Holeee Cow!

One of the things that I found inspiring about living in Minnesota was the voter turn out rate in Minnesota. Say what you will about us brain frozen Northerners, we took our right to vote quite seriously! That is why when I was told today about Utah's dismal voter turn out I had to do the research.

Despite the money politicians spend courting Utahns and the constant pleas by ecclesiastical leaders to show good citizenship by voting, Utah now has the nation's worst voting participation rates.

Even more disheartening was this stat....

The Census shows that huge numbers of Utahns do not bother to register to vote.

It said Utah has the third-lowest reported registration rate among the states — 56.8 percent of adult citizens. Nationally, the average is 67.6 percent, about a fifth higher than in Utah.

OK guys - I'm going to climb on a soap box here and I am going to speak especially to the liberals in this state! I know things appear hopeless out here in crimson red Utah. Then again, 14 years ago Minnesota was a deep royal blue! Every Republican that ran for office out there stood about as much chance of being elected as a Democrat does here in Utah...unless that is they ran as an "independent" (sound like a certain Congressman from Utah?). However instead of giving up and staying home, Republicans in Minnesota organized and worked harder than they had ever done before, registered voters and set up a get out the vote organization that is the envy of many states. As a result, Minnesota has roughly 80% voter turn out regularly (2006 was around 78% in a boring off year election). As a result, Minnesota went from royal blue to the purplest of purple states!

There is also a lesson to be had here for Utah Republicans. As Republicans in Minnesota started making electoral gains, the Democrats in Minnesota had to scramble to keep up. They organized and they registered and they ID'd and the drove people to the polls and the did the hard work necessary to keep a tenuous hold on the majority.

A lot of non partisan and bi-partisan work went into the effort. Voter education was a priority - as well as educating young people about voting - is something that Minnesota takes well deserved pride in.

Utah has many things to be very proud of - it's an amazing state with a wealth of riches whether it be people or finances or the grand and glorious landscape that we are fortunate enough to have in our lives every day. However all of that is at risk when the electorate is as disengaged as it is here. You end up with the anti-thesis of what our representative republic is all about.

Please, please people....get registered! You have until October 6 to get registered to vote. Then once you do either sign up to have your ballot mailed to you or make sure you get to the polls on November 4.

Mark Buesgens Q&A

The Jordan Independent recently published a Q&A that the publisher had with HD35 B incumbent Mark Buesgens. A couple of the questions were standard boilerplate but the answers remind voters about what they like about Rep. Buesgens.

JI: Why are you a Republican?

MB: I passionately believe in the vision of a governmental structure created by our brilliant founders – one where all power rests with the people and government’s first role is to ensure their liberties and freedoms. A government focused on a few key priorities and held highly accountable for every taxpayer dollar that is spent. The Republican Party’s platform best fits these principles and values, and I’m proud to be endorsed by Scott County Republicans.

Now many of us would argue that the Republican Party Platform still fits the principles of small, accountable government given what we have seen out of the last 8 years but I know that there are many who are working at fixing that. His next answer goes right to that...

JI: Are there any areas in which you disagree with the main party line or you think Republicans have gone astray in state government?

MB: One, of course, is on the issue of gaming, and I’ll expand on that in question 6. A second is ethanolmandates, which have driven up the prices of corn, beef, and other commodities, benefiting a few while harming many, including farmers. A third would be the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, which I believe is a dangerous precedent in government controlling what you can and cannot do on your own private property.

These are just two issues that has gotten Governor Pawlenty in very hot water with his base over the last couple of years. It has become a very real problem for the moderate wing of the Republican Party that they need to address or they run the risk of being minimized again.

Then the interview touches on the last legislative session and what lies in store for the next one.

JI: What did the Minnesota Legislature do right and wrong last session?

MB: The legislature did add additional protections for families of Minnesotans serving in the military, and that was a positive. However, they were very wrong in increasing government spending by almost 10 percent, while the families and business who pay the tab are struggling to make ends meet. The current mindset in St. Paul of putting government before its citizens must be rejected and completely turned around, and I’ll work tirelessly to do so.

JI: The state will likely see another deficit this coming session. How should it be handled?

MB: By downsizing government and cutting taxes. Our government needs to stop doing everything they deem as nice, and zero in on what is necessary. Politicians need to realize that when government coffers are running low, most likely so are family wallets. I will passionately advocate for putting the family budget far ahead of the government trough.

There were many who tried to raise the alarm about growing government so significantly during and economic downturn but those warnings were ignored. Now the state is in dire straits - with businesses leaving the state or downsizing and tax collections way down. The Legislature has no choice but to cut back on current spending and put future spending wants on hold. However, as we saw last year, the current leadership in the House (more on that later).

The one issue that gets Mark in "trouble" with some in his base (and those on the left) is the Racino. Here is Mark's answer to that.

JI: One of the major differences between your opponent and you is your support for permitting Canterbury Park to operate a racino, which would have slot machines. Why are you a proponent of that?

MB: It’s pretty simple: Racino would add 1,300 new jobs to the area. The equestrian center that would be built would be a huge boost to the entertainment facilities in Scott County and boost the equine industry statewide. This would greatly help our local and the state’s economy. With Mystic Lake, Canterbury Park and pull tabs and scratch-offs at every gas station around, to say this would “expand gaming” is very disingenuous.

I happen to agree with Mark on this issue (some will be shocked that I agree with him I know...). As a horse person, I have long supported Canterbury Park in this. The jobs and the income (via horse shows and events) that the equestrian center would bring to the area would be a huge benefit for Scott County. Most people who show horses spend a lot of money at shows (I know the people I showed with did). It would be a huge boom for the local economy.

While most of the questions (and answers) were no real surprise to anyone who has known Representative Buesgens for any length of time, it was a good thing for the Jordan Independent to remind the voters just who is representing them and let them know just what he stands for. That is what the press is supposed to be doing (as opposed to trying to make news themselves). It is nice to see this happening.

In Case You Are Wondering...

This is the view from my new backyard!



In the background are the Oquirrh Mountains.

We finally got everything out of storage and we got all the important things in life set up....beds, a semi-functional kitchen, school for the Junior and internet access for Mom. While there are still boxes everywhere, I will be able to spend a little more time blogging now that we are finally in the new place and semi-settled.

Cost Of The Compromise

Great news out of DC tonight. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has taken a look at today's compromise bill and it looks like the taxpayers are going to get a (small) break.

I

n any case, the ultimate cost to the government on the transactions would not be the total amount spent to purchase assets—limited to $700 billion outstanding at any one time—but rather the difference between the amount spent by the government and the amount received in earnings and sales proceeds when all of the assets are finally sold, presumably some years from now. That net cost is likely to be substantially less than $700 billion but is more likely than not to be greater than zero.

