Could the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights actually subpoena U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.?
That scenario is unlikely, but it suddenly has entered the realm of possibility. The Civil Rights Commission is making a full inquiry into a controversy about a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and several of its members and has escalated its investigation. At its meeting last Friday, the commission voted 5-2 on a motion to authorize Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds to issue subpoenas to a broad range of witnesses and decision-makers relating to the case.
The motion specifically listed three separate categories of Justice Department personnel among the five categories of potential subpoena targets. As well it should. After the judge in the case had issued a default judgment against the Black Panthers, the Justice Department inexplicably dropped all the charges except one and asked for an absurdly non-punitive "penalty" on the one charge remaining.
The Washington Times has since reported that, despite original assertions to the contrary by Justice spokesmen, top political appointees at the department participated in the decision to drop the cases. Meanwhile, the department has remained unresponsive to requests from Republican Reps. Frank Wolf of Virginia and Lamar Smith of Texas for more explanations.
In authorizing subpoenas, the Commission on Civil Rights is acting directly pursuant to its primary purpose, as defined by law, of "investigat[ing] allegations in writing under oath or affirmation relating to deprivations because of color [or] race ... of the right of citizens of the United States to vote and have votes counted." Moreover, "the Commission shall submit to the president and Congress at least one report annually that monitors federal civil rights enforcement efforts." And: "The Commission may issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of written or other matter." Furthermore, "all Federal agencies shall cooperate fully with the Commission."
This passage from its authorizing legislation does not say federal agencies "may cooperate," but that they "shall cooperate fully."
Finally, by regulations that implement the statute, whoever "willfully withholds ... any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is subject to such demand ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
In short, all the top political appointees and temporary political appointees at Justice who had a role in deciding to drop the case are legally compelled to cooperate with the commission's investigation. That means, in turn, that if Mr. Holder himself played any role in that decision or in a refusal to reinstitute the case, he should be subject to a subpoena no less than the Black Panthers themselves are.
The allegations against the Black Panthers involve what veteran civil-rights activist Bartle Bull called "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen." If the Justice Department is changing its long-standing approach to and criteria for civil-rights enforcement, the commission is uniquely situated to analyze the change. If perchance the case was dropped for nakedly political reasons, that's a potential scandal.
The Justice Department should fully cooperate with the Commission on Civil Rights. Failure to do so would be unlawful, and a travesty of justice.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah, like THAT's gonna happen. Should I begin holding my breath waiting for that miracle to occur now?
#2
"investigat[ing] allegations in writing under oath or affirmation relating to deprivations because of color [or] race ... of the right of citizens of the United States to vote and have votes counted."
These laws were written to be used against whites, and civil rights activists are aghast that they are being used against blacks.
#3
May I suggest that if this is successful, a couple of Master Sergeants get together to file on behalf of troops whose properly requested absentee ballots were not sent in time... and a second case on behalf of troops whose absentee ballots were rejected for spurious reasons?
People, Abbie Thernstrom has big brass balls. Do not mess with her. She is one hell of a force. I fully expect her to follow through wherever this leads.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
11/05/2009 6:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The more effective approach would be to play a little payback. Start pressuring the Trunks in Congress to initiate legislation to declare our military to be a protected group, thus giving them standing as other 'special interests' group before the courts. That would allow existing organizations to file civil rights violations on behalf of our military personnel in instances when pols decide to screw with their votes. The Trunks can use the same tactics the Donks use' in beating their opponents at every turn about not supporting the troops and their sacrifices if they drag their feet on the legislation. It's just like the racist card the Donks play regularly. This could be entertaining.
#8
I'd just as soon we didn't have to fight with Democrat machine politicians who try to disenfranchize military votes every friggin election. Where is the outrage and shame?
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/05/2009 18:56 Comments ||
Top||
The single most common swap which occurred more than 8,200 times involved Ford F-150 pickup owners who took advantage of a government rebate to trade their old trucks for new Ford F-150s. They were 17 times more likely to buy a new F-150 than, say, a Toyota Prius. The fuel economy for the new trucks ranged from 15 mpg to 17 mpg based on engine size and other factors, an improvement of just 1 mpg to 3 mpg over the "clunkers."
WASHINGTON -- Making good on a campaign promise to hold a yearly summit with American Indians, President Barack Obama told tribal leaders today gathered in Washington that he is determined to reverse the U.S. government's history of marginalizing Indian nations.
"You will not be forgotten as long as I'm in this White House," Obama said during opening remarks at the all-day conference of tribal leaders and government officials.
Obama said the meeting is the largest and most widely attended gathering of tribal leaders in U.S. history. Officials planned to discuss problems facing American Indians, including economic development, education, health care, public safety and housing.
Given the government's history of reneging on agreements with Native Americans, Obama said it took an "extraordinary leap of faith" for leaders to attend the meeting. Obama said he is determined to be a good partner with tribal nations.
