Disagreement among friends

Disagreement among friends is expected. It can be good and reaffirming or it can be bad and destructive depending on how it is handled. My dear friends Savage Republican, Amendment X and I have disagreed on the Miers nomination and how it was handled. However, we handled our disagreement in a constructive manner - each respecting the others view points, even if we don't agree with it. As such, even though we disagree on this single issue (there are probably more waiting in the wings guys) we agree on the main principles that brought us together in the first place and thus - life is good.

How will things turn out for the Republican Party post Harriet Miers? My friend Savage Republican is correct - the Dems WILL oppose any nominee that President Bush puts forward, just for pure, unadulterated spite! I may not be feeling as gloomy as I was when I posted this last night, but I am still troubled. I believe that we handed the Dems a victory by not allowing a candidate, flawed though she may have been, to come before committee. I agree with Savage Republican's assertion that we Republicans should demand excellence from our candidates, but I am a bit of a pragmitist in that I do not feel that it is in our best interests to hand the enemy ammunition with which to fight us and I firmly believe that we did just that, in denying Harriet Miers at least a chance to appear before committee before dismissing her candidacy. We put a lot of stress on the demand that "every judicial candidate DESERVES an up or down vote" during the last election and yet, when faced with a candidate we didn't like, we did the very same thing that we hammered the opposition on.

I do honestly hope that I am wrong here. I would dearly LOVE to be wrong here, but everything that I am hearing out of the echo chamber on the left says I am right. PLEASE GOD, help the President pick another John Roberts type nominee. Someone with a track record but someone knowledgeable enough in the law to put all litmus test questions off with the same grace and aplomb that Chief Justince Roberts did. I pray there is someone out there that can pull this off. For the sake of the country.

They will oppose anyone

Once again we find disagreement here.
The reason I was upset with Meirs was besides the lack of qualifications - politically it was stupid.
No matter who the President nominates the dems will oppose.
So to submit someone like Meirs who was a stealth candidate with no record, still dems came out and said they did not like her.

They are Democrats - So to think that by picking someone who will please them, they will get confirmed is politically dumb.

So the President should nominate the best candidate - Let the Dems go on record for a filibuster and then the Senate can do what they should have done back before the gang of Seven derailed the constitution - That is force a vote on the Rules and confirm over the Filibuster.

And if he picks a constitutionally Sound Judge, he will have the backing of all the conservatives that supported him in the last election.



Historical Note:
Wanted to point out how wise our founding fathers were.
One of the complaints about the current nominee is that she was chosen not as much for her judicial skills but for her connections to the President.
If she had continued foward, she should and been allowed an up or down vote, and nothing I have heard or seen would have disqualified her from service (The complaint is not the she was not qualified, just that there were lots of others much more qualified).
But back to the founding fathers, they also knew that the confirmation makes it a much more open process and as was written in Federalist Paper #76 - A President would be reluctant to put forth a candidate based on personal relationship for fear of public admonishment.
This is exactly what happened.
The President put forth a candidate who did not have the sort of legal reputation and dedication to the constitution that was desired by those who elected the President. We let him know and he did what the founding fathers envisioned.
If only the Senate were as dedicated to the constituion as both Harriet Miers and the President are.

As an final thought - the fact that she removed her nomination, shows that Harriet Miers does have respect to the consitution -
If only she had said more and done more actions like this in her past she might have been a good candidate.

Well I hope ya'll are happy!

Yeah, Harriet Miers was not the best pick. I think Savage Republican called her a B+ pick and I would probably concur. However, because not enough was known about her, I was willing to wait for the hearings....well now we will not get that chance. Because Ms. Miers removed her name from contention for the Supreme Court, we have handed the Dems a victory. The talking points (from Terry MacAuliff to Harry Reid to Joe Trippe to Pat Leahy) are already saying that the "radical right has scuttled this candidate!" They are already setting the stage that the next candidate had better be a "moderate" (aka pro-abortion) or they will be considered to be too extreme and thus a candidate for filibuster! Because of this little tantrum, WE are going to be seen as extreme and out of the mainstream!!!!!