While I am still not happy that we the people are going to be on the hook for bailing out a bunch of failed CEO's, I am very glad to see that pork provisions to assist ACORN and people who can't make their car and credit card payments were taken out.

Power To The People!

The people won a major battle yesterday.

WASHINGTON -- Democrats have decided to allow a quarter-century ban on drilling for oil off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to expire next week, conceding defeat in a months-long battle with the White House and Republicans set off by $4 a gallon gasoline prices this summer.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., told reporters Tuesday that a provision continuing the moratorium will be dropped this year from a stopgap spending bill to keep the government running after Congress recesses for the election.

It appears that this will also include the ban on oil shale production.

A new budget bill to be unveiled soon drops a provision, pushed by Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, that would have allowed states to choose whether companies could pursue oil shale extraction within their borders. But, so far, the bill also doesn't re-enact a ban on finalizing rules for leasing federal lands for oil shale extraction.
Matheson says Congress would have to formally approve another ban by Tuesday, and if not, the Interior Department could move forward on a leasing program that would allow companies to tap oil shale deposits on federal tracts.

However, don't go popping the champaign corks just yet....

"The White House has made it clear they will not accept anything with a drilling moratorium, and Democrats know we cannot afford to shut down the government over this," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "We look forward to working with the next president to hammer out a final resolution of this issue."

This is not a permanent solution to our energy problems. We still need to develop a program that utilizes ALL forms of available and alternative energies. The time for reliance on fossil fuels as our sole source of energy is past. With the growth in demand, it is imperative that we expand nuclear, wind, coal (clean coal that is), hydrogen, ethanol, oil AND conservation. However, oil is still an essential part of the equation and the drilling bans need to go away permanently.

ALF/PETA Strike Again

Over the weekend, several thousand mink were released from a Kaysville mink ranch. Today, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA) paid terrorist group the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) took credit for the release.

In a communique posted on the group's Web site and sent to Utah news-media outlets, the ALF said three members were behind the "liberation" of the minks.

"On releasing about 10,000 mink we found and destroyed all breeding records. We also vandalized the trucks and various forms of equipment, including destroying the electrical fence and cutting about a hundred holes in the fence's perimeter," the group said. "Don't let the animals be destroyed so their skin can be worn by some rich (expletive). There is nothing glamorous about wearing an animal's carcass."

What really got to me was the "justification" that one of the spokespeople for the group gave for doing what the did. On KSL radio, the spokesperson said (in response to the comment that their actions were DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of many mink) that while it was regretable that several hundred died on the highway it was worth it because these animals were "wild" and "it's not like they will starve or die from dehydration" as a result of their actions. That was about the time that I almost drove off of the road! These animals were born and bred in captivity and have absolutely no survival instinct at all! The mink have never had to fend for themselves, never had to forage for food or to hide from predators like coyotes and mountain cats! But ALF never let little things like facts or common sense stop them from releasing domestic animals to their impending doom. They certainly never let something stupid like reality get in the way of ideology!

There is a reason why ALF has earned it's classification (from the FBI) as a "terrorist" organization. I have no doubt that the mink that they terrorized will testify to that fact.

Children and Feeble First

I see that the Baroness Warnock is back in the news again. This time she is advocating death to the elderly!

Baroness Warnock: Dementia sufferers may have a 'duty to die'

Elderly people suffering from dementia should consider ending their lives because they are a burden on the NHS and their families, according to the influential medical ethics expert Baroness Warnock.

The last time we heard from the Baroness she was advocating that premature infants should be allowed to die so that they would not eat up precious government health care resources. I guess I should not be surprised that she has now turned her eyes on the elderly and the mentally infirm. She needs to get together with this "gentleman" and compare notes.

The veteran Government adviser said pensioners in mental decline are "wasting people's lives" because of the care they require and should be allowed to opt for euthanasia even if they are not in pain.

She insisted there was "nothing wrong" with people being helped to die for the sake of their loved ones or society.

The 84-year-old added that she hoped people will soon be "licensed to put others down" if they are unable to look after themselves.

This in a nutshell is the British model of government health care that our friends on the left (including Senators Obama and Biden) have in store for you and your aging parents. Me - I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy or even on the Baroness herself.

My dear friend Ed called it what it is.....totalitarianism.

Totalitarian governments have always worked this way; the shock comes from the same impulse occuring in supposedly enlightened democracies. We’re seeing a new kind of government these nanny states, though — a democratic totalitarianism that makes all of the choices for its subjects after they willingly give the bureaucracy the power of life and death over them. It’s a voluntary totalitarianism, and it starts by assigning government the role of caretaker from cradle to grave, the latter point coming at their choosing.

Western civilization built itself on the sanctity of human life and the rights of the individual. It doesn’t take much for Westerners to give up that birthright. The only incentive for voluntary slavery appears to be low-cost prescriptions and catastrophic hospital coverage. Once we buy into that system, all manner of personal choices get removed: the foods you can eat, the beverages you can drink, your pastimes, and apparently your right not to be murdered just to clear a hospital bed.

Resources will get rationed in one manner or another. Only air exists in such abundance that it needs no rationing. The question for any society is whether they will choose the efficient method of market-based rationing or the caprice of a top-down bureaucratic diktat. The former encourages more of the resource to be produced, while the latter restricts new resources and forces a shortage management system onto its community. We see this more clearly in Britain’s NHS than in any other Western construct, and Baroness Warnock’s monstrous demand is only the natural result.

And that is why Ed is Ed and he is the best at what he does. All I can add is that I pray that the Baroness does not fall prey to her own "monstrous" diktats.

Modern Day Nazis

When I saw this story on Newsbusters a couple of days ago, I was livid.

Like many, I am troubled by the implications of Alaska governor and Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin's decision to knowingly give birth to a child disabled with Down syndrome. Given that Palin's decision is being celebrated in some quarters, it is crucial to reaffirm the morality of aborting a fetus diagnosed with Down syndrome (or by extension, any unborn fetus)—a freedom that anti-abortion advocates seek to deny.

A parent has a moral obligation to provide for his or her children until these children are equipped to provide for themselves. Because a person afflicted with Down syndrome is only capable of being marginally productive (if at all) and requires constant care and supervision, unless a parent enjoys the wealth to provide for the lifetime of assistance that their child will require, they are essentially stranding the cost of their child's life upon others.

Emphasis mine. I am going to start this off committing the gravest of sins here. I am going to admit, as a Christian Conservative, that abortion is not my number one issue. As someone who had trouble conceiving a child I cherish every child born and unborn, but I recognize that Roe is the law of the land and until it is changed, there is not much we can do to fix the situation. However, this "gentleman" (and I use the term advisedly) has obviously never dealt with the reality of having a member of the family with Down's Syndrome where we have. My sainted mother in law gave birth to a Down's child almost 40 years ago. After a couple of years raising this wonderful child, she decided one was simply not enough so they adopted another. Our family knows what the realities are.