"We're not going to go through the motions and pay tribute to each other, then furl up the flags and go our separate ways," he said.
Obama signed a presidential memorandum calling on every cabinet agency to give him a detailed plan to improve the relationship between the government and tribal communities.
During his Democratic presidential primary last year, Obama traveled to Indian reservations and promised health care improvements.
"I'll appoint an American Indian policy adviser to my senior White House staff to work with tribes and host an annual summit at the White House with tribal leaders to come up with an agenda that works for tribal communities," Obama said in a video address to the National Congress of American Indians' convention in Phoenix during the final days of his campaign. "That's how we'll make sure you have a seat at the table when important decisions are being made about your lives, about your nations and about your people."
He made good on that pledge, appointing Kimberly Teehee to serve as senior policy adviser for Native American affairs within the Domestic Policy Council. Teehee, a member of the Cherokee Nation, previously served as a congressional aide and worked for the Democratic National Committee.
He also tapped Dr. Yevette Roubideaux to serve as director of the Indian Health Service within the Department of Health and Human Services, making her the first American Indian to head the federal agency since its founding in 1955. Roubideaux, a member of the Rosebud Sioux tribe, worked for the healt service on the San Carlos Indian Reservation and in the Gila River Indian community.
Thursday's event is an opportunity for the administration to promote its $787 billion economic stimulus program. About $3 billion of the economic recovery money went to tribal communities. Obama also has sought budget increases for Indian health care and programs run by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, officials said.
The administration also plans to develop steps with tribes to improve the quality of life on reservations.
#2
Offer the native Americans the chance to form a non-contiguous state with two Senators and the appropriate number of Congressmen. Treaties with the other 50 states would then be up for renegotiation. They probably wouldn't take it but that's the most honest way to make them part of the US.
Give Puerto Rico and a few other territories the same offer. Yeah it would mess up our flag, and would probably introduce new liberal Senators but how long can a place be a territory? Only the District of Columbia should be eternally a territory.
#3
Pull back the US military and let the world go to hell in a hand basket. Tell different areas begging for intervention that the price is they become US territories and follow US laws and rule of law. Otherwise we have no interest.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/05/2009 18:28 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Just before he shuts down the Navajo coal power plant in the four corners. Nothing like kicking the economic foundation out of tribe located in a place where just about no one else would live.
#6
I guess this means no more reservations, Federal gov money, casin0s, tax free booze and cigarettes. Right Barack?
Posted by: ed ||
11/05/2009 18:46 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It's not just the Donks. Back in the 80s the Army had a contract with a tribal reservation that produced the camo netting the Army used in the field. Did a good job and met the specs. The amount of work kept the res busy. Then some Trunk congresscritter decided the get a bill enacted that required all federal work to be first offered to fed prisons. Make the devil work and get some of the money back. The end result was some prison took the work, leaving those on the res unemployed.
In the never-ending struggle in the West over whether public lands should be harvested for their valuable metals, fuels and timber or set aside for future generations of people and wildlife, environmental interests have gained the upper hand since President Barack Obama moved into the White House.
Obama has begun a dramatic reversal in Western land-use policy that already has had a major impact in Arizona. In a sharp departure from the Bush administration, the Obama team has halted new uranium-mining claims near the Grand Canyon, proposed new preserves for wild mustangs and funded the expansion of the Petrified Forest National Park.
Obama also signed into law the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 that protected thousands of miles of scenic, historic and recreational trails, including the 807-mile Arizona National Scenic Trail from the state line with Mexico to the Utah border. The sweeping bill designated more than 2 million acres as wilderness area - nearly as much protected land as President George W. Bush created in two terms in office. One of the worst unconstitutional abuses by the national government are these seizures from the individual States. Once the lands are taken, then the States and people are both taxed for their use, or in the vast majority of lands, prohibited from their use altogether.
#2
"Again I want to say, the farmers who owned these farms, which now have been designated and offered to new owners, must respect that law. They must vacate those farms, they must vacate those farms, they must vacate those farms."
#3
Glenn Beck was speculating on what the new global currency would be based upon and decided it would be real estate. Hence the federal land grab. Makes sense.
#4
The state trust lands are a sham, at least in Arizona. The lands are fenced and literally given to cattle farmers. You can't go on them, the ranchers are armed and they will draw on you if your on "their" land. The land looks like a moonscape due to the cattle. When you go to the BLM lands it's different. People are out there, hiking, horseback riding, dirt bikes, etc... I'm not sure about other state but here in AZ the BLM land is better managed and the public use is better.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
11/05/2009 23:16 Comments ||
Top||
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) is blaming Republican lawmakers for the District of Columbia's high HIV/AIDS rate.
In a letter posted on her website, Norton lashed out at Republican efforts in recent years to attach riders to annual congressional spending bills that limited the District from using locally raised revenues to support needle exchange programs.
Has Del. Holmes (D) considered seeking private funds for this effort? Surely George Soros would be willing to part with a pittance of his billions for such a progressive cause.
