Sigh.....

So I get a link to a post in my daily media alerts. It contains the usual snarky rhetoric displayed by those who deny the realities of Econ 101...supply and demand...

Jason Chaffetz recently visited Alaska, looked solemnly at the beauty that surrounded him, and declared we could end the $4.00 a gallon prices at the pump by drilling away into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. To his credit, he mentions our need to pursue alternative energy sources, including the renewable source of wind power.

Sigh.....here is the pristine wilderness that is 10-02 area of the ANWR.

and here...


Now, let's take a look at a map of the area where the drilling is proposed to take place.


Click the map in order to see a large detail of the drilling area. Do you see that little red square? In the northwest portion of the green "coastal plain" area? THAT little red square marks the 2,000 acres (3.13 sq miles) where the proposed new drilling will take place. Now, do you see the red arrows? The ones pointing to various other spots along the coastal plain? Those areas represent areas of this so called "pristine wilderness" that have already been opened up for drilling! This tiny portion of the 19.6 MILLION ACRES of land is what we are talking about "despoiling" here. This tiny portion of the larger refuge contains enough oil for 436.8 BILLION gallons of gasoline - enough for roughly 12.6 BILLION TANKS (at 16 gallons per tank) of gasoline!

Lastly, the coastal plain is not part of the "refuge". It is in an area that was set aside FOR FUTURE OIL DRILLING by President Jimmy Carter in 1980.

The facts of the matter are that the DEMOCRATS in Congress and the DEMOCRATS in the Senate are doing everything in their power today to block votes on additional domestic drilling. The DEMOCRATS are more than happy to send $70 million a year to the Middle East. The facts are that the 10-02 area is not part of the Arctic REFUGE - it is outside of the area.

Can you honestly and truly say that 436.8 billion gallons will not make a difference in the price of a gallon of gasoline? If so, then you really need to take a refresher course in Economics because every theory of economics acknowledges that very basic fact.

Of COURSE We Heart The Troops

Ed Morrissey brings us the latest from Senator Obama's campaign trip to Germany.

I guess this is a question of priorities. Barack Obama apparently ran short on time in his visit to Germany today, and travelers know how schedules can slip during long tours, even without all of the events Obama had planned. Those circumstances force people to prioritize their time, and eliminate less-useful stops.

So what did Obama cut today? Der Spiegel’s blog reports on Obama’s priorities:

++ Visit to US Military Bases Cancelled ++
1:42 p.m.: SPIEGEL ONLINE has learned that Obama has cancelled a planned short visit to the Rammstein and Landstuhl US military bases in the southwest German state of Rhineland-Palatinate. The visits were planned for Friday. “Barack Obama will not be coming to us,” a spokesperson for the US military hospital in Landstuhl announced. “I don’t know why.” Shortly before the same spokeswoman had announced a planned visit by Obama.

So the Senator's schedule was so full that he had to cut out a planned visit to our wounded warriors in Landstuhl? They weren't a priority? That seems to match up with the contents of an email that I got yesterday. While I am not at liberty to share the details of the email (I do not want to get the soldier in question in trouble with his/her brass but the events that were told to me were verified as actually having taken place) I will just say that the Senator was given ample opportunities to talk to soldiers when he was in Afghanistan and he did not take advantage of those opportunities - unless the cameras were on hand to document it (the famed basketball shot).

We have (sadly) seen this kind of support for our troops out of Democratic nominees for President before. Yet they tell us that we should not question their respect and devotion to the troops. I'm sorry - but if you do respect the troops, you stop and shake their hand when the opportunity is presented. If you are devoted to the troops, you cancel a campaign appearance before a foreign nation in order to spend time with those who were wounded in the line of duty. IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

UPDATE: BlackFive has confirmed and has further witness testimony that Candidate Obama snubbed the troops in Afghanistan.

I had a first hand view of Barrack Obama's "fact finding" mission, when he passed through this base.

While I can't name it, it's one of the largest air bases in the region, with up to 8000 troops (depending on influxes and transients in mobilization/demobilization status), mostly Airmen and Soldiers, but some Marines, Sailors, Koreans, Japanese, Aussies, Brits, US Civil Service, contractors including KBR, Blackwater and Halliburton, among others in the news. The overwhelming majority of all of these are professional, courteous and disciplined. Problems are rare.

Casualties are also rare. This base has a large hospital for evacuation—twenty plus beds. I have yet to see a casualty in one, though I am told there are about three evacuations a week through this region, of which two on average are things like sports injuries, vehicle accidents or duty related falls and such. You can tell from the news that the war is going well. The ghouls are now focusing on Afghanistan, since there is no blood to type with here.

This oped is of course subjective and limited, but I will try to present the facts as I saw them. I wasn't able to see much, which makes a point all by itself.

