Open Mouth...

As phenomenal as Hillary Clinton has been (for Barack Obama) the same can not be said of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Her open feud with the Catholic Church on abortion seems to be the final straw for the Obama Campaign (HT Gary Gross).

The Obama campaign has asked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to shut her mouth, but in as nice a way as they possibly can. That isn't to say they aren't mad about her recent activities.

"It's like 'Thanks, madam speaker, you've done quite enough. Please move along,'" says one Obama adviser. "She got us stuck on three different issues that we wanted no part of. She's no master strategist, no matter what she may believe. You may see more of her, but if her mouth is open, what comes out won't be anything that our campaign wants anything to do with.

Emphasis mine! It seems that the Speaker's ego has threatened to overshadow the Presidential nominee's ego.

According to several House Democrat leadership staffers, Pelosi grew increasingly angry several months ago that she was not being given a strategic role in directing the Democrat convention or being actively sought out by the Obama campaign for advice. "She made a point that she was queen of the far left, which was the group that really helped Obama get to where he was," says Democrat leadership staffer, adding, "She didn't call herself a queen, but you get the point, and so did the Obama people."

Emphasis again mine. Now having an ego is a necessity for a politician - especially a politician that wants to be President. However, Speaker Pelosi has to recognize that she is not the one with the power that she craves. Barack Obama is....

Out In The Open

It is so nice that the Democrats are finally coming out and admitting that what they want for America IS socialism. First it was Rep. Maxine Waters, admitting in a recorded House Committee meeting that a government take over of the oil industry was necessary. Now Rep. Maurice Hinchley (D-NY) is calling for the government to take over an industry that "never should have been private in the first place.” (HT Allahpundit and Rick Moran). Rick asks the same questions on this government take over that I have been asking during the whole health care debate....name ONE thing that the federal government does now that it is good at? Health care? Look at the mess the Veterans Administration system is in. Running wars? Look at the mistakes made in Iraq. The IRS......puhlease! There is nothing that government bureaucrats do well or efficiently - what makes us think that a nationalized oil industry would be ANY different.

Rick asks another set of very pertinent questions as well.....

But to our Democratic Socialist friends (Can we start calling them that now? Can we?), the point is not supplying the American people with gasoline or heating oil but rather control – control of the industry so that it functions for “the benefit of the people.”

How often have we heard that battle cry in history? And oh how miserably those who have uttered it have failed to deliver promised benefits. From Lenin to Castro to Mugabe, the nationalization of industry to benefit “the people” has been a spectacular economic disaster. In the end, production in nationalized industry always declines. In the end, the industry has always fallen into ruins.

Rick is right - ALL of this talk of government taking over industries...whether it is health care OR petroleum production smacks of socialism and communism and maybe it is time to start calling this exactly what it is.....

Jazz Shaw and I will be discussing this with Rick Moran and possibly Ed Morrisey on Mid Stream Radio today over at Blog Talk Radio. Join us please.

Minnesota's Mr. Right Strikes Again

Jason Lewis is known for being "hard" on the GOP for not sticking to their principles. Well today he takes the microscope to his favorite target....the Minnesota DFL.

As is always the case, getting into a bidding war with big-spending liberals ends in defeat for conservatives. Especially when Democrats seem more willing than ever to exploit any calamity, however horrific, for political gain. Whether politicizing the Wellstone memorial, Hurricane Katrina or even the casualties of war, the motto of the majority party in Washington and St. Paul is now best described as "No Tragedy Left Behind."

Indeed, no sooner had Minnesota's Interstate 35W bridge collapsed than our liberal elite starting pointing fingers -- and they've been doing it ever since. Led by the state's twin deacons of demagoguery, U.S. Rep. James Oberstar and state Sen. Steve Murphy, the party of government wasted no time in going public with its shopworn answer to every conceivable catastrophe: more funding and more taxes.

Ten years ago, long before Tim Pawlenty or George W. Bush took office, Minnesota's Office of Legislative Auditor made clear in a report to lawmakers that there was a "backlog of bridges that are classified as having structural deficiencies." How could a bridge found "structurally deficient" by state inspectors as early as 1990 be the fault of Pawlenty or Bush?

The report also found that Minnesota had the fifth-largest road system in the nation and was spending 52 percent more per capita on roads than the national average. Since our total transportation budget (including federal funds) jumped from $1.9 billion in fiscal 2005 to $2.3 billion in fiscal 2006, it's doubtful this has changed much. Moreover, only 25 percent of the state's gasoline and vehicle registration taxes dedicated to the Trunk Highway Fund even reach the Twin Cities area. If Minnesota's highway funding formula accurately reflected lane miles traveled, the congested metro area, the site of last summer's tragedy, would be receiving a far larger share.

Jason then goes on to poke at a few liberal "sacred cows".

So where are the dollars going? To outstate districts like Murphy's, where local highway funding is more about public-works projects and less about transportation policy. No wonder the esteemed senator sponsored a bill last session that would have pushed the gas tax from 20 cents per gallon to more than 40 cents over the next decade.

For his part, Oberstar is no slouch when it comes to pork-barrel projects. When he isn't holding news conferences demanding a 23.4-cent federal gas tax, he's busy at his perch on the House Transportation Committee bringing home the bacon. The 2005 "bridge to nowhere" highway bill (one of the reasons the GOP lost control of Congress in '06) was loaded with $24 billion of earmarks, including some $500 million for Minnesota. Oberstar's office touted his achievement in allocating $12 million for the Eighth District, some $10 million of which was for non-road uses, including pedestrian trails and bicycle paths, not to mention mass-transit centers in that metropolis known as Duluth.