She said this explains "in large part" why the District has a higher HIV/AIDS rate than do similar cities. "The District has a higher HIV/AIDS rate than cities with similar demographics in large part because of riders attached by Republicans," Norton wrote in a letter on Tuesday. Republican efforts came "at the cost of many lives and illness caused by the spread of the virus," she said.
The letter came in response to efforts by Republicans to seek a congressional probe into the high rate of HIV/AIDS in the District and the use of federal funds. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is scheduled on Friday for a staff briefing with D.C. city officials on the management of federal AIDS funding.
At least 3 percent of the District's population has HIV or AIDS, a rate far above the national average of 1 percent, according to a 2008 report by D.C.'s HIV/AIDS Office reported by The Washington Post.
Reps. Darrell Issa (Calif.), the Oversight panel's top Republican, and Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) called for a congressional probe of the District's AIDS rate and its use of federal AIDS funding after the Post reported on questionable spending and other lapses in record keeping.
"The waste and inappropriate use of such funds is inexcusable," Norton wrote. But she said she opposed the congressional investigation because it would violate the District's home rule and District officials are already looking into the issue.
"When the Democrats assumed the majority in the 110th Congress, we removed the needle exchange ban and the District initiated a state-of-the-art exchange health program, but Republicans are again trying to attach a rider that would effectively end the program," Norton wrote.
Issa and Chaffetz responded in a letter on Wednesday that Norton's claim was "absurd and offensive."
Issa and Chaffetz also objected to Norton's claim that the committee should not look into the situation, saying that it concerns the "waste and mismanagement of federal taxpayer dollars."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Jeez lady. Why don't you blame the citizens involved in the risky behavior. I swear these people are from a different planet / dimension / parallel universe bleed-over.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
11/05/2009 6:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Wow, and I thought it was promiscuous gay sex and African immigration that spreads AIDS.
#4
"The District has a higher HIV/AIDS rate than cities with similar demographics
Other "cities with similar demographics?" You mean like Accra, Brazzaville, Kampala, Joannesburg, Nairobi? Are republicans to blame for HIV there as well?
#5
Everyone knows the Republican Coke Fairy was spiking the hoods' crack with HIV. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright told me so.
Posted by: ed ||
11/05/2009 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Democrats have a serious problem with the blame game. They have run out of people to blame and are using the same ones over and over again. They need fresh new material to work with and i'm just the one to provide it. Got a problem? Blame me! I offer unlimited amounts of scape goat at affordable rates. You don't have to look any further. I'm to blame! For a reasonable fee, of course.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
11/05/2009 11:20 Comments ||
Top||
Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) confirmed Wednesday that he reached out to influential Republican insider Fred Malek and sought his counsel on how to court former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's endorsement for his Senate bid.
As first reported by the Washington Post, Kirk sent a memo to Malek seeking advice on how to acquire a "quick and decisive" endorsement from Palin urging Republicans to embrace Kirk as the "lead candidate" in Illinois.
Kirk acknowledged the authenticity of the memo to POLITICO. The Republican's campaign said that it has sent materials to Palin, though Kirk spokesman Eric Elk downplayed the significance of the move. "The Kirk campaign provided the governor's team a briefing including talking points on Congressman Kirk and the Illinois Senate Race," Elk said. "The memo was like many others regularly prepared for high-profile visitors, pundits and media. The briefing provided details on the race and only requested supportive comments."
Malek, in an email, acknowledged receiving the memo, but said he did not advise Kirk on how to land the former governor's endorsement.
Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton did not return a request for comment.
The endorsement of Palin might serve to insulate the Illinois moderate from criticism on the right that he is not conservative enough. Palin attracted attention recently for offering her imprimatur to Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman in the Nov. 3 New York special election. Palin's endorsement was followed by a flood of other Republican endorsements for Hoffman.
Despite Hoffman's loss, Palin applauded the conservative third-party candidate Wednesday on her Facebook page for having the "courage" to run. "The race for New York's 23rd District is not over, just postponed until 2010," Palin wrote. "The real victors in this election are the ordinary men and women who voted for positive change and a return to fiscal sanity. Your voices have been heard."
Kirk, a moderate, may also face a third-party challenge from the right, after fellow Republican Eric Wallace made clear in dropping out of contention for the GOP nomination that he may mount a Hoffman-like run. Kirk is also facing opposition on his right flank from several Republican candidates, including Andy Martin, who is best known in state political circles for having filed a lawsuit in Hawaii calling for the release of President Barack Obama's birth certificate.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rep. Kirk is a RINO mostly. Although working with the Illinois GOP Establishment (80% RINOs), it may be just 'survival'.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
11/05/2009 8:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Kirk is a conundrum. He is (or was) a Navy Reserve intelligence officer. He supports the WOT and is pushing sanctions on Iran. On the other hand he voted for the cap&trade bill in the House. He's probably the Trunks best hope for gaining the seat, but a 3rd party challenger would definitely push it to the Dums.