When his plane arrived (also containing Senators Reed and Hagel, but the news has hardly mentioned them), there was a "ramp freeze." This means if you are on the flight line, and not directly involved with the event in question, you stay where you are and don't move. For a combat flight arriving or departing, this takes about ten minutes, and involves the active runway and crossing taxiways only. For Obama's flight, this took 90 minutes, during which time a variety of military missions came grinding to a halt. Obviously, this visit was important, right?

95% of base wanted nothing to do with him. I have met three troops who support him, and literally hundreds who regard him as a buffoon, a charlatan, a hindrance to their mission or a flat out enemy of progress. Even when the rumors were publicly admitted, almost no one left their duty sections to try to see him, unless they were officers whose presence was officially required.

Mister Obama's motorcade drove up from the flight line and entered the dining hall toward the end of lunch time. Diners were chased out and told to make other arrangements for food, in the middle of the duty day.

But don't question his devotion to the troops!

Piling It On

On Monday, I wrote about the spate of bad news that Team Franken started the week with. Today it got worse. The Rassmussen Reports Daily update came out with these two polls.

Minnesota: Obama Leads by Twelve

Minnesota Senate Race Still a Toss-Up

Even worse came from MinnPost who reported on the latest Quinnipiac poll that showed Senator Coleman up be 15%.

In the same poll showing Barack Obama's margin over John McCain slipping to 2 percentage points, Quinnipiac University pegs Norm Coleman's U.S. Senate lead at 15 points over Al Franken, 53 percent to 38 percent.

The next paragraph has the money quote.

If you go by the 1,261-likely-voter survey, Franken's problems are manifest. He only splits union households 47-44; loses women 41-48, and is getting clocked among independents 32-55. Fully 19 percent of DFLers back Coleman; meanwhile Republicans support their nominee 94-3.

Emphasis mine. Minnesota gains it's purple reputation due to the high number of self-described "independents" in the state. Therefore, that demographic is still a key demographic to win over. However, when nearly 1/5th of your own party backs your rival, there are serious problems to be had...and Team Franken appears to have them in spades.

Kline Conference Call

As I mentioned earlier, I participated in a conference call with Congressman John Kline (MN-2 and my former Congressman). The purpose of this call today was to launch a new microsite Stop The Pork (www.stopthepork.com) . On the call with me were Rob Neppell of Porkbusters and my dear friends and fellow True North contributors Gary Gross from Let Freedom Ring (who live blogged the call), Janet Beihoffer from SCSU Scholars, Leo Pusateri from the Ice Palace and Derek Brigham and J.Ewing from Freedom Dogs.

Congressman Kline started off by talking about his conversion to the "no more pork" fold.

When I got to Congress I thought that this was the way things got done. I have since learned that this (the process of deciding which project gets funded) is not based on the merit of the project but by who you are, what party you are in and what committees you are on...

He then went on to note that last year, 12 members signed the no pork pledge - a number that has moved up to 50 this year and it does include a couple of Democrats (Ron Kind of Wisconsin and Henry Waxman of California).

The Congressman kept his remarks brief to allow questions from the bloggers on the call. Jerry lead us off by asking if there was a difference between earmarks and pork. He wanted to make sure that legit projects didn't get a short shrift in the march toward reform. Congressman Kline said that legit road funding projects are the ones where the money goes to the DOT and the state decides which projects are a priority - as opposed to those where the Congressman (or woman) goes in and dictates which projects are more worthy. Congressman Kline reiterated that the projects do not compete on merit - just on who the requesting party is.

Derek asked if Senator McCain was on board with the Project. Congressman Kline replied that while Senator McCain is on board with stopping pork, he has not "signed on" to this project specifically.

Rob asked what the long term goal of this project was - was it to stop pork altogether? Congressman Kline replied that a short term goal was a moratorium on all pork spending. He reminded us that Congress is granted the Constitutional authority to spend money, but that the process for doing so was broken. The long term goal is to reform the system into a rational merit based system.


Janet asked if we need to get more "seats" before we can make any progress on the "no pork" front. Congressman Kline mentioned that the movement has momentum - right now Congressional leaders are not putting spending issues on the floor to vote on because they know that the public sentiment is against irresponsible spending. He said that they are "afraid" to put these issues on the floor where they can be held to their voting record. He said that they are "playing on the calendar" - waiting to see what the outcome of the election is before they do their job. This will be an issue during the campaign.

Carrying forward on the momentum question I asked if there was a mechanism to get non-incumbents (like UT 3 candidate Jason Chaffetz) on board - candidates who have made pork a central issue to their own campaigns. Congressman Kline answered that there wasn't really anything yet but that he would look into it. He mentioned that Brian Davis (challenger to MN1 Democrat incumbent Tim Walz) has also campaigned on earmark reform so he would try to find a way (other than signing the petition on the site) to get these challengers involved.

Mine was the last question and we ended the call. Those of you who want to know more about earmark reform can go to Congressman Kline's site (for the petition), Porkbusters OR Reagan21 which is a bi-cameral coalition of conservative legislators who are standing up for a 21st century Reagan Revolution of government reform.