In fact, federal and state governments have diverted billions of dollars to a number of mass-transit schemes that make about as much sense in the sprawling Midwest as a freeway through Central Park. Since the Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Congress has dedicated 20 percent of each increase in the federal gas tax to the Mass Transit Account -- the effect of which resulted in $52 billion coming out of roads and bridges in the 2005 bill.

Last fall, Minnesota voters reluctantly backed a constitutional amendment dedicating the 6.5 percent motor-vehicle excise tax to "transportation." They should have read the fine print, which states that not more than 60 percent of the proceeds can be spent on highways and that at least 40 percent must be used for public transit. This means that all of the tax could conceivably be devoted to costly light-rail lines.

Such as the three-quarter-billion-dollar Hiawatha Line. Touted for its ridership success, it not only has failed to put a dent in traffic congestion, but already is running annual deficits (expenses less fares) of $10 million as far as the eye can see. The state is now the largest funding source for Metro Transit, spending $200 million annually for 2.8 percent of Minnesota commuters.

Just a few days before the spectacular bridge failure, Twin Cities transit advocates were putting the best spin on increased cost projections for the new Central Corridor line running between downtown St. Paul and Minneapolis. It seems that internal memos suggested the Washington Avenue bridge would not be strong enough for the new trains. Now, at the insistence of the city of Minneapolis, the new I-35W bridge will include capacity for -- you guessed it -- a light-rail line.

In addition to raising the gas tax, transit advocates have been pushing hard for a metrowide sales-tax increase to fund the Central Corridor line, one of the reasons Pawlenty vetoed this year's pork-laden transportation bill. Given all of the so-called "transportation" money going for non-road and -bridge uses, you'd think Oberstar and Murphy might be a bit embarrassed calling for significant increases in the gas tax.

Not a chance.

New taxes are not the answer. Reasonable, responsible priorities are. When are our representatives going to wake up to that fact?

This is one of many reasons why Jason is still called "Minnesota's Mister Right". You may not like his bombastic approach, but his rhetoric is based in cold hard facts....facts that our friends on the left would have you forget.

Survey Says...

As many of you long time readers know, I don't put a lot of stock in polls and polling. I've seen how easy it is for less than honorable or honest pollsters to manipulate the data. That being said, the Gallup Organization is usually fairly straight up in their processes, which makes the results of their latest poll so striking (HT Captain Ed)



"A new Gallup Poll finds Congress' approval rating the lowest it has been since Gallup first tracked public opinion of Congress with this measure in 1974. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 76% disapprove, according to the August 13-16, 2007, Gallup Poll. "



It is Gallup's breakdown of the numbers that I find to be of the most interest.



"Frustration with Congress spans the political spectrum. There are only minor (but not statistically meaningful) differences in the approval ratings Democrats (21%), Republicans (18%), and independents (17%) give to Congress. Typically, partisans view Congress much more positively when their party is in control of the institution, so the fact that Democrats' ratings are not materially better than Republicans' is notable.
The nine-point drop in Congress' job approval rating from last month to this month has come exclusively from Democrats and independents, with Democrats' ratings dropping 11 points (from 32% to 21%) and independents' ratings dropping 13 points (from 30% to 17%). Republicans' 18% approval rating is unchanged from last month."



The Democrats are bleeding support from their own people. That could be as disasterous for them as 2006 was for Republicans.



"The decline in congressional job approval could merely reflect the cessation of any public good will it engendered when the new leadership arrived in January, since the current 18% rating is similar to what it was in December 2006 (21%).
But, it could also reflect disappointment with the new Congress' performance (especially among Democrats) and economic unease.
Americans elected the Democrats as the majority party in Congress in November 2006's midterm election in large part due to frustration with the Iraq war and an ineffective and scandal-plagued Republican-led Congress. But any hopes that the elections would lead to change have not been realized as Democrats' repeated attempts to force a change in Iraq war policy have been largely unsuccessful due to presidential vetoes, disagreements within their own party, and the inability to attract Republican support for their policy proposals. Also, many of the Democratic leadership's domestic agenda items have not become law even though some have passed one or both houses of Congress. "



This Congress has, without a doubt, lived up to the "Do Nothing" label. They have both Houses, they have relatively veto proof majorities, but the have not had the intestinal fortitude to do the one thing that their voters want most...to end the war in Iraq NOW! All Congress needs to do is to with-hold the funding for the war and the troops would have to come home IMMEDIATELY. It's that simple.



What the Congressional leaders know, what they refuse to stand up and tell the voters is that to do what they wish would certainly DOOM the Iraqi people to unspeakable violence and would destablize an already volitile region. That is also very simple. Will ANY Democrat in Congress stand up to the left-roots and say "NO"? I doubt it, but I pray that someday soon I can stand here in this forum and say "I was wrong"!

Start the Spin Cycle

Well, it has begun. Last week I reported on the change in reporting coming out of Iraq - from the media AND from the legislators. Well the first couple of drips have started to turn into a flow.

"WASHINGTON - One senator said U.S. troops are routing out al-Qaida in parts of Iraq. Another insisted President Bush's plan to increase troops has caused tactical momentum.
One even went so far on Wednesday as to say the argument could be made that U.S. troops are winning.
These are not Bush-backing GOP die-hards, but Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin, Bob Casey and Jack Reed. Even Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services committee, said progress was being made by soldiers.
The suggestions by them (sic) and other Democrats in recent days that at least a portion of Bush's strategy in Iraq is working is somewhat surprising, considering the bitter exchanges on Capitol Hill between the Democratic majority and Republicans and Bush. Democrats have long said Bush's policies have been nothing more than a complete failure."

Shrugging aside the horrible English, did you notice WHO is admitting that we are making progress? Some of the most vitriolic partisans in the Senate!

There is no denying that General Petraus' surge is working. The Dems are spinning hard now so that they won't look as bad in September when the report finally comes out.

