protrusions of a proposed wind farm. So, they have hired high-priced lobbyists to kill Cape Wind, a project providing an environmentally sound source of energy. Their most important ally in this venture is a fellow wealthy Cape Cod landowner, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy

This is the problem that I have with the "green" movement. From Al Gore to Barbara Streisand to the Kennedy's of Massacheusettes, they all want alternative energy until they are the ones that have to make the sacrifice and then forget it! It's ok to have a wind farm - unless it blocks their view and then it is an eyesore that must be eliminated. It's ok for the rest of the country to give up their cars, but they must keep their Gulfstream jets because they are "important".

Over at Anti-Strib we are having a discussion on the things that we do to conserve. It started off (as many AS posts do) with a gross over generalization, but... Many of us do don that extra sweater so that we can keep our home heating fuel use lower. Many of us do ride the bus when possible or ride bikes when appropriate - it is plain old common sense! The average Americans ARE doing their part....it's time for the elites to do the same. You want us to sacrifice our lifestyles in order to save Gaia? Fine....LEAD BY EXAMPLE....give up the 100 room mansion and move into an 2 room flat. Better yet - subdivide your mansion into individual "affordable" apartments. Sell the Gulfstream and start flying coach with the rest of the unwashed masses and THEN maybe the rest of the country will pay attention to what you have to say.

Stupid is as Stupid Does

Just a quick hit. Ron, over at Middle Earth Journal (yes I will read an intelligent, reasonable "progressive" blog and MEJ is both intelligent and reasonable) points to an article that should make everyone cringe.

If you're planning to vote in Virginia's February Republican presidential primary, be prepared to sign an oath swearing your Republican loyalty.
The State Board of Elections on Monday approved a state Republican Party request to require all who apply for a GOP primary ballot first vow in writing that they'll vote for the party's presidential nominee next fall.

Now I do understand why they are doing this - there have been too many demonstrable cases of party crossing during the primaries - in order to screw up the other side. However, this is B.S. in a number of ways. First and foremost though is the fact that I reserve the right to vote for the candidate of my choice - party loyalty be damned! I am a principles first conservative and if this party puts up another big spending George W. Bush clone, I will vote my principles!

Now thankfully the Commonwealth of Virginia makes the enforcement of this oath moot. However the utter stupidity that is shown by the Virginia Republican Party is something that needs to be exposed for the world to see.

No Ron, it is not a "Republican thing"...it is a stupid thing!

UPDATE! Scott over at Reach Upward (yes I am reading Utah blogs now - I'm trying to familiarize myself with politics out there before I move...) brings up something that could be the reason for the "vow".

Ron Paul has raised eyebrows with his fundraising, but he seems incapable of drawing much support from likely GOP primary voters. There is some truth to his
supporters’ claims that the polls are skewed because much of Paul’s support is coming from people newly registering as Republicans to vote for him, so that they are underrepresented in polling that focuses on traditional GOP primary voters. But even correcting for this would not significantly raise Paul in the polls. His support is deep, but not broad. And broad support is what will be needed to prevail in next year’s GOP primaries.

There has been much proof of the Ron Paul supporters "gaming" internet polls and it is well known that a lot of Congressman Paul's financial support is coming from people who had previously supported more "liberal" candidates. It is entirely possible that the "reason" for the vow is to make sure that the Ronbots don't game the primary! It's a stretch - but something to consider.

Irony in Blogging

Eva Young (aka lloydletta of Lloydletta's Nooz and Comments) posted a hit piece on her site about yours truly last night. She apparently took umbrage with my post in defense of Archbishop Nienstadt. The post (which I won't link to because it is well known that Eva does this to get traffic driven to her site) is one of Eva's typical veiled threat posts.

I wonder what Senator Claire Robling, will think of her BPOU Chair's post.

Well I would venture to guess that since I didn't say any of the things that Eva claims I said, it won't be a problem. Especially within the context of the post where I am simply defending the Archbishop's right to teach Catholic Theology as the Bible says it should be taught.

Here is where the irony comes in. I posted a comment to Eva's post this morning and I got the following back from Yahoo (Eva's email provider).

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
xxxxxxxxx@yahoo.com
Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 16): 554 delivery error: dd Sorry your message to xxxxxxxxxx@yahoo.com cannot be delivered.
This account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. - mta228.mail.re4.yahoo.com

Emphasis mine and user name redacted out of courtesy to Eva.

Now I also have a Yahoo account. I have had it for about 10 years when your only email options were dial up account and online free accounts. I still use it for a number of things. I know, as a Yahoo user that this error message generally comes after an account has been suspended due to a violation of the Yahoo Terms of Service! Now I certainly hope that is not the case. I wouldn't wish ill on Eva or any of her contributors just because we disagree on issues. You see, unlike Eva, I welcome discussion and invite comments - EVEN ANONYMOUS COMMENTS (something Llyodletta's Nooz does not allow). I invite open, honest, respectful discussion - even if we disagree on the issue. That is how things should be in a civil society.