Slackling Off

Sorry for being such a slacker yesterday. I was working on a couple stories and preparing for a conference call with Congressman John Kline (which takes place in 20 minutes). Regular posting shall resume starting with a post on the call later this morning.

A Tale Of Two Very Different States

It really is eye opening to get into a new state for a long period of time so that you can see the difference between the way the state you live in (or in my case lived in for 14 years) and the one you are in now. Case in point is how the current economic downturn is being handled by the State of Utah versus how it's hitting the State of Minnesota. First Minnesota....thanks to a slowing economy, state revenues are down $530 million, the reserves (rainy day fund) is down $33 million and spending is up $64 million, leaving the state in the hole $935 million - a far cry from the $2.2 BILLION surplus that the state had at the end of FY 2006. That led some legislators to come flat out and say "I Told You So".

One year ago the economy was doing well and the Legislature was overflowing with ideas on how to spend the $2.2 billion state budget surplus. It was the first time in several years that we weren't facing a large deficit. A new cast of leaders was eager to validate its sweeping victory in the 2006 election by turning their campaign promises into promises kept.

In the midst of the spending frenzy, I wrote to constituents my belief that "we need to be prudent with spending and not leave ourselves in a tough situation if the economy takes a sudden downturn." There was at the time plenty of historical evidence to suggest such a downturn could take place.

Utah, on the other hand, took many of the steps that Rep. Beard laid out in his legislative update. I know Rep. Beard will not be surprised at the results of such prudence.

On Friday, the Utah State Tax Commission released preliminary year-end revenue numbers.

When you look at the numbers, you will notice we're collecting less revenue than originally projected. That is not a surprise (we're actually pleased it's not worse). We're still within the range we predicted last month.

No one wants to be right about bad news but legislative dinosaurs like me have been through enough economic cycles that we felt the downturn coming and planned ahead for it. We have some carry-forward money, a healthy Rainy Day fund and we socked away an additional $100 M for the Uniform School Fund. In addition, we crafted a FY 2009 budget that is significantly lower than the FY 2008 budget.

From the article in the Salt Lake Tribune:

"We intentionally reserved a large carry-forward because we anticipated a slowdown," Valentine said. "Utah is very well poised to weather any kind of economic downturn."

Some states are having to cut services because of dwindling tax revenues, said State Tax Commission spokesman Charlie Roberts. "We're in a lot better fiscal shape than most," Roberts said, pointing to Utah's fiscally conservative bent and efforts to foster a favorable business climate as contributing factors.

So, we need to pay attention, spend carefully, and act wisely - but we don't need to be afraid. In keeping with being the best managed state in the nation we have already asked state agencies to plan ahead on where and how they can cut, should that become a necessity. I'm hoping it won't.

The Minnesota Legislature can and should take a lesson from their bretheren in Utah. Economic cycles are the norm. A little prudent planning, forethought and a lot of self-discipline can (in the long run) save your state from being blown around by the inevitable economic storms of life. Just as a wise worker sets aside money (and spends wisely) in case of a loss of income, the state should be setting aside money and wisely spending their money - in case of a loss of income. That is supposedly what we pay the Legislature to do.

Welcome!

Welcome Utah Bloghive readers. For those of you who are here for the first time, let me introduce myself.

I am a new resident to your fair state - having transferred here from the very purple blue state of Minnesota. Because I left Minnesota in the middle of a couple of very hotly contested elections, I will be posting about the elections back in Minnesota. However, I am already starting to follow a couple of elections out here and will be commenting on those as well. PLUS, you will get insights from the Republican National Convention as I had applied for Special Media Credentials to the convention prior to finding out about the Logical Husband's transfer to Utah.

Prior to my move, I started to get to know a couple of local Utah bloggers and I hope to get to know many of you quite well in the coming months.

Thanks to Bradley and the rest of the Bloghive managers for adding me to your daily reading list. I hope you all enjoy what you see here.

Shocking!

I know we are all surprised to read this.

An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES -- less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'

Considering this new Rasmussen poll...

The belief that reporters are trying to help Barack Obama win the fall campaign has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help Obama with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

Even CNN's Howard Kurtz realizes that the media is in the bag for an Obama victory.

KURTZ: Sometimes the big, sprawling, undisciplined beast we cal the media have an impact just by showing up, the cameras magnifying everything in their view. Now, Barack Obama's overseas trip was always going to be a journalistic sensation, but the Illinois senator's campaign wasn't taking any chances.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COURIC: By the way, I'll be reporting next week from the Middle East. We'll have the first one-on-one interview with Senator Obama.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Actually CBS' Lara Logan getting the first one-on-one interview today. But by dangling the offer of exclusive interviews with the candidate, exclusive for one night a piece, that is, the Obama team persuaded Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson and Brian Williams to trek halfway around the world to cover this trip. What that means, of course, is that the "CBS Evening News," "NBC Nightly News" and ABC's "World News" will be broadcast from Europe and the Middle East this week, throwing an even brighter spotlight on Barack's excellent adventure.