Where do we go from here?

A lot of people have been speaking out about "who's to blame?" but I don't hear a lot of solutions. AAA over at Residual Forces has a couple of thoughts.

I'm not totally certain I agree with his "repeal the MVST Amendment" solution, although if we could guarantee that the 60% maximum for roads - at least until such time as we have brought our infrastructure up to snuff. If we get that guarantee, I could be convinced...

His second post lobbies against the possibility of a gax tax increase. All last session I was firmly in that corner. While in principle I still think raising the gas tax is a horrible idea (especially when the price of fuel oil is so painfully high) I could be convinced of the necessity of the increase, but there would have to be a couple of caveats that I would like to see tied to it. The first is the condition that ALL gas tax receipts go toward roads and bridges. Not one penny for ATV or snowmobile trails until we get our infrastructure is back on sound footing. The second is that commuters and truckers should not be the only ones to make sacrifices. Roads ARE a common good. Our food comes into the Cities over the roads...most of our goods do! So in order to foster that spirit of shared sacrifice, I would like to see our state Legislature give back the raise in per diem that they gave them selves. I would like to see a minimal (1-2% possibly) cut in state spending ACROSS THE BOARD! Imagine how much money we could "find" for roads and bridges if we were to cut 1% from Education and 1% from Health and Human Services and 1% from all of the state agencies! About the only agency that I would even consider sparing would be Veterans Affairs and if you have to ask why... Lastly, I would like to see a thorough PUBLIC audit of MNDOT. I would like to see what their priorities have been for the last 10 years and what they spent on them (Captain Ed has the list of what the priorites for the Federal funding was).

Even those who don't drive benefit from a functional highway infrastructure. It is high time that the state put their priorities in the right place. Assistant Majority Leader, Sen. Tarryl Clark (DFL-St. Cloud) said (in response to Governor Pawlenty when he saidwas calling a special session to address road funding) that she welcomed the opportunity to revisit transportation spending, education spending AND HHS spending! (I am looking for a link to the direct comment and I will post it when I have it) Well now we know where the Senate Leaderships priorities are, don't we?

Finally AAA had one last point for those who think that raising the gas tax was the "only" answer.

"I would be remiss not to point out the flaw in thinking that simply raising the existing gas tax, and using the current formulas, revenue will dry up rapidly. As the CAFE (miles per gallon) standards keep going up and up, and our vehicles use less and less gas and fuel, we’ll all pay less in gas taxes."

Great point, if we are using less fuel, we are paying less in fuel taxes. If that is the case, how are we going to pay for these new roads?

Invested in Defeat

I was going to post on this story Wednesday evening, but...

It is quite refreshing to find an "honest" politician in DC these days...

"House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war..."I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. (emphasis mine)

If this doesn't convince you that the Democrats in Congress are invested in our losing this war, nothing will.

Chutzpah!

In the reporting on President Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby's jail sentence, a local radio station has been playing a sound byte of Presidential hopeful (and former First Lady) Hillary Clinton talking about how the pardon "elevated cronyism over the rule of law".

OK - after the hysterical laughter subsided I started to think back to the waning hours of the Clinton Administration. During his last 24 hours in office President Clinton pardoned the following:

Marc Rich - contributor (through his wife) to the Clinton Library and fugitive convicted of tax evasion was pardoned.
Dan Rostenkowski - fellow Democrat (IL) convicted of fraud was pardoned.
Mel Reynolds - another fellow Democrat (from Illinois) convicted of bank fraud, sexual assualt, obstruction of justice AND solicitation of child ponography - his fraud sentence was commuted.
Roger Clinton - the presidents half-brother was pardoned after serving time on a drug related charge.
Almon Braswell - convicted of mail fraud and was the subject of an active money laundering investigation (federal). Braswell gave $200,000 to Hugh Rodham (Hillary's brother) and within weeks, was pardoned on ALL charges.
Carlos Vignali - a convicted drug trafficer who had his sentence commuted.
Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory - "friends" of Tony Rodham who were pardoned after their bank fraud conviction. After the pardon was received, Tony Rodham received $107,000 in "loans" from the Gregory's....loans that were never repaid!

Look - it is the Constitutionally given right of ANY President to pardon or commute the sentence of any person he or she so chooses. This is not flouting the "rule of law" as many Democrats are saying today, au contrare....it IS the rule of law and Hillary (of all people) knows this fact better than anyone else!

If this (the commuting of Scooter's prison sentence) is "cronyism" what do you call the rewarding of people who gave money directly to you or your family? Talk about chutzpah!

Cheesecake?????

It is 8:40 pm - the session is supposed to end at midnight and Rep Phyllis Kahn and Rep. Frank Hornstein are talking about cheesecake and the tradition of eating dairy on the Jewish holiday of Shavuot??? Does the DFL lead legislature have nothing better to talk about???????

And what business is it of yours?

Michael Vick, quarterback of the Atlanta Falcons, recently had a Virginia home he owned raided by police who busted up an apparent dog fighting ring. Now Vick claims to have not had anything to do with the ring even though (according to the story) there were dozens of malnourished and injured animals on the property. The story does not state if Mr. Vick lives in the home, just that it was a home that he "owned" which I find to be interesting. No charges have been filed in the matter as of today.

That has not stopped Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) from jumping in and condemning Vick based on the "evidence" available to him (which is the same evidence available to you and I - news reports).

"The level of cruelty involved in exploiting animals to the point that 60 malnourished and injured dogs were removed from Mr. Vick's property is mind boggling," Lantos said. "I will view anything less than the strongest repudiation of Mr. Vick's involvement as tacit support for this atrocious activity."