You want to know why certain members of the MOB don't respect you Eva? Maybe it is because you seem to routinely forget the Golden Rule....do unto others as you would have them do unto you! In the context of our discussion, I don't dislike gays. I dislike their lifestyle choices, but I understand that the two are not one and the same.

I pray for the day when Ms. Young can see the difference and can learn to appreciate the fact that we are all fallen sinners. The only difference is that I choose to attempt to live within the constructs of the Bible. I do not continue to live in my sin and demand that God change to suit me. It simply does not work that way. Maybe when that happens, she and I can have an open dialog on the issue once more.

Gaia Worship Run Amok

The headline says it all...

Nevada man is guilty of killing trees

Then there is the opening paragraph...

Cloaked by darkness, a saw tucked under his jacket, Douglas Hoffman skulked through suburbia, methodically killing trees.

Or as one of the laywer in the article called it "arborcide"! Arborcide????? Good grief people they're trees not human beings! The vergiabe that is being used by the paper, the lawyers and the neighbors make it sound like this guy is a mass murderer and not a disgruntled long time member of a community who was mad that his view had gone away (that is another rant entirely...). Phrases like "foliage slaughter" and "tree-slasher" are designed to elicit an emotional response....a response that one normally should save for humans who have been attacked.

Now I can certainly see taking this guy to task for criminal trespass, destruction of private property, vandalism and any one of a number of other property charges - but to equate (as this reporter has done) the damage to murder is just another symptom of the devaluation of human life that the environmental movement and the animal rights movement have developed. All life is indeed precious BUT human life is most precious of all solely because we are supposed to have the ability to think, to speak and to reason. Sadly, it seems that reason is lost on the world today.

Updated to include the link which I forgot this morning!

Paging Revs Jackson and Sharpton

As you can tell by my output today, yes the packing is as done as it can be. The real estate sales agreement has been signed and now begins the waiting game. So that means I can get back to posting on a more regular basis!

Remember all of the hubbub over the plight of the Jena 6? Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were all over the news decrying Mychal Smith's trial saying that the jury was biased because there were no African Americans on the jury. What the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton didn't mention (as I pointed out over at Anti Strib) was that African Americans were called to report for Jury Duty but they didn't show up.

Meanwhile, there are real cases where African Americans were specifically excluded from the jury pool in order to taint the prosecution of the case. The good news is that the Supreme Court is taking up one of these cases in an effort to correct a judicial travesty.

Jim Williams had a reputation as a highly skilled, tenacious prosecutor -- maybe even a little bloodthirsty.

After scoring convictions in dozens of murder cases, he told a reporter: "It got to the point where there was no thrill for me unless there was a chance for the death penalty."

In the mid-'90s, Williams posed for Esquire magazine standing behind a miniature electric chair with mug shots of five African American men he sent to death row. Since then, two of the defendants have been exonerated, two had their sentences commuted to life because of misconduct by Williams, and the fifth won a retrial after an appeals court overturned the verdict.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court is to review another case in which Williams obtained a death sentence against a black man. The key question is whether Williams violated Allen Snyder's constitutional rights by removing all the potential black jurors at the start of his 1996 trial.

What gets me is how Williams closed the trial.

At the end of the trial, Williams exhorted the all-white jury to give Snyder a
death sentence because the case was "very, very similar" to the "most famous
murder case" just a year earlier, in which former football star O.J. Simpson
"got away with it."

Give him the death penalty because OJ "got away with it"....yeah that's a real good reason to take a persons life....

It is precisely for this reason that I have no respect for civil rights "leadership" in America today. The do not stand up for the people that really need their help, instead going to for the "show trial". Maybe when they start standing up for the little guy I'll come around, but until then...

Oh - and I can't wait to see the Strib and the rest of the dead tree media pick up on this story. I'm willing to take bets now that they don't even touch it! It's just not "sexy" enough for them.

Controlling What You Read

Last week, I wrote a little something about "Pastor" Nick Coleman and his screed against Archbishop John Nienstadt calling homosexuality a "grave sin". Needless to say, I was not the only one. Well today, I got this in the inbox.

The editors at the Star Tribune appear to be censoring the public's outrage in response to Nick Coleman’s recent attack piece against Archbishop John Nienstedt. The newspaper has published just six letters in response to Coleman’s column (besides Archbishop Nienstedt’s formal response). And four of the six letters were in support of Coleman. But here's the most revealing fact exposing the newspaper's bias -- NOT ONE of the over 60 letters critical of Coleman's column submitted through our online letter writing tool were published by the Star Tribune.

Emphasis in the original. Minnesota Majority, an admittedly conservative organization, has taken advantge of the technology available in order to track letters sent through their tool. It is a really slick set up. This tracking has confirmed what a lot of conservatives have long suspected...that the Star Tribune editorial board will not print conservative letters. Oh they will say that they don't get them or that the letter was in some way or another "unpublishable" but they will gladly print the most spittle flecked leftist conspiracy rant while rejecting conservative letters. I even had an e-mail exchange with one of their LTE screeners who accused me of all kinds of malfeasance for questioning their motives on letters and editorial policy. After one email that was particularily nasty, I reminded the screener that she WAS talking to a customer at which point the correspondence ended.