First off is the aspect that the parents who choose to keep a Down's child is burdening society with the "cost" of the childs life. While both of my brothers in law do get supplimental Social Security Income due to their "disability", there are many other disabled people who get the same SSI that people with Downs do. Does that mean that this person is ok with killing anyone who has a disability? Going even further, does this mean that ANY member of society who is a "burden" to society should be killed? Is he advocating that we should "euthanize" every person who becomes unable to financially contribute to society?

The column wraps itself in the mantle of defending a "woman's choice" but the not so underlying theme is it's a woman's choice until she makes the "wrong" (in his eyes) choice.

The comments were (not surprisingly) spirited, with a couple of the usual "if you disagree with me then you are a hater" comments, but one in particular caught my eye.

By George P. Burdell, on September 16, 2008 9:57 PM

Um, I am pretty sure that eliminating those that are not "economically viable" was an argument of Marx himself. Course, then that begs the question, who will decide what does and does not constitute being viable, or how much money do you have to have in order to keep a disabled child. Also, should we "dispose" of other citizens that are not "viable," say those on welfare and or those disabled in accidents? Actually, I guess, following your argument, they should just kill themselves, to save the rest of us. My head is hurting, going to go get some Koolaid!

While the commenter may be correct in the argument that eliminating the economically unproductive is Marxist, the Logical Husband likened it to another historical figure.

Nazi eugenics were Nazi Germany's race-based social policies that placed the improvement of the race through eugenics at the center of their concerns and targeted those humans they identified as "life unworthy of life" (German Lebensunwertes Leben), including but not limited to the criminal, degenerate, dissident, feeble-minded, homosexual, idle, insane, religious and weak, for elimination from the chain of heredity. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while 70,000 were killed in the Action T4.^[1]

Following the link to "feeble minded" brings you to this definition.

The term feeble-minded was used from the late 19th century through the early 20th century as a loose description of a variety of mental deficiencies, including what would now be considered mental retardation in its various types and grades, and learning disabilities such as dyslexia

Emphasis mine. Going back to Lebensunwertes Leben lets compare the following paragraph with "life unworthy of life".

And most parents seek to create healthy life; in the case of the unborn fetuses shown to have severe developmental disabilities, one study reports that over 90% of these fetuses are aborted prior to birth. But if you notice, the anti-abortion zealots try to attach a dirty little slur to these abortions, labeling them a form of eugenics. For example, in 2005, as he condemned those who opposed federal legislation that would have attempted to dissuade women carrying fetuses diagnosed with severe disabilities from having abortions, conservative pundit George Will wrote:

If it is not unobjectionable, let's identify the objectors, who probably favor the pernicious quest -- today's "respectable" eugenics -- for a disability-free society.

So in the anti-abortion advocate's eyes, a parent's desire to raise healthy children by squelching unhealthy fetuses while the are still in the womb is little more than a pernicious quest, but it is not considered a pernicious quest to knowingly bring severely disabled children into this world. On the contrary, such a choice is held out as an great example of upstanding morality.

In order for the author to have any credible argument that this is not "eugenics" but a moral choice, then the author should also be advocating that ANYONE who is on welfare or other government assistance should have their children (or fetuses) killed so that he is no longer stranded with the "cost of their child's life". Somehow I don't think that this "reasonable" person is stupid enough to go down that particular road.

All protestations aside, this author has more in common with the monsters of Nazi Germany than he realizes. Why else would you spend this much bandwidth ruminating on one woman's choice on keeping a child that he deems to be a burden to society?

Telling One Third of the Story

Our friends in the SD35 DFL blog bring us the sob story of the tiny city of Freeport MN.

It seems like you aren’t the only one thats feeling squeezed these days.

Just when you thought you had heard it all, the little City of Freeport Minnesota has sent the State of Minnesota a bill for $71,600.03! It all started back in 2003 when the State decided to cut back Local Government Aid. Like all the cities and counties, Freeport lost about a third of its annual aid.

Then the City of Freeport did improvements in 2005 that it would normally assess the State for, which it did. But the State refused to pay. The little city of 517 near Albany in Central Minnesota feels stretched so it sent out a bill.

The policies pursued by the Pawlenty administration and adopted in 2002 and 2003 have greatly impacted Minnesota municipalities ever since. Not suprisingly, SD35 Representatives Mark Buesgens and Mike Beard supported the policies that now plague local governments.

They then refer their readers out to this story from the MN2020 website. One minor problem is that the MN2020 story is rife with hyperbole, inaccuracies and complete fabrications.

There is a whole lot of this story that they (Sd35 DFL and MN2020) don't tell you. Like the fact that the LGA cuts started when the state was facing a $4.1 billion deficit! There was a lot of belt tightening that needed to be done in 2003 - either that or we pass that debt on to our children and grandchildren which the Democrats claim to be against when it is a Republican (like President Bush for example) doing the deficit spending. The other thing that they don't mention is that there was a special formula that was designed FOR cities like Freeport (pop. 517) so that they did not take the financial hit (as a percentage of income) that the bigger cities took. Instead of taking the 9.7% hit that most bigger cities took, cities with a population under 1000 people would get hit with a 0% to 2% deduction! In 2003 (for example) Freeport's LGA payment was $87,091 and in 2007 it was $79,438 - a decrease of roughly $8,000 in 4 years - not the $18,000 a year that MN2020 claims! So if they are passing on a $71,600 bill to the state for the last 4 years, I am thinking that the problem can be found more with the city council of Freeport then with anyone in St. Paul!

Regarding the "Main Street Project" I want to know why it is the city of Freeport feels that it is the responsibility of the taxpayers of Scott County (or Dakota County or Hennepin County for that matter) to pay for their repaving projects. Other cities pay for their repaving projects - why can't Freeport do the same?

The last and probably most important thing that our DFL friends left out had to do with this last legislative session. You see, last session, when the DFL had control of both houses of the Legislature they had the opportunity to fix this "iniquity". Instead of "fixing" the problem House File 3149 (authored by Rep. Anne Lenczewski (DFL_Bloomington) made it worse. The "new" formula actually reduced the amount of aid that went to cities like Freeport! I don't hear our friends at the SD35 DFL blog chastising the DFL leadership for THEIR part of this problem. I can't imagine why the left THAT important tidbit out of their story....

Oh He Did NOT....

This September 15 entry from El Tinklenberg's campaign blog simply can not go unaddressed.

Today we honor those who lost their lives or suffered injury in the tragic 35W bridge collapse on August 1, 2007. We are thankful to the dedicated responders who so bravely participated in the recovery and those who have since worked to ensure the future safety of the 35W Bridge. This efficient rebuilding effort would not have been possible without the help of many people, including the Minnesota Congressional delegation.