Now leave it for the moment that no charges have been filed or that there is an ongoing police and NFL investigation or the fact that this is not even happening in Rep. Lantos' district. What business is it of yours, Rep. Lantos? Well he answered that.....

"U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.) pointed out that he's a senior member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which two years ago held highly publicized hearings on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in professional sports....In a not-so-subtle threat of possible congressional action, Lantos reminded the commissioner of his committee's efforts to weed out those who use performance-enhancing drugs.
"I also suggest you educate your players on the illegality and cruelty of dog fighting to prevent this from happening again," Lantos wrote. "It is my hope that the issue of animal fighting will not require us to further investigate the behavior of your athletes." (emphasis mine)

So Vick and the NFL py proxy are guilty until proven innocent in Rep. Lantos' eyes. Lovely...

Oh and for the record, if Vick was involved in this and the evidence shows as much, I would certainly not mind him getting punished under the full extend of the law, losing his job with the Falcons AND having some of the abuse he meted out on those innocent dogs visited on him. I have no love for people who abuse children or animals. I also have no love for people who will condemn a person before all the evidence is in. I happen to be a little picky that way...However, I will not publically call for ANY punishment until all the facts are in and charges filed and that is where Rep. Lantos and I part company.

Fairness for all

Congressman Dennis Kucinich recently revived discussion of the "Fairness Doctrine". The Fairness Doctrine (for those of you who are too young to remember it) was an FCC rule that dictated if you had 1 hour of programming from one side of the politicial spectrum, you MUST provide equal time to the other side. This was government interfering in business with a heavy hand and it lead to some really boring radio. Also it was really easy to cheat. A station could put all of it's "liberal" programming on during the day (for example) and all their "conservative" programming on overnight when no one was listening and they could still be in compliance with the law.

Rep. Kucinich says this is because liberal views are not getting "equal time" in talk radio and in the blogosphere (apparently he has not heard of the Daily Kos which has traffic that dwarfs what most conservative bloggers get but I digress). However, is that really the case?

As I discussed previously, scientists who deviate from the Al Gore "man made global warming is a reality" matra are routinely stripped of their jobs and their funding. However, it is not just the MMGW activists that use these tactics.

But the MMGW activists are entitled to their heartfelt opinions aren't they? Of course they are, and their opinions should be respected. Just as they respect the heartfelt opinions of conservatives right?????

"That people on the political left have a certain set of opinions, just as people do in other parts of the ideological spectrum, is not surprising. What is surprising, however, is how often the opinions of those on the left are accompanied by hostility and even hatred.
Particular issues can arouse passions here and there for anyone with any political views. But, for many on the left, indignation is not a sometime thing. It is a way of life.
How often have you seen conservatives or libertarians take to the streets, shouting angry slogans? How often have conservative students on campus shouted down a visiting speaker or rioted to prevent the visitor from speaking at all?
The source of the anger of liberals, "progressives" or radicals is by no means readily apparent. The targets of their anger have included people who are non-confrontational or even genial, such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
It is hard to think of a time when Karl Rove or Dick Cheney has even raised his voice but they are hated like the devil incarnate.
There doesn't even have to be any identifiable individual to arouse the ire of the left. "Tax cuts for the rich" is more than a political slogan. It is incitement to anger. " (emphasis mine)

I do find it "enlightening" that this same group of people that "hate" the thought of anything conservative are the same ones that are advocating hate speech legislation! Some would say that there might be some historical parallels to be made here.

""Why don't you go f--- yourself?" That was how House Democrat Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel reportedly responded to a Politico reporter's request – made "in the effort for openness and disclosure" – to sit in on a caucus debate over the language of a lobbying bill. "

Now I will leave aside the snide remark about Vice President Cheney saying the same thing and getting in hot water for now. What I will say is that this reaction, to a member of the media's request to sit in on a caucus debate, just goes to show the elitist arrogance of the left. It is this kind of attitude that got the Republican Caucus in trouble last year. You would think that Rep. Emanuel - as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - would be well aware of that little fact.

The “Little” Minority that could.

The Star Tribune had a fluff piece in Sunday’s paper about the “little” Republican Minority and how they are holding their own in this session against a majority that has been adamant at getting “their way”. AAA touched on reasons why he thinks the minority has had success, but he missed what I think was one of the more important points.

“The turning point, Republicans say, came in early May, when DFLers trotted out an ample public works bill that used loans to pay for DFL projects and cash to pay for GOP items. Pawlenty had warned leaders not to augment the bonding bill with cash spending.
When DFLers did it anyway, said Rep. Michael Beard, R-Shakopee, it was the Republicans wet-rag-in-the-face moment. "We're not rocket scientists, but we realized real fast this was a pretty clever political move on their part."
If Pawlenty had used a line-item veto to trim the bill of its cash costs, he would have had to kill Republican projects.
Pawlenty went to the GOP House caucus that morning and asked for its help.
"We told him 'Veto the whole damn thing,' " Beard said. "He said 'What about your projects?' We said, 'We don't care, governor. We're in this together.' "
It turned out, Beard said, "their bonding bill bonded the wrong thing. We've held together ever since."

The bonding bill bonded the wrong thing alright. Take a look at what has happened since then. The governor has vetoed 7 bills now and the only one that they THOUGHT was veto proof now appears to going down to the same defeat that the rest has. What gets me though was the DFL's assertion that the tax bill actually provides "property tax relief".

"Property tax relief is not really on the way," said Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller, DFL-Minneapolis. Pawlenty, he said, "has roadblocked significant property tax relief, and that is a big disappointment."