#3
Palin has her own problems. She needs to have Conservative GOP support across the entire Party spectrum for her own political bid in 2012.
Her viability is about in as good a shape as the GOP in general. And we all know how good a shape the GOP is right now, dont we?
Now we DO have the encouragement of Virgina and the other place positions recently. Pelosi's reaction is the best indication that they heard it whether they admit they heard it or not. They heard it... Like the Monty Python Black Knight with no arm "its only a flesh wound".
Palin is staking everything on a slow but steady momentum. Well, she's better than Obama...he doesnt have ANY experience, and at least Sarah does. But Sarah faces a lot of GOP ambiguity and some outright resistance. Still, she can blow a Moose's brains out in subzero and gut the thing in the snow. Try it and see if you can.
Is she a "lightweight"? Can she handle a campaign and the stresses? Her "team" has to be vetted and it has to be strong. And THEN the American people have to be CONVINCED she is hard enough to lead the United States...and make no mistake...leading is hard...and leading the most powerful Nation on Earth made up of a fickle pragmatic self indulgent and often self centered electorate is like herding cats.
Most men are not forthright honest righteous patriots. They are more usually going to scoot on you when the going gets rough. A Leader has to make do with what men really are. And the American people are only momentarily brave and the rest of the time they are going to wave and run.
Its no good talking to the American people and expecting them to be anything different from basic Human nature. Human nature is ripe.
Palin wants the job. The job is inspiring cowards to think for a moment that they are lions. Palin has to make it easy for the American people to believe in American Values of Freedom and Courage and Decency...when it is SO much easier to believe in tail in the air and blow your bowels like a Democrat. Suck and serve and sashay like a Dhimmi. Doink Values are EASY Values.
Sarah has to be prepared to serve the HARD way of doing things, like hold your ground and drag an enemy in where you can grab him by the throat and bite his artery in two and choke him until he's just warm meat. Bush did it in Iraq and if we are going to win our wars there is never a nice way or an easy way to win a war. Wars stink and they hurt like hell for a very good reason.
Reagan called a spade a spade and stood up, and that's why we respect his memory. You dont win by compromise, you win by pushing, keep pushing, and then by kicking the bastard when he's down.
Palin has a long way to go. But she he can pull the trigger and then skin the beast herself. And she is one of us. Maybe she stands a chance.
First: Sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. And stick to it. Be very vocal about fiscal conservatism.
Second: Be clear and consistent that you support core principles of smaller government, constitutional federalism, lower taxes and fees, and increased individual liberty. This will mean repudiating past errors such as support for Cap and Trade and other things like that, and an emphasis on liberty and responsibility. Use this a lot and mean it: We do need to change things, but we need to be sure we are making the right changes!
Third: Stand clear of ACORN, SEIU and other unions, Planned Parenthood, and other hard left organizations. They will oppose you vehemently no matter what so do not curry favor with them. Do not push social issues but be clear and firm on them when asked and move on quickly.
Asked and answered.
Posted by: M Defarge ||
11/05/2009 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Palin is setting up for 2016
Posted by: M Defarge ||
11/05/2009 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Mark Kirk: How can I get Sarah Palin to like me?
In February, Sen. Dick Lugar and his wife took a $16,000 trip to Jordan.
In April, Lugar and his son John took a $9,300 trip to Valencia, Spain.
In May, Lugar and his wife took a $10,000 trip to Croatia.
And in August, Lugar and his wife took a $6,500 trip to Banff, a tourist hot spot tucked in Canada's vast mountainous terrain.
Total cost to Lugar and his family for the travel, lodging and food: zero.
The travel costs for the Indiana Republican and his family members were picked up by the nonprofit Aspen Institute, a group synonymous on Capitol Hill with paying for travel and lodging for members of Congress to attend seminars on public policy issues.
Two years after Congress toughened ethics laws that prevent lobbyists and corporations from paying for members' trips, lawmakers are still seeing the world courtesy of other outside groups.
Although the trips are permissible because the money doesn't come directly from lobbyists or corporations, the walls can be very thin. Some of the nonprofit groups that sponsor member travel are themselves funded by corporate sponsors, and the conferences that members attend on the groups' dime often put them in direct contact with representatives of the corporate sponsors.
"While the new ethics rules broke the direct-sponsorship link, the concern remains that many of the same powerful interests are still involved through other means, namely as members and benefactors of the nonprofits sponsoring the trips," said Sheila Krumholz, head of the Center for Responsive Politics, which monitors influence in government.
In 2009 alone, outside groups have spent more than $140,000 for a host of senators in both parties to visit locales around the world -- and they have spent hundreds of thousands more for senators' aides to attend conferences and meetings and make various on-site visits.
House members, too, have taken advantage of nonprofit travel; several of them participated in the Banff trip with Lugar, as did Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).
