Sandy Burglar, now serving 15-25 in Leavenworth (or Marion, IL or Atlanta, GA) Maximum Federal Penitentiary

Well, seems that Sandy Berger, who plead guilty to stealing and destroying archived documents from the National Archives, is even more guilty. It was reported by the Inspector General that Berger hid papers under a construction trailer before taking them home to be "accidentally thrown away" after he "accidentally" may have inadvertently stuck these archived documents down his pants...accidentally.
My question is, why was this Clintonista allowed to get away with a felony with a hard misdemeanor punishment? And why isn't he in prison? And why did it take the Inspector General a year to make this report?
My suggestion: sweat him real hard as to what were in the documents (all related to the Clinton Administration and terrorism) and offer him 10 years off a 20 year hard time sentence at hard time place like Leavenworth if he is forthcoming...fully forthcoming.
But, this is an administration that's let run the Washington Post, New York Times that's become the reporting arm for Al Jezeera and seems to be, for all practical purposes, on Al Qa'ida's payroll. And not a whimper from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue about aiding and abetting from the MSM.

Boo-hoo and LONG overdue!

Prairie Pravda has a feel bad story about the ICE raids on six Swift meat processing plants last week. It's a "those poor victims" story that Prairie Pravda loves to tell about criminals and their hardships (I remember a horrid story in 1992 about a black punk who broke into a home in one of the northwest suburbs, stayed the day and found a shotgun that he modified by cutting down the barrel. The mother came home with her children, a son and a daughter, all white (I, unlike Prairie Pravda, have no hesitation at all to tell the race of perpetrators or victims). The little puke killed her and her daughter in cold blood. When he was caught, the despicable asses at Prairie Pravda ran an article, front page, telling us that this murderer had had a hard life. The term is "garlanding" where the perpetrator becomes an elevated victim. Like the reason a rapist rapes is that he didn't get a hug at his fifth birthday party from his great aunt).
Well, the story about the raid says that there is great trepidation up and down a 75 mile stretch of Hwy. 60. And every one of those towns mentioned is one I know intimately as they are all ones that I've been traveling through for 58 years to go to my Mom's home town of heron Lake.
So, all I have to say about the raid is: GREAT!!! WONDERFUL!!! Seems that this is exactly what's needed. Enforce the law with vigor and HOOZAH! The broken windows theory of crime applied to ILLEGAL immigrants. Seems that this should have been done years ago, especially after there was an increasing gang problem, Hispanic gang problem, in East L.A.? No. Dallas? No. Phoenix? Uh, uh. Sioux Falls? Yup. Sioux Falls with a gang problem. Hispanic gang problem!
Good for ICE...finally!
There also an excellent story on why this flood of illegals is NOT immigration (which is what my great grandparents from Sweden did over 120 years ago) but is migration. Brown America vs. America. Again, an excellent read showing once again that the left is at war with America and all things American. And nothing less than the destruction of America is their goal. Nothing less.

Liberty Lovers United

Last night about 70 like-minded people gathered at Stub and Herbs to eat, drink and discuss what ideas we had to keep our Second Amendment rights here in Minnesota in light of the left wing take-over (or rather Republican dereliction of duty) last 7 November. Joel Rosenberg invited conceal carry advocates for a get together to assess what needs to be done to preserve the MN Personal Protection Act (MNPPA). I sat and talked with Mitch Berg (A Shot In The Dark) and John Caile (information officer for MNCCRN) about politics, conceal carry, the best firearm to carry and a host of other topics. I also had the opportunity to talk briefly with my friend Duke Powell (R-40A) on what happened on 11-7-06. Not a pretty picture. Duke worked very hard and very long sensing that Republicans were in deep trouble. And he did yeoman labor in an unfortunate losing effort. He and I agreed that the public's disgust with Republicans extended and splattered even to rock ribbed conservatives, like Duke, ample evidence of collateral damage from the electorate's deserved anger. I also had the opportunity to talk again with Sue Jeffers about post election politics and her upcoming stint subbing for Jason Lewis after Christmas.
John Caile had an idea that Mitch grabbed right away and that I titled. John suggested that the Minnesota bloggers (MOB) get together for a shoot at one of the local ranges. I suggested the event be titled "The MOB Shootout". Joel also liked the idea and the title when Mitch and I talked about as we were leaving. So, watch for details. And be sure to listen in when Sue takes over the airwaves just after Christmas.

Current Events Quiz

OK kids, it's time for a quiz on current events. So, put away your books, take out a clean sheet of paper and a pencil. No, we don't need a #2 pencil as this will be a written test where we don't have to fill in ovals. Please keep your eyes on your own paper. Here we go.
1. Name one thing that you know about Paris Hilton?
2. What is Brittney Spears known for?
3. Who is the producer/director of the new movie "Apocalypto"?
4. Name one member of the womens' show "The View".
5. Name Tom Cruise's current wife and any one of his previous two wives.
6. Name just one Medal of Honor winner from Iraq.
7. Tell of one good story you've read, not heard, about Marines, soldiers or sailors involvement in Iraq.

Pencils down.
Self scoring:
Zero points for any answers for questions 1-5.
A thousand points for any correct answer for 6 and 7.
If you were able to answer any question 1-5 and couldn't answer either 6 or 7, deduct a million points, then go to the nearest mirror, look long and hard, and weep bitter tears of shame at what you see.
Then go here and here to right the wrong.

Musings from an amateur historian

Yesterday, as was my habit on Wednesday, I was having lunch with my WWII friends, and the topic was what were they doing when they heard of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. About ten or twelve of the guys got up and told stories of being in a theater watching a movie when the movie was stopped and the announcement made. Or being on a date and asking their date "where's Pearl Harbor?". Another one of the guys told about also being at the movies with his friends and again, the movie being stopped and the news reported. And he and his friends seeing that they were seated behind a group of girls, proceeded to introduce themselves. And that was the first time he met his future wife. And with the report of the Baker/Hamilton Commission I've been thinking and reading about the comparisons between WWII and the GWOT.

I'm a WWII history buff. I have been for most of my life. And it appears to me that many Americans (and seemingly all Europeans) have yet to apply critical analysis to the GWOT. And as I see politics evolve, it appears to me that many Americans do not have the ability to do critical analysis. That being said, I'll take the title from a Victor Davis Hanson (VDH) book called "A War Like No Other" and apply it to the GWOT.