The bill presented to Governor Pawlenty was nothing more than smoke and mirrors. It provided (based on my understanding of the bill - correct me if I am wrong) a one time payment to property owners. However, until Senator Pogemiller and his mates in the House can do something to stop runaway county and city and school district spending, there will be no property tax relief. The only thing that the state government can do is to pass Proposition 13 type legislation that caps property taxes. Don't hold your breath on that happening anytime soon - that is unless the taxpayers of Minnesota finally get fed up and rebel against the taxes.

Tea, anyone?????

The rest of the story?

A couple of days ago I wrote about a statement that was made by the governor of Kansas in wake of a killer tornado. A couple of days later, a Democratic candidate for President used that tornado to bash the President on his deployment of the National Guard in Iraq. Now it is being reported (unconfirmed at this moment) that the governor's remarks were made at the behest of the DCN and Chairman Howard Dean in order to gain cheap political points on the President and the Republicans. At first I was hesitant to believe that this could be the case, but then I found this editorial from the Topeka (KS) Capital Journal.

"Taken at face value, there was nothing about party politics in Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ recent comments that the war in Iraq was sapping the National Guard’s ability to respond to natural disasters.Viewed through even a thin layer of skepticism, though, an image emerges of a politician seizing a chance to score points at the expense of the Bush administration....But Sebelius, like anybody else, knows there are inherent political implications in a Democratic governor raising concerns about a Republican president’s military management. And it wouldn’t take a huge leap to conclude Sebelius considered those implications before she spoke out.Sebelius works without a carefully crafted game plan about as often as Ashton Kutcher finishes a novel. She’s calculating and cautious, which is a big part of why she’s won two terms as governor in a Republican state.The timing of Sebelius’ remarks also gives rise to skepticism. After drawing a stinging response from the White House, where press secretary Tony Snow said equipment was available but Sebelius didn’t follow procedures to get it, Sebelius’ office said equipment shortages weren’t an issue in Greensburg.“We are doing absolutely fine right now,’’ said the governor’s spokeswoman, Nicole Corcoran. “What the governor is talking about is down the road.’’

Down the road???? Let's go back and revist the governors remarks from Monday.

" A shortage of trucks, helicopters and other equipment -- all sent to the war in
Iraq' has hampered recovery in a U.S. town obliterated by a tornado, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said on Monday.

"There is no doubt at all that this will slow down and hamper the recovery," Sebelius, a Democrat, told Reuters in Kansas where officials said the statewide death toll had risen to 12 on Monday." (emphasis added)

These are not forward looking statements....these are here and now statements! Now back to Mr. Anderson.

"Why, then, was the issue brought up so early? This is the time for rebuilding, healing and grieving, not for politics.Too bad Sebelius’ remarks have already steered the tragedy in that direction."

Why indeed Governor Sebelius? There may indeed be more to this story than first blush would lead us to think. This bears close scrutiny - but then again we will never see this out of the Star Tribune.....

UPDATE - my friend Joni sent me this.

"XM Radio’s Quinn & Rose made the allegation that DNC Chairman Howard Dean called Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius early Sunday morning and instructed her not to request federal assistance in recovery from the Greensburg tornado, and to lie about the federal response to date, on their show, The War Room, today. After I discussed the story via phone with both Quinn and Rose today, here’s what they sent me.
PLEASE NOTE: The following is information we have received from a reliable source. We have never been misinformed by this person in the past.
It seems that, on Sunday, a few hours after Kansas Governor, Kathleen Sebelius, made her remarks about Bush sending all their National Guard Members and Resources to Iraq, she made a call to Brownback
Sebelius, was calling to apologize to the Senator for making the Political statements that she did. She explained that she did not believe them and that they actually had too many National Guardsmen show up.
Governor Sebelius explained “Sam, you know how political everything is right now and we’re not allowed to let an opportunity like this just pass.” She continued “I made sure not to blame you or Pat (Senator Roberts?) or anybody outside the White House. With his (Bush’s) numbers, you can’t really blame me for usin’ that.”
Then Sebelius explained the path to her comments. After Brownback told her that he was very disappointed in her, She pleaded “You know me Sam, I wouldn’t have said it if I didn’t have to.” She declared “Howard (Dean) called me around 5 o’clock (in the morning) and told me not to ask The White House for any help or make any statements until I heard back. Dick (Durban?) called me an hour or 2 later and that’s when he told me we needed to use this ‘n’ said to talk about the Guard all bein’ at war.”
She then explained the thinking; “Speaker and Harry got so much heat on them from both sides over this damn war, ‘n’ they need to get the press on somethin’ else. I didn’t think it was right to use it like this either, but I didn’t see’s I had much choice in this climate, Sam.”
She the[n] apologized a few more times and promised that she’d try to move away from the comment when she and Brownback were to meet up later and tour the damage, but she had to so it without disappointing Dean and Pelosi.
I asked them to characterize their source, and they replied that she or he would be in a position to have knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Brownback and Gov. Sebelius and has never misinformed them before. Sean Hannity has called Sen. Brownback’s office to either verify or debunk the story, but so far the senator has done neither. There is word that the senator may attempt a “limited hangout” strategy this weekend, in which he acknowledges that the conversation took place but won’t remember the Dean angle. Such a strategy, if that’s what Sen. Brownback does, might be an attempt to maintain comity in what has until now been by all accounts a smooth relationship between the Democratic governor and Republican officials in Kansas. Comity shouldn’t come at the price of truth, however.
At this point, I have no way of verifying whether DNC Chairman Howard Dean called Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and instructed her to lie about the federal response to Friday’s devastating tornado. But I will make some calls and see what I can find out. Quinn & Rose’s story does fit the timeline and does fit the Democrat M.O. of late, in which they find a way to blame every single thing under the sun on Bush and on the war in Iraq. Other Democrat governors have pre-emptively blamed the lack of response to disasters that haven’t even happened yet on Bush and the war in Iraq. So on its face the story strikes me as very plausible."