But let's not forget that not all of our representatives were united on this effort. While today Congresswoman Michele Bachmann took credit for supporting the 35W bridge bill, the facts tell us that she voted twice to keep it from coming to a vote.

First, she voted to adjourn Congress before the bill could be voted on; and subsequently, voted against allowing the bill to come to the House floor. These votes clearly demonstrate the extent Representative Bachmann will go to put party loyalty before Minnesotaâ€'s interests.

Let's take a quick trip in Mr. Peabody's Way Back Machine shall we? The bill in question (above) was the bill that contained more than a few poision pills as I described here. Pills like Mayor Ryback's desire to build an "enhanced bridge" with the emergency funds instead of replacing the existing one.

Add to this her "no earmarks" pledge against replacing the structurally disabled DeSoto Bridge in St. Cloud and her votes against funding local first responders, and you start to see a pattern of neglecting the emergency needs of the citizens of the 6th District.

Except that the "no earmarks" pledge came later - long after the 35W bridge collapse. The other "votes"....well let's just say I think Mr. Tinklenberg needs to give bill numbers so that the people can do their due diligence instead of relying on the claims of a politician running for office.

Clearly, we cannot afford two more years of Representative Bachmann putting political gain before the needs of Minnesotans. As a former mayor and former Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation I can assure you that I understand that when it comes to the safety of our citizens there should be no such thing as partisan politics.

Yes - let's talk Mr. Commissioner....let's talk about the recommendation (in 1999) to fix the 35W bridge that YOU said "NO" to...a recommendation to fix the gusset plates that ended up failing 8 years later! Bridges do not "fail" overnight - they take time. Were you thinking about the safety of our citizens when you said "no" to fixing those gusset plates? Or are you eschewing "partisan politics" when you got in front of the Channel 9 cameras to blame Lt. Governor Molnau for your failure to fix the gusset plates?

I think that the citizens of the 6th District are due honest answers from you on that if you wish to represent them.

Media Tougher On...

CBS News posted a wide ranging interview with Mark Penn over the weekend. While they did indeed cover a lot of ground in this interview, I wanted to focus on one particular part of the interview here.

CBSNews.com: Your former colleague Howard Wolfson argued that you all unintentionally paved the way for Palin by exposing some of the unfair media coverage that Hillary Clinton received. And, therefore, a lot of the media may now be treating Sarah Palin with kid gloves. Do you agree with that?

Mark Penn: Well, no, I think the people themselves saw unfair media coverage of Senator Clinton. I think if you go back, the polls reflected very clearly what "Saturday Night Live" crystallized in one of their mock debates about what was happening with the press.

I think here the media is on very dangerous ground. I think that when you see them going through every single expense report that Governor Palin ever filed, if they don't do that for all four of the candidates, they're on very dangerous ground. I think the media so far has been the biggest loser in this race. And they continue to have growing credibility problems.

And I think that that's a real problem growing out of this election. The media now, all of the media — not just Fox News, that was perceived as highly partisan — but all of the media is now being viewed as partisan in one way or another. And that is an unfortunate development.

CBSNews.com: So you think the media is being uniquely tough on Palin now?

Mark Penn: Well, I think that the media is doing the kinds of stories on Palin that they're not doing on the other candidates. And that's going to subject them to people concluding that they're giving her a tougher time. Now, the media defense would be, "Yeah, we looked at these other candidates who have been in public life at an earlier time."

What happened here very clearly is that the controversy over Palin led to 37 million Americans tuning into a vice-presidential speech, something that is unprecedented, because they wanted to see for themselves. This is an election in which the voters are going to decide for themselves. The media has lost credibility with them.

Emphasis mine. The media swarm on Alaska (which I hear rivaled the late August mosquito swarms and were just as welcome) only managed to dig up the fact that when Sarah Palin took office she (gasp) fired the appointees of her predecessor who just happened to be a tiny bit corrupt and hire people she knew and trusted! Of course that didn't prevent some of them from breathlessly implying that there was something to be concerned about.

While I would caution that you take a lot of what Penn says at face value (he is a long time adviser to both former President Clinton and Senator Clinton) it is still one of those interviews that you should read in its entirety because it offers a lot of insight into this leg of the campaign.

A "Post-Partisan" Campaign???

So much for the man that was going to run a "different" kind of campaign. Senator Obama just released a new ad today.

NEW YORK - John McCain is mocked as an out-of-touch, out-of-date computer illiterate in a television commercial out Friday from Barack Obama as the Democrat begins his sharpest barrage yet on McCain's long Washington career...

The newest ad showcasing their hard line includes unflattering footage of McCain at a hearing in the early '80s, wearing giant glasses and an out-of-style suit, interspersed with shots of a disco ball, a clunky phone, an outdated computer and a Rubik's Cube.

"1982, John McCain goes to Washington," an announcer says over chirpy elevator music. "Things have changed in the last 26 years, but McCain hasn't.

"He admits he still doesn't know how to use a computer, can't send an e-mail...

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail."

While it is true that Senator McCain does not send e-mails, it is obvious that Team Obama doesn't know how to use Google or Lexis-Nexis - because if they did they would have found this 2000 article that explains WHY Senator McCain does not use email (HT Ed M).

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard or tying his shoes.

Emphasis mine. If they had looked at all they would have found this NYTimes interview from last July (HT Allahpundit)

Q: What websites if any do you look at regularly?

Mr. McCain: Brooke and Mark show me Drudge, obviously, everybody watches, for better or for worse, Drudge. Sometimes I look at Politico. Sometimes RealPolitics, sometimes.

(Mrs. McCain and Ms. Buchanan both interject: “Meagan’s blog!”)

Mr. McCain: Excuse me, Meagan’s blog. And we also look at the blogs from Michael and from you that may not be in the newspaper, that are just part of your blog.

Q: But do you go on line for yourself?

Mr. McCain: They go on for me. I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself. I don’t expect to be a great communicator, I don’t expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer literate to the point where I can get the information that I need – including going to my daughter’s blog first, before anything else.

So there you have the new "post-partisan" candidate of change....mocking a man for his disability. Way to stay out of the gutter Senator.....

Someone Gets It

God Bless Hillary Clinton - she gets it!

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton marched for labor and stumped with Democrats on Saturday but sidestepped questions about the woman who has displaced her as the nation's most-talked-about female leader.

Clinton brushed aside questions about Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin during appearances at New York City's annual labor parade and later during a stop on Staten Island.

"This election is about issues, and that's what's going to matter to people at the end of the day," she told reporters who asked her about the Alaska governor at a rally for a Democratic congressional candidate at Wagner College.

Say what you will about the Clintons, you have to give Senator Clinton credit. She understands why the Obama campaign's smears of Sarah Palin are counter-productive and she refuses to participate in them.