In the GWOT there is no enemy with a return address. There is no Tokyo Bay to sail into to have surrender documents signed. There is no school house in Reims were we can take the unconditional surrender of the combat leaders to order their soldiers to lay down their arms. There is no Berlin to bomb to kill all the leaders of the enemy in one fell swoop. There is no Battle of Midway that signals the turning of the tide of battle. No Battle of Leyte Gulf where we can point and say we established supremacy over our enemy. This is a war that may easily go on for decades.
I have a number of friends who are retired Special Operations (Spec Ops). They range from a Green Beret, a Force Recon sniper, a Navy SEAL, a couple of Airborne Rangers, and even a former member of Spetsnaz . And most of the GWOT is fought by the Special Warfare troops. You and I will never hear of the SEALs Boat Squads that will insert and carry out an intelligence gathering mission or maybe even a Direct Action. Special Air Services will do high level assassinations-and you and I will never know happened.This is a war where the vast majority of the war is fought off the front pages and top of the hour news reports. Accept that fact! This is a war where the troops believe they are obeying their god, not following a political leader who can be proven wrong. And the enemy has no respect for any infidel-conservative, liberal, Jew, Christian, Hindi, Buddhist, man, woman, child. He wants to kill them all.
It's wrong to refer to the conflict in Iraq as "The War in Iraq". It's properly referred to as the "Battle in Iraq". Or even as "The Battle for Iraq". The war with radical Islam will continue on no matter what the outcome is in Iraq. This is a single battle in that war. As I've heard it said "Rather fight them there rather than here."
And you hear the public discourse hover around the point that we're "losing the war in Iraq". Time for a little critical analysis:
One of my Christian friends always believes that we should be able tell what we believe and also why. That we have an obligation not to just spout an opinion or a position but be able to defend it by sharing the reasoned knowledge that led us to that conclusion.
So, when you hear someone say that "we're losing the battle/war/whatever" ask them why they believe that. Ask them upon what do they base their opinion. I remember a business associate that always had an opinion. And always wanted to have an opinion. But he never wanted to exert any effort to be able to have an informed, reasoned, well thought out opinion. Ask them where the vast majority of conflict takes place (there are eighteen provinces. The bulk of the fighting and killings take place in two, two of those provinces). Ask them to list any successes that they're aware of that have taken place in Iraq (here is a list of accomplishments as of 10-03 and this from a short article on Fox News Sunday in June, 2004).
Here is a clip that preceded a follow-up to the Fox News Sunday article called "Winning Iraq-The Untold Story" that was broadcast about a year ago. Greg Palkolt was the reporter and readily admits that he was not a war supporter. But, the Fox News team roamed Iraq for about five weeks. Here is brief clip highlighting the story (be sure to view it in Internet Explorer). Pay very close attention to what he says about "The Green Zone" and that this is where almost all American reporters keep themselves. And then remember that the Baker/Hamilton committee, save one member, ever ventured out of the Green Zone when the went on their "fact finding" trip to Iraq. And then ask your "we're losing the war" nay sayer why they've never seen or heard anything like this...or this (and be sure to read the comments).
Here is an audio clip of Hugh Hewitt's interview with Victor Davis Hanson about the battle in Iraq. And about the larger GWOT.
This is a war like no other. And most Americans do not understand that they and their loved ones are targets. And the enemy is already here . As Caroline Glick of the Center for Security Policy stated in the film "Obsession" "Remember, the nineteen Arab (Muslim) hijackers trained for this attack on America IN America."
And Baker/Hamilton Report is a joke. And the committee members are an embarrassment to me, personally, as an American. And to the country as a whole.

Your fees are too high, your taxes are too low

Yup, now that the DFL (an acronym for Dumb-Something-Loser) is in charge, let it be known that the losers with no clue legislators feel that a voluntary business arrangement between you and a business that offers gift card is in need of gross meddling. Seems that the DFL thinks that fees are too high and other parts of the gift card arrangement need to be changed or eliminated. Of all the pressing needs in this state (such as cutting needless regulations just like this), this is the first story Minnesota Izvestia comes out with for the DFL. So, private party fees are too high and unnecessary. But, taxes are just way too low. Just watch and see what the DFL does with taxes to correct that problem.
So, we'll watch as the DFL crimps business and watch the gift card business erode.
After all, the Dimwit Farout Lefties (DFL) surely know best.

Tim on Hugh

5:37 p.m.-OK, so I'm listening to Hugh Hewitt online. He's going to interview Gov. Tim Pawlenty in a few minutes, and he's introducing Pawlenty as the Last Red Governor Standing. I sent Hugh and his producer an email about five minutes ago asking that as long as Hugh has excoriated Republicans for straying badly from conservatism, that I'd suggest asking Gov. Pawlenty about his comments supporting universal health coverage for Minnesota children. We'll see if Hugh's got the spine to pop that question on the Governor.
5:53 p.m.-yup. No spine in either interviewer or interviewee. Pawlenty was asked by Hugh as a surviving Republican Governor what recommendations he had for the Repubs across the nation. "They need to do some soul searching." "We need to espouse those conservative values..." His veto pen is handy, but hopefully there will be "good products" coming down the line so he won't have to use that veto pen.
Yah...
Here is my email to Hugh on 9 November, 2006:

Dear Hugh-

I’ve been a loyal listener for as long as AM1280 The Patriot has been on the air here in Minneapolis. And have been a caller on a few occasions.

I was glued to your program on 9-11. I had very painful foot surgery that very morning, but delayed getting my pain medication prescription filled because I wanted to hear Frank Gaffney’s comments on what was happening.

That being said, I listened to as much of your program last night as possible as I was traveling and the AM1280 signal weakens at local sunset.

And I was taken aback by your strong stance on your stated reasons for the Republican shellacking on Election Day. You stated that the Repubs had strayed, they brought this on themselves. There wasn’t anything that you said last night that I didn’t agree with. The reason for my amazement was your timing. You said that you had written about the danger to Republicans in March, 2006 in your book “Painting the Map Red”. And I thought “What took you so long?” March, 2006 was way too late to come over from the Dark Gray Side. I and many others were concerned in the 2002 Election about this shift away from the class of the 1994 Election. And many of us were writing and calling to our Senators and Congressmen in 2004 and sounding hard alarms then.

But Hugh, you were quite clear on 15 April of 2005 that you supported moderate and center right Senators. You stated that on your show. And then you went on to say how upset you were that there was such a horrible battle going on to confirm federal judicial appointees. What on earth did you expect? And when I got home on the 15^th April, I heard you go on to say that you’d support liberal Republican Senators if they supported the Republican Party (post here ). An oxymoronic phrase if ever there were one. And yet these very same Senators that you supported in 2005 were the very same Senators that you railed against yesterday!

I agree that we now, at least for the next two years, have little if any hope of getting judicial nominees through Congress. But, I’m wondering what GWB will do to set the stage for the 2008 elections. Set the stage and make the appointments anyhow.