I know that I was in the minority opinion on the Miers nomination, but I feel safe in predicting this. WHOEVER the President puts forth, regardless of their stellar qualifications and prior experience in front of the Senate Judiciary committee, will be considered to be extreme and unacceptable! Please understand, I have never been accused of being a pessimist. Quite the opposite is true - I have been accused of being an obnoxious optimist. However, we Republicans have set the next candidate up for failure. Period, end of discussion. Enjoy your victory now, all of you anti-Miers conservatives, because it is going to be short-lived. Regardless of who the next candidate is and no matter how qualified, the angry left is going to shoot them down. The only candidate that they will confirm will end up being to the LEFT of Justice O'Connor......

This man wants to be a Senator?????

Now I have no problems poking fun at one another. A friend of mine showed me a card the other day that had me howling....it was a take off of a poster of "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" with President Bush photoshopped in. It was a clever piece of work.

Al Franken has a new book out. While that may not be newsworthy in and of itself, what Al is doing to promote the book that is. Michelle Malkin brings our attention to this little promotional gem (see high bandwidth and low bandwidth versions). Now as I said earlier, I have no problems poking fun at one another however there is nothing "fun" about staging an "attack" on someone who disagrees with you. Imagine, if you will, that Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or (God forbid) Ann Coulter had staged a fake attack on a liberal......Can you hear the howls of outrage from the left?

What ever happened to civil discourse? What ever happened to respectful discussion of the issues of the day? Does Mr. Franken really think that this kind of "discourse" will add to the "worlds greatest deliberative body"???? How does this promote the best interests of Minnesota or the United States????? I dearly hope and pray that our esteemed friends in the DFL reject this publicity stunt disguised as a run for office. We certainly deserve better than this....

Calling Senator Coleman

Earlier this week, the unthinkable happened. A sitting Senator (Senator Tom Coburn from Okalhoma) had the audacity to propose an amendment to a spending bill that called for certain "earmarked" dollars to be redirected from their assigned projects and sent to Louisiana and Alabama to help pay for the promised relief from Hurricane Katrina. Projects such as the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska and a sculpture garden in Washington state would loose their funding (this year anyway) in order to rebuild the Twin Spans in New Orleans and rebuilt infrastructure in Mississippi. Very sound, logical thinking to me, however, it did not appear that way to 82 of the Gentleman from Oklahoma's colleagues, including our soon to be senior Senator - Norm Coleman! Now I understand that Senator Coleman at one time was a Democrat, but he ran for his seat as a fiscal and social conservative and in this post 9/11 world, with multiple natural disasters and a war to pay for, what was he thinking voting against this?

I'll tell you what he was thinking - he (along with the 81 others who voted against the Coburn Amendment) was more concerned about "congressional courtesy" - the act of supporting another Senator's pet "pork" project so that some day in the future, (s)he supports yours in turn! While this kind of "thought" is great for sitting Senators and Congressmen (who can go home and brag about how much federal money they brought home) it is lousy for the American people that they are supposed to be looking out for!

Instead of being commended for making the "tough" proposals, Senator Coburn was vilified by his colleagues.

"I come to warn the Senate, if you want a wounded bull on the floor of the Senate, pass this amendment," a red-faced Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) snorted. "I stood here and watched Senator Allen teach the Senate lesson after lesson after something was done to Alabama that he didn't like. I don't threaten people; I promise people." That's right - a supposed "conservative" is threatening his fellow senators if they dare to vote against his pet pork project!

and

"If the Senator from Oklahoma wants to look for a culprit for the fiscal situation in this country, he should look into the billions and billions of dollars in tax cuts that have been granted to multimillionaires in this country, and he should look at additional tax cuts his party wants to implement in future years if he wants to find incredible savings," Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) lectured. That's right dear reader - rather than temporarily suspend pork spending, Senator Murray would rather rescind YOUR TAX CUTS!!!!! Then she threw out this threat..."What is good for the goose is good for the gander. And I tell my colleagues, if we start cutting funding for individual projects, your project may be next."

Meanwhile, Senator Coburn is concerned about projects, such as one in Rhode Island where $220,000 is going to toward a $2.2 million animal shelter when "...we are spending $200,000 for the construction of an animal shelter when we cannot even shelter the people properly in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi."

We need more Senators like Senator Coburn. It is time for ALL savage Republicans to stand up for fiscal sanity and restraint. Contact Senator Coburn and let him know that you appreciate his looking out for your hard earned dollars. Then put your sitting Senators on notice. Contact them and let them know that they need to do what is right for the country first. If it means putting a pet project back home on hold, so be it...