This is one reason why the Republican Party breathed a huge sigh of relief when Barack Obama won the Democrats primaries. Senator Clinton is a smart politician....she and the former President did not get where they are being anything less.

Who Am I?

Who Am I?

I am under 45 years old,
I love the outdoors,
I hunt,
I am a Republican reformer,
I have taken on the Republican Party establishment,
I have many children,
I have a spot on the national ticket as vice president with less than two years in the governor's office.

Who Am I?

Answer in Comments!

Never Forget

Bridges Falling Down Bureaucrats To Blame

Well, well, well....according to a GAO report we now know what is responsible for the deterioration of our country's infrastructure - and it is not as the Dems said it was....

A government report is recommending closer federal oversight of one of the primary funds for fixing structurally deficient bridges across the country.

The Government Accountability Office report, to be discussed at Capitol Hill hearings today, calls for clearer goals and performance measures for the Highway Bridge Program, the $4.4 billion fund through which states help maintain their bridges....

House Transportation Chairman Jim Oberstar, D-Minn., has been particularly outspoken about Minnesota, which has redirected nearly half of its available Highway Bridge Program money in the past five years for other purposes.

You mean to tell me that it was diversion of monies for bridge repair to things like bike paths and not tax cuts for "the rich" that did this? You don't say???

Another Minnesota legislator deserves credit for asking for this report that uncovered more government waste and mismanagement.

The fund has been the source of controversy as many states — with Minnesota leading the way — have diverted available money for other transportation projects. Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., and others requested the report in the wake of last year's collapse of the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis.

Coleman said the report shows the fund lacks the accountability to ensure it's working to improve the nation's bridges.

"With the absence of accountability, there is neither a carrot nor a stick for states to improve the condition of their bridges," Coleman said.

Roads and bridges are a responsibility of the state AND federal governments. The Federal Government's responsibility is in maintaining the Interstate Highway program. If the Feds can not even manage a vitally important existing program like the Interstate Highway System, I have to ask again - what makes people think that they can adequately manage our health care system?

The Feds need to concentrate on responsibly managing money they already get from taxpayers before they think about taking more from our already stretched pocketbooks.

Mommy Wars

I really have tried to bite my tongue on a lot of this. After all, if you are going to play politics, you have to be able to endure the "slings and arrows". However, the crescendo has reached such a fever pitch that something must be said.

Since August 29, the liberal/progressive side of the political debate started trying to find the "dirt" on Sarah Palin. The attacks have ranged from juvenile to vile. Rather than address the ones that have come out so far, I will point you to these two websites as they have done all the hard work so far.

But the arguments that have really stuck in my craw are the statements that Governor Palin can't run for office and take good care of her son Trig and the converse (that came out yesterday) complaining that Governor Palin is (gasp) taking her children with her on the campaign trail! These are the kinds of attacks (you can't work and be a good mom) that women have been fighting for half a decade. What is worse is that this is coming out of supporters of the party that supposedly gives a fig about womens rights! While I don't find this surprising (after all they used these tactics against Senator Clinton in the primaries) the sexist comments coming out of Senator Obama's supporters are growing in their histrionics.

Senator Obama and his surrogates in the media are worried. They understand that Sarah Barracuda is "the real deal" and they are trying their darnedest to smear her. It got to the point where Democrat Kersten Powers (HT Gary at LFR) took the feminist movement and the media to task over their reaction.

Last night, "Sarah Barracuda" more than lived up to that slogan as she fought back at the media and Washington naysayers who've ridiculed her as a bimbo bumpkin interloper and showed she isn't going to be pushed around.

Had the media not been viciously attacking her family for the last few days, the speech might've seemed too tough. With that backdrop, it was more than appropriate.

The Obama camp also gave her the perfect chance to smack it around for being elitists - since its first response to John McCain picking her was to ridicule the size of her home town.

On that stage last night, Sarah Palin represented everything the feminist movement claims to strive for: a successful working woman with a happy family life and a husband who helps raise the children. Yet, rather than hailing her accomplishment, the feminist establishment has sat by silently as she's savaged for being a working mother.

Turns out old feminism is really just a bunch of good 'ole girls telling you what to think.

The latest offense came from Senator Obama himself when he turned Governor Palin's "pitbull/hockey mom joke" around saying that even if you put "lipstick on a pig it's still a pig". Imagine the righteous howls of indignation if someone referred to either Senator Obama (and his policies) or Senator Biden - I don't care HOW jokingingly - as a "pig". The left and the media would be apoplectic!

It is obvious that the Obama campaign is scared to death of Governor Palin. If not why would they have sent an army of lawyers and opposition researchers to Juneau and Wasilla to try to dig up dirt of Sarah Palin. (HT Ed) . It is also obvious that supporters of Senator Obama only care about feminist "ideals" when the feminist is one of theirs. I just heard an Obama supporter call into Rush Limbaugh's program and on national radio call Governor Palin a "smelly pig"!

And that could very well be the tale of the campaign as this site indicates:

We keep saying this — and no one seems to listen — but over the course of this campaign, we’ve met about 50 people who worked on McGovern-72, and every one of them said to us, without quivocation, that the main reason McGovern lost to Nixon was McGOVERN’S SUPPORTERS. The way McGovern’s “youth army” behaved, and the terrible things they did in McGovern’s name, worked against their candidate and every day drove more people who would have never voted Republican over to Nixon.

We’ll try to spell this out even more clearly: when people see things like this anti-Palin Ebay stunt, it makes normal people wonder why they would support SoetorObama, if this is what his followers are up to. It makes people who might have pulled the lever for this man question the very act of putting someone like this into office, when these are the types of followers he attracts.

People do not want to be associated with this sort of filth – and the fact that SoetorObama’s campaign doesn’t clamp down hard and stop this sort of daily, vulgar, nastiness says A GREAT DEAL about the person Oprah calls “The One”.

They are correct - the more "The One" and his followers stoop into the gutter to attack Sarah, Bristol and Trig Palin, the more they are going to turn off voters that only get their news in 30 second sound bytes on the nightly news. They are going to remember Senator Obama's pledge not to engage in this kind of cynical personal attack and they are going to reject him just as certainly as the electorate rejected Senator McGovern back in 1972.

Accountability For Whom?

I'm putting the easy post out as this darned near writes itself. From the inbox:

After months of consideration, U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Seattle, said Tuesday he signed on to an effort to impeach President Bush because he believes in holding leaders accountable.

McDermott, who is up for re-election to his 10th congressional term this year, is the eighth member of the U.S. House to sign on to the impeachment resolution.

It accuses the Bush administration of more than a dozen impeachable acts, including misleading the American public about Iraq, spying on American citizens and trying to "destroy Medicare."

The Democratic leadership in Congress has said an impeachment battle is too distracting.

"I fully understand the gut-wrenching consequences such a national debate could precipitate," McDermott said in a speech Tuesday. "Yet, there is one fact we cannot overlook or escape. America cannot regain its moral leadership in the world if America cannot hold its leaders accountable for their actions at home."