This is definitely a Romans 8:28 moment. Adios RINO’s. Time to clean and clear house.

Interesting times indeed for Republicans.

Best regards,

Kids, if Hugh's interview is what we can expect from media "conservatives" we as conservatives and Republicans are surely in the very deep weeds.

Cut and run or trim and trot, smell the dead as they rot

Redeployment. Time schedules. Mile markers. Phased withdrawal(s). All the synonyms for turning tail and running. Cowardice. Lying.
And the left has a long record of doing all of that. A very long record.
The death of millions in Vietnam is put directly at the feet of the Ted Kennedy and the Democrats. The Paris Peace Accords were quite explicit that the Americans would leave S. Vietnam and the North Vietnamese were not to invade the South. If they did, the Americans would intervene on behalf of the South. Enter Watergate. Here at last was the liberty loathing lefties opportunity to extract revenge on Richard Nixon for his fighting Alger Hiss in the 40's and his anti-communist positions 50's. And with Watergate, the Democratic controlled Senate flatly refused to fund the U.S. military going back into to Vietnam after the North invaded the South in direct violation of the Paris Peace Accords. In other words, the Democrats in the Senate broke the word of the United States of America. And millions died. Millions because of the likes of Ted Kennedy.
And we're now in a parallel situation where again, for political revenge, millions will die thanks to Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Murtha and all their ilk should they get their way. Real blood for political blood is always a bargain for the left. This time though it won't be faceless Asians that won't disrupt Kennedy's and Kerry's vacations due to their inherited millions. This time, the beheading knife will swing across the globe:

"For one thing, a post-U.S. Iraq could make the Vietnam bloodbath seem like a tea party, given the traditions of savagery among terrorists and their ilk in that part of the Middle East.

Then, swooping down like vultures on the Iraqi carcass would be - you count on it - Iran and al Qaeda.

Separately, or in alliance.

That should send shivers down the spines of Iraq's regional neighbors: the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia and, most particularly, Israel - which Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vows to wipe off the map.

Anyone who cares about the fate of the only law-abiding, democratic bastion of civility in the Middle East should dread a U.S. surrender in Iraq.

Here's the worst part: With America gone and its enemies in control, how long before oil becomes a powerful strategic weapon - and before those enemies set their sights beyond the region, to places like Europe? And, eventually, America itself?

Do Americans really want Iraq left to become a staging ground for terror attacks on New York or Washington?

The irony is that the Dems' delusions and calls for surrender only make it more difficult to end the violence and defeat the terrorists now. Why should militias disband when America may be about to head for the hills? Why halt their suicide bombings when they seem to be pushing America to flee?

Having captured Congress, Democrats now need to act responsibly. Talk of defeat and "cutting losses" must end.

Or defeat will come sure enough.

With losses that know no end." From the N.Y. Post

And from an editorial in August in the WSJ:

This means that if Democrats retake Congress, we will be back where we were in Vietnam circa 1975. Early that year the Congressional left blocked funds for our allies in the government of South Vietnam, weakening its defenses even as Hanoi massed for an attack. Within weeks, the North was on the march and the last American helicopters were leaving Saigon. The stakes are just as serious today in Iraq. The defeat in Vietnam could at least be contained elsewhere in Southeast Asia, although the Soviet Union was clearly emboldened to assert itself via proxies from Afghanistan to Central America.

A precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would likewise signal a defeat echoing far beyond Baghdad. Iran would exploit the turmoil in Iraq to assert itself in the Middle East, and both terrorists and their state sponsors would feel they could hit us again, this time with confidence that any U.S. response would be limited, as it was before 9/11. The idea that quitting Iraq would be discrete penance for President Bush's invasion is a delusion against an enemy that cited our 1993 withdrawal from Somalia as a reason to believe it could attack New York with impunity."

Lefties conspire, millions expire.

The passing of a champion of liberty

The Cato Institute has posted the passing of Noble Laureate Economist Milton Friedman. Friedman wrote extensively on and about free markets and on public policy always with the mind set of liberty, personal freedom and personal responsibility.

Horizon shot

I race sailboats. One of the most satisfying views in a race is near the end when you look back and see all the competition far behind. It's called a horizon shot. Newt Gingrich refers to horizons as he lists the seven things that the Republicans need to regain majority status (again HT to Tapscott). And the horizons that he refers to are the House and the White House. In two years, GWB retires. The entire House of Representatives faces election in two years. A two year horizon for both with completely different perspectives. And Gingrich warns that the House's perspective had better be getting along with the voters instead of getting along with the White House.
And again, we'll see what that perspective really is depending on who the House leadership elects tomorrow.

Is it safe?

The title comes from "Marathon Man" where the Laurence Olivier character is asking for a sign if it's safe to conduct business. I chose it because the vote last Tuesday was a sign to the Republicans that doesn't seem to be taking. And I asked myself what does it take for conservatives to vote as they did? What would drive some of them, though a small but significant percentage, to vote for someone other than a Republican candidate? I came across an article by Michael Franc of the Heritage Foundation giving, again, telling information about the election (the article is linked from Tapscott's Copy Desk).Franc repeats that the Repubs lost, not conservatism. But, the telling part of the article is how conservatives voted:
"exit poll data demonstrate that self-identified conservatives who supported the Democratic House candidates made up fully 6 percent of the electorate, while liberals who gravitated to the Republican amounted to only 1.7 percent of the total. That means the "my-conservatives-for-your-liberals" trade netted a loss of 4.3 percent of the total electorate."

And it seems that Bill Clinton caught the movement fairly accurately:
"The reason we are at this moment," he said in a campaign speech last week, "is that [Republican leaders] do not represent faithfully the Republicans and the more conservative independents in the country." He stretched reality a little, but not by much, when he argued that anyone who takes the conservative view on the budget, law enforcement and other issues ought to cast his or her lot with the Democrats." Seems that that is exactly what some conservatives did.