Senator Coleman - pay attention to what your base is saying! You will need our help in two very short years when you are up for re-election. Ignoring the disgruntled base will not get you sent back to DC in 2008......

The difference between Left and Right

OK - this can go a number of directions I know, but I think that this poll over at Minnesota Public Radio is the most telling one I have seen. It asks (I am deadly serious here) which one of the Constitutionally granted rights they are most willing to give up to the government! That's right gentle reader, our friends on the left are willing to give up their God granted, Constitutional rights. Not surprisingly, according to the poll 40.2% of my fellow Minnesotans would be perfectly happy to surrender their right to bear arms. While that result does not surprise me, it certainly frightens and saddens me at the same time. The right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms is going to be the right that protects the other rights from the over-reaching arm of an out of control government who is bent on usuruping the rights of the people!

So there you have it, dear readers....our friends on the left are happy to give away their rights while those of us on the right are not willing to give up a single one! For we on the right know, that the day the citizens give up any one of these God given rights (to the government) the rest will fall in short order! The people of Minnesota need to wake up to the fact that government is not our friends and that the best government is the one that governs least!

Proud to be a Conservative

I rarely listen to the Rush Limbaugh program anymore. I prefer the calm, quiet reasonings of the Dennis Prager show which is on at the same time in our area. However, this article in today's Wall Street Journal is a real gem! It articulates in clear, concise terms why we are proud to be Republicans. It also ties in nicely with this post by my friend and fellow blogger Savage Republican.

"The Miers nomination shows the strength of the conservative movement. This is no "crackup." It's a crackdown. We conservatives are unified in our objectives. And we are organized to advance them. The purpose of the Miers debate is to ensure that we are doing the very best we can to move the nation in the right direction. And when all is said and done, we will be even stronger and more focused on our agenda and defeating those who obstruct it, just in time for 2006 and 2008. Lest anyone forget, for several years before the 1980 election, we had knockdown battles within the GOP. The result: Ronald Reagan won two massive landslides."

Yes, Rush is right and so is my friend Savage Republican. We do expect perfection from ourselves and our elected leadership. Bravo gentlemen for a couple of well thought out pieces.

"The Democratic Party today is split over the war and a host of cultural issues, such as same-sex marriage and partial birth abortion. It wants to raise taxes, but dares not say so. It can't decide what message to convey to the American people or how to convey it. And even its once- reliable allies in the big media aren't as influential in promoting the party and its agenda as they were in the past. The new media--talk radio, the Internet and cable TV--not only have a growing following, but have helped expose the bias and falsehoods of the big-media, e.g., Dan Rather, CBS News and the forged National Guard documents. Hence, circulation and audience is down, and dropping. "

In this quote, Rush also ties into another article I read today. While this article says it in a little harsher manner than I would, as a parent I do understand and appreciate the analogy. The Democratic Party is acting like a bunch of spoiled, petulant children. Spoiled, petulant children should not be allowed to run the country. We need adults to run the country, because the country faces grown up problems. Which is why I come back to a post I made here. For the sake of the country, the adults need to get our arguments done and then move on so that in 2006, we do not turn the governance of the country over to the spoiled, petulant children.

I am so depressed....

Apparently, Chairman Howard Dean was in my own backyard (H/T Republican Minnesota)on Saturday and I missed it. I am depressed, because if I had known that the Chairman was going to be so close, I would have prepared an appropriate welcome for him - maybe even cooked him lunch - so that I could thank him for all of his hard work on behalf of the Republican, er, Democratic Party. Thankfully we have the Star Tribune on hand to tell us all about the Chairman's visit.

"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Saturday that the party intends to target the seats now held by U.S. Reps. Mark Kennedy and John Kline."

I am so glad that we have the Star Tribune around to hand us that news flash. The Scott County DFL has only been saying that for the last 6-8 months that I know of.

"He pointed to the problems of White House adviser Karl Rove, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas. DeLay has been indicted on campaign finance law violations.
Rove and Frist are under investigation in unrelated matters.
"The Republican Party is bankrupt of ideas and bankrupt of morality," Dean said, tying in Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty because of the resignation of his campaign treasurer, Ron Esau, whose mortgage company was found to have "misled and deceived" homeowners."