John McCain, meanwhile, was accompanied by zero anchors on his three foreign trips since wrapping up the Republican nomination in March. And that has the pundits debating whether the sheer volume of airtime and ink is tilting rather dramatically in Obama's direction.

Is it any wonder why newspapers and television news are losing their readers/viewers. If you are going to get opinion anyway - why not go to a blog or to Rush Limbaugh? After all - the only difference between Rush and the NY Times is the fact that Rush ADMITS his bias.

Bad News Gets Worse

Team Franken got a dose of bad news as the new week starts.

Just a few months ago, Al Franken had plenty of reasons to smile about his chances of unseating Minnesota’s Republican Sen. Norm Coleman .

Minnesotans oppose the war — and the president — that Coleman supported. Franken was doing his homework: he had entered the race early and was running a strong grass-roots campaign focused on local organizing and smaller-venue events.

And, in early June, he secured the DFL nomination at the state convention on the first ballot.

But costly mistakes in the campaign of former Saturday Night Live writer are now imperiling his chances of winning.

Poll trends in the past several weeks indicate that Coleman has increased his lead over Franken. Although the numbers have fluctuated, four of the last five polls show Coleman ahead of Franken - three by more than nine points. So now, CQ Politics is changing the rating on the race to Leans Republican from No Clear Favorite.

Part of the reason for change is that the reasonable voters of Minnesota are starting to see the candidate for who he really is. No small amount of credit for this goes to Michael Brodkorb - he has done a yeoman's work on exposing the candidate for the petty, mean individual that he is. However, there are a few Democrats who are coming to the realization that Team Franken is not the brightest bulb (or bulbs) in the bunch.

I’ve always felt that it’s hypocritical to only criticize candidates you oppose for positions that appall you while turning a blind eye to the missteps of those candidates you support.

That brings me to a current TV commercial for the DFL-endorsed candidate for U.S. Senate, Al Franken. Let me preface this by saying that although I am not committed in this race, my politics are much closer to Franken’s than they are to those of his opponent, Republican incumbent Norm Coleman.

Franken’s 30-second spot points out that the U.S. has built hundreds of schools, more than a thousand roads and thousands of sewer and water projects in Iraq. He goes on to say that instead, we should spend that money on education, health care, jobs and infrastructure in the U.S. He closes with, “We need to invest in America again” (emphasis his).

That’s what I call pandering. It verges on xenophobia-this statement more than implies that the choice is between spending money on Iraqi infrastructure or American needs. It is Us versus Them-they are the Other, we are Americans. This sort of message seems designed to appeal to Minnesotans who are bitter about the financial costs of the war and/or foreign aid in general. It says that once we stop spending money on them, we’ll have more for us.

The writer then goes on to tell about her interaction with Team Franken about this ad and the exercise did not leave the author with warm fuzzies.....to put it nicely.

When Team Franken starts loosing leaners like the author above, you know things are not going well. When things are not going as well as planned, it leads to desperation measures like we are seeing in the latest round of Franken ads. His latest round of ads claim that he was always against the war (unlike his opponent) but it has been widely reported that it was not always the case.

It is clear that the DFL's gamble on Franken is not paying off as well as they had hoped. They went with the comedien because of the name recognition. What the DFL failed to recognize is that name recognition and the ability to raise money outside of the state are not good reasons to nominate a candidate. The candidate has to have ideas and ideals that he can and will stick by. Al Franken was never that man and now the DFL has no other option. It seems that they have given up on regaining the "Wellstone seat".

Free Speech And The House Of Representatives

I recently began subscribing to a newsletter that is a daily reflection of the Founding Fathers thoughts and beliefs. I got one late last week that really hit home with this blogger.

"Without Freedom of Thought there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as Public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech."

-- Benjamin Franklin (writing as Silence Dogood, No. 8, 9 July1722)

Reference: The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Labaree, ed., vol. 1(27)

Freedom of thought and speech is the lifes blood of bloggers. Which is why so many of us are up in arms about this.

Talk radio’s suspicions of a movement to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine were confirmed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Tuesday June 24 during her comments at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. When John Gizzi, an editor for Human Events asked Speaker Pelosi whether she favored a return of the Fairness Doctrine, she told him an unhesitating “yes,” reports Gizzi.

Moreover, when Gizzi asked if she supports the Broadcaster Freedom Act, “She added that ‘the interest in my caucus is the reverse’ and that New York Democratic Rep. ‘Louise Slaughter has been active behind this [revival of the Fairness Doctrine] for a while now,’ he writes.

Representative Slaughter (D-NY) introduced the 2004 MEDIA Act to bring back the Fairness Doctrine and reintroduced it in 2005 as the Fairness and Accountability in Broadcasting Act.