Now, here's my thought: With all the warnings about a Nancy Pelosi Speaker, no constructionist judicial appointments, a weakening of national security, there were conservatives that took to voting for Democrats. Why? I posit exasperation. The Repubs were being warned in 2002 (though there is also a thought of those people who voted Repub in 2002 because of 9-11, supported GWB against Kerry, but went away by 2006). The conservatives were talking about "holding their noses" and pulling the lever for Repubs in 2004. And with no veto's (save one), amnesty, Harriet Miers, No Child Left Behind, Mediscare Prescription Drug Plan, McCain/Feingold, the conservatives saw no out. That with all the warnings being sent to conservatives by Karl Rove and the neocons ("It will be worse with THEM"), the Repubs were ignoring all the warnings sent to them by conservatives. And so, in exasperation, the voters voted for reform,change.
And once again, there is this telling statistic: "one election-eve poll found that Americans trusted Democrats over Republicans to control spending by a remarkable 53 percent to 29 percent."
Franc also writes: "Republican strategists, and more than a few Democrats, will undoubtedly take note of how easily legions of conservative voters switched their partisan loyalties, and will scrutinize the data for clues as to how this could have happened." The Republican strategists will take note. The Senate has not and it looks like the House will follow suit. The Senate leadership has voted for their leadership and the House will elect their leadership tomorrow.
So much for sober reflection.
We, the voters, taught the lesson. The Senate Republican leadership didn't learn it at all by returning Trent Lott to leadership (in a parallel move that mimics bringing out Walter Mondale to replace Paul Wellstone). Tomorrow we'll see if the House Republicans have learned the lesson.
And if the House Republicans don't get their act together and show they've learned the lesson the voters taught them, well, they have two years to practice saying "Madam President".

And lessons taught but obviously not learned

And Trent Lott returns to kill the base even further.
And I'd be willing to bet that if the Senate Republicans ran White Star Line that they would put Captain Smith at the helm of RMS Olympic or HMHS Britannic .
Let's hope and pray the House of Representatives shows a higher degree of learning ability.
Let's hope.

The lesson we hope they learn

Your last bumper sticker

A lesson in the basic

I've seen a number of 11-07 postmortems. There is one that I've looked at and reviewed and recommended. The Club for Growth is an organization I'm familiar with, but I've not studied much. However, Pat Toomey had an article last week that was linked at Real Clear Politics . Mr Toomey cites a study (opens with Word) that the Club for Growth commissioned from Basswood Research. Basswood polled 15 Congressional Districts across the nation a few days before the election. All House seats were held by Republicans. The poll was taken by talking to likely voters (not registered voters).
The breakdown was as follows:

• Q: With which political party are you registered or affiliated?
  

A: Republican 37.6%
Democrat 40.6%
Independent 19.4%
Refused 2.4%

This falls within margin of error agreeing with conventional wisdom that the nation is evenly divided between Republican and Democrat at 40% each with 20% as independent.
The next question is where the first "Oh, oh" occurs:

• Q: Would you prefer to see the Democrats or the Republicans in control of Congress when the new Congress meets in January?
  

A: Democrats 50.8%
Republicans 36.3%
Refused 13%

And next, we have an "OH, OH!!":

Introduction to Question: Now tell me whether you think the following phrases better describe the Republicans or the Democrats in Washington.

Q: “The Party of Big Government”

A: Republicans 39.3%
Democrats 27.9%
Both 16.3%
Neither 9.3%
Don’t know/Refused 7.4%

Q: Would you agree or disagree with the following statement: “The
Republicans used to be the party of economic growth, fiscal discipline, and limited government, but in recent years, too many Republicans in Washington have become just like the big spenders that they used to oppose.”

A: Agree 65.8%
Strongly Agree 43.4%
Somewhat Agree 22.4%
Disagree 26.4%

Strongly Disagree 13.4%

Somewhat Disagree 13.0%

Don’t know/Refused 7.9%

This is exactly what many of us have been saying for years.We blogged, emailed, and stated that government had grown faster under the first five years under Republican control of the White House and Congress than under the full eight years with Bill Clinton. That the Repubs were not becoming Big Government Lite, that we saw Repubs as THE Big Government Party. And obviously so does everyone else except Karl Rove,GWB and the Republicans in Congress. This is what so many pundits, like Hugh Hewitt have been saying is not true. The kept proclaiming that to say that there wasn't a dimes worth of difference between the Dems and Repubs was just wrong. Seems the electorate saw a half dollar's worth of difference. And voted accordingly.

But here is what I find extremely interesting:
Q: The 2003 federal tax cuts lowered tax rates on capital gains and dividend income. In two years, those taxes will go up if Congress does not extend the tax cuts. Do you support extending the current lower rates on capital gains and dividends, or do you support allowing those taxes to go up?
A: Extend the tax cuts 62.1%
Allow taxes to rise 24.8%
Don’t know/Refused 13.1%

Q: The 2003 federal tax cuts lowered income tax rates across the board, cutting the lowest tax rate from 15% down to 10%, and cutting the highest tax rate from 39.6% down to 35%. In four years, those tax rates will return to their previously higher levels if Congress does not extend the tax cuts. Do you support extending the current lower income tax rates, or do you support allowing the income tax cuts to expire and let rates return to their previous higher levels?

A: Extend the tax cuts 59.1%
Allow the tax cuts to expire 26.8%
Don’t know/Refused 14.1%

Q: The 2001 federal tax cuts phased out the inheritance tax, also known as the death tax. The law is currently scheduled to completely eliminate the death tax in four years, but then it allows the death tax to return in the year 2011. Would you prefer to have the death tax permanently eliminated, or would you prefer to see the death tax brought back in 2011?

A: Permanent elimination 61.6%
Brought back in 2011 21.5%
Don’t know/Refused 16.9%

In other words, these people wanted what the Repubs had offered, but the people didn't trust them to deliver. Even the Dems want to end the death tax. Even the Dems want permanent tax cuts. Even the Dems want tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. In other words, people want to keep more of the money they earn. And the Repubs were not trusted to deliver.

Look at the dates when the tax cuts were proposed: 2001 and 2003. And even with majorities in both houses of Congress and a Republican in the White House, the Republicans could not make those cuts permanent in three to five years.

This is one of the most eye opening surveys I've seen in years. And unfortunately one that proves the conservatives right. And all those people who proclaimed it was more important to get Republicans elected than to adhere to principles and a platform? Well, they were wrong, flat wrong. Miserably wrong. And they never listened. Or worse, chose to ignore.

When will we learn?

There are post and editorials about how wonderful Senator Allen is for not putting the people through a recount and setting a great example for other politicians.

My response. Horse-Hockey!!

If anyone thinks this will change the way Democrats behave they are fooling themselves.

The is the same stupid logic that was at the heart of the Nuclear Arms movement.
"If we set a good example just get rid of our Weapons, the Soviets will!"
Horse-Hockey - If you want to win you defeat the opponent.
The Democrats want to win and they know this - Just because we want to play fair does not mean they will.

Do I think Allen should be fighting the outcome?
Maybe - Sort of like when a coach calls for a play to be reviewed on a turnover even when he knows he will lose.
It takes away some of the momentum, and also sets up the Officials to question themselves.

But the key is, if anyone thinks that 2008 will not have the Democrats calling voter fraud and recounting every ballot they lose, they are kidding themselves.