A little historical refresher here on Representative McDermott is in order here so that we can see just WHO is calling for "accountability". The Jim McDermott that is calling of ethical accountability for the Bush Administration is the same Jim McDermott that was investigated for ethics violations stemming from his releaser of an ILLEGALLY RECORDED telephone conversation involving House Republican leaders. Not only was McDermott investigated, the House Ethics Committee determined that McDermott HAD violated House Ethics rules and in 2008 a judge ordered him to pay $1.8 million to one of the Republican legislators (Rep. John Boehner) who was on that illegally obtained telephone call. THIS is the person who is calling for "accountability".

I hope that the voters of Seattle will heed McDermott's call for accountability and in November hand out a little accountability to McDermott.

If you are interested in helping McDermott's opponent, Steve Beren (a good man whom I have "known" for a couple of years) his donation page is here.

Debate Thoughts

First off - again thanks to Lyall and the Sutherland Institute folks for hosting us this morning. It was a lot of fun. Oh I know my non-political friends and family are all scratching their heads but it really was. I got the opportunity to chat with both Jason Chaffetz and Ben Spencer before and after the event (respectively) and they both struck me as being fine, gracious gentlemen. There were not a lot of fireworks - which I have to say coming from Minnesota struck me a bit....I am used to more "explosive" debates.

There were a couple of comments that I highlighted in my notes because I really felt that these were comments that needed a little more scrutiny.

First on energy there was agreement and disagreement. Both candidates said that energy was a hot issue and both agreed (to an extent) that more drilling and advancement of alternatives was necessary. Where the two appear to disagree is where Mr. Chaffetz said that we need to make the best use possible of ALL domestic resources - something that I have been saying all along.

During Mr. Spencer's opening remarks he made the comment that if we had a foreign policy that supported Hashemi Rafsanjani over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad then we would not be in Iraq. Is he really suggesting that we should have a foreign policy that routinely interferes in the elections of sovereign nations? I was also mildly taken aback to hear a serious candidate for national office refer to the duly elected President of a foreign country as "nuts". While arguments could be made for the mental stability of said president, it is not a good idea to express those sentiments in such an open forum.

There was only one time where a question really never got answered. When the question what would YOU do to foster transparency, Ben Spencer never said what HE personally would do. While I agree that the press needs to be made accountable to their customer, saying what the people need to do and what the press needs to do does not say what YOU will do...

All in all I was very glad to have attended this event. I look forward to a couple of more in the coming 56 days.

Q&A Time/Final Remarks

The Q&A format was pretty straight forward. Lyall would ask the questions and each candidate would get one minute to answer. Because I was writing (long story) this all out all questions and answers are paraphrased from my shorthand.

Q1) What will you do when you get to DC to try to get rid of the partisan rancor?

Jason Chaffetz - I don't care who gets the credit as long as a solution is found. Take the Legacy Parkway for example (not to try to take credit) - I forged relationships on both sides of the aisle so that all concerns were addressed so that the highway could get built.

Ben Spencer - Term limits and you have to take a stand against leadership. He talked about how he spoke out against Speaker Pelosi adjourning 5 weeks ago leaving a bill on the floor that was trying to address the energy crisis.

Q2) What do you think are the two biggest threats facing the country today?

B - International or Domestic?

Q - each.

B - Russia Pakistan and Iran are the greatest international threats. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and political unrest. Russia - we just don't know if the old guard or the new guard are in control. Iran - Ahmadinejad is "nuts" - we are not sure who is in power or what their intentions are.

J - We are hearing no solutions here just a list of problems. We need to drive down our debt. Debt notes devalue our currency. Billions go daily to people who don't like us. Immigration is a national security issue that must be addressed.

Q - Domestic?

J - You can not separate domestic and international issues as they are intertwined.

B - Immigration - I agree with Jason. We need to rework NAFTA. Weakened dollar increases interest rates. Dollar value has direct impact on gas prices. People gave President Bush a hard time for going to Beijing for the Olympics but we can not longer push China around anymore on human rights issues. They own too many of our debt notes.

Q3) When does life begin?

J - at conception. I am opposed to abortion

B - I agree with Jason. Life begins at birth and I am opposed to abortion.

Q4) Do you consider health care to be a "constitutional right"?

B - Nothing in Constitution that says that. The Founding Fathers were "divinely inspired" when the wrote the Constitution. It is a "moral" response - it is because government already subsidizes so much health care and government can not "discriminate".

J - No this is not the proper role of government. We need to put more into the hands of private providers and in the individual states. We need to transition away from a Medicare/Medicaid model in a methodical way but no socialized medicine as is being proposed now.

Q5) Define "excess profits" and if we get into taxing "excess" oil company profits what industry is next?

J - I am opposed to "windfall profits" taxes. Rather than taking federal money in the form of earmarks, we need to just give "block grants" to the states and let THEM decide where the money needs to be spent. Transportation decisions need to be made by the states and not the feds. We don't have a "revenue" problem we have a spending problem - cut irresponsible spending and the money for necessary spending will be there.

B - I agree that we have a "spending" problem. It is easy to pick on oil companies because they are successful at running their business. The Senate "investigations" into the oil companies were mostly grandstanding. I am against the Obama "windfall profits" plan because companies are entitled to make a profit. We need to let the oil companies work on what they are good at.

Q6) What steps will YOU take to foster government transparency?

B - The press needs to step up and do their job (in fostering transparency). One thought (from Senator Obama) is to make CSPAN more accessible and put more content on it but who really watches CSPAN. The people need to hold the press accountable and make them do their job.

J - I think how you run your campaign is a good indicator of how you will act as Congressman. I fully disclose all my donors - not just those who give over $250 as is required by the law. We need to make the budgeting process more accessible - put budget bills on line. One thing I will do is to reject all airdropped earmarks until the system has been reformed.

Final Remarks

Ben Spencer - thanks for being here and thanks for holding the press accountable. While my opponent and I disagree on much we will have a "good" campaign.

Jason Chaffetz - If we get the principles right we will then get the process of governing right.

My thoughts next.

Chaffetz/Spencer Blogger Breakfast Debate

I am probably the last to get my post on this morning's debate up...with good reason - life got in the way. However, this morning was the Jason Chaffetz - Bennion Spencer debate hosted by the fine folks at the Sutherland Institute (for my MN readers think along the lines of the MN Free Market Institute). The moderator was Lyall Swim from the Sutherland Institute. The forum started out with a 15 minute intro from each candidate, approximately 30 minutes of Q&A followed by a 5 minute closing statement.