One of these years, the Portland Avenue Politbureau will get it. They will get the fact that the readers know that they are a bunch of rabid, unrepentant leftists posing as unbiased journalists and that readers are tired of them attempting to "control" the news. They will understand that they can no longer control the message that we hear because there are a multitude of choices out there for the average news consumer. They will understand that their advertisers won't spend money on advertising in a paper that does not get read! Unfortunately, it will probably be too late for them to recuperate...

Trouble in Gotham

Six months ago, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Mayor Rudy Giuliani were the "inevitable" nominees for their respective parties. All of their supporters told us so! Now, however, that inevitability seems to be less likely. A series of gaffes by Senator Clinton have eroded her 20+% average lead from earlier this summer down to more mortal numbers - trailing Senator Obama in Iowa and barely leading in New Hampshire. Mayor Giuliani never enjoyed the type of lead Senator Clinton did, but has fallen all the same. More disappointing (for the Mayor's supporters) is the fact that he is now running a distant 3rd in Iowa and an even more distant second in New Hampshire.

Stories like this are not going to help Mayor Giuliani's campaign. Now a defender of the Mayor told me that the Daily News is a rather "liberal" rag (as opposed to the conservative NY Times?) but this story has also been run by ABC News (HT Captain Ed) and the Politico (among others) so I highly doubt that this is a "liberal hatchet job" as some might claim.

Now considering that I grew up in the Chicago of Mayor Richard J. Daley (the man who perfected modern party machine politics) and stories like this were normal and not all that remarkable. However, Mayor Daley never had a yen to run for President. If he had, those stories would have been an issue, just as they are an issue today! The Mayor and his campaign have not handled the questions well (as Captain Ed points out).

More importantly (in my mind) is the fact that the media has a very large stack of stories just like this, that they are just itching to publish should the Mayor become the Republican nominee. The Mayor's personal life will become part of the campaign. It will be used as a club with which the media will beat the "values voters" over the head in an effort to keep them discouraged and (hopefully) home next November.

The Republican Party must do better at chosing a nominee. We know that the whoever the nominee is will get that media anal probe, do we really need to give them fuel for the fire? I don't think it would be a wise thing to do at all.

UPDATE AND BUMP: Things are going from bad to worse for Senator Clinton. She was booed at a campaign appearance (by phone) for advocating that illegal immigrants earn a path to citizenship. She has also slipped further in Iowa polling which has lead her campaign to ratchet up the attacks on Senator Barak Obama. They have even started to (in a Pot meet Kettle moment) "question his character". This from the campaign that has taken tainted campaign donations from a convicted felon!

It's going to be an entertaining month.

Driver Alert: It’s Not the Taxes Stupid, it’s the Spending Priorities!

From Sue Jeffers

The Vote Yes gang has broadened their horizons and expanded into Progress in Motion. They recently posted a new billboard along Highway 280. It reads, “Drivers Alert: No new taxes means no new bridges.”

Many of us remember Transportation Alliance as the folks behind the Vote Yes campaign. (http://www.transportationalliance.com/) This well funded and well-organized group succeeded in raising $3.6 million and worked to deceive voters about the true nature of the MVST constitutional amendment dedicating 100% of the motor vehicle sales tax revenue to “transportation.”

We already know the Transportation Amendment comes at the expense of roads and bridges. It dedicates revenue from sales taxes on new and used vehicles to transportation expenses using a formula requiring a minimum of 40% for public transit assistance and up to 60% for highways effective June 30 2011. Of course, the ugly truth of the amendment is that while it guarantees minimum funding for mass transit, there are actually no guarantees that road and bridge projects will receive any funding at all from MVST receipts.

Progress in Motion and the Transportation Alliance are not looking out for the interests of the taxpayers, nor are they truly interested in improving highway conditions for drivers. Groups like this want one thing: more of our money. Their objective is securing ever- higher taxes for transportation, including transit. Both groups feed at the public trough; both groups know how to play the game and it is their hope that an uninformed general public will again fall for this latest deceit ad campaign.

Instead of opening the debate about spending priorities in Minnesota we will hear calls for a gas tax increase, more transit funding and ousting DOT Commissioner Carol Molnau.

It won't matter that almost 60% of us oppose a gas tax increase, transportation funding is at an all time high and we still don't know why the 35W bridge fell. It won't matter that the DOT is an enormous bureaucracy filled with almost as many rules and regulations as the tax code. It won't matter that LRT is inefficient, wildly expensive and only used by 2% of the population.

It will matter that Commissioner is a Republican.

So until we fully dedicate 100% of the gas tax revenues to roads and bridges, adjust funding formulas or allocate general funds to roads and bridges I will start my own campaign. My first billboard will feature a fallen bridge and read:

Driver Alert:
It’s not the taxes stupid, it’s the spending priorities!