For the perfect example. Gov. Pawlenty makes a gesture talking about how he wants to work with the new DFL House and Senate. And what does the DFL, appoints the most partisan fighter they have to lead the Senate.

And peoples are surprised!

When will we learn?

Pre-post mortem

It’s 1:00 a.m. on 7 November, 2006, Election Day for the mid-term elections.

I’ve started the post mortem early with politicians and some RINO’s here locally in mind. The RINO’s I have in mind are not politicians. I’ve served with them on campaigns and committees. The keep trying to impress me with their credentials hoping that I’ll accept them as conservative. That being said, they only impress me as having the very same virus as the Republicans that are now in heavy spin.

I’m starting my day after my Bible readings and meditations, with coffee, and now am listening to Laura Ingraham. And her advice to the Repubs? Don’t wait until October 1^st of an election year to start paying attention to your base. It becomes pandering at that late date. She mentioned the Harriet Miers disaster, the Dubai Ports deal, no reform of Social Security, amnesty for illegals just to name a few. Here locally we’ve got the horrible stadium deal, fees instead of taxes, ethanol/E85 subsidies, and Republican senatorial candidates running ads against the oil industry. Laura has just had on Robert Novak who has written some great articles. I read where once again I’m being warned about the Senate and judicial nominations. I remember that same carrot being held out two years ago when I joined many others to work chasing the same carrot. And was given Harriet Miers.

There are plenty of articles and blogs that have warned the Repubs that the day of reckoning was approaching. Dick Armey wrote an insightful piece as did Fred Barnes. But then, there is this piece today from the WSJ by Arthur Brooks. Brooks refers to the rightward tilt of the country. That if right versus left were a seesaw, Nancy Pelosi would be doing an air dance and a Democratic House majority would just mean that her shoes are a few inches closer to the Mother Earth that she and the other lefties try to put on God’s Eternal Throne. The gross and overarching error in the article is that Brooks assumes that Republican = conservative. He states “long-term trends are still distinctly right wing.” I’d posit that what he really means is the long term trends are less left wing. When I see the federal register still growing, tax cuts not made permanent (or at least kinda’ permanent-remember the two tier tax levels from the Reagan Presidency and where we are now?) Now, to give Brooks his due, he has a book that really proves that churchy going conservatives really are more compassionate by what they personally give, not what they vote to force others to give to horrible, disastrous and evil government programs.

P.S. 11-07-06 1:09 p.m. I voted.

The Quote of the Night

I started my post mortem early yesterday morning and will post it later.
But, the quote of the night came from none other than Senator John McCain when asked to comment on the Republican losses. It absolutely should be tatooed on every Republican's forehead.
"We came to change Washington. Washington changed us."

Gang of 14 now Gang of 12

Good News tonight.

So long to DeWine and So long to Chafee.

The great RINO Hunt continues.

"Obsession"

I had heard of a new documentary called "Obsession" that uses the evidence that radical Islamists Jihadists themselves provide. Fox news did an hour special on the film. What I was able to see was chilling. And shows exactly why Democrats can not be trusted with national defense. Ever. And you need to tell others to see these clips before you vote.
Powerline and The News Buckit has linked the Fox News Special from YouTube . You need to see it. The really scary and alarming episode is where the radical Jihadists are willing to indoctrinate their children (just like the lefties do here in America in government education). I've embedded that clip below. But, for a moment, do the numbers. Though Fox and the producers mention anumber of times that most Muslims are peaceful, the usual number that are radical is 10%. 10% of 1,500,000,000 is 150,000,000. And if 10% of those are moved to terrorism, that means an active army of 15,000,000. And in the last chapter of Fox's Special , Ms. Glick is very clear to remind us that the 19 highjackers came here to America, got drivers lisences, paychecks, lived and trained to kill us all on our own soil. And the Jihadists are training all over the world. Here is the clip about the children of Jihad:

Consumer, voting ,you and victory.

This is the last weekend. I just got through talking with a national Republican Get Out The Vote director. He's quite clear that the sentiment of all of us reflects Edmund Burke's saying that all that's necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. All it takes for lefties to win is for liberty minded, freedom loving citizens to do nothing.
Time to stop being a consumer and start putting back on the table.
Click on the logo and go to the website to do 30 minutes of work. Use your cell phone as an instrument of victory. Call 30 other like minded Republicans and urge them to vote. Make a difference. Or do it for no other reason that a Republican victory will really tick off Al Franken and Garrison Keillor. Entertainment easily worth the 30 minutes of effort:

Light rail diguised as cars

never let it be said that Minneapolis Izvestia doesn't practice the lefty cathechism by trying to trap innocent people into believing that they are incapable of acting and thinking independtly. I call as my witness the attempt to convince us that social engineering is for our own good by running an article about how there is an overwhelming need for "transit" . And there seems to be an important vote coming up in a few days about funding "transit" (via a constitutional amendment) that well over 95% of all of us will never use or benefit from as we use "cars" not "transit". So, here we have a propaganda piece that's news about the huge demand for "transit" and voting in favor of the amendment that supports "smart growth" whereby you will be forced to possibly fund transit, not the roads that we all use, at 100%.

frum ower truupes n Irakk

From Drudge:

Kerry and Klobuchar

No need to go past Minnesota Izvestia online edition. While every other online news source has a headline about the despicable comments by Kerry, Izvestia terms it as "Bush,Kerry trade barbs". What a disgusting example of a news organization. Cowards and liars all on the editorial board.
Now watch and see how many lefties distance themselves from this contemptible man and his horrid comments.
If Klobuchar goes forward with any public appearance with this "man" that means that she agrees with his statement and his sentiment. Same for every single lefty that doesn't shun him or scream for a genuine apology. Opening a vein would suffice as due penance.
anyhow,just one more reason why Klobuchar does not merit the title Senator.
Let's be real clear about one thing: if Klobuchar's last name were Anderson or Abramowitz, she'd be running a tele-marketing call center someplace in Maple Grove.

Governor Race

While I will not reveal yet who I am voting for Governor,
This latest Press Release from Tim Pawlenty is helping me make up my mind.

Dear Robert,

With only 9 days until the election, come show your support for Governor Pawlenty as he campaigns across Minnesota with special guest, Senator John McCain.