Members of Congress staunchly defend the practice, saying such trips help bring into focus deeply complex issues, allow them to interact with members from the opposite body or party with whom they rarely talk and expose them to experts in those areas to better understand public policy concerns.
Lugar, who is the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said trips sponsored by the Aspen Institute have been "remarkable educational experiences." "There are very few times that you have the opportunity to concentrate on a subject, whether it be energy or China or Latin America," Lugar told POLITICO. "But equally important is the fact that it's my best opportunity to actually meet members of the House of Representatives who may have an interest in subjects. ... You know who your allies are, or at least who has heard the same arguments, and have some opportunity then to progress with constructive bills or in conference to know really who is there."
Aides to Boxer and Harkin similarly defended the Banff trip, with Natalie Ravitz, a top Boxer aide, calling such Aspen trips "extremely" beneficial because they allow attendees to "study a specific issue from morning until night." Harkin spokeswoman Kate Cyrul said her boss -- who has traveled several times on the Aspen Institute's tab -- believed the Banff trip was "an opportunity to gather ideas on how to improve education standards for America's kids."
Bill Allison, an ethics law expert at the Sunlight Foundation, a group that promotes transparency in government, said the trips paid for by outside groups can "create the appearance of influence ... and the question is, is there an agenda behind these things?"
A few months before the Banff trip, Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) each took a trip with his spouse to scenic Beaver Creek, Colo. (motto: "not exactly roughing it"), paid for by conservative think tank The American Enterprise Institute. The cost to AEI: $3,225 and $1,910, respectively. The conference featured business leaders, government officials and scholars discussing economic, social policy and security issues.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Aspen Institute is a tranzi nonprofit? Not exactly--they pay no taxes and promote their agenda but get plenty of political payback.
Most House Democrats tried to put a good face on Tuesday's election results, saying they picked up two more votes for a sweeping health care bill that could be on the floor as early as Friday.
But it can't make it any easier for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she works to corral the last holdouts she needs to pass legislation overhauling the nation's health care system.
Of course, the speaker, who told POLITICO recently she's "not big on showing weakness," brushed aside questions about how the Democratic gubernatorial losses in Virginia and New Jersey would impact her final tally and instead trumpeted the two special election House wins.
"From our perspective, we won last night," the California Democrat told reporters during a Wednesday photo op. "We had one race that we were engaged in, it was in northern New York, it was a race where a Republican has held the seat since the Civil War. And we won that seat. So, from our standpoint, no, a candidate was victorious who supports health care reform, and his remarks last night said this was a victory for health care reform and other initiatives for the American people."
"From our standpoint, we picked up votes last night," a cheerful Pelosi said, "one in California and one in New York."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Remember Blue Dogs you're all expendable political cannon fodder for Miss Nancy and her power.
#2
But it can't make it any easier for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she works to corral the last holdouts she needs to pass legislation overhauling the nation's health care system.
The morning after Republicans lost an upstate New York House seat, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) warned that conservative activists will bring destruction to the Republican Party if they drive out moderate candidates across the country.
"To those people who are pursuing purity, you'll become a club not a party," Graham told POLITICO in the Capitol Wednesday. "Those people who are trying to embrace conservatism in a thoughtful way that fits the region and the state and the district are going to do well. Conservativism is an asset. Blind ideology is not."
Graham, who has sparred with his party's right wing on issues ranging from climate change to Guantanamo Bay to Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination, warned that those concerned about the state of the GOP should help find candidates who are electable -- not ones who adhere to a particular type of ideology. And he said that both the GOP nominee, Dede Scozzafava and the conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman were both out of the mainstream of the upstate New York district -- which lead to the victory of Democrat Bill Owens Tuesday night.
"If your goal is to make everybody just like you in terms of ideology, that's a self-centered approach to politics," Graham said.
Graham took issue with conservatives taking aim at Rep. Mike Castle (D-Del.), a moderate seeking Joe Biden's old Senate seat next year, as well as conservatives looking to take out former businesswoman Carly Fiorina, the choice of Washington Republicans to challenge Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in next year's election.
Graham's South Carolina colleague, Jim DeMint, backed Chuck DeVore, a conservative California state assemblyman who is running against Fiorina.
"I understand why he's attracted to the agenda of the candidate -- I wish he would sit down and talk to Carly," Graham said. "Carly is a good person -- she's a solid candidate. We're lucky to have her running.
"But that's Jim's decision -- I'm totally for Carly. I know her, I know she's pro-life, good on taxes, she's going to be a good solid -- she'll fit California well and be of assistance to mainstream conservativism."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...if they drive out moderate candidates across the country.
A Donk is a Donk is a Donk. You can pin a Trunk label on it, but its still a Donk. A one party system is the ultimate Big Tent.