I should have warned you about that last one. How hysterical is that? The party that brought the VietNam war into the 2004 election is saying that the Republicans are bankrupt of ideas???? I won't touch the morally bankrupt statement at all because both sides are equally guilty of moral bankruptcy - neither party has the lock on moral bankruptcy.

"Dean, however, said the Democrats will campaign on the issues of a "real national defense policy" based on truth, job creation tied to renewable energy, health insurance for every American, and strong public education."

John Kerry kept telling us about this mythical "plan" that the Democrats have for "real national defense" etc but I have yet to see any plan put forth? Have you????

"The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux, which run the casino, are based in Prior Lake, in Kline's Second District. Responding to Dean, Republican Carey asked sarcastically, "Has Coleen Rowley actually found out where the Second District is? She's been globe-trotting all around the country."

Now that quote is funny - true but funny all the same. It would be nice if Coleen would start campaigning in the district she wants to represent....

In all seriousness - this visit was sponsored by the latest 527 to join the DNC stable. It is high time to repeal McCain Feingold and get rid of 527's once and for all.

I want to close with a presonal note to Chairman Dean. Next time you are in Scott County - please stop by the Lady Logicians house. I promise you a wonderful lunch, served with a side of what Scott County is all about!

Local politics

Whoever said all politics is local was very wise indeed. What makes me think back on this bit of wisdom? I spent the better part of 2 hours this evening, meeting with some very passionate people discussing the direction of the city I live in. Yes, dear readers, it is City Council election time. Off year elections are always tough - people are not motivated to get out for City Council elections as they are for Presidential elections. However, this time may be different.

I live in a small, semi-rural town. It is the type of town people move to in order to raise their families and escape the pressures of their work day. It is a quiet town on one of Minnesota's 10,000 lakes. Recreation is a vital part of life in our town. Our town, however, is located in one of the top 5 fastest growing counties in the entire United States. That growth has been effecting our community if good ways and bad ways. As a result the mayor and the current city council have had to address how to handle the growth. One of the things that the current mayor and city council have been managing (if that is the word you want to use) has been housing growth. Housing growth is a natural by-product of population growth. Their idea of managing housing growth is to rezone areas from single family homes to high density housing and from environmental set aside lands to high density housing. Now this flies in stark contrast to what the citizens of the city want. According to a survey that was conducted by consultant that the city council itself hired, 53% of the residents of this town want to keep the small town/rural feel of the community. I have a hard time seeing how high density housing fits into that mold.

While I am just one vote and what is important to me may not be the most important issue to my next door neighbor, the common theme I took away from this meeting was that the city leaders were unresponsive to the citizenry. The phrases that I kept hearing was that the people had "no voice" in city government and that there was no sense of "accountabilty" within City Hall. Those two phrases, in a nutshell, reverberated in my mind. While the voters say they want their state and federal governments to be more accountable, they demand it from their city governments. A city government that is unresponsive and unaccountable is going to face an uprising at the polls. Will it happen this time? I can't say for certain, but it will eventually happen. However, if it takes too long to happen, the city may be doomed.....

Conservatism demands Excellence

When Norm Coleman ran for office - as conservatives objected we were told - We need his vote in the Senate so we can get our conservative judges confirmed.
When Arlen Specter was being supported by the White House against the wishes of conservatives - We were told - We need his vote in the Senate.

And now the President had a chance to nominate someone to be a true constitutional Judge and instead gives us an unknown who we are told can get confirmed because she has no record - So why did he need the votes?

We wanted a candidate who a record of Constitutional writing and judgment.
We have had other justices who were not judges, but they had a long and distinguished careers and writings in Constitutional Law. Something this candidate lacks.

Some say it is because she is not from an Ivy League School or because she is a woman, but many of the other candidates being suggested are not from Ivy League Schools and many are women - It is sad to see a "conservatives" play the gender and eliteist card.

And what does the nomination of a stealth candidate tell conservative legal scholars, judges and law students?
That even when we have a "conservative" President and control of the Senate - you had better not stand up and show your conservatism - because only those who say nothing can get appointed.


But the thing that worries me the most is we are told to not worry because the president knows her and trust she will be a "constitutional" judge.