8 Days

The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. And I'm still conflicted. Despite what others have written and commented about me, I have never, ever counseled not voting or staying home in this or any election. Anyone who does is, well, to be kind, being less than honest. Way less. Since my 21st birthday, I have only missed four elections and not a one of those was a General Election. I consider voting the most sacred and important thing we do in our constitutional republic. I have never taken that duty and privilege lightly. As citizens we are duty and honor bound to be informed on issues and candidates. The opportunity to cast a ballot has been bought with blood and suffering and denial and sacrifice. I have been an election judge for four years. I loathe same day registration. I despise vouching. I hold the vote in such high regard that I believe that people need to prove that they are eligible to vote.That they hold the vote in such high regard and esteem that they will go to extraordinary lengths to vote (I'm reminded of the story of an Iraqi citizen living here in America who drove for eight hours one way to vote in the Iraqi election!). No one decides to move in three days. The sanctity of the vote needs to be fully insured. OK. I've vented. So, my confliction? Republicans.
I wrote to a friend of mine that I'm sick and tired of Hugh Hewitt, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al telling me that if the Repubs lose either or both houses of Congress that it's going to be my fault. Wait a minute pal. Each and every election is a referendum. The voter/electorate are consumers. And we, as the market, decide if we're going to buy what's proposed, or going to keep buying what we been forced to buy for the last two or four years. In 1994 the Repubs made the case that the old lefty product was really bad, that the sellers in Congress had become contemptuous of the voters. Congress had become a lot like the American auto industry in the 1970's when Detroit assumed that Americans would always buy whatever the Big Three put out. And Detroit has been trying to catch the Japanese auto makers for the last three decades. And in 1994 the Repubs put together a great marketing effort with their Contract for America. And the Repubs took 54 seats in the House and 8 seats in the Senate. And then what happened? Well, for a few years things went well. And then "we" became "them". The Repubs became the Dems. Spent more. Much, much more...more in six years with a Repubs controlling both hoses of Congress and a Repub in the White House then when there was a dress staining cigar smoker in residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, D.C.Spent much, much more.
Yesterday Dick Armey had a great column outlining the downward spiral of the Repubs since the 1994 Repub Revolution. Seems that the main Repub campaign slogan is "SPEAKER PELOSI !!!!!!!!!!!!" or "Vote for us because it will be worse with those others!" Not exactly what I'd call a strong message. The Repubs rightly refer to tax cuts as working. They always have. And they screech "SPEAKER PELOSI will raise your taxes!" I'm sure she will. Now, that being said, the Repubs being in control of BOTH houses of Congress AND the White House still haven't made the tax cuts permanent. They passed the direct attack on the 1st Amendment with McCain/Feingold. And the equally horrible HAVA (Help America Vote Act [a great column by George Will]...meaning you and I are both way too stupid to know how to vote). And a $1,500,000,000,000 addition to Mediscare via a prescription drug program (Yup. Nothing at all succeeds like a government program. Just look at New Orleans after Katrina!). And of course, the New Jersey Supreme Court decision was a two fold bonus for Repubs: gay marriage and rank, unchecked judicial activism. Couldn't have come at a better time for the Repubs.
And on the other hand, the Repubs are absolutely correct: of course it will be worse with the lefties. They are appeasers, UN dependent internationalists who are more concerned with how people feel and building up support for harsher UN resolutions than resolving any conflict. I'm re-reading "The Art of Political War" and have just finished Horowitz's analysis of Clinton's disastrous foreign policy. More than ample evidence again that lefties can NOT be trusted in any way, shape or form to defend America . And their solution for any and all failed programs? More of it, more money for it or another program that at the very least is just as bad.
And so, if I were alone in my in my confliction, there would definitely not be the concern over the closeness of this election. If I were the only conservative with these doubts, there would be absolutely no talk about "the base" or,"energizing the base" or concerns that "the base will stay home". I haven't heard any reference to the Repubs picking up a net increase, only articles about minimizing the losses, of still keeping the majority but with a smaller number of seats. But, there are those concerns. And the pundits are hitting hard about those concerns. The Repubs are hitting hard about those concerns. My email inbox is getting at least 6-10 emails a day from the Repubs.
As Dick Armey said in his article that I referenced above:
"Republicans -- too busy dreaming up wedge issues to score cheap points against Democrats -- have lost sight of their broad national agenda.

The likely Republican losses in next week's elections will not constitute a repudiation of the conservative legacy that drove the Reagan presidency and created the Contract With America. To the contrary, it would represent a rejection of big government conservatism. When we get back to being the party of limited government, putting a national agenda ahead of parochial short-term politics, we will again be a party that the American voters will trust to deal with the serious challenges facing our nation.

The 2006 midterm elections will be a success for the Democrats. Republicans will have to manage their own disappointment. Fingers will be pointed, and various villains will be fashioned out of recent events. But the plain fact is that Republicans have been setting the stage for this outcome for nearly a decade, running from themselves and their own principles. We will not find ourselves by conforming to the status quo, but by returning to our Reagan roots."

And be sure to vote!

One more degree in boiling the frog

International financial expert and leading economic wizard radical left wing and scofflaw Congressman Barney Frank feels the need to dissolve more American sovereignty by having an international financial regulator. That is if the left wingers take the House.
And the great ideas just keep on coming!

Canaries and beaches

I was over at Real Clear Politics and came across this headline "Kill Muqtada Now" by Ralph Peters. It's a very disturbing article. Peters writes near the beginning of the piece:
I lost faith in our engagement in Iraq last week. I can pinpoint the moment. It came when I heard that Maliki (the Iraqi Prime Minister) had demanded - successfully - that our military release a just-captured deputy of Muqtada al-Sadr who was running death squads.
Peters then goes on to tie that event to GWB's press conference and the current state of inside politics in Iraq:

As a former intelligence officer, that told me two things: First, Iraq's prime minister is betting on Muqtada to prevail, not us. Second, Muqtada, not the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, is now the most powerful man in Iraq.

At his news conference, Bush was asked about another statement made by Maliki just hours before. Our troops had conducted a raid in Sadr City, Muqtada's Baghdad stronghold. The Iraqi PM quickly declared that "this will not happen again." He was signaling his allegiance to Muqtada. Publicly.

Oh, Maliki realizes his government wouldn't last a week if our troops withdrew. He doesn't want us to leave yet. But he's looking ahead.

For now, Maliki and his pals are using our troops to buy time while they pocket our money, amass power and build up arms. But they've written us off for the long term.

The rest of the article is an analysis by Peters that portends no good. As I wrote a friend of mine the story reminds me a the canary in the cave that warned of poisonous gas, or the receding of water at the seashore that forecasts the soon to arrive tsunami.
Read the article. Peters has a solution to the problem. It's still a very ominous piece.