Don't kid yourselves my friends...this will not stop with the Broadcast Media. Once implimented, the "Fairness" Act will eventually come to apply to blogs. Congress has no faith in anything that they can not control. They will eventually mandate that there be an even number of blogs on the left, center and right in every state. That means that the center right blogosphere in Minnesota will have to be cut and the center/left blogosphere in Utah will suffer the same fate!

Ben Franklin knew what he was saying when he said that there was no "public liberty without freedom of speech". Regardless of where that speech appears or whom it apparently favors today, a free society must encourage the free exchange of ideas. It is the foundation of our country and we can not allow Rep. Pelosi and her ilk to take it away from us all.

The Bloom Is Off Of the Obama Rose

Others have written about the Charles Krauthamer column that took Senator Barack Obama to task for his out of control ego, you expect a column like this out of Krauthamer. Where you don't expect it is out of Joan Vennochi of the Boston Globe, but get it we did and boy is it a barn burner.

JUST LIKE the Obama girl, Obama has a crush on Obama.

Barack Obama always was a larger-than-life candidate with a healthy ego. Now he's turning into the A-Rod of politics. It's all about him.

He's giving his opponent something other than issues to attack him on: narcissism.

A convention hall isn't good enough for the presumptive Democratic nominee. He plans to deliver his acceptance speech in the 75,000 seat stadium where the Denver Broncos play. Before a vote is cast, he's embarking on a foreign policy tour that will use cheering Europeans - and America's top news anchors - as extras in his campaign. What do you expect from a candidate who already auditioned a quasi-presidential seal with the Latin inscription, "Vero possumus" - "Yes, we can"?

Obama finds criticism of his wife "infuriating" and doesn't want either of them to be the target of satire. Tell that to the Carters, the Reagans, the Clintons, and the Bushes, father and son.

There's no such thing as a humble politician. But when Obama looks into the mirror, he doesn't just see a president; he sees JFK.

Vennochi brings up a lot of the same criticisms that the conservative punditry has brought up in recent weeks which leads one to wonder if this horribly long campaign season hasn't done more to defeat Barack Obama than anything the Republicans could have done. It certainly seems that way.

Sweet Home Chicago

It's a pity I didn't get this until after my last post on Senator Obama.


I guess I'll have to just settle for this as a stand alone post along with this link to another look at Senator Obama's Chicago ties. As Mark H remarked in the comments to my last post - do we really want Chicago politicians doing for the country what they have done for Chicago and Cook County?

A House Divided

I imagine that this story will be of cold comfort to my friends in the MNGOP.

The House is on fire, and Republican factions are busy dousing each other in gasoline.

Long-running feuds and tension in the Utah House of Representatives have erupted recently in name-calling, ethical charges and countercharges, and claims of retribution and character assassination.

I say cold comfort because it shows that the infighting that we have been seeing for the last couple of years in Minnesota are not an anomoly. Sadly though, this infighting does not show any sign of abating any time soon. Especially when you have people like Chris Cannon saying things like this about the party and party leadership.

Rep. Chris Cannon is angry.

Not at the voters who tossed him from his 12-year perch, but at the Republican leaders and those vocal few hammering on about earmarks and lobbing stinging criticism at their own party members. While he says he's not bitter, Cannon argues that some Republicans are tearing apart the Grand Old Party.

"I'm angry at Republican leadership and I'm angry at the people who have demeaned the political process by claiming corruption," Cannon said during an interview this week.

Sound familiar Minnesota? It should...

Again, the people speaking out, whether it be the voters themselves or the grassroots volunteers in the county and state organizations, who felt that the politicians have quit representing them are the ones at fault....not the politician! It is frustrating to no end for the grass roots workers to be this roundly ignored day in and day out and we are the ones at fault for daring to speak out against it Rep. Abeler and Rep. Cannon. You don't get it do you....you serve at the pleasure of the voters - we don't serve you. That is the lesson that you need to take to heart here!

Here is a radical thought for everyone....let's get back to doing what is right for the COUNTRY and the STATE. I mean that is what we elect you to do...not line your pockets or spend other peoples money. Do what is best for the state and the country and we will all get along a little better. If we don't agree about "what is best" you should be able (with all of your years in the Legislature) to articulate your position better than just saying "you're not from my district go away!". We can and should be able to discuss that with our legislators - shouldn't we?

What do you say? Can ya do it?

Holiday Road

A lot has been said in previous weeks about Senator Obama's serial gaffes. Many have started to wonder what has happened to change Obama from a bright and shining Democratic rock star to Spinal Tap - a shallow parody of reality. Rick Moran thinks he has the answer.

It’s not making news because after all, reporting on the messiah’s mixed race upbringing and sterling oratory makes for so much better copy.

But someone, someday in the major media is going to wake up and take a good long look at Barack Obama’s campaign and notice something very strange; it is staffed from top to bottom with Chicagoans who have mostly made their bones working for Mayor Richard Daley and the Chicago Machine.