The same President who told us he believed in a limited government - and then signed the Campaign Finance Law - A direct attack on the First Amendment.

The same President who talks about fiscal conservatism then went on TV to tell me how much money the Federal Government was going to transfer to New Orleans.

Conservatives have said - She will be the swing vote we need on "Roe".
I don't want a vote - I want a Judge.


She may turn into a reliable conservative vote on the bench - but the outcome does not justify the selection.

As a conservative, I seek excellence and for the Supreme Court I want an excellent Constitutional Scholar - We did not get it with this candidate.


As another nominee said, the Supreme Court is about calling Balls and Strikes.

On this one President Bush was told the swing away and instead we have a called strike - with the bat still on his shoulder.

Harriet Miers for Supreme Court

I have been holding my tongue on this issue, because so many others have been going off emotionally on the nomination of Ms. Miers. The conservative punditry was quick to condemn the President on his choice and the ensuing noise from the echo chamber has been deafening. From the National Review, to Michelle Malkin, to the Powerline gents (whom I have great admiration for), the conservative world is abuzz with disappointment. Those who take a more positive approach (Hugh Hewitt for one) are sometimes taken to task for their "blind support" of the President. The hue and cry has been so overwhelming that President Bush had to hold yet another press conference today to try to calm the base a little bit....

Now I will not pretend to be an expert on Consitutional Law. That is why I admire the Powerline gents and Hugh Hewitt so much. They know the law and they can translate it so that a lay-person like myself can understand it. I would (however) like to comment on the hysteria that has been coming out of the vast right wing conspiracy (of which I am a card carrying member) over the last 24 hours. It seems to me like we are doing it again....we are fracturing ourselves over an issue where we simply do not have all of the facts. Yes, Ms. Miers is a judicial unknown. However, the days and weeks leading up to the Senate Confirmation hearings is where we will get to know her judicial temperment better. The nay-sayers say she has no judicial experience. True enough - but neither did 19 other seated Supreme Court justices. She has had the administrative experice of running a large legal enterprise that has to make tough decisions and do it in a way where all parties feel that they were given the opportunity to make their side heard. That is a good thing in my book.

All I am saying, dear readers, is let's back away from the feeding frenzy of self destruction and wait until we have all of the facts, before we make a snap judgement on whether Ms. Miers is an acceptable candidate or not. We have time, let's not jeopardize the 2006 mid-terms over an unknown.

Just what district is this again????

Colleen Rowley, former FBI whistleblower of 9/11 fame, has been in the news a lot lately. She was in Crawford Texas last month with Cindy Sheehan and she has been giving speeches all over the state lately. Her most recent was in Brooklyn Park and is reported here. About the only place where she has not been giving "stump" speeches has been in CD 2 and that is the district that she is supposedly running to represent! You hear reports of her speaking in lots of places outside of CD 2 including Washington DC where she spoke in support of Representative Dennis Kucinich's proposed "Department of Peace and Non-Violence".

Hey Colleen - why don't you save your money and speak a little closer to home. Say, anywhere in CD 2 where the people that you want to represent live.....Just a thought.

Smoking ban

I'm going to step into Anti-Strib's realm here. The folks over there have posted numerous stories about the adverse effects of the smoking ban that Hennepin and Ramsey counties instituted this year. According to this story in today's Star Tribune, charitable gaming revenues are down 22% in Hennepin county for the 2nd quarter of 2005 (the last quarter reported) and Ramsey county is down 10%. Metro counties (where there is no ban) are more mixed with a few counties gaining minimal revenue and others loosing minimal revenue. This should surely add to the pressure to both counties to reconsider their smoking bans.

This adds to the economic bad news that the smoking bans have brought to the counties. I would encourage you to go read the archives over at Anti-Strib. They have put a ton of research into this and they deserve all the credit for keeping this issue front and center.

Hysteria in the Media

My dear friend in New Orleans send me this today. I think I have read and re-read it a dozen times since then. Two passages hit me the hardest. First was this one:

"The picture that emerged was one of the impoverished, masses of flood victims resorting to utter depravity, randomly attacking each other, as well as the police trying to protect them and the rescue workers trying to save them. Nagin told Winfrey the crowd has descended to an "almost animalistic state.""