Neo, paleo

I was listening to a brief overview of President Bush's comments from yesterday. One of his comments was that "the government needs to reward success". He then used that comment to support cutting taxes. The government needs to reward success. I repeated that phrase one more time. And I thought "Exactly WHERE in the Constitution is THAT perogative of government located"? It's bad enough that business is regulated to death (and BTW, regulations are encouraged by big business to thwart small business).
The very last thing I want is for any President or Congress or state government or city planning agency "rewarding" business for the same reasons that I don't want them regulating "for" or "against" business. The best thing government can do is stay out of the way. As Ludwig von Mises said "Progress is that which the rules and regulations did not foresee". As any and all august government agencies assume is that a small or select government group has better and more extensive knowledge than all those hundreds, thousands and millions of citizens and those who provide for them who make up "the market". Walter Williams has an excellent article on what he calls "The Pretense of Knowledge" which shows the radical arrogance of government.
No rewards.

Nuts and Sluts exposed

Seems that the only people who attack people from the DFL here in the state or the Democrats nationally are either nuts or they're sluts, if you ask the DFL or Dems that is. Seems that's the case with Amy Alexander and her controversy with Muhhamed X Ellison, at least according the truth merchants at Mpls Izvestia.
Yesterday they had a piece that showed poor Muhhamed X Ellison as being victimized by Alexander. OK, so that makes her a slut. But today, Izvestia hits the perfect bifecta: She's a NUTTY SLUT! Oh please , tell me more!!!
The headline is the prime clue as to what will follow: "Woman in Ellison case is an enigma". Enigma... The subsentence reads "Amy Alexander is known as smart but troubled. An advocacy group saw her temper firsthand." Oh, oh...hope she's in counseling. And it's then piling on, sometimes subtle...and sometimes not so subtle:
The woman at the center of an alleged blackmail controversy surrounding Fifth Congressional District candidate Keith Ellison is a long-time Twin Cities resident known for being both bright and volatile.
Gotcha. HE'S not at the center of the controversy, she is. It's her fault. Poor, poor Muhhamed X Ellison. A victim of political hate and spite ( you just know Haliburton and Dick Cheney are in this somewhere). Understood Brother X's victimhood yesterday from Izvestia's clear and concise article from. No need to convince me anymore. It'd be overkill with all their insight and logic. You need to save column inches, just like you did in the Alan Fine piece. But, now I also see that she's "volatile". I'm locking all my doors in case she's in the neighborhood. Hhhmmm. OK. What next, oh muses of truth?
Interviews with people who have known Alexander reveal a woman who has impressed others with her intelligence but also displayed what they considered a difficult nature.
People who know her...intelligent...difficult nature...really? What next?

Sen. Linda Higgins, DFL-Minneapolis, said she has known Alexander since she was a teenager because Alexander's parents were active in North Side politics. "She's very well-spoken, very opinionated. She can quote literature and famous people. There's a lot of intelligence," Higgins said. "It was nice to have a young person interested in political things."

Higgins didn't want to say much else, and other political figures who know Alexander declined to comment.

Didn't want to say much else, huh? As did others. Seems Izvestia wants me to question what these DFLers might NOT be saying by their silence.

Alexander "said she collects Social Security disability insurance because of anxiety and depression."
She wouldn't talk about any specific diagnosis because of "the stigma of mental-health problems in the African-American" community.

Otay Panky, there you have it! What others are reluctant to say, Izvestia has been able to get her to admit-She's a self confessed nut! From her own mouth!

And another group she worked with said they were "terrified" about the disruptions. "It wasn't just inappropriate behavior; it was, 'Oh, my goodness, this woman is so angry about not being hired; what do we do about this?' ""She's an incredibly intelligent person, but the anger and destructiveness -- it's hard to reconcile,".

And there you have it. Well, maybe not. Here is the story from Amy Alexanders point, a story that Izvestia has not yet seen fit to run.

It's not in there-

How many of you remember the spaghgetti sauce ad of a few years ago that with every ingredient mentioned that should be in a good sauce, the refrain was "It's in there!"
Well, I just came across a little letter that puts the lie to probably well over 95% of everything that Congress has passed and the President has signed for the past 100 years. In other words, as far as the Constitution is concerned "it's not in there" when it comes to the Congress's power to pass many bills. And it was written by someone to would know (my blog on the constitutional scholars Auntie Rosie and the Smartest Woman in the World notwithstanding). The letter was penned by President James Madison, Father of the Constitution. Seems that he had vetoed a bill passed by Congress that seemed good, but as the author of the constitution noted, didn't warrant signing as it failed under Article 1 section 8. And it also didn't pass the "general welfare" clause either. His letter should be read by all Americans. And memorized by every politician.
If we had a Congress that observed its oath of office, a president who also did the same, and judges who understood the Constitution and their responsibilities, well, there would precious fewer economic and social problems in America.

Blacks , ball bearings and beachheads

The radical left wing's existence absolutely depends on keeping the black vote locked up at 90% +. Over a year ago I wrote about the black vote , its necessity to the left wingers and the issues that should peel that vote away from the lefties and to the Repubs. And it seems that there might possibly be the intellectual dawning of this here in Minneapolis. Seems that the modern equivalent of "Heather Has Two Mommies" is now being taught in the Minneapolis Public Schools. And parents, especially moms, are in an uproar...finally! And Katherine Kersten has reported on the issue now firmly in front of black families (HT to Mitch Berg). The curriculum is called "Families All Matter" and is a device to indoctrinate children into "diversity" regarding gay and lesbian couples...oops, uh, families, ...and you know where this is going.
""Families All Matter" is supposed to teach tolerance. In fact, says Bounds, her daughter has learned that people who believe that a mother and father are best for a family are discriminatory." Yup. You read that right. Once again, the left says that if you have principles and morals, you are discriminatory. Even worse, you're a bigot!:"After Sage read "Asha's Mums," he "told the class that his grandfather had believed that black people are stupid," she says. "He said that other adults had helped him see that his grandfather was a bigot." The implication? That parents who don't share Sage's views on family matters are bigots too.

Sage touched a nerve by claiming the mantle of the fight against racism for his own agenda, says Preyer. "I'm appalled that he, a white man, would use that tactic to push his views on African-American children."" I'm tempted to ask if Preyer even remotely sees the racism in her response, also tempted to ask "Well, how does it feel?" And the incredible irony:We conservatives have been called bigots for years because we didn't swallow the pap from the left. But, bigger fish to fry here.

And the arrogance of the school administrators?:"Officials told them to consider withdrawing their children or enrolling them in a private school."

So, we have one more beachhead issue into the monolithic black vote that involves two basic issues: gay diversity indoctrination and government schools. As Dr. Walter E. Williams (who is black) once mused that the KKK couldn't have come up with a better way to destroy black families than government schools.

And what do you think the chances are that Repubs will go into the black communities and use this beachhead issue (as Mrs. Battle told me at the 2004 MN Repub Convention) ? And I'd bet the farm that this same issue exists in Detroit, Cleveland, Atlanta, New York, Los Angeles. And the Repubs will whine with no action. A squandered moment and superb opportunity.