Stay tuned kids.....it could get interesting!

Dialog

AAA has a post up today that really caught my eye. He linked to a City Journal diary that summarizes a problem that Conservatives face on a daily basis.

"The thing I like best about being a conservative is that I don’t have to lie. I don’t have to pretend that men and women are the same. I don’t have to declare that failed or oppressive cultures are as good as mine. I don’t have to say that everyone’s special or that the rich cause poverty or that all religions are a path to God. I don’t have to claim that a bad writer like Alice Walker is a good one or that a good writer like Toni Morrison is a great one. I don’t have to pretend that Islam means peace.
Of course, like everything, this candor has its price. A politics that depends on honesty will be, by nature, often impolite. Good manners and hypocrisy are intimately intertwined, and so conservatives, with their gimlet-eyed view of the world, are always susceptible to charges of incivility. It’s not really nice, you know, to describe things as they are."

He also nails liberalism with the cold hard truth.

"This is leftism’s great strength: it’s all white lies. That’s its only advantage, as far as I can tell. None of its programs actually works, after all. From statism and income redistribution to liberalized criminal laws and multiculturalism, from its assault on religion to its redefinition of family, leftist policies have made the common life worse wherever they’re installed. But because it depends on—indeed is defined by—describing the human condition inaccurately, leftism is nothing if not polite. With its tortuous attempts to rename unpleasant facts out of existence—he’s not crippled, dear, he’s handicapped; it’s not a slum, it’s an inner city; it’s not surrender, it’s redeployment—leftism has outlived its own failure by hiding itself within the most labyrinthine construct of social delicacy since Victoria was queen.
This is no small thing. To rewrite the rules of courteous behavior is to wield enormous power. I see it in Southern California, in the bleeding heart of leftism, where I live. I’ve been banned from my monthly poker game, lost tennis partners, lost friends—not because I’m belligerent but because I’ve wondered aloud if the people shouldn’t be allowed to make their own abortion laws, say, or if the world might not be a better place without the UN.
It’s a rotten feeling. I sometimes think that I’d rather be deemed evil than a boor. Wickedness has some flair to it, even a whiff of radicalism. If you molest a child, there’s always a chance that you can get the ACLU to defend you as a cultural innovator. But if you make a remark at table about the destructive social effects of broken homes and then discover that your dinner partner is a divorcée—trust me, you feel like a real louse. It’s manners, not morals, that lay the borderlines of our behavior."

This is where AAA steps in.

"Far too often we back down for fear of ruining the party or conversation. Far too often our leaders and officials don’t want to be seen as mean or uncaring.
Is it better to give a man a fish, or teach him how to fish so he will never need your handouts again?
Liberals will give the man someone else’s fish, and then tax the other fishermen.
I’m tired of watching leading Republicans turn spineless in the face of elections. I’m tired of Republicans backing away from the ideological battle we are in. I am tired of being “nice” at dinners abnd parties, just because.
Until we conservatives and Republicans are willing to speak our minds and argue on behalf of our values, we will never win the hearts and minds of the average voters. The DFL could care less where and when they aspouse their liberal agenda. So why are we?"

I certainly agree - conservatives need to step up the defense of the philosophy. We need to be able to stand up and defend what we believe and why - but that does not mean that we have to be mean, confrontational or rude about it. When debating issues, I have always let the words of a wise philosoper guide me - I speak the truth in love. My experience has been that when I do speak the truth of conservatism in a loving, gentle manner, I get one of two possible responses. I either get a thoughtfull "I hadn't thought of it that way" or I get "YOU BEOTCH". Sadly, too many liberals, when presented with a calm, factual argument resort to name calling in response. It does not need to be that way, but it is. However, I will not back away from a rational defense of my ideals. Our leaders need to start doing the same.

One trick pony

Remeber the "ambitious" first 100 hour agenda that was set by then incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Well it looks like they have fallen well short of their plans.

"In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them."

Progress has foundered because of their single minded obsession for one issue...Iraq.

"We cannot be a one-trick pony," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party's takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all."

Well, I hate to break it to you Congressman Emanuel - but your party will remain nothing but a one trick pony so long as you are let the net roots run the show!

Of course, as long as they do continue to let the net roots run the show, it should make things a lot easier for Republicans in 2008.

Clueless

You would think that this would be obvious to even a blind man.

"The political battle in Washington over a Democratic plan to pull U.S. troops from Iraq is being exploited by al Qaeda, which has stepped up attacks to hasten a withdrawal, Iraq's foreign minister said on Sunday."

Sadly, our friends on the left don't seem to get that at all.....

But it makes me feel good....

The same folks that are pushing for more ethanol production and $4.00 a gallon gas are at it again. The same folks who are spouting the "reality" of man-made global warming are now decrying President Bush's agreement with Brazil for sugar cane based ethanol. Their reason.....rainforest depletion. However, as this IBD column points out, that is not a "reality" either.

"Instead, we hear how sugar production for ethanol is trashing the otherwise forgotten rain forest and now adds to global warming. The United Nations stepped right up with this new warning. Others are blaming ethanol for everything from poverty to floods.
The argument doesn't even get the facts right. For one, Brazil is not growing sugar for ethanol production on rain forest land but in the southern grasslands, making environmentalists' renewed interest in cuddly rain forest creatures irrelevant.
And on the grasslands, ethanol production has barely started. Brazil's entire agricultural production is done on only 8% of the nation's arable land. Clearly there is room to expand.
Environmentalists, however, are trying to sell Brazil as one big rain forest in need of 'saving' instead of a diverse, rapidly industrializing country whose development is critical to conservation."

WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!! What happened to the "concensus" that man made global warming had to be stopped AT ALL COSTS????? What happened to doing something "now"? Well if you look at the Democrats running for President, you would swear that there was an unlimited supply of oil and no need to reduce carbon emissions. Robert F. Kennedy and Al Gore, both very vocal advocates of everyone else cutting back both fly private jets to all of their global warming speaking arrangements! They live in mansions that use more electricity in one day, than my humble abode uses in a year. Yet we peons are supposed to only use compact fluoroscent lights (regardless of the fact that they are considered hazardous waste if broken) and drive hybrids and do without air conditioning and electric appliances....all so some can feel good about "doing something now". People in Mexico are starving because corn prices have shot through the roof - so Democrats (and some squishy Republicans) can feel good about "doing something".

It has never been about the environment...it has always been about dictating a specific lifestyle on everyone else. Which is a hallmark of socialism and that is NOT what a free society is about.

School Daze

A couple of interesting school related stories in the news this week.

First, the City of Minneapolis is closing 6 schools at the end of this school year.

"The closings are due to budget issues that the district if facing, as well as declining enrollment.

Enrollment is down 23 percent overall in the district compared to five years ago – and down 50 percent on the North Side."

This story doesn't tell you what they told in the 10pm news last night. The fact that the students that left the district went to charter schools, private schools and suburban schools! No mention of this in the Strib...just on the 10pm news broadcast. WCCO reports that many of the students went to Harvet Prep, a new charter school.

"The things we're providing, parents value and they feel a need for it," said Callie Lalugba, Harvest Prep's principal."

Parents value the things we are providing says Harvest Prep's principal....HELLOOOOO Minneapolis School Board....HELLOOOOOOO MEA...HELLOOOOO St Paul......are you listening??????

They also report the cold hard numbers....6000+ student lost to charter schools and over 2000 to suburban schools! KMSP talked to one Harvest Prep parent who said that the public schools just were not teaching the kids at all. That is astonishing.

In our own school district (here in the Savage lands) we are discussing cutting staff and instructional time because of an "erosion" of state support - according to one school board member. However, a quick peek at the Department of Education numbers shows a 4.4% average annual increase over the last 7 years! THAT is an erosion? If these people can not tell the difference between a 4% increase and a decrease - how can parents expect them to teach little Johnny that 1+1=2?

What is not so surprising is that we knew this was coming. The school districts have been crying poor for the last couple of years. It was a major issue for the DFLers on the campaign trail last fall. So you would expect, given the spending spree that the DFL led legislature is on that they would have out spent Governor Pawlenty in the way of education funding, right? WRONG!

"The bill introduced by the DFL-dominated Senate allocates $498 million more in funds over the next two years for early childhood education and K-12 schools. Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty has proposed more than $700 million in new spending for schools. "

While I do hate to chide the Dems for being fiscally responsible (for once) I do find it amusing that they spent all last fall telling their friends at Education Minnesota how they would make up for the "cuts" that the evil Republicans made and yet when time comes to put up, they don't.

This is one of the few things that the state SHOULD be providing. Not health care for everyone, not an income for everyone, not housing for everyone....an education! With a decent education, people can get their own income and health care and car and housing and.....

Ch-ch-ch-changes

Several states are exploring the idea of moving their primaries up in 2008 (in a bid to be "relevant" to the Presidential process) including Minnesota. However, one state is already finding this change may put them at odds with the Voting Rights Act of 1995.

"Last year, Alabama's Legislature voted to move the state's presidential primary from early June to the first Tuesday in February in order to make the state a more enticing campaign stop for national politicians.
That created a conflict for 2008, as both the primary and Fat Tuesday are scheduled for Feb. 5.
Fat Tuesday parades run through three Mobile voting precincts, all of which are majority black, according to U.S. Census Bureau data for 2000:
Precinct 14, which votes at Bishop State Community College and includes land north of Beauregard Street and Martin Luther King Boulevard, has 5,360 residents, 5,266 of whom are black.
Precinct 16, which votes at the Springhill Avenue Recreation Center and includes the downtown loop and parts of Midtown, has 3,832 residents, 2,086 of whom are black.
Precinct 18, which votes at the Mobile Civic Center and includes the Down the Bay community, has 2,752 residents, 2,169 of whom were black. "

That is the problem with reactionary legislation. You end up shooting yourself in the foot. It would be better, albeit slower, to take a more deliberate pace and finding out all of the potential problems before you enact legislation. It's just logical...

Be thankful they don't take it all

Last fall, Minnesota voters voted on an amendment to the constitution that would dedicate 100% of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax to transportion (roads and transit). The backers of the amendment told the voters that money would be able to pay for the road work that needed to be done, now and in the future, plus it would be able to help develop transit such as bus, trains and other forms of transit and all without raising taxes! Well we were either sold a bill of goods, or the Democrats in the Minnesota Legislature are drunk on taxes for there are now proposals on hand to:
1) raise the gas tax ten cents a gallon
2) charge a wheelage tax on every car licensed in several metro counties
3) impose a .50 percent sales tax on the seven county metro area
4) imposing additional county sales taxes of vehicles
5) allowing cities and counties to impose vehicle "impact fees"

All of these additional taxes (and the last 2 were in the same bill) are ostensibly to "fund transportation projects".

Which leads to this question...were the people of Minnesota sold a bill of goods with the MVST Amendment? Or are the Dems drunk with taxation power? Either way, the DFL legislature are bound and determined to tax the lower and middle class straight out of the state of Minnesota. Once they do that, just who do they think will pay the bills?

Just a couple of quick thoughts

I've been rather busy lately, helping out friends with a couple of projects and that has really cut into the blogging time. However, I wanted to start the day with a couple of quick items that I hope will spark discussion.