I was stunned by that statement. I can not help but wonder what the collective press corps' reaction to that statement would have been had the mayor been someone like Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago or Mayor Randy Kelly of St Paul - white men.

The second striking paragraph was this one:

"One widely circulated tale, told to The Times-Picayune by a slew of evacuees and two Arkansas National Guardsmen, held that "30 or 40 bodies" were stored in a Convention Center freezer. But a formal Arkansas Guard review of the matter later found that no soldier had actually seen the corpses, and that the information came from rumors in the food line for military, police and rescue workers in front of Harrah's New Orleans Casino, said Edwards, who conducted the review."

Remember the game "telephone". I whisper a sentence into one person's ear and that sentence is whispered, one person at a time, until the last person in the room to hear the sentence gets it and then he/she is supposed to say it out loud and never resembles the initial sentence. This one was that this widely ciruclated story was reported as gospel by the various media outlets around the country and it turned out to be nothing more than the results of a game telephone! These same people who denigrate certain news bloggers as being rumor mongers and unreliable because they don't have editorial boards looking over their shoulders. Well folks you all have the editorial board oversight - why didn't you catch this?

I guess that just goes to show that even with editorial board oversight, just knowing stuff isn't enough. You have to be willing and able to chase a story down - to get to the truth! The legacy media, in their hysterical rush for disaster of the week ratings, ran with stories that now, in the cold, hard light of reality were not what they claimed to be.

We have officially entered the "Viet Nam" zone...

But not in the way that the left has envisioned it...There is no military quagmire, only a protesting quagmire...

I have been reading and watching the coverage of last week-ends Anti-American (and Pro-American) protests in Washington DC. While watching (and reading) the coverage, I had a flashback to Chicago 1968 and the Democratic National Party Convention that year. For context, I grew up in Chicago and in 1968 we were innundated with live coverage of the anti-American protests there. The protests themselves (and the City's horrible reaction to it) are indelibly etched into my memory. I would sit, alternately transfixed and horrified, as I watched my beloved city collapse into lawlessness. The fact that the City reacted with such overwhelming brutality was even more frightening to me than the riots were.

Fast forward 37 years to 2005. Watching the protesters and seeing their signs, I could not help but think that I was having a deja vu moment because the people that I saw were the same people I watched back in 1968. The only difference was that the protesters were a lot grayer (aren't we all) than they were then. They only thing missing (thankfully) were the riots and the chants of "THE WHOLE WORLD'S WATCHING". The rest was the same...the same tired chants, the same socialist speakers and the same tired ideas that died when the Cold War ended.

More importantly, I remembered something my father said to me one night (while we were watching the chaos unfold). He said, never forget that people died in Europe, people died in Korea and people are dying today in Viet Nam in order for these people to have the right to protest today! Never forget the sacrifices of our soldiers. Now my father was not a "military" man. The closest we got to having a family member in the service was one uncle in the Navy and a great uncle in the Air Force (both during Korea), but even then he knew what was right. It's amazing how smart my parents got as I got older. I hope I am that "smart" when my son gets older too.....

UPDATE: From my lips to God's ear. According to this story from the Washington Post, Cindy Sheehan was arrested today in front of the White House. She was arrested for blocking a public sidewalk. As police led her away, her follow protesters were heard chanting "the whole world's watching". I can't help but marvel at the narcissism and total lack of a sense of history that these people (protesters and reporters) have. When the 1968 protesters were chanting that, they were being trampled by police horses and beaten bloody by baton weilding police officers and gassed with tear gas while being dragged to waiting police vehicles. Not one tear gas canister, not one baton, not one horse and not one dragging was in sight in the pictures I saw of the arrest.

The racism of the "anti-war" movement

A Texas friend forwarded this to me today. To say that this was an eye-opener is an understatement, but not totally surprising when I think back on conversations that I have had with the rabid anti-war left. Their statements puzzled me and saddened me at the same time for I was always told how accepting of others these people were (granted they were usually the ones telling me how accepting they are but that is another story). I have heard, out of supposedly intelligent, well meaning people, that the Arab culture could not handle democracy. That they don't understand it, that it is not workable for them. These are the very same kind of justifications that people used when trying to justify slavery, opposing women's sufferage and opposing the Voting Rights Act of 1968!!!! The very people who today say that "liberating Iraq is not worth the sacrifice that my son (white) made" would not be caught dead saying that the life of a black man or woman and yet they feel quite comfortable saying that about a brown (or "yellow") man or woman.