#2
What is a 'Conservative' these days? The aspect of conservatism I care about is the fiscal part. All these idiot religious whackos who want to shove their creationism and their bigotry down our throats are retards. I will never, ever vote for a creationist (Palin, Pawlenty, Jindal, etc) for President. Someone who is stupid enough to reject all Reason is too stupid to be President. The government has no business peddling idiotic views of Christian fundamentalists any more than they should be pushing Islamic fundamentalism. Abortion is murder. I could care less if gay people get married, because, you know what? It has no bearing on me or my family. My Faith doesn't depend on what other people think, say or do. Graham is right. And if the religious fundies take over the GOP, then I'll just stay at home or vote for whoever I think is the least likely to screw up the economy anymore.
#4
Values are something that define the man and Politics IS Values.
GOP Values, Conservative values are different from Doink or RHINO Values.
Rhino Values are political expediency values. That's it in a nutshell. Politicians ,by their very nature ,are COMPROMISERS. Rhinos are compromisers.
Often Compromise is good as a tactic but not as a strategy.
In the long run you can never afford to compromise your Values. A Rhino will do that. A Rhino will compromise his values. You cant allow then to lead, they WILL compromise GOP Values. Its their nature.
DOinks do that. Doinks do rub rump and say its Gay pride and wear Chaps with no bottoms in the parade with feather Boas. Doinks do Hollywood.
Obama is a Doink. Geraldo is a Doink. Pelosi is a Doink.
Rhinos say we have to get along with the Doinks. We have to listen to the Doinks, right?
The VALUES of the Doinks are spend other people's money, shove it down your throat if you dont like it, spit on a soldier, and rub your rump.
Am I lying to you? WHAT ARE YOUR VALUES? WHY do you have those Values? Do you WANT to compromise your Values?
#8
I will never, ever vote for a creationist (Palin, Pawlenty, Jindal, etc) for President.
Given that Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species wasn't published till 1859, I would extrapolate you'd never vote for Washington, Madison, or Lincoln.
#9
Ironically enough, the truly new conservatives can be of both parties, and are reaching far beyond traditional conservatism: they are becoming federalists.
Look at the big left-right issues at the federal level today, and they all get markedly shifted by the glare of federalism.
Abortion? State issue, NOT federal issue.
Marijuana? State issue, NOT federal issue.
Guns? State issue, WITH 2nd Amendment restrictions on State controls.
Federal Balanced Budget? If the States have to intervene to bring this about, they will, as the feds have ZERO self control.
Federal land takings? The States want their lands back.
National borders? Federal government controls the borders, so control the borders already.
Foreign wars? Congress declares war, or it had better in future. Strict limits on foreign deployments.
National debt, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? No way can these continue to exist, they must be renounced. They were promises made that couldn't be kept.
Repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments, reinforcing the 10th Amendment. Deleting the unconstitutional parts of the federal government. Massive civil and criminal legal reform. Tight restrictions on the powers of federal judges.
Conservatism is what was. Federalism is the future.
#10
Often Compromise is good as a tactic but not as a strategy.
Well said, Angleton9! Very well said. In other words, be true to your core values.
Posted by: Alaska Paul back from Tok, AK ||
11/05/2009 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Graham is a pansy.
He sells his principles, if he had any, for popularity and power. He is a disgusting political herd animal. As far as representative animals go, Graham is not a Rhino, but a stupid cow.
Posted by: M Defarge ||
11/05/2009 11:31 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Conservatism is what was. Federalism is the future.
My two-cents worth:
While I'm certainly more of a federalist than a conservative (whatever that word means), I don't think the two are exclusive. Conservatism as a whole implies federalism, as a federation is the best guarantor of limited government: one of the key ideas behind American (as opposed to European) conservatism. (OK, Con-federation is a better guarantor, but that word has been tainted within the context of our culture.)
I should also point out the importance of the three legged stool of the Reagan coalition, which extended beyond the confines of the Republican Party to include independents, conservative Democrats, libertarians, and what have you: fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, and an aggressive, hawkish foreign policy. The supporters of all three philosophies are necessary to forge a coalition large enough to take and hold power within our democratic system.
For example, while I'm definitely an economic and foreign policy conservative, I don't have a huge problem with gay marriage, am not particularly religious, and think that drug laws are idiotic. I'm also pro-life and hate gun control with a burning, white hot passion. Shall I spend all of my time worrying about what church Sarah P. or Bobby J. goes to? Of course not. 2.5 out of 3 not only ain't bad, it's pretty damn excellent within the confines of realpolitik.
What Graham is missing about the NY-23 election is that while 2.5 out of 3 may be great, .5 of out 3 totally sucks! It's like voting in California. When I lived in San Francisco and had to make hard, hard choices when voting, we SF Republicans had a saying: when your choices are Stalin, Mao, and Trotsky, you pick Trotsky.
#19
Well said 'moose. I'm a little r repub or a big C conservative and a bigger F federalist....and an overwhelming C for Constitutionalist. It's time for a re-founding.