It is not an exaggeration to say that Barack Obama’s campaign is being run out of Chicago. He recently moved most of the Democratic National Committee functions to the Windy City and his campaign headquarters is there as well.

The question the press might want to ask would be is there anything being “run” in Chicago that doesn’t have Mayor Daley’s fingerprints all over it?

Is Barack Obama Daley’s man?

As someone who grew up in Chicago, during the original Mayor Daley days, nurtured (politically) and immersed in Chicago politics, I am not as much surprised that someone came up with this thought as much as I was surprised that I didn't think of it first. I suspect that my time away from Chicago has dulled my political cynicism somewhat.

One of the things that has become most apparent is that Barack Obama will say and do ANYTHING to move up into higher office. I pointed out (in a previous post) how the Senator's career has been nothing more than a constant run for higher office. That can be the only reason that can explain gaffes like this.

After receiving a hailstorm of criticism for considering Brandenburg Gate for a public speech, as well as official German dissuasion, Barack Obama moved the venue to the Siegessäule monument. Obama will speak about “historic” US-German relations, but once again, Obama’s own grasp of history has been proven deficient. Not only does the site contain a monument to Prussian victories over other American allies in Europe, its placement was decided by Adolf Hitler — in order to impress crowds in his idealized version of Berlin called Germania:

Still, even as the issue of his speech’s location has now been settled, a number of politicians in Berlin are still dissatisfied with the site. The Siegessäule — or Victory Column — was erected in memory of Prussia’s victories over Denmark (1864), Austria (1866) and France (1870/71). The column originally stood in front of the Reichstag, Germany’s parliament building, but was moved by Adolf Hitler to its current location in 1939 to make way for his planned transformation of Berlin into the Nazi capital “Germania.”

“The Siegessäule in Berlin was moved to where it is now by Adolf Hitler. He saw it as a symbol of German superiority and of the victorious wars against Denmark, Austria and France,” the deputy leader of the Free Democrats, Rainer Brüderle, told Bild am Sonntag. He raised the question as to “whether Barack Obama was advised correctly in his choice of the Siegessäule as the site to hold a speech on his vision for a more cooperative world.”

Andreas Schockenhoff of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats said, “the Siegessäule in Berlin is dedicated to a victory over neighbors who are today our European friends and allies. It is a problematic symbol.”

The German people know their history - something that the Obama Camp doesn't. As Ed pointed out in his post...

Obama could be excused for his gaffe, except for two reasons. His team certainly understood the historical weight that the Brandenburg Gate would have lent his event, so why didn’t they bother to ask the Germans about the Siegessäule? Quite obviously, the Germans understand the meaning and subtext of the monument, and most of them wonder why Obama does not. Maybe this is a better example of clueless Americans traveling abroad than those who can only say Merci, beaucoup.

Oh snap - that stings! Ed brings out an even bigger question though...on that I think I have the answer for. Ed asks...

The more basic question is why Obama feels the need to conduct a campaign event among Germans. Meeting with foreign leaders makes sense for a man with no foreign policy experience whatsoever, but that doesn’t require massive rallies among people who aren’t voting in this election. In his rush to look impressive for no one’s purposes but his own, Obama has made himself look ignorant and arrogant all over again.

Why indeed does Sen. Obama feel the need to campaign in Germany. The answer, I believe has to do with the fact that the Senator knows that he will not get the 24/7 scrutiny that he has been getting here at home. There is a natural lag, thanks to time zones, that will keep the reporting of the Senators activities pigeon-holed into the morning and evening news time slots. Anything that happens outside of those times will get minimal coverage.

I think it also has to do with ego....Barack Obama needs to feel the adoration that was so prevalent during the early days of the campaign. Since he has started his much documented tack to the center, he has felt the loss of "love" from the press and the voters. This European "vacation" with the accompanying MSM puff pieces (see the video "Obama Nails A 3-Pointer) from Katie, Charlie and Brian, will no doubt be just the balm that the battered candidate's ego needs to help him get his campaign "mojo" back - just in time for his coronation in Denver next month.

When PseudoRepublicans Attack

I got an email from a reader, friend and fellow SD35 grass roots activist. It was a copy of an email that she had gotten from former Representative and current candidate Tom Rees. She sent it to me because she knew about the past issues that I had documented about Mr. Rees and his personal vendetta against current HD35B Representative (and staunch conservative) Mark Buesgens. This email is a continuation of an attack on the local BPOU that he started two years ago when he first unsuccessfully ran agaist Rep. Buesgens.