Are they truly that blinded by their hatred of President Bush that they can not see the hypocrisy of their own statements? Or are they willfully that hypocritical? That is the million dollar question. For if they are blinded by their hatred of President Bush, well then maybe there is hope - hope that when the next Administration is in place they will see the error of their ways. However, I fear that they are that willfully hypocritical....take a look at the leadership of the "loyal" opposition. They are the ones whose voices are calling for our withdrawl from Iraq the loudest! Leaders like Senators Clinton, Kennedy or Kerry are demanding that our troops be brought home now because of the quagmire that Iraq has become. So supposedly "color blind" people are using race to score political points! That to me, is the lowest of low. Whatever happened to having a "color blind" society? It was sacrificed on the alter of political power! When will the people of America wake up to the hypocrisy of the anti-war movement??????

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

This morning, while getting ready for church, I was listening to George Stephanopolis interviewing Senator John McCain (R-AZ). Now Senator McCain is more of a liberal than he is a true conservative and as such, has taken much scorn from the hard core Republican base. However, what he had to say this morning made a lot of sense. He was saying that if we are going to spend billions of dollars on rebuilding the hurricane ravaged areas of Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas we must find other areas in the budget to cut the spending. Sen. McCain's idea was to cut some $26 billion out of the Highway budget that was just passed. So far, the only governmental "leader" to get behind this idea was Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca). The Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate are dead set against this, as is the White House. This is a shame as the Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility...at least that is what the grass roots activists are all about!

It is time for the Republican grass roots to speak up to their leadership! N.Z. Bear, over at www.truthlaidbear.com has started a new project called Porkbusters. He is asking that all concerned citizens, regardless of political party, write to their respective represenatives in both the House and the Senate demanding that they take a stand against this continued deficit spending. I suggest taking it one step further. Send the message to the White House as well! I did. I hope to hear from my representatives (Senators Dayton and Coleman and Rep John Kline) soon and if I do, I will be sending that information on to N.Z. Bear like others have. With the 2006 elections right around the corner, now is the time to make your voices heard. Because if they don't hear and they don't respond, they know that we the voters will take our voices elsewhere.

UPDATE: I sent a letter to Congressman Mark Kennedy (who is running for the Republican nomination to Senator Dayton's seat). I noticed on his website he talks about a $2.5 million grant to a regional airport in his district. I wonder what his reaction to my letter will be in light of that grant. I will keep you all posted.

A department of WHAT?!?!?!?!

Just when you thought it couldn't get ANY sillier, comes this gem from Washington. It seems that my esteemed Senior Senator, Mark Dayton, has decided that our federal government needs yet another Cabinet level position (he obviously hasn't learned any lessons from the fed's reaction to Katrina has he?). So he has introduced legislation to form (sit down for this one) a Department of PEACE AND NON-VIOLENCE! Yep, the same Senator who closed his office and ran back to Minnesota to hide in his mansion on Lake Minnetonka because he heard that Washington DC might be a target for terrorist attacks is proposing that we form a department of Peace. The budget for this new department is supposed to come out of the DOD budget, but we all know how that works. Give the federal government a penny and they'll steal a dollar! Cover your wallets friends.

In a related note, on 9/11 Colleen Rowley (former FBI whistleblower and candidate for congress in Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District) was the featured speaker at a Washington DC conference that was being held to support a similar bill in the House (sponsored by Rep Dennis Kucinich). The bill, H.R. 3760, (which can be found here) calls for the creation of a "Peace Academy" that would be modeled after military schools such as West Point, would rename January 1 from "New Years Day" to "Peace Day" where citizens would "be encouraged to observe and celebrate the blessings ofpeace and endeavor to create peace in the coming year." and would develop such needed bureaucratic offices as the "Office of Peace Education and Training" and the "Office of Domestic Peace Activities" (not to be confused with the "Office of International Peace Activities" and positions such as the "Assistant Secretary for Peaceful Coexistance and Non-Violent Conflict Resolution".