First - why is it when an Evangelical Church makes available a voters guide (that is published by an outside interest like the League of Women Voters) to their congregants, they get into trouble with church/state watchdog groups. Yet Democratic candidates can get away with campaigning in the pulpit? Can you say double standard?

Second, am I the only one wondering if John Edwards has figured out the brouhaha over Amanda Marcotte yet? I mean he hires a woman who calls Christians "godbags" and now he is miffed when Ann Coulter returns the "compliment". Don't get me wrong...I think Ann stepped way over the line. I thought what she said at CPAC was in extremely poor taste. I have heard Ann's defenders and I think their excuses ring as hollow as Amanada Marcotte's lefty defenders excuses did. However, for Edwards to so vocally express his indignation when it took him a week to even respond to L'Affaire Marcotte seems just a wee bit hypocritical to me.

But then again, I just a right wing "godbag". Obviously I'm just not as smart as our friends on the left are.

The Energizer Bunny has nothing on this guy!

You have to give Representative Murtha credit. He just refuses to give up on a plan that has no backing.

"Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified on Tuesday to the Senate Appropriations Committee that my plan to restore military readiness in order to meet current and future threats and to require the Pentagon to uphold its own guidelines, standards and policies would somehow be damaging on the battlefield.

I would think that General Pace would know better than me, better than Representative Murtha what would and would not be damaging to the military.

"Gen. Pace himself recently issued a report to Congress that said because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a significant risk that our military wouldn't be able to quickly and fully respond to another crisis. Two weeks ago, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, said the president's surge in combat troops in Iraq will further erode the Army's ability to respond to other incidents around the world."

That is probably true, Congressman, however where ARE the incidents happening right now in the world. Are they happening in Kosovo? In South Africa? In Australia? Or are they happening in Afghanistan and Iraq?

"Gen. Pace also indicated that if he were forced to adhere to established Defense Department readiness standards, one-third of units currently programmed for Iraq could not be deployed. This statement is alarming. Is Gen. Pace saying that he is willing to accept that in the near future one-third of the total military force in Iraq will not be fully manned, fully trained or fully equipped?
Gen. Pace is trying to shift the blame, when in fact it is this administration's polices that are hurting our military."

Excuse me Congressman, but we ARE at war. At least we were the last time I looked. The Logical Husband was in the military and when he was in, he never got "off time". He was always on duty. It comes with being in the military...something the Congressman appears to have forgotten.

"Let's revisit history. On Nov. 17, 2005, I said that the failed war policies of this administration were destroying the future of our military. I said that our military is stretched thin, that the war in Iraq is resulting in significant shortfalls at our bases in the United States and that we must rebuild our Army. I knew then that the war policies of this administration were unsustainable and that our military preparedness and strategic reserve would suffer.
After visiting Iraq in 2003, I was the one who found severe shortages in body armor and shortages in armor and spare parts for our military vehicles. I worked with my colleagues to fix these problems. Since the start of this war, Congress has provided an additional $145 billion for essential war fighting and life sustaining items which the president did not ask for but which were needed. Congress also provided funding for 30,000 extra troops as a "temporary increase in end strength" because our military asked for it."

Timeline issues aside, let's just cut to the chase. What does the man that is the commander in Iraq want? What do the experts want? They want more troops in the field! Even Senator Joe Liebermann wants more troops in Iraq! However, that will now sway the intrepid Representative. He wants to withdraw the troops and that is that.

The people of America are indeed uneasy about this war, but they are not willing to withdraw in defeat. If nothing else, we learned the lessons of VietNam - something that apparently the Democrats in Congress have not.

Not what they expected.

Surprise, surprise...now that the Dems are in control of the House and the Senate, they are backing away from the crown jewel of their campaign promises.

"CHICAGO - In Washington, Democrats are blaming Republicans for the Senate's failure so far to vote on a resolution opposing a troop increase in Iraq.
But in the heartland, some voters say such excuses no longer are good enough.
Having banked on the promise that Democrats would force a change of course in Iraq if they won control of Congress, some of the people who helped the Democrats get there are growing impatient.
They're frustrated that Democrats sank so much energy into a nonbinding resolution then dropped the bipartisan plan of Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., like a hot potato when Republican leaders who support President Bush maneuvered them into a corner. "

"They're being overly cautious, to the point of really not accomplishing anything," said Lisa Rone, a psychiatrist from Oak Park, Ill. "I thought the Democrats would be much more clear about that vote and be much more active." "

Of course, if you ask Senator Harry Reid...

"I think the American public's very satisfied with what's happening," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We're on the right side of the angels here."

They couldn't get their weak "non-binding" resolutions passed, they couldn't get Rep Murtha's "slow bleed" plan even into committee and even here in Minnesota, the Dems are backing away from their promises to their base. They realize that if they keep those promises, their days in power are limited!

Welcome to the club guys. Now you know how the Republican base feels.

Cleaning up the "culture of corruption"

One of the campaign promises that the national Democrats made was that they would clean up the "culture of corruption". Of course once they got into the majority, that promise - like their promise to get the US out of Iraq - quickly slipped away. Well, now at least one Republican lawmaker in DC wants to actually clean things up....

"Republicans plan to force a floor vote on Rep. William Jefferson's move to the Homeland Security Committee in an unprecedented maneuver to force Democrats to go on the record supporting their embattled colleague who is the target of a federal bribery investigation.
House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) pledged to call for a recorded vote on the House floor when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) introduces a resolution to make the Jefferson move official."

Well that is indeed a start. Let's force them to defend the move. Says Rep Blunt:

"The idea that Homeland Security is less important than the tax-writing committee is ludicrous," Blunt said Wednesday."

He has a point.

It is sad though, that the Rep. Blunt and his collegues couldn't develop this kind of a spine BEFORE last Novembers elections. Things might have gone differently if they had.