Dear Scott County Republican:
The Republican State Convention is now history. I trust that you were able to share some Good time (sic) with people of similar political beliefs. Our partys governance principles remain the Best hope for your grandkids and mine.
There was a time not too long ago when Scott County was a hostile place for

Republicans. As the first Scott County legislator elected with a party labelI know how it was. For example, in Shakopee when I was door knocking a person of different political persuasion Grabbed a baseball bat and chased me nearly a city block screaming to “Get out of town!” I was cursed and spat upon several times by Savage residents when I identified myself with the Republican Party. It was a different time and place.
Now we are facing another low point for our party on the national level. I believe we

Have had local electoral success for several reasons: (1) A superior Get Out the Vote (GOTV) Effort that overcomes a numbers deficiency by generating a larger turnout of those people that Tend to vote Republican; (2) A rather philosophical DFL local party many that I know personally That simply are not the “get your hands dirty” type of political worker(3) Candidates that for the Most part adhered to the Republican Party of Minnesota Party Platformand (4) A small group of

Hard working advocates.
However I submit that the local party leadership has squandered organizational opportunities. First the notion that the formal Party leadership should include elected officials who are endorsed by the organization. The result is inevitably loyalty to the official/candidate rather than the Party philosophy when the local Party organization becomes the campaign structure for the candidate that the narrowed involvement ultimately hurts the effort by shutting out those individuals that may have talents that would serve the Party and the public more effectively.
Second opportunity is the “Search Committee” function of the BPOU. This activity is the way party loyalty is built and future success! I don't mean the sop to precinct requests to at least have a Search Committee meeting scheduled less than two hours before the endorsement but to Show that the incumbents own the party. Each time I received a party endorsement it was the party members given the opportunity to get to know the candidates that chose me to represent the

party principles even though I may not agree with every item on the platform, I was the Best to bring the Party message to the constituency. The local Party’s Constitution identifies the Candidate Search function as one that should be assigned to one or more of the Executive Committee members. Howeverfor at least since the redistricting this important function has been Ignored.
Thank you for your consideration.

A little history on Tom Rees. Two years ago, claiming that Rep. Buesgens was not representing the HD35B, Mr. Rees went to the SD35 DEMOCRATS (so much for his loyalty to the Party philosophy) for endorsement. He never approached "his" party for endorsement - choosing instead to challenge Buesgens in a primary race. During the primary race, rather than running on issues, he made Rep. Buesgens the issue. He played the politics of fear and personal destruction - quite poorly I might add.

I can't argue with the first two paragraphs. There was a time when being a Republican in Scott County was akin to being a Republican in Ramsey County (note to Mitch - it CAN be done). However, it is the final two paragraphs that I simply must take issue with. First is the claim that the local BPOU has "squandered" organization opportunities. Given that in the 6 years I was involved in the local BPOU I only saw Mr. Rees at one convention or BPOU planning event, I am hard pressed to figure out how he even KNOWS what organizational opportunities he is talking about. In the 6 years I was involved in the BPOU, they have completely computerized their lists and developed many opportunities for the activists to get involved and get together. These opportunities were set up after input from the grass roots - input that was solicited FROM grass roots members including Mr. Rees - who chose not to reply to requests for input.

My second and third issues come in the final paragraph. First is the Search Committee function. The Candidate Search committee is a standing committee within the SD35 organization and is run solely on volunteer efforts. During the ONE AND ONLY convention that I saw Mr. Rees at (in my 6 years in the BPOU) he had the opportunity to sign up for that standing committee and again - he refused to get involved. How can you criticize a process that you know nothing about and that you have never been involved in? If he was involved in the process he also might understand the difference between an "ex officio" member of an organization and a voting member of the organization - something that activists have been trying to explain to him for the last 4 months (since the convention).

My last disagreement with him has to do with his accusation that delegates are not given adequate time to get to know people who are running for office. The candidates who are successful in running for office actually come to conventions and caucuses when they are not running - again something Mr. Rees has been reticent to do. County Commissioner Barbara Marschall is an excellent example of how to do it. Every year she is at caucus - talking to attendees and party officials alike. She comes to conventions - not as a delegate, but as a candidate whether she is running for election or not. Same thing with Rep. Mike Beard. He is always making the rounds of the caucuses, conventions and community events. People in his district know him, not because he is their elected representative in St. Paul but because he is active in the BPOU and the community - unlike Mr. Rees who does not even show up for BPOU conventions.

As I said in my post yesterday, Mr. Rees was invited to speak to the Nominations Committee of the last BPOU convention so that he would be allowed the opportunity to speak to the convention. He chose to respond to that invitation by storming out of the convention hall because the Nominations Committee would not allow him to interrogate Rep. Buesgens. These are not the actions of a serious candidate for public office. They are the actions of a gadfly - someone whose only interest is to tear down a good man and tear apart the Republican Party he claims to care about.

The Campaign Begins!

This is just a reminder of the choice that is in front of the voters in House District 35B this year.




Rep. Buesgens is faced with another primary challenge from former Representative Tom Rees. In 2006 (the last time these two faced off), Rees managed to garner 263 votes - 22.34 percent of all votes cast. During that election, Rees threw every false allegation he could think of at Rep. Buesgens - accusing him of (among other things) of stealing from his former employer. None of the charges gained any traction. He started off this campaign season with more of the same, accusing Rep. Buesgens this time of being a tax cheat both in the local papers and on this blog. Yet Mr. Rees says the district is craving "honorable" representation. What is honorable about making up false charges about your opponent????