Jason Chaffetz started us off talking about how honored he was to be with us and what an honor it was to be the Republican nominee for Congress. He mentioned how the Republicans needed to get back to it's core principles as it was what was best for the country and the party. He said that the party blew it when they had control and governed against their principles - being more concerned about putting the party before principles. He then went on to talk about how he set out to run a "different" campaign - eschewing paid political operatives and polling for volunteers and common sense. He said that he didn't do polling because he didn't need polls to tell him how to vote! (No Minnesota you can't have him!). He touched briefly on the fact that he was outspent 6-1 during the primary and that he refused to go into debt in order to get elected. He said that was part of the fiscal discipline that this country needed. On fiscal discipline he said that we needed to quit trying to be all things to all people. He also mentioned a website Expectmore.gov which lists out the programs that are performing and those that are not. He said that we needed to look at the under performing or ineffective programs and cut them where we can. He also spoke on energy and education calling energy security a "national security issue" and that NCLB needs to be repealed and the Federal government needed to get out of what is a local/state issue (education).

The fireworks of the event came when Chaffetz spoke about illegal immigration. He said that his comments on tents (we should take a look at what Maricopa County AZ is doing with lawbreakers) were taken grossly out of context. His detractors say that this is a racial comment and Chaffetz said both here (and on Nightside last night) that he didn't care what race - if they are here illegally and they broke other laws it does not matter what their race is they need to be punished. He demanded an apology from Mr. Spencer and his surrogates. That was the end of his first 15 minutes.

Ben Spencer got up and apologized right off the bat for having little voice (bad allergies - I can sooooo sympathize!) and said he was happy to be at the event. He agreed with Mr. Chaffetz that the Republicans "blew it" when they had control of all three houses, but went on to say that the problems we are facing today are not "Republican" or "Democrat" problems they are American problems. He said he was a firm believer in term limits and that he did not want to go to DC to "die" (I think Paul Wellstone did something similar and then when his self imposed term limits came up he ran again!). He said that he will draw on his experience as a journalist in DC (more on that later) - talking about the time he spent with then Governor George W. Bush while filming a documentary. He related a story about how they had Governor Bush for an unscheduled 45 minute flight back to Austin and how Governor Bush never talked policy - just talked sports. He said that was a smart move. He stated that energy was the number 1 issue today and that we needed to develop alternative fuels. He said that if drilling were expanded we needed a guarantee that the fuel would stay here to solve our needs and not go to China or Russia. He repeated the Democrats "we can't drill our way out of this" mantra. While I agree that "Drill Baby Drill" is a simplistic response to this crisis, so is the "we can't drill our way out" response but that is another post. He finished talking about foreign policy saying that if we had a foreign policy that supported Hashemi Rafsanjani (a pro US Moderate) when he ran against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad then we would not be in Iraq today!

Q&A and analysis in the following posts.

Oh Snap!

This is going to make Team Obama flinch.






Since Senator McCain kept his promise to accept public financin, Senator McCain can not use any of the money raised for his campaign so instead it is going to help down ticket candidates in other states. Either way that kind of fund raising is what the GOP has been looking for. That it is coming now, in the stretch is going to help their cause immensely.

Where Did They Get Their Credentials?

One of the things that struck me about this convention is just how tight security was. Before you could even go through the metal detectors, you had to have your credentials scanned. Then once you got to the metal detectors your credentials were scanned again! On the first day of the convention I had the bar code on the back of my credentials scanned three times. Then, once you got into the X you had to show your credentials multiple times in and around the seating area. So given all of that, just how did Code Pink get into the convention on Wednesday and Thursday? Spokes people for the the Pinks said that they were "given" the credentials by disaffected Republican delegates. However, according to delegates I spoke to, that was not the case.

This Code Pinker came in and halfway down the stairs took off the top of her outfit to reveal a pink sign about the war. She was quickly grabbed by one of our CT delegates and smacked to the floor. The other one was also grabbed by another CT delegate and shoved onto the stairs. Turns out they got media/press passes..

Emphasis mine. It turns out this was not the first time.

Later, after radio host Laura Ingraham spoke, Schlafly returned to the podium, and additional Code Pink protestors mounted the stage and chanted from in front of the stage. These protestors were escorted from the stage and the front of the stage to outside the hotel.

Abileah was among the Code Pink protestors escorted out of the hotel after the second disruption.

“Someone gave me it from a media outlet,” Abileah said outside the hotel. “It’s friendly of them. There’s a lot of media out there that support our message.”

Newsbusters is reporting that the RNCC knows whose press passes were used by the Pinks. Any guesses?

There is another, much more intriguing, explanation out there. According to Shay at Booker Rising, which describes itself a newsite for black moderates and black conservatives [emphasis added]:

I took the shuttle bus back to Minneapolis, and I overheard a convention organizer named Phil telling a convention delegate that the protesters on Wednesday night got through because of media credentials that were traced back to MSNBC (he told her that each credential has an individual bar code for each convention invitee). They suspect MSNBC this time as well.

Emphasis in the original. As I said, each credential was bar coded and the bar code identified the organization you were with. When the Pinks were arrested, they still had their purloined credentials on them. It certainly would have been easy enough to identify where the credentials came from. If they were indeed from a "traditional" media outlet, what will this mean for future conventions and candidate availabilities?

If the purloined credentials did indeed come from someone in a MSM outlet, that outlet runs the risk of being excluded from all future RNCC Conventions. I can not believe that someone who relies on access would be so stupid as to endanger the access for his entire organization just to promote an agenda. Then again, if it was indeed MSNBC credentials, being the home of Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, anything is indeed possible.

Senator McCain's Speech

I got this from a friend of mine. I think it sums up my feelings on Senator John McCain and the race for president quite nicely.

I think I'm fairly representative of those conservatives who just could not stand to vote for John McCain. But I now plan to vote for him this November. Let me tell you why.

The author goes on to describe the traits of the "McCain haters" and I agree that hate is probably too harsh of a word, but I am probably as dismayed with many of Senator McCain's policy stands.

The logic of the anti-McCain crowd was not that simple. Our time horizon was not just the next four years, but the future in general. I had stated that it is better to have a Democrat President who governs like a Democrat than a Republican who governs like a Democrat. Why? Because the Democrats would get a twofer with the latter: the enactment of a Democratic agenda and the ability to fix the blame for anything bad on the Republicans.

And what would conservatives get? An agenda they despise, blame for everything bad and no political party representing them any more.

While this author said that the Sarah Palin pick was the sole reason for the turn around, I have to admit mine is a little more complex. Yes - beyond a shadow of a doubt Sarah Palin being on the ticket is a huge shot of adrenaline. However there is more to it. That came from Senator McCain's speech to the convention. As I said in a prior post, Senator McCain was not my first or even 5th choice for president. However, as the speech wore on, I was reminded of the many things that I admired about President Reagan. The faith in the goodness of the country and the absolute devotion to America. These concepts shown brightly through every line of the speech. The other theme of the speech that really hit me was service. Senator McCain talked often about how everything he has done in is his life was for country first and his "glory" last. It was that and the exhortation that he needed the American people to join in the solution of the problems that face America today.

That is what real leaders do. They say "join me" in solving this problem....not "you must sacrifice all while I get the glory". It is that sense of shared sacrifice and shared glory that I think will help push Senator McCain over the top in November.

Did You Hear The One About...

One of the stories that I had hoped to rant at length on was the absolutely shoddy treatment that Senator McCains’s VP pick, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, had gotten in the media and by Obama surrogates. However, I am very glad that I didn’t get a chance to do so and you shall soon see why.

I won’t go into all of the rumors that were spread about Governor Palin, nor will I rebut all of them since there is a website already devoted to doing so. In addition, FactCheck.org debunked the vast majority of them and is working on the rest. Rather, I would like to make a couple of observations in general and then relay an anecdotal story of a very unscientific survey that I took while here in Chicago.

One of the stories that really appeared to get legs was he slime that Trig is not really Sarah’s baby…that is her 17 year old daughter’s baby. When the campaign announced that Bristol was already 5 months pregnant so she could in no way be 5 month old Trig’s mom the scandal mongers (like the folks at US Magazine) were still not satisfied. The campaign is lying about how far along Bristol is, the conspiracy goes…she is really only 3 months along….I have to think that the people spreading this rumor are childless because if they did have children they would know how hard it is (although not totally impossible) to get pregnant while you are nursing an infant.

Then there is “Troopergate”. What is frustrating about this particular quasi scandal is that the “respectable media” isn’t telling a third of the story – much less half of it. As has been reported in Alaska (but not here in the lower 48), Governor Palin’s former brother in law had been caught drinking on duty, had a DUI that was much more current than the one her husband Todd had 20 years ago and that the trooper in question had used his taser on his 11 year old step son! Governor Palin's former brother in law's excuse for tasering the kid was that "he asked for it". Now as the adult in that situation would you taser a 10 or 11 year old because he "asked for it"? Most reasonable adults would not. Do you want someone carrying a gun or a taser that thinks it is ok to use a taser on an 11 year old child? They also don’t tell you that the Public Safety Commissioner is an “at will” employee which means that he can be fired for any reason or no reason at all. Just ask all of the assistant Attorneys General in Lori Swanson’s office!

But the thing that frustrates me the most is the fact that here we are in 2008 fighting the “Mommy Wars” yet again. I thought that we fought the “Women’s Rights Movement” so that we did not have debates like this going forward. Although I have to be grateful to Gloria Steinem for finally admitting that her organization is only for a right to choose if it is the right to choose abortion. She came flat out and said last week that the only thing she had in common with Governor Palin was one chromosome and that was not enough. I mean here I thought that NOW was all about rights for ALL people who shared a common chromosome with her and Governor Palin. Now all of a sudden that chromosome is not so important…..

While I was here in Chicago, I had the opportunity to talk to many women about the Sarah Palin nomination. Some were Republicans, some were Democrats and some were very apolitical and ALL of them were appalled at the treatment that Governor Palin had received at the hands of the press and at the hands of the Obama surrogates. Almost all of them (my very Demoractic mother being the sole exception) were talking about voting for the McCain Palin ticket in large part because of the way that the Democrats had treated both Senator Hillary Clinton and Governor Palin.

Good work guys! Keep it up.

End Of The Week Notes (Part 1?)

As I sit here in the airport waiting to fly home from Chicago (I made a side trip to go visit my family) I thought I would throw a few random notes about things that happened at the convention.

First off, mega, mega kudos to the combined police and state patrol forces for all of their hard work last week. I know that they had their hands full every day trying to keep the balance of free speech and public safety. They responded appropriately to the threats that were presented and did so in a way that was not over the top. Another round of mega thanks goes to Il Duce and the LME for hosting Fausta and I all week. The convention had us running very odd hours and I sure hope we were not too much of an imposition.

Now a couple of short stories…on Tuesday – after a long day at the super secret protest watch bunker, I got a call from Fausta. It seemed that we had been invited to a party at the home of Minnesota’s premier humorist, James Lileks. The party was being thrown by the fine folks at Pajamas Media in honor of the 50^th anniversary of the birth of said Mr. Lileks. The party drew such notables as Hugh Hewitt and Michael Medved (of Salem Radio), Hugh’s producer Duane (Generalissimo) Patterson, Roger L. Simon and Rick Moran (of Pajamas Media), Ed Morrissey (of Hot Air and Minnesota’s Northern Alliance Radio Network), Mitch Berg (also from the Northern Alliance), Mary Katherine Ham and a whole host of traditional media (fellow Star Tribune reporters and radio personalities from Chicago and Minneapolis), bloggers, performers and regular folks. I got to meet many of the dignitaries there (for all you Hot Air Show denizens – yes MKH is as cute and as nice in person…) Probably the most surreal time for me at the party was when I spent about half an hour chatting with Duane and Five For Fighting’s John Ondrasik about what Sarah Palin needed to do in her speech the next night. I don’t know about the guys but I think she definitely “stuck the landing”.

On Wednesday I attended a bloggers brunch with many of the bloggers covering the convention. Governor Bobby Jindal was supposed to be the guest speaker, but he was understandably unable to attend thanks to Hurricane Gustav. The second featured speaker was supposed to be Joe Scarborough from MSNBC but he cancelled at the last moment. But the speakers we got were fascinating indeed. The first to speak to us was Google CEO Eric Schmidt. There was a spirited back and forth about net neutrality and the apparent leftward bias of Google. The second speaker was Representative Kevin McCarthy of California. He spoke to us about the Republican Young Guns program – a program designed to recruit and mentor the next generation of Republican Congressional candidates. At the brunch I met a bunch of online friends including Skye, John and Minnesota’s favorite Small Town Mayor. From there we went to lunch with Ed Morrissey and the Townhall folks. Not much was talked about although a lot of talking and “getting to know you was done”. It was after that lunch that my newfound friends Skye, John and I ran into the Code Pink protest.

Thursday night (prior to the speech) I spent quite a bit of time wandering the halls of the Convention Center looking for friends (Hi Andrea) and just poking around. I saw George Stephanopolus (he is much shorter than I imagined him being), country music artist Trace Atkins (also from TV’s “The Apprentice”) and former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele. I even got a chance to get my picture take with him. While down in the media dungeon, I got the opportunity to sit in on a discussion with Representative Michael Burgess (TX) where we talked at length about health care reform (more later) in general and Senator McCain’s health care reform plans in specific.

All in all, it was a crazy busy week (as you could probably tell by the lack of posts). However, I learned an awful lot and I had a blast meeting so many on line friends for the first time. This may have been my first convention, but hopefully it will not be my last. I enjoyed it too much.