Big Hollywood has already posted a couple disturbing videos of young school children singing/speaking praises to President Obama, but when eleven more dropped in our email box it came as quite a shock. What seemed like an aberration now appears to be a troubling pattern.
Maybe "epidemic" is a better word.
I don't know... there are twenty-two schools in the trailing daughters' school district, from pre-school through high school. While I'm sure there are more schools who've inappropriately celebrated Mr. Obama's ascension to the highest office in the land, I'm not sure that even a few hundred such performances would count as more than an aberration. An aberration that should be punished because it is so highly inappropriate, but an aberration nonetheless.
Each one of the videos below is creepier than the last because the further down you go, the younger the children -- brace yourself for kindergartners -- except for the last and most disturbing video, which you have to see to believe.
Young captive minds, easily influenced, eager for direction, enlisted into a cult of personality focused on an individual who, other than being the first black president, has yet to accomplish anything of significance.
But Obama's skin color has nothing to do with this. Does anyone interested in retaining their merit badge for intellectual honesty really want to argue that Condi Rice or J.C. Watts would've spawned a dozen-and-counting tribute videos?
This is about brainwashing our children into Leftist identity politics. Sure, the schools can argue that they had some kind of parental permission -- which, if true, is somehow even more disturbing -- but who even considers doing something like this with young minds? That's a rhetorical question.
There was some guesswork, but to the best of our ability the videos run from oldest to youngest, starting with high schoolers. We list the name of the school and the date the video was posted. From there, if it could be found (or a confident guess made), you'll find the schools' website, followed by the original title given to the video and any notes added by whoever uploaded to YouTube.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's all about civics. I'm sure that there were similar celebrations with George Bush's election. /sarc off
#3
I told you before that the state doesn't DO education. "Education" is a creche so both parents pay income taxes and an indoctrinator for the safety of bureaucrats.
You pushed away the severe storm
You made us believe, Comrade Kim Jong-il
We cannot live without you
Our country cannot exist without you!
Our future and hope depend on you
People's fate depends on you, Comrade Kim Jong-il!
We cannot live without you
Our country cannot exist without you!
Even if the world changes hundreds of times
People believe in you, Comrade Kim Jong-il
We cannot live without you
Our country cannot exist without you!
Oh... Our Comrade Kim Jong-il
Our country cannot exist without you!
We Believe in Barack Obama
Brainwashed Kiddie Corps from the link
We believe in Barack Obama
He loves you and he loves your mama
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah
With all the change hes building
Gonna bring hope to the children
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah
Change
That we can believe in
Change
That we can believe in
Change
That we can believe in
We believe in Barack Obama
He loves you and he loves your mama
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah
With all the change hes building
Gonna bring hope to the children
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah
Change
That we can believe in
Change
That we can believe in
Change
That we can believe in
Yeah, haha, haha.
Alright, come on now, here we go;
You know we gotta get Barack and all of his crew
In the White House so they can prove that
In their hearts they know what to do
And that includes Michelle and the kiddies too
Heated referendums over same-sex partnership laws in Maine and Washington powered voter turnouts today in an off-year election that included closely watched races in New Jersey, Virginia and New York.
Pundits were debating what the results could mean for President Obama, who campaigned for Democrats in governors' races in New Jersey and Virginia and in an upstate New York congressional race.
But the White House sought to put some distance between the president and the outcome.
"We don't look at either of the gubernatorial races or the congressional race as something that portends a lot for our legislative efforts going forward or our political prospects in 2010," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said at his daily briefing.
In New Jersey, where Gov. Jon Corzine was in a close race with Republican Chris Christie and independent Chris Daggett, the early turnout was described as light by state officials, who cautioned that much of the vote usually came later in the day. Democrats outnumber Republicans in registration, about 1.7 million to 1 million, but there are 2.3 million voters unaffiliated with a party.
In Virginia, Democratic gubernatorial candidate R. Creigh Deeds was trailing Republican Bob McDonnell in polls by double digits. In the closely watched 23rd Congressional District in upstate New York, Democrat Bill Owens was in a close race against conservative Doug Hoffman after the GOP candidate dropped out over the weekend and threw her support to the Democrat. No Democrat has won a race in the district near the Canadian border since the 19th century.
Also being closely watched were referendums dealing with same-sex laws, which generally attract high voter turnouts.
In Maine, where voters were deciding whether to repeal a gay-marriage bill, the turnout was at the higher end of expectations, about 50% to 55%, Secretary of State Matt Dunlap said in a telephone interview. The turnout is usually 15% to 25% when a less controversial referendum is on the ballot.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You idiots just keep on denying and rationalizing the warning signs. That's what I like to see.
#2
It remains to be seen whether this will burn itself out with this election or continue to grow, affecting the outcome of 2010 and beyond. The Democrats think this is an anomaly in this off-year election that focussed on local issues. If they are wrong, they'll lose big next year, and then they will pay attention to what it means, including President Obama losing the chance to make the changes he wants... and perhaps even losing the gains already made.