I wish, dear reader that I could tell you that this is satire, but sadly it is all too real. The resolution already has 60 co-sponsors in the House. Some of the co-sponsors are the usual Minnesota suspects - Rep Betty McCollum, Rep Martin Olav Sabo and Rep Jim Oberstar - but it also includes some of the usual national suspects such as Rep. Cynthia McKinney (GA), Rep. Charles Rangel (NY) and Rep. Maxine Waters (CA).

My dear friends and readers know that I despise the inflammatory rhetoric (using such words as "moonbat" and "chickenhawk") as it detracts from the debate, rather than adding to it, but I really have to wonder seriously about the mental health of the people sponsoring this legislation. Do they not understand that the world is full of dangerous people who see this kind of nonsense as weakness? Are they really that out of touch with reality that this seems "sensible" to them? I have to ask in all honesty for I simply do not understand their logic in this.

Dear, dear readers.....this is why elections are so very important. Trivial issues like this should not be the focus of our elected leadership at a time when we are facing multiple crises (Katrina and Rita clean-up, Iraq elections pending and Afghan elections just finished). Serious times demand serious leadership and I desperately hope that my friends here in CD2 reject Ms. Rowley's bid for Congress, that my neighbors in CD4 (Rep McCollum's district), CD5 (Rep Sabo's district) and CD8 (Rep Oberstar's district) find serious leaders to replace them with and that the good people of Minnesota elect a serious leader, like Rep Mark Kennedy, to the Senate seat that Mr. Dayton will soon be vacating.

Hurricane aftermath

Much has been made, in recent days, of the attitudes of the evacuees from New Orleans. I have talked to many people in the shelters. Most have stories of grateful people who are thankful to be alive and truly astonished at the goodness and kindness of strangers who would put their lives on hold to help them recover from a personal disaster. Then there are the ingrates who, rather than being thankful for the help they are getting, are complaining that they aren't getting better. I'm sure we have all seen the email, that was purported "written" by a doctor who decries the greed and ingratitude of evacuees in the Houston area.

Well today, I have the most uplifting exchange with a couple of lovely ladies. The first was a young woman who was volunteering in a shelter in northern Louisiana. The second was a woman who was helping, as best as she could, from a distance. The young lady in Louisiana echoed the Houston account, which saddened her greatly as the people she was seeing this attitude out of were "her own". She was so angry at this attitude of ingrattitude that she was considering not going back. The other young woman, put herself in the situation and reminded the first that while the bad attitude was not acceptable, it is understandable given what they had all gone through. What struck me though, what should strike us ALL in the heart was the end of the email. She said:

"...do not take this on as a race issue. Attitudes come in all colours, and don't reflect you. I have met some pretty ungrateful and spoiled white people and don't feel they reflect me. I know it's hard because racism uses faulty logic to explain itself by clumping things together. One bad attitude from a black person and ALL black people are such and such. It's faulty logic of people trying to prove what they themselves believe. It's not logical. Attitudes come in equal share to all colours. It does not reflect race, it reflects the individual and the situation they are in."

I stopped and let that sink in. So much truth in so few words. How much better would this world be if we all remember that simple phrase - attitudes come in all colors. If we could all stop and put ourselves in one anothers shoes and remember that attitude comes in all colors.....

Anniversary of a tragedy

Tomorrow is the 4th anniversary of an American tragedy - the 9/11 attacks. To honor the passengers of Flight 93, the Discovery Channel is showing a program that "recreates" that doomed flight - based on phone conversations, voicemail messages and 9-1-1 taped calls that the passengers made on that fateful day. That is the ONLY program that the "legacy" media is doing to recognize what the day is. Meanwhile over at CNN, their attorneys are suing the government because their reporters are not being allowed to video/photograph the bodies of the dead as they are being recovered in New Orleans. Now I can certainly understand the ban. If I were searching for a relative, say I have an Uncle Beaudreaux who is missing, I certainly would not want the first word of Uncle Beaudreaux's fate to come from CNN!!!! Glenn Reynolds over at Instapundit makes another point. The same press that is suing to show my dead Uncle Beaudreaux felt that showing us the dead and dying (and jumping off of the 20 floor of WTC Tower 2) was "too upsetting" to the American people.

Now what am I missing here? Showing us the dead of Hurricane Catrina, a natural disaster is ok, but showing us the dead who were killed by a cowardly attack on civilian targets is "too upsetting"????