Balanced reporting:"They're out to get me!!"

OK. Time to declare victory and go home kids. Prairie Pravda (or Minneapolis Izvestia) has finally come over from the Dark Side and now has balanced reporting. Mpls Izvestia has finally reported on Keith Ellison's woman problems: "She's blackmailing me! HELP! HELP!" In other words, Ellison's a complete and total victim, unlike Alan Fine, who, according to the Prairie Pravda account, seems to have just stopped short of beheading his wife because she neglected to align the toothpaste tube with the edge of the counter in 1995.
Now, I notice that the Strib goes to great lengths to get all the facts in the story that seem to give Ellison the victim status that lefties desire (always better than sainthood). And yet, the radical left wingers at Izvestia just can't seem to squeeze in the real facts on the Alan Fine case. Why? Column space. Mitch Berg at Shot in the Dark does an excellent analysis of the story and an interview with the writer. And thanks to Captain Ed for the brief synopsis and the link:
"All of these facts, which provides a much different context than that supplied by Olson, got left out of the story on October 7th. When asked about this, Olson replied that the Strib had space limitations and had to decide which facts would make the editorial cut. Every mitigating fact about Fine was edited out of the story, and every salacious and sensational allegation was included, no matter how little evidence supported it.

So we have Ellison meeting with terrorist sympathizers, a description by no less of an authority than Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, and the Strib sniffs. We also have a gossipy and unproven allegation made by an ex-wife and her father (a Family Court judge), and the Strib rushes that to print, stripped of all context and exculpatory information.

That's the local media here in the Twin Cities. That's the editorial incompetence of the Star Tribune. That's why voters in MN-05 have to consider their vote carefully three weeks from now. If you think that reading our local press has informed you of the candidates in this race, think again. You owe it to yourself to read Power Line, where Scott Johnson has done the work that the Star Tribune should have been doing all along."

As captain Ed says, if you live in CD-5, and believe you're getting the real and whole story, you're lying to yourself.

Walter Cronkite and Isaiah 5:20

In a press conference yesterday, George Stephanopoulos asked GWB if this recent upswing in attacks in Iraq we the Iraqi equivalent to the Tet Offensive in Vietnam in 1968? And he commented that there could be a comparision. We can only hope. The Tet offensive was an attempt by the communists to influence the upcoming major party presidential conventions and primaries. As a military venture, it was an absolutely unmitigated disaster for the the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese. However, you would have thought it was the greatest and most successful military offensive since Operation Overlord after listening to the "I hate America and all it stands for" left wing media. Amazing that the objective of the Tet offensive was to turn American public opinion against the war. And the MSM basically became allies of communism (sound of me being stunned now uttered). The MSM became an integral part of the communist offensive. And now, we have the intellectual and cultural sons and daughters of Rather and Cronkite. There was a quote from a soldier "Gosh. I didn't know that we were losing the war in Iraq until I came back to the United States!"
And the Isaiah 5:20 quote? Look it up. And remember, the worst rebuke in the Bible is "Woe".

Madison wrong! Constitutional scholars Rosie and Hillary on original intent

I'm listening to The O'Reilly Factor (a rare event occurence) because I saw a clip of him whacking Rosie O'Dumbell. She was screeching that she wanted an America as the Founding Fathers wanted it, a democracy. What? A democracy? And the Smartest Woman in the World (our Ex-Co President Hillary) said that we have a constitutional democracy. Smartest Woman in the World. Yup. Out of their mouths. And you'd think at least the Smartest Woman in the World would know that the Founders were quite clear that they loathed and feared democracy. And therefore put together a constitutional constructed representative republic that was democratically elected. You'd assume she'd know...
Just one more reason I want her to run so we can watch the ensuing smack down and see this oxygen sucking Jezebel and her hubby finally shown the door!

Gloves? Nah, bare knuckles:The final disgrace of Patty Wetterling

Here's the bold new headline from Minneapolis Izvestia :"Complaint: Brooklyn Park pastor endorsed Bachman". A left wing complaint group out of D.C. wants to lodge a complaint with the IRS. Yet, in the article, Pastor Mac Hammond is quoted as saying that the church can't endorse Bachmann, but that he personally would be voting for her. OK. A private citizen states his preference and that warrants an investigation by the IRS? So why the huge headline when there is a small print subheadline where the Wetterling campaign has fired a paid staffer that lied to get into the Bachmann campaign. And the question is why aren't those two headlines reversed? Because Minneapolis Izvestia is a yellow dog paper where the truth does not reside nor can it be found.
So, Wetterling is a liar when she runs her ad stating that Bachmann wants an additional 23% tax (she doesn't-she's referring to a national sales tax to REPLACE the income tax), she's a liar when she states that the GOP covered up child abuse in Congress (and then Mpls Izvestia did not report that she said she had no evidence to support her claims). Now she supports illegal campaign activities. Her only qualification for Congress: Her supposed moral authority because her son was kidnapped seventeen years ago. She allowed those on the left to pour poison and beguiling words in her ear only because she had a name. And she believed them. And she has destroyed the real good she was doing with the Jacob Wetterling Foundation. And when she no longer serves a purpose, the left will dump her.

Truth from fiction

I saw the following video and remembered a story where the head of security of El Al was talking to the head of security from United Airlines. The UA security chief asked why El Al had never had a hijacking. The El Al chief said "It's because you screen for weapons. We screen for terrorists."


The story between security chiefs and the video of fiction reminded me of this picture from reality:






















Screen for terrorists, not weapons.

The ad Fox News won't run...yet

The headline at WorldNetDaily reads:
"Fox News bans ad critical of Clinton". "Really?", I thought.
Seems that the organization that submitted the ad didn't provide the documentation that Fox thought was needed to support the ad. Move America Forward felt that Cinton's outrageous assertions that he did all he could to eliminate Osama bin Laden failed on its face. Seems that jabbing finger of arrogance upset others. And though Move America Forward had CIA officials directly contradict those lies of Clinton, they failed to provide that documentation to Fox.
Here, however, is the video from YouTube:

Your country run by lefties

Look at this picture. It's a satellite picture with a night view showing the bottom part ablaze with light. The top not quite as much. Notice the line of demarcation. It's also called the DMZ, the 38th Parallel. It marks the boundary between South and North Korea. It also marks the difference between a country run by lefties (to the north) and one where liberty runs prevalent. This picture shows the natural courses of socialism (aka Communism Lite, in this case it could be said light lite, so to speak) and government control and regulation versus liberty and free markets.
Vote accordingly.