#1
This climate change shell game is gonna cost us all a lot more money than the "long lost relative left you $500million USD in a Nigerian Bank" gig.
Same sort of this deal though, take money and resources and hand them over to a small group of carefully chosen politically active/savvy scam artists and you have cap and trade.
Don't these morons know that one volcano eruption in Indonesia puts more of those "green house gases" in the upper atmosphere than all of the industrial activity that has ever occurred since the beginning of history. You can shut down every power plant, take every car off the road and kill every methane emitting cow on the planet and we would still have cycles of colder than normal weather and hotter than normal weather.
They are trying to play the melting glaciers on Kilamanjaro as proof of climate change. I would, myself, begin moving as far away from that VOLCANO as possible. Some experts say the melting snow on Mt.K is evidence of some kind of volcanic activity....
Can we have nuclear energy back? I mean what is cleaner than that.
Posted by: Karl Rove ||
11/05/2009 10:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Speaking of Nigerian scams, William Jefferson D-LA (of the cash-stashed-in-the-freezer-fame) is scheduled to be sentenced in the next week or two. He was convicted on 11 of 16 corruption counts (not the one connected to the cash in the freezer, though) and could be sentenced to more than 200 years in prison.
His wife, 5 daughters, brother and other family members were involved, as well.
#2
Gay marriage is like the death penalty, the ruling caste won't permit the unwashed masses from of having their say on it. Our 'betters' will use other means to overcome the wishes of the people. When you talk term limits on politicians, remember to throw in term limits on federal judges as well.
#3
Maine became the 31st state to reject same-sex marriage at the ballot box.
Perhaps another way of phrasing that would be to say that Maine reaffirmed that the majority of Americans prefer the traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Of course, it also reaffirms that Sean Penn believes all of America should be ashamed because he sees it is a nation of bigots.
#4
It would be cool (although probably unconstitutional) to have a ballot proposition proposing Gay Marriage, lots of traffic cameras and lots more affirmative action all as part of the same proposition.
Posted by: lord garth ||
11/05/2009 10:28 Comments ||
Top||
#5
So? no surprise - this is how I'd have voted if I lived in Maine.
Fox News was the clear winner in the cable ratings last night, averaging 4.04 million total viewers during prime-time, with 1.13 million in the 25-54 demo alone. Fox beat the other three networks combined.
This demonstrates conclusively that Fox News is not a real news network, unlike the others.
MSNBC came in second (974K, 308K), according to Nielsen, with HLN taking third (842K, 341K).
CNN, which won the 2008 election night, continues to struggle in prime-time. The network placed fourth for the month of October, and claimed the same spot last night, with 826,000 total viewers and 227,000 in the demo.
Amidst falling numbers, CNN executives have long maintained that the network is still the go-to choice for major events. But on this off-year election night, it clearly wasn't.
Let's see how they do next year before crying triumph, but I venture to predict the Obama White House has caused a permanent change. Life can be so amusing.
CNN brought in over 12 million between 8 and 11pm in 2008. That said, all the networks were higher for the closely-watched presidential election night.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/05/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Posted by: Bisa ||
11/05/2009 0:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I saw ratings demo from Tuesday nite, and in every hour between 5 and midnite, Fox had at least a 3 to 1 edge over #2 MSNBC. WH probably saw this because they sent out Axelrod for damge control for an interview with Fox. Here's link to opinion piece in this am's LA Time.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
11/05/2009 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
MSNBC reruns (as of 10 PM, IIRC) beat CNN live coverage?
That's beautiful.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
11/05/2009 9:51 Comments ||
Top||
#4
To the left and the MSM, only one comment from the famed Greek philospher Itoldyousos....FECOM OCCURE!
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
WASHINGTON -- Making good on a campaign promise to hold a yearly summit with American Indians, President Barack Obama told tribal leaders today gathered in Washington that he is determined to reverse the U.S. government's history of marginalizing Indian nations.
In February, Sen. Dick Lugar and his wife took a $16,000 trip to Jordan.
Most House Democrats tried to put a good face on Tuesday's election results, saying they picked up two more votes for a sweeping health care bill that could be on the floor as early as Friday.
The morning after Republicans lost an upstate New York House seat, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) warned that conservative activists will bring destruction to the Republican Party if they drive out moderate candidates across the country.
Big Hollywood has already posted a couple disturbing videos of young school children singing/speaking praises to President Obama, but when eleven more dropped in our email box it came as quite a shock. What seemed like an aberration now appears to be a troubling pattern. 
Heated referendums over same-sex partnership laws in Maine and Washington powered voter turnouts today in an off-year election that included closely watched races in New Jersey, Virginia and New York.
Fox News was the clear winner in the cable ratings last night, averaging 4.04 million total viewers during prime-time, with 1.13 million in the 25-54 demo alone. Fox beat the other three networks combined. 