Here is my challenge to Mr. Rees. If you really want to talk about "honorable" representation, instead of making charges about Rep. Buesgens, why don't you tell us what you would do differently if you were back in St. Paul. What votes would you have made differently? What issues would you push in St. Paul? What agenda would you promote?

While we are asking questions, let me ask this...why did you refuse to stand before the Nominations Committee at the SD35 Convention? Why did you leave the convention, rather than appearing before the assembled delegates - even after you had been specifically invited to do so? All you had to do was talk to the Nominations Committee if you wanted to be considered for Nomination. Yet instead you chose to leave the convention. Why?

Instead of engaging in the politics of fear and rumor - tell us what YOU WOULD DO to improve Scott County. I'll even remove comment moderation so that your comments will hit unedited and without delay! Go ahead - tell us what you would do differently. Can you do it?

Relativism

By now most of you (in Minnesota anyway) heard about this horrible story.

Eight young men are accused of taking turns stomping on and kicking the head of the 41-year-old man, who was knocked unconscious as his wife and three daughters tried to help him. Prosecutors say more serious charges could be brought against the men if the man's injuries are permanent.

What many of you may not know is that this is not as isolated an incident as the Star Tribune editorial board would have you believe. From the comments on the editorial:

Visited your fine city, went in to MOA. I have a very pretty 13yr. old, unfortunately has developed fast, looks 18. She does not dress "provocatively". We are very used to obnoxious men falling all over themselves to get a second look, and she has had to learn to ignore stupid comments. Sometimes I will respond back and let them know she is far too young for their attentions. Back to MOA: Had a trio of young men, all black, start following us, and make comments like "I'd hit that" and "Hey, girl, need friends" and "Sweet thing, let's have a little fun" I finally turned and confronted them, said she's only 13, leave her alone, so what do they say? Come on momma, let the kid grow up, it's time to learn about *******, she's at the prime age. And lots more crap. We finally had to call 911 and get them removed. Did we have a fun time at the famous MOA? Absolutely not, and we won't be back, either. Mall security was a joke, and tried to diffuse the situation by "getting us to talk it out" NO, we wanted to enjoy our visit in peace.

Then we have this report of rampaging youths on Route 68 bus.

A Metro Transit bus driver was hospitalized after he was beaten by a group of teenagers Tuesday evening in downtown St. Paul.

Metro Transit spokesman Bob Gibbons said the driver was assaulted by six to eight teenagers on Robert Street between 4th and 5th Streets as his bus was arriving downtown.

Sadly stories like this are becoming more and more common. Jazz and I spoke earlier today about the Pope's recent speech condemning moral relativism in our society. His post on the subject earlier today was the basis of the discussion.

The moral relativism that has taken over this country, saying that there are no unacceptable actions has gotten us to a point where people think it is perfectly acceptable to grope 12 year old girls in front of her parents. It has gotten us to a point where roving bands of thugs tell adults that a 13 year old is in the "prime age" to learn about being raped. It has gotten us to a point where people act like there is not right and no wrong. We need to get back to a point where there are actions that are unacceptable in a civilized society so that we can all live at peace with one another.

Out Of Touch!

Back during the election of 1992, one of the things that absolutely destroyed then President Bush was his total disconnect to the economic pains that the country was reeling from. In what turned out to be a masterful stroke, then Governor Bill Clinton proclaimed "It's the economy stupid" and turned the election around.

Fast forward to last Wednesday. In a speech to supporters in Michigan, Michelle Obama made a speech that shows just how disconnected they are from the reality that most voters face.

Surrogate alert! Barack Obama's wife quipped that a $600 tax stimulus check could be used for a pair of earrings.

Now the underlying point that she was making was that the economic stimulus plan that the President signed into law (and the Democrats are trying to put a part 2 on) was not going to be a long term fix to what is ailing the economy and she is absolutely correct! Yes you read correctly - a center right blogger said that Michelle Obama was right on something! Here is the first half of the quote...the part that makes sense.

You're getting $600 — what can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or anything, but maybe it pays down a bill, but it doesn't pay down every bill every month," she said. "The short-term quick fix kinda stuff sounds good,

She's right - $600.00 per person one time is not going to help much unless you have a one time unexpected expense come up (like say moving across the country). It is not going to help someone struggling to keep up with their rising electric bills or the rising cost of gasoline and the rising cost of feeding their family. Here is where she goes off of the rails...

and it may even feel good that first month when you get that check, and then you go out and you buy a pair of earrings."

Now I don't know where Michelle shops for earrings, but for most normal "middle class" people, $600.00 is a months worth of groceries or two car payments. With the average voter having almost $20,000 in credit card debt, that $600.00 could possibly pay off one of the credit cards.

No matter how "correct" she may have been, on the first part of her statement, the voters will only remember the $600.00 earrings....IF the media decides